HomeMy WebLinkAbout4 6160 Bridge Street Water Storage Tank 0`0 NOV 2 6 2001
Engineering,Sauers
Civil & Environmental Engineers
Memorandum
November 21, 2001
TO: Board of Directors, and
Peter Holzmeister, General Manager
FROM: Keith Knibb, Consulting Engineer
SUBJECT: Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage Tanks- CEQA
As of August 13, 2001, the State Clearinghouse review period was closed for the Bridge Street
6160 Water Storage Tank. The Board of Directors held a Public Hearing on August 15,
2001 which was continued until September 5, 2001. A public hearing was also held on October
17, 2001. Six comment letters were received during the review period. Along with this memo
are copies of the comment letters and responses to the written and oral comments.
The final CEQA documents included with this report are:
► Comments and Responses, including copies of the comment letters
► Final Negative Declaration
► Notice of Determination
► Mitigation Monitoring Plan
RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend the Board of Directors take the following actions:
► Approve the responses to comments.
► Adopt the Final Negative Declaration.
► Approve the project for purposes of CEQA.
► Authorize the filing of the Notice of Determination with the Office of the Nevada County
Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.
► Approve the Mitigation Monitoring Plan
► Adopt a finding that the draft documents as circulated and the negative declaration reflect
the District's independent judgement.
440 Lower Grass Valley Road, Suite A, Nevada City, CA 95959 (530) 265-8021 Fax(530) 265-6834
4'
Truckee Donner Public Utility District
Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage Tanks
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
The following are responses to comments received during the circulation and review of the
proposed negative declaration and initial study for the "Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage
Tanks." Copies of each of the comment letters are attached.
Comments/Responses Page
Letter from California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Lahontan Region dated July 30, 2001 2
Letter from Town of Truckee dated August 13, 2001 2
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on
behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated August 15, 2001 4
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on
behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated September 5, 2001 5
Letters from Shute, Mihaly& Weinberger LLP and
Acton, Mickelson Environmental, Inc. (on behalf of
Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area Preservation
Foundation) dated September 5, 2001 5
Verbal comments from TDPUD Director Pat Sutton at
the regular board meeting of September 5, 2001 17
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on
behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated October 17, 2001 18
Letter from Janna S. Caughron dated October 17, 2001 20
1
Letter from California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region dated July 30,
2001:
Comment: District will need to submit application and filing fee.
Response: Comment acknowledged. This issue was discussed in the Initial Study under
"Explanations to Checklist Answers, IV. Water" including the following statement:
"Prior to site disturbing activities, the District will prepare a Report of Waste
Discharge in compliance with the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control
Board."
Comment: Temporary and permanent best management practices (BMPs) need
to be designed to comply with the Regional Board's Guidelines for Erosion
Control.
Response: Comment acknowledged. This issue was discussed in the Initial Study under
"Explanations to Checklist Answers, IV. Water." Mitigation measures M-2 and M-3
include requirements for temporary and permanent BMPs. As is typical for all District
construction projects requiring Regional Board permitting, these BMPs will be designed
in compliance with the Lahontan Regional Board's Guidelines for Erosion Control.
Comment: Source of dust control water should be disclosed.
Response: As is typical for District construction projects, dust control water will be
made available to the contractor free of charge from the District's potable water system.
The District will select locations at fire hydrants where the contractor may get
construction water.
Comment: A more detailed map of the project should be included in the final
documents.
Response: Comment acknowledged. The Initial Study included a scaled topographical
map showing the tank site, tank pad, cut and fill areas, access road, and other surrounding
features. Apparently this map was not included with the document reviewed by the
Regional Board. The map shows that the location of the tank is well outside any 100-
year floodplains.
Letter from Town of Truckee dated August 13, 2001:
Comment: Concerns regarding location of proposed water tanks and associated
potential visual impacts.
Response: The Initial Study notes under"Explanations to Checklist Answers, XIII
Aesthetics"that the tank may be visible from Interstate 80. It is also hereby
acknowledged that the tank may be visible from portions of the Downtown area. Areas
from where the tank may be visible include Bridge Street and the Truckee River Bridge
2
and West River Street especially near the old County yard. The initial study also states
that the tank will be screened by a number of trees located around the tank site and that
the tank will be painted to blend with its surroundings.
The hill on which the tank site is located is covered with large, mature fir and pine trees.
The tank site will be located near the top of the hill with the top of the tanks and top of
cut bank below the top of the hill. Following construction of the tanks, existing tall trees
will remain on all sides of the tank site. These trees will provide a partial screening of
the tanks. Potential visual impacts associated with the tank project are considered less
than significant.
The existing trees which will remain following construction will provide a visual buffer
to the tank site. Planting new trees within the existing treed areas would not be
recommended since they would likely be out-competed by the existing mature trees.
Trees could be planted on the downhill side of the tank in the fill slope areas to provide
added visual screening. In order to provide additional visual screening, the following
mitigation measure is added:
M-7. Trees shall be planted on the downslope side of the tank in the fill slope areas.
The number, location, and spacing of the trees shall be determined following
design of the grading plan and determination of the extent of the fill slope areas.
Tree size and species shall be selected so as to insure a high likelihood of survival
given the competition from existing trees.
Comment: General Plan policies encourage preservation of scenic resources for
areas such as the tank site.
Response: Although the water storage tank project is exempt from the General Plan
policies of the Town as a public water supply facility, the District is sensitive to the issue
of scenic resources in the Truckee area. The design of the tank project incorporates a
number of the Town's design criteria for scenic highway corridors and hillside
development. Some of these design features include:
Scenic Highway Corridors:
► Although the project site may be visible from sections of Interstate 80, the site is
approximately 1,000 feet from the right-of-way, well outside the 300 foot scenic
corridor.
► The project will not include high illumination yard lighting. Any exterior lighting
shall be designed to operate only when necessary for operation and maintenance
activities which will rarely occur at night on this site.
► Tank color will be chosen to blend into the natural setting.
3
► The height of cut and fill slopes will be minimized by utilizing the maximum
allowable slope angle. A geotechnical investigation shall be conducted to
determine the maximum stable cut and fill slopes.
► A landscaped setback of approximately 600 feet shall be provided by preserving
the existing forested area between the tank site and Interstate 80.
Hillside Development:
► The height of the tank and cut slope shall be lower than the top of the ridgeline.
► Slopes shall be constructed using smooth cut and fill grading techniques to
conform with the natural topography.
► Graded areas shall be protected from wind and water erosion in accordance with
the BMPs of the Lahontan Regional Board's project guidelines.
► Graded slopes shall not exceed a ratio of 2:1 (vertical:horizontal) unless
determined appropriate through the geotechnical investigation.
► The tank color shall be chosen to blend with the natural landscape of earth tones
and natural vegetative growth.
► Cut and fill slopes shall be revegetated following construction. Fill slopes below
the tank will include new trees as discussed in mitigation measure M-7 above.
► The alignment of the access road shall be meandering, following the natural
contours of the area. The road shall not be perpendicular to the slope.
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated August 15, 2001:
Comment: The environmental document is inadequate because it does not
identify the source of water that would supply the project or analyze the
environmental consequences of utilizing the water resources.
Response: The project being considered under this environmental review is the
construction of water storage facilities. Water storage tanks do not,by nature, consume
water and therefore do not create any additional demand for water resources other than
the water required to fill the tanks. The source of water for the proposed tanks will be a
combination of existing District wells including Sanders Well located west of the
Coachland Mobile Home Park,Prosser Heights Well located on Alder Drive at Cheyenne
Way, and Prosser Annex Well located on No Other Way. The District currently has
adequate source of supply in these wells to fill the proposed tanks.
Filling the new water storage tanks will require the one-time filling of the tanks, a total of
4,000,000 gallons (12 acre-feet). The District recently completed a study titled "Ground
4
Water Availability in the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin,Nevada and Placer
Counties, California"by Nimbus Engineers, March 2001. This study concluded that
approximately 24,700 acre-feet per year of ground water is available in the Martis Valley
Ground Water Basin without changing the amount of ground water in storage over the
long term. Considering the amount of ground water available, a one-time withdrawal of
12 acre-feet is considered less than significant.
The District's Water System Master Plan identifies a deficiency of approximately 4.5
million gallons of storage capacity District-wide, including a 0.95 million gallon shortage
in the Town pressure zone and a 0.84 million gallon shortage in the Gateway pressure
zone. The proposed new storage tanks, once filled, will provide water storage capacity
for peak demand periods as well for emergency and fire protection needs for the area
being served by the tank, providing service to existing District customers in the Interstate
80/State Route 89 intersection area and supplementing the District's existing Town and
Prosser pressure zones. Through interconnections with existing District distribution
systems, these new tanks will also provide back-up storage capacity including fire and
emergency storage capacity, to the Town, Gateway, and Prosser pressure zones.
Having the additional storage will also allow the District to operate well pumps more
efficiently through the practice of off-peak pumping, or peak shaving. Well pumps may
be shut off during high energy demand periods of the day with water being supplied by
the storage tanks. The tanks are then replenished by operating the well pumps during
lower electrical demand, or off-peak, periods.
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated September 5, 2001:
Comment: The environmental document does not indicate the environmental
effects of developing a source of supply for the project. The safe yield of the
Martis Valley Ground Water Basin has not been adequately studied. Letter
includes reference to and a copy of a letter from Acton, Mickelson
Environmental, Inc. dated September 5, 2001, providing a critique of the
District's "Ground Water Availability in the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin"
prepared by Nimbus Engineers, dated March 2001.
Response: As stated in the previous response, the proposed water storage tanks will not
create any new demand for water sources other than a one time 4,000,000 gallon (12
acre-feet) demand to fill the tanks. The source of water for the proposed tanks will be a
combination of existing District wells including Sanders Well located west of the
Coachland Mobile Home Park, Prosser Heights Well located on Alder Drive at Cheyenne
Way, and Prosser Annex Well located on No Other Way.
Letters from Shute, Mihaly &Weinberger LLP and Acton, Mickelson Environmental, Inc. (on
behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area Preservation Foundation) dated September 5,
2001:
5
Responses to further comments included in the September 5" letters from Shute, Mihaly
& Weinberger LLP and Acton, Mickelson Environmental, Inc. were prepared by Nimbus
Engineering. Nimbus Engineers is a hydrogeologic engineering firm which specializes
groundwater resources. A list of references cited by Nimbus is included with the Nimbus
responses. A statement of qualifications for Nimbus Engineers is attached to this report
and included herein by reference.
General Statements from Nimbus Engineers
Neither the Shute et al nor AME letter identifies specific or substantive evidence of
environmental effects due to current or proposed ground water extraction in the Basin.
While the Basin Study did not specifically identify the "safe yield" of the Basin, it did
quantify current(calendar year 2000) ground water extraction of approximately 7,250
acre-feet per year(AF/yr). This amount is slightly over half of the maximum withdrawal
of 13,000 AF/yr recommended on an intermediate term basis by Hydro-Search, Inc.
(1995) and less than one third of the 24,701 AF/yr of ground water available in the Basin
(Nimbus, 2001).
The one-time tank filling associated with the Proposed Project will require the extraction
of 4 million gallons (or twelve acre-feet) from the TDPUD Sanders, Prosser Heights,
and/or Prosser Annex wells, as discussed elsewhere. Each of these wells extracted from
90 million gallons to in excess of 100 million gallons (280 to 325 acre-feet) during
calender year 2000 (Nimbus, 2001). The cumulative 2000 ground water extraction from
these three wells was in excess of 300 million gallons (or 920 acre-feet). The extraction
of 4 million gallons of additional ground water from these wells will not result in
measurable increases in drawdown at these wells. Extraction of ground water for the
one-time tank filling associated with the Proposed Project will not have any measurable
environmental impact.
General Comments:
We fully support the contentions that a numeric model is an appropriate tool for
ground water management. Insufficient data is currently available to develop a
calibrated numeric ground water model for the purposes of analyzing the
environmental consequences of ground water extraction. The Basin Study's
water balance is an important step in the development of a numeric model, as is
the development of a conceptual model. New information and data will be
incorporated into a conceptual framework for a numeric model, as it becomes
available. A conceptual model will provide the framework for a calibrated
numeric model that will be an important tool for the overall management of the
water resources available.
Specific Comments: The italicized bulleted text is the original comment with Nimbus'
response given below.
6
• The Basin Study assumes that all ground water flowing into the Truckee River,
Prosser Creek Reservoir, and Prosser Creek is available for extraction to supply
growing water needs in Truckee and the surrounding region. The Basin Study
provides no analysis of the environmental consequences ofstopping all ground
water discharge to the Truckee River, Prosser Creek Reservoir, and Prosser
Creek.
The purpose of the Basin Study was to address availability of ground water in the Martis
Valley. It was beyond the scope of the Basin Study to propose or recommend amounts to
be extracted or withdrawn from the Basin. This study was a basin-wide evaluation of the
current state of ground water resources. Analysis of environmental consequences of
ground water extraction should and will be evaluated on a project specific basis.
• The Basin Study makes numerous assumptions regarding recharge efficiencies
and Basin conditions that have the likely effect of overstating the amount of
ground water available for extraction. The assumptions in the Basin Study are
not sufficiently supported by explanation or information available in peer-
reviewed literature. The assumptions operate to overstate the amount of ground
water available for extraction, but the assumptions should be conservative since
ground water from the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin will be the principal
supply of water for growth in the region (see Master Plan at 5-9) and since a
significant amount of additional ground water extraction from the Basin is
planned already for the District's system improvements (see Master Plan at 5-9).
