Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution - 3413 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) RESOLUTION NO. 3413 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF SAN JACINTO ) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO CONSIDERING A 2007 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE HEMET/SAN JACINTO INTEGRATED RECHARGE AND RECOVERY PROGRAM, MAKING RESPONSIBLE AGENCY FINDINGS AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN, CONSIDERING ADDENDUMS TO A 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE HEMET/SAN JACINTO INTEGRATED RECHARGE AND RECOVERY PROGRAM, AND APPROVING THE PROJECT INCLUDING A PHASE 1 FACILITIES COST AND USE AGREEMENT, THE HEMET/SAN JACINTO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THE STIPULATED JUDGMENT DETERMINING WATER PRODUCTION RIGHTS WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto ("City") previously cooperated with the i Eastern Municipal Water District (the "EMWD") to formulate and analyze the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations section 15000 et seq.) ("CEQA") an Environmental Impact Report for the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program was prepared and certified by EMWD, as lead agency, in June of 2004 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003121068); and WHEREAS, the City, the EMWD, the City of Hemet, the Lake Hemet Municipal Water District and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District wish to undertake modifications to that previously certified 2004 EIR and approved Program by agreeing to a Stipulated Judgment determining water rights (production rights), and implementing an associated Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan and an Agreement Regarding Phase 1 Facilities Construction Cost And Use; Cost And Use Of Unused Tribal Water (`Phase 1 Facilities Agreement"), which implements the IIRP (the "Project'); and WHEREAS, the EMWD served as lead agency for the environmental review and analysis of the Project pursuant to the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City had more limited approval and implementing authority over the Project and thus served only as a responsible agency for the Project pursuant to the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the EMWD determined that a Supplemental EIR should be prepared pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15163 in order to analyze the Project's potential environmental effects. On November 21, 2007, and as required by CEQA, the EMWD's Board of Directors, at a noticed public meeting, reviewed and considered the Final Supplemental EIR, the Initial Study, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Project, all oral and written comments received, and certified the Supplemental EIR, made written findings, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approved the Project; and WHEREAS, subsequent to EMWD's certification of the 2007 Supplemental EIR, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") issued a Biological Opinion ("BiOp") detailing conservation measures which would further minimize the Project's potential impacts to the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. WHEREAS, the 2007 Supplemental EIR includes a mitigation measure requiring that the Project comply with any conservation measures set forth in the FWS's BiOp, but whereas the 2004 EIR was the CEQA document that specifically analyzed the impacts of the recharge basins. WHEREAS, the FWS's BiOp required that two conservation measures be implemented which will result in minor modifications to the Project and corresponding clarification of previously imposed mitigation measures, including (1) the reduction in size of the Phase 1 recharge basins and the relocation of those basins within the area already studied and analyzed in the 2004 EIR and (2) the elimination of the low-flow channel which is no longer needed to divert river flows. WHEREAS, the EMWD, as lead agency, decided to prepare an Addendum to the previously certified 2004 EIR to describe these minor Project revisions and to analyze, with supporting substantial evidence, that no new impacts would occur as a result of these changes and that no further EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required by CEQA. WHEREAS, the EMWD adopted that Addendum at its June 23, 2010 noticed, public meeting and filed a Notice of Determination as required by CEQA on June 24, 2010. WHEREAS, the FWS subsequently developed further conservation measures that required the relocation of the recharge basins back to the approximate location analyzed in the 2004 EIR; and WHEREAS, the EMWD, as lead agency, therefore decided to prepare a Second Addendum to the previously certified 2004 EIR in order to describe this subsequent minor Project revision and to confirm, with supporting substantial evidence, that no new impacts would occur as a result of placing the basins back into the location previously analyzed in the 2004 EIR and verifying that no further EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required by CEQA; and WHEREAS, the EMWD adopted that Second Addendum at its November 16, 2011 noticed, public meeting and filed a Notice of Determination as required by CEQA thereafter; and WHEREAS, the final version of the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement has now been developed and reflects the minor modifications to the Project as required by the FWS's BiOp and authorized by EMWD's Addendum. WHEREAS, because the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement is now in final form, the City Council can now verify that the 2004 EIR, as supplemented through the 2007 Supplement EIR, and the 2010-2011 Addendums to the 2004 EIR fully and adequately analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the City's limited role as a responsible agency in the implementation of the Project and the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement. WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Jacinto does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. CEQA Actions Regarding the 2007 Supplemental EIR. (a) Consideration of the 2007 Supplemental EIR and Findings Regarding CEQA Compliance. As the decision-making body for the City of San Jacinto, and in the City's limited role as a responsible agency under CEQA, the City Council has received, reviewed, and considered the information contained in the 2004 Final Environmental Impact Report for the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program, the 2007 Final Supplemental EIR for the Project, the Initial Study, all comment letters, and other related documents. Based on this review, the City Council finds that, as to those potential environmental impacts within the City's powers and authorities as responsible agency, that the 2007 Supplemental EIR for the Project contains a complete, objective, and accurate reporting of those potential impacts and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. (b) Findings Under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. As described in the above Recitals, subsequent to the certification of the 2004 EIR and the 2007 Final Supplemental EIR for the Project, conservation measures were developed by the FWS as part of the BiOp process in order to protect the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. Under State CEQA Guidelines section 15162, once an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or if new information of substantial importance which shows that the project will have a significant impact on the environment has been made available. The City Council finds that the issuance of the BiOp and the development of conservation measures does not meet the criteria of State CEQA Guidelines section 15162, such that no new EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required. Specifically, the 2007 certified Final Supplemental EIR included a mitigation measure which requires the Project to comply with any measures detailed in the FWS's BiOp, such that no changes to that EIR are necessitated by the BiOp. Furthermore, the 2004 certified EIR analyzed the recharge basins, and assumed that they would be approximately 40-acres in size. The recently issued BiOp requires the recharge basins to be reduced in size by five acres and to be located within the 2004 EIR's original study area so that impacts are minimized to the fullest extent feasible. Accordingly, the City agrees with EMWD that no supplemental EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required because none of the conditions specified in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 have occurred with respect to either the 2004 or 2007 EIRs and because these conclusions are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including EMWD's two CEQA Addendums. (See Exhibits "B" and °C" hereto.) (c) Consideration of the Eastern Municipal Water District's Addendums. Where a modification to a project is needed following the certification of an EIR, a subsequent EIR or mitigated negative declaration is only permitted where one of the conditions specified in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 occurs. As described in SECTION 1, above, no such conditions exist. Therefore, the preparation of the two Addendums documenting and analyzing the minor changes to the Project are appropriate pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15164. State CEQA Guidelines section 15096 governs the responsibilities of responsible agencies, such as the City, and requires that a responsible agency "consider" the CEQA documents certified or adopted by the lead agency. Additionally, State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 requires that a responsible agency "consider the addendum with the final EIR ... prior to making a decision on the project." Consistent with these requirements, and in its limited role as a responsible agency, the City Council has considered the two Addendums to the EMWD's 2004 EIR and also considered the EMWD's 2007 Supplemental EIR, and the City Council finds that the Addendums contains a complete and accurate accounting of the minor modifications to the Project. Additionally, the City Council finds that the 2007 Supplemental EIR requires compliance with the BiOp. The Addendums prepared and adopted by EMWD are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C" and incorporated herein by reference. (d) CEQA Findings on Environmental Impacts and Statement of Overriding Considerations. In its limited role as a responsible agency under CEQA, the City Council finds that there are no feasible alternatives to the Project which would avoid or substantially lessen the Project's potentially significant environmental impacts but still achieve most of the Project's objectives. The City Council further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures within the City's authority which would eliminate or reduce the Project's potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant. The City Council further finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by EMWD is supported by substantial evidence and that each Overriding Consideration outweighs the Project's potentially significant impacts. As such, the City Council concurs with the environmental findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations made by the EMWD, which are attached hereto as Exhibit 'A," and therefore the City Council adopts those findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as its own and incorporates them herein. (e) Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Project and approved by the EMWD, which is included with the EMWD's written findings attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. SECTION 3. Approval of the Project, Including the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement, the Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan, and the Stipulated Judgment determining water production rights. As required by State CEQA Guidelines section 15096 and in its limited role as responsible agency under CEQA, the City Council hereby approves the Project, including the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement set forth in Exhibit "D", the Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan, on file with the City Clerk, and the Stipulated Judgment set forth in Exhibit "E". The Mayor shall execute the Phase 1 Facilities Agreement and the Stipulated Judgment subject to non-substantial amendments approved by the City Manager and City Attorney to conform to the Agreements approved by the other parties, and shall take other actions as necessary to implement the City's limited role in carrying out the Project. SECTION 4. Notice of Determination. The City Council hereby directs City staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County Clerk and also with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research within five (5) working days of the approval of the Project. SECTION 5. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the offices of the City of San Jacinto's Planning Office located at 595 S. San Jacinto Ave. in San Jacinto, CA. SECTION 6. Execution of Resolution and Agreement. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City's Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 7th day of February, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Bartel, Di Memmo, Ledezma, Miller, Kotyuk NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None City of San Jacinto Andrew F o' yuk, Mayor ATTEST: t Richard Miller, City Clerk Exhibit "A" Eastern Municipal Water District's CEQA Findings, Statement of Oven iding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program For The 2007 Final Supplemental EIR Exhibit"A" EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT HENLET/SAN JACINTO WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Findings of Fact And Statement of Overriding Considerations NOVEMBER 2007 Table of Contents FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Page I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................1 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................1 3. BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................................2 4. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS.......................................................................................................3 5. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA.......................................................................................4 6. MITIGA`i'ION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM...............................................5 7. FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................6 8. FEASIBILI`IY OF PROJECT ALT'ERNATIVES........................................................................28 9. NARROWING THE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES.................................................................32 10. INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS--...... ...—.......--.....—........ .......... ......-......-33 11. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS...........................................................34 12. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS.............................................................................................37 Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page i Findings of Fact 1. INTRODUCTION The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR; State Clearinghouse No. 2006101023) evaluates environmental impacts that would result from adoption and implementation of the proposed Stipulated Judgment determining water rights (production rights) and the associated Hemet/Sap, Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan (Plan). Together, the Stipulated Judgment and the Plan constitute the "Project" addressed in the SEIR. The SEIR is a supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program (Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP; State Clearinghouse No. 2003121068), certified by EMWD in June 2004. Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) is one of the Project proponents and the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The SEIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The Lake Hemet Municipal Water District (LHMWD), the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto, and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District(RCFCWCD) are CEQA Responsible Agencies (i.e., public agencies other than the Lead Agency that have discretionary approval over the proposed Project). The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) also may be a Responsible Agencies under CEQA. 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Among other objectives, the proposed Project is intended to implement the draft Settlement Agreement with the Soboba Band of Luiseiio Indians (Tribe). The draft Settlement Agreement establishes the Tribe's prior and paramount right to pump designated volumes of water from the Canyon Sub-basin and a portion of the Upper Pressure Sub-basin (collectively called the `Basin"), as well as requiring certain payments and land transfers by local water districts and the United States government. In addition, the drab Settlement Agreement requires that EMWD and other local water districts develop and implement a Water Management Plan (Plan) for the Basin to address the current Basin overdraft, and take into account the Tribal Water Right, The Plan that forms part of the proposed Project analyzed in the SEIR was developed in response to this requirement of the draft Settlement Agreement, As noted above, the proposed Project would consist of the Stipulated Judgment, which would allocate production rights among the Public Agency parties to the Stipulated Judgment, (as defined in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the SEIR), and the Plan, which presents in more detail the mechanism for allocation of production rights, and proposes an institutional and financial framework for managing water resources in the area at a prograrn level, including proposed projects to replenish and conserve local water resources. The participants in the Project as a whole and in the Plan, in particular, would include EMWD, LHMWD, the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto, and private water producers. The parties are collectively referred to as the "Plan Participants" in these findings and the SEIR, while EMWD, LHMWD and the Cities of HemetlSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page I Findings of Fact Hemet and San Jacinto are collectively referred to as the"Public Agencies." Participation in the Plan by private water producers would be voluntary, and no private producers would be mandated to participate (nor would the existing overlying production rights of non participant private producers be affected by the Plan). Private water producers would be encouraged to participate primarily through financial incentives, as discussed below and in SEIR Section 2.4. Although not a Plan Participant, the Tribe also is involved in this process because Plan implementation would help achieve a water rights settlement with the Tribe. The goal of the proposed Project is to define the individual and collective rights to surface and groundwater of the four participating Public Agencies, together with the participating private water producers, within the Management Area; to provide a reliable drinking water supply through groundwater stabilization and conjunctive use within the service areas of the four participating Public Agencies; and to meet the needs and water rights of the Tribe. The Project's more specific objectives, as stated in the Plan and summarized in the SEIR, include the following: 1. Address pumping overdraft and declining groundwater levels 2. Provide for the Tribe's prior and paramount water rights 3. Ensure reliable water supply 4. Provide for planned urban growth 5. Protect and enhance water quality 6. Develop cost-effective water supply 7. Provide adequate monitoring for water supply and water quality 8. Supersede the Fruitvale Judgment and Decree These proposed objectives are described in SEIR Chapter 1.0. Because the specific strategies and actions that would directly or indirectly result in effects to the physical enviromncnt arc generally described in the Plan, the SEIR focuses on proposed Plan elements in more detail than it does on the Stipulated Judgment. The Project would determine the production rights (Base Production Rights) of each of the Public Agencies to produce water from the Management Area based upon actual average production during the period 1995-1999,with certain adjustments(see Table 2-1 in SEIR Chapter 2.0). As noted above and discussed in SEIR Chapter 1.0, one of the Project goals is to recognize and protect the rights of the Tribe, as determined in the Settlement Agreement among the Tribe, the United States, Metropolitan, EMWD and LHMWD. Under the Agreement, the Tribe has a prior and paramount right, superior to all others, to pump 9,000 acre feet annually from the Canyon Sub-Basin and the Intake portion of the Upper Pressure Sub-Basin (both within the Management Area and shown in Figure 1-2 of the SEIR). Use is restricted to the Soboba Reservation and certain nearby land, and such water may not be exported. Use is further constrained by an agreement to limit the Tribe's pumping according to a yearly schedule, with a maximum of4,100 acre-feet annually, for the first 50 years. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 2 Findings of Fact Under the Agreement, Metropolitan agrees to provide an average supply of 7,500 acre-feet per year at untreated replenishment rates to recharge the Management Area until 2035, and to negotiate in good faith for an extension for a total of 50 years. This supply is to meet Tribal needs and to reduce overdraft. The water will be paid for by the Public Agencies in proportion to their Base Production Rights, with the right to use that portion of the water not produced by the Tribe in the same percentages. The Project also would recognize certain surface production rights of EMWD and LHMWD and largely supercede the 1954 Fniitvale Judgment and Agreement, as set forth in Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Stipulated Judgment (see Appendix A of the SEIR). The Stipulated Judgment is subject to court approval and the Plan is subject to approval by the Tribe and the United States. The Plan addresses a number of proposed strategies and actions necessary for meeting the eight Plan goals listed above. In addition, the Plan includes institutional, financial and implementation plans that address the means by which these actions would be authorized, funded and implemented. Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the focus of the SEIR is on those elements of the Plan that would result either directly or indirectly in physical effects to the environment. These Plan elements include: • Reduction in Public Agency native groundwater production free of replenishment assessment Implementation of the San Jacinto River Recharge and Recovery Project • Groundwater replenishment In-lieu water use • Additional water conservation measures Water monitoring These Plan elements are summarized below and described in more detail in SEIR Chapter 2.0. Under the proposed Plan, the Public Agencies would reduce their collective native groundwater production,so that the total production(including replenishment supplies)would be within the Safe Yield of the Management Area. The Public Agencies would be required to achieve a 10 percent reduction from each of their Base Production Rights in the first frill year after entry into the Stipulated Judgment, and periodic further adjustments as necessary to achieve the Safe Yield. The reduced production rights of native groundwater are referred to as Adjusted Production Rights. The Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP is the core element of the physical solutions included in the Plan. That is, of the potential projects that could be constructed, this would contribute the largest share toward meeting the eight plan goals. Because the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP was previously addressed in the 2004 certified FEIR that the SEIR supplements, it is not addressed in detail in the SEIR. HemetiSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 3 Findings of Fact Replenishment efforts to increase water supply in the Management Area can be grouped into two categories: 1. Direct replenishment of groundwater to store water for future use 2. Augmentation of supplies with imported or recycled water to provide immediate increases in water supply and an associated decrease in native groundwater pumping. These categories can be combined, with increases in imported or recycled water being used to replenish groundwater for future use. In addition to the HemeUSan Jacinto IRRP, up to seven additional recharge basins could be implemented within the Management Area to help increase the replenishment of groundwater through infiltration. The seven potential sites include one site at the existing Buena Vista flood control basin, two sites in the San Jacinto River, two sites in or adjacent to Bautista Creek, one site along Salt Creek,and one site at an existing recharge basin facility known as"Little Valley." Increased direct use of either imported water or recycled water could help decrease the demand for groundwater, with the corresponding potential to decrease firture demand for groundwater extraction within the Management Area. Within these Findings, the Plan,and the SEIR, this is referred to as"in lieu water use." In general,water conservation measures are already represented by ongoing Public Agency programs and, therefore, do not constitute a means to address the Management Area's water needs. Nonetheless, the Public Agencies acknowledge the importance of continually seeking means to further increase water conservation within their services areas. In addition to existing conservation measures implemented by Public Agencies, further conservation measures could be designed and implemented by agricultural and dairy water users. The Plan also includes increased water monitoring to help assess the status of the water resources (particularly groundwater) within the Management Area and to monitor responses to the future management actions implemented under the Plan. To help address the groundwater overdraft and related effects on the water supply, the Plan includes incentives to entice private water produces to participate in the Plan. Private water producers are those property owners who are pumping more than 25 acre-feet per year (AFY) of groundwater pursuant to overlying production rights, typically for agricultural or domestic uses. As the Public Agencies recognize the overlying production rights of private water producers, the Plan provides several options for voluntary participation by the private producers. There would be two classes of Plan participants, Class A and Class B; both would agree to have their wells metered and to have those meters read by EMWD personnel at no cost to the participants. The two types of participants are further explained below and in SEIR Chapter 2.0. It is important to note that private water producers could elect not to participate in the Plan and not to formally acknowledge its Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 4 Findings of Fact existence. These non-participants would continue to exercise their production rights unaffected by the Plan. Private water producers would be able to sign an agreement acknowledging the existence of the Plan, while not being required to participate in Plan implementation. These "Class A" participants would be allowed to vote for and/or serve as a representative on the Watermaster Committee. The Class A participants would be able to continue to pump from their property without assessments by the Watermaster, so long as the water is put to a reasonable and beneficial use as authorized by California law. The Class A participants would have the right to convert to Class B during a grace period that would end three years after the entry of the Stipulated Judgment, and upon payment of the total assessments without interest, as if they were Class B participants to begin with. Private producers could become Class B participants by electing to limit annual pumping to their estimated average annual production from 1995 through 1999, and by agreeing to pay replenishment assessments on amounts in excess of that average annual production. Additional benefits would be given to Class B Participants. Under certain conditions, Class B Participants could convey their adjusted production right to the Plan or to a Public Agency. Also, upon conversion from agricultural to urban uses, Class B Participants would receive credits from the Public Agency toward the satisfaction of any requirements then in effect for water supplies, and toward any fees associated with water supply that the public agency might then have in effect. 3. BACKGROUND As noted above, EMWD is a Project proponent and the Lead Agency under CEQA. Formed in 1950, EMWD provides domestic and agricultural water, wastewater collection and treatment, and recycled water to a 555 square mile service area in western Riverside County. The mission of EMWD is to provide safe and reliable water and wastewater services to its service area in an economical, efficient and responsible manner, now and in the future. EMWD serves a population of approximately 660,000. This population is expected to grow to approximately 830,000 by 2025. In addition to providing retail water service, EMWD provides water on a wholesale basis to the seven local water agencies in its service area, including LHMWD and the water departments of the Cities of Hemet and San Jacinto. In the portion of the EMWD service area located within the Management Area,water use was 13,900 AFY in 2004, and is projected to rise to 21,000 AFY by 2020. In 1971, EMWD purchased the Fruitvale Mutual Water Company, and thus became subject to the Fruitvale Judgment and Decree. The SEIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The SEIR is a program-level document that evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the Stipulated Judgment determining water rights and the associated Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan. Development of any specific facilities associated with the Plan, such as recharge basins or pipelines, would require fiirther, project-specific environnmental review. If that fixture review determines that the impacts of the planned facilities have been adequately addressed in the SEIR, no additional CEQA compliance documentation would be required If those facilities would result in Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 5 Findings of Fact environmental effects that have not been adequately disclosed in the SEIR, then additional project-level review tinder CEQA would be required. 4. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS For pla poses of CEQA and the findings set forth herein,the record of proceedings for EMWD's decision on the proposed Project consists of the following documents: • The NOP prepared for the Draft SEIR; • Public notices issued in conjunction with the proposed Project; • The Draft SEIR; • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public continent period on the Draft SEIR; • The Final SEIR for the proposed Project; • All findings and resolutions adopted by EMWD in connection with the proposed Project and all documents cited or referred to therein; • All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, and other planning documents relating to the proposed Project prepared by EMWD, EMWD's consultants,or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to EMWD's compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to EMWD's action on the proposed Project; • All documents submitted to EMWD by agencies or members of the public in connection with the proposed Project; • Minutes and verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings and public hearings held by EMWD in connection with the proposed Project; • Any documentary or other evidence submitted to EMWD at such workshops, public meetings, and public hearings; and • Matters of common knowledge to EMWD, including,but not limited to federal,state and local laws and regulations. • All of the above items as they relate to the previously certified FEIR and Draft EIR for the IIemet/San Jacinto IRRP The custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is the Eastern Municipal Water District,2270 Trumble Road, Perris, CA 92570. 5. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA Under CEQA, for each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR (including an SEIR) for a proposed project,the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three allowable conclusions. The first allowable funding is that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 6 Findings of Fact incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR." (State CEOA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. [a][1].) The second allowable finding is that "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency." (State CEOA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. [a][21.) The third allowable conclusion is that "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR." (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. [a][3].) CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with some other agency. (State CEQA Gzidelines, § 15091, subd. [a][3][c].) Public Resources Code section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successfid manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." State CEOA Guidelines section 15364 adds another factor: "legal' considerations. (see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors["Goleta I1'7 [1990] 52 Ca1.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal. Rptr, 410].) The State CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding' a significant environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening' such an effect. EMWD must therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used. Public Resources Code section 21081, on which State CEOA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The State CEQA Guidelines therefore equate`'mitigating' with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects." (Public Resources Code,§ 21002.) For purposes of these findings, (lie terra "avoid" refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise potentially significant effect to a less-than-significant level. In contrast, the tens "substantially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of such measure or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that effect to a level that is less than significant. Although the State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed]," these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a level that is less than significant,or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant. Moreover, although section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address environmental effects that an FIR identifies as merely "potentially significant," these findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final SEIR. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 7 Findings of Fact Only after fully complying with the findings requirement can an agency adopt a statement of overriding considerations. (Citizens,for Quality Growth v. City of!Mount Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 442,445 [243 Cal. Rptr. 727].) In cases in which significant impacts are not at least"substantially mitigated," the agency,after adopting the findings, may approve the project if it first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its "unavoidable adverse environmental effects." (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ I5093, 15043, subd. [b].) The California Supreme Court has stated that, "[t]he wisdom of approvuig . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced." (Goleta H, 52 Cal.3d 553, 576 [276 Cal.Rptr.401].) This document presents EMWD's findings as required by CEQA, cites substantial evidence in the record in support of each of those findings, and presents au explanation to supply the logical step between the finding and the facts in the record. (State CEQA Guidelines,§ IS091.) 6. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM A Mitigation Monitoring and Repotting Program ("MMRP") has been prepared for the Project (refer to Public Resources Code, § 21081.6). EMWD will use the MMRP to track compliance with Project mitigation measures. EMWD's Board of Directors will consider the MMRP during the certification hearing for the Final SEIR. The final MMRP will incorporate all mitigation measures adopted for the Project. 7. FINDINGS The previously certified FEIR identified ten environmental categories that may result in significant or potentially significant environmental impacts. The proposed Project evaluated in the SEIR would result in or contribute to significant effects in eight of those ten environmental categories. The proposed Project evaluated in the SEIR could potentially cause significant environmental effects to one other environmental category (agricultural resources) for which significant effects were not identified in the FEIR for the proposed Program, Almost all of the significant impacts of the proposed Project can be avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. Significant impacts in two environmental categories (noise and air quality) and incremental contributions to significant cumulative impacts (air quality) can-not be avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or alternatives; however, these significant effects are outweighed by the benefits of the proposed Project, as discussed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations(see Section I I of these findings). This section presents in greater detail F,MWD's findings with respect to the environmental effects of the Project. It also suuunarizes the evidence relied upon by EMWD in making these findings. This evidence is HemetlSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 8 Findings of Fact drawn from the Final SEIR, the comments and responses to comments on the Draft SEIR, and other evidence presented to EMWD, including all other information in the administrative record. According to the Final SEIR, the proposed Project would be expected to contribute to the significant and unnutigable air quality and noise impacts identified in the 2004 Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP FEIR. One of the potential replenishment basin sites (at Salt Creek, see SEIR Section 2.2.3) encompasses farmland, and the development of a recharge basins at that location could constitute a significant agricultural resources impact; however, this impact may not be significant depending on the specific design, location and timing of the proposed basins. No other Project impacts are identified as significant and unmitigable. The following discussion examines each of the environmental impacts deemed significant or potentially significant in the Final SEIR. 7.1 HYDROLOGY The previously certified FEIR identified a significant impact to hydrology that would be mitigated to a less- than-significant level. No new or Substantially more significant hydrology impacts were identified in the SEIR,and the mitigation identified in previously certified FEIR would not be changed. Reference: SEIR Section 4.1 7.2 WATER QUALITY The previously certified FEIR identified a significant impact to water quality that would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. No new or substantially more significant water quality impacts were identified in the SEIR,and the mitigation identified in previously certified FEIR would not be changed. Reference: SEIR Section 4.2 7.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially significant geology and soils impacts were identified in the previously certified FEIR in association with potential rupture of or damage to the Phase 2 water supply pipeline from seismic activity along the Casa Loma Fault. A similar potentially significant impact was identified in the SEIR associated with potential ground rupture hazards related to the water supply pipeline for the Cienega and Fairview recharge basins, due to that pipeline's proposed location across and/or adjacent to the active Claremont Fault. 7.3.1 Significant Effect The proposed Cienega and Fairview recharge basins water supply pipeline crosses the active Claremont Fault. A large magnitude earthquake along local segments of this fault could potentially result in local Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 9 Findings of Fact ground rupture effects, which could damage or sever the proposed pipeline. While the probability of such an occurrence is considered low, the associated potential impacts are significant due to the location of the proposed pipeline and the active nature and seismicity potential of the Claremont Fault. Mitigation: EMWD shall implement the following mitigation measure: Geology and Soils Mitigation Measure GEO-1 A geotechnical analysis shall be conducted by EMWD prior to final Project design of the potential Cienega/Fairview basins water supply pipeline to assess potential hazards related to rupture or damage from seismic activity along applicable local and regional faults (including the Claremont Fault). Based on the results of this analysis, appropriate measures shall be included in the pipeline design to reduce potential pipeline rupture/damage hazards to the maximum extent feasible. Specific design measures may include elements such as the use of: (1) shorter pipeline section lengths and flexible joints in fault rupture hazard areas to reduce rigidity; (2) remote, automatic water pressure detectors and shut-off mechanisms to terminate water flow in the event of a pipeline rupture; and(3) expanded fill depths or extents to increase pipeline support and stability. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not Significant Finding(s)per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][I].