HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/13/02City of Bakersfield
Water Board
Meeting of
November 13, ~002 ~
CITY OF
WATER BOA
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
DaSd Couch, Vice Chair
Harold Hanson
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WATER BOARD
Notice is hereby given that the regular meeting of the City of
Bakersfield Water Board scheduled for Wednesday, November 13, 2002, to
be held at the Water Resources Building Conference Room, 1000 Buena
Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311, at 4:30 p.m. has been changed and will
be held at 4:00 p.m.
Gene ~og~rt
Wafter ResoUrces Manager
POSTED: November 8, 2002
1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 ° (661) 326-3715
CITYOF
WATER BOA ?'
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
David Couch, Vice Chair
Harold Hanson
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
SPECIAL WATER BOARD MEETING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2002 - 4:00 p.m.
Water Resources Building Conference Room
1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311
AGENDA
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. TOUR
A. Tour of Kern River Water Facilities Construction Projects - 1 Hour
(Reconvene at Water Resources Building Conference Room -
Approximately 5:00 p.m.)
4. MINUTES
A. Approval of July 17, 2002 Meeting Minutes
5. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
6. KERN RIVER LEVEE DISTRICT
A. U.S. Corps of Engineers Bi-Annual Inspection Report.
7. REPORTS
A. Kern River Operations Report.
B. Northeast Bakersfield Water Supply Project.
C. Kern County Water Agency Mediation Process.
D. Update on Request to Kern County Water Agency for Treated Water to Serve
Northwest Bakersfield.
1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (661) 326-3715
WATER BOARD AGENDA Page 2
NOVEMBER 13, 2002
8. OLD BUSINESS
None.
9. NEW BUSINESS
A. Letter to Kern County Board of Supervisors concerning Ordinance on Bio-solids
Application - For Board Review and Action
B. Participation in Weather Modification Program with Kern River Interests and
Atmospherics Inc. - For Board Approval
C. Letter to Supervisor Jon McQuiston regarding Kern River Bikepath.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
A. 2003 Water Board Meeting Schedule - For Board Information
11. WATER BOARD STATEMENTS
12. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(A) North Kern
Water Storage District vs. Kern Delta Water District, Et Al, Tulare County Superior
Court Case No. 96-172919.
B. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation: Initiation of Litigation
Decision Pursuant to Subdivision (C) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (One
Potential Case)
13. CLOSED SESSION ACTION
14. ADJOURNMENT ~,~,~~ ~ / ~'~l. ~~~
~- (~r~ B~'gart
W~ter ResOurces Manager
POSTED: November 8, 2002
S:\WB MINUTES 2002\WBAGNO13.doc
3. TOUR
A. Tour of Kern River Water Facilities Construction Projects - '1 Hour
(Reconvene at Water Resources Building Conference Room -
Approximately 5:00 p.m.)
4. MINUTES
A. Approval of July 17, 2002 Meeting Minutes
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
City of Bakersfield Water Board meeting held its meeting on July 17, 2002, at the Water
Resources conference room, located at 1000 Buena Vista Rd., Bakersfield, CA 93311.
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Board Chair Salvaggio at 4:32 PM
2. ROLL CALL: Mark Salvaggio, Chair
David Couch, Vice-Chair
Harold Hanson
3. APPROVAL OF MAY 15TM, 2002 MEETING MINUTES
-- Board member Couch made the motion for approval of the Regular Water Board
meeting minutes held on May 15th, 2002.
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS:
There were no public statements.
5. KERN RIVER LEVEE DISTRICT OPERATIONS REPORT:
No action required by the Board.
6. KERN RIVER OPERATIONS REPORT:
The 2001 Kern River Annual Report was introduced at this time and presented to
the Chairman of the Board. These reports will be made available to the Mayor and
the full council if so desired.
Action: The 2001 Kern River Annual Report along with a cover letter be sent to Ginger Moorhouse of the Bakersfield Californian.
7. OLD BUSINESS:
7A. NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD WATER SUPPLY PROJECT:
Project is still on target for an April 23, 2003, initial operation of the treatment
plant.
No action required by the Board.
7B. KERN RIVER FLOW RESTORATION PROJECT UPDATE - For
Board Information:
After a lengthy and thorough presentation by Gene Bogart, a Motion was
made to:
a.) Provide Renee Nelson and Arthur Unger copies of items 7A and 7B of the
Board Agenda.
b.) Bring back a draft from the Kern County Water Agency out-lining
how the flow restoration program would work.
7C. UPDATE ON REQUEST TO KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY FOR
TREATED WATER TO SERVE NORTHWEST BAKERSFIELD - For
Board Information:
Flom Core stated that progress on the Northwest Pipeline from the Kern
County Water Agency Treatment Plant to serve Northwest Bakersfield is
being made. Next step is to enter into contract discussions for the water
supply.
No action required by the Board
7D. DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE MAINLINE EXTENSION AGREEMENT
REFUND RE-ASSIGNMENTS:
The re-assignment affects Contract No. 80----10. No change in payment
obligations by City. The Board requested Florn Core explain that within
certain areas of our domestic water service system, a contractor or developer
installs the water facilities and the City refunds the costs over a 40 year period
without interest.
Motion to approve by David Couch
Approved
2
8. NEW BUSINESS:
8A. ELECTRICAL DEMAND RELIEF PROGRAM PARTICIPATION - For
Board Review and Approval:
Florn Core reviewed the operation and the contract.
Motion to approve by David Couch
Approved
8B. KERN DELTA WATER DISTRICT BANKING PROJECT EIR:
For Board Review and Action:
Staff reviewed and explained the Kern Delta Banking Project EIR. Staff
requested authorization to respond to the EIR.
Motion by Mark Salvaggio
Approved
8C. AGREEMENT BETWEEN DUANE MORRIS LLP AND CITY FOR
LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH KERN DELTA WATER
DISTRICT EIR - For Board Review and Recommendation to City Council
Alan Daniel introduced Colin Pearce who is representing the City on several
cases. Staff requested approval of contract and recommendation to City
Council.
Motion by Mark Salvaggio
Approved
9. WATER BOARD STATEMENTS:
David Couch stated "I just want to let you know that I feel good about the progress
on Rio Vista. I feel good about my trip. I'm going to a Southern
California Committee Meeting, I feel good about the board and actions we're taking
and I knew that it would. Thank you."
ADJOURNMENT:
Water Board meeting held on July 17, 2002 adjourned at 6:54 PM.
Mark Salvaggio, Chair
City of Bakersfield Water Board
Vivian Carpio-Wirth, Acting Secretary
City of Bakersfield Water Board
4
6. KERN RIVER LEVEE DISTRICT
A. U.S. Corps of Engineers Bi-Annual Inspection Report.
7. REPORTS
A. Kern River Operations Report.
KERN RIVER NATURAL FLOW, REGULATED FLOW, & ISABELLA RESERVOIR STORAGE
November 5, 2002
5000 -, ....... .
,-' - - - 600,000
· (2608.25 Ft.)
4500 ................................................................... 550,000
............... (2603.91 Ft.)
500,000
4000 ............................................................... (2599.38 Ft.)
Normal
Isabella Storage 450,000
3500 ............................ (2594.62 Ft.)
- 400,000
[ (2589.60 Ft.)
3000 .............................. '
,~, 2500 ............................................... 300,000 _
(2578.53 Ft.)
Natural Flow
2000 ................................... ...................... 250,000
,~ , 200,000
1500
.......................... , ....... J . . ~:",~
1000 ....................... , ~~_ '~.~ :'_'~t~
~ ..... J/ \~, ~ // _ &/li~ ' ! "% . '~'---~,.~ ~ Isabella Storage
(2531.$5 Ft.)
Regulated Flow
0 .................. , ......... ,, .............................. r .............................. r ................. ; ............ ~ .............................. , .............................. .,,,,,; ....................... ~ ............... ,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,~ .......................... ;.. .............................. ~ .............................. ~ ................... i. 0
Jan-02 Feb-02 Mar-02 Apr-02 May-02 Jun-02 Jul-02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02
ISABELLA RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS REPORT
(All readings are for date of repor~ (TUESDAY)
as of 0001, except as noted.., cfs in italics) Date of Report: November 5, 2002
ISABELLA RESERVOIR
1 2542.09 Lake Elevation (ft.) 82189 Storage (AcFt) -110 Change (AcFt) 128 Inflowto Isabella (cfs)
2 568075 Storage Capacity 14% %of Capacity 157027 Normal Storage 52% % of Normal Storage
For this Date
3 3657 Average Lake Area (Acres) 1238 Inflow(Month) 1200 Outflow(Month)
4 136 North Fork Mean 135 North Fork @ 0600 Hours 10237 Accumulative Inflow (02-03 WY)
5 155 Mean Outflow 0 Borel Canal 155 Main Dam Outlet 14852 Accum. Outflow (WY)
6 160 Outflow @ 0600 0 Borel Canal @ 0600 Hours 160 Main Dam Outlet @ 0600 Hours
Hours
7 28 Lake Evap. (cfs) 0.19 Inches Evap. for 24 Hours 184 Lake Evap. (Month to Date)
8 0 Spillway Discharge for 24 Hours
PRECIPITATION AND TEMPERATURI=
9 0.00 Inches of Precipitation at Isabella for 24 Hours 0.00 Inches of Precipitation at Isabella for Month
0.00 Seasonal Precip. Isabella 0.49 Normal for 0% Isabella Precip.
(Season: Oct 1 through Sep 30) this Date % of Normal
11 0.00 Inches of Precipitation at Pascoe for 24 Hours 0.00 Inches of Precipitation at Pascoe for Month
12 0.20 Seasonal Precip. Pascoe 2.02 Normal for 10% Pascoe Precip.
this Date % of Normal
13 0.1 Upper Tyndall Creek 0.3 Pascoe 0.0 Wet Meadow
14 70 Isabella Maximum Temperature 0.18 Isabella Maximum Precipitation on Record For this Date (Inches)
15 37 Isabella Minimum Temperature 52 24 Hour Wind Movement (Miles)
NATURAL RIVER FLOW
16 146 Natural FIow(cfs) 1302 Natural Flow(Month to Date) 215307 2002April-July Runoff
17 286 Mean Flow 51% Natural Flow 257 Median Flow 57% Natural Flow
For this Date in % of Mean For this Date in % of Median
18 796 Max. on Record 122 Min. on Record 10325 Accum. Natural Flow (Water Year)
For this Date For this Date
19 159 First Point Flow 1234 First Point (Month to Date) 14803 Accum. First Point (Water Year)
ERN RIVER FACTS & FIGURES: ~ ·
B A. K E R S F I
On November 11, 1972, the minimum temperature at Isabella Lake fell to 33° as a storm front
pushed through the Kern River Valley, depositing 1.27" of rain. Fueled by El Nine conditions in Produced by City of Bakersfield
the eastern Pacific, additional storms would pummel the area during November 1972, resulting Water Resources
in 270% of normal precipitation levels for the month. (661) 326-3715
7. REPORTS continued
B. Northeast Bakersfield Water Supply Project.
MEMORANDUM
(White paper due to photographs)
October 17, 2002
TO: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Manager
FROM: Flom Core, Water Resources Director
SUBJECT: Northeast Bakersfield Water Supply Project - Construction Progress
The Northeast Bakersfield Water Supply Project is to bring high quality Kern River drinking
water to the citizens of northeast and central Bakersfield, as well as provide the catalyst for
orderly development of the dry foothills on the eastside. The project began with the City
constructing a Kem River turn-out structure, located below the California Living Museum. The
entire project, a public-private cooperation between California Water Service Co. and the City,
will include a river pumping station, two adjoining reservoirs, the purification/filtration plant
and distribution pipelines to and from the purification plant. The Cai Water/City Kern River
pumping plant, the City reservoirs, the Cai Water Treatment Plant and the Cal Water pipelines
are under construction at this time.
The Kern River Pumping Plant, located just east
.... ~-~"#. of the reservoirs, is now over 90% complete. A
54" raw water pipeline, already installed extends
from the pumping plant, crosses Alfred Harrell
Highway and follows the bike path 'southerly
until turning east at the PG&E substation
~ '""~'~' ~- '~ (pictured below) until it reaches the Cai Water
purification/filtration plant. The pumping and
treatment plant facilities will be served through
this PG&E substation.
Kem River Pumping plant [
A liner installation blanketing the bottom
and sides of the two raw water reservoirs is
scheduled has phase two of the reservoir
Pacific Gas & Electric power substation
construction. The liner will be a geomembrane
or flexible polypropylene seal to prevent
leakage. City Council has awarded the liner
construction at the October 16, 2002 City Council
Two reservoirs with pumping plant construction at right meeting. Installation should begin within three
weeks and completed by January 2003.
Page - 2 -
Northeast Bakersfield Water Supply Project
Three Million Gallon
Clear Water Storage Tank
Cai Water Treatment Plant buildings ·
The California Water Service Co. Bakersfield Treatment Plant is approximately 50% complete.
The plant is located approximately 1]/2 miles north of Mesa Marin Raceway, just west of Valley
Lane. Installation of the state-of-the-art micro filtration system, using membrane technology,
should begin in January 2003. All underground piping is complete. Construction is on schedule
for an April 2003, initial start-up and demonstration of the plant and distribution system. This
will analyze the facilities for any adjustments prior to officially serving City residents in May
2003.
Cal Water is currently installing almost 7 miles
Of transmission and distribution water pipelines
~'? - that range in size from 18" to 54" in diameter.
~. ~ That portion of pipeline along Alfred Harrell
~.~ Highway and the major transmission lines
along Paladino Drive have been completed.
Ductile iron pipe along Panorama Drive
Installation of pipeline will continue along
Morning Drive, Panorama Drive, Fairfax
Road and Auburn Street over the next three
months. Minor traffic lane disruptions are
expected on these streets during this
installation period.
Digging, crushing material and backfilling trench along
Panorama Drive
7. REPORTS continued
C. Kern County Water Agency Mediation Process.
KERN COUNTYWATER AGENCY
Mediation Process
Wednesday, November 6, 2002
at the Kern County Water Agency's Board Room
A full breakfast will be served at 8:00 a.m.
Lunch will be served at 12:00 p.m.
Adjourn by 5:00 p.m.
Proposed Agend~a
Morning Session (Groundwater Issues)
8:00 - 8:30 a.m. Brealffast
/
8:30 - 8:45 a.m. 1. Call to order and introductions
8:45 - 9:00 a.m. 2. CVC SCADA project change order - extension of time to complete project
9:00 - 9:30 a.m. 3. Discussion of outlook for legislative activity during 2003 ~l~d to-ggoundwater
and water management (Attachment 1_)
9:30 - 10:30 a_m. 4. Report on groundwater balance information received to-date (Attachment 2)
10:30 - 12:00 a.m. 5. Discussion offi-aming decisions
A. Development of a system for computing water balances (Attachm.ent
B. Need for groundwater consultant 1. Draft scope of work (Attachment 4.)
2. List &potential consultant~ (_Attachment 5)
C. Potential next steps
1. How to address potential initial data gaps for:
a. Districts that do not have necessary data
b. Non-district areas
2. How to integrate district expertise into development of water balance
computation system and necessmy data
12:00 - 1:00 p.m. Lunch
Afternoon' Session (State Contract Issues)
1:00 - 1:30 p.m. 6. Inlroduction and overview of process to-date
1:30 - 5:00 p.m. 7. Report on progress by key issues, discussion and directions as necessary
5:00 p.m. 8. Adjourn
-3-
C IT Y O F
WATER BOARD
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
David Couch, Vice Chair
Harold Hanson
October 2, 2002
Adrienne J. Mathews, President
Kern County Water Agency
P.O. Box 58
Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058
Re: Kern County Water Agency 2002 Mediation Process
Dear Ms. Mathews:
The City of Bakersfield has held the acquisition and protection of local water
Supplies for the residents and citizens of the urban area as a high priority. With the
City's purchase of Kern River water, the construction of the "2800 Acres" recharge area,
augmented by the Agency's ID#4 state water and groundwater management program,
the long-term water supply for the existing urban area will be assured.