Nimbus undertook extensive research as part of the preparation of this report. The
reference section in the report details more than 100 references used in the study. Many
of the references are not peer reviewed but are reports from well respected consulting
firms with long histories of working in the Basin; others are references from published
literature and public agencies which have undergone extensive review. We are not
aware of other published and peer reviewed information regarding the Basin, but would
welcome the chance to review any additional references.
The Basin Study provides an estimate of the amount of ground water available based on
ground water flux through the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin (the Basin), some or all
of which may be available for extraction.
Nichols (2000) stated "Measuring ground-water recharge is difficult at local scales and
not possible at regional scales with current technology. Consequently, rather than
measuring recharge, the approach in Nevada has been to estimate it on the basis of
ground-water discharge from a basin or hydrographic area." Similar methods have been
widely applied throughout the western United States. The use of ground water discharge
to validate ground water recharge from precipitation was employed by Nimbus after
accounting for other recharge to and discharge from the Basin.
7
The validity of the basin-wide recharge efficiencies is best demonstrated by the
agreement of predicted ground water discharge to the Truckee River when compared to
observed ground water discharge based on stream gaging data, as discussed in Section
9.0 - Comparison of Predicted and Observed Values of the Basin Study. The observed
ground water discharge is, in effect, the calibration point of the water balance. The
agreement of these values lends considerable credence to the Basin water balance, as a
whole. Nimbus' response to AME's comments to Page 17, 5"Paragraph, given below,
are relevant to this comment, as well.
The extraction of twelve acre-feet of ground water for the one-time tank filling associated
with the Proposed Project is insignificant when compared to the current (calender year
2000)Basin-wide ground water extraction of approximately 7,250 acre-feet per year and
the annual Basin-wide ground water recharge (infiltration of precipitation, infiltration of
surface water, and ground water transfer into the Basin) of 29,165 AFlyr (Nimbus,
2001).
• A calibrated numerical model should be developed for the Martis Valley Ground
Water Basin. Such a model would be more reliable than the water budget
approach employed by Nimbus Engineers.
A water budget quantitatively describes the dynamic interrelations among the inflow and
outflow components of a hydrologic system and is a prerequisite to making an effective
water-resources assessment (Berger, 1999). A water balance calculation should be a part
of every modeling exercise (Anderson and Woessner, 1992). The Basin Study is an
important step in management of the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin. As
development of ground water resources in the Basin continues, the District plans to
develop a calibrated numeric model to address potential impacts to specific areas of
concern.
The District has plans, as part of its Phase II Groundwater Management Plan, to
incorporate information which is currently being gathered by increased monitoring of
water levels and metering of withdrawals into the framework for a numeric model. The
conceptual model will continue to evolve as additional information is gained during
hydrogeologic investigations throughout the Basin.
RESPONSES TO ACTON,MICKELSON ENVIRONMENTAL, INC (AME)
COMMENTS
The following comments were provided by Acton Mickelson Environmental, Inc. based
on their analysis of the Basin Study.
• Page 11, last sentence. Hydro-Search, Inc. designated ten zones (A through J)
that were estimated to have similar groundwater recharge and movement. The
Zones are shown on Nimbus Figure 3. The text (Basin Study,page 11) indicates
that Bennett Flat and Juniper Flat were "...underlain by predominantly volcanic
8
rocks with significantly less storage potential than the deep alluvial Basin and
are not included in this ground water storage calculation. " Bennett Flat is in
Zone F and Juniper Flat in Zone E. Table 2 and Figures 17 and 18 indicate Zones
E and F were indeed included in the ground water storage calculation.
Zones E and F were not included in the ground water storage calculation. Table 2, titled
"Area, Precipitation, and Ground Water Recharge" shows areas, precipitation, recharge
efficiency, and recharge for the Hydro-Search, Inc. study and the Nimbus study. Table 2
is unrelated to the ground water storage calculation.
Figure 17, titled " Water Balance for Zone E", and Figure 18, titled "Water Balance for
Zone F", show the inflow and outflow components of the water balance for their
respective zones. These figures are unrelated to the ground water storage calculation.
• Page 13, last full paragraph. This paragraph seems to imply that the lower water
table resulting from increased ground water extraction is only temporary, and
that the change in storage will recover once the system re-establishes
equilibrium. This is not correct. The rate of change ofstorage will recover, but
the water table will remain depressed as long as the increased pumping
continues.
The intent of this paragraph was to identify the localized removal of ground water from
storage due to the formation of a cone of depression which induces ground water flow to
the well during active pumping. These localized cones of depression are restored(i.e.
recover) when pumps are shut off. Hence, the removal of ground water from storage is
transient (or temporary). The amount of ground water removed from storage to induce
flow to the wells is insignificant in light of the Basin-wide ground water storage and does
not result in regional ground water level declines. As long as recharge to the Basin
exceeds discharge, regional water levels will remain stable.
• Page 17, 2nd Paragraph. This paragraph classifies the four hydrologic soil types
(A, B, C, D) into three categories (favorable, moderate, and notfavorable). Type
A soil has the most rapid infiltration rates, Type D the slowest. Types A and B
were classified as favorable, Type C moderate, and Type D unfavorable, Types B
and C may be more appropriately classified as moderate, since these values lie
between the upper and lower values. Figure 8 shows most of the soils in the
Basin are Type B. If the Type B soils are improperly classified as favorable, then
the estimate of the amount ofground water recharge and the estimate of water
available for extraction could be overestimated.
Five types of spatial data were classified to estimate recharge. Each data type was
broken down to a three-fold classification, as described above. The hydrologic soil
groups, as defined by soil scientists from the Soil Conservation Service in the United
States Department of Agriculture, are:
9
A. (Low runoff potential). Soils having high infiltration rates even when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained
sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission(greater than
0.30 in/hr).
B. Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and
consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained
soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a
moderate rate of water transmission (0.15 - 0.30 in/hr).
C. Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting
chiefly of soils with moderately fine to fine texture. These soils have a slow rate
of water transmission (0.05 - 0.15 in/hr).
D. (High runoff potential). Soils having very slow infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling
potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a claypan or clay
layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission (0 - 0.05 in/hr). Mockus,
1964 and USDA, 1986
Based upon our many years of experience in observation of a variety of watersheds, we
have found the actual runoff from A and B soils to be minimal. Using that experience
and comparing the transmission rate, we determined the logical break between favorable
and moderate would be 0.15 in/hr.
• Page 17, Yd Paragraph. Classifying the Basin fill volcanic unit as moderate may
result in an overestimation of recharge. The volcanic rocks are shown on Figure
4 as being aquitards. These aquitards were noted on page ]] as being relatively
competent in limiting the transfer of shallow ground water to the middle/lower
aquifer system. The volcanic rocks were also described on page 11 as having
"significantly less storage potential"than the alluvium. These data suggest that
the permeability of the volcanic rocks is much lower than the alluvium,probably
on the order of one to several orders of magnitude. However, the recharge
difference between favorable and moderate was only 22 to 26 percent (Table 1).
The much lower permeability associated with the volcanic rocks may warrant
classification as not favorable.
Nimbus classified the geologic units into three major groups. The basement rocks have
limited ability to transmit water and were rated unfavorable. Basin-fill sedimentary units
have high ability to transmit water and were rated as favorable. The volcanics have
localized fracture permeability and were rated moderate because they fall between the
two extremes.
10
Volcanic rocks may have significantly less storage potential than the alluvium. The
concept of storage refers to the volume of water an aquifer releases from or takes into
storage per unit surface area of the aquifer per unit change in head, while permeability is
defined as "the property or capacity of a porous rock, sediment or soil for transmitting a
fluid; it is a measure of the relative ease of fluid flow under unequal pressure" (Driscol,
1986). Fractured rock units having low coefficients of storage may have high fracture-
controlled permeabilities and sedimentary units having high coefficients of storage may
have very low permeabilities (i.e. silts and clays). Therefore, precipitation can infiltrate
through the permeable zones in the basin-fill volcanic rocks and recharge the aquifer.
Review of Section 7.1 -Recharge of Precipitation of the Basin Study explains how the
recharge efficiencies in Table 1 were assigned. Geologic units were only one of five data
types used to define the recharge efficiencies of the final five GIS classifications shown
on Table 1. Figure A, attached, shows the distribution of GIS classifications in the areas
of basin fill volcanics and Table A, attached, shows the percentages of GIS classification
which overlie the basin fill volcanics. Examination of Table A shows that more than half
of the area underlain by basin fill volcanics was assigned a Not Favorable classification
based on factors other than geology.
• Page 17, Yh Paragraph. It is suspected that recharge efficiencies are seldom as
high as 65 percent and can be less than 11 percent (e.g., over bedrock). In Table
1, the assignment of recharge efficiencies appears to be overly judgmental.
Under the least favorable conditions, a recharge efficiency of 15 percent was
used(Table 1), and over the entire Basin, a recharge efficiency of 25.3 percent
was used(Table 2). A Basin-wide recharge efficiency of 25.3 percent is greater
than the 11 percent value referenced in literature (Berger, 2000). (Eleven
percent was likely for the Basin as a whole, not just the most unfavorable portions
since the(Berger, 2000]study was titled " Water Budget Estimates for the 14
Hydrographie Areas in the Middle-Humboldt River Basin") Four out offive of
the assigned recharge efficiencies in the Basin Study exceed 33 percent (Table 1).
Therefore, the one literature attained value of 65 percent, which does not appear
to be published or peer-reviewed, unlike the other references cited, was used to
adjust recharge efficiencies upward. Because the literature attained values are
so highly variable, assessing the amount and spatial distribution of recharge may
be best accomplished via calibration of a numeric model.
Nimbus applied recharge efficiencies based on our review of the literature, our best
professional judgement, and our many years of professional experience.
The Berger(2000) reference cited in the text of the Basin Study and referred to above
was mis-identified. The correct references are listed below under References. Berger
(2000a) states "...about 11 percent of mountain-block precipitation becomes ground-
water recharge" for areas in of the Middle Humboldt River Basin where average annual
precipitation is less than 30 inches. Consolidated rock ranging in age from Precambrian
11
to late Tertiary makes up the mountainous regions (Berger, 2000b) of the Middle
Humboldt River Basin.
Brown et al(2001) conducted regional bedrock ground water recharge estimates of the
Mount Rose(approximately 20 miles east of Truckee) and Peavine Mountain
(approximately 25 miles northeast of Truckee) areas. They estimated that almost one
third of the gross precipitation reaches the bedrock aquifers of each area using a modified
soil-moisture deficit method and 30 years of actual monthly precipitation data.
Nichols (2000) applied recharge efficiencies as high as 62.6 percent of precipitation to
areas in central Nevada underlain by folded and faulted rocks ranging in age from
Precambrian to late Tertiary.
The recharge efficiency of 65 percent was calculated by Nimbus using figures presented
in the text of CH2M Hill (1999). The relatively high rate of ground water recharge
estimated by CH2M Hill (1999) for portions of the Martis Valley was attributed to
coarse-grained and permeable surface soils. Their ground water recharge estimate was
computed on a daily basis by a computer program (HELP v.3) for a portion of Martis
Valley. The C142M Hill (1999) document (Draft Environmental Impact Report) and
following CH2M Hill (2000a) document(Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact
Report) were subject to interested public and regulatory agency review and comment. A
list of individuals, organizations, and public agencies commenting on these documents is
included in CH2M Hill (2000b). Only one comment (Comment 30-91 in CH2M Hill,
2000b) was received regarding ground water recharge and was addressed by Response
30-91.
The range of recharge efficiency values used by Nimbus is consistent with published and
peer-reviewed references. Examination of Table 3 - Recharge Due to Precipitation by
GIS Classification shows that the four recharge efficiencies which exceed 33 percent
account for less than half the area of the Basin and recharge efficiencies which exceed 37
percent account for approximately 12 percent of the area of the Basin. The conservative
basin-wide recharge efficiency of 25.3 percent is less than the bedrock recharge
efficiencies identified by Brown et al for nearby areas.
• Page 18, last paragraph. The uplifted basement rocks to the south were
estimated to contribute 5,336 acre feet per year(AF/yr) ofground water (Tables
7 and 8). Ground water recharge from the watershed upgradient of the Basin
was included in the water balance. These aspects of the Basin Study are
inconsistent with other statements in the study. On page 7, it was stated that
"Basement rocks in the Truckee Area typically contain, transmit, and yield
relatively small quantities ofground water. " The basement rocks are not
anticipated to contribute significant ground water to the Basin for the reasons
stated on the first paragraph of Section 7.11.2. It is not clear why ground water
recharge from the watershed upgradient of the Basin was included in the water
12
balance when, as stated on page 23, `No ground water transfer into the basin
was included from these areas."
Section 7.11.2 is a subsection of Section 7.11 - Other Potential Components of the Water
Balance, which discussed potential components of the water balance which were
identified and evaluated, but not included in the water balance. The statement"No
ground water transfer into the basin was included from these areas"refers specifically to
the Carpenter Valley and Euer Valley, as indicated in the third full paragraph on page 23.