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) O Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: While the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 will not eliminate the potential for earthquake-induced pipeline damage, the associated reduction of potential hazards, combined with the low probability for the occurrence of ground rupture, would reduce related impacts to the potential water supply pipeline below a level of significance. This conclusion is based on implementing the noted geotechnical investigation and related recommendations as described above under Mitigation Measure GEO-1, as well as the necessity for siting large infrastructure projects in seismically active areas. That is, Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 10 Findings of Fact numerous large water pipelines are present in the Project study area and throughout southern California that cross or are in close proximity to active faults. Because of the widespread occurrence of such faults and the need to provide imported water to urban areas, the location of large pipelines within or across fault zones is unavoidable and is generally considered an acceptable risk. Reference: SE1R Section 4.3 7.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially significant direct and indirect impacts on biological resources were identified in association with the proposed Program addressed in the previously certified FEIR. The SEIR identified additional potentially significant impacts to biological resources. 7.4.1 Significant Effect The proposed Fairview and Cienega recharge basins could affect sensitive habitat: riparian scrub, mule fat scrub, southern willow scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, and non-native grassland. To varying degrees, any of the recharge basins could affect sensitive animal species. No basin is expected to affect sensitive plant species. Construction could cause direct impacts to animals within the footprint, and indirect(noise) effects on nesting birds. Specific level of impacts is currently unknown due to the preliminary nature of proposed recharge basins' designs; additional project-level analysis would be necessary to quantify impacts. The Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) encompasses the Management Area, including the seven basin sites. Four of the seven potential recharge basin sites (Cienega, Fairview, Bautista along Florida, and Bautista Hood control pond) are located within Subunit 3 (Upper San Jacinto River/Bautista Creek) of the MSHCP's San Jacinto Valley Area Plan, with associated MSHCP compliance requirements for local jurisdictions and other agencies permitted under the MSHCP. Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or State jurisdictional streambed would likely occur at the Cienega, Fairview, and Bautista Creek flood control pond sites. The potential for impacts to jurisdictional areas at the State Street site is dependent on whether the diversion of storm flows into the basin would require dredge or fill within Salt Creek. The Buena Vista site is likely exempt from federal jurisdiction, but subject to State jurisdiction, and it appears that jurisdictional areas do not occur within the Bautista along Florida and Little Valley sites. Mitigation: Because of the program-level nature of the above analysis, specific (quantified) impacts have not been determined. Accordingly, it is also not possible to identify the exact mitigation that would be required at any one of the seven recharge basins to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Nonetheless, based on the types of resources present at the potential recharge basins sites and the types of activities required to construct, refurbish, operate and maintain recharge basins, the following mitigation measures would be expected reduce each identified potential impact to less-than-significant levels. Thus, Hemet/San Jacinto Wafer Management Plan page II Findings of Fact while exact mitigation measures would need to be based on specific development plans, mitigation would likely include some combination of the following avoidance,minimization,and compensation measures. Mitigation for Direct Impacts Vegetation Communities/Habitat. Significant vegetation community/habitat impacts could occur at the Cienega and Fait-view recharge basin sites. Mitigation could include site design and facility locations (e.g., pipeline alignments) that minimize impacts to sensitive communities, restoration of sensitive vegetation disturbed by constriction, on- or off-site preservation of similar vegetation communities, and on- or off-site enhancement or creation of similar vegetation communities (coupled with preservation of the crcated/enhanccd habitat). For Plan Participants subject to the MSHCP, mitigation for impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would require payment of MSHCP Local Development Mitigation fees. Fees for commercial and industrial uses currently are$6,li I per acre. However,fees may be offset through on-or off-site conservation. Jurisdictional Areas. Impacts to jurisdictional areas would be mitigated in accordance with the requirements of the Corps and CDFG, as determined during the permitting process. Federal, state, and local regulations have a no net loss policy on all riparian habitats, so any loss of riparian areas would need to be mitigated at a minimum 1:l ratio. Animal Species. As part of future project-specific analyses, a qualified biologist would conduct focused surveys for arroyo toad, burrowing owl, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and Los Angeles pocket mouse in areas with suitable habitat. Tf any of these species would be affected, mitigation would be required as determined by the regulatory agencies. Depending on the level of impact and the sensitivity of the species involved (and the associated regulatory requirements), mitigation for impacts to animal species could include: • Active and/or passive relocations of animals to outside of the construction area • On- and/or off-site conservation of suitable habitat • On- and/or off-site enhancement and management of suitable habitat • Use of fencing/barriers to prevent sensitive animal species from entering the project site during construction • Use of construction monitoring to avoid or minimize construction-related effects (for example, having a qualified biologist direct construction equipment around observable San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat burrows) At Cienega and Fairview, a qualified biologist would be required to conduct a habitat assessment for least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and western yellow-billed cuckoo. If suitable habitat were Found for any of these three species during the habitat assessment, focused surveys would need to be Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 12 Findings of Fact conducted, as applicable. If any of these species would be affected, mitigation would be required as determined by the regulatory agencies. At recharge basin sites near trees that could support raptor nests, a pre-construction survey for raptors would be conduced by a qualified biologist to determine if any active raptor nests occur within the limits of disturbance. If a nest occurs in a tree to be affected, the tree would not be removed while the nest is active(typically January through July). Where suitable habitat is present, a qualified biologist would need to conduct a pre-construction survey for burrowing owl. If burrowing owl is present, CDFG would be consulted and a passive relocation effort would be undertaken outside the nesting season. Burrowing owls would be relocated passively to an area outside the impact zone and existing burrows would be destroyed once they are vacated. No disturbance of active nests would occur. Mitigation For Indirect Impacts As noted above, specific mitigation measures would be developed pending future project-level review. Based on the information currently available, however, it is expected that the following measures could reduce indirect impacts to less than significant levels: ® No grubbing, earthwork, or construction shall occur within 500 feet of occupied tree-nesting - raptor habitat during the raptor breeding season, or within 800 feet of ground-nesting raptor habitat during the raptor breeding season (January 15 through July 15, or until all nesting is complete). ® If clearing or grading is planned to begin during the avian breeding season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted to determine if breeding or nesting avian species occur within impact areas. If there are no raptors nesting (includes nest building or other breeding/nesting behavior) within this area, clearing or grading shall be allowed to proceed. However, if any of these birds are observed nesting or displaying breeding/nesting behavior within the area, clearing or grading shall be postponed until all nesting(or breeding/nesting behavior)has ceased. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not Significant Finding(s) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][I].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.(Subd. [a][2].) Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 13 Findings of Fact ( } Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: With implementation of mitigation measures, no significant, unavoidable adverse impacts to biological resources would result from the proposed Project. No further mitigation is required. Reference: SEIR Section 4.4. 7.5 NOTSE The previously certified FEIR identified potentially significant noise impacts in association with construction and operation of the proposed Program. The SEIR identified additional constriction noise impact that would add to the previously identified significant noise impacts. 7.5.1 Significant Effect The proposed groundwater replenishment options analyzed in the SEIR would generate both short-term construction noise and long-term operational noise impacts; however, only potential 24-hour(around-the- clock) well drilling would be expected to cause significant noise impacts. Mitigation: EMWD shall implement the following mitigation measures: • Noise Mitigation Measure Noise-I EMWD shall constrict temporary noise barriers around drill rigs at extraction and monitoring well locations near noise-sensitive receptors. Noise barriers may be constructed as a temporary wall, berm or combination of both. The temporary noise barrier shall be constructed of one-inch thick plywood, oriented strand board (OSB) or acoustical blankets with a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 25. • Noise Mitigation Measure Noise-2 Adequate buffers, where feasible, shall be provided at extraction wells located adjacent to residential areas. hi addition to the noise barriers noted above, equipment shall be located as far as practical from residential property boundaries. • Noise Mitigation Measure Noise-3 Building plans for extraction wells shall be reviewed to ensure that the buildings have been designed so that equipment noise will not exceed the local jurisdictions' noise limits. This study shall be prepared by a practicing acoustician with demonstrated previous experience related to the control of mechanical equipment noise. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 14 Findings of Fact Several noise abatement measures are available to mitigate the extraction well pump noise levels to the applicable local jurisdictions' noise criteria. The measures could include a combination of installing sound absorbing materials on the interior walls and ceiling surfaces, providing acoustical louvers, sound attenuators, orienting the louver openings and locating the buildings to minimize noise exposure to the adjacent noise-sensitive receivers. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not Significant Finding(s)per State CE!2A Guidelines Section 15091: O Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][11.) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) (X) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: Because well constriction requires a 24-hour per day schedule, there are no feasible mitigation measures to avoid significant noise impacts. Therefore, a statement of overriding considerations is required (refer to section 11). Reference: SEIR Section 4.5 7.6 AIR QUALITY The previously certified FEIR identified that construction-related emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NO.,) would exceed established thresholds during construction of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 recharge basins, the Phase I and Phase 2 pump station upgrades, the Phase 2 water supply pipeline, and long-term repain'reconstruction of the recharge basins. The Project elements addressed in the SEIR would incrementally add to the previously identified significant air quality impacts. 7.6.1 Significant Effect Recharge Basin construction-related emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NO.) would add to the previously identified significant air quality impact. Mitigation: No feasible mitigation measures available. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 15 Findings of Fact With mitigation the Effects are Found to be: (X) Significant O Not Significant Finding(s) per State CE,QA Guidelines Section 15091: O Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][1].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) (X) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infi•a, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: NO., emissions associated with certain elements recharge basin construction could exceed SCAQMD criteria and are considered significant, although these impacts are not expected to generate any long-term adverse effect to ambient air quality due to their temporary nature. The main source of NO., ( ernissions during construction is heavy equipment exhaust, with the only feasible related mitigation measures involving the implementation of ride-sharing programs for construction personnel and/or the use of a shuttle system during lunch hour trips. These measures would not affect heavy equipment operation, would involve only very minor reductions of NO., emissions and would not reduce associated impacts below a level of significance. Based on these conditions, the described measures to reduce NO, emissions are not proposed as mitigation for Project construction activities. Air quality impact would remain significant; therefore,a statement of overriding considerations is required(refer to section I I). Reference: SEIR Section 4.7. 7.7 CULTURAL RESOURCES The previously certified FEIR identified potentially significant cultural resource impacts that would be mitigated to less-than-significant levels. The Project addressed in the SEIR would not change the previous assessment of impact significance and the associated mitigation. Although no known cultural resources would be affected by the Project elements addressed in the SEIR, the potential remains for uncovering previously undocumented cultural resources. 7.7.1 Significant Effect Cultural resource impacts are not expected due to disturbed nature of potential recharge basin sites and probable pipeline alignments,however, construction could affect unknown,buried deposits. NemetlSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 16 Findings of Fact Mitigation; EMWD shall implement the following mitigation measures (note that there is no measure "CUL-2" in order to maintain consistency between mitigation measure numbering in the SEIR and the previously certified FEIR): • Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Because burials and buried sites are known to occur in the valley, and unrecorded and unanticipated buried archaeological sites, and possibly Native American or other human remains, could be encountered during constriction, cultural resources monitoring will be conducted for the following: — grading or excavation of recharge basin sites in upland areas and/or on the banks of the San Jacinto River or Bautista Creek — initial grading(if required)for monitoring and extraction wells — initial trenching for water supply pipelines As noted above, no monitoring is reconunended within the channel of the San Jacinto River or Bautista Creek, since these deposits are recent in age and are worked and reworked by recent flooding events. ® Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CUL-3 If cultural resources are discovered during constriction monitoring, they will be evaluated for significance according to the criteria contained in SEIR Section 4.7.2. Initial analysis should be directed toward evaluation of site significance to assess the site's eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. To achieve this goal, an archaeological testing strategy that carefully balances definition of data potentials and realization of those potentials would be used. These investigations would be designed to (1) define the extent, content, integrity, age, occupation units or components, and research potentials of each site; (2) define spatial, temporal and cultural relationships among sites within and near the study area; (3) advance knowledge of local and regional history and prehistory by addressing explicit research questions; (4) assess poteiuial Project effects if a cultural property proves eligible for the Register of Historical Resources; and (5) define key parameters (e.g. extent, structure, age, contents and integrity) of each site sufficiently to define a treatment program. a Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CUL-4 If previously unknown potentially significant or important cultural resources (Native American or historic artifacts)are encountered during construction which is not being monitored, work should stop in the vicinity of the find until the materials can be assessed by a qualified archaeologist. Although not a mitigation measure per se, California law mandates the process to be followed in the unlikely event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. If human remains are exposed during construction, Califomia Health and Safety Code Section Nemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page I7 Findings of Fact 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. Construction must halt in the area of the discovery of human remains, the area must be protected, and consultation and treatment should occur as prescribed by law. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not Significant Finding(s)per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect.(Subd. [a][1].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) O Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][31.) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Rationale: Construction monitoring and, if necessary, site testing and investigation, data recovery and/or avoidance would mitigate potential impacts to cultural resources to less than significant. Reference: SEIR Section 4.7. 7.8 TRANSPORTATION The previously certified FEIR identified potentially significant transportation impacts associated with construction of the Phase 2 water supply pipeline that would be mitigated to less-than-significant levels. The SEIR also identified potentially significant traffic impacts associated with water supply pipeline construction. 7.8.1 Significant Effect Construction of the water supply pipelines could significantly reduce LOS on affected roadways and hinder emergency vehicle access. Mitigation: EMWD shall implement the following mitigation measures: Transportation Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 18 Findings of Fact EMWD and its pipeline contractor(s) will prepare and implement a detailed Traffic Control Plan in accordance with applicable standards, including local requirements and/or the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook (WATCH, American Public Works Association 2001). The Project Traffic Control Plan will be implemented at the time of pipeline constriction (anticipated to be approximately 2010) and copies of the Traffic Control Plan will be provided to the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto at least one month prior to construction. Specific measures to be used in the program Traffic Control Plan would include (but not necessarily be limited to) the following types of controls: (1) providing applicable warning signs, barriers and/or lights at appropriate locations near construction activity (per WATCH or other guidelines); (2) identifying (via signs, etc.) specific locations/activities such as construction vehicle access points and lane/road closures; (3) use of flaggers and (if applicable) guide vehicles to control access (including pedestrian and bicycle traffic) in areas of lane or road closures; (4) providing and identifying (e.g., through signing) alternate routes in appropriate areas (e.g., lane closures); (5) maintaining constant access (either directly or via alternate routes) for emergency vehicles during construction; and(6) minimizing access restrictions to driveways through measures such as daily backfilling and/or the use of metal plates to cover open trenches. Transportation Mitigation Measure TRANS-2 EMWD and/or its pipeline contractor(s) will coordinate with the City of Hemet and/or San Jacinto Transportation Engineers (as applicable) to discuss any planned lane or roadway closures, prior to -- designating such closures or alternate routes. Transportation Mitigation Measure TRANS-3 EMWD and/or its pipeline contractor(s) will notify the applicable fire and police departments prior to any lane or road closures. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not Significant Finding(s)per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][11.) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) O Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 19 Findings of Fact Rationale: Preparation of a detailed traffic plan and coordination with City of Hemet and/or San Jacinto traffic engineers regarding lane or road closures prior to designating such closures or alternate routes would mitigate potential transportation impacts to below a level of significance. Reference: SEIR Section 4.9. 7.9 HAZARDSIHAZARDOUS MATERIALS The previously certified FEIR identified potential hazardous material contamination impacts within the proposed Phase 2 water supply pipeline alignment, and a potentially significant public safety impact was identified for the proposed Program recharge basins. These impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. The SEIR also identified potentially significant effects with regard to hazards and hazardous materials. 7.9.1 Significant Effect Construction of the Buena Vista, Cienega, Fairview, and Bautista along Florida recharge basins and their water supply pipelines could potentially result in significant impacts associated with previous hazardous materials contamination. Mitigation: EMWD shall implement the following mitigation measures: • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 Where soil is to be excavated and contamination is suspected, sampling shall be implemented to provide a complete characterization of the soil prior to excavation. In addition, a risk assessment shall be performed to establish site-specific protective measures for human health and the environment. Contaminated soil shall be properly disposed at an off-site facility. Fill soils shall also be sampled to ensure imported soil is free from contaminants. All assessment and remediation activities shall be conducted in accordance with pertinent local, state and federal regulatory guidelines, under the oversight of the appropriate regulatory agency. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HA7;2 In the event that unknown USTs are discovered during excavations, all work shall cease until appropriate health and safety procedures are implemented. In addition, either the Department of Environmental Health or the RWQCB shall be notified, depending on the nature of the contamination. All contamination, remediation, and removal activities shall be conducted in accordance with pertinent local, state and federal regulatory guidelines, under the supervision of the appropriate regulatory agency. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not Significant Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 20 Findings of Fact Finding(s)per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][1].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) O Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. (a][4) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: The implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, combined with compliance with mandatory federal, state and local regulations for hazardous materials and emergency response plans relative to hazardous materials, will reduce risks to hurnan health and the environment to below a level of significance. Reference: SEIR Section 4.9. 7.10 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES The previously certified FEIR did not identify any significant impacts to agricultural resources. Potentially significant impacts to agricultural resources are identified for one of the potential recharge basin sites addressed in the SEIR. 7.10.1 Significant Effect The potential conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural uses at a replenishment basin site at Salt Creek may be considered a significant effect; however, this impact may not be significant depending on the specific design, location and timing of the proposed basin. No other significant agricultural impacts. Mitigation: No feasible mitigation was identified for effects to farmland at this potential recharge basin; however, it may be possible to avoid or minimize impacts to farmland when (it) a specific site layout for this potential recharge basin site is proposed. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to he: (X) Significant ( ) Not Significant Finding(s) per State CEOA Guidelines Section 15091: Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 21 Findings of Fact O Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect.(Subd. [a][1].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd [a][3].) (X) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. (a][3].) See infra, section 11, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: The proposed Project would not cause significant effects to agricultural resources with the potential exception of the future Salt Creek recharge basins. Because the Salt Creek sites are currently in active agricultural production and are adjacent to other agricultural land, the conversion of 40 acres of one of these sites to use as recharge basins could represent a significant impact to agricultural resources. Once a specific location within one of the these sites has been selected for recharge basin development, however, any determination of significance would require reassessment of the site's then-current viability for agricultural use, given water and infrastructure availability, climatic conditions, cropping patterns, market considerations and other factors at the time. Pending the identification of a specific development plan for Salt Creek, it is not feasible to identify mitigation for agricultural resource impacts. In general, it is difficult to mitigate the effects of converting agricultural land to non-agricultural uses when such conversions are occurring throughout the area (e.g., throughout the San Jacinto Valley). The EiRs for each of the local jurisdictions' general plans also found that impacts associated with the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses represents a significant impact, and none of the EIRs identified feasible mitigation that would reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. Similarly, the potential impact to agricultural resources at the Salt Creek site is considered significant and immitigable; therefore, a statement of overriding considerations is required (refer to section 11). Reference: SEIR Section 4.10 7.11 CUMULATIVE LMPACTS Project implementation would incrementally contribute to significant potential cumulative impacts in the area air quality as defined per section 15130 of the State CEOA Guideiines. Cumulative air quality impacts would result from the combined generation of emission from construction and operation of the proposed Project and other local/regional development. These combined emissions would contribute to the deterioration of air quality within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Chapter 6 of the SEIR discusses the rationale for concluding that each incremental effect on the other impact categories is less than cumulatively considerable. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan ,page 22 Findings of Fact The previously certified FEIR also identified a significant cumulative biological resources impact, in large part because there was not an adopted regional habitat management program in place at that time that could address regional preservation of habitat. Because the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation PIan (MSHCP) has been adopted since the 2004 certification of the FEIR, there is now a mechanism to address the previously assessed cumulative impact to biological resources within the San Jacinto Valley and western Riverside in general. Accordingly, the previously assessed significant cumulative biological resource impacts may be considered less than significant. 7.11.1 Significant Effect Cumulative air quality impacts would result from the combined generation of emission from construction and operation of the proposed Project and other local/regional development. These combined emissions would contribute to the deterioration of air quality within the South Coast Air Basin(SCAB). Mitigation: It is not feasible to mitigate significant cumulative air quality impacts. With Mitigation the Effects are Found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not Significant Finding(s)per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091: O Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect. (Subd. [a][I].) O Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (Subd. [a][2].) (X) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (Subd. [a][3].) See infra, section I1, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Rationale: As described in the SEIR and in Section 7.6.1 of these findings, there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce cumulative air quality impacts; therefore, a statement of overriding considerations is required(see Section I1). Reference: SEIR Chapter 6 Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 23 Findings of Fact 8. FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Because the proposed Project will potentially cause unavoidable,significant environmental effects, as stated above in Sections 7.5.1, 7.6.1, 7.10.1 and 7.11.1 of these findings, EMWD must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternatives to the project. EMWD must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could avoid or substantially lessen the project's unavoidable significant environmental effects. (Citizens for Quality Growth v. City of Mount Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 443-445 [243 Cal.Rptr. 727]; see also Public Resources Code, §21002.) In preparing and adopting findings, a lead agency need not necessarily address the feasibility of both mitigation measures and environmentally superior alternatives when contemplating approval of a proposed project with significant impacts. Where a significant impact can be mitigated to an acceptable level solely by the adoption of mitigation measures, the agency, in drafting its findings,has no obligation to consider the feasibility of environmentally superior alternatives, even if their impacts would be less severe than those of the proposed project as mitigated. (Laurel Hills Homeowners Association v. Cily Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515,521 [147 Cal.Rptr. 842]; see also Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford(1990)221 Cal.App.3d 692, 730-731 [270 Cal.Rptr. 650]; and Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of'Colifornia (1988)47 Ca1.3d 376,400-403 [253 Cal.Rptr. 426].) Accordingly, in adopting findings concerning project alternatives, EMWD considers only those environmental impacts that, for the project, are significant and cannot be avoided through mitigation. The proposed project would have significant,unavoidable adverse environmental impacts on noise and air quality. As described in Section 4.6 of the SEIR, the construction noise impacts associated with drilling of the extraction and monitoring wells could be considered significant after mitigation and is unavoidable since construction would occur 24 hours per day. As described in Section 4.7 of the SEIR, all construction emissions except for oxides of nitrogen (NOJ would be within identified thresholds, with no associated significant impacts. NO, emissions associated with earthwork would contribute to previously identified exceedences of the SCAQMD significance thresholds. Such emissions would thus result in significant short-term air quality impacts, although these impacts are not expected to generate any long-term adverse effect to ambient air quality in the SCAB due to their temporary nature. The main source of NO, emissions during construction is heavy equipment exhaust. The only feasible mitigation measures to reduce NO., emissions involve the implementation of ride-sharing programs for construction workers traveling to and from the site, and/or the use of a shuttle system during lunch hour trips. Because these measures would not affect heavy equipment operation, they would involve only very minor reductions to the described NO., emission levels for construction (i.e., from reduction of light-duty and light heavy-duty vehicle emissions). Such measures would not reduce NO,, emissions below a level of significance, and are not proposed as mitigation. Additionally, as described in Chapter 6 of the SEIR, construction of the proposed Project could result in an unavoidable significant cumulative short-teml and long-terra impact on air quality. HemeVSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 24 Findings of Fact As described above and in Section 4.10 of the SEIR, the proposed Project would not cause significant effects to agricultural resources with the potential exception of the future Salt Creek recharge basins. Because the Salt Creek sites are currently in active agricultural production and are adjacent to other agricultural land, the conversion of 40 acres of one of these sites to use as recharge basins could represent a significant impact to agricultural resources. Once a specific location within one of the these sites has been selected for recharge basin development, however, any determination of significance would require reassessment of the site's then-current viability for agricultural use, given water and infrastructure availability,climatic conditions,cropping patterns, market considerations and other factors at the time. The SEIR examined a reasonable range of alteratives to the proposed Project to determine whether any of these alternatives could meet the Project's objectives, while avoiding or substantially lessening significant, unavoidable impacts (SEIR Section 7.0). Alternatives to the proposed Project include (1) the No Project Alternative; (2) an adjudication or determination of all production rights in the Basin, including all agricultural rights and not just those of Class B participants; (3) not making any agricultural production rights transferable off the land, essentially eliminating the Class B participants; and (4) implementing the Plan plus the policy elements, but without constructing or operating any of the seven proposed recharge basins. Each of these alternatives is discussed in Chapter 7. Implementing the Plan plus the policy elements, but without constructing or operating any of the seven proposed recharge basins, is considered environmentally superior because it would avoid the physical effects of the seven new recharge basins' construction, refurbishtnent, operation and maintenance, but it would still contribute toward meeting due most basic objects of the proposed Project. This alternative would not provide the same level of groundwater supply reliability as the proposed Project because it would entail incrementally less groundwater recharge than the proposed Project; accordingly, this alternative would not fully meet the objectives of the proposed Project. These findings examine the Project alternatives to the extent they lessen or avoid the proposed Project's significant environmental effects. EMWD need not consider the alteratives with respect to the proposed Project's environmental impacts that are insignificant or avoided through mitigation. 8.1 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE CEQA and the State CEQ.4 Guidelines require the evaluation of a "No Project Alterative." Under the No Project Alternative, the Stipulated Judgment would not be implemented, no production rights would be determined, the overdraft would not be controlled, no proposed Project facilities would be constructed by EMWD and, no production right transfers and development fee credits would be offered to water producers. The Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP analyzed in the FEIR would not be affected by the No Project Alternative, since it is the subject of a separate environmental document, the above-mentioned FEIR and previously approved by EMWD. This alternative would avoid the significant effects associated with the proposed Project's construction and operation,but would not meet any of the proposed Project's stated objectives. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 25 Findings of Fact Because the proposed Project is integral to the Draft Settlement Agreement with the Tribe, the settlement agreement could not be implemented under the No Project Alternative. The result would likely be a general adjudication of all production rights within the watershed, brought by either the Tribe or the United States. Under the No Project Alternative, overdraft of the SJWGB (and related adverse water quality impacts) would continue. Absent the proposed Proicct or some similar measures, it is projected that native groundwater levels in the SJWGB would continue to drop. As described in Section 4.1 of the FEIR, existing groundwater depths within the SJWGB vary from at or near the surface at some wetlands and drainage courses, to over 400 feet below ground level. The depth to groundwater ranges from approximately 150 to 280 feet below the surface in most areas, with existing depths in the eastern subbasins generally between 150 and 400 feet (Psomas 2003a). Continued drops in the groundwater elevation eventually would exceed the reach of existing groundwater extraction wells supplied by the SJWGB. At some point, a general adjudication to limit pumping would likely be brought, even if not by the Soboba Tribe or the United States on their behalf, hi addition to failing to meet the obligations of the Draft Settlement Agreement and failing to help reverse the existing SJWGB groundwater overdraft, the No Project Alternative also would not achieve the Project's remaining goals with respect to ensuring reliable, cost-effective, monitored water supply; providing for planned urban growth; protecting, ensuring and monitoring water quality; and superseding the Fruitvalc Judgment and Decree. 8.2 DETERMINATION OR ADJUDICATION OF ALL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION RIGHTS Instead of determining the production rights of only Class B participants, an alternative would be to attempt to determine, or adjudicate if necessary, the rights of all significant pumpers within the basin. This would include not only the Public Agencies, but all overlying water users, who are primarily the agricultural pumpers. It is highly unlikely that this could be accomplished by agreement, and would likely require a general adjudication of production rights. Such an adjudication would eventually lead to a reduction in pumping to bring the Basin into a safe yield condition, but that effort would require many years and be tremendously expensive. It should also be recognized that a court in such an adjudication suit cannot force the parties to pay for and bring in imported water for recharge. Without some kind of settlement, farmers could become pitted against urban users for the available natural supply. The rights of overlying users are generally prior and paramount to those of appropriators,namely EMWD, LHMWD and the Cities of Hemet and San Jacinto. However, it is possible that overlying rights might be lost by prescription. Litigation of this kind could undermine the agricultural foundation of the community. Moreover, a reduction in the amount of water available to agriculture, or an increase in its cost, would likely accelerate the conversion of agricultural land to urban use, with significant environmental effects. The Plan attempts to avoid such undesirable social and environmental consequences by recognizing the production rights of the farmers, and by having the cities and water districts undertake primary Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Pfan page 26 Findings of Fact responsibility for reducing the overdraft and bringing in necessary supplies of supplemental water to meet community needs. The alternative of a general adjudication, on the other hand, would accomplish virtually none of the Plan's goals in a timely manner. 