In 1992, the City adopted a "Statement of Water Resources Policy" (copy
attached) that is designed to set policy for the protection and preservation of Kern River
water rights and facilities for our local area. As you are aware, the Kern River is of
excellent quality, available by gravity flow and not interruptible by power outages. With
these facts in mind, the number one priority in the City's Water Policy is the protection of
Kern River water surrounding the urban area that will provide for the future orderly
growth of our community. Examples of the policy state:
Policy #1. "City owned Kern River water shall not be
utilized outside the boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley
portion of Kern County".
Policy #3. "When irrigated lands now being served by
Kern River water become urbanized, the water rights
related to these lands shall be protected to insure that
such water will continue to be available to satisfy the water
requirements of said lands".
1000 BUENA VESTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (661) 326-3715
Adrienne J. Mathews, President
September 27, 2002
Page 2
Policy #6. "The City will continue to preserve its water
resources to provide for the future orderly growth of the
City, and those benefits derived from the water rights and
properties acquired by the City from Tenneco-West on
December 22, 1976 shall remain dedicated to the
residents and taxpayers within the incorporated
boundaries of the City of Bakersfield".
In reference to the Kern County Water Agency 2002 Mediation Process, the City
wishes to call the attention of the participants to these City Council policies and the
commitment which has been made by the City Council and the Water Board to keeping
high quality Kern River water in this area.
Further, as a major contributor to the KCWA Zones of Benefit, if KCWA member
units water is sold, marketed or transferred outside the KCWA, payments to the Zone of
Benefit program should be reimbursed to the zone fund from the proceeds derived from
the sale or transfer. The subsidy derived from the zone tax collection should be repaid
to the taxpayers who subsidized the original cost of the water.
We hope these water policies and comments will be helpful to you as the KCWA
reviews its water policies and goals. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the
KCWA mediation process.
Sincerely,
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WATER BOARD
MARK C. SALVAGGIO, Chair
Attachment
cc: v'Honorable Mayor and City Council
Alan Tandy, City Manager
Bart J. Thiltgen, City Attorney
Gene Bogart, Water Resources Manager
Tom Clark, General Manager, KCWA
S:\WATER\LETTE RS\KCWA.2002Mediation.doc
7. REPORTS continued
D. Update on Request to Kern County Water Agency for Treated Water to Serve
Northwest Bakersfield.
8. OLD BUSINESS
None.
9. NEW BUSINESS
A. Letter to Kern County Board of Supervisors concerning Ordinance on Bio-solids
Application - For Board Review and Action
CITY OF ,':: '" ~-."
WATER BOARD
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
David Couch, Vice Chair '-.
Harold Hanson
November 13, 2002
JonMcQuiston, Chair D R A F T
Kern County Board of Supervisors
1115 Truxtun Avenue, 5th Floor
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: KERN COUNTY ORDINANCE ON LAND APPLICATIONS OF BIOSOLIDS
Dear Mr. McQuiston:
The City of Bakersfield Water Board is concerned about the land application of imported sewage sludge or
biosolids, on lands overlying the groundwater basin in the Southern San Joaquin Valley. Water pumped
from our local aquifer is the primary drinking water supply source for City residents. The City and its
water banking neighbors have invested many millions of dollars to preserve this primary drinking water
supply for local residents. The City is opposed to any plans or actions that may jeopardize or degrade the
quality of our groundwater supply. The land application ofbiosolids over the basin, places the aquifer at
risk of contamination and long term degradation.
In 1999 Kern County adopted Ordinance No. G-6638 to regulate the land applications ofbiosolids which
becomes effective January 1, 2003. We understand the Kern County Resource Management Agency is
drafting new amendments to this ordinance and we wish to comment and offer suggestions for the
protection of our water supplies.
The City is against the application of imported biosolids of any quality to lands overlaying the
groundwater basin. The introduction of the new classification of"Class A - Exceptional Quality" is a step
towards a cleaner sludge material, however, our goal continues to be the elimination of all imported
biosolids applied over the groundwater basin in the Southern San Joaquin Valley..
Sincerely,
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
City of Bakersfield Water Board
cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council
1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (661) 326-3715
9. NEW BUSINESS continued
B. Participation in Weather Modification Program with Kern River Interests and
Atmospherics Inc. - For Board Approval
FIGURE ~
Fresno ; ..
",,~ Msalia ·
: .,.~ 2. ~'. , ~ ..¢.- :, .,-.
..... .. ,...,.: ?: f : .... [% , -- , , : .
' ':." '.- ."'. ' ., U;'4t.A' l~['.. , , .--'
. ' ..... .'. -,'.,"':~';, . ' Lake Success
, Po~e~ille~
', .... ~ Radar and
,.,. · A~rpo~, ~, Aircra~
,, '~[
,,. ~__ '
,,, Delano '.
'%' ' -'~ ~le in MII~
~ ". Ground Gonorotor Silos o .~._.
Sofionol Pork gounOo~ ......
WEATHER MODIFICATION BY CLO~ SEEDING
The potential for beneficial wmther ~~n by cloud ~ wu diacover~zl by Dr.
Vinzent J. 5chazfer in 1948 while working at tho Omen*al £1e~tric Re~nnrch Laboratory in
~y, New York, He noted quit~ by sc.~idmt that dry ice pe~lms introduced into & cloud
formed in a freez~ chest produced tiny ice crystals (snowflakes). Dr. Iknard Vonnegm, also a
member of the Gesm~ Electric Research Tram, soon d~cov~ that ~lver ~Mick smolc~
particles produoed the same effect. Hence, the beginning sta~e of a new science and technology
Since 1948, the technology of increasing precipitation by artificial me, ax~ has moved through
three presidential investisative committees. Following the early discoveries, basic research
prosrltms at the University and $overnment levels now number in the hundreds. Foremost
among these field research prosrams has been the effort supplied by the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, The Department of Commerce, The National Science Foundation and the National
Academy of S~ienc, es. The resttlt$ from aH these fundamental and statistic~ studies since 1948
strongly indicate that increases in precipitation within the ranse of 5-15% have been achieved
from properly designed and operated cloud soeding programs. Foremost among these studies has
been those focused on orographic wintertime clouds, particularly the programs over the Sierra
Ranse in California.
At one time, thc environmental community questioned thc effects fxom cloud seedin~ programs.
Several hundred environmental studies followed these concerns. The most comprehensive
publication on potential environmental effects is, "Environmental Impacts of Artificial Xc, e
Nucleatin8 Agents", Donald A, Klein, Colorado State University. A total of' more than 400
references for various environmental studies are listed in this publication. All have indicated "no
significant negative impacta on the eavironment'.
At the prasent time there are approximately 37 active cloud ~ding programs in the United
States. Thirteen of these m-e in California. Worldwide, thea-e are presently 59 countries involved
in some type ofserious cloud seeding program.. Thc nttached list shows the individual programs
currently active in California and the number of years each has been operated. It is interesting
that the program sponsored by the Soutahem California Edison Company over the San Joaquin
River watershed is the longest continuously operated cloud seeding program in the world.
The many evaluations have included the Kern River Cloud 5ceding Program. Statistical
analyses focused on target=control streamilow data have been included in these studies. The
project radar system located on the P~le Airport has furnished almost endless data on
precipitation echoes from both ~eeded and non-seeded clouds and storm ~y~m~. All these Kern
River studies have indicated positive results which support other program studies conducted on a
worldwide basis.
GEOGBAPHIC,~L ~.~T OF
WKATHF~ MODHrICATION (CLOUD SEEDING) I~ROJECI~
OPEBA~G IN C~I2FO~IIA DURING WY2001/02·
Project River Basin ] Year~ Of
OperationI Sponsor
1. Almanor Feather 4~ Pacific Gas and Electric
2. Tahoe-T~kee Truckee 15 Dcsmrt Bae~,ltrch Institute
University of Neva~
3. Upper American American 32 Sacrnmento Municipal Utility
District
4. Upper Mokelumne Mokelumne 36 Pacific Gas and Electric
Company
5. Ca~on-Walker Carson-Walker 15 Desert Research Institute
University of N~vada
6. Tuolumne Tuolumne 10 Turlock and Modesto Irrigation
Districts
7. Eastern Sierra Mono-Owens 19 Lo~ Angeles Department of
Water and Power
8. Upper San ~loaquinSan Joaquin 52 Southern California Edison
Company
9. Kings Kings 47 Kings River Conservation
District
10. Kaweah Kaweah 37 IOtweah Delta Water
Conservation District
11. K~n Kern 38 North Kern Water Storage
District
12. Santa Barbara Santa Barbara 42 Santa Barbara County Water
Agency
13. San Gabriel San Gabriel 20 Los Angeles County
Mountains Department of Public Works
* All projects have activated occ. uionnl short-term "shutdowns" because of either power
plant construction or suspension criteria dealing with streamflow or snowpack conditions.
H~H E~LEVAT~ON SCENES
CLOUD SEEDING PYROTECHNICS
50 gram silver iodide cloud seeding flares.
Flares mounted on wing of cloud seeding aircraft
NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
33380 Cawelo Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93308-9575 P.O. Box 81435
Telephone (661) 393-2696 Bakersfield. CA 93380-1435
Facsimile (661) 393-6884
October 18, 2002
Ocr ,:,, ,_.
Ci'r~, ,-.-..-,
Buena Vista Water Storage District, Martin Milobar
City of Bakersfield Water Resources, Flom Core
Mark Mulkay, Kern Delta Water District
RE: 2002 - 2003 Weather Modification Program
Gentlemen:
Enclosed for your files is a copy of the subject contract with Atmospherics, Inc. Please
sign the copy of this letter where noted that certifies your agreement to participate in 25% of the
costs of the program and return to North Kern. Please note the $5,710 increase in costs, the first
increase in a number of years, is pursuant to the August 19, 2002 letter previously sent to you,
copy attached.
Very truly yours,
C. H. WILLIAMS
Staff Assistant
We agree to our 25% share
of the program for 2002-2003
Name
Agency Date
Enclosure
CONTRACT
This contract entered into this 8TM day of October 2002 by and between the NORTH KERN
WATER STORAGE DISTRICT, a Water Storage District organized and existing under and by virtue
of Division 14 of the California Water Code, hereinafter referred to as the "District" and, Atmospherics
Incorporated, a California corporation hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS: the Department of Water Resources, State of California, initially issued to the
District a permit for Weather Resources Management (hereinatter referred to as the "permit"), dated
July 2, 1980 (Permit #11), which authorizes the District to conduct a Weather Resources Management
Program (hereinafter referred to as the "Program"); and
WHEREAS: the Contractor has on its staff qualified and recognized weather resources
management personnel and other professionals necessay to carry out and supervise the program and
has at its disposal the equipment necessary to carry out the program;
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows:
1. Contractor shall engage in artificial cloud nucleation operations during the term of this contract,
within the target area identified by and consistent with the INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF KERN RIVER WEATHER MODIHCATION PROGRAM
and the above referenced permit. The purpose of this cloud nucleation operation is to increase
precipitation within the target area.
2. The term of this contract shall cover one seasonal operational period beginning on November 1,
2002 and ending on May 31, 2003.
3. The Contractor shall furnish and have available for use during the operational period the following
equipment and personnel:
a) The Contractor agrees to have available on a 24-hour-per-day, 7-day-per-week basis the
services ofa competem staffto furnish full meteorological data.
b) A complete radar system of the type designed to track precipitation areas within storms will be
located at the vicinity of Porterville, California and shall be installed to cover the target area to
the best advantage.
c) All basic weather data will be processed at the head office of the contractor in Fresno and will
be available at the location of the radar system. This information will be used to coordinate
various phases of the field program.
d) Telephone and power facilities will be maintained at the location of the radar system.
e) A weather radio receiver will be additionally maintained at the location of the radar system for
receiving hourly airway weather reports.
f) Contractor will provide special photographic equipment designed to furnish permanent
records of the various phases of the program. These photographs will be used to study and
analyze various storm situations and will be made available to the District upon request.
g) A cloud seeding akcratt will be based at the Porterville Municipal Airport. This aircraf~ will
be equipped for all-weather flying. It will be further equipped with facih'ties for dispensing
silver iodide and other nucleating agents for use in cloud seeding activities throughout the
The contractor agrees that its akcratt and equipment thereon will be certified by the Federal
Aviation Administration, an agency of the United States of America, and that any and all
pilots operating akcratt for or on behalxe of the Contractor shall be duly licensed by the said
Federal Aviation Administration.
h) Contractor will install, operate and maintain five (5) silver iodide ground generators for use on
the program during those periods when windflow directions and velocities fi.om southerly
directions make akbome seeding impractical due to military restricted air space southeast of
the target area.
i) Contractor will provide a service vehicle for field work related to all ground and air equipment
utilized on the project.
j) Contractor will furnish the following personnel who will be stationed within or near the
project area during the contract period:
1) One radar meteorologist
2) One instrument rated cloud seeding pilot
3) One radar technician
4) One field serviceman and equipment technician
k) Thomas J. Henderson shall supervise the program and act as Contractor Representative.
4. The primary nucleating agent will be silver iodide, which shall be dispensed fi.om aircraft and
ground generators. Other advanced nucleating agents may be utili?ed as spedal storm
characteristics may suggest.
2
5. The Contractor shall prepare all reports pertaining to the program required to be filed by the
Contractor and District to comply with Federal and State Law. The Contractor shall furnish
monthly operational reports during the full course of the cloud nucleating operation. As soon as
practical after the conclusion of each yearly operational period, the Contractor will furnish the
District a final operations report covering the entire yearly operation.
6. The Contractor shall fi~nish and keep in force during the operational period the following
insurance: comprehensive public liability and property damage insurance in the amount of not less
than $2,000,000, covering the operation of all its equipment owned or leased including aircraft and
workers compensation insurance. Such insurance shall be maintained at Contractor's cost. With
respect to the above referenced insurance policies, the contractor shall deposit Certificates of
Insurance with District prior to the commencement of the operational period reflecting the
existence of the required insurance. The certificates of insurance for the comprehensive public
liability and property damage insurance and the aviation bodily injury and property damage liability
insurance additionally shall name North Kem Water Storage District, Buena V'~na Water Storage
District, Kern Delta Water District, and the City of Bakersfield, and their officers, agents and
employees, as additionally named insureds. Parties require a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation.
7. Contractor agrees to be responsible for, and to indemnify and hold the District harmless and free
from, all claims of damage to person or property of any kind or character whatsoever, caused by
Contractor's acts of negligence of malpractice in its cloud seeding operations.