A similar statement was made for the Cold Stream Valley area in the second full
paragraph on page 23. Section 7.3 - Transfer of Ground Water into Basin, Section 8.2 -
Zone B (Martis Valley), and Section 8.3 -Zone C (Dry Lake) discuss ground water
recharge to the mountain block south of Martis Valley and transfer into the Basin.
The 11% recharge efficiency applied to this area is based on work by Berger(2000a and
2000b).
Localized faulting or fracturing and weathering may produce secondary permeability in
the bedrock aquifers. A substantial amount of ground water may move through these
fractured zones or be stored, where saturated, even though their primary permeability is
low. Recent drilling activities in the Basin by Northstar Community Services District
confirms that volcanic rocks bounding the southern portion of the Basin can, in fact,
transmit substantial amounts of ground water. Recharge to the Basin from other areas of
the water shed upgradient of the Basin will be evaluated as additional data becomes
available.
• Page 21, Section 79.1. Literature presented values ofground water
contributions to the Truckee River ranged from 8,180 to 12,000 AFfyr; but the
water balance used a much greater value of 20,207 AFlyr(Table 8). Nimbus then
used this value as part of the ground water that is available for extraction (Table
12). The greater Truckee River ground water discharge value was calculated by
balancing inputs and outputs. As discussed above, the inputs may be artiflcially
inflated by precipitation recharge values, and possibly by the ground water
transfers into the Basin. Therefore, the amount of water available for extraction,
assuming it is acceptable to stop all ground water discharge to the Truckee River,
would also be inflated.
Ground water discharge to the Truckee River for the Basin Study was estimated as a
residual from mass-balance calculations of the water balance. Ground water discharge to
the Truckee River was also independently estimated using USGS stream gaging data as
discussed in Section 9.0 - Comparison of Predicted and Observed Values. The two
values are in close agreement.
Hydro-Seach, Inc(1975) estimated 12,000 AFlyr of ground water discharge to the
Truckee River based on their water budget. Westphal (1975) used mass balance methods
to estimate net gains to the Truckee River of 8,180 AF/yr based on USGS stream gage
13
data. Both estimates were prior to operations of regional waste water facilities (Tahoe-
Truckee Sanitation Agency or T-TSA) in 1978. T-TSA infiltrated 5,433 AF/yr of treated
waste water during 1999, most of which eventually discharges to the Truckee River.
The Westphal(1975) study used gage data from a 22 mile reach of the Truckee River
with significant contributions from four ungaged tributaries. The Nimbus (2001) study
used USGS stream gage data from a 10 mile reach of the Truckee River with only one
ungaged perennial tributary. The methods and data for each investigation are
summarized below.
Westphal (1975) used gaging station data at 1) Truckee River at Tahoe City, 2) Truckee
River above Truckee, 3) Donner Creek near Donner Lake, 4)Martis Creek, 5) Prosser
Creek, and 6) Truckee River at Farad to estimate net gains in the Truckee-Farad reach.
Four ungaged perennial streams contribute water to the Truckee in the Truckee-Farad
reach. Westphal (1975) estimated annual flows for each of ungaged streams using linear
regression techniques applied to hydrologically similar tributaries in the Truckee River
Basin.
The Basin Study used gage station data at 1)Truckee River at Truckee, 2) Donner Creek
at Highway 89 near Truckee, 3) Martis Creek near Truckee, and 4) Truckee River above
Prosser Creek to estimate net gains. Ungaged flow from one tributary, Trout Creek, was
estimated using linear regression methods. Nimbus believes that the use of well located
gage stations in a shorter reach and estimation of flows from only one tributary results in
a better estimate of ground water discharge to the Truckee River than provided by
Westphal(1975).
• Table 7 and Figure 11. There are some discrepancies between Table 7 and
Figure 11. For example, on Figure 11, Zone A is noted to lose 854 AFfyr to Zone
B, and 977 AF/yr to Zone D for a total of 1,831 (the value in Intrabasin GW
Transfer Out(Table 7]). Figure I indicated Zone B only receives Intrabasin
GW transfers from Zone A,yet the Intrabasin GW transfer into Zone B is 1,981
AFIft, not the 854 AFfyr provide by Zone A. An explanation for the difference is
not provided.
Figure 11 has an arrow from Zone C to Zone B showing a transfer of 1127 acre-feet/year.
This amount plus the 854 acre-feet/year from Zone A gives the total of 1981 acre-
feet/year shown in Table 7.
Table 7 - Summary of Ground Water Recharge, Movement, and Discharge in the Martis
Valley Ground Water Basin provides a summary of the more detailed information
presented on Table 8 - Average Annual Water Balance for Martis Valley Ground Water
Basin. Examination of data presented under the Zone B Water Balance on Table 8
identifies components of ground water transfer into Zone B from Zones A (854 acre feet
per year) and C (1,127 acre feet per year) totaling 1,981 acre feet per year. Figure 11 -
Ground Water Transfer Components of Water Balance summarizes the transfer of ground
14
water between Zones. Figure 14 - Water Balance for Zone B provides a comprehensive
view of the water balance components for Zone B. Both of these Figures identify ground
water transfer from Zone A and Zone C into Zone B, as described above. Additionally,
text in Section 8.2 - Zone B (Martis Valley), which is a subsection of Section 8.0 -
Estimated Ground Water Recharge, Movement, and Discharge, explains the transfer of
ground water into Zone B from Zone A and Zone C.
• Table 12. The volume of ground water available for extraction (24,701 AF/yr)
was calculated using all of the ground water that was estimated to provide flow to
the Truckee River, Prosser Creek, and contribute to Prosser Creek Reservoir.
For this approach to work, the water table would uniformly have to be lowered to
the thalweg elevation of the current groundwater discharge points. In reality,
pumping will create cones of depression that will create an uneven water table
surface. Portions of the steams that were ground water discharge reaches will
become ground water recharge reaches.
The intent of the Basin Study was to calculate the amount of ground water available in
the Martis Valley Ground Water Basin without changing the amount of ground water in
storage over the long term. As the District moves into Phase II of its Ground Water
Management Plan, the volume available for extraction based upon a concept of
sustainable yield will be determined.
The majority of AME's comments suggest that the amount of ground water recharge may
be overestimated. Overestimation of ground water recharge in a water balance will result
in a corresponding overestimation of ground discharge after accounting for all other
Basin inflows and outflows given the condition of no net change in storage. Taking these
factors into account, the ground water discharge predicted by the Basin Study has been
independently verified by observed data, validating the overall water balance.
As the above comments and responses indicate, AME has not provided any specific or
substantive evidence of impacts or potential impacts due to current ground water
extraction or proposed ground water extraction to meet the needs of the Proposed Project.
No measurable increase in drawdown and no measurable environmental impacts will
occur due to the one-time extraction of 4 million gallons of ground water for the
Proposed Project.
References
Anderson, Mary P., and William W. Woessner, 1992, Applied Groundwater Modeling
Simulation of Flow and Advective Transport, Academic Press.
Berger, David L., 2000a, Water Budgets for Pine Valley. Carico Lake Valley, and Upper
Reese River ValleHydrologic Areas Middle Humboldt River Basin, North-Central
Nevada - Methods for Estimation and Results, USGS Water Resources Investigations
Report 99-4272.
15
Berger, David L., 2000b, Water Budget Estimates for the14 Hydrographic Areas in the
Middle Humboldt River Basin North-Central Nevada, USGS Water Resources
Investigations Report 00-4168.
Brown, Norm, Thompson, Tim, Bachman, Steve, and Larsen,Nils, 2001, Bedrock
Groundwater Recharge Estimates for Groundwater Exploration, Mount Rose and Peavine
Mountain Areas Nevada, in Abstracts of Technical Publications, 2001 A Water Odyssey,
Nevada Water Resources Association, 2001.
CH2M Hill, 1999, Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency Water Reclamation Plant
Expansion Project(Draft Environmental Impact Report Sch#98052005),prepared for
Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency, April 1999.
CH2M Hill, 2000a, Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency Water Reclamation Plant
Expansion Project (Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report Sch #98052005),
prepared for Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency, April 2000.
CH2M Hill, 2000b, Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency Water Reclamation Plant
Expansion Project (Final Environmental Impact Report Sch#98052005), prepared for
Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency, December 2000.
Driscoll, Fletcher, 1986, Groundwater and Wells.
Hydro-Search, Inc., 1975, Availability of Ground Water, Truckee Donner Public Utility
District, Nevada County, California,prepared for the Truckee Donner Public Utility
District, February 14, 1975, 60 p.
Mockus, Victor, 1964, Chapter 7. Hydrologic Soil Groups, reprinted with minor
revisions, 1972 in U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1985,
National Engineering Handbook, Section 4 -Hydrology.
Nichols, William D., 2000, Regional Ground-Water Evapotranspiration and Ground
Water Budgets, Great Basin, Nevada, USGS Professional Paper 1628.
USDA, 1986, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Technical Release 55, Appendix A
- Hydrologic Soil Groups, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Conservation
Engineering Division, updated January 1999.
Westphal, J. A., 1975, Accretion to Truckee River from Ground Water in the reach
between Truckee California and Farad California, letter to John V.A. Sharp, January 22,
1975.
16
Verbal comments from TDPUD Director Pat Sutton at the regular board meeting of September 5,
2001:
Comment: The water storage tank project falls under the category of"growth-
inducing"because it includes capacity for new development not yet approved by
the Town of Truckee.
Response: Although the proposed water storage tank project will provide storage
capacity for developments not yet approved by the Town, the capacity of the tanks is
based on the Town's approved General Plan. The General Plan was the basis for the
District's Water Master Plan Update,which was, in turn, the basis for determining the
capacity of the proposed water storage tank project. This tank project is intended to
provide water storage for existing District customers, for supplementing existing storage
deficiencies, and for new development consistent with the adopted General Plan of the
Town of Truckee. Potential growth-inducing impacts associated with the tank project are
considered less than significant.
CEQA allows agencies to streamline environmental review by following the procedure
set forth in section 21083.3 of the Public Resources Code and its counterpart in the
CEQA Guidelines, section 15168. Under this procedure, projects which are consistent
with the development density established by an existing general plan will generally not
have to undertake further environmental review for issues which are adequately
addressed in the general plan and accompanying environmental review. Additional
environmental review is still required to identify and address any project-specific
significant effects. In the case of the water tank project, this procedure does apply to
potential growth-inducing effects.
One of the steps public agencies are required to take in order to use this procedure is to
adopt any mitigation measures contained in the general plan for the environmental effect
for which the agency wants to streamline its review. In order to streamline the review of
growth-inducing effects, the District has adopted the mitigation measures for growth-
inducing impacts which are contained in the Town of Truckee's general plan. These
mitigation measures are not added to reduce a potential significant impact to a level less
than significant, rather they are added out of an abundance of caution with respect to
growth-inducing effects.
M-8. .(Truckee General Plan Land Use Policy 2.3) - To provide for projected
population growth in an efficient manner, accommodate development at the
highest densities in infill areas, consistent with the goals for environmental
protection and land use compatibility.
M-9. (Truckee General Plan Land Use Policy 3.1) - Work with all special districts,
including the Tahoe-Truckee Unified School District, to ensure that development
within the Town is coordinated with provision of services.
17
In the planning of infrastructure such as water system facilities, it is not practical to wait
until each new development is approved to construct facilities. If this were the case, it
would suggest that, in terms of water storage, a new tank would have to be built for each
new development following approval to meet that new development's, and only that new
development's, storage needs. Prudent infrastructure planning would state that, prior to
the existence of a deficit condition, facilities would be designed and constructed based on
the best available information, in this case the Town's General Plan and the District's
Master Plan. If it turns out that as the service area approaches build-out, the actual
densities are less than projected in the General Plan and Master Plan, the District may
end up with some surplus storage capacity. If, on the other hand, the densities prove to
be higher than projected, the District may have to provide more storage capacity. The
capacity of the water storage tanks does not determine the land use or densities of new
development. Those decisions are made through the planning process by the Town of
Truckee.
As previously stated, the District's Water System Master Plan identifies a deficiency of
approximately 4.5 million gallons of storage capacity District-wide, including a 0.95
million gallon shortage in the Town pressure zone and a 0.84 million gallon shortage in
the Gateway pressure zone. The proposed new storage tanks, once filled, will provide
water storage capacity for peak demand periods as well for emergency and fire protection
needs for the area being served by the tank,providing service to existing District
customers in the Interstate 80/State Route 89 intersection area and supplementing the
District's existing Town and Prosser pressure zones. Through interconnections with
existing District distribution systems, these new tanks will also provide back-up storage
capacity including fire and emergency storage capacity, to the Town, Gateway, and
Prosser pressure zones.
Having the additional storage will also allow the District to operate well pumps more
efficiently through the practice of off-peak pumping, or peak shaving. Well pumps may
be shut off during high energy demand periods of the day with water being supplied by
the storage tanks. The tanks are then replenished by operating the well pumps during
lower electrical demand, or off-peak, periods.
Letter from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (on behalf of Sierra Watch and the Mountain Area
Preservation Foundation) dated October 17, 2001:
Comment: "Tiering off an earlier EIR is appropriate only if the impacts
of the proposed project were (1) mitigated or avoided as a result of the
prior EIR, or(2) analyzed at a sufficient level of detail in the prior EIR
such that the earlier analysis can be relied on to identify project-specific
avoidance or mitigation measures in subsequent environmental review.