8.3 ELIMINATE TRANSFERABILITY OF PRODUCTION RIGHTS As described in Chapter 5.0, the elements of the Plan applicable to Class B participants could incrementally accelerate the conversion of agricultural land to non agricultural uses. This is because Class B rights, adjusted to safe yields,would become transferable to a Public Agency or the Watemmster. Eliminating the production right transfers and development fee credits would eliminate any potential for the Plan to provide economic incentives for private water producers to convert their land to non-agricultural uses. This change would also, however, eliminate the Class B category, leaving the ability to serve on the Watennaster Committee as the only incentive for agricultural producers to join, and the ability to meter agricultural Pumping as the only benefit to the Plan. Absent the abovementioned financial incentives, the proposed alternative would not contribute to an acceleration of agricultural land to urban uses. Over the long tern, however, it is probable that the conversion from agricultural land to urban uses would occur to the same extent regardless of whether the proposed Project is implemented. That is, although the Plan's financial incentives may incrementally accelerate the rate at which this conversion occurs, the overall development trends in western Riverside County are not likely to be stopped by the absence of the Plan's financial incentives. The conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses in the San Jacinto Valley during the recent real estate market boom, for example, occurred absent any Plan-related financial incentives to those property developers. Similarly, over time, it is expected that land designated for urban uses will be developed with those uses, even if the proposed Project addressed in the SEIR provides no financial incentives. This statement is supported by the fact that each of the three local governments' general plan EIRs identifies a significant and nmnitigable impact to agriculture resulting from the respective general plan's implementation. Making agricultural production rights transferable would also reduce the amount of replenishment water required,and would adversely affect overdraft. Provided that the core physical clement of the proposed Project—the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP—is implemented, the Participating Agencies should be able to meet their Stipulated Judgment obligations to the Tribe. Without private water producer participation,however, an agricultural viewpoint on the Watermaster Committee and metering agricultural pumping would be lost. Moreover, as the Participating Agencies increase the available groundwater supply (either by reducing extraction or by increasing recharge), there would be no incentive for private water producers to reduce their extraction and, in fact, the increased supply of groundwater could encourage additional extraction. Eliminating the production right transfers and development fee credits would not affect those impacts associated with the proposed development of recharge basins. These would include potentially significant Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 27 Findings of Fact but mitigable impacts related to geology and soils, biological resources, hazardous materials, cultural resource, and traffic; potentially significant unmitigable but temporary impacts to noise and air quality; and potentially significant unmitigable long-term impacts to agricultural resources. 8.4 DELETE FROM PLAN (DO NOT CONSTRUCT) PROPOSED NEW RECHARGE BASINS All of the potentially significant impacts identified in the SEIR arc associated with the proposed new recharge basin sites and/or their associated pipelines. Deleting these basins from the proposed Project would cause a corresponding reduction in the extent of potential Project impacts, as described below. Because the previously approved Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP is the core physical element of the Plan, its deletion is not feasible—refer also to Chapter 7.0 of the FEIR. Deleting die seven proposed new recharge basins from the proposed Project would avoid the construction- related effects described in Chapter 4.0 of the SEIR. Specifically, there would be no ground disturbance,no alteration of surface hydrology, no impacts to habitat or sensitive species, no air pollutant emissions from construction-related equipment or workers' vehicles, no construction noise, and no potential conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses at the Salt Creek sites. This alternative would also avoid the potential for unexpected impacts to buried cultural resources, and it would also avoid the potential to encounter hazardous materials during recharge basin and pipeline construction. This alternative would not change the significant impacts identified for the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP in the FEIR. This alternative, would, however reduce the conjunctive use opportunities of the Project, whereby imported water, when available for replenishment, would be stored underground for later use at times when imported water might not be available. Although there would be less groundwater recharge under this alternative than under the proposed Project, implementation of the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP and the in-lieu projects, along with the expected voluntary participation in the plan by private water producers, would be expected to substantially accomplish the proposed Project's main objectives, as described in SEIR Chapter 1.0. 9. NARROWING THE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES An EIR should provide some discussion of how the lead agency or project proponent, in detcnnining the scope of an EIR, narrowed the range of alternatives discussed in detail within the "range of reasonable alternatives" required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, subdivision (c). The preliminary discussion of how the range was focused need not be as extensive as the full "alternatives analysis"required by the guidelines. (See Goleta II, 52 Cal.3d 553, 569 [276 Cal.Rptr. 410]; Laurel Heights Improvement ,association v. Regents of the University of California(1988)47 Cal.3d 376,404-405 [253 Cal.Rptr.42611.) In Goleta I1(52 Cal.3d 553, 564-566 [276 Cal.Rptr. 410]), the California Supreme Court emphasized that the range of alternatives to be included in an EIR should focus on those that could"feasibly"attain the basic objectives of the project. In that case, viewing the record as a whole, the Supreme Court concluded that the HemetlSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 28 Findings of Fact respondent county was justified in not treating as "feasible" (and thus not including in the challenged draft EIR) various alternatives that"would impede to some degree the attainment of project objectives, or would be more costly." The State CF,OA Guidelines also state that: "Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR arc: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.6, subd. [c])." The proposed Project is the product of a thorough analysis of potentially feasible alternatives, as described in Section 8 of these Findings. No other feasible alternatives were identified by agencies or members of the public during the seeping period or Draft SEIR review period. In sum, EMWD believes the alternative analysis it has prepared in the SEIR (Chapter 7) satisfies the legal requirements as mandated by CEQA and the State CEOA Guidelines. Reference: SEIR Chapter 7 10. INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Under CEQA, the lead agency mast (1) independently review and analyze the EIR, (2) circulate draft documents that reflect its independent judgment; and(3) as part of the certification of an EIR, find that the report or declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency (Public Resources Code, §21082.1,subd [c]). EMWD independently reviewed and analyzed the Dralt SEIR and determined that the Draft SEIR reflected its independent judgment. Moreover, upon completing its review and making this determination, EMWD circulated the Draft SEIR, as described above_ EMWD also has independently reviewed and analyzed the Final SEIR. With the adoption of these findings, EMWD finds that the Final SEIR reflects its independent judgment. HemeVSan Jacinto Water Management Plan page 29 Findings of Fact 11. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 11.1 Overview Pursuant to State CEOA Guidelines Sections 15092, 15093 and 15043, decision-makers are required to balance the economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered"acceptable."When a public agency approves a project which will result in significant effects which are identified in the EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the State CEQA Guidelines require that the agency state in writing the specific reasons to support its action,based on the EIR and other information in the record. 11.2 Overridina Considerations To the extent that any significant environmental effects associated with EMWD's proposed Project are not avoided or substantially lessened, EMWD, acting as the CEQA Lead Agency for the Project, having reviewed and considered the information in the Record, and having balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the unavoidable adverse effects which remain, finds such unmitigated effects to be acceptable, based upon the considerations set forth below. This Statement Of Overriding Considerations shall be included in the record of Project approval and shall be mentioned in the Notice of Determination for the Project. 11.3 Sianificant and Effects That Cannot Be Mitigated to Less-than-significant Levels According to the Final SEIR, the environmental effects that are significant and cannot be avoided are: the temporary air quality impact related to NO., emissions during construction; short-term noise construction noise impacts associated with monitoring and extraction well construction; potential conversion of up to 40 acres of farmland to non-agricultural use, and incremental contributions to significant cumulative impacts for air quality. The reasons why these impacts cannot be mitigated to less-than-significant levels are described in the SEIR and summarized above in these findings. The benefits of the proposed Project are described below. 11.4 Proposed Project Benefits The proposed Project would help address Pumping Overdraft and Declining Groundwater Levels. The Plan and the Stipulated Judgment recognize that the groundwater levels within the Management Area have generally been declining for a number of years, and that the Management Area is in a condition of groundwater overdraft. The amount of groundwater overdraft is estimated to range fiom 10,000 to 15,000 AFY. The Project has a goal of reducing the overdraft in the short-term, and completely eliminating the annual overdraft in the long-term, a six-year period assuming an annual overdraft of 10,000 acre feet. Management strategies are included in the Plan to reduce overdraft and ensure long-term supply of Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 30 Findings of Fact reliable water for current and fixture uses. The Plan contains both management (non-structural) and capital facility (structural) elements whose purpose is to reduce demand and/or increase the available supply. The management elements include: reduction in native groundwater production; enhanced recharge with native (local runoff), imported, and/or recycled water; and water conservation programs. Short-term planned reductions in pumping are part of the Plan while further supplies are obtained through the identified management elements. Addressing pumping overdraft and declining groundwater levels will be a benefit to the communities whose water supply depend in part on these groundwater resources. The proposed Project would help provide for Soboba prior and paramount water rights. The Soboba Indian Reservation was created between 1883 and 1913 and encompasses approximately 10.7 square miles (6,865 acres) in the San Jacinto River basin. The San Jacinto River is a major water feature within the Reservation. Between 1933 and 1939, however, a tunnel was constructed through the mountains approximately 3.5 miles northwest of the Reservation at an elevation substantially below most of the Reservation Lands as part of the Colorado River Aqueduct. This tunnel adversely impacted springs and streams on the Reservation. Tribal needs for domestic use and irrigation are met from wells in the Canyon and Intake subbasins. In June 2006, the Tribe, Metropolitan, EMWD, LHMWD and the United States reached agreement on a Draft Settlement Agreement. This Draft Settlement Agreement provides for financial obligations, settlement of all water rights claims, and water purchases from Metropolitan, including infrastructure and groundwater storage. It recognizes the Tribe's prior and paramount rights to 9,000 AFY of groundwater from the Canyon subbasin and the Intake portion of the Upper Pressure subbasin for use on the Reservation or on after-acquired lands located within such subbasins, provided that. for 50 years the Tribe's use is limited to a schedule and a maximum use of 4,100 acre-feet annually. The Draft Settlement Agreement provides that EMWD will contract with Metropolitan for an average annual supply of 7,500 acre-feet of imported water to implement the draft Settlement Agreement. The Plan requires that all parts of the Agreement with the Soboba Tribe be met, and includes management elements to achieve this requirement. Helping to achieve this settlement will be a benefit to all of the parties to the Settlement Agreement and their members. The proposed Project would help ensure reliable water supply. Reliability is a key component of any water supply system. The Project would help ensure that the Public Agencies have a consensus and commitment to develop a comprehensive water supply portfolio that realizes all potential opportunities, and that plans are in place to adapt to changing demands, natural disasters, and drought conditions. This would minimize, to the extent possible, reliance on weather patterns, over-stressed aquifers, and over- allocated imported water. Improving water supply reliability will be a benefit to the communities that depend on this water supply system. The proposed Project would help provide for planned urban growth. The Management Area, like much of the Inland Empire area of Southern California, is experiencing dramatic urbanization. The Plan recognizes and acknowledges that the Management Area will continue to experience residential, commercial, and industrial growth and development, and that the existing water production and service Hemet/San Jacinto Water Panagement Plan page 31 Findings of Fact systems will need to be expanded to meet this growth. This urbanization will affect water supplies in several ways. Urban development on non-irrigated lands will increase water use. Urban development and conversion of irrigated lands may not significantly increase water use, but the urban water use requires a more dependable, higher quality water supply than agricultural uses. It is estimated that at least 15,000 AFY of incremental water supply capacities over the existing Base Production Rights (BPR) of the Public Agencies must be dedicated to adequately serve this growth. The Plan will help local communities comply with changes in state taw effective January 2002 (Senate Bills 221 and 610) requiring municipal suppliers, water districts, and cities or counties to document water availability from all sources in normal, dry, and multiple dry years whenever land use decisions are made. Planned urban growth, as identified in prevailing land use and general plans, or in approved Urban Water Management Plans(UWMP), provided the basis for all demand forecasts and assumptions in the Plan. The proposed Project will help protect and enhance water quality. The Management Area has some of the highest quality groundwater in the San Jacinto Watershed, but it has problems and issues. Nitrates and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) concentrations have historically increased as the area experienced urban and agricultural growth. As noted above, urban uses are expected to continue to replace agricultural uses in the Management Area, resulting in more stringent water quality standards for most constituents, including nitrates. The Plan seeks to meet goals for water quality through preventing degradation of the groundwater due to activities in the Management Area. Each of the Public Agencies also seeks to prevent degradation or to improve groundwater quality to be cost-effective and ultimately avoid high costs for drinking water treatment. Improving water quality will be a benefit to the communities that consume the water subject to the planned improvement in quality. The proposed Project will help develop a cost effective water supply. Equitable distribution of costs and benefits are part of the Project. It is important that the Plan elements are selected and implemented in a way that keeps costs to a minimum so as to keep water bills as low as possible for customers. Cost management includes purchasing imported water at low rates, utilizing groundwater storage space; fully utilizing existing infrastructure; promoting conservation; and efficiently implementing new infrastructure; and maintaining good quality groundwater and surface water to keep treatment costs low. The Public Agencies also seek to cost-effectively reclaim municipal wastewater for beneficial reuse whenever possible. Providing cost effective use of public fins is benefit to the ratepayers and other parties that fund the Public Agencies participating in the Project. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 32 Findings of Fact 12. ACRONYNIS AND DEFINITIONS acre-foot An acre-foot is equivalent to the amount of water that would cover one acre to a depth of one foot (approximately 326,000 gallons). It is estimated that an average southern California family of four consumes about one-half an acre-foot of water a year for all of the family's water uses in and around the house. BMPs Best Management Practices CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEQA California Environmental Quality Act(Public Resources Code, § 21.000 et seq.). CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level J DB Decibel EIR Environmental Impact Report. EMWD Eastern Municipal Water District FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report for the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program(July 2004). LHMWD Lake Hemet Municipal Water District LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program NPDES National Pollutant Elimination Discharge System NOP Notice of Preparation for the Draft Environmental Impact Report. NO, oxides of nitrogen Plan Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 33 Findings of Fact PM10 Particulate matter equal to or less than ten microns in diameter. Program Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program. Project Stipulated Judgment Determining Water Rights and the Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan RCFCWCD Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SBKR San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat SEIR Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District State CG'OA Guidelines Guidelines by the State of California to implement the California Environmental Quality Act(14 Code of California Regulations, § 15000 el seq.). SWPP Stonn Water Prevention Plan Tribe Soboba Band of Luiscno Indians USACOE United States Army Corps of Engineers Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan page 34 HEMET/SAN JACINTO INTEGRATED RECHARGE AND RECOVERY PROGRAM HEMET/SAN JACINTO WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Introduction and MMRP Requirements The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its implementing guidelines require public agencies to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for approved Environmental Impact Reports(EIRs) and Mitigated Negative Declarations(MNDs). In 2004, Eastem Municipal Water District(EMWD) certified a Final FIR and adopted an MMRP for the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program EIR (State Clearinghouse No, 2003121068). This MMRP is a supplement to the previously adopted 2004 MMRP and has been prepared in association with the 2007 Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Supplemental EIR (SEIR; State Clearinghouse No. 2006101023). The purpose of this MMRP is to ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures, verify that required measures effectively mitigate identified impacts and provide guidance for future actions. The MMRP provides overall mitigation monitoring requirements for the proposed Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program (IRRP) and the Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan (Plan), including identification of mitigation measures, proposed monitoring activities, timing, and responsibility for monitoring and reporting. EMWD will designate a mitigation compliance coordinator (MCC) to oversee implementation of the MMRP, including such duties as assigning qualified personnel for specific monitoring tasks, ensuring adequate documentation of findings, and modifying the extent and/or frequency of monitoring activities, if necessary (and with concurrence from EMWD). Approved changes in monitoring requirements will be duty noted in activity logs and monitoring reports, with this MMRP modified accordingly. The MCC will be ultimately responsible for verifying the implementation of required mitigation measures, although he/she may utilize existing materials to avoid duplication of effort. Specifically, this may include using documents such as technical reports (e.g., cultural or biological resource studies), construction progress reports or activity logs to document mitigation compliance. If authorized to do so by EMWD (and to the extent that such actions do not conflict with enforcement activities or regulatory guidelines of other applicable agencies), the MCC will also enforce the implementation of mitigation measures and monitoring activities in the field. This may entail interrupting construction activities to resolve conflicts over compliance issues. Documentation of specific monitoring activities will utilize a checklist type format, with additional narrative attached as separate sheets, if required. If requested by EMWD, summary mitigation monitoring reports will also be prepared by the MCC following the completion of project Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Page 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program November 2007 Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan MNIRP(continued) construction activities. Such reports will describe all monitoring activities during applicable periods, the success of associated mitigation measures, and any recommendations for future MMRP actions. Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP and Plan Summary Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP The proposed Hcmct/San Jacinto IRRP is located in the San Jacinto Valley in western Riverside County, and involves the infiltration of imported State Water Project water to recharge the San Jacinto Watershed Groundwater Basin (SJWGB). The SJWGB underlies the eastern portions of San Jacinto Valley, including the Hemet/San Jacinto area and a section of the San Jacinto River corridor. The proposed IRRP consists of constructing a number of recharge basins to accommodate the described infiltration, as well as related facilities such as extraction and monitoring wells, a water supply pipeline and pump station upgrades. The IRRP would be constricted in two (or possibly more) phases, with Phase 1 to be completed and operational by 2006 and Phase 2 to be completed and operational by 2010. This phasing schedule may be revised in response to a number of factors, including permitting requirements, construction-related constraints and project funding. HemetiSan Jacinto IRRP facilities that would be constructed during Phase 1 are addressed at a project level in the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP EIR (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15161), while Phase 2 facilities are addressed at a program level (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168). Phase 1 Facilities Under Phase 1, EMWD would use an existing pipeline to deliver State Water Project water to six proposed groundwater recharge basins in the San Jacinto River. Upgrades to two existing EMWD pump stations would be required to accommodate the increased flow to the recharge basin site. Six new wells also would be required, including three extraction (or production) wells and three wells used to monitor groundwater quality and levels. Refer to the HemetiSan Jacinto IRRP EIR for more detailed description of the proposed Phase 1 facilities. Phase 2 Facilities Under Phase 2, EMWD would increase the capacity of the proposed facilities by extending a new water supply pipeline to the recharge basin site, increasing the number of recharge basin clusters from two to five (for a two-phase total of 15 basins covering approximately 100 acres) and increasing the number of extraction and monitoring welts to eight and six, respectively. Refer to the Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP EIR for more detailed description of the proposed Phase 2 facilities. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan The SEIR evaluates environmental impacts that would result from adoption and implementation of the proposed Stipulated Judgment determining water rights (production rights) and the associated Ilemet/San Jacinto IRRP and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Page 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program November 2007 Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan MMRP(continued) Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area Water Management Plan (Plan). Together, the Stipulated Judgment and the Plan constitute the "Project" addressed in the SEIR. The Stipulated Judgment would allocate production rights among the Public Agency parties to the Stipulated Judgment. The Plan presents in more detaif the mechanism for allocation of production rights, and proposes an institutional and financial framework for managing water resources in the area at a program level, including proposed projects to replenish and conserve local water resources. Plan participants would include EMWD, Lake Hemet Municipal Water District(LHMWD),the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto, and private water producers. Participation in the Plan by private water producers would be voluntary, and no private producers would be mandated to participate. Although not a Plan Participant, the Soboba Band of Luisefto Indians (Tribe) also is involved in this process because Plan implementation would help achieve a water rights settlement with the Tribe. The goal of the proposed Project evaluated in the SEIR is to define the individual and collective rights to surface and groundwater of the four participating Public Agencies, together with the participating private water producers, within the Management Area; to provide a reliable drinking water supply through groundwater stabilization and conjunctive use within the service areas of the four participating Public Agencies; and to meet the needs and water rights of the Tribe. More specific objectives, as stated in the Plan and summarized in the SEIR, include the following: 1. Address pumping overdraft and declining groundwater levels 2. Provide for the Tribe's prior and par<vnount water rights 3. Ensure reliable water supply 4. Provide for planned urban growth 5. Protect and enhance water quality 6. Develop cost-effective water supply 7. Provide adequate monitoring for water supply and water quality 8. Supersede the Fruit-vale Judgment and Decree Specific MMRP Elements This MMRP includes the following elements: • Mitigation measures identified in the Elemet/San Jacinto IRRP EIR and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan SEIR (summarized where appropriate) • Mitigation monitoring and reporting activities • Timing of monitoring and reporting activities • Allocation of responsibility for monitoring and reporting These elements of the MMRP are identified and explained below in Tables I (IRRP) and 2 (Water Management Plan). Hemet/San Jacinto IRRP and Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Page 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program November 2007 r o 0 bA '� xz o ° Y w CA bA �y � •� .O •U cli v� p, � p o a to b U U ���jj ,•I 4_. 4-' U '�;y3U ci: N iC U >� cz A o ... � c .", U U m U (t� o � > 4)cz ti" Ll $ cz > � 00 ❑ O r o > o c p ar U o p e W rl U c3 Q cJ O o�A Lei cc CC c.3 y �cr .�".. ^ N Q O U 'v , U b p U c7 3 c'�i U i G .c •Cl b 0 A *� per � . , C-)i al ° fn 0 ro 3 C. Cd cd v� o v 3 00 o^ ° N ro co m o +, •> ° Q •� U ,C� N Zi b1l bb o ., y O >' T > y U c3 m o G 17-U rn p ~ o P cz -> P � ro a o a meq 3 U a o o N oct 7 N ,o o a a LC s 'D 00 �" U "m' '•=, c�'3 cn U ['" N y"' •.J. U g•9 U cN3 tpi O h ,0--+ H ''""' j 'V ,O J '.. .� c�] .U. n r > p ti ,� c�3 T �. 3 U y R ❑ a in, °° U p n 3 on U ° ° w 3 of yb > a 0 g °C° U ° U v 3 cJ N a ^ U 0 �J oa • U f . cl ^O ">1 b ,'� 33 N v� 'L7 3 J .. CS R. •N• a3 O •Ui �'� ^. J .r". 'zi 7a � wUP x �n t� 0 z o (A PazCdWro u u u � a to � � U C t+ 1 C O CA P, oU 'd 'a �r Z 0 r U .. CIS r cC cs H U P. ri a .0 c cz fl bD ON ON O t)� • N a'3 cC cd O .= a ^ a p U � o on �, p F Z o z CISy•°� ,o C 'b o o o y o ao ro 3 �'^. •v � � o •� o �. � o � o _ _ o b ° 0 0 R, o ° ^ o �' CIS v ct � � .. m �� w G1 �. ,2 Ca U c CC Y b ,n y; :d ° C U p O CD y —Cdao o ° d o Y o' cs oq a) .' al Q �i 3 CZ 1�r y cl v N o N ° '^ o u °' o n° n G R o fl o o b .°. 3 9 .b 00 0 '.pi w-' U •C cUNi `n a0- in 4�-' ? u y o a w a Cd P. >1-c3 �. U 4. r, U Gf:jJ ou..r ci a .� ,fl o "" ..O 'd •=� Ci C r, C�i :3 'a?+ U `� o G= ¢, p N c'� "'� X a0 rn of ^^' �"'^. cd c3 n . � 3 o ° ro cs ° c a o WI O. w -El c c U R'�.� O n zS v, '-' N .V ai , 'C3 4V •o j O., O y •^ ^-� �4 Cl,'6 'D N �c�'j " " U .- `�' O U 0 U m N, C O ^^. ^. cpJ W O O, ccd vi ;i JO .a Ci. a) - .c S, > O O-(ZI vpi '5 '.�. .9 5 'O OA a0.+ Y p0 CbO .�.�ic'�j % L'+ '~al G c3 U ° J G4 H c Q n ^ '.�. � 3 = .- 'd .j 'LS o y`d- o :: O. ci Ew ,Ly cl o ° � " W a 'n,.o o �y e� . P, U o .D N 8 C7 C,7 f=1 .tea �s .a 0, coo � .�� 0 o,.5 M fCl ; 0 0 09 � (yJ CJ O Ks O ' y t O � .-. O .-� 'b S7 .-� � ❑ � � N .ti �s-� ccf O F oAw 3 0 a 8 L b g o o ti o o, o ti N .O .". CU v U U M o o tin "0o a t to C: O mac.. �s Ep K `O " C `° o O oA.y m p . b a c c'A'C7 n 'cA ❑ cA n a ° o 'er N b C° a ti Y o o p 3 cA O .bA N U U «i cU. ,n ,y V cJ O O � O ti O A+ C 0 U O m `- U cC U bb b o � 'n 3 'S .o b e> � 0 o tyA �_ .� O i Y C CA.O W cJ "G � cd .� ..� [y vi U U ^ O U U L � . r p u 3 8 o 0 -2 p V] !;A •' vi :j V J O � 'J U ,--r-, i].,'C7 C O y') a 0 O V � '-. .- U •-., 5A b U u, U ro .: ;C 'b .b U d ti W'O O V 3." .-. O C OL W w O 40 � 3 b y ro Q C) v b _c y ° b � � 0 3 cl y b a o o o > aA o v o o .5 a• oA y '' .0 fl o - y 'a o �� 3 e y N o�A 3 ^o o .Y x a b y 3 f It p v 0 7 > � n� � .- oA � 0O ° ti C V 'Ud G 3 v > 2 0 .: oA en U _^ yy ci 3 i oo N °� 0 3 r - o o c ° oA fl V H a �— p 4- d o � O 3 0 o ; E m oA, 23cz b e q p bA NW o o b c o 40 . tics u 0 c p 3 o Ca as o °0° g Q a O as ' ctw > U e� em � o m o o ;r � ea api cj � nb � doy d 'on CW CIO V ftt O ,� U ed ;� e� y O O O at a 3 n Pa 3 p ro 4 o U U n o h U n fl y � 0 N �/ Fri H GA .fl >4 Qi cG cV .D O Iz ^ z W W R G Lcwd C f7 2 'C3 U U q cd r ' Y to U� .0 cd O G ti �' •� y O Q O ^ N ° � �• TS O w C M w EGA'—' O cG " '.� 'p w 'Y U oA (y cc3 a3 LXi 0 H O ^ ZU ' T� r a cl �° � a oci o G(�yy n o ❑ e) C r ° .� •� b w � bA 71 ° ch bb a°i as �? o .0 o •� c o C�l a 01 [ A o . 3 wLID .? tl v v Q, 3 ° a o o ' a�i N o 3 0 �� o ' s ° p 3 N p o a ° N v y ° o a " c s c x+ 3 .fl U cs ° ro Ui w G�^n npA r CL o t c i o Q > o ° x t w ° Q ^ o Nob r CHI > .D O c03 Q, 'a .0 j 'd r O ~ C G O N .O O Q O u ,� ^� Eb > N° .O r ^. t1.'y 3 o a • 0 3 m 3 CR �' U ti o o 'o e) p 7:s ❑ o 0 � wwC7 N aoww aP ti 3 w ockn $ ? o m Q O O wo N z° � o O c4 Q a O •�, .D cd C ..y P. 0. 3 rL4 vOi .D CL � W� c � a *" � _ o 0 0 o a cu to O ° c alo . Q c ? Aw o cl; oCd ^A G A ° ;N . r nq o 01) .. !n ° C/] O t1 a G b r " 0 3 o a+ Q ca 3 P. <n .�.D L.1�'. U w O v cC Y � .� •� W y b w MAY R woQ • ... tD 'U tz' cd yoCd Obq a w ° o a.0 o U W o c, c Q ° oil 0 G b +r••' W U 'G u cd ^-• ° '� ^ .^. U r 'L5 Q, y R Ti � Q' � � � Y '�� C� •. � � b4 cGa a r ° d oc-, rr1.' bbD 9 NCf) ¢ Q X _ cd G Q cn C1 V c'J �] .•.) .�, 1 N O O bA CZ 4] y .D p '.+ p Y s y y y O .ti G w •b q rn O Gi W W O W F`y bD O .� U cn p >i CG a� cd IJ y O H O U r�7- Sti+ O 73 al V `"�. :> r 4y `n Cq.: cO .fl00 r✓ cd 0 o 'm r3 ? a Y > m ° ° v G . o 0 o Q 0 ' Q.' ° r •Z;0 b a U c W �°.a fl cd ti 'D bq o c `'3 0 8 o h 3 3cd r C ,� Q 'cc c0 x Q «+ p o s. o o ^"� x cG r .^. O ❑ y N v o c Q H� V1 .fl � .D ca _, v, as •+ u .. t� ,._., �c N 6, O E� Cd z p Cd ® bo U 0 G ro a ro o ro a � v o -a ro an ' o � •— pn b N G as �Oy n N CGE' 0 30 •3 0 ' � .- 3: v ° G ob 0 ` ro ® � o o ° 0 ro n G a o ro ro al o v y ��., '� � ti '� !-•.'G o � n, � �s ro . o a� C ocq oGn Cs O ,-, U 'C7 Y U .vi. ro w, s. >' ro 'd o 0 0 5 . o ro ° a ° O a 0 n U a o w b c0i U b ' �, ;� 0 -0 t h e Y ° ro ° o G ° an ro '3 0 n b O ro > U c� •° ' ., O bA >' 'b cA H a, t,. •ti b h � ^.. p y., O ..p .~• '� b1J O O •^-• [1, a w O ro U u U CL "J O W b O c6 G bD > G y :: a O ..N. Gy rU. alO •`+- .Cll G v, ,ti-� J C7 0@ 0 d 0 0 o ro > G g a U a .•, � N � � 3 .� � N � � 0 4.. � 3 o G � G c� � 0 � � � o b `� � 0 � � 00 E v -, o 0 0 o rob G b o a0i s a x • 0 3n V a o 0� ro o ,o � nY_ o _ 0 3 ❑ Gap ' • as a � TO = � � � � o c �, 3 •r" a ?�` U o .� N O ,., JG cC U c3 o o ' fl 3 o a ° Z boa M Cd 0 a � bA ':- U �- c3 dq :• ro > •? p ti V C aroi o . 0 o y � � ro � � � .•. 0_ .� 0 � 3ro � " o .o � `" Gad ° � .^0. o �— �" u vo H ® x o a o cc z A. fa 7j Q z z m 3 :4 CC � 7n • c � V o U V o a an b o +� c ro a C pn a+ c0 Y O N 0 y V Ui '� ^ bA cO a a�i � O ti -•J f^'. o b 'a c3 O o ~ N � . ti bnca 3 o 'n 3 o 0 0 p o o o a U w N • c ^7 eci ^ U o o . o ,a o o •o •� cucz o o ro o Q o R .n a. v m Q o �� o a, 0 � � J O y 4ti in bn Q) cC W M W o FF� d O n oA o � ° o QL ° a) o ° VI 0 P6, ® mow u 'C 0j) .0 uID a e o r 0 o a o •y 0 •° y 0 ro o w o a o . L1 r o U W (� M o g 3 v 0 cu GH NaU ° cn cl wo c ^ on -a 3 � jEj m Q 0 ro o o v o a g o aj o 0 0 o o fl 0 .xv v ce o o �y o ' ° W • .� o ~ 3o- O o 0 ci 0 0 tu � a Z o M w Y d ? an m � Yo. ° co '.r. r oon cc U o o c =i cccY o cUi ; cXi cc ai M c. o o RS v v o o yn ® '� b o 3 0 G 0 y ccz oA O o^ ~ v o [ Z 3 3 e n 3 c ° Cc) o 0CC o F" o m > y ti S o a tia 3 . .� . cro ° Y> o pa :a G m G, oo o _ cz .° p p p cn w L .o U .fl a cc d e o 0 o c� G o ce o � a fl 0 o 141 i2 0 o ti o 3 w 0 b on en � � T > ° c am o � M y' ? W � 3 � o .� w .� ? � � o ono 0 0 = a N C� 3 'oAo :Z Q o ° ° o . o ? 3 T 0 G c ° o '> W p .0H v° o > .Y ,`n C`. •.Mi p a'_~+ O ® OU ^~' .b .J A O to r 0 W O p 0 r--i U :" O is ti 0 ." G H X = O O ® 'O 0 0 r7 y O W n fA .n 3 V W 3 0 o .� z z z v o n •� ;D N :O w ® G O a � o ce PW, z -cz W . cs y ° A. c o C cz a o N p � 0 ca q m ° m to m ° CZal o a ° S7i A O .^ O N H 3 ^ 0 9 N o Z y w n w o CZ 3 a ® q O m a bA y y U 0 N a' N O SA.q ° .0 o al c Gbw ° to c "3 o C13 'N U a u y .D m bq,rN�! cam: ^ p —' N .O CIDca oj a> a S ro o 0 ° m r�i a G .a 'o CIS:a^ � � •� � Y � y � � � '� .a by r '� •� w .� ,�� ° cOi � ;d .. O SP Cd m o m m -c m u ca o G G = W c ti G Ycd a ou CL) , ^� M rn y y q ^ O O G ,s' c.> = .. C> ci q o ro c ❑ r = Ca ^ o Y G ro 3 •o .� r a� " ^c `'� „G u n A n a ci e v� 3 m � ro x •— v c o °' ma ° v c ® `a b v ® ° ° o y O H � py cr PLI OC W 3 �AA 94 bA _ s 1. C b 0 'G O Z le v a N u b W .- U cz c o 3 q p 1 Cabo as � . w '.,, 0 6' ❑ cis c o p•' ro Q 0 c y v Y a N o ti o a chi ab o (13 z CJ o a ai m o 0 5 bl) ^ as44 N WO U •--; w iG S]. !7 LC ... (CCU L`.,�.,, O 0 p c4 •o tiQ o, � � � a, Ua, a _ /tj m �_ ❑ O u cC cn 72 J"i U ,O Q, rn U .`-. � U O U `" � '� iU. U 'U � p � .-� c>S � ro � •m CV' .`�. Q.� -• ¢ y c+d � i." ti ,i � ,•^�- c6 � r,Oj Vt .[ > � G p N ��, G 'O 'J ti R. O ,' p R, w :J 0 U r b b <C L* C '' e) •� OU m ti c^u � O O O c3 w Y > O 0 a U v� ^-. d" M U p C ,d y-+ 3 .B JJ L. , tE C r :J vi 6A L„ > J U U M4 C P., O U .^-� 4 V, 1] U .^. �' U m .v' ❑ 'O rn H cOJ b_ bA,.O ,0 p,• C1. QT U ui ^n `^�" ".W' w c� N N O -U� o cC CID p 5 v o O c c ^n� b e x C) y . a o cc z .A, O ,O •,;, ..n O ^, ,^� H O ,.Uy O O ."�- .y0 W84 E o o y ^ aso o o a OD y , o C a, > a)U 'O ' .+ r ti U 3 epi o c l °m o ro' Wo Uo 0 3 0 Y o b a y �? a U n 0 3 a, .ate y ❑ b •- �? O v� v> U �`" p Gz7 c� N �--� "� U .4+ vi U L W C%1 .O cz L o o P. h o 3 E 3 U E 8 o c U U a W ¢ T M [� 0 O z .. N z a � o &r z qN W ® U o xz o � S P•+ N O *' U o-r � W N Y U O O >_ C� U O ti O � � U U � Z >* O 0. H o z U a . �^ •bA V � '� `� ca t.y by•�, O � O e`� � 00 ^O Q O U ^. O W' O 'O N oA O N N ^A 0 CG U U p CI '� 'd O ' " O bA �n 'O b9 r r .*' 4U+ O C p > of) N b •-• cG G A CIO .0 Z E o o U ❑ pYG .� .G W RS b n. O > t� •ice-. O C" cd .n '� O'.p ^O WO" > s%-�0 W � v CA E~ "3 ^• N ,'~�" h C O ¢.;')1 p'b �' O b Z M) ® O 'b 'ri b .� U as _ O .+ cd vi O 9bA� O .O Ey R$ •++ U C13 m ' s = CA °A n ro x n r b b cG ti r 4•+ U �-• C=1 bL'b > C) �., ,^, W z5 �w, 4:, ... � 3 � � � � •� •;, '� � ,A p � r� � ,-. ^. N y O � U "" N G .: U � U = bA� � ,0, '� O N ✓� .� p :.. y O O O �0 bA•.. U of �. p"' N 'O " .'+ O .`". ^ U C U ti 8 v 3 a a p P <C a G 's 3 a ro cn 0 U OU m 7A C,3 (-Ia.) � a ;d 5 o al CIS O cG 'Qj J bA O W 5 W W O o ^ �n o c° W H i �i o o 0 o W ce �-y7 F■ v p o bn o y p o 'O y-+ CQ C3 '> cn c3 .^ O O l-..ti .0 bn N+ �J n ... ril I) v: cQ 'bn--+ 3 fn .�..il ?? vNi ,O U ++ U U .0 y� •�• ti bA .: 4, ti .�" N 4% ..+ bA eJ �, �s O C,3 �U C V :- 'p b >' 'U ^_ ti c0 y F.y❑y U 00 'O c3 � N N r O .: F X• w f-. ,.U.. .O _ 0 '-' U p CS ,.: In U N u LL�1 G > > V .G: W bU� xi, 7 O a". � Q� in NO 0 �_ U V' Y ;-. -" .�; .O O r '.« •••= N U U -C ,^`., 0.'i U O '' -. H � �, CA ar ) > � � °J 1;-, W > v Ei "' � 'C7 ..O .j r-t C J V C 1 bA `+ U R. `� O � � •^• '7 G �3 '^O'.� �+ ,^- ' .. :G N H cJ ..+ ..+ O bA.� O C •.,p., N O bn V_ T T `' U cS O �_ _ p "D " " 'c7 c3 b bn N J H T c1 cS c3 V O N .N .o d)A W._, rUn '[7 ti .� U ¢, U U n ?J _q bA bA Q r CL n H •^ �. c3 = ,�. > O U cIS 'C .'''i ti cOC p^c3 ~ c3 ~ N C U r, 'U ^. O O p > .2 cd U '0rl o w o U 03r2 Cd cs a) s a� w a ? z� v U eG z n t� ® ® v h V V c3 3 � 3 = an �. tq U c a C� to 0 3 C c> 3 eJ 4-i o nJ •� Ste^. .� .f'i O t3 .� .^. O t� C cz z � � cz 3 O � a � o •DU L �^ o "" � N ti' H o Y b a cz U F" bQ ° c .❑ C� UW � tiW G1 ❑ ; c � •� C O ai U U •� ^ 7D tD 0,0 a�.I .� O ✓ .� ,� iC v,� U ^ r-., L7 � v N M U U O � .� ^II. OU p r _ 0 ° a4 ti _ .—' .n .� O cJ bA c Cc -O O U to n N 1 , n oA � V] is `� (� O '� � r,� � Q � � U .C".' U '� T c5 cJ atC+ •r'-I '= G 'O c3 U U > i cs chi i]. a) U a. 00 U .: N ^7` G 'O_ w �n l-. .D bA.C O g = % UO r- �' $n4 4=a U .� O O U O U N .N.. Q C N F G Y W �-' f3, c� — {y cC O r^i� `� bA ,.., O o .� 'U„ ..UN. H �' N 7; -,� il, ® ^J F p '' .D U .T'. Y.D L '" '.N ^' y f1, .� c6 O V O OL at 'b N ct rs O o A U U Y pi c 3 U 3 . to o yit� vp ooc - d � i 31 F rq o w oA goj s '� r o tog �n. ❑ ^ Y o o s 5 a �+ 7 L U " U �, '—. R,a o U O ml = m ^ N O 4. a+ c3 o O G O .o •9 .^, V] 4-, ~�. c3 p �' w Q O to W 3 F ° o o o a o o o y o u tD > ei m CZM L o m U U p . a o 0 0 rn wCD Uc3 -,:I R P.UQU. Y a,� oto U Z U Ui o rr n c��, U v •.a � o ti pp N s ® m > W 7 H C. ro P1 ro V O G cq ® � z Q 14, 3 bn o ° cz C a C U O V cz to Q, vi O 10 10 `V N •U' rA ply ..••. roCC C 2 v O U U «CSyc N o O " O' on � � U ' U H ' Ow UM C '^"- ^Ua; `c ti Y ro rl cs o > o U cn N cz Q y ° Cs u a z 0 z N ¢ o r � a°i o aoi o o .� > C � w � � ° grow °' bA � wp � d p 5n � G � 3 .-. C) .0 RS A U C Y O O v T ' - cz o G � o a X c o r .S v : _ cs v W r) cs o ^ V] .w+ .� •-• A c� `' ,� rn U Q U 0A U � 'o •° r3 U y D °J o _� c a � P. ® ° .� U U RS T T u) O _ 4•. C U in bD �„ U b c3 c3 ti «O+ _^. 44r-. U ^ p .ti ��„ ti ." �-" U w xj �. O P. b x CD O = >O �.^O 4:, r" ro O •� C U O C r •O CZ CZ �,-: iC ° '"" O C A. ^O •l U O O O U �' P. m bA Ne u a ° rU0 cs° Q '� to o i o •o cq to N T M 'O •N O O O Cs O a N d5 0 .5 � a aroi «° 4 c� a N g w ❑ �� ° o � a ro ° g x ci ° a . ro o d °i '� c � .N p . O C `n U O � C ,� O 0 0 C b.0 cC X c3 'x ti oxl � o cp r a U 0 cC v O as m zz w 3 � CL'. � C'sp C64a Q u W - •7 = I-, U W I•••1 _ U cC E (� m C o c C 0 "s cz ej bn ro Q nn j p 73 0 ' a°i c p as a Qcz o nn on a py W F..i U N ^ cu - N to 0 CIS X OO j O N Cl A.. O cNa N `n 4. .cz G s-� � ca "' N bC's cu 'd b k ej b C U hA U .�, ."� F" ti q y o , " bo W v Ate. G U m X won 7 O U `^3 q .O C U U ti i, II. U C. U q ^ cu cu y W id b 0 .^, O, O UO cu N p,.k 'd •O O i o W U rn" 3 U .ocn �. w .U. ca U O T U CS N —•i c> "}, C �, 3 0 ,r-�[� C" O cJ ca "n 'U'-+ bn .�^. '.�. "C7 r. ti U r .: `'i CL m �y •yy cz c� U i, 7 J bn u O S� Cn �' e 3 ' a' 3 �p +� CA o > p an one 1czCZ oA �✓ a�i �+' o -UG �b aotn oN ..uu Cl) a lu nf ' °o on o _ ° 0 ® O rJ > � Y 7 U a o `wwO' ® mac o _ v CZ + v �, � �.• �, D U N O U n 4"' L O y can o 5n a� o p ^ � o � a o o 0 0 = P. /..F' on V O V .O o y N G V •G y U = .N tiCj = tp U t ti > o cr � CIS ai � 3 •� `.° rob o a3 _.-., a� � �,: P, p V ,r � ° y. ": 0 Y � ❑ V] � � .D v ro '� ;n 'in O bUfJ.� 'U q N O O '9 U -+ N.. F'. —. d4 oj O ,n ❑ C xi � cn G cC � bA ��" � ❑ L U iC V U q R5 CA y O �Uj c✓q1� yr" tz a a r o M o c� ca cl O Y cr .o o v b° ' c� CIS :R m o op.o r o '� L 0 a. ao k L o U 3 y + C,3 c U > U > " ° y c 3 o ei I o ^.0 t7 tj SM � - b o W Q o o o d an ^ a O L V V �^ cVi W U V o O �v', r W a o o '� k o (� W �- s o w a. n 3 O � � a � O > a � ° o w 0 .� ej N ••a v U O bA tiA O v 'O � z a3 � � w � 0 U s" U bp ° a i o 78 cl o ° D >� w; w o w e d oa N •zz; in ti U `G 1. c3 .b .^. O .� R. ct Oh bA o ' ❑ �' p o 04 0 �s o a 3 .r I O �n `" ti '° °v,' .� 'D ,fl M V r x cN 0. d n "�� U �' YO ' bb cj U cl cl r r co .b .� w O V ^. O iV 'O w U Y 30 '�3 71 'a O Fy bA., ° C e) V O G J C N 4-+ al 'D an+ 41 •p tkb -, d e w w q b ° > w b U ro b o °U' w ° ° o � � ° � b °° c 3 � w •� ° o bin c o ° 3 bA f1..0 n4 .. `) U U cJ <C .O p .V O ?^ b •' bA " ]!l 3 w cJ G U ,^. C «2 4--i n o o ° o i • v o O O y ° ° ° c r j o o ° ^>1 0 .ro "o > �' o � U (V 7A :d o > H � z ° o o � H 0 � � ❑ 3 y •- z i1..U. O CA 'ir Q Ky H 'O t= rn rr O U Y v z U I� o Cal lu y '" ti `� O QTj '' r bA• U U U U w o ° c r °3 o o 00 o r ti V� W ° bo ° - n o o ° a 3 � o Ucd U cC A ^ 'y U U r C7 U 'n . c3 i� vUi 'O U O i .� 7 �+`•+ ,�' 'D O U bA co to O R7 U cNV ° V ti ^ U A _ rr W 00 b U •'�" T 3 in c3 .^. ? N N Q > O i A. � 0 -d -4� 'n ocd ° o N o .C�j L) G 3 .;. c .� Z a a ° n �, •- ° Y cif ' CL to a a o > N do ° ° n i = bn ti a P G v ❑ 2 � ° by � ° •_ o ° ° o bn 3 o a-A 2 3 �° 4 o .� i m p co 0 o c> : c� ° a o c U x ^ rqC> N O O yu fly ^� W ® U (z a G O e m � y � y "CS bn ,-+y ui 0O u di 0O .Ny, 71 c �, � •o ao � � � O o on 3 �, ' � ,o on 3 C -�4 U O X J o O X ai o OU X nNj cJ � F U G cJ s.• ti Py G y ti Fy G y v� O Rf riyn N A _ y C � -G J V cz H Y n bO cz Q 3 71 U am , U O 0.0 U R. c O z � C3 U .D G y .L7 A '" G hA bo CC ro i. y s. R ti zed cr o .N ° y w a O F 3 ti ': cs A U � .0 '' 'O � '� > •cz d G .G C G y Q, O y A cG O T) in (C U cz y n ti G a 3 I alCil W W •n r O in w �' cy r '�' 4-i ] !.-, +t'] G k �G. O �"' v� U] al o '� -rs ..» d' O .fl •-C: Yn •�" i OO G c3 �., ,� ... U p j c 7 y .� � •= ° Q a oCO Y o 0 op cn- o O o m r R y 'L7 •; ° ...� cJ �, >, G �., Y a� 's^. G `4�� rz cd '" �' .fl G .G ` � G N � O � y � a 'c3 .�� � CQ aGi �., cU^.1 U �;) y '•� y U 0 ll `� U bD •n aDitl ,�, R. YO 'G bO rn -. 21 G � ^-� DA rc O '.; U s !'V .b G G cz N1 C.