8. Contractor agrees to be bound by all the laws of the State of California and the Federal
Government, and that prior to commencing the operation under the contract for the District, the
Contractor shall have in force all necessary licenses and permits from the State of California to so
operate.
9. This Contract may be canceled by the District for any of the following reasons upon five days
written notice, sent by mail to the principal office of the Contractor.
a) The issuance of any court of competent jurisdiction of any temporary or permanent injunction
against all or any part of the cloud nucleation operations undertaken by Contractor under this
contract, whether the District is a part of said legal proceedings or not. It is understood that
the issuance of any temporary restraining order, or any temporary injunction limited by its
terms to a period of less than twenty (20) days in duration, shall not constitute a basis for
cancellation under this paragraph.
b) The passage of any overriding legislation by the State of California which shall outlaw, limit,
void or alter in any substantial respect any provisions of this contract, or shall make unlawful or
improper in any substantial respects, any of the operations of the Contractor under this
contract.
c) For any reason considered in the best interest of the District.
3
In the event of cancellation by the District under or pursuant to the tea'rrm of 9a through 9e
above, all monies already paid to the Contractor by the District shall be retained by the
Contractor as compensation for services akeady performed. If the District requests a mnanm~
report on the cloud seeding operations for that season up to the time of such cancellation,
Contractor will furnish such a report.
10. In the event the District derides that additional precipitation is not desired for any portion of the
operational period, the District may suspend cloud seeding operations for any specified portion
of such operational period by providing three (3) days notice to the Contractor. In the event the
District suspends operations under this paragraph, Contractor will reimburse the District in the
amount of $250.00 for each day of the suspension.
11. District agrees to pay the Contractor for the services rendered, as outlined in this contract, the
total sum of ONE HUNDRED AND FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TEN DOI JARS
($104,110), PLUS AN AMOUNT OF ONE HUNDllF. D EIGHTY FOUR DOI.I.ARS
($184.00) PER. HOUR OF AIRCRAFT SF. EDING FLIGHT TIME PLUS SI:.k--T)ING
MATERIALS IN PAYMENTS AS SET FORTH BELOW. It is understood and agreed that
this sum includes the total fee for all aircratt flights and evaluations of the program.
12. SCHEDUI~E OF PAYMENTS:
PAYMENT DATE AMOUNT
1 November 2002 15,000
1 December 2002 15,000 + November conmmables
1 January 2003 15,000 + December conmmables
1 February 2003 15,000 + January consumables
1 March 2003 15,000 + February consumables
1 April 2003 11,000 + March consumables .'~
1 May 2003 11,~00.+ April consumables
1 June 2003 7,110 + May consumables
TOTAL: $104,110 + all consumables
Consumables are considered to be aircraft flight time and seeding materials. Special liability insurance
("consequential loss") at the $1,000,000 coverage level can be supplied for an additional cost of
$3,200. This can be separately billed as a pass-through cost if desired by the District.
13. Any notice to be given hereunder may be served personally or by depositing the same in the
United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to the party being notified at his address as
set forth below, or at such other address as may be hereafter designated in writing. If sen, ed by
ma/l, service shall be conclusively deemed to have been made upon deposit in the United States
mail.
4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals to this contract the day
and year first herein,above written.
ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 81435
Bakersfield, California 93380-1435
NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
~,, ,%,-~ ::.R
__ B
~.~n~- ~. - ~'W~"
ATTEST:
t%h~_ . .COO " ......
Secretary
Date
ADDRES S:
5652 E. Dayton Avenue
Fresno, California 93727
AmOS?~cs~~t~~
President' "~r'~
Secretary
Date
atmospherics incorp°rate l
19 Angust 2002
Mr. Dana Munn
~nginec;-Manager ..
North Kern Water'Storage District ~'~, ~':5 ::, c... :,...
33380 Cawelo Ave. · .......... ~
Bakersfield, CA 93308-9575
RE: Contract for Weather Modification Program
Dear Dana:
Don't know how the time gets away so fast, but the contract renewal of the present one-year
NKWSD Cloud Seeding Program will soon be up for consideration. Some of the other six
programs we conduct in California are also up for renewal, and the rest are on ruultiple year
contracts with another year or two before contract expiration.
Of course, we would be pleased to continue as the contractor for this work. Costwise, we are in
the same boat as everyone. Prices on essentially everything are going up, up, up! In our case,
the major items which affect Atmospherics Incorporated, and their percentage increases over the
past two years, are the following:
AircraR fuel +46%
AircraR parts +67%
Radar parts +41%
Insurance (all categories) +37%
Silver Iodide +21%
Other general operating requirements +16%
I'm sure you are aware of the cost spiral on everything we try to do these days. In the case of an
overall cost increase for the NKWSD Cloud Seeding Program, we are willing to conduct the
program for another year with a general cost increase of 5.8%. The total base cost for the period
I November 2002 through 31 May 2003 would then move upward fi.om the present $98,400 to
$104,110. In our view the basi: NKWSD contract terms would require no changes from the
previous contract, except for the proper dates and costs. A suggested payment schedule would
then be:
I November 2002 $15,000
I December 2002 $15,000 + November Consumables
I January 2003 $15,000 + December Consumables
I February 2003 $15,000 + January Consumables
I March 2003 $15,000 + February Consumables
1 April 2003 $11,000 + March Consumables
1 May 2003 $11,000 + April Consumables
1 June 2003 $ 7,110 + May Consumables
TOTAL $104,110 + All Consumables
Consumables are considered to be aircrat~ flight time and seeding materials. Special liability
insurance ("consequential loss") at the $1,000,000 coverage level can again be supplied for an
additional cost of $3,200. This can be separately billed as a pass-through cost if desired by the
District.
Again, it has been a great pleasure for our group to conduct this historic program for the district
during the past several years. We would certainly be pleased to continue this effort within a
single or multiple-year contract.
Most sincerely,
Tom Henderson
President
Cc: Chuck Williams
9. NEW BUSINESS continued
C. Letter to Supervisor Jon McQuiston regarding Kern River Bikepath.
WATER BOARD --'
Mark C. Salvaggio, Chair
David Couch, Vice Chair
Harold Hanson
November 13, 2002
Mr. Jon McQuiston ~J "" " L~
SUPERVISOR, DISTRICT NO. 1 and CHAIRMAN
Kern County Board of Supervisors
1115 Truxtun Avenue., 5th Floor
Bakersfield, CA. 93301
Re: KERN RIVER BIKEPATH
The purpose of this letter is to update your office on the progress of the Kern River Bikepath.
As you know, since the mid-1970s the bike path has been a highly popular and successful local
project for our community.
Since adoption of the KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT in July of 1985, the City of Bakersfield
and the County of Kern have worked closely together to maintain a priority to complete portions of
the bikepath located in the Kern River Parkway whenever funding resources became available.
Following the passage of Proposition 12 (the Park Bond) and Proposition 13 (the Water Bond) by the
California voters in March of 2000, the City has undertaken an aggressive program to complete the
bikepath along the Kern River from Lake Ming to Freeway I-5 by the end of 2003.
To update you on our progress so far, the 9omile portion of the Bikepath located between the
Enos Lane parking lot and Stockdale Hwy. bridge was completed and opened to the public on
November 1,2002.
Plans and specifications to widen and improve the bikepath between Stockdale Hwy. bridge
and Manor Street are now being drafted. Actual work is scheduled to begin on this section of the
bikepath next Spring with completion estimated for late Summer of 2003.
The northeast reach of the bikepath between Fairfax Road and Paladino/Morning Drive is
currently under design and will be completed in calendar year 2003. The portion of the bikepath
connecting the intersection of Paladino/Morning Drive to the parking lot at California Living Museum
(C.A.L.M.) is completed and will officially open when the Emergency call boxes are installed in the
near future.
1000 BUENA VISTA ROAD · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93311 · (661) 326-3715
Mr. Jon McQuiston
Supervisor, District No. 1 and Chairman
Page 2
As you are aware, the City and County entered into a cooperative agreement in March of this
year (Kern County Agr. # 197-2002) to provide Proposition 12 funding to the County to extend the
Kern River Bikepath from C.A.L.M. past Lake Ming to the eastern-most river parking lot located in the
Kern River County Park. If the County is able to complete this last link of the Kern River Bikepath in
2003, the entire 30-mile Class 1 bikeway could be operational beginning 2004.
We ask you and your Board's support in this joint effort to complete last remaining link in this
unique community resource.
Sincerely,
Mark Salvaggio
Water Board Chairman
cc: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Alan Tandy, City Manager
S:\WB MINUTES 2002\WBLTRBOS1113.doc
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE': April 24, 2002 J AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
I
ITEM: 8. u.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
FROM: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD ),t~l~.
DATE: April 12, 2002 CITY A'I-rORNEY //'~
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement with County of Kern for use of Proposition 12 Funds to extend the
Kern River Bike Path (Ward 3)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Agreement.
BACKGROUND: One of the projects approved by the State is the extension of the Kern River Bike Path,
approximately (3) miles from the California Living Museum (C.A.L.M.) through the Lake Ming area to the
eastern river parking lot in Kern River County Park. Since this stretch of the bike path is entirely on the
County of Kern's property the County would be the lead for engineering and construction of this project.
The City of Bakersfield has authority from the State Resources Agency to construct improvements along the
Kern River Parkway utilizing Proposition 12 (Park Bond 2000) grant funds. The terms and conditions for
construction of the projects and use of the Funding has been formalized in Grant Agreement No.'Z2-1
between our agencies.
This agreement would allow for the construction of the Kern River Bike Path Extension (East) by the County
under the terms of the Proposition 12 Grant Agreement No. 72-1. The City will be the fund conduit for
payments from the State.
On March 19, 2002 the County Board of Supervisors approved this agreement between the City and County
for use of Proposition 12 Funds for the Kern River Bike Path Extension.
Funding for this project is currently budgeted in the Water Resources C.I.P. Budget.
April 15, 2002, 10:26am
S:~002 ADM RPTS~,P24WT1CC
Kern Coa:~ty
AGREEMENT NO. 0 ~ -
APR 2&
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT B~EEN
CI~ OF BAKERSFIELD AND ~E COUN~
OF KERN FOR USE OF PROPOSITION 12
FUNDS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on ~ ~ g ~ , by and
between the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a charter city and municipal corporation ("CITY"
herein), and the COUNTY OF KERN, a political subdivision of the State of California
("COUNTY" herein).
RECITALS' '
WHEREAS, the CITY has received access to certain Proposition 12 grant funds
under Grant Agreement No. Z2-1 (attached as Exhibit"A"), the Kern River Parkway Project,
for improvements on the Kern River Bike Path; and
WHEREAS, the community will benefit from an extension of the Kern River Bike
Path from the California Living Museum ("C.A.L.M.") to past Lake Ming to the eastern-most
river parking lot in Kern River County Park ("Project" herein); and
WHEREAS, CITY desires to work with COUNTY to extend the Kern River Bike Path
from C.A.L.M. past Lake Ming to the eastern-most river parking lot in Kern River County
Park; and
WHEREAS, CITY will be the fund conduit for payments from the State to the
COUNTY under the terms of the Proposition 12 grant and Grant Agreement No. Z2-1; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY has been given a copy of Grant Agreement No. Z2-1, and
said Agreement is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth and the
COUNTY is willing to extend the Kern River Bike Path under the terms of said grant,
NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the above recitals herein, CITY and COUNTY
mutually agree as follows:
1. (~RANT. Grant funds to extend the Kern River Bike Path have become
available under Grant Agreement No. Z2-1 for the Kern River Parkway Project, Park Bond
2000, said funds coming from Proposition 12 monies. Among other conditions, under the
terms of the grant a three (3) mile extension (east) of the Kern River Bike Path may be
funded from the California Living Museum past Lake Ming to the eastern-most river parking
lot in Kern River County Park. Said Project will provide for the restoration of river riparian
habitat adjacent to the new bike path and re-vegetation of stream-side areas along the
south bank of the Kern River Channel adjacent to the new bike path and trailhead areas.
Temporary signage will be installed to indicate Proposition 12 (Park Bond 2000).re~t~.~.~
funding source.
r'
ADD:Isc
S:~Public Wm-ks~grs\CltyCounlyCoOpProp12Fnds.wp_d. Page 1 of 4 Pages -- ORIGiNAl.
March 7, 2002
2. CITY-COUNTY COOPERATION. Under the terms of the grant, COUNTY
shall coordinate the planning and construction of the Kern River Bike Path ExtenSion (East)
with the CITY and State. COUNTY shall plan and construct the Project within the terms
of the grant and submit to CITY progress payment requests as the work is completed.
COUNTY understands it will need to expend construction funds and be reimbursed by the
State thereafter. CITY shall expeditiously process each such request and forward same
to the State within a reasonable time. After payment of sums requested by the State to
CITY, CITY shall forward same to COUNTY. Neither CITY nor COUNTY shall charge
administrative fees or overhead to the State or to one another. CITY and COUNTY agree
to fully cooperate in completing the Project and work together to resolve any questions
which may be asked by the State concerning the Project. CITY and COUNTY agree to
expend all reasonable efforts to obtain State funding for the Project and recoup any funds
expended under the terms of the grant. CITY and COUNTY understand that among other
approvals the State must approve the design prior to the COUNTY bidding the Project and
starting construction.
3. ACCOUNTING RECORDS. CITY and COUNTY shall maintain accurate
accounting records and other written documentation pertaining to ali costs incurred in
performance of this Agreement. Such records and documentation shall be kept at CITY's
and COUNTY's offices during the term of this Agreement, and for a period of three (3)
years from the date of the final payment hereunder, and said records shall be made
available to CITY or COUNTY representatives upon request at any time during regular
business hours.
4. ASSIGNMENT. Neither this Agreement, nor any interest in it, may be
assigned or transferred by any party without the prior written consent of ali the parties.
5. BINDING EFFECT. The rights and obligations of this Agreement shall inure
to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the parties to the Agreement and their heirs,
administrators, executors, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
6. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously or in
one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which
together constitute one and the same instrument.
7. E,Y~=.~=L~J.Q~. This Agreement is effective upon execution. It is the product
of negotiation and all parties are equally responsible for authorship of this Agreement.
Section 1654 of the California Civil Code shall not apply to the interpretation of this
Agreement.
8. GOVERNING LAW. The laws of the State of California will govern the
validity of this Agreement, its interpretation and performance. Any litigation arising in any
way from this Agreement shall be brought in Kern County, California.
9. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each party shall execute and deliver such
papers, documents, and instruments, and perform such acts as are necessary or
appropriate, to implement the terms of this Agreement and the intent of the parties to this
Agreement. '~
ADD:Isc
$:'~Pubiic Works~Agrs\CityCountyCoOI3Prop12Fnds,w~l._ Page 2 of 4 Pages -- ,~')Ht(~NA~
March 7, 2002
10. JOINT LIMITATION ON LIABILITIES AND INDEMNIFICATION.
10.1 Neither party shall be liable to the other party for any loss, damage,
liability, claim or cause of action for damage to or destruction of
property or for injury to or death of persons arising solely from any act
or omission of the other party's officers, agents or employees.
10.2 CITY and COUNTY agree to indemnify and hold each other harmless
from any and all claims, demands, liabilities, losses or causes of
action which arise by virtue of its own acts or omissions (either directly
or through or by its agents, officers, or employees) to such extent and
in such part as the respective parties are found by reason of law to
have proximately caused the injury or damage.