(See Pub. Res. Code §21094(a))...Given the inadequacy of the General
Plan EIR as a first-tier document with respect to cumulative impacts, the
District' must address the project's cumulative impacts in the MND, or, if
18
those effects are significant and cannot be rendered insignificant through
adoption of mitigation measures, in an EIR..."
Response: This contention is simply misplaced, and appears to be based on a
misunderstanding of TDPUD's MND and the mitigation measures adopted subsequent to
the circulation of the MND. TDPUD is not relying on the tiering provisions of section
21094 of the Public Resources Code. The criteria set forth in that section are therefore
inapplicable to this project and the environmental documents prepared for the project.
TDPUD has instead opted to use an alternative to tiering, namely, the procedure set forth
in section 21083.3 of the Public Resources Code. This section establishes different
standards for the use of an earlier EIR. Under the 21083.3 procedure, the only impacts
which need to be addressed are: (i) effects which are peculiar to the project and were not
addressed as significant effects in the prior EIR; and (ii) effects which "substantial new
information shows will be more significant than described in the prior environmental
impact report." The applicability of an earlier EIR is much less susceptible to being
diminished by changed conditions under the 21083.3 standard than under the 21094
tiering provisions. In this case, there were no cumulative or growth-inducing impacts of
the project which were not addressed in the General Plan EIR, and there are no effects
which"substantial new information shows will be more significant" than described in the
General Plan EIR.
Comment: "Second, as we noted in our second letter, the water source for the
proposed project must be identified and the effects of the projects withdrawals
from that source must be addressed in a revised MND or an EIR..."
Response: As stated in a previous response, the proposed water storage tanks will not
create any new demand for water sources other than a one time 4,000,000 gallon (12
acre-feet) demand to fill the tanks. The source of water for the proposed tanks will be a
combination of existing District wells including Sanders Well located west of the
Coachland Mobile Home Park, Prosser Heights Well located on Alder Drive at Cheyenne
Way, and Prosser Annex Well located on No Other Way.
Comment: "Finally, we note that alteration of the MND to add discussion of a
new significant effect or mitigation measure would be a "substantial revision"
requiring recirculation of the document...The revisions discussed in this letter,
such as adoption of new mitigation measures to address the project's growth-
inducing impacts,plainly come within the ambit of[CEQA Guidelines section
15073.5(b)(1)]...The revisions discussed in this letter involve the identification of
new significant impacts and mitigation measures."
Response: Alteration of an MND to add discussion of a new significant effect would
constitute a "substantial revision"requiring recirculation of the MND. However, several
California cases have held that the addition of a new mitigation measure does not per se
require recirculation of the MND. In cases where an effect was determined by the initial
19
study to be insignificant, or where an effect will already have been mitigated to a less-
than-significant level by a mitigation measure contained in the version of the MND
which was circulated, and a new mitigation measure is simply added out of an abundance
of caution, the addition of the new mitigation measure does not trigger a recirculation
requirement.
The first case in which such a ruling was made by the court was Leonoff v. Monterey
County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337. At page 1357 of the opinion,
the Leonoff court noted that:
"...if the initial public review demonstrates the initial mitigation will adequately reduce
potential effects to insignificance, imposition of additional mitigation does not require
further public review."
The Leonoff court went on to find that no substantial evidence existed that the initial
mitigating measures were inadequate to reduce project effects to insignificance. This
being the case, "if County imposed further conditions in an excess of caution, they were
not subject to public review." (Id.) Similar findings were made by the courts in Gentry
v. City ofMurrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4"' 1359, 1392 (citing and analyzing Leonoff) and
Citizen Action to Serve All Students v. Thornley (1990) 228 Cal.App.3d 748, 759.
In this case, subsequent to the circulation of the MND, TDPUD added two new
mitigation measures which pertain to growth-inducing impacts. Such impacts were
examined and determined to be less than significant in the initial study for this project.
Since the impacts had already been determined to be less than significant, the later
addition of the two new mitigation measures, made "in an excess of caution" in the words
of the Leonoff court, does not trigger the recirculation requirement of Guidelines section
15073.5.
This section requires recirculation only where (i) "a new, avoidable significant effect is
identified" and mitigation measures must be added in order to reduce the effect to
insignificance; or (ii) the lead agency determines that the mitigation measures already
identified in the negative declaration will not reduce potential effects to less than
significance. The growth-inducing effects were not a newly identified significant effect,
and TDPUD did not determine that mitigation measures already identified were
inadequate. The result is that neither of the recirculation criteria is met in this case, so
recirculation of the MND is not required.
Letter from Janna S. Caughron dated October 17, 2001:
Comment: "...information from the TDPUD seems to indicate there is an infinite
amount of water in the Martis Valley aquifer with which to fill the proposed water
storage tanks. It does not appear that the conclusion has been reached using the
best available hydrological testing and quantification methods, nor evaluating all
of the fixture cumulative impacts."
20
Response: As previously stated, the one-time tank filling associated with the proposed
project will require the extraction of 4 million gallons (or 12 acre-feet) from the TDPUD
Sanders, Prosser Heights, and/or Prosser Annex wells, as discussed elsewhere. Each of
these wells extracted from 90 million gallons to in excess of 100 million gallons (280 to
325 acre-feet) during calendar year 2000 (Nimbus,2001). The cumulative 2000 ground
water extraction from these three wells was in excess of 300 million gallons (or 920 acre-
feet). The extraction of 4 million gallons of additional ground water from these wells
will not result in measurable increases in drawdown at these wells. Extraction of ground
water for the one-time tank filling associated with the proposed project will not have any
measurable environmental impact.
Comment: "Nowhere to my knowledge has the cumulative effects of all the
proposed golf courses, snow-making,residential, commercial, and industrial
water usage been quantified or estimated for the aquifer."
Response: Attempting to determine the quantity of water usage for all of the various
development scenarios which might use water from the Martis Valley aquifer is
considered beyond the scope of the proposed tank construction project. Through the land
development planning process, the Town of Truckee will require a detailed
environmental review of any proposed development which could be accommodated by
the proposed water storage tanks, including an analysis of water resources issues. Placer
County will also require such review and analysis for projects which will draw water
from the Placer County side of the Martis Valley. The Town is currently requiring an
EIR to be prepared for the PC-2 project. As a responsible agency under CEQA, the
District will have an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the EIR with respect
to water issues. In any event, the withdrawal of 12 acre-feet to fill the proposed tanks is
so minor that it does not cause any significant cumulative impacts.
Comment: "How is TDPUD going to provide protection to the existing
residential wells."
Response: As previously stated, extraction of ground water for the one-time tank filling
associated with the proposed project will not have any measurable environmental impact.
Should the District construct additional wells in response to land development in the
Prosser area, any useful analysis of potential impacts to existing wells would depend on
the location of the new well, distance to existing wells, the local geology, and other site-
specific conditions. Attempting to determine the location and associated conditions with
respect to future District wells, whose locations are as yet unknown, is considered
beyond the scope of the proposed tank construction project.
21
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
Water. Our most precious natural resource. Its prudent and effective management
is the growing West's greatest challenge. If you are a public agency, private
developer, or civil engineer, water will eventually be one of your foremost concerns.
At Nimbus Engineers, we're uniquely qualified to help you meet that challenge. We
specialize in one field...water. With close to 100 years of combined experience in
engineering, hydrology and geology, we are authorities on water technology.
From groundwater resource exploration and development to flood control,
watershed and basin management to river mechanics, we understand our unique
western setting. Our diverse climate and topography and rapid growth demand far
more than textbook engineering or geologic approaches. They demand engineers,
hydrologists, and geologists with solid experience, both in the West and in water.
That's why Nimbus is best equipped to solve your water resources problems.
Nimbus Engineers was created specifically to meet the growing demand for
intelligent, economical management of the West's limited and unpredictable water
supply. We're a small fin-in and we believe that size is our advantage. Water is not
a sideline or a division of our company. It's all we do.
Nimbus is committed to utilization of progressive methods. We offer state-of-the art
computer modeling, experienced interpretation of data and GIS mapping and
analysis. In addition, we aggressively pursue continuing education to maintain our
leadership position in water resources technology and to utilize the most effective
methods to approach any project.
We invite you to examine our enclosed lists of capabilities, qualifications, and
experience.
MPUD Ground Water Development Program
Margaret F. Bowker, P.E.
President
Education B.S., 1978, Civil Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno
Continuing Education in HEC-1,HEC-2, Erosion and Sedimentation
' Registration Professional Engineer, Civil,NV 5252
Professional Engineer, Civil,AZ 14256
' Experience Ms. Bowker has a broad background in the field of civil engineering; she has served
as Principal in Charge and Project Manager for numerous projects overseeing
' budgets,timetables and project scheduling as well as concept development,technical
review, principal investigator and expert witness. She is a recognized expert in the
field of surface water hydrology and hydraulics, flood control design and storm
1 drainage for and and semi-arid climates. Ms. Bowker is committed to working
toward development of sound public policy on all types of water issues. She has
participated on a number of advisory committees and technical councils, including
' Washoe County's initial Water Planning Commission,FEMA's Technical Mapping
Advisory Council and the National Research Council's committee on Alluvial Fan
Flooding. She has also been an invited witness to testify on proposed federal and
1 state legislation.
Her experience includes management of a wide variety of projects including channel
design and storm drain design, hydrologic studies,hydraulic analyses and other civil
engineering projects which include design for airports, roadways and subdivisions.
' Relevant Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan,Southeast Truckee Meadows Specific
Projects Plan, Washoe County, Nevada
I Principal in Charge and Project Manager for development of a flood control master
plan for a 1,800-acre master planned community affected by two major Truckee River
tributaries, Steamboat and Whites Creeks, and numerous off site drainages.
Flood Insurance Studies, Various Counties and Cities, Nevada
Principal in Charge and Project Manager for six major FEMA studies for Nevada
' communities. These studies include development of hydrologic and hydraulic models
for delineation of floodplain boundaries to assist the local agencies in floodplain
regulation and to develop rates for flood insurance. These studies involved
hydrologic evaluation of large rivers using gage data and frequency analysis, and
evaluation of smaller streams using HEC-i modeling techniques.
Nimbus Engineers "'''
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Margaret Bowker, continued
Whites Creek Branch Four Channel, Galena Meadows Subdivision, Washoe
County
Principal in Charge and Project Manager for development of a channel to convey
supercritical flows of Whites Creek Branch 4. Channel design involved extensive
riprap design and the relocation of an irrigation channel.
' Geographical Information System(GIS)Model for Sewer Connectivity Diagram
for City of Reno,Nevada.
Principal-in-Charge in the GIS mapping of the City of Reno's sanitary sewer system.
Nimbus' responsibilities were to collect information needed to establish coordinates
' for each sewer manhole and to determine connectivity. This project used GPS field
numbers which were converted into a unique identifying number for the city and the
coordinates of each manhole were projected into the State Plane Coordinate System
to be used as the Nodes for an ARC/Info line coverage.
Technical Advisor for the Truckee River Water Management Council, Reno,
Nevada-Nimbus Engineers and Ms.Bowker,in particular,were retained by a group
of landowners and property managers in the area of the Truckee Meadows which was
most severely impacted by the January 1997 floods. The group was seeking was to
' protect themselves and the entire community from future flood damages. Projects
undertaken on behalf of the Council were a mapping and quantification of flood
damage in the area and the development of information to support a financial analysis
of the flood's impact. A HEC-2 Model of the flood was developed and is currently
being incorporated into a UNET model. Ms. Bowker also was responsible for the
Council's presentation of a flood proofing workshop for local public and private
I interests. As the Council's Technical Advisor, Ms. Bowker has organized and
attended public and agency meetings to assist the communities' efforts in flood
recovery. The Council is currently monitoring ongoing efforts to develop a flood
' control project and a flood warning system.
' Flood Insurance Studies for Nevada for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, FEMA - Ms. Bowker has served as Principal in Charge and Project
Manager for six major FEMA studies for Nevada communities. These studies include
' development of hydrologic and hydraulic models for delineation of floodplain
boundaries to assist the local agencies in floodplain regulation and develop rates for
flood insurance. Studies performed to date for FEMA include streams in the cities
of Reno, Sparks, Elko, Carson City and Henderson as well as unincorporated
Washoe,Lyon and Clark Counties.
Margaret Bowker, continued
' Nimbus Engineers ]
'IIIP`
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan,Southeast Truckee Meadows Specific
Plan, Washoe County, Nevada - Principal-in-Charge/Project Manager for
hydrologic and hydraulic analyses and preliminary design to develop a Master Plan
for a large agricultural area being converted to a planned residential and commercial
' development. The project is traversed by two major Truckee River tributaries,Whites
and Steamboat Creeks. Project involved preliminary channel designs, major
hydraulic structures for roadways and an overall concept for preserving wetlands and
riparian areas and mitigating impacts of the development. A HEC-1 hydrologic
model was developed to calculate existing and proposed storm runoff. A 5000 cfs
diversion structure in Steamboat Creek was included in the project so that existing
drainage pattern will be preserved once development begins. The 5000 cis diversion
will maintain flows through existing and created wetlands in the plan, as well as two
regional detention basins designed to reduce the proposed flows to the existing flow
condition.