� G U Y �� .� .-, 'V 0 y CZ 0 •G (n .� a n .� a n G v� b r? 3 Ts y y R ' > c '� o ., y Y m y N bn Y cO o O o cl o 0 0 ® ° c e O y o r ° Z 2 n y y a n a 7 cO a> � m C ti y S n cu cu 0 O U O bb bA C CZU W U p O :C bA G ccz '> aGi �, 71 b0 o ., cJ "O b � G 0 U ca ti N O O oD 04 co cGu 4. CS. O ca U � � A W rN G U c3 C ti W U .— ca ® a . ca rl �s rs C U •C ca U .� O cf f? U . to G N p •`• -0 M O Q U G ai Q v U in U v 0... y "N �•.. ti by bA p O U U Y 'C3 U •.Cc ++ U •,'" .? > _> f1U. U bA V] rn cH V U C "� i o o c"i o ¢ cc 7:1 . oU o y .Q R 3 G i U x ti a G a� on ?^ o o �". Cam!] �� '=' .'O Ui � � :� O � '° m o t]. G '�, tU. o a>i OG � � .� bp� ro •� Ji -•cam CF,A al wN �' U •o U 'b N N C. bA U ^" >> "' .�' � �. A .`� ti U O Y > p r G is In w W .oeq .G o bn c a A Uw w � v o h (U o A O cs ? o ^ U 3 > w U b N C? �-. .� C b U cs U w �' ^r-i 'O ,cd 'xc, v, >, U cs G U ^ >' ca .. p b0 p -�-• c.. J o U U .'"U.. C G to fl w atn to Cl Uo� O m O O o 0 •� G U cU. C cs `a O cJ U �.,, ._ O •y ,-+ "aU•yy r U W •` �, O p C° CO U ,p f=c G U "' DO :. c O bn _ ai L - ro cn .� a c d an q .em u a - ry m fl g ❑ C O C A U •� cc o o o r o o O G a ^ U U oA 0 0 o ZC/: ti UI ° v ° C -o P--c's M l� N "J U O � O bA w �p, U V s. 0 d bn C i4 a GQ O bn O o o t 3 .. ono o a a o o U n o 0 o y 4 a o w o cu Cd Cd al t4 cq -zzl a 1r .� !Y �\f7"r O OH .✓'�j /n � O � N 0 R. «f N cC o on ul >.. Y bn .. a ..� r+ O ur P �''��. R ct 0 m av ' m cQ o .� 3 o o V k 01) a o 0 G V] s. O U +J•,'j C C". 00 'O O ;J Q 'CJ icf 'CJ ' <n R, bn .°� U � ... In U >•. -Q P ^-+ U F7 A " O � .'" 'D U � �" -fl ° (L) U W p ° C -0 P L0 -C a L� ° ob ° o ' � ob � M 3 � i � H °' ,y m ti m C.) p � " o p .3 ° clg o o o o ao dj ca 0. O .n +J cQ �cyn cUa „�' Z" i 'a •: 0 'Q r r 'p V on '�. bo �1 ° 4 _Y CL o T7 n4 . 4 w . to in..•.-� Uy U U 6" «5 `� C7 c0 y .^a cJ ti cv � L� N O N cn z to rq ® N W W P, � o � z C7 cl CI ® Q p ` o bA ® U a U a U 0 "D b M rWn bD n bC n .W. -C _ ro W r^ r o RS V "O � � b � CNJ 'CS O U Cl qWj U bA Z L 3 3 ` mow ° 0 b r bn a aka o p l � 0.1Uwro ..cdo 3 a V w W a Cd c ti) W V o cs as C o . ro S. _ 0 c o 0 c W � — 54 aj o U bA ° O �.rW+. cU3 C O C ° O c'� ti �'O •^-� C Cy 4= W v ca cd TJ v c] ��cc1 o a N an cd Eb as 7j NYb +� W o asa P. o o ^ o Wo CZ cs G o i p� " c> CD o . rW ro c •S na v .�_ '� o •O > •� b9 C C M O p W ti P. W ro A.'O O ro '<j 'C1 >r U P. cd bA a O aCp g r v vxU c�.l p `n A.OR. cd a bw O o o ° " i O cd " cd o C C o W p O O •c C7 d o r R r J cs U ° $ m W o ° 3 Eb S'�'. O cd A N .� C1. GJ 4 U '> ^J atiJ ^n v'1 W s-, U �'.t, C O b-0.✓cd V '4 O " f. O •" o U 0 C f^1 Y W O cy U CO ti b ro Op C W " •"i O T y ' J] C O '� O ✓� '.-�" L' *y U U cd �' U •C cC CIO .� bn > CL cs r n W o C v o ac V"' > N � JA N W r O Y O py U U LL a� �i ^O � o � Z y .a c � o o � ❑ Q 0 J-1 �, as •� ° � = va •� yo ya £-1 \/ CL (� w m Q �Dth U cat � asoyCIJc � ( n tj�•cl� W y o en T o as to ti W pay C4 to aj H at > a,'O tom, p O .� o a:+ O c3 cq G � 0 q ND U � ._ VN .. a O •'. V ,� :G W Exhibit "B" Eastern Municipal Water District's 2010 Addendum To The 2004 Final Environmental Impact Report Exhibit"B" 1:hi rf_R.�'tvf:7vlC:2i'AL FATER �14TRIC� Eastern Municipal Water District Proud of our past, 2270 Trumble Road • Perris, CA 92570 ReaJti for our future Tel: (951) 928-3777 • Fax:(951)928-6177 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery program Final Environmental Impact Report SCH#2003121068 Final FIR Certification Date: August 4,2004 Supplemental EIR Certification Date: November 21,2007 First Addendum Adoption Date: June23, 2010 Second Addendum Adoption Date: November 16,2011 This Second Addendum has been adopted by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) Board of Directors to address minor technical changes to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report (Final FIR) certified on August 4, 2004 and its Final EIR Addendum adopted June 23,2010(First Addendum). Subsequent to certification of the Final FIR in 2004, EMWD collaborated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)to change the proposed location of the groundwater recharge basins in order to further minimize potential effects to the federally listed San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR; Dipodomys merriarni parvus). This project change and its environmental effects were addressed in the 2010 First Addendum, which demonstrated that the proposed changes were minor and that no Subsequent or Supplemental EIR was required to address the changes. Changes to the Proposed Project In consultation with the USFWS, EMWD had agreed to shift the location of the proposed recharge basins from their originally approved location to a new location, further upstream. That change in location was addressed in the First Addendum. After EMWD agreed to the USFWS' requested basin location change, the USFWS requested another location change. More specifically, the USFWS requested that the proposed recharge basins be constructed in essentially the same location that was addressed in the 2004 Final EIR. EMWD has agreed to this change(see attached Figure 3). This return to approximately the originally proposed location for the recharge basins is within the original study area addressed in the 2004 Final EIR, and this proposed change was developed in collaboration ' Although a Supplemental EIR was certified by EMWD in November,2007,that Supplemental EIR did not address the proposed groundwater recharge basins that are the subject of this Second Addendum. Accordingly,this Second Addendum focuses on changes to the proposed project as described in the 2004 Final EIR and 2010 First Addendum. Page I of 6 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report(continued) with the USFWS and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(Corps)during the ongoing Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation. (Implementation of Phase 2 of the proposed project, although included in the 2004 Final EIR, is speculative and was not included in the Clean Water Act permits, the associated Endangered Species Act consultation, and/or California Fish and Game Code Section 1600 permit.) The currently proposed recharge basins would encompass approximately 35 acres, as addressed in the First Addendum and approximately 5 acres less than the 40-acre Phase I footprint addressed in the 2604 Final EIR. )Environmental Impacts Environmental impacts resulting from returning the proposed groundwater recharge basins to the originally proposed location would be similar to the impacts addressed in the 2604 Final EIR. This is because the proposed location is similar to the groundwater recharge basin footprint that was addressed in that EIR State CEQA Guidelines Criteria for an Addendum Per Section 15164(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent FIR have occurred." The changes to the proposed project(and the resulting change in environmental impacts)are considered minor, and a Subsequent EIR is not necessary because: ® No substantial changes have been proposed "due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects" (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162(a)(1)). The proposed recharge basins location change occurs within the overall project footprint previously evaluated in the 2004 Final EIR. To the extent that potential impacts associated with the basin have changed from what was addressed in the First Addendum, it is anticipated that the currently proposed recharge basins would have less of an impact on SBKR because the currently proposed basins are in an area now considered less important for SBKR than the habitat Iocated at the proposed site included in the First Addendum. Since the currently proposed site is essentially the same as the originally proposed site addressed in the 2004 Final EIR, the currently proposed site would have similar impacts to the recharge basin site addressed that EIR. ® No substantial changes have occurred "with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR... due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects of a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects" (Section 15162(a)(2)). The circumstances within which the proposed project would occur have not changed significantly. As noted previously, the proposed change in recharge basins location is in accommodation of a USFWS request and is intended to reduce, not increase,the environmental impact of the proposed project. ® No new information of substantial importance that was previously unknown shows that "ItJhe project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR" (Section Page 2 of 6 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report(continued) 15162(a)(3)(A)). No new information has come to light that would suggest that the proposed project would have previously undisclosed significant effects on the environment. It was disclosed in the 2004 Final EIR that the proposed project would have significant impacts on SBKR, and that these impacts would be mitigated through habitat conservation and enhancement. As a result of the USFWS consultation on the proposed project,the level of mitigation required for the recharge basins was increased over what was included in the 2004 Final EIR. That increase was noted in the 2010 First Addendum. The ongoing Section 7 consultation has even further increased the amount of land that would be enhanced, permanently conserved and managed to benefit SBKR. This increase in mitigation for a previously identified significant impact does not trigger a requirement for preparation of Subsequent EIR. ® No new information of substantial importance that was previously unknown shows that "[slignificant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR" (Section 15162(a)(3)(13)). The proposed project will not have substantially more severe impacts than were disclosed in the 2004 Final EIR and/or First Addendum. The EIR's assessment of impacts to SBKR was based on the acreage of habitat affected,and that acreage will be lower under the proposed project as revised than was addressed in the 2004 Final EIR and identical to the acreage addressed in the First Addendum. This reflects that (A) the revised recharge basins footprint is five acres smaller(35 acres now compared to 40 acres in the 2004 Final EIR), and (B) project effects to SBKR have been reduced. • No new information of substantial importance that was previously unknown shows that "fmlitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative" (Section 15162(a)(3)(C)). In this case, additional mitigation, above and beyond what was identified in the 2004 EIR and First Addendum, has been identified by the USFWS and is being adopted by EMWD. This mitigation, summarized below,replaces and supplements the mitigation for impacts to SBKR habitat that was included in the 2004 Final EIR and First Addendum. To the extent that the shift in the proposed recharge basins location can be considered an"alternative," EMWD is adopting an alternative that would further reduce one of the significant(but mitigated)effects of the proposed project. • No new information of substantial importance that was previously unknown shows that "[mlitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effect on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative" (Section 15162(a)(3)(D)). As noted above, additional (different) mitigation has been identified, and EMWD has agreed to this mitigation. Revised Mitigation Mitigation Measures Bio-3 and Bio-6 from the 2004 Final EIR are deleted from the proposed project and replaced with the following measures developed in consultation with the USFWS. For purposes of mitigation tracking, these measures can, together, be considered as a new mitigation measure"13I0-11," fi which replaces the"BIO-I I"mitigation measure described in the First Addendum. Page 3 of 6 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report(continued) Impacts to SBKR habitat will be offset through conservation and management of approximately 186 acres of land along the San Jacinto River, as described in the Reinitiated Biological Opinion for the Hemet-San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program, Riverside County, California (USFWS 2010) and approximately an additional 260 acres of EMWD and LHWD properties along the San Jacinto River. All EMWD-owned properties within the conservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement(s) that names the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) as the beneficiary. The language in the conservation easement(s) will have the written approval of the USFWS Carlsbad Field Office prior to project implementation. ® The RCA shall serve as the reserve manager for the conservation areas and provide annual habitat management oversight on the property pursuant to Section 5.2 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) (Dudek and Associates 2003). The RCA shall maintain the biological values on the site, which now support alluvial scrub vegetation and associated upland habitat. The habitats on the property also support known populations of SBKR, which the RCA shall manage in accordance with the species-specific management activities detailed in Table S-2 of the MSHCP. EMWD will provide a one-time endowment in the amount of approximately $1.5 million to the RCA, in advance of ground disturbance by the project, to fund their perpetual habitat management of the conservation areas; ® EMWD will prepare a Restoration Plan (RP) and implement the RP in areas that are heavily degraded and do not now support suitable SBKR habitat, as described in the Biological Opinion for the project. The RP will be reviewed and approved by the USFWS Carlsbad Field Office prior to initiation of project construction. ® To encourage SBKR movement between the active floodplain and habitat outside of the flood control levee, EMWD will construct three`habitat ramps" leading from the floodplain to the top of the levee.Two of these habitat ramps will also be used for vehicle access,but all ramp surfaces will be constructed of native soil (e.g,, they will not be topped with decomposed granite, gravel, or any other"all-weather"surface)to encourage use by SBKR. ® No new permanent structures will be placed in the floodplain,excepting pipelines to deliver water to the recharge basins. ® Prior to commencement of clearing and/or grading for each project element in suitable habitat, the construction footprint will be flagged by a USFWS Carlsbad Field Office-approved biologist familiar with SBKR habitat requirements (SBKR biologist) to delineate the boundary of the construction footprint. The name, contact information, and qualifications of the SBKR biologist will be submitted to the USFWS Carlsbad Field Office for approval. All movement of construction contractors, including ingress and egress of equipment and personnel, as well as any staging and storage areas, will be limited to the designated construction footprint. A SBKR biologist will be on site during initial clearing activities and on at least a weekly basis during the remainder of construction activities to ensure that no impacts occur outside the construction footprint. Any material used to delineate the project boundary will be removed once construction is completed. Page 4 of 6 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report(continued) ® To minimize and track incidental take of SBKR during routine repairs (e.g. pipeline repair) in suitable SBKR habitat outside of the flood control levee, EMWD will restore any habitat impacted by the repairs in a manner consistent with the RP. a EMWD will impact no more than one acre of suitable SBKR habitat annually rnrtside the flood control levee. Impacts will be photographed and described in a report submitted to the USFWS at the end of each calendar year. ® To limit impacts to SBKR and other species,EMWD and the SBKR biologist will ensure that any lighting used during facility construction or operation,including well sites, is directed away from Conservation Areas or any other surrounding habitat. ® To limit indirect impacts to SBKR habitat downstream of the recharge basins, EMWD will clean basins of fines regularly and specifically prior to the rainy season. ® The SBKR biologist will have the authority to halt work if it is determined that the construction activities have exceeded the authorized footprint or minimization measures are not being followed. ® Best Management Practices to prevent discharge of hazardous materials associated with use and maintenance of construction equipment will be followed pursuant to the guidelines in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District management plans. CLOSING With the adoption of this Second Addendum, the HemetlSan Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final EIR is modified to reflect the currently proposed recharge basins' location and SBKR mitigation as discussed above. REFERENCES Dudek and Associates. 2003. Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan dated June 17, 2003. Prepared for County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency. Eastern Municipal Water District(EMWD). 2004. Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse Number 2003121068. Cover date: July. Certified:August 4. 2007. Hemet/San Jacinto Water Management Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Cover Date: Septem her. Certified:November 21. HELIX Environmental Planning Inc. 2006, San Bernardino kangaroo rat and Los Angeles pocket mouse presence/absence trapping studies for the San Jacinto 516-acre proposed project in Riverside County, California (APN's 430-0808-012, 430-090-013, 430-110-012/013/015, 403-120- 010/010/011 1/012)Submitted to USFWS June 20. Page 5 of 6 Second Addendum to the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Final Environmental Impact Report(continued) 2005. Presencelabsence trapping studies for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat on the Hemet/San Jacinto recharge and recovery program, San Jacinto. Prepared for Eastern Municipal Water District.Submitted to USFWS June 2. 2003. Presence/absence trapping studies for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat on the Hemet/San Jacinto recharge and recovery program, San Jacinto. Prepared for Eastern Municipal Water District. Submitted to USFWS February 5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Carlsbad Field Office. 2010. Reinitiated Biological Opinion for the Hemet-San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program, Riverside County, California_FWS-WRIV-08B0 106-1O170650. Page 6 of 6 r[2LLR.ff'"'�FaL X"ieA Y yzy t .? a.F i S v i 1 MM `ifs 4� .J � F �a� �t�� �^°#�' j�� 5� -S'1a`E'er. ! .Y,2'4���+ Y Y✓ .: � • MY�1 • w 1 • �. �� 9 _ - �" � �`r'"a T^�+f��#.�a�� I d3 C"4 � I IR d� • DNA 1'a '1t ut',+ r y 5�� ..< KA ,des yefwyw�! f 'hYV 54X q ri YS ay d"' @gAa3 Moat T �T `F g'•1 A j r i y • rfi $ f y,K°1�' `�3. wr�. W3,n"„' "'C {i✓)rJ !1 y & �x)�!1'', lin n cu tow My gM vat Y+? `�tyy���C='L.• i #' �..T �a„g• /J = '� `'�.� .-� i '}iF "�' �.-i{,{�),y�� .�.tdt TY •, rt f.. i T] i .r; _ y �1ii ♦ qq a y ' r�F,. - '4 l � e.,. >Raas .N� � y�Q� °4• " .;�` � �' � s 1 a i � e1 ti W f- a i m t 'p. s as+Y.�♦ 4 ,�ts,,,,y •' 6s r '.,x a '" ,u a1 U: i ."�o-, ."F 3 y l.i �`✓'� eC 4 *siT'} '' 1 9 J T r M r i i z x ♦ a 4 a. • mod•♦ t ((}i� z'-atP tP_� _ ;,•- s z d� i .d f 1�. y.� ); 0%1' ' .R g' ri sar Jet ,age s { ax '"i 'r♦�s F tm sr,,,,;, 'v1 A. yifA-fF�• ..-jai y 1 rT �♦ i /f -•�.'l i v N ,p�"� 7 J I .r r 0-1 a .. 41 1, x ♦ a t i r i j F v e ,r �Is1i r, J t 7) x I ! / r t e ° bt a E 9 i} ]� i� _ r a.� �„ t'1)1 it •1 1 :� 'szti I �y ki.'Tt�S�ppi 19��♦ V° [ aT ♦�i �. { 1 {t r i Ft IV .