10.3 The party against whom any claim arising from any subject matter of
this Agreement is filed shall give prompt notice of the filing of the
claim to the other party.
11. MERGER...AND MODIFICATION. This Agreement sets forth the entire
Agreement between the parties and supersedes all other oral or written representations.
This Agreement may be modified only in a writing approved by all the parties.
12. NO WAIVER OF DEFAULT. The failure of any party to enforce against
another party any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of that party's
right to enforce such a provision at a later time, and shall not serve to vary the terms of this
Agreement.
13. NOTICES. All notices relative to this Agreement shall be given in writing and
shall be personally served or sent by certified or registered mail and be effective upon
actual personal service or depositing in the United States mail. The parties shall be
addressed as follows, or'at any other address designated by notice:
CITY: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
City Hall
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
COUNTY: COUNTY OF KERN
Department of Parks and Recreation
1110 Golden State Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
14. PAYMENT PROCEDURE. COUNTY shall be paid after receipt of properly
documented request for the work completed as required by the State of California in
accordance with the terms of the grant. Payment by CITY to COUNTY shall be made after
receipt of the payment from the State of California. A portion of the payment (10%) will be
withheld by the State of California until the Project is completed.
ADO:Isc
s:~,~t~=wo.,~v~s~c~co..~c~o,,~2~.~.w~__ Page 3 of 4 Pages -- "
March 5, 2002
15. ~T~RTING WORK. COUNTY shall not begin work until authorized to do so
in writing by the State of California.
16. TERMINATION. in the event that funds are no longer made available for the
Project or if the State of California fails to approve the design of the Project, COUNTY may,
at its election, terminate this Agreement by written notice to CITY. Said termination shall
be deemed effective ten (10) days after personal delivery, or fifteen (15) days after mailing
by regular U.S. mail, postage prepaid. In addition, either party may immediately terminate
this Agreement should the other party fail to substantially perform in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the
termination. It is also agreed that COUNTY will not be required to perform under this
Agreement if it becomes necessary to expend funds beyond those available for
reimbursement under the Grant Agreement for the construction of the Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed, the day and year first above Written.
TY OF BAK~' COUNT~IOF KERN ("COUN~:'~')
c,
By: - By'
H^RVE rL..ALL /
CHAIRMAN, Board of Supervisors
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BART J. THILTGEN BERNARD C. BARMANN, SR,
City Attorney Coun~.~C ~Iel//~
~_...//ALAN ~3.~ANI~' Deputy City Attorney
COUNTERSIGNED: APPROVE~ AS TO CONTENT:
ROBERT D. ADDISON
J ~ce Director Parks and Recreation Director
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
$'co'n' E. JONF~'~
Kern County Administrative -'- ~
Page 4 of 4 Pages --
. Tile Resources Agency
GRANT AGREEMENT
' Park Bond 2000 EXHIBIT NO.
APPLIC~T: Ci~ of Bakersfield AG~M~ffT ~UMB~R: Z2-1
PROJECT TITL~: Kern River Parkway Proiects
PRO~ECT P~O~C~ PE~OD IS: October !~ 20{)0 to M~y 1~ 2004
Under ~c te~ and condk~ons of ~is a~e~cnt. Ibc applier agmcs to complclc thc proj~t ~ d~cribcd in thc projc~ d~cdption, ~d
thc State of California, acting through'thc Resour~ Agency punu~t to thc Safe Ncigh~rho~ P~ks, Clcan Watcr, ~c~ Air. ~d C~tal
Prmccdon Bond Act of 2000, ag~ to fund thc project up to thc tma[ state grant amoun~ indi~Icd. '
PROJ~ DESC~PTIOH: Completiou of scvcn projects along ~e Kern ~vcr Par~ay: widen and
improve 9 mil~ of existing Kern River Bike Path; 3-mile extension of Kern ~vcr Bike Pa~ ~ast);
expansion of greenbelt, signage and kiosks; complct~on of equestrian' trail alignmeut; expansion of
traiihead parking areas and development of additional recreational facilitics; river shoreline
improvement; and acquisition of approximately 157 acres of specified privately owned prope~cs
from ~e Wanamaker Trust, Texaco Exploration and Production, and Dorothy J. Moore, Trustc~
Total ~tatc G~t not to exceed $2,358,500 (DC project costs, whichever is Ies~)
~e Special ~d General ?rovisions attached arc made a p~ of~d inco~o~tcd into ~c A~eement.
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD STATE OF CAI~IFORNIA
~Ap~ THE RESOURCES AGENCy .
By ~ '
Title
Date
- CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING
AM UNTOF ~-----------------~sT MATE FUND AGREEMENT NUMBER FUND
$ S2.358,500 Z2-1 005002 Parks Bond Fund ,.Prop 12
ADJ. INCRE. ASiNG ENCUMBRANCE APPROPRIATION
s 005002-2000-101
ADJ DECREASING ENCUMBRANCE FUNCTION
s Local Assistance
UNF~CUMUEILED BALANCE LINE ITEM ALLO'I'M ENT { CH'AP'I'ER ] ~,T~'fUTE ] FISCAL YEAK
s 0540-101-0005002 { 152 [ 2000 [ 200 0
T.B.A. NO, B.R. NO.
INDEX ' J OLIJ: EXPEN0 I FCA 'PROJ ECTIW'CIRK PHASE
0540 1751.04 I 10107
! hereby ¢cnify upon my personal knowledge lhat budgctcd funds arc available f~ this cncumbrancc
ONAC~
KF:RN RIYER PARKWAY PROJFGTS
Prop 12 (Park Bond) Act of 2000
Project Name Project Description
2) Kern River Bike Path In co-operation with the County of Kern Parks Department, this
Extension (East) project will construct and extend the bike path along the Kern
River between California Living Museum and Lake Ming Loop
(3miles). The project will provide restoration of river riparian
habitat adjacent to the new bike path and will include re-
vegetation of streamside areas along the south bank of the Kern
River channel and trailhead areas. This project is one o! three
phases of the bike path that will ultimately extend 30 miles from
Lake Ming on the east to Interstate Highway 5 on the west when
fully completed. Finally temporary signage will be installed at
various points along the project to indicate Proposition 12
( Park Bond 2000) as the funding source.
2 ORIGtNAL
2) Kern River Bike Path Extension (East)
DEVELOPMENT COST ESTIMATE WITH
PERCENTAGES BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY
Scope of Work Estimated Cost Percent
Construction of Project
- Compacted embankment with Class Ii Aggregate Base $ 75,000 16.7
- Asphalt concrete (type 'B") $'. 320,000 71.1
- Restoration of Riparian Habitat $ 30,000 6.7
Subtotal $ 425,000
~" Engineering and Administration
- Civil Engineering $ 25~000 5.5
- Administration $ -0- .,
Total cost of the project $ 450,000' ,100,0
PROJECT TIME TABLE
SCOPE OF WORK REQUEST FUNDS ESTIMATED
FROM STATE COMPLETION DATE
Engineering and Design Oct. 2001 April 2002
Bidding and Award Contract July 2002
Construction of Project May 2002 Nov. 2002
Request release of retention Dec. 2002
GRANT AGREEMENT
Special Provisions
Recipients of grant funding pursuant to the Sale Drinking Water. Clean Water. Watershed Protection, and Rood
Protection Act of 2000 shall post signs acknowledging the source of the funds pursuant to Ihe sign guidelines Issued by
the Secretary of the Resources Agency.
Every proposed activity to be ~nded pumuant to the Safe Neighborhood Pa~s. Clean Water. Clean Air. and Coastal
Protection Bond Act or' 2000. shall be In COmpliance wilh the California Environmental Quality A~ (Division 13
(commencing with Section 21000,1) Section 5096.307(a).
Lands acquired with funds allocated pu,,'suanl to the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Nr, and Coastal
Protection Bond ACt of 2000. shall be acquired from a willing seller of the land. (Seciion 5096.307(b) of the Public
Resource Code).
Upon a finding by the administering entity that a particular project for which funds have been allocated canr~ be completed, ~
that the funds are in excess ol' Ihe total needed, the legislature may reallocete I~K~se funds for other high priority needs
consistent with the Safe Neighborhood Pa~ks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Pro[eclion Bond Act of 2000 {Section
5096.3075 of the Public Resources Code).
It is the Intent of the Legis~ture to strongly encourage every state or ~ government agency receiving the bond funds
allocated pursuant to the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air. and CoastaI.Proteclion Bond Act of 2000, ~or
an eclJvtty to give full and proper consideraUon to the use of recycled and reusable products whenever po~ible with regard tO
carrying out that a~ty. (Section 5096.306 of the Pul~ic Resources Code).
Grantee agrees to su1:x~t detailed bu~gets for all projects when detailed plans and specll'~aUon.s are complete. ~ to
requesting conlrector bidS. If, following the request for conlractor bids. the Project budget does not aco~rate~¥ rellect the
allocation of itemized Project costs, the Grantee s~ll submit a revised Project budget to the State. Grantee agrees to prompl~y
submit updated Project budgel~ to the State whenever the allocation of itemized Project costs changes by at Ieast ten (10%)
percent.
General Provisions
A. Oefinltlons
1. The term 'Act' means the enabling [egislaUon foe the program under which grants are being given.
2. 'r'ne term 'Acquisition' means to acquire a fee interest or any other interest inc~tding easements and
deveJopment dghts in real property, from a willing seller.
3. The ten~ 'Application' as used herein means the individual application fon'n and ils required attachments
for granls pursuant to the enabling legislalJon and/o~ program.
4. The term 'Development' means improvements to real property by construction of new facilities ot
renovation or additions to exis~ng facilities.
5. The.term 'Grantee' means an applicant who has a signed agreement for grant funds,
6. The ten'n 'Project' means fbe acquisiEon, development or o~er activity described ~n page 1 ~ this'
Agreement to be accomplished with grant funds.
7. The term *State' means the State of California, Secretary of the Resources Agency.
B. Project Execution
1. Subject to the availab~ity of grant moneys in the Act. [he State hereby granLs to [he grantee a sum of
money (grant moneys) not to exceed the amounl stated on page I in consideration1 of and on cond[lior~
that fha sum be expended in carrying out the purposes as set fod, h in fha Desc~ption of Project on page 1
and under the terms and condil~ons set rod. h in this Agreement.
C.-~-antee shalt assume any obligation to l'urnish any additional fund= that may be necessary to complete
the project. Any mediliceUon or ali~alion in the project as set forth in the applicaUon on ~e with the State
must be submlited tO the Slate for approval.
2. Grantee shall complete Ihe Project In accerda'nce with the Ume of project performance .~t forth on page
*..._ and under the terms and con~Uons of this Agreement. Extensions may be requeste~ in advance and
be comddered in the event o1' circumslances beyond the conb'ol o! the Grantee.
3. Grantee shal~ comply; as lead agency with Ihe Cali~'omia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources
Code, Section 21000, et. seq.)
· 4. If the Project includes development, the grantee shall comply with all current laws and regulalior~ which
apply to development projecls, including, but not limited to. legal requimmenLs t'or construction contracl.s,
building codes health and sale ,;odes, and disabled access laws.
5. C~antee sha~l permit pedo(~c site visits by the State to determine ii' development woA is in accordance
with the approved Project Scope inducllng a final inspeclJon upon Project comp~eUon.
6. Prior to the c~'nmencement of any wod~, Grantee agrees lo submit In writing any sign/§cant deviation
the original Project Scope to ~he State [or p~ior approval. Changes in Project Scope must conlJnue to
meet U~e need cited In the original applicalJon or they WII~ not be approved.
?. ii' Ihe Pm~ect. Includes acquisil~on of real property, the grantee agrees to comply with all appticab~e
state and local laws or ordlnance~ that apply to relocation and ma~ property acquisilion by public agendas.
8. Gt'antee agrees to provide for public access in accordance with the intent and provisions of the
9. Grantee must have (1) fee title, {2} lease hold (3) other interest to Project lands and demonstrate I~ the
satisfaction of the Slate ti'mt the proposed Project wil! provide public benefits that are comm~surate with
the type and dumUor~ of the interest in land as determined by the State that is held by the Ggantee.
10. Grantee agrees to provide a copy of all memo~'andums of understanding or other cooperative
~;Feements between Grantee and ali other participating agencies for the project.
Pr~ec~ Costs
The Grant monies to be provided Grantee under this agreement will be disbursed as follows.'
1. I! the Project includes Acquisition o[ mai property, and is through ~egotiated purchase, the Slate may
disbu~e [ha amount of the Slate approved purc,~se price together with Sla~e approved costs d
Acquisition when an escrow is opened. The amount disbursed in any event shall not exceed the State
Grant amount set fodh on page 1 of this AgreemenL The remainder, it any, shall be reimbursed alter the
Project is completed.
2. . If the Project IncJudes development, the Stele may disburse to g~ntee grant mo~eys as fonows, but not to
exceed in any event the Slate grant amount set forth of pal~e I of this Agreement:
a. On a reimbursement basis for construcl/~n and development c~osts.. Ten percent o! the grant
amount w~] be held beck and issued as a t~nal payment upon complelion of the project.
b. Remaining grant ~unds sha~l be paid up to the amount of the Grant ~ the actual Project cost,
whichever is les,s, on compteUon of Ihe Project and receipt of a dete,'ted summary o[ Project
costs fi'om lhe granlee.
C. Advance payments may be made if warranted by compelling need.
3. ~[ee should allow four to six weeks to mca[ye reimbursement from the State alter submitting the
request for payment.
D. Project AdmlnistraUon
Grantee agrees to pmmplJy submit such reports as the Slate may ~:equesL in any event Grantee shall
provide .~late a report showing Iolal t'mal Project expenditures.
2. Grantee agrees that property and t'ac~iUes acquired or developed pursuant to this Agreement shall be
available for inspection upon request by the Slate.
3. Grantee agrees to use any money~ advanced by the Stale under [he [arms of this Agree~ent solely for
._ the Project herein described.
.'~RIGINAL
..._ 4. It grant moneys ;re advanced, the grantee shall place moneys In a separate inLer~lt beating accounl,
Setting up and identifying such account prior to the advance, tntm'est earned on grant moneys shall be
u~ed on the Project or paid to the State. If grant moneys are advanced and not expended, the unused
portion of the Grant shall be returned to the State within 60 days at' complel~on of the Project or end of the
Project Performance Pmiod. whichever ~s earlier.
5. Grantee shall use income earned by the gFantee from use of the Project to further Project purposes, or, if
· approved by the State, for related purposes within the grantee's jurisdiction.
6. Grantee shag submit a~ documental,on for project completion and final reimbursement within 90 days of
project coral:delian, but no later than May 1.2004. The May 1, 2004 date does not apply If the State has
formerly granted an extension of the project complelJo~ date.
7. Payment Documentation:
AJI payment requests must be submitted using a completed Payment Request Form. (Appendix D). This
form must be accompanied by an itemized list of all charges documenting chec~ numbers, amounts,
dates, rec~pieniso and purpose of expenditures. In addition, the payment request will inciude an itemized
descrlpUon of all ~ done for which disbursement is requested. Any payment request that Is submitted
without the itemization wiU not be authorized. If the itemization or documentation is inc~'nplete,
· inadequate or inaccurate, Ihe State will inform the Grantee and hold the payment request unUI all required
information is received or corrected. Any penalties imposed on the Grantee by a co~tmctor because of
delays in payment wig be paid by the Grantee and is not reimbursable u,'k:ler th~s grant.