' I-80/Pyramid Way Interchange Project,Nevada Department of Transportation,
Sparks, Nevada - Principal-in-Charge for the drainage design and utility mapping
and relocation for the interchange project. The project includes the hydrologic
' development,hydraulic analysis of existing and proposed facilities, final design and
preparation of plan and profiles of the storm drain system for the interchange. One
of the parameters for the project was the design of two detention basins to insure that
' the runoff in the proposed condition did not exceed that of the existing condition.
The project also includes the relocation of several thousand feet of existing storm
drain. Storm drain design software included Hydrain and HY-8.
Flood Control Master Plan, South Meadows Business Park/Double Diamond
Ranch, Reno, Nevada - Ms. Bowker was Principal-in-Charge/Project Manager for
developing existing and proposed conditions,hydrologic and hydraulic analyses,and
the flood control master plan for this 2000t acre master planned community. The
project included two requests for Conditional Letters of Map Revision which were
submitted to and approved by FEMA. An additional Letter of Map Revision for
Thomas Creek flooding was submitted and approved by FEMA. This involved
extensive hydraulic and sedimentation analysis.
Nevada Department of Transportation,Interstate 580,Whites Creek Detention
Feasibility Analysis, Reno, Nevada - Principal-in-Charge for a feasibility study
including hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of Whites Creek for existing and
proposed conditions, design of drainage structures for existing and reduced flows.
' The project also included preliminary design of debris and detention basins and
channels as well as construction cost estimates, right-of-way requirements and a
geotechnical analysis. This project was developed on a tight time schedule and
' required careful co-ordination with NDOT, Washoe County and a number of private
interests.
Nimbus Engineers G
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Margaret Bowker, continued
Reno-Cannon Airport, Reno,Nevada
Principal-in-Charge of Phase I and II improvement designs, surveys and field
investigations subcontracted from Greiner, Inc. Nimbus' responsibility included
review of airport Master Drainage Plan, data gathering and field investigation for on-
site and off-site specific drainage information, design and construction drawings of
5100 lineal feet of service road,hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of infield drainage
areas, preparation of BAK-14 plans and detail sheets, as well as on and off-site
surveys. Phase I of the project was completed under an extraordinarily tight time
' schedule. Each and every deadline was met due to a good working relationship with
the prime contractor, compatible computer and software capabilities and careful
coordination.
Flood Insurance Restudy for Pittman Wash, Clark County Regional Flood
' Control District, Clark County, Nevada - HEC-1, HEC-2 and HEC-6 analysis of
flood improvements to the Pittman Wash, including a large multi-use detention area.
The purpose of the project was to revise the Clark County Flood Insurance Rate
' Maps.
Member of the Nation Research Council Committee on Alluvial Fan Flooding
Ms. Bowker was chosen as a contributing member for this committee which
published a report on alluvial fan flooding under contract to FEMA.
' Member of FEMA's Technical Mapping Advisory Council
Council is charged with reviewing the methods of producing Flood Insurance Rate
Maps. The Council has just presented its 3rd Annual Report to the Director of
FEMA
Nimbus Engineers
Otis,.
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Kirk E. Swanson, Ph.D, CEM, RG, CHG
Senior Hydrogeologist
Education Ph.D, Geology 1998, University of Nevada, Reno
M.S., Geological Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno, 1990
' B.A., Geology, Western State College of Colorado, Gunnison, 1983
Registration Registered Geologist,#RG 6272, CA
' Certified Hydrogeologist,#HG 340, CA
Certified Environmental Manager, #EM-1659,NV
' Experience Dr. Swanson has seventeen years experience, both domestic and international, in
hydrology,geology,geophysics and geological engineering. His experience includes
project management and technical supervision of groundwater investigations for local
and regional hydrogeological characterization programs. He has provided support of
environmental impact documents and permit applications and performed groundwater
' resource evaluations, including aquifer testing and analysis in fracture, volcanic and
fluvial media for determination of basin yields. Dr. Swanson has developed
numerous deep well designs for high production water supply.He is also experienced
in groundwater contaminant assessment and remediation, and development of water
rights acquisition strategies.
' Relevant Truckee-Donner Public Utility District, Truckee,California
Projects Project Manager for development of an additional 6,000 to 8,000 gallons per minute
of water supply well drilling to be developed in interbedded fractured and alluvial
units. Current work includes development of a basin wide geologic and
hydrogeologic understanding and exploration drilling program in newly defined area.
Managed the day to day operation of data analysis, project development, and
exploration drilling. Previous experience working for the TDPUD involved data
analysis of exploration and production well drilling and testing.
' Magma Copper CompanylBHP Minerals,Ruth,Nevada
Project Manager for the development of an 6,000 gpm water supply from fractured
carbonate aquifers in a remote area. Selected sites for exploration drilling based on
' geologic field mapping of local fracture zones along and adjacent to intersections of
regional structures. Supervised reverse air exploration drilling and evaluated
potential water production based on airlift results,drilling rig response, drilling fluid
' circulation, and geophysical logging. Supervised production well drilling utilizing
a fluid reverse drilling method to minimize borehole and aquifer destruction and
' maximize well yields and efficiencies. Well yields exceeded 4000 gpm. Total project
costs were approximately $3 million.
Nimbus Engineers =N'
ant"
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Kirk Swanson,continued
' Confidential Aerospace client,Burbank Operable Unit, California
Project Manager/field Coordinator of a Phase II program which included the design,
supervision, and installation of three monitor wells within alluvial core holes at this
Superfund site for characterization of a proposed well field site within a PCE/TCE
plume. Supervised drilling,construction,development,and aquifer testing of seven
18-inch stainless steel extraction wells (totaling 6,000 gpm) and 10 associated
monitoring wells. Splitspoon sampling, containment of drill cuttings, and air
' monitoring were required. Waste management issues included disposal of drill
cuttings and treatment of groundwater generated during aquifer testing.
Responsibilities included evaluating bids and contractors selection for rapid
' completion. Reviewed subcontractor invoicing totaling over $2 million.
Minera Escondida (BHP Minerals),Region I1,Imilac Basin,Chile
' Provided structural evaluation of the groundwater resources for a major copper mine
in a extremely and basin in the Atacama Desert, based on geologic field mapping,
review of company files and through review of literature. Following phases of work
' integrated Transient Electromagnetic data, borehole lithology,borehole geophysics,
gravity data, aquifer testing, and groundwater modeling to evaluate the production
potential and basin-wide impacts to the fresh and brackish water. Fractured rock
units and extensive alluvial basins were evaluated. Included management of$1.5
million budget for exploration drilling.
' South Lake Tahoe Public Utility District, South Lake Tahoe, California
Conducted review of well construction in regard to water quality for existing wells.
Provided oversight of core drilling and Simulprobe zone specific sampling to
determine the vertical extent of MTBE in the aquifer.
U.S. Department of Energy,Nevada
Lead in charge of data collection team for geologic and groundwater characterization,
geophysical logging, drilling fluid discharge, and waste management activities at 10
' wells sites during deep multi-agency 2500-5000 ft monitor well installation program.
Publications Swanson, K.E., 1998, Geology of the Orcopampa 30 minute quadrangle, souther
peril,with special focus on the evolution of the Chinchon and Huayta Calderas.Ph.D.
dissertation, Reno,Nevada, University of Nevada, 320 p.
Gibson, P.C., McKee, E.H., Noble, D.C., and Swanson, K.E., Timing and
interrelation of magmatic, tectonic, and hydrothermal activity at the Orcopampa
district, souther Peru: Economic Geology, v. 90,pp. 2317-2325.
Nimbus Engineers ""`'
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Kirk Swanson, continued
McKee, E.H., Gibson, P.E., Noble, D.C., and Swanson, K.E., 1994, Chronology of
' igneous activity, hydrothermal alteration and mineralization, Orcopampa epithermal
Ag-Au district, southern Peru: Cong. Geol. Chileno Res. Expand., 205-207.
Swanson,K.E.,Noble,D.C.,McKee,E.H.,and gibson,P.C., 1993,Collapse calderas
and other neogene volcanic and hydrothermal features of the Chila cordillera and
adjacent areas, southern peru [abs.]: Geological Society of America Abstracts with
Programs, v. 25,p. 154.
Swanson,K.E., 1990,Statistical analysis of snow-pack stability in the northern Sierra
Nevada, California. M.S. thesis, Reno,Nevada, University ofNevada, 240p.
Swanson,K.E., 1998, Statistical analysis of snow-pack stability Alpine Meadows Ski
Resort, California: Proceedings of the 1988International Snow Science Workshop.
Killeen, K.M., Slemmons, D.B., Swanson, K.E., 1987, Timing of folding and uplift
of the Pismo Syncline, San Luis Obispo County, California [abst] 83" Annual
Meeting Cordilleran Section, Geological Society ofAmerica, vol. 19,No. 6, p. 394.
Watters, R.J., Swanson, K.E., 1986, Sensor frequency, waveguide orientation and
type and their influence on acoustic emissions monitoring of snow pack stability:
Proceedings of the 1986International Snow Science Workshop.
' Reeder, J.W., Swanson, K.E., Larson, M.J., 1985, Unconsolidated deposits, recent
' volcanic rocks, and active faults of the Makushin volcano and Dutch Harbor region
of Unalaska Island, Alaska:Alaska division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys
Reports of Investigations.
Reeder,J.W., Swanson,K.E.,Larson,M.J., and Edge,D.B., 1985,Geologic bedrock
observations and map of the Makushin volcano and Dutch Harbor region, Unalaska
Island, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of
Investigations.
' Swanson, K.E.,Nobel,D.C., McKee,E.H., Sempere, T., Martinez, C., and Ciribian,
M., 1987,Major revisions in the age of rock units and tectonic events in the northern
Altiplano basin of Bolivia [abs.]: Geological society of America abstracts with
' Programs, v. 19, p. 456.
i
Nimbus Engineers ]
%ins•
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
David Westhoff
Senior Hydrogeologist
Education M.S. 1979 Hydrogeology, University of Nevada,Reno
B.A. 1972 Geology, Western State College of Colorado
' Registration Registered Geologist#544, State of Idaho
Registered Geologist#4341, State of California
Registered Geologist#G1267, State of Oregon
Experience Mr. Westhoff has over 21 years experience as a hydrologist/hydrogeologist for water
resource assessment in both surface and ground water projects. His responsibilities
have included project planning, site investigations, field supervision of well drilling
and aquifer tests, report preparation, and presentation of results to clients and
regulators. He has managed water supply development projects, water budget
analyses,environmental investigations and flood hydrology projects.
Relevant Grasberg Mine, PT Freeport Indonesia,Irian Jaya,Indonesia
Projects Senior Hydrogeologist for a dewatering project for the Grasberg Mine. The project
' involved planning and constructing in-pit drainwells and a monitoring well network,
and planning for the construction of outside the pit dewatering wells. Duties included
drilling planning and supervision, budget management, coordinating with several
other mine operations, and reporting.
Ministry of Water Resources, Sultanate of Oman
' Senior Hydrogeologist on the Wadi al Batha Project,a comprehensive water resource
evaluation of the largest watershed in Oman. Duties included management of a
comprehensive ground water and surface water data base,managing drilling and test
pumping contracts, supervision of drilling and test pumping programs, analysis of
rainfall and wadi (ephemeral stream)flow data, analysis of ground water level data,
training of Omanis in basic hydrologic practices,and liaison with local officials. The
' drilling and test pumping contracts were in fractured rock and limestone terrain and
involved drilling and completing deep wells.
U.S.Bureau of Land Management, Craig, Colorado
Evaluated condition of wetlands and riparian areas using methods adopted by the
BLM and the U.S. Forest Service. Inspected riparian areas to determine stream
' morphology, condition of floodplain, and areas of excessive erosion or deposition.
Determined whether the riparian areas and wetlands were improving or deteriorating.
' Nimbus Engineersi
'into•
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
David Westhoff, continued
Boateng &Associates Environmental Scientists,Mercer Island,Washington
' Involved as office manager,project manager and as senior hydrogeologist in soil and
ground water remediation projects. Technical responsibilities included ground water
supply investigation, design and installation of piezometers for ground water
monitoring, collection of soil, ground water, and soil gas samples from industrial
sites, and supervising excavation of contaminated soils.
' Hydro-Search,Inc., Reno,Nevada
Designed, planned, and supervised hydrological investigations, including
environmental studies,ground water supply projects and dewatering studies. Specific
tasks included literature studies, field surveys, geological evaluations, water budget
studies, estimates of recharge, ground water/surface water interrelationships, and
obtaining water rights permits. Supervised drilling, construction and development of
' water wells, evaluated geophysical logs, designed production and observation wells,
and supervised test pumping programs.
Bighorn Development, Spanish Springs Valley, Sparks,Nevada
Project Manager for preparation of a flood control master plan. The plan involved
analyzing means of routing flows through and around Cimarron Subdivision in
' Spanish Springs Valley, Sparks,Nevada. Also routed flows through reservoirs (both
on-site and off-site) and evaluated possible outlet structures for the reservoirs.
Stonebrook Development, Spanish Springs Valley, Sparks,Nevada
Project Manager for development of a flood control master plan for the proposed sub-
division. Because of its unique location,the flood control master plan had to consider
the Orr Ditch which is channelized through the middle of the subdivision.
Damonte Ranch, Reno,Nevada
Project Manager for ongoing work for the Damonte Ranch. Specific projects include
analysis and development of drainage patterns for the proposed high school,
' development of regional detention facilities and other hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses.
' SEA Engineers & Planners, Sparks,Nevada
Involved in many surface water projects including statistical analysis of river flows,
estimating peak flow rates, monitoring surface water flow rates, rainfall/runoff
' studies, channel and culvert design, and peak flow attenuation.
Nimbus Engineers
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Frank M. Forsgren
Geologist/Hydrogeologist
' Education B.S., Geology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, 1980
Graduate Course Work, University of Nevada, Reno, 1984 to 1986
Experience Mr. Forsgren has had twenty years of professional experience in hydrology and
geology including hydrogeologic characterization, water resources evaluation and
' development, aquifer testing and impact analysis, soil and ground water
contamination assessment, and materials characterization.
Relevant Truckee Donner Public Utility District,Truckee, California
Projects Project Manager for development of a ground water budget for the Mattis Valley
Ground Water Basin used to estimate the availability of ground water. The budget
required identifying and quantifying inflows and outflows. A geographic information
system database was used to identify areas with similar recharge characteristics and
' used to estimate ground water recharge. The results of the budget were incorporated
into the Martis Valley General Plan.
' Minera Escondida Limitada,Mina Escondida,Chile
Conducted groundwater resource evaluation of the 1200 km' Imilac Basin, located
in the extremely and Atacama Desert of northern Chile. Supervised and coordinated
integrated exploration program including 200 km of transient electromagnetic lines;
interpretation of surface and subsurface data; collection of lithologic, geophysical,
and hydrologic data from deep test borings; and installation and testing of deep
monitor and test production wells. Coordinated contractors working concurrently at
several sites and managed field budget of$1.5M. Program resulted in identification
of previously unidentified, sustainable, low TDS, ground water resource.
' Department of Energy,Project Shoal Area
Shift Supervisor during drilling and installation of four monitor wells at an
' underground nuclear test site in western Nevada. Prepared cost estimates for a
variety of proposed drilling,well construction, and testing scenarios. Cost data was
used for a formal DOE evaluation of cost versus the reduction in groundwater model
' uncertainty each scenario would provide. Prepared bid specification for$1.5M well
installation program in accordance with stated scientific objectives in support of
groundwater modeling effort. Provided on-site supervision of construction activities,
drilling and installation of 5 %-in wells to depths of 3,565 ft,and hydrogeologic data
collection and analysis. Prepared data report for DOE.
' Nimbus Engineers ;""'
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Frank Forsgren, continued
' The Winters Company and BHP Copper,Ruth,Nevada
Conducted field supervision of water supply exploration and development program
including resource evaluation, exploration and production drilling, well design and
construction,aquifer testing,impact analysis,and report preparation. Wells were 18-
inch diameter,up to 2,300 feet deep, and had production ratings of up to 3,000 gpm.
Program resulted in 8,000 gpm water supply from 4 wells.
South Tahoe Public Utility District, South Lake Tahoe,California
' Conducted field supervision of drilling,installation, development, and testing of two
municipal water supply wells, rated up to 2,500 gpm each. Temporary wells were
constructed in the pilot holes to allow collection of preliminary water quality samples
and hydraulic parameter data. Prepared bid specifications and conducted billing
review, data interpretation, and report preparation. These high capacity wells were
placed into service,replacing lower capacity wells.
Hydrogeologic and Materials Characterization, Round Mountain Gold
Company, Nevada - Major participant in evaluation of potential impacts to
' groundwater from heap leach residue dumps at operating gold mine in central
Nevada. Study included evaluation of heap leach residual material, sold, and
groundwater chemistry. Work included performance and supervision of drilling and
sampling of waste rock and native soils, installation of monitor wells, ground water
sampling, design and implementation of empirical degradation and attenuation
' studies, interpretation of hydrogeologic and chemical data, coordination of
contractors and preparation of report. Study was conducted in response to a NDEP
request. Presented Work Plan and results of study to NDEP on behalf of client.
' Hydrogeologic characterization data was also used to design conceptual model for
numerical modeling of mine dewatering activities.
Department of Energy,Nevada Test Site
Site Supervisor/Field Coordinator during preliminary (pre-Phase I) assessments of
109 Corrective Action Sites located throughout the NTS. Responsibilities included
' preparation of detailed Field Instructions,coordination with laboratories,compliance
with all applicable IT Corporation/DOE policies and practices, coordination and
supervision of three sampling teams, interpretation of analytical results, and
' preparation of reports for each CAS. Field evaluation was completed within tight
time constraints and under budget.
' Publications Herzog, D.J., and F.M. Forsgren, 1995, Evaluating the Potential Impacts of Mine Wastes
on Ground and surface Waters, Mining Engineering, Vol. 47,No. 3, pp. 254-256.
' Pohll, G., J. Tracy, and F. Forsgren. 1999. Data Decision Analysis: Project Shoal,
DOE/NV11 1 5 08-42, Water Resources Center Publication 45166, 27 p. Las Vegas, NV:
Desert Research Institute
' Nimbus Engtineers =�:j
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
' Michelle Stamates
Hydrologist
Education M.S., 2001,Hydrogeology, University of Nevada,Reno
' B.S., 1982, Electrical Engineering, West Virginia University
Experience Development of hydrologic and hydraulic modeling for flood control planning
utilizing HEC-1, HEC-2, HEC-RAS, and ArcView GeoRAS software. Application
of GIS software ArcInfo and ArcView to watershed modeling and spatial analysis.
' Development of ground water flow and particle tracking models utilizing
MODFLOW,MODPATH,and MT31)with a GMS interface. Background in control
systems engineering and project management.
Relevant Boneyard Flat,Spanish Springs Valley,Washoe County,Nevada
Experience Developed a hydrologic model to determine the maximum stage at the topographically
low point in the valley, Boneyard Flat, from a 100-year, 10-day catastrophic storm
event.
Damonte/Double Diamond Regional Flood Control Facilities,Southeast Truckee
Meadows,Reno,Nevada
Developed hydrologic and hydraulic models for flood control facilities and channel
' modifications on Steamboat Creek. Prepared and submitted CLOMR for approval
by FEMA.
' Whites Creek Branch 4,Washoe County, Nevada
Prepared and submitted as-built models and report for LOMR approval by FEMA for
a flood control channel on Whites Creek Branch 4.
Ground Water Availability Study, Truckee, California
Developed a GIS spatial model to identify areas with similar ground-water recharge
' characteristics based on the following data types: precipitation, aspect, slope, soil
type, geology, and land cover.
' Water Resource Exploration and Development,Truckee,California
Field supervision of a 72-hour aquifer test at a discharge rate of 2200 gpm. Collected
water level measurements, water quality samples, and field water quality
' measurements. Worked closely with contractor and client.
Nimbus Engineers ;""'
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Michelle Stamates, continued
Callamont Estates,Washoe County,Nevada
Project hydrologist for developing a master flood control plan for the proposed
' subdivision and private golf course. The master plan required the incorporation of
methodologies and results from previous studies on adjacent developments.
Nimbus Engineers ""''
TDPUD Ground Water Development Program
Selected Relevant Experience of Company Members
Mantis Valley Ground Water Basin
Ground Water Resource Evaluation: development of conceptual hydrogeologic model of the Basin; exploration
drilling and testing;production well installation and testing; and development of Basin-wide ground water budget
' Client: Truckee Donner Public Utility District,Truckee,California
Metro Air Park
' Ground Water Resource Evaluation:development of a conceptual hydrogeologic model; exploration drilling and
testing;preliminary production well design to minimize exposure to poor water quality zones.
Client: Spink Corporation,Sacramento,California
U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Test Site and Proiect Shoal Area,Nevada
Deep Monitor Well Installation: developed preliminary cost estimates used for a data decision analysis;prepared
bid specifications;provided site supervision and data collection coordination during drilling and construction of
' wells up to 5,000 feet deep; met stringent requirements of health and safety plan; and prepared draft report for
DOE.
Client: IT Corporation/U.S.DOE
Imilac Basin Atacama Desert,Northern Chile
Ground Water Resource Evaluation: developed conceptual structural and hydrogeologic model of the extremely
' and Imilac Basin;integrated surface geophysical data with model;and drilled and installed test wells to determine
water quality and aquifer parameters. Program resulted in identification of new resource meeting the needs of the
Escondida Mine.
Client: Minera Escondida(BHP Minerals)
' Robinson Mining District,Ruth Nevada
Ground Water Resource Development: developed target and conceptual hydrogeologic model; conducted
' exploration drilling and testing program; and installed four production wells to meet 6,000 gpm requirement for
mining and milling.
Client: Magma Copper Company(BHP Minerals)
' Burbank Operable Unit,Burbank,California
Ground Water Remediation: installed three monitor wells in a PCEJTCE plume to characterize extraction well
' field; installed and tested seven 18-inch diameter extraction wells under rigorous waste management guidelines.
Client: Lockheed Martin Corporation
South Lake Tahoe California
' Ground Water Resource Development: conducted characterization study to define MTBE plume; performed
exploration drilling and testing program to characterize potential sites; and installed and tested two,2,500 gallon
per minute production wells.
' Client: South Tahoe Public Utility District
Wadi AI Batha Project,Sultanate of Oman
' Ground Water Resource Evaluation and Development:supervised exploration and production well drilling program,
managed budgets and coordinated contractors,developed water supply wells for irrigation and municipal use.
Client: Ministry of Water Resources,Sultanate of Oman
' Nimbus Engineers
tNimbus Qn9ineeRs
' Metro Air Park Ground
' Water investigation
Sacramento, California
The ground water experts at
Nimbus Engineers were recently re-
quested to develop a ground water
exploration program for the 1,450 acre
Metro Air Park project located next to €
Sacramento International Airport. The
purpose of this investigation was to
establish and define specific ground
water zones which could be utilized to
meet the 6,750 gallons per minute re-
quirement of the project.
Nimbus Engineers began this
project by collecting and analyzing cur-
rent geologic and hydrogeologic infor-
mation forthearea. Based on an analysis
of the data,an exploration drilling pro-
!t
gram was developed to confirm ground
' waterpotential.Dtuingthedrillingoftwo
exploration boreholes,specific zones of low
ground water were sampled for water ,
qualityparameters.At the completion of
drilling,a geophysical log of each bore- €
hole was prepared. Utilizing data col- r
lected,atone of the locations,a multiple
string monitoring well was constructed
and completed.After evaluat on of the
' geophysical log,geolog c log,andwater V
a.
chemistryresults NimbusPngmeersw
design a production well program that
' will be capable of meeting the supply
requirement. Because of water quality drilling program through the design and Services Provided:
concerns, the production wells will be construction of the production wells. Af
Ground Water Investigation
designed to minimize exposure to the
ter completion of the field work,Nimbus Water Quality Analysis
poor quality zones foundduring the drill- will provide an additional service by Be-
ing ofthe exploration boreholes. velopment of the ground water model for
For this project, Nimbus Engi- the project area.This model and its results
neers is providing complete ground will be used in developing a water resource
water services from an initial exploration management schedule.
Nimbus Gn9 neeRs
' Ground Water Resource Exploration and Development
Truckee Donner Public Utility District
Truckee, California
Nimbus Engineers'staff have been pro-
viding hydrogeologic consulting services ,
to the Truckee Donner Public Utility
District for nearly a decade focusing on `
the water resource exploration and de- -
velopment. Nimbus Engineers con-
ducted a ground water resource evalu-
ation by compiling and evaluating avail- *`
able hydrogeologic data to identify and
rank areas favorable for development
of additional ground water resources.
' An exploration drilling program was
conducted to further evaluate ground
' water production potential and ground
water quality at two prospective sites.
Slim-diameter boreholes were completed Client:
to depths of approximately 1,200 feet Truckee Donner Public Utility District
and observation wells installed. These Truckee,California
exploration boreholes identified produc- Contact:
' tive sequences of interlayered alluvial peter Holzmeister,General Manager
sediments and volcanic flows. Based 530-582-3916
on the results of the exploration drilling,
one site was identified for the installa-
tion of ahigh-capacity production well.
A 930-foot deep,l8-inch diameter pro-
duction well was installed, tested, and
given a preliminary production rating of
' 2,000 gallons per minute. This well pro-
vided additional system capability to
meet the needs of the peak seasonal
demand and is scheduled to be opera-
tional and on line by mid-June 2001.
Nimbus eng neeRs
' Ground Water Availability Evaluation
Truckee Donner Public Utility District
Truckee, Callfornia
Nimbus Engineers' staff have been
providing hydrogeologic consulting
services to the Truckee Donner Public
Utility District for nearly a decade i t �
focusing on the water resource issues.
Nimbus Engineers developed a ground
water budget for the Marts Valley .
Ground Water Basin to identify avail-
able ground water resources. s k
Nimbus Engineers identified and quan _
tified ground water inflows to the Basin J > Y ,
a gee
and ground water outflows from the
Basin,including:precipitation artificial
recharge,ground water transfer into the T
` auoreeVait
Basin, ground water pumping, and ' s u
spring and wetlands discharge. The
relationships between ground water
and surface water were also evaluated.
Nimbus Engineers employed Geograhic
lV
' Information System databases to iden- I l t-
tify areas within the Basin that have r
similar ground water recharge charac-
teristics. The resulting areas were used
to estimate ground water recharge due A;
to precipitation. Ground water dis-
charge to the Truckee River predicted
by the water budget compares well to # G
net gains observed in the gaged,
Truckee River reach.