E. Project Terminat~
1. C.~-antee may unilatm-agy rescind thLs Agreement at any th-ne prior to tho commencement at' the Project.
After Project commencement this Agreement may be resc~ded, modified or amended by mutual
agreement In writing.
2. Failure by the grantee to comply ~th the terms of this Agreement or any other Agreement under the Act
ma), be cause for suspension oF aZ! obligal~ons of the State hereunder.
3. Fa'lure o~ the grantee to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall not be cause for the suspension of
all obligaUons of the State hereunder if in the judgment of the State such l'aiture was due to no fault of the
grantee, itl such case, any amount required Lo setUe at minimum cost any In'evocabte obligations property
incurred shall be eligible ror reimbursement under this ^greemenL
4. Because the benefit to be dedved by the State, from the full compliance by the grantee with ~ terms oi
this Agreement, is the preservation, protecUOn and net increase in the quantity and quaJity of parks, public
recmarlon Parities anG/or historical resources available to the people of the State of Cal;rfomIa and
because suc~ benefit exceeds tO an immeasurable and unascertalnable extent the amount of mormy
furnished by the State by way of gra~t money~ under the provisions of Ih[s agreement, the grantee agrees
that payrrm~t by the g~'antee to the State of an amount equal to the amount of the grant moneys disbursed
under this Agreement by the State would be ~adequeta compens~tio~ [o the SLate for any breach by the
grantee of this AgreernenL. The grantee [udher agrees therefore, that the appropriate remedy in the event
of a breach by the granlee or U~s Agreement shall t~e the specific pedormance of this ,~greement. unless
other-wise agreed to by the State.
5.Grantee and State agree that if th~ Pr~ect includes development, final payment may not be made un~Jl
the Project confomts substantially to this AgreemenL
F, Indemnification
The grantee agrees lo indemnify, defend, and save harmless the state, ils officers, agar,ts, and
employees from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulUng to grantee and to any and all
conba~=to~, subcontractors, materialman, laborers, and any other person, firm, or corporation furnishing or
supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connecUon with the performance of this agreement, and
from any and ail claims and losses accruing or resuliieg to any person, firm or cofporaUon who may be
injured or damaged by the grantee in the performance o! this agreement.
G. Financial Records
1. Grantee shall maintain satisfactory finandal accounts, documents and records I'or the Project and to make
b'~m aveiJable to the slate for auditing at reason;~ble times. Grantee shall also to retain such §nanc~ai
accounts, Oocuments and records for three yeas following protect lerminatJon or completion.
2. Grantee and State agree that during reguJar office hours each of the parties hereto and their duly
authorized representatives shall have the right to inspect and make copras of any books, records or
reports o[~ the other party pertaining to t,~s agreement or matters related thereto. Grantee shall maintain
and make available lr~r inspe~on by the State accurale records of ~ of its cesta, dlsbursemenls and
mcelpl=, with respect lo ils acUviUes urger ~ AgreemenL
3. Grantee shaJl use any generafly accepted acoounting system.
H. Use of Facilities
1. Grantee agrees that the grantee Shall use the prop~ acquired or developed with grant moneys u,'lder
this agreement only for the purposes for which the Stale grant moneys ~ requesled and no o~her use
of the area shall be permitted except by' ,~peci§c act of the Legislal~e.
2. The g~antee shall maintain and operate the property acquired or developed for a period ~urate
with the type of project and the propor0on of State Grant 6Jnds and local funds allocated to the capital
coals of the proJecL
I. NondiaaiminalJon
1. The grantee shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of sex. raca. color, nagonal ¢xigln. age,
religion, ancestry, or physical handicap in the use of any property or fao'lib/acquired or developed
pursuant to ~ts AgreemenL
2. The grantee shall not d~scrlminate against any person on the basis of residence except to the extent ~at
reasonable differences in admission or other fees may be maintained on the basis o/resident and
pursuant to law.
J. Application Incoq:)oralion
The ~oplicatlon and any subsequen! change or addilion approved by the $~te Is hereby In--ted by reference
into this Agreement as ~hough *~el forth In full in this AgreemenL
K, Seve~bi.qty
If any provision o~ this Agreement or the apptication thereof is held Invalid. that invalidity shall not affect other
provisions or applications ot~ the Agreement which can bi} given effect without the invalid provision or appiicallon, and
to this end the prcnastons of this Agreement are severable.
Entire Agreement
This Agreement. including all exhibits hereto, constitutes the entire agreement betwee~ the parties ~aling to this
subject matter and supersedes ali prfor or simultaneous representalions, discussions, negollations and agreemenis
whether written or oral.
M. Choice otr Law
This Agreement will be govemed by and construed in accordance with the laws of California as applied'to
agreements entered Into and Io be performed entirely therein.
N. Waiver
No tann or provision hereof will be considered waived by either party, and no breach excused by either party, un~ess
- such waiver or consent ts in wflUng and signed on behalf of the party against whcxn bhe waiver ia asserted. No
_ ro.C~ent by either party to. or waiver of. a ~each by either patty, whether expressed oc imp[led w~l! constitute consent
waiver of, or excuse of any othar, different, or subsequen{ breach by either party.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
A. 2003 Water Board Meeting Schedule - For Board Information
WATER BOARD SCHEDULED MEETINGS
JANUARY 2003 THROUGH DECEMBER 2003
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
Adopted on 10/16/02 Resolution No. 174-02
[~REG. MTG. @7PM r~---------~BUDGET MEE,,'I'ING & PRESENTATIONS
WORKSHOPS @ 5:15PM Monday's @ Noon, Wednesday's @ 5:15pm
Hearing on 6/11, Adoption on 6/25
[~Water Board @4:30PM
Holidays - City Hall Closed [~Joint City/County Meeting
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH
S M T W TH F S S M r w TH F S S M T W TH F S
1 2 3 4 1 1
5 6 7 8 910 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 201 21 22 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
APRIL MAY JUNE
S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 1 21 3 4 5 6 7
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 111 12 13 14
13 14 15 16! 17 18 19! 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 18 191 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 251 26 27 28
27 28 29 30 25 26 27 281 29 30 31 29 30
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7! 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30
31
OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S
1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2! 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 28 29 30 31
30
S:\2003 Water Board IMeetings.xls
12. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(A) North Kern
Water Storage District vs. Kern Delta Water District, Et Al, Tulare County Superior
Court Case No. 96-172919.
B. Conference with Legal Counsel- Anticipated Litigation: Initiation of Litigation
Decision Pursuant to Subdivision (C) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (One
Potential Case)
I OCTOBER 2OO2
I
Kern County Water Agency
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline,
KCWA-2002-05 Bakersfield, California
I
I VISALIA (~) 7ttN. Com'tS~'mt, S~te.~
N T 559.~9.~72
F 55~.732.30~
I FRESNO ~ 470 E. H~do~ S~m 203
~ F~no, C~omi~ 93720
T 559.4~9.4~1
F 559.439.1142
I S~ Luis Ob~o, ~ifomin
T
i ~consultin~{~tpgconsulting. net www.tpgconsulting.net
Kern County Water Agency
Initial Study for the Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline
August 21, 2002
NORTHWEST FEEDER PUMP STATION AND PIPELINE, KCWA-2002-05
APPLICANT: Kern County Water Agency
P.O. Box 58
Rio Mirada Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project will include
construction of a pump station and
.approximately seven miles of pipeline
which .will extend water treatment
capabilities to westem Bakersfield.
AGENTS: Kern County Water Agency
P.O. Box 58
3200 Rio Mirada Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058
City of Bakersfield
1000 Buena Vista road
Bakersfield, CA 93311
California Water Service Company
3725 South H Street
Bakersfield, CA 93304
Vaughn Company Inc.
Water
10014 Glen St.
Bakersfield, CA 93312
ENGINEER: Ben Hom, P.E.
Boyle Engineering
5001 E. Commercenter Dr. Suite 100
Bakersfield, CA 93309
OWNER OF RECORD: Kern County'Water Agency
ASSESOR'S PARCEL NOS.: See appendix for list
I Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
i LOCATION:
'~ The Kem County Water Agency is located near Hwy 99 in Califomia's San
' Joaquin Valley (see attached Vicinity Map). The exact location of the project site
can be seen on the attached Location Map. The proposed pump station, which
I is an addition to the existing facility, will be constructed at the Kern County Water
Agency (see address above). The proposed 48-inch wide pipeline will follow the
Calloway and One Ditch Canals westward, until it will meet with Coffee Road.
i The will then head north to the intersection of Coffee Road and
pipeline
Hageman Road. At this point the proposed pipeline will split into two separate
lines. One 42-inch wide pipeline will continue north on Coffee Road until it
I Norris Road where it ends. The 30-inch wide line
reaches
running
west
on
Hageman Road will end at Calloway Drive.
I GENERAL AREA
DESCRIPTION:
The City of Bakersfield is located in California's Central Valley, approximately
120 miles north of the City of Los Angeles on Highway 99. The San Joaquin
Valley is bound by the Coastal Range to the west and the southem Sierra
Nevada Range to the east.
Metropolitan Bakersfield, the largest city in Kern County, has historically been
i dependant on the agricultural and oil resources evident when at the proposed .
project site. Currently, the area is experiencing rapid population increases
attributed to other types of industrial/corporate growth. This growth has been
planned for by the City of Bakersfield as stated in its 2000 General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:
Kern County is characterized by moderate, wet winters and hot, dry summers.
The proposed project site elevation is approximately 450 feet above sea level
and lacks any distinct topographical features. The environmental setting was
observed during a July 2002 site visit.
The majority of the proposed site is located in areas characterized by open
grassland lying adjacent to Calloway and One Ditch Canals. Much of the
grasslands were in a dormant state, evident by their dry golden brown color.
I The site, which was once a major riparian corridor of the Kern River and Goose
Lake Slough, now. lacks the presence of any community indicator species or
consistent water flow. It is thought that this loss is attributed to the surrounding.
urban/industrial land uses, such as Highway 99 and four large oil refineries.
The project site near Coffee and Hageman Roads is urban/residential in
I . character. Here, much of the proposed project site has been paved over for use
as suburban streets. Coffee and Hageman Roads are bordered by commercial
shopping plazas and/or tract housing developments..
,I
i TPG Consulting, Inc. 2 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Kern County Water ^gency Improvement District No. 4 proposes to
construct a new 45 MGD (70 cubic feet per second) Treated Water Pump Station
(IWPS). This addition will be located in the vicinity of the Henry C. Garner
Water Purification Plant (HCGWPP). Its purpose will be to pump treated water
from the same into the Northwest Feeder Pipeline (NWFP). The NWFP shall
follow the alignment from the TWPS along the Calloway and One Ditch Canals to
Coffee Road where the pipeline will split at the intersection of Coffee and
Hageman roads. One section will follow a westedy alignment along Hageman
Road to the terminus of the branch pipeline at the intersection of Hageman and
Calloway roads. The other section will follow a northern alignment along Coffee
Road to the terminus of the branch pipeline at the intersection of Coffee and
Norris roads.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES:
.
Currently two alignment altematives (see Location Map) have been developed
for the proposed project. Each of these alternatives is a section of pipeline
which could be placed in a manner to reduce the actual length of pipeline needed
for the proposed project. In addition, these altematives have been designed as
contingency plans so as to avoid construction around existing utilities. Much of
proposed project an area which has been used for industry
the
site
is
located
in
for over a century, which means historical utility and/or drainage pipelines may
be unexpectedly encountered during project construction. Technical studies are
being conducted to better map the historic infrastructure which underlies the
project site.
IMPACTS:
The following is a discussion of the potential adverse enVironmental impacts
associated with the proposed project:
Aesthetics:
No potential environmental impacts to aesthetics would be caused from.
implementation of the proposed project. The hidden nature of infrastructure
would allow for the above ground open-space character to be maintained long
after completion of the project.
Air Quality:
No potential environmental, impacts to air quality were identified in the
environmental checklist. HoWever, some short-term construction related
TPG Consulting, Inc. 3 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
particulate matter (Pm10) may be associated with the grading and trenching
process, which could reduce the quality of the air in the area.
Mitigation measures such as reduced construction machinery speed and soil
wetting would reduce the amount of dust created during construction to less than
significant levels.
Biological Resources:
The project area consists of both urbanized and open space type environment. A
portion of the project area was once a major part of the riparian Corridor that
made up of the Kern River and Goose Lake Slough. The slough was
channelized into Calloway Canal and through normal maintenance activities has
been heavily disturbed ever since.
A biological assessment was prepared for the proposed project site (Attached as
Appendix B) which indicated that during the site reconnaissance San Joaquin kit
fox tracks were present, but that no dens were noted. The results and impact
analysis from this study indicates the temporary loss of approximately 27.9 acres
of habitat may be disturbed at full build out of the project.
Mitigation Measure
The project may result in permanent loss of one (1) acre of urban and/or
agricultural habitat at the well, storage tank, and pump station sites as well as up
to 27.9 acres of temporary habitat loss resulting from well drilling and pipeline
construction. The entire project resides within the Metropolitan Bakersfield
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). As such, the project will implement all
mitigation measures necessary to comply with the provisions governing the HCP.
If applicable, the project proponent will compensate for loss of habitat pursuant to
City Ordinance 3556 amending chapter 15.78 of the Bakersfield municipal code
relating to mitigation for urban development impacts on endangered species.
Cultural Resources:
No potential impacts to cultural resources as the result of implementation of the
proposed project were identified in the environmental checklist.
Energy and Mineral Resources:
The City of Bakersfield is an area built on crude oil resources; however the
proposed project site is not located on known energy or mineral rich resources.
No potential harmful environmental impacts to these resources would result from
implementation of the proposed project.
Geological Resources:
TPG Consulting, thc. 4 duly 2002
I Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The proposed project site does not lie in an area of geologic sensitivity, and so
I no potential environmental impacts were identified related to this matter.
Hazardous and Hazardous Materials:
1 The proposed project site occupies stretches of Calloway Canal which lie
adjacent to heavy industrial use land. The process of refining crude oil into
gasoline' and other isomers or compounds can yield hazardous by-products
which may be released into the surrounding environment if unregulated or not
monitored.
I Stringent federal and state regulations have been designed so as to avoid
hazardous waste overspill in industrial areas. Based on these standards the
I short-term Construction phase would not be considered a significant
environmental impact related to implementation of the proposed project.
-I Hydrological Resources:
No significant natural hydrological resources exist on the site. The Calloway and
I One Ditch Canals remain dry sandy washes throughout much of the It is'
year.
thought that the numerous historic, disturbances have led to the loss of the
natural riparian and hydrological resources in the area.
Ii, Land Use and Planning:
I The proposed project will be constructed on approximately seven miles of land.
With easement entitlements this pipeline will traverse through approximately 30
different agency jurisdictions and/or privately owned parcels. See the location
map, which is an aedal photograph of the site, for a visual representation of land
uses~
Much of the land lying adjacent to Calloway and One Ditch Canals will remain
open space in character upon completion of the proposed infrastructure
i, enhancement project. At this section, the site is bound to the south by land
which is zoned and used for industry. To the north of this section the land is
zoned for industry, however it remains undeveloped at this time. Also, Highway
99 and a railway line (which run north and south) perpendicularly intersect the
proposed project site near this location.
i Where the proposed project site meets Coffee Road the land directly west is
zoned and used for agricultural production. In addition, at this point two public
schools lie in close proximity to the site.