The results of this evaluation were ` �, y 3 =y
incorporated into the Martis Valley
General Plan as the first step of a ground J,
a
water management plan.
t `S
f
' Nimbus QnginccRs
Silver Lake Water District P17
Ground Water Model
Reno, Nevada ;` k a ,
S <
Sierra Pacific Power Company,
' one ofthe largest utilm es in the western u' 1
United States,recently called upon the
expertise of Nimbus Engineers to de-
velop aground waterniodel forits Silver
Lake Water District in Lemon Valley,lo- s t 'w n""'
1�
cated just north of Reno,Nevada. l '
zc
Utilizing the powerful GMS
ground water modeling software,Nim- `�tr ., i \ �A
bus Engineers provides state-of-the-art j i r
modelingservices,which arecurrentl sass �REN� srao qR oRr IS
Y
being used to develop a ground water RENO STEAD\
model fortheSilverLake Water District.
Aquifer pumping tests that were
•Web Na a
conducted in 1998 indicated that a se 3c
pumping and injection program could s v.�rat,a (�� """"''� i • �-
be established that would potentially 1 aRNo
retard the movementofa shallow water
table plume of contaminated ground
water that was migrating towards the — A_ xEx o
two Silver Lake production wells. The '
testing program indicated that the shal-
1 �j � usw
low aquifer was separate from the
deeper ground water aquifer which sup Ste
plies water to the Silver Lake produo- ''s ? ? , 2--
tion wells. Additional data through — # `-
puunping tests and monitoring will be development,and the discharge effects of
' required to define the extent of the im- SilverLakeitsel£This irtFomtabon Mllboth 3
permeable silt clay zone which sepa- enhance understandingofthe entire area's 3
rates to two ground water aquifers. ground water system and provide impor-
tant data to the Silver Lake Water District.
' The modeling work by Nimbus
Engineers will not only characterize the
Water District's production wells and services Provided:
the contaminantplume,itwill alsomodel Aquifer Testing _
the entire Silver Lake hydrographic ba- (Hound Water Modeling
sin. The model will take into consider- , >m �
' ation precipitation recharge,the effects
of the nearby Silver Knolls residential
1 Nimbus eng neeRs
' Water Resource Exploration and Development
Somersett Development
Reno, Nevada
Previous efforts to develop water ;
resources for the Somersett Develop-
ment have been disappointing. Nimbus
Engineers was called onto evaluate two r
wells installedby theprevious consultant
' e
After evaluating the well construction,
additional intervals of one of the wells . .�
r
were perforated and additional well
development completed. Nimbus ;
conducted aquifer tests in both wells,
evaluated the results,and determined the
tproduction potential will not meet the
needs of the development. Nimbus r
Engineers has identified fourprospective ~ t '
exploration drilling sites based on our
compilation ofall available geologic and '
hydrologic data from the area. These , "
targets will be drilled during the Summer
of2001.
Client:
' SomersettDevelopment
Reno,Nevada
1 Contact:
Greg Ruiz
775-323-1405
Nimbus enginceRs
t Cold Spring Valley
Ground Water
N
Investigation '
Washoe County, Nevada
Nimbus Engineers served as
expert witnesses and provided testi-
mony for a hearing before the Nevada
State Engineer in Carson City. Re-
sults of a ground water investigation
was presented pertaining geologic
and hydrogeologic features of the
' Cold Spring Valley,an area north of
Reno,Nevada.
The specific information
sought from the experts at Nimbus V
Engineers was a technical evaluation 7 `�
of the effect of residential develop- i
ment on the Cold Spring Valleys
' ground water system. Water levels ,
had been rising in the area immedi-
ately north of White Lake and septic
systems were being impacted. Con-
struction of more homes was under
consideration and Nimbus was asked x
to determine the impact this addi-
tional development would have on '
' the Valley's ground water system t
Nimbus Engineers began this I
project by analyzing precipitation data, "» ,
and then evaluating it with respect to j
' geology and soil infiltration properties. ' R
Nimbus then analyzed corresponding
water level data from ten monitoring ^ '"""
wells located north of White lake.
By utilizing the data provided by
' this analysis, and then determining a
correlation between wet and dry years
and water levels within the wells, S@rV�C88 Provided:
' Nimbus Engineers was able to project Ground Water Investigation
future ground water levels and the po- Expert Witness Testimony
tential impacts on the Cold Spring Val-
ley
i
Nimbus engineeRs
Kiley Ranch
Sparks, Nevada
When the owners of Kil ey Ranch,
one of the largest proposed develop-
merits in the area recently needed a y�
hydrologic analysis and Flood Control
Master Plan,they called upon the ex-
pertise ofNinibus Engineers.
The proposed 1,929-acre resi-
dential and commercial development is
in the southern Spanish Springs Val In
-
ley,a 62-squaremile burgeoning are to
the north of Sparks,Nevada. Having NNW
' completed many hydrologic projects in
the Valley, beginning with a revised
BEG l hydrologic model done in1986. w Nimbus Engineers is recognized for it's
unique knowledge of the area. _
As a result ofNimbus Engineers'
findings in modeling the area,a Mas-
ter Drainage Plan was approved in
1991,governing all new development
' in Spanish Springs Valley. The hydro-
logical features of Spanish Springs rately, taking into account the hydro- As a result of the modeling com-
Valley required all new developments logical impacts of the prior phases. pleted by the experts at Nimbus Engi-
' to provide on-site detention storage neers,it was demonstrated that one of
for runoff, so accurate hydrological Nimbus Engineers completed a
the detention facilities was not needed.
analysis is essential when planning a total of three models for this Flood Con-
new development within the Valley. trol Master Plan,each cooinciding with
' Nimbus Engineers began the a specific phase of development. Since Services Provided'
the first two phases were evaluated in
Kiley Ranch project by first evaluat- the existing conditions model,Nimbus Hydrologic Modeling
' ing an existing HEGI basin model of began with phase three. Hydraulic Analysis
the area. Once this model was exam-
ined and verified, Nimbus incorpo-
rated the Kiley Ranch subdivision both a permanent and a temporary de-
plans into the existing model, thus tention facility. In the next model,phase
providing an accurate determination four, the temporary detention facility
of the project's impact. was removed,and a channel created to
divert flow from Sun Valley to an exist-
Since Kiley Ranch is a devel- ing facility upstream of the Spanish
opment that is proposed to be built Springs Dam. In the model for the last
in five phases,the analysis and flood base,Nimbus Engineers added a diver-
control master plan needed toevalu- sion channel.
ate each phase of development sepa-
Nimbus �n9'!nCCR8
Flood Insurance Studies �-
Various Counties and
Cities, Nevada
Nimbus Engineers,under con- '
tract to the Federal Emergency Man- sue,
agementAgency,has performed flood
insurance studies for communities lo-
cated throughout the State ofNevada. -�
These studies include development of < " "'
hydrologic and hydraulic models for A k "
delineation of floodplain boundaries
to assist the local agencies in flood-
�4
plain regulation and to develop rates
f
for flood insurance,
These studies involved hydro-
logic evaluation of large rivers using Washoe County Clark County and City ofHenderson
gage data and frequency analysis,and • Truckee River -floodplain and • Duck Creek — floodplain and
evaluation of smaller streams using floodway floodway
HEC-1 modeling techniques. Hydrau- • Steamboat Creek—floodplain and • Rawhide—floodplain
lic evaluations of rivers and streams floodway
were performed using HEC-2 and allu- • Thomas Creek—hydrologic analy- Carson City
vial fan analysis and employed TEMA sis, floodplain and floodway • Carson River—verify hydrology,
' methodology. Newland surveys and analysis floodplain and floodway
topographic mapping were required for • Dry Creek—hydrologic analysis, • Goni Canyon,Lakeview,Coombs
each area studied. All surveys were floodplain and floodway analysis Canyon,Voltaire Canyon andH&I
completed as outlined in the Federal Tributaries
Emergency Management Agency City ofReno,
(FEMA)Guidelines for Study Contrac- • Truckee River—floodplain and
' tors. Studies performed to date for floodway Client:
FEMA include streams in the cities of • Steamboat Creek—floodplain and Federal Emergency Management
Reno,Sparks,Elko,Carson City and floodway Agency(FEMA),Region IX
Henderson,as well as unincorporated • City of Sparks San Francisco,CA
Washoe,Lyon and Clark Counties. • Truckee River—floodplain and
floodway Contact:
' • Northe Truckee Drain — flood- Mr.Ray Lenaburg
plain and floodway
City OrEBW
• Humboldt River — hydrologic
analysis,floodplain and flooway
• Eight Humboldt Tributaries—hy-
drologic analysis,flood plain and
floodway
Nimbus engineeRs
City of Sparks Flood
Recovery Program ,
Floodproofing
Workshops and Site
Assessments
Sparks, Nevada
Nimbus Engineers conducted
a series of six floodproofing work-
shops for the city of Sparks as part of
their post-disaster outreach program
following the 1997 floods in North-
ern Nevada. Nimbus worked with a Client;
public relations firm to design bro- City of Sparks Public Works and
chure mailers,newspaper advertise. Planning Departments
ments and television appearances to
notify businesses and residents of Contact;
the workshops. The workshops in- Mr.Neil Krutz,P.E.,
cluded information about dry and wet Public Works
flood proofing techniques and in- Ms.Margaret Powell,
eluded several case studies of Planning Department
sucessfully floodproofed properties.
The workshops also included
information which participants could
use in developing their own emer-
gency action plans. The plans are an
essential part of floodproofing activi-
ties and need to be tailored to the spe-
cific site and operations. The plans
which some businesses have in place
were discussed and refined and ap-
propriate modifications suggested.
' Business participants in the
workshops were also given the option
' ofhaving Nimbus and their consultant
visit their operations and discuss pos-
sible floodproofing techniques which
might be employed.Nimbus visited26
sites and prepared written assessments
of flood readiness for each property.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Lahontan Region
0
Winston H.I ickox Internet Address: httpl/www.swrcb-ca.gov/rwgcb6 bray Davis
Secrelan far 2501 Lake Tahoe Boulevard,South Lake Tahoe,California 96150 Governor
Environmental Phone(530)542-5400'FAX(530)544-2271
Protection
MEMORANDUM
TO: Katie Shulte Joung
State Clearinghouse
Office of Planning and Research
FROM: Scott C. Ferguson, Chie
Northern Watersheds Unit
DATE: July 30, 2001
SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE TRUCKEE-DONNER PUD BRIDGE STREET 6160 WATER
STORAGE TANK PROJECT
NEVADA COUNTY ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 19-40-13, 19-42-37 AND
38 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO, 2001072060)
Thank you for providing us the opportunity to comment on the above-mentioned project. It is
the Regional Board's understanding that the proposed project consists of constructing two new
water storage tanks, access road, and underground utilities (including pipelines, electrical
conduits, and communication conduits). The proposed project will disturb a total of 2.1 acres
and is expected to take place in two phases. The proposed project is located near Bridge Street
and Eller Valley Road in Truckee.
The draft mitigated negative declaration is tiered off from the 2001 Negative Declaration
adopted for the "Truckee Water System Water Master Plan Update". This update was based
upon the General Plan for the Town of Truckee. These two documents adequately discuss
cumulative growth inducing impacts from projects such as the proposed project.
We have the following comments:
I. As discussed in the draft mitigated negative declaration, the applicant will need to submit a
Form 200, Report of Waste Discharge, and filing fee, in order for the Regional Board to
make a determination on the type of permitting appropriate for the project. The form can be
downloaded from the Regional Board's website located at www.swrcb.ca.pavlrwgcb6.
California Environmental Protection Agency
The energy challenge facing California is real.Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy
consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs,see our Web-site at
littp://+vu'iv.swrcb-ca.gov
Q* Rervcled Paper
Katie Shulte Joung -2-
2. The draft mitigated negative declaration appropriately requires inclusion of temporary and
permanent best management practices (BMPs). The BMP's need to be designed to comply
with the Regional Board's Truckee River Hydrologic Unit Project Guidelines for Erosion
Control (enclosed). The BMPs shall be designed to prevent stormwater runoff from a 20-
year, I-hour storm event (0.7 inches of rain) from leaving the project site. Pretreatment of
runoff from impervious surfaces such as roads and parking areas shall be provided in order to
prevent ground water and surface water degradation. Such BMPs may include, but not be
limited to, drop inlets, sand and oil separators, detention basins, filtration devices, and
conveyance systems. Calculations used to determine sizing and capacity of these devices
shall be included in the final plan.
3. Mitigation Measure No. M-4 states that water will be used for dust control. While we concur
that this is a necessary activity, the source of the water should be disclosed. Often, water
trucks contain non-potable water from the treated effluent at local wastewater treatment
plants. The discharge of wastewater with average total nitrogen concentrations greater than 9
mg/L entering the Truckee River or any of its tributaries is prohibited. The ground water
basin is such a tributary.
4. The final environmental document should provide a more detailed map of the proposed
construction site, including areas for proposed conduits, roads, and water lines. This
information was not provided in the draft document, and it is necessary to determine whether
the project area is within the I00-year floodplain of the Truckee River or any of its
tributaries. Such tributaries include ephemeral streams and drainage swales. The Regional
Board prohibits activity (fill, discharges, construction, etc.) within the 100-year floodplain.