The pipeline splits at the intersection of Hageman and Coffee Roads and traVels
west and north respectively. Here the land is zoned and used for
i TPG Consulting, Inc. 5 July 2002
I Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
' residential/commercial development. Examples of these types of uses include
numerous residential housing tracts and stdp malls, such as River Lake Village:
I Much of the actual project site is located undemeath the roads maintained by the
City of Bakersfield.
The proposed project will not require zoning or land use amendments to the City
of Bakersfield or Kern County General PlanS, which means no significant.
I environmental impacts to land use and planning are evident at this time.
'I
Noise:
No potential environmental noise impacts were identified in the environmental
checklist. However, some shod-term construction related ambient noise may be
associated with the accompanying equipment and machinery, which' could
'1 increase noise in the area, particularly to sensitive receptors.
Mitigation measures such as limited construction machinery operation times in
t residential areas would reduce noise created during construction to less than
· significant levels. Weekday operation should commence between 8 a.m. and 6
p.m. and weekend operations, if applicable, shall occur during 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.
I so as to avoid neighborhood disturbance in project site areas near Coffee and
Hageman Roads.
I ' and Housing:
Population
i . The proposed project would not directly add population to Metropolitan'
Bakersfield or Kern County. It may however be considered growth-inducing,
according to CEQA, based on the addition of increased capacity-supplying
infrastructure because the Kern County Water Agency expansion would be able
I better and additional housing in western Bakersfield.
to
serve
population
growth
However, the City General Plan has accounted for growth in this area and thus
implementation of the proposed project would be facilitating the expected
I population size.
In addition, by not implementing the proposed project the expected population
growth must have continued reliance on well or groundwater supplies, which are
already in overdraft conditions. These overdrafts have serious environmental
i consequences, such as salinization or complete dry-out of groundwater supplies.
Further, Bakersfield has experienced groundwater pollution problems which are
thought to be attributed to hazardous materials released dudng the process of
refining crude oil. Volatile contaminants such as arsenic, hexovalent chromium,
and MTBE are known Iow-level carcinogens which when sampled cause
I groundwater to be deemed unusable for municipal consumption based on
environmental toxicological standards.
!
I TPG Consulting, Inc. 6 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Parks and Recreation:
The proposed project would not increase demand or use of park and recreation
services, which means no potential impacts were identified to be caused from
implementation of the proposed project
Traffic and Circulation:
The proposed project has the potential to create traffic and circulation problems
dudng its construction phase. This impact is limited to the proposed project site
areas on Coffee, Fruitvale, and Hageman Roads, which are currently paved over
and used for residential/commercial streets. The construction phase is not
expected to exceed two-years, during which time implementation of a Traffic
Management Plan will be necessary.
Mitigation Measure
Impacts to traffic and circulation could be reduced to levels less than significant if
mitigation is implemented. The proposed project should be constructed in
accordance with a Traffic Management Plan. The Traffic Management Plan will '
reduce both the safety issues and congestion issues associated with constructing
the project within street rights-of-way.
Utilities and' Public Services:
The proposed is a public improvement project for the "Kern County Water
It is to take two from start to
Agency.
planned
approximately
years
completion
at
which time westem Bakersfield will be able to be better served by the water
treatment facilities. These additional services will not increase demands on
staff the of staff at the local water
current
or
require
hiring
agency.
Thus,
no
significant impacts to the environment will be attributed to development of the
proposed project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the information available at the time of the preparation of this report
and without the benefit of additional information which may come to light at the
public hearing, the Environmental Officer recommends a Mitigated Negative
Declaration be prepared for project # KCWA-2002-05. The determination is
based upon the information contained in the Initial Study addressing the
Northwest Pump Feeder Station and Pipeline Project.
PREPARED BY: Kem County Water Agency
P.O. Box 58
3200 Rio Mirada Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058
TPG Consulting, Inc. 7 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaratio~
(name) Date
(name) Date
Attachments:
Figure I - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Location Map
Appendix A - Assessors' Parcel Number List
Appendix B - Biological Assessment
TPG Consulting, Inc. 8 July 2002
I
I
I
! .
i
I
!
!
!
!
I NOT TO SCALE
I j~~ Kem County Water Agency
VICINITY MAP Bakersfield' California
I
I
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA22002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Checklist Form
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
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 [] [] [] []
of the site and its surroundings?
quality
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which [] [] [] []
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
..area?
H. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Would the proposal:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or FI. [] [] []
· Famaland of Statewide importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for-agricultural use, or a [] [] [] '[]
Wiiliamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in 'the existing environment [] [] [] []
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
IlL AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the [] [] [] []
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an [] [] [] []
existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of [] [] [] []
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [] [] [] []
e) Create objectitnable odors? [] [] [] []
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
TPG Consulting, Inc. 11 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or [] 15~] [] . []
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian [] [] [] []
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected [] [] [] []
C)
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 [] ' [5~1. [] []
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory, wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances [] [] [] []
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preserve
policy or ordinance?
0 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat [] [] .[] -[]
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
'
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance [] [] [] []
of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance [] [] [] []
of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological [] [] [] []
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred [] [] [] []
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the proposal:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [] [] [] []
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Prioli
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
TPG Consulting, Inc. 12 July 2002
Northwest Feeder'Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
I Potentially
Significant
i Potentially Unless Less Than
~ignificant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
State Geologist for the area or based on other
I substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [] [] [] []
I iii) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [] [] [] []
I iv) Landslides or mudflows? [] [] [] []
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [] [] [] []
I 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
I spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Belocated on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- [] []' [] []
B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
I substantial risks to l/fe or property'?.
e) Have soils incapable Of adequately supporting the use [] [] [] []
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
I of waste water?
VII. llAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
I Would the proposal:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] [] [] .15~
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
I b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] [] [] []
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
I materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or [] [] [] []
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
I within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
c) Be located on a site which is included on a list of [] [] [] [] '
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
I Govemment Code Section 65692.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
I e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, [] [] [] []
where such a plan had not been adopted, within two
miles of a public use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working on the
'1 project area?
I TPG Consulting, Inc. 13 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
· Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated "Impact Impact
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 I--I. [] [] []
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, [] [] [] []
injury or death involving wiidland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
VHI. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the proposal result in: ·
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge [] [] []
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or imerfere [] [] [] []
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifier volume or a lowering
of the 'local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses of planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [] [] [] []
site area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [] [] [] []
site area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or fiver, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site? ..
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed [] [] [] []
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?.
0 Otherwise substantially degrade the water supply? [] ' [] [] []
g) Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as [] [] [] []
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures [] [] [] []
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of [] .[] []
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
floodinl~ as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
TPG Consulting, Inc. 14 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
.r PotentiallY
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [] [] [] []
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Divide an established community?. [] [] [] []
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or [] [] [] []
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
Project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of aVoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with applicable habitat conservation plan or [] [] [] · []
natural community conservation plan?
,X;~MINERAL RESOURCES. '
Would the project result in:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral [] [] [] []
resource that would .be of future 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
~eneral plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
' Xi. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: :
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in [] [] [] []
excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive [] [] [] []
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) Substantial or permanent increases in ambient noise [] [] [] []
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or per/odic increase in [] [] [] []
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, [] [] [] []
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airship, [] [] [] []
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
I TPG Consulting, Inc. 15 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and SupPorting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
· XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or [] [] [] []
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, [] [] [] []
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating [] [] [] []
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
"
XIIL PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a). Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other ·
performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? [] . [] [] [] ...
ii) Police protection? [] [] [] []
Schools? -. [] [] [] []
iii)
iv) Parks? [] []. : [] []
v) Other governmental services? [] [] [] []
XIV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
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) Does the project include recreational facilities or [] [] [] []
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.
Would the proposal:
TPG Consulting, Inc. 16 .~ July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Cause increase in traffic which is substantial in [] [] [] []
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase either
in the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level' of [] [] [] []
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for'designated roads or
hil~hways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including [] [] [] []
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that result 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? [] [] [] []
ir) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] [] []
g) Conflict with. adoPted policies, plans, or programs [] [] [] []
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater lxeatment requirements of the [] .[] [] []
applicable Regional Water Qualit~ Control Board?
result in the construction of new water [] [] [] []
b)
Require
or
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 entitlen~ents 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?
0 Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted [] [] [] []
capacity to accommodate the project's' solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and [] [] .. []
TPG Consulting, Inc. 17 July 2002
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCWA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated . Impact Impact
re~:ulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS
OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a) ' Does the project have the potential to degrade the [] []' [] []
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- .. [] [] ' [] []
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
c) Does the Project have environmental effects that will [] [] '- [] []
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
I
I
I
I
I
!
.I .TPG Consu~n~ Inc. 18 Ju~ 2002
Land Ownership Information
MAP KEY APN Name & Mailing Address Site Address City State Z_jp_
1 115-120-04 Kern County Water Agency P.O. Box 58 Bakersfield, CA 93302 No site address
2 115-120-05 Kern County Water Agency P.O. Box 58 Bakersfield, CA 93302 No site address
3 332-200-28 Kern County Water Agency P.O. Box 58 Bakersfield, CA 93302 No site address
4 332-200-70 North Kern Water Storage Dist. 13000 Golden State Highway Bakersfield, CA 93308 Sillect Avenue Bakersfield CA
5 332-100-40 WP Davies Oil Company 4200 Pierce Road Bakersfield, CA 93308 No site address
6 116-110-25 WP Davies Oil Company P.O. Box 80067 Bakersfield, CA 93380 3321 Rio Mirada Drive Bakersfield CA 93308
7 116-090-47 James Robert Vamer 9107 Yvonne St. Bakersfield, CA 93307 No site address
8 116-150-18 James W. Boylan, Inc. P.O. Box 668 Bakersfield, CA 93302 4947 Standard Street Bakersfield CA 93308
9 116-050-19 Unknown
10 116-150-20 Unknown
11 116-150-21 James W. Boylan, Inc. P.O. Box 668 Bakersfield, CA 93302 4235 Foster Avenue Bakersfield CA 93308
12 116-150-22 James W. Boytan, Inc. P.O. Box 668 Bakersfield, CA 93302 4301 Foster Avenue Bakersfield CA 93308
13 116-150-30 Jim & Susan E. Steiner 2007 Autumn Rose Court Bakersfield, CA 93312 No site address
14 116-150-25 James W. Boylan, Inc. P.O. Box 668 Bakersfield, CA 93302 No site address
15 116-080-20 Cornerstone Propane Lp 432 Westridge Drive Watsonville, CA 95076 4937 Standard Street Bakersfield CA 93308
16 332-040-30 Equilon Enterprises LLC 1100 Louisiana Street Houston, TX 77002 No site address
17 332-012-24 San Joaquin Facilities Mgn Inc. 5400 Rosedale Highway Bakersfield, CA 93308 No site address
18 332-012-07 Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe RR 5200 Sheila Street Los Angeles, CA 90040 No site address
19 332-012-23 Equilon Enterprises LLC P.O. Box 4369 Houston, TX 77210 No site address
20 332-011-38 Equilon Enterprises LLC P.O. Box 4369 Houston, TX 77210 No site address
21 332-011-39 North of the River San Dist. 5001 Olive Drive Bakersfield, CA 93308 No site address
22 332-180-13 Phillip W. Witte Family Trust 108 Glen Oaks Drive Bakersfield, CA 93309 6300 seven Seas Avenue. Bakersfield CA 93308
23 452-030-23 Athol J. E. Tekaat P.O. Box 485 Bakersfield, CA 93302 No site address
24 452-030-14 Wm. Arnold David; Ida Jo Ellen Wiley 3501 Patton Way Bakersfield, CA 93308 3501 Patton Way Bakersfield CA 93308
25 452-030-13 Walter E. & Alma L. Swanson 903 Alandale Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 No site address
26 452-030-29 Kern Asphalt Company 4100 Alken Street Bakersfield, CA 93308 No site address
27 452-030-01 James J./Cynthia R. Joslyn 7609 Pack Saddle Ct. Bakersfield, CA 93309 770 Downing Ave. Bakersfield CA 93308
28 452-010-25 Unknown
29 452-010-26 Unknown
30 452-010-29 Robed and Ruby Wade 7900 Downing Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 7900 Downing Ave. Bakersfield CA 93308
31 City of Bakersfield Tank Site Nords and Coffee
32 494-020-07 City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 Hageman Road Sump
33 USBR Friant Kern Canal
34 494-350-20 North Kern Water Storage District P.O. Box 81435 Bakersfield, CA 93380 No site address
35 County of Kern Roads ROW
36 Cit)/of Bakersfield Streets ROW
'1
June 2002
I
Biological Assessment of the Proposed Northeast Feeder
Pipeline Project in Metropolitan Bakersfield, Kern' County,
I California
I Prepared by: William J. Vanherwag, Biological Consultant; 332 North Stina Rd.; Bakersfield, CA 93309; (805) 839-0375
INTRODUCTION
I Project Description
The KernCounty Water Agency is proposing this list. The list was compiled using
to construct a Water supply pipeline from California Natural Diversity Data Base re~:ords
I wells (CDFG 2002) and our personal knowledge of
existing
and
proposed
water
to
a
proposed pump station at the ID4 Purification indigenous sensitive species distributions and
Plant, a proposed storage tank at Coffee and habitat preferences in relation to the project
I Norris Roads, and a Proposed turnout at area.
Hageman and Calloway Roads (Figures I &
2). The new wells are near the intersection of
I Stockdale Highway and Allen Road in Species Status
Bakersfield, California (Figure 2). San J'oaquin kit fox (Vulpee velox m~cr~da) CT, FE
Tipton kangaroo rat (Oipodomy~ nib, ace/des) CE. FE
The pipeline route, for the most part, follows Blunt-nosed leopard lizard {Gembelia a,Tel CE. FE
I the rights-of-way of the Calloway, Friant- Buena Vista Lake shrew [Sorex ornatus re/ictus) CSC,FE
Kern, One Ditch, Cross Valley, and Goose Burrowing owl ($peryto cu, icule~ia) MBTA
Lake Canals.
I Leqend
Studies Required CT= Listed as threatened by the State of California
The Kern County Water Agency has been cE = Listed es endangered by the State of California
FE = Listed as endangered, by the Federal government
advised to conduct biological surveys at the.. MBTA = Protected by Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
I project site to determine
if
the
proposed
development would have adverse effects on
threatened or endangered species and other
I sensitive biological resources. The following The section below contains brief descriptions
report addresses potential project-related of each of these sensitive wildlife species.
effects on biological resources and species San Joaquin Kit Fox
I protected by Federal Endangered Species Act The San Joaquin kit fox is a small (9-12 in.
of 1973 as amended and the California tall, approx. 20 in. total length, 4.5-5.0 lb)
Endangered Species Act. canid endemic to the San Joaquin Valley and
i adjacent foothills (CDFG 1980, O'Farrell
The surveys were conducted by William J. 1983). Kit fox use underground burrows in
Vanherweg 6/5-6/02. level or gently sloping terrain as denning sites
(Morrell 1972). They also use manmade
I structures such as culverts or pipes. Kit fox
SPECIES OF CONCERN occur primarily in grassland and semi-arid
scrub habitats, but they also occupy the
I The sensitive species tl~at could potentially disturbed habitat found in oil fields. The San
reside at the project site are listed in the Joaquin kit fox is federally listed as
following table. Other sensitive species that endangered and state listed as threatened.
could occur in the area on an infrequent
I basis,i.e., on migration, are 'not included in
1
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 1. East half of the Northeast Feeder Pipeline 'Route ,adjacent habitat types, and sensitive
i I resource locations.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 2. West half of the Northeast Feeder Pipeline Route ,adjacent habitat types.
I
!
', ~ Tipton Kangaroo Rat
',· Tipton kangaroo rats are one of three protected by the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty
subspecies of San Joaquin kangaroo rats, Act and by the CDFG Code,
I They occur in alkali sink habitat dOminated by
seepweed (Suaeda fruticosa) in fine sand-silt SPECIES-SPECIFIC WILDLIFE METHODS
on the southern San Joaquin Valley floor,
i Tipton kangaroo rats-usually burrow in San Joaquin Kit Fox
elevated mounds or at the~oase of shrubs We conducted daytime ground surveys for their
(Williams 1985). They also occur in dens, and sign in the proposed project area and
surrounding saltbush habitat on higher, a 200 foot buffer area. The ground surveys'
I sloping sites characterized by sparsely were completed by walking transects 50-100 ft
distributed ~ltriplex po/ycarpa, A. canescens, wide. The ground surveys followed California
,4. lent~formes, and seepweed. Burrow Department of Fish and Game Approved Survey
i entrance horizontal widths range from 25-70 Methodologies for Sensitive Species (CDFG'
mm, and average 42 mm (Williams 1985). 1990a). We recorded and mapped, on USGS
Historically, Tipton kangaroo rats occupied topographic maps, the locations of all San
most of the Tulare Basin floor, north to Joaquin kit fox sign and dens. We classified
I Lemoore and Hanford, east to Visalia, Tipton, underground burrows according to the following
Delano and Bakersfield, and west to the edge USFWS kit fox den definitions (USFWS 1989}:
of the alkali sink plant communities which end
i in the elevational transition into the Temblor Known Den: Any existing natural den or man-
foothills (Williams 1985). made structure for which conclusive evidence or
strong circumstantial evidence can be shown
· Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard that the den is used or has been used at any
I This large, robust lizard is endemic to the time
in
the
past
by
San
Joaquin
kit
fox.
southern San Joaquin Valley and adjacent
valleys to the southwest (Jones 1980, Potential Den: Any natural den or burrow within
I USFVVS 1980). It occupies sparsely the species' range that has entrances of
vegetated plains and drainages, Iow foothills, appropriate dimensions (4 to 12 inches in
grasslands, and desert-scrub communities diameter) to accommodate San Joaquin kit
i (CDFG 1980). These lizards usually use foxes for which, however, there is little to no
burrows excavated by small mammals, but evidence of kit fox use.
they also tunnel in dirt banks and under rocks
(Stebbins 1985,. USFWS 1980). They often Pupping Den: Any known San Joaquin kit fox
I occur in the dirt berms along washes, den (as defined) used by kit foxes to whelp
arroyos, and unimproved roads (Jones 1980). and/or rear their pups.
i Buena Vista Lake Shrew Atypical Den: Any known San Joaquin kit fox
The Buena Vista Lake shrew is one of four den that has been established 'in, or in
subspecies of ornate shrew in California. They association with, a man-made structure.
forage at night on insects and other
I invertebrates under logs, rocks, and litter. Evidence of the presence of kit fox consists of
They are most abUndant in and prefer riparian scat and tracks. Scat measuring 15-20 mm in
habitats With moist soil and dense cover, diameter of appropriate canid shape was
i however, they have been found in dryer attributed to kit fox or red fox. No other vulpid
areas with dense cover indicating they do not is known to inhabit the project area, and scats
require water (CDFG 1990b). larger than 20 mm diameter probably belong to
coyote (Canis latrans) or domestic dog (Can/s
I BurroWing Owl spp)~ Canid tracks to 45 x 38 mm in size
up
Burrowing owls are relatively small owls that were attributed to kit fox. Tracks larger than
often nest in abandoned California ground this are probably attributable to coyote or
i squirrel burrows. They prey on insects and domestic dog (Murie 1974).
small mammals and are active during the day
and at night. Individual owls and nests with
i eggs and/or unfledged young are fully
5
!
Tipton kangaroo rat and operations and canal maintenance and are
We surveyed for potential Tipton kangaroo rat probably not occupied at this time.
burrows during the course of Conducting surveys Impact- None.
for other species, i.e., San Joaquin kit fox dens.
Five night Trapping surveys for Tipton kangaroo Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard
rats are recommended if potential burrows in The corridor and facility sites are too heavily
suitable habitat are present CDFG (1990a). disturbed and lacks numerous small mammal
burrows to be suitable habitat for blunt-nosed
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard leopard lizards.
Habitat was evaluated to determine if the project Impact- None.
area was suitable to support blunt-nosed leopard
lizards. Buena Vista Lake Shrew
The corridor and facility sites are too heavily '
Buena Vista Lake Shrew disturbed and lacks dense vegetation and suitable
determine if the project foraging areas to be suitable habitat for Buena
Habitat
evaluated
was
to
area was suitable to support Buena Vista Vista Lake shrews.
Lake shrews. Impact- None.
Burrowing Owl Surveys
We surveyed for burrowing pwls during the Burrowing Owl
course of conducting surveys for other species, The corridor and facility sites contain suitable
i.e., San Joaquin kit fox dens and Tipton kangaroo
habitat
for
burrowing
owls.
However,
no
owls
or
rats. (CDFG 1990a). burrows were observed.
Impact- Loss of potential foraging habitat.
ENVI RO N MENTAL SE'FTI NG
· Sensitive Plants
The eastern end of the pipeline corridor are The project sites have been farmed and
situated in what was once a major riparian heavily disturbed for many years. Potential
corridor made up of the Kern River and Goose habitats for sensitive plants have been
Lake Slough. The slough has chann~lized into a severely degraded. There were no sensitive
canal and the surrounding area .has been modified plant species observed at the site during our
by agricultural and urban developments. The June 2002 site survey.
Goose Lake Canal and some of the well sites are
located in areas dotted with a few cottonwood
and willow trees, however, a typical riparian EFFECTS ON SPECIES
habitat no longer exists. Generally the well sites
pumping station, and pipeline corridor are highly The project will result in the permanent loss of 1
disturbed areas with little or no vegetation, acre of urban/agricultural kit fox habitat at the
well, storage tank,' and pump station sites as well
RESULTS and SPECIES SPECIFIC as approximately 35.6 acres of temporary habitat
IMPACT ANALYSIS loss resulting from well drilling and pipeline
construction. The permanent and temporary
San Joaquin Kit Fox disturbance caused by construction of the
I found sign of recent kit fox use of the pipeline facilities and water conduit should have no
corridor along the Fdant-Kern Canal near the Kern significant impact on listed species if the
River Inter,tie and potential kit fox dens along the ~ following mitigation/minimization measures are
same canal near Rosedale Highway. Most of the implemented.
pipeline route and facility sites have potential as a
movement/foraging areas for kit foxes.
Impact- Permanent and temporary loss of
potential kit fox foraging habitat.
Tipton Kangaroo rat
No kangaroo rat burrows or sign were observed.
The pipeline corridor and facility sites are highly
disturbed on a regular basis by the agricultural
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF
Cumulative impacts are those impacts of THE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX PRIOR TO OR
future state and private actions that are DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE) will reduce
reasonably certaintooccur. Future Federal potential project-related impacts on biological
actions will be subject to the consultation resources at the facility site to less than significant
requirement established in Section 7 of the levels.
Federal Endangered Species Act and,
therefore, are not considered cumulative to
the proposed action.
There are other projects that have been
approved or are currently under review by
state, county, and local authorities'where
biological surveys have documented the
present or former occurrence of the San Joaquin
kit foxes. These projects include urban
development, construction and expansion of
highways and canals,, mineral and wind
energy development, flood control and
reservoir construction, rodenticide use, and
power plant construction. The cumulative
effects of these known actions pose a
significant threat to the eventual recovery of
the species. The resource agencies
reviewing these actions are aware of these
'threats and are adopting appropriate ·
measures to minimize the threat.
MITIGATION/MINIMIZATION
The project will result in the permanent loss of 1
acre of urban/agricultural kit fox habitat at the well,
tank, and station sites as well as
storage
pump
approximately 27.9 acres of temporary habitat
loss resulting from well drilling and pipeline
construction. The USFWS requires 1:1 habitat
compensation for permanent disturbance and
0.2:1 for temporary disturbance to this type of
habitat. The project is proposing to compensate for
this loss by seeking approval to be covered under
the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation
Plan. Under this conservation plan, 6.6 acres of
habitat will be purchased and managed for San
Joaquin kit foxes and other sensitive valley species
into perpetuity.
When applicable, implementation of the measures
contained in Attachment 1 (U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE STANDARDIZED
7
!
LITERATURE CITED
I Butt, W. B. and R. P. Grossenheimar. 1976. A field O'Farrsll, T. P. 1983. San Joaquin kit fox recovery
guide to the mammals. Houghton Mifflin Co. plan. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Boston, MA 289 pp. Sacramento, CA. 84 pp.
Califoria Department of Fish and Game. 1980. At the
crossroads, a report on the status.of Orloff, S., F. Hall, and L. Speigel. 1986. Distribution
I California's Endangered and rare fish and and habitat requirements of the San
wildlife. (Amended July 1983). State of Joaquin kit fox in
California Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA the northern extreme of its range. Cal-
147 pp. Nav. Wildlife Society Proceedings.
I Department United States Fish and Wildlife Servi~e. 2000. Letter
California
of
Fish
and
Game.
1
990a.
Region 4 Survey methodologies for San 1-1-00-TA-0884 to Lorelei Oviatt
Joaquin kit fox, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, San -' regarding the proposed construction of
i Joaquin antelope squirrel, Tipton kangaroo rat, the Rio Bravo Tomato Processing Plant. 2
, giant kangaroo rat. Compiled by R. Rempel pp.
and G. Presley.
Williams, D.F. 1985. A review of the population
i California Department of Rsh and Game. 1990b. status of the Tipton kangaroo rat,
California's Wildlife, Vol. III, Mammals. Dipodomy= nitratoide= nitratoide~. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Final'rep. Order
California Department Of Fish and Game. 2002. No. 10181-4861 (ts) '84 SE-0020-4.
California Natural Diversity Data Base Records. 44pp.
I Hall, E.R. 1.981. The Mammals of North America. J..
Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York. 1181 pp. Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A field guide to Western r
eptiles and amphibians, Houghton Mifflin
I Co. Boston, MA. 336 pp.
IngleS, L.G. 1965. Mammals of the Pacific states,
California, Oregon, Washington. Stanford
Univ. Press, Stanford, CA. 506 pp.
I' Jameson, E. W. Jr. and H. J. Pesters. 1988. California
Mammals.. Univ. of California Press. Berkeley,
CA. 403 pp.
Jones, L. 1980. Distributional study of the blunt-nosed
leopard lizard Gamba/ia silu~ in the southern
San Joaquin Valley, California. Unpubl. Report
I submitted to Bureau of Land Management in
response to Contract Number YA-512-CT9-97.
22 pp.
I Laughrin, L. 1970. San Joaquin kit fox, its distribution
and abundance. Wildlife Management
Branch Administrative Report No. 70-2. .
State of California Resources Agency,
Department of Fish and Game.
Sacramento, CA. 19 pp.
Morrell, S. 1972. Life History of the San Joaquin Kit
I Fox. California Fish and Game. 58(3):
162-174.
Murie, O.J. 1974. A Field Guide to Animal Tracks.
I Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA.
Attachement 1
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR PROTBCTION OF THE SAN $OAQUIN KIT FOX
PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
STANDARDIZED I~COMM~NDATIONS
FOR PROTECTION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX
PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE
Prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
June 1999
INTRODUCTION
The following document includes many of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) protection measures
typically recommended by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Sereice), prior to and during ground disturbance
activities. However, incorporating relevant sections of these guidelines into the proposed project is not the only
action required under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Ac0. Project applicants should contact the
Service in Sacramento to determine the-full range of requirements that apply to your project; the address and
telephone number are given at the end of this document. Formal authorization for the project may be required under
either section 7 or section 10 of the Act. Implementation of the measures presented in this document may be
necessary to avoid violating the provisions of the Act, including the prohibition against "take" (defined as killing,
ham-ling, or harassing a listed species, including actions that damage or destroy its habitat). Such protection
measures may also be required under the terms of a biological opinion pursuant to section 7 of the Act resulting in
incidental take authorization (authorization), an incidental take section 10 of the Act.
or
permit
(permit)
pursuant
The specific measures implemented to protect kit 'fox for any given project shall be determined by the Service based
upon the applicant's consultation with the Service.
The purpose-of this document is to make information on kit fox protection strategies readily available and to help
standardize the methods and definitions currently employed to achieve kit fox protection. The measures outlined in
this document are subject to modification or revision at the discretion of the Service.
All surveys, den destructions, and monitoring described in this document must be conducted by a qualified biologist.
A qualified biologist Coiologis0 means any person who has completed at least four years of university training in
wildlife biology or a related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification and life history
of the San $oaquin kit fox. In addition, biologist(s) must be able to identify coyote, red fox, gray fox, and kit fox
tracks, and to have seen a kit fox in the wild, at a zoo, or as a museum mount.
SMALL PROJECTS
Small projects are considered to be those projects with small foot prints such as an individual intill oil well,
communicatiou tower, or bridge repair. These projects must stand alone and not be part of, or in any way connected
to larger projects (i.e., bridge repair or improvement to serve a future urban developmen0. The Service recommends
that on these small projects, the biologist survey the proposed project boundary and a 200-foot area Outside of the
project footprint to identify habitat features, and make recommendations on situating the project to minimize or avoid
impacts. If habitat features cannot be completely avoided, then preconstmction surveys should be conducted.
!
I
I
2
Preconstructlon/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more t~an 30 days prior to the
beginning of ground disturbance and/or construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Surveys should identify kit fox habitat features on the project site and evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible,
and assess the potential impacts to the kit fox by the proposed activity. The status of all dens should be determined
and mapped (see Survey Protocol).
Written results of preconstmction/preacfivity surveYs must be received by the Service within five days after survey
-completion and prior to the start of ground disturbance and/or construction activities. If a natal/pupping den is
i discovered within the project area or within 200-feet of thc project boundary, thc service shall be immediately notified.
If the preconstmction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal/pupping den or new information, the project applicant
should contact the Service immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit.
'l If take authorization/permit has already been issued, then the biologist may proceed with den destruction within the
project boundary, except natal/pupping dens (active or inactive). Protective exclusion zones can be placed around all
known and potential dens which occur outside the project footprint (conversely, the project boundary can be
i demarcated, see den destruction section).
OTH1Z~R PROJECTS
I It. is likely that all other projects occurring within kit fox habitat will require-a take authorization/permit from the
Service. This determination would be made by the Service during the early evaluation process (see Survey Protocol).