Enclosed are exemption criteria to this prohibition that the Discharger will have to satisfy if
the proposed project impacts any 100-year floodplains or wetlands. The final CEQA
document should also demonstrate compliance with the prohibitions, and if applicable, the
exemption criteria.
Please contact Eric Taxer at(530) 542-5434 or me at (530) 542-5432, if you have any questions
regarding this matter or if I can provide any additional information.
Enclosures: 1. State Clearinghouse Form A
2. Truckee River Hydrologic Unit Project Guidelines for Erosion Control
3. Truckee River I00-Year Floodplain Prohibition Exemption Criteria
cc: Keith Knibb, Sailers Engineering, Inc (w/enc)
Peter L. Holzmeister, General Manager, Truckee Donner PUD (w/enc)
Tony Lashbrook, Community Development Director, Town of Truckee (w/enc)
Regional Board Members
ETIAgTTDPUD-Bridge St.Tanks
129/New/Truckee Donner PUDI
California Environmental Protection Agency
The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy
consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our web-site at
http://un .sw eb.ca.gov
Oa Recycled Paper
701'n Count it Depm Intent Heads
Omr McCwmaek Manor' '![ Sephen L Wright. 7brtn Manage,
Dan Boon Chief af Police
Ronald.l Florian J.Dennis Crabh li","Aanna2,
Ted 01,res Tony Lashbrook,Commanit} Derclopm(ni
inisp
Jasi na Jf Susnrnn Aarnarrs of°d lg9g dill R.OlscPatt O,larne,trlom,C/ok
°ea raga tnoa*P°� Daniel P. Wilkins.Pablic Works DirecmdEngineer,
August 13, 2001
Keith Knibb
Sauers Engineering, Inc.
435 Coyote St
Nevada City, CA 95959
RE: Proposed Negative Declaration for Truckee Donner PUT)
Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage Tank Project
Dear Mr. Kni bb,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration prepared for the
Truckee Donner Public Utility District's Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage Tank Project. In
addition to the information contained within the project description of the Negative Declaration, it
is our understanding the project exhibits the following characteristics:
• The water tanks are located within 1/4 to 1/3 mile of Interstate 80 and the Downtown area
• Grading will create a cut area of approximately 325 feet in width and 200 feet in depth
• There will be a retaining wall/cut bank of approximately 50 feet in height to the rear of the
storage tanks (from elevation of 6,135' to 6,183')
• It is not known at this time what the height of the retaining wall will be
c Tlic top of the Ciit bank -:!! Ile approximately 15 feet Higher than the storage tanks and 10
feet below the peak of the hill
• There will be a fill of approximately 20 feet in height below the storage tanks to the
southwest side (from elevation of 6,105' to 6,135')
• An access road will be constructed to the storage tanks on cross-slopes of up to 35%
Based on its location and the above characteristics, it appears to us that the water storage tanks,
associated cut and fill, removal of vegetation, and the access road will be visible from Interstate
80. In addition the project will also be visible from several vantage points in the Downtown area.
It is our understanding that a visual analysis and simulations have not been prepared for this
project to ascertain key vantage points of visibility and the extent of visibility from these vantage
points.
10183 Truckee Airport Road,Truckee,CA 96161-3306
Administration: 530-582-7700%Fax: 510-582-7710l e-mail. hzickeera)tmranftrackceconi
Community Development: 530-582-78201 pax: 530-W-7889/e-mail: cddiidtem noftrackee,com
Animal Control/vehicle Abatement: 530-582-78301 Fax: 530-582-7889/e-mail animalcnnnot crtmvrroftntekee.com
Letter to K. Knibb,8/13/01
Page 2
The purpose of the Negative Declaration is to inform the decision-makers and the public on the
environmental impacts of the project and how the lead agency came to the conclusions they did
about the project's impacts. There is not enough information in the proposed Negative
Declaration for us to understand how you came to the conclusion that the project will not have
significant aesthetic and visual impacts, and lacking a visual analysis and simulations of the
project, the Town believes that the District cannot ascertain the significance of the project's visual
impacts. The Town General Plan has strong policies for the preservation of the scenic beauty of
Truckee, and these policies are pertinent to this project because of its location and visibility.
Conservation and Open Space Policy 4.3 establishes Interstate 80 as a scenic highway corridor
and stresses the need to address the appearance of projects within the Interstate 80 viewshed in
order to preserve views from the freeway. Conservation and Open Space Policy 4.4 emphasizes
the protection of visible hillsides from new development.
The Town requests that the District defer taking action on the Negative Declaration until a visual
analysis and visual simulations can be prepared to address the aesthetic and visual impacts of the
water storage tanks and associated improvements and the Negative Declaration is revised to
incorporate the findings of this visual analysis. The purpose of our comments is not to delay or
encumber this important public improvement project of the community, but rather to make it a
project that exemplifies the standards of the community of Truckee. These water tanks have the
potential to be highly visible to the community and its residents and visitors, and we believe that
the District can take reasonable steps to minimize the visibility of these tanks. Before that can be
done, however, we must know how visible the tanks will be, and that is the basis of our
comments.
If you have any questions or need further clarification of any our comments, please do not hesitate
to contact Duane Hall, our Town Planner, at (530) 582-7820.
Sincere
7
r
i Stephen Wn h
Town Manager
CC: Peter Holzmeister, General Manager, TDPUD
Town Council
10183 Truckee Airport Road,Truckee,CA 96161-3306
Administration: 530-582-7700/Fax: 530-582-7710/e-mail_ truckeena,townoftruckee.com
Community Development: 530-582-7820/Fax: 530-582-7889 l e-marl: edtl Teton noftruckee.com
Animal Control/Vehicle Abatement: 530-582-7830/Fax:530-582-7889 l e-mail:animolconhnl@too noftt-trekee.com
• I qUG-15-01 03 :48 PM CABOHA'S 9165878842 P. 01
o+n• eu,ui LO:ua xy' SHM,91HALT o ,
SHUTE, MIHALY & WEIrBERGER LLF
[ e.eMen7 a^+u7[, JR, A'FTl`KYGYs ki LAw
NAHA Wt1NL-RUtH LXA 61cL1:NKY
MARC S. MIHALY. R.C. nw�hGR�C h.TNOO VNi
FRAY In, LA`TON J9�5 MarEs `3TgcrT BRIAN A. %Cd KIOT
NA,:.H'_L D HOOReP JANLITC L �,;IU%
a.CN J. f.A AO GA oA.4 FRANCIJ'CO, CALIMANIA *AI oz iw,AH J. JO.N9Ca
SM4I4-Y n TAYLOR TAMARA 7. GALANre Tt...t.P VCNE f4 �? f4B 27"9t LnuR C.. :n•Etr, Al�r
R .AMv n,winFA
[LLb•LN FOLK !�A C.$I N11 F Id 1 B! 6a;�•8916
VIChAHa t, 'ArLVR CUZw KC7� N• 0000
9U84NNAH r. rn EN CH Y'Wyi9rMWLAW.CCM a AYIU NAW I
'W WA`!A. 1YHITF AC.r-ti
gC G. F'tA{,MJTYPI
73A7A L, ARM:
August 15,2001
b'iaNvsd!]Plivery
Members of the Board
Truckee Donner Public Utility District
P.O. Box 309
Truckee, CA 96160.0309
Re: Negative Declaration
}3tidgge�t_0)§t7•Vi'@ter.Storage Wank
Dear Board Members:
On behalf of SierraWatch and the Mountain Area Preservation Foundation
(' MAPF"), we have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
("N ND") prepared by the Truckee Donner Public Utility District("District") as lead
agency under the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA"). Public Resources
Code section 21000 rel,M. for the Bridge Street 6160 Water Storage Tank("proposed
project"). SierraWatch is a California based non profit organization formed to assist
Sierra-based groups with education and information so that they can participate
effectively in local planning processes. MAPF is a Truckee-based group of residents and
business owners formed in 1987 to protect valuable open space resources of the To%m of
Truckee, to protect viewsheds in and around Truckee, and to preserve the unique, smail
town character of the Town. Both groups are committed to working constructively with
local agencies to ensure that development in Truckee and the Martin Valley does not
impair the regional environment or the Waal character of the Sierra Nevada.
The District's proposed project involves construction of two new water
storage tanks, construction of an access road, and installation of underground utilitie,,
AbC-15-01 03 :48 PM CABONA'S 9165878842 P. 02
1.1111. 1U.U.; U SNLTE,M[tLdLl' �till;t 01tI
Nlemhors of the Board
August 15,2001
Page
including 1,200 feet of pipelines and conduits. The two storage tanks would provide
approximately 4,000,000 gallons of storage to the District's Truckee System and would be
located north of downtown Truckee near Bridge Street and Eucr Walley Road.
SierraWatch and MAPF are concerned with several aspects of the proposed project, and
their members will be making additional comments to the District. This letter focuses on
the inadequacy of the District's analysis of the water supply for the proposed project
An environmental review document must identify the water resource for a
proposed project and analyze the environmental impacts associated with the project's
utilization of the water resource. (544 Stanislaus Natural Hpfitaee Proiect v n of
Starti$laus, 48 Cal.AppAth 182(i 996).) If an existing water source is proposed to be
Wtci, the environmental review document must discuss whether the existing source has
enough water to serve the proposed project and current users. (des Santiagoo C_ ounty_
W atgr DioviQt vy Cguaty.of Qgvgt, 118 Cal.App.Sd 818 (1981).) If there is uncertainty
a; to the adequacy of the water supply to serve a proposed project, then the environmental
review document must identify additional sources of supply and discuss the
environmental consequences of tapping those resources. (S—Le Napa C itizens#Qrj�Onest
Government v, Nava County Board of Supervisors,No. A089095 (Corm of Appeal of the
State of California,First Appellate District,August 2001).)
The MND for the proposed project is inadequate because it does not
identify the source of water that would supply the proposed project or analyze the
environmental consequences of utilizing those water resources. The HIND does not
identify the source of water for filling and maintaining the proposed storage tanks. Nnr
does it address the envirunmental impacts of withdrawing water for the tanks. The MND
addresses only the environmental impacts of some of the Construction activities associated
with the proposed project. The MND does not address the environmental impacts of
water withdrawals required to operate and maintain the proposed storage tanks. (See
MNUITnitial Study at 6, 11-12 (discussing the impacts of the proposed project on water
resources only in terms of the impacts of construction of the access road and installation
of the conduit and tanks)_)
The source of water and the environmental effects of water withdrawals For
the proposed project are also not addressed in any of the documents referenced in the
NTSD. The District's Water System Master Plan(March 2001) ["Master Plan"] is referred
to in the MND for the proposed project, but the Master Flan does not clarify the source, of
water or address the environmental effects of water withdrawals for the proposed project.
According to the Master Plan,the adequacy of the existing water supply to meet proiected
AUG-15-01 03 :49 PM CABONA"S 9165878842 P. 03
�'O,iJ 'tlla
Members of the Board
August 11,2001
Page 3
demand and to supply the required system improvements (including the proposed project)
i i not certain. 13M Master Plan at 5.9.) Under such circumstances, CEQA requires that
the environmental review document identify additional water resources and discuss the
environmental consequences of utilizing the additional resources, (iU N-ARIL11JUJIs for
1•lonest Government, sl7M.)
The Lahontan Regional Water QLality Control Board("RWCQB") recently
noted, in a letter to the Placer County Planning Department regarding the Notice of
Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Manis Valley Community Plan
Update, that the environmental consequences of extracting large amounts of ground water
within the Mattis Valley Ground Water Basin have not been addressed. (5ft Exhibit A,
Letter dated August 9,2001 from Scott Ferguson to Bill Combs, pp. 3-4.) The RWQCB
nmed that potential environmenal consequences included the lowering of ground water
levels affecting the sustenance and viability of existing springs, wetlands, and other
surface waters. ($fig W) The MND similarly does not address the environmental impacts
of withdrawals from the Mattis Valley Ground Water Basin for the Truckee System
improvements, including the proposed project. The District should not commit to
withdrawal of water for the proposed project without more information on the source of
the withdrawals and the environmental impacts of the withdrawals.
Before approving an environmental review document for the proposed
project,the District must identify the sources of water that would supply the proposed
project and must conduct an environmental review of the impacts associated with
utilizing those water resources. If an initial study of the withdrawals required to supply
the proposed project indicates that the proposed project may have a significant effect on
the environment, then the District must prepare an environmental impact report("M")
for the proposed project. {t Laurel Heights Improvement Assn v Resents ofrhp
un 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1123 (1993); Pub. Res. Code § 21080(d').) As
noted by the RWCQB,withdrawals from the Mattis Valley Ground Water Basin could
sihrnifiicantly affect the availability of groundwater; the viability of existing springs,
wetlands, and other surface waters; and the amount of habitat for species dependent on
springs and wetlands, In addition, withdrawal of groundwater, over time,may have
sifmificant cumulative adverse effects.
AUG-15-01 03C49 PM CARONA'S 9165878842 P. 04
ua in t 1rt:9t1 SHIIE, IHALS'
inns.uio
Members of the Board
August 15,2001
Paige 4
Tbank you for this opportunity to provide these colornents. We would be
glad to discuss the issues that these comments raise.
Very uuly yours,
SHUTE, MIHALY& WENBERGER LLP
1&4t,G'v ,/1
RICHARD S. T'A'YLO� be m
r:a+Ei,rurrA'1 U�301].W t0