These other projects would include, but are not limited to: linear projects; projects with large footprints such as urban
I development; and projects which in themselves may be small but have far reaching impacts (i.e., water storage or
conveyance facilities that promote urban growth or agriculture, etc.).
iThe take authorization/permit issued by the' Service may incorporate some or all of the protection measures presented
in this document. The take authorization/permit may include measures specific to the needs of the project, and those
requirements supersede any requirements found in this document.
!
!
!
I
3
I. EXCLUSION ZONES
The configuration of exclusion zones around the kit fox dens should have a radius measured outward from the entrance or
cluster of entrances. Thc following radii are mlnimnm.q, and if they cannot be followed thc Service must be contacted:
Potential Den: 50 Feet
Known den: 100 Feet
Atypical dcm 50 Feet
NOTE: Natal/pupping Den (Occupied and unoccupied):' Service MUST be Contacted
Known den: To ensure protection, the exclusion zone should be demarcated by fencing that encircles each den at the
appropriate distance and does not prevent access to the den by kit foxes. Exclusion zone fencing should be maintained until
all construction related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all fencing shall be removed to avoid
attracting subsequent attention to the dens.
Potential and At¥1?ical dens: Placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 .feet from the den entrance(s) will suffice to identify the den
location; fencing will not be required, but the exclusion zone must be observed.
Construction and other project activities should be prohibited or greatly restricted within these exclusion zones. Only essential
vehicle operation on existing roads and .foot traffic should be permitted. Otherwise, all construction, vehicle operation,
material other of surface-disturbing activity should be prohibited within the exclusion
storage,
O~
ally
type
zones.
DESTRUCTION OF DENS
Disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be avoided to the maximum extent possible. Protection
provided by kit fox dens for use as shelter, escape, cover, and reproduction is vital to the survival of the
species. Limited destruction of kit fox dens may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative,
provided the following procedures are observed. The value to kit foxes of potential, known, and
natal/pupping dens differ and therefore, each den type needs a different level of protection. Destruction
of any known or natal/pupping kit fox den requires take authorization/perEnlt from the Service.
Natal/pupping demi Natal or pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the Service. Therefore, project activities at some
den sites may have to be postponed.
Known Dens: Known dens occurring within the footprint of the activity must be monitored for
!
!
I
I 4
three days with tracking medium or an infra-red beam camera to determine the current use. If no kit fox
I activity is observed during this period, the den should be destroyed immediately to preclude subsequent use.
If kit fox activity is observed at the den during this period, the den should be monitored for at least five
consecutive days from the time of the observation to allow any resident animal to move to another den
I during its normal activity. Use of the den can be discouraged during this period by partially plugging its
entrances(s) with soil in such a manner that any resident animal can escape easily. Only when the den is
determined to be unoccupied may the den be excavated under the direction of the biologist. If the animal
i is still present after five or more consecutive days of plugging and monitoring, the den may have to be
excavated when, in the judgment of a biologist, it is temporarily vacant, for example during the animal's
normal foraging activities. The Service encourages hand excavation, but realizes that s0il conditions may
I necessitate the use of excavating equipment.' However, extreme caution must be exercised.
Destruction of the den should be accomplished by careful excavation until it is certain that no kit foxes are
i inside. The den should be fully excavated, filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes cannot
reenter or use the den during the construction period. If at any point during excavation a kit fox is
discovered inside the den,'the excavation activity shall cease immediately and monitoring of the den as.
i described above should be resumed. Destruction of the den may be completed when in the judgement of
the biologist, the animal has escaped from the partially destroyed den.
Potential Dens: If a take authorization/permit has been obtained from the Service, den destruction may
I proceed monitoring, other restrictions were issued with the take authorization/permit. If no
without
unless
take authorization/permit has been issued, then potential dens should be monitored ~ if they were known
dens. If any den was considered to be a potential den, but is later detem7fined during monitoring or
I or previously by (e.g., fox sign is found inside), then
destruction
to
be
currently,
used
kit
fox
if
kit
destruction shall cease and the Service shall be notified immediately.
I CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Habitat subject to permanent and .temporary construction disturbances and other types of project related
I disturbance should be minimized. Project designs should limit or cluster permanent project features to the
smallest area possible while still pemitting project goals to be achieved. To minimize temporary
disturbances, all project-related vehicle traffic should be restricted to established roads, construction areas,
Iand other designated areas. These areas should also be included in preconstruction surveys and, to the
extent possible, should be established in locations disturbed by previous activities to prevent further
impacts.
I 1. Project-related vehicles should observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas, except on county
roads and State and Federal highways; this is particularly important at night when kit foxes are most
I active. To the extent possible, night-time construction should be minimized. Off-road traffic outside
of designated project areas should be prohibited.
I 2. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during the construction phase of
a project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 2 feet deep should be covered at
the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or. provided with one or more
i escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled,
they should be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a
I
I
' I 5.
trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 13 of this section must be
followed.
I 3. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming
trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4-
I or greater are a one or more overnight periods should be
inches
that
stored
at
construction
site
for
thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used
or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe should not be
I moved until the Service has been consulted. If and under the direct of the
necessary,
supervision
biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the
fox has escaped.
I 4. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps should be disposed
of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from a construction or project site.
I 5. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site.
I 6. To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets should
be permitted on project sites.
I 7. Use of rodenticides and herbicides in project areas should be restricted. This .is necessary to
prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which.
they depend. All uses of such compounds should observe label and other restrictions mandated by
I the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and
other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project-related restrictions deemed
necessary by the Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide should be used
I because of proven lower risk to kit fox.
8. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent who will be the contact source for any
I employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured
or entrapped individual. The representative will be identified during the employee education
program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be provided to the Service.
I 9. An emplOyee education program should be conducted for any project that has expected impacts to
kit fox or other endangered species. The program should consist of a brief presentation by persons
i knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative protection to explain endangered species concerns
to contractors, their employees, and military and agency personnel involved in the project. The
program should include the following: a description of the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat needs;
i a report of the occurrence of kit fox in the project area; an explanation of the status of the species
and its protection under the Endangered Species Act; and a list of measures being taken to reduce
impacts to the species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet conveying this.
information should be prepared for distribution to the above-mentioned people and anyone else who
I may enter the project site.
I
!
i
6
I 10. Upon completion of the project, all areas subject to temporary ground disturbances, including
i storage and staging areas, temporary roads, pipeline corridors, etc. should be re-contoured if
necessary, and revegetated to promote restoration of the area to pre-project conditions: An area
subject to "temporary" disturbance means any area that is disturbed during the project, but that after
i project completion will not be subject to further disturbance and has the potential to be revegetated.
Appropriate methods and plant species used to revegetate such areas should be determined on a site-
specific basis in consultation with the Service, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG),
i and revegetation experts.
11, In the ease of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures should be installed immediately to
i allow the animal(s) to escape, or the Service should be contacted for advice.
12. Any contractor, employee, or military or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a
San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to their representative. This
I representative shall contact the CDFG immediately in the of a dead, injured or kit
case
entrapped
fox. The CDFG contact for immediate assistance is State Dispatch at
(916) 445-0045. They will contact the local warden or biologist.
13. The Sacramento Fish ~and Wildlife Office and CDFG will be notified in writing within three
. working days of the accidental death or injury to a San J'oaquin kit fox during project related
I activities. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident or.of the finding
of a dead or injured animal and any other pertinent information. The Service contact is the Chief
of the Division of Endangered Species, at the addresses and telephone numbers given below. The
I CDFG contact is Mr. Ron Schlorff at 1416 9" Street; Sacramento, California 95814; (916) 654-
4262.
IAny project-related information required by the Service or questions concerning the above conditions or
their implementation may be directed in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at: Sacramento Fish
and Wildlife Office; 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605; Sacramento, CA 95825-1846; (916) 414-6600.
I
!
!
1
I
I
i
Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project, KCwA-2002-05
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
REFERENCES:
City of Bakersfield and County of Kem (1991). Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat
Conservation Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report.
City of Bakersfield and County of Kem (1990). Metropolitan BakerSfield Habitat
Conservation Plan: Endangered Species Inventory.
Kern County Planning. Department (2000).Kern County General Plan.
Metropolitan Bakersfield Community Development Department (2000).City of
Bakersfield 2010 General Plan.
Nord, J. (2002). Boyle Engineering, project engineer.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (1994). Federal Fish and Wildlife
Incidental Take Permit # PRT-786634.
Varga, M. (2002). Kern County Water Agency~ civil engineer.
!
!
i TPG Consulting, Inc. 21 . July 2002
KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[to confirm CEQA Guidelines section 15072 determination]
Pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act and CEQA Guidelines, the Kern County Water
Agency hereby provides notice of its intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15072 for the following:
1. Name of Project: Northwest Feeder Pipeline Project
2. Project Lead Agency and Sponsor: Kern County Water Agency, P.O. Box 58, 3200 Rio
Mirada Drive, Bakersfield CA 93302-0058. Contact person: Thomas N. Clark, General Manager, 661-634-
1400.
3. Project Description: The Agency proposes to construct a new 45 MGD (70 cubic feet per
second) Treated Water Pump Station (TWPS) and a six and one half mile pipeline, called the Northwest
Feeder Pipeline (NWFP). The TWPS will be located at the Agency's Henry C. Gamett Water Purification
Plant (HCGWPP), 811 Nadine Lane, where the plant will pump treated water into the NWFP. The NWFP will
commence from the TWPS and follow a northwesterly path along selected canal easements and road right-of-
ways to the terminus of the pipeline located at the intersection of Hageman and Norris Roads. Pipeline
turnouts have been incorporated into the NWFP at various locations along the alignment to make treated
water deliveries to the project participants. For more information concerning the project, See the Kern County
Water Agency Environmental Initial Study Form [for CEQA Guidelines section 15072 Determination] dated
October 23rd, 2002 (the "Initial Study"), which is available for review and copying during regular business hours
at the Agency office at the above address.
4. Purpose and explanation of Initial Study: The Agency has prepared the Initial Study in
order to determine whether the approval and implementation of the pr,oject as described in the Initial Study
may have a significant effect on the environment under CEQA Guidelines section 15063. The Northwest
Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline Project is intended to provide significant water quality and water supply for
the northwest metropolitan Bakersfield area and a broad range of Kern County water users. The Agency has
determined, in light of the record as a whole, there is no substantial evidence that the Project may have a
significant effect on the environment.
5. Project Location: The Project is located in the City of Bakersfield with an alignment
commencing at the HCGWPP, located at 811 Nadine Lane, and proceeding west following a parallel
alignment to the Calloway and One Ditch Canals. At the intersection of Meany Avenue and Coffee Road the
pipeline will follow a northerly alignment parallel to Coffee Road to the terminus of the pipeline located at the
intersection of Coffee and Norris Roads. There will be one branch pipeline commencing at the intersection
of Hageman and Coffee Roads and following a parallel alignment with Hageman Road in a westerly direction
to the terminus of the pipeline located at the intersection of Calloway Drive and Hageman Road (see maps
attached to Initial Study).
6. Proposed Finding: The Agency Board of Directors has reviewed the proposed project, Initial
Study, comments received on the proposal to adopt this Mitigated Negative Declaration, and other documents
and information from Agency staff, and on the basis of this information and the whole record before the
Agency, hereby finds and determines as follows: (a) The Initial Study and Negative Declaration reflect the
Agency's independent judgment and analysis; and (b) mitigated measures have been included to reduce to
less than significant any potential environmental effects of the project and nothing further is required. This
Mitigated Negative Declaration confirms this conclusion.
7. Initial Study: A copy of the Initial Study is either attached or available for public review at
the Agency office at the above address.
8. Location of Background Documents: The Initial Study, notice of intent to adopt a Mitigated
1-
!
I Negative Declaration, comments on the Initial Study, and other documents conceming this project are on file
and available for public review at the Agency office at the above address. The Agency Board Secretary (same
address) is the custodian of the documents that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision
iin this matter is based.
9. Public Review: Pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15105, public comments on this
proposal to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be received by the Agency at the above address
I beginning October 28, 2002 and ending December 2, 2002. The Agency Board of Directors is expected to
consider the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public meeting scheduled for Friday,
December 20, 2002 at 12:00 p.m., at the Agency's office at the above address.
I ma~N. C~a~;k (~C. 7~'~/~,~ z~-~
I Tho Date
General Manager
Kern County Water Agency
!
KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY
PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This is prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), ~ and the
State CEQA Guidelines, 2.
NAME OF PROJECT: Northwest Feeder Pump Station and Pipeline KCWA-2002-05
PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: The Kern County Water Agency is located near Hvvy
99 in California's San Joaquin Valley. lhe exact location of the project site can be seen
on the location map attached to the Initial Study. The proposed pump station, which is
an addition to the existing facility, will be constructed at the Kern County Water Agency.
The proposed 48-inch wide pipeline will follow the Calloway and One Ditch Canals
westward until it will meet with Coffee Road. The pipeline will then head north to the
intersection of Coffee Road and Hageman Road. At this point the proposed pipeline
will split into two separate lines. One 42-inch pipeline will continue north on Coffee
Road until it ends at Norris Road. The 30-inch wide line running west on Hageman
Road ends at Calloway Drive
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT: Summary. The proposed project will include
station and approximately seven miles of pipeline which will
construction
of
a
pump
extend water treatment capabilities to western Bakersfield.
Expanded Description. See Initial Study for Proposed Project, attached.
FINDINGS WHICH SUPPORT NEGATIVE DECLARATION: After making an assessment
of the possible impacts of the proposed Project and reviewing an Study
dated
October 24, 2002, the Board of Directors of the Kern County Water Agency has
determined that the proposed Project as presented will not have any significant effect
on the environment, either directly or indirectly.
INITIAL STUDY: A copy of the Initial Study and environmental checklist prepared by
Agency staff, dated October 24, 2002, is attached.
MITIGATION MEASURES: Mitigation measures which have been incorporated into the
proposed Project to avoid potentially significant environmental effects are as follows:
1. Biological Resources: The project may result in permanent loss of one (1)
acre of urban and/or agricultural habitat at the well, storage tank, and
pump station sites as well as up to 27.9 acres of temporary habitat loss
resulting from well drilling and pipeline construction. The entire project
resides within the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. As
such, the project will implement all mitigation measures necessary to
comply with the provisions of the HCP. If applicable, the project
proponent will compensate for loss of habitat pursuant to City Ordinance
3556 amending chapter 15.78 of the Bakersfield municipal code relating
to mitigation for urban development impacts on endangered species.
2. Traffic and Circulation: Impacts to traffic and circulation could be reduced
to levels less than significant if mitigation is implemented. The proposed
project should be constructed in accordance with a Traffic Management
Plan. The Traffic Management Plan will reduce both safty issues and
congestion issues associated with constructing the project within street
rights-of-way.
CONTACT PERSON, TELEPHONE NUMBER: Mr. Thomas N. Clark, General Manager,
Kern Gounty Water Agency, P.O. Box 58, Bakersfield, GA. 93302; (661)-634-1400. If
you require additional information regarding this proposed Project, please contact Mr.
Martin Varga, Kern County Water Agency, (661) 634-1448; e-mail: mvarga@kcwa.com
Thomas N. Clark, General Manager Date
1. Public Resources Code, Section 2100, et seq.
'2. Title 14, Division 6, California Administrative Code, as amended.