� i�,ai e♦n�u(Iti i I � !dam f • .:r>... Mt /.M f^'T^t �..0 t i "'A A i� '', t! i 4•Ir ,Ns!17�,� �lj W r — . P X 1�F x,. : ram• ai 1 1{ L , .S 1 .:�.1 4 ti � ,zhs i• L a+:(:, � � afilf 4 ; ti Y _z » � Exhibit "C" Eastern Municipal Water District's 2011 Addendum To The 2004 Final Environmental Impact Report Exhibit"C" RtveRSio�omr Qj CEQA-7 NOV 17 2011 L ARRy W.WARD.CLERK N"GE OF DETERII�lNATION eY —ty mere _ U46Yet To: r Office of Planning and Research From: Eastern Municipal Water District 1400 Tenth Street 2270 Trumble Road P.O. Box 3044 Post Office Box Sacramento,CA 95812-3044 Perris,C/� CLERK tc Deiermtnaticn Rsd per R.C.21152 r County Clerk POSTED County of Riverside NOV j J 2011 2724 Gateway Drive 7 P.O. Box 751 Removed: 2-- G, ` Riverside, CA 92502-0751 8y. ept. County of RWerside.r Ca(i(pmie Subject Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 1152 of the Public Resources Code Project Title: Hemet/Son Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program Second Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse Number: 2003121068 Contact Person: Karen Hackett Phone Number/Ext:(951)928-3777, Extension 4462 Project Location: The proposed project is located within or near the Cities of San Jacinto and Hemet, Riverside County, California,Township 5 South, Range 1 West, near Section 31, SBBM ProjectDescription: As part of the Hemet/San Jacinto Integrated Recharge and Recovery Program project, Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) proposes to construct groundwater recharge basins and appurtenances to allow water to Infiltrate the groundwater aquifer and to provide a reliable drinking water supply through groundwater stabilization and conjunctive use within the eastern portion of EMW D's service area. The groundwater recharge basins and appurtenances were proposed in the original Environmental Impact Report(EIR). Subsequent to certification of the Final EIR,and as a result of consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS), EMWD agreed to shift the location of the proposed recharge basins and the First Addendum was completed to address the requested basin location change, Since completion of the First Addendum, USFWS has requested another location change of the proposed recharge basins. The USFWS has requested the proposed recharge basins be constructed in essentially the same location as was proposed in the 2004 Final EIR. The currently proposed recharge basins would encompass approximately 35 acres, as addressed In the First Addendum,and have a footprint of approximately 5 acres less than the 40-acre recharge basins footprint addressed in the 2004 Final EIR, Mitigation Measures Blo-3 and Bio-6 from the 2004 Final CEQA-7 EIR are deleted and replaced with a new Mitigation Measure Bio-11 which replaces the Bio-11 Mitigation Measure proposed in the First Addendum. The shift in the proposed recharge basins location in accommodation of a USFWS request would further reduce the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Additional mitigation,above and beyond what was identified in the 2004 EIR and First Addendum, identified by the USFWS, replaces and supplements the mitigation for impacts to SKBR habitat that was included in the 2004 Final EIR and First Addendum. The Second Addendum has been prepared in accordance with§15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. The second minor project modification will not 1)constitute a substantial change in the project as originally proposed;2)lead to substantial changes in the circumstances underwhich the project will be undertaken;or 3)constitute new information of substantial importance. Accordingly,a Second Addendum was prepared as opposed to a negative declaration or subsequent environmental impact report. This is to advise that the Eastern Municipal Water District has approved the described project on November 16, 2011 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project; i. The project{m will, ❑will not)have a significant effect on the environment. 2. m Two Addendums and an Environmental Impact Report were prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA 3. Mitigation measures fm were,c were not) made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting and monitoring plan{m was, c was not)adopted for this project 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations{s was, c was not)adopted for this project. 6. Findings (m were, o were not)made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the First and Second Addendums, and Final Environmental Impact Reportwith comments and responses,and/or record of project approval are avallabletothe General Public at: Eastern Municipal Water District 2270 Trumble Road Perris, CA 92570 Ia"Date: I l I't 1( J� -- ph Lewis Director of Engineering Services Date Received for filing at©PR: STATE OF CAUFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT Receipt#: 201100301 State Clearinghouse#(if applicable}: 2003121068 Lead Agency: EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Date: 11/17/2011 County Agency ofFilhig. Riverside Document No: 201100"1 Project ride.- HEMETJSAN JACINTO INTEGRATED RECHARGE&RECOVERY PROGRAM 2ND ADDEN Project Applicant Name: EASTERN MUNICIPAL 11/ATER DISTRICT Phone Number. Project Applicant Address: 2270 TRUMBLE ROAD PERRIS CA 92572-8300 ProjeciApphcont: Loyal Public Agency CHE•CKAPPLICABLE FEES: ❑Environmental Impact Report ©Negative Declaration ❑Applicalron Fee Water Diversion(State Water Resources Control Board Only) ❑ProjectSnbjeu to Certified Regulatory Programs X©County Administiateon Fee $64.00 ®Project that is exempt from fees(DFG No Effect Determination(Form Attached)) ❑Project that is exempt from fees(Notice of Exemption) To£al Receivers $64.00 Signature and title ofperson receiving payment; Notes: t STATE OF CALIFORNIA•THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT Receipt# 200400897 Lead Agency: EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Dare: 08/09/2004 CounryAgencyofFttiag: Riverside Document No: 200400897 Project Tttle. I-IEMETISAN JACINTO INTEGRATED RECHARGE RECOVERY PROJECT Project Appmeant Name: EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Phone Number: Project dpplicamt lddress: 2270 TRUMBLE ROAD P.O.EOX 8300 PERRIS,CA 92572-8300 Project Appiicant: Local Public Agency CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: } X❑Environmentat Impact Repoa $8%00 ❑Negative Declaration ❑Application Fee"Voter Diversion at,,,Water Resources Control Board Only) Project Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs Q County Adminestrattoa Fee -- $54.00 ❑Project that is exempt from fees iDeMinimis Exempiton) ❑Project that is exempt fronrleee(Notice of Exempnon) Total Received 19I4.00 Signature and title ofperson receiuiug payment: Na[es: Exhibit "D" Phase I Facilities Agreement Exhibit "D" AGREEMENT REGARDING PHASE 1 FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COST AND USE; COST AND USE OF UNUSED TRIBAL WATER RECITALS..................................................................................................................................................................3 AGREEMENT.............................................................................................................................................................9 A. RECITALS INCORPORATED......................................................................................................................9 B. DEFINITIONS.............................................................................................................................................. 10 1. Additional Facilities.......................................................................................................10 2. Base Production Right...................................................................................................10 3. Existing Facilities ..........................................................................................................10 4. Phase 1 Facilities ...........................................................................................................10 5. Prorata Share..................................................................................................................10 6. Revised Prorata Share....................................................................................................10 7. Settlement Agreement ...................................................................................................I 1 C. CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF PHASE IFACILITIES.......................................................................... 11 1. Role of EMWD..............................................................................................................11 2. Construction Cost Estimates..........................................................................................11 3. Biological Mitigation.....................................................................................................12 4. Title to and Use of Phase 1 Facilities ............................................................................13 a. Imported Water Conveyance.............................................................................................................._-.............. 13 b. Recovery/Extraction Facilities................................................ ............................... ..................................... 14 (1) Allocation......_........... .............. _.......................................,..................,............................................ 14 (a) 7,500 afa Capacity............................................................................................-........................ 14 (b) Excess Capacity.........................................................................................................-................ 14 (c) Limit on Use..... .............._..... . _..__......_......_.._..............._............ ......... 14 .................... (d) Obligation to Use.................................. C. Distribution Facilities................................................................................................................---.................... 15 d. Budgeting Costs of Use....----......_.._........................_......................................................................................16 e. Invoicing by EMWD and Watermaster..._...........................................................................................................16 (1) Import Conveyance and Recharge Facilities......................................................................................... 16 (2) Phase 1 Recovery Facilities and EMWUs Distribution system......................................................... 17 5. Nonappointment of Watermaster or Failure of Settlement Agreement.........................17 D. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS REUSE OFTRIBE'S UNUSED WATER............................................17 1. Settlement Payments to or for the Benefit of the Tribe.................................................17 2. Payment of Purchase Price of MWD's Imported Water...............................................18 3. Use of Unused Tribal Water..........................................................................................18 E. SHARING TRIBAL WATER SHORTAGE OBLIGATIONS..................................................................... 19 R CONDITIONS PRECEDENT...................................................................................................................... 19 G. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS................................................................................................ 19 H. TRANSFER OF INTEREST tN CAPACITY OR UNUSED WATER.........................................................20 1. Failure to Pay.................................................................................................................20 I. TERM...........................................................................................................................................................21 1. Initial Term....................................................................................................................21 2. Withdrawal by Party......................................................................................................21 3. Dispute Resolution.........................................................................................................21 J. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS................................ ...........----......... ....... ................ ......................21 1. Debt Limitation..............................................................................................................21 2. Counterparts...................................................................................................................22 3. Notices...........................................................................................................................22 -1- 4. Amendments; Modifications..........................................................................................24 EXHIBIT A- LIST OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES..............................................................................................26 EXHIBIT B- LIST OF EXISTING FACILITIES....................................................................................................27 EXHIBIT C- ESTIMATED COST OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES...................................................................28 EXHIBIT D- FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS...........................................................................................................29 A. CONSTRUCTION.AND ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES PAYMENTS....................................................................29 B. SETTLEMENTPAYMENTS...............................................................................................................................30 C. CONSTRUCTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES PAYMENT SCHEDULES..................................................31 -2- AGREEMENT REGARDING PHASE 1 FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COST AND USE; COST AND USE OF UNUSED TRIBAL WATER This Agreement is entered into this day of 2011, between the Eastern Municipal Water District("EMWD"), the Lake Hemet Municipal Water District ("LHMWD"), the City of Hemet ("HEME`IT"), and the City of San Jacinto ("SAN JACINTO"), sometimes collectively referred to as the "Public Agencies" or "Agencies" or "Parties." RECITALS I. Within the Hemet/San Jacinto Valley, there are a series of groundwater basins, i.e., the Canyon, Intake, Upper Pressure and Hemet Subbasins, that are the subject of a groundwater management plan ("WMP") being developed by EMWD, LHMWD, the Cities of Hemet ("HEMET") and San Jacinto ("SAN JACINTO"), and a number of private pumpers (all of whom produce groundwater from one or more of these basins) to address the problem of overdraft. It is anticipated that demands of growing populations will result in increased production of groundwater by EMWD, LHMWD, and the two Cities ("Public Agencies") that will exacerbate the overdraft if not addressed. 2. The Soboba Band of Luiseho Indians ("the Tribe") has asserted a claim of senior rights to the surface flows of the San Jacinto River and to the groundwaters of the Canyon Sub-basin and Intake portion of the Upper Pressure Sub-basin. In addition, the Tribe has asserted claims for money damages against (a) the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California ("MWD") for the alleged wrongful diversion of surface and groundwaters away from the Tribe's reservation as the result of the construction of the San Jacinto tunnel portion of the -3- r` MWD Colorado River Aqueduct and (b) EMWD and LHMWD for alleged wrongful groundwater production and surface water diversions and otherwise wrongfully interfering with the Tribe's water rights. 3. The Tribe, the federal government as Trustee for the Tribe, MWD, EMWD, and LHMWD have reached agreement on a resolution of the Tribe's claims to senior water rights and for money damages in a document titled the"SOBOBA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT" ("Settlement Agreement"); Congress has approved the Settlement Agreement by adopting FIR 4841 which has been signed by the President and has become law. 4. The WMP is intended to restore and protect the Sub-basins described above by, among other things, implementing the Settlement Agreement described in the preceding paragraph. It will be administered by a Watetmaster consisting of a board composed of one (1) elected official selected by each of the Public Agencies and one (1) private pumper representative, to be appointed by the Court pursuant to a Stipulated Judgment for Adjudication of said Sub-basins which is expected to occur before the Phase 1 facilities that are the subject of this Agreement are operational. In the event that the effectiveness of the Settlement Agreement is delayed or does not become effective, it is the intent of the parties that the terms of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in effect. 5. The Settlement Agreement provides, in part, that: a. The Tribe shall have a quantified water right of 9,000 acre-feet per year, subject to certain restrictions; -4- b. A groundwater management plan("WMP") shall be developed and implemented by EMWD and LHMWD in cooperation with other groundwater producers in the area to address the overdraft and recognize and account for the Tribe's prior water right; C. EMWD on behalf of the WMP shall enter into a contract with MWD whereby MWD sells to EMWD an average of 7,500 acre-feet of untreated replenishment water ("Imported Water") each year to be recharged in the Intake portion of the Upper Pressure Sub-basin and/or Canyon Sub-basin so as to be available for production by the Tribe; the Contract with MWD terminates on December 31, 2035, but is subject to the requirement for good-faith negotiations regarding an extension which, when added to the original term would provide for a total term of fifty (50) years. d. MWD will have the right to deliver this water at any time of the year which necessitates expansion of and additions to EMwD's existing facilities to the point where deliveries can be made by MWD at the rate of 42 cubic feet per second and recharge facilities can accommodate such flows and to provide pre-delivery storage of up to 40,000 acre-feet. e. The Tribe has agreed to limit the exercise of its quantified water right to a maximum of 4,100 acre-feet per year for 50 years as provided in the Settlement Agreement, Exhibit "I," and limit the use of such water to lands within the Reservation and lands now owned or hereafter acquired by the Tribe contiguous to the Reservation or within the Basin, i.e., the Canyon Sub-Basin and Intake portion of the Upper Pressure Sub-Basin, as depicted on Exhibit "B" (Map) and described in Exhibit"C" to the said Settlement Agreement. The unused portion of the Tribe's water right will be available for use by the Public Agencies. f. In the event that the Tribe is unable to produce up to 3,000 acre-feet per year of its water right from the Canyon Sub-basin, and the balance from the Intake Sub-basin(as -5- that right is limited by Exhibit"I"to the Settlement Agreement) because of a lack of water, EMWD and LHMWD shall deliver the shortfall. g. The Federal Government will establish a Restoration Fund with two (2) appropriations totaling$10,000,000.00 to pay or reimburse costs associated with constructing, operating and maintaining the recharge facilities required to recharge the MWD water. EMWD, on behalf of the WMP, shall submit an expenditure plan for the use of said funds, and, upon approval of the plan by the Secretary of the Interior, may, on behalf of the WMP, expend or be reimbursed monies from the Restoration Fund as provided in the plan. h. The Tribe shall be paid $7,000,000.00 by the Parties to this Agreement within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date the Settlement Agreement becomes effective. In addition, within one hundred twenty (120) days of the release of funds from the Restoration Fund to EMWD, on behalf of the WMP, the Tribe shall be paid a sum equal in amount to the funds so released. 6. The existing EMWD facilities, as expanded and increased in capacity to accommodate a flow rate of 42 cfs, and the recharge and recovery facilities to be constructed for recharge of the MWD water, are known as the"Phase 1 Facilities"; the cost of the expansions, additions and construction is currently estimated to be$21,504,000.00. In addition to these capital costs, an additional $3,302,000.00 will be required to fund environmental related activities to obtain the Clean Water Act's Section 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, necessary to construct and operate the Phase I Facilities, including the recharge ponds. Specifically, S2,084,000.00 will be required to create an endowment fund to be held by the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Authority; and $1,218,000.00 to fund the -6- environmental mitigation costs beyond the endowment held by the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Authority. 7. For purposes of the WMP, the Public agencies have been assigned the following prorata shares of Base Production Rights (as defined herein): LIIMWD - 34.2%; EMWD - 33.7%; HEMET - 19.6%; and SAN JACINTO - 12.5%. The Public Agencies have agreed that these prorata shares shall be used for the purpose of generally allocating joint financial obligations required to implement the WMP. Although these prorata shares will remain fixed, subject to a Party's right to withdraw after all financial obligations described in Exhibit "D"have been satisfied pursuant to Subparagraph I.2 below, except as noted above, it is anticipated that each Public Agency's actual production will fluctuate over time in response to needs of each Agency's system and customers as well as conditions within the Management Area. In addition, one of the methods utilized in the WMP to address the overdraft is to reduce overtime, the amount of groundwater each Public Agency may pump from the Management Area free of the obligation to pay a Replenishment Assessment (as defined in the WMP). The WMP states a goal of eliminating the overdraft. The funds raised from the payment of Replenishment Assessments will be utilized by the Watermaster to purchase and recharge Supplemental Water(as defined in the WMP). Neither the fluctuation of an Agency's actual production, nor any adjustment in its right to pump free of Replenishment Assessments shall increase, decrease or otherwise alter its stated share of obligations assumed under this Agreement. 8. EMWD has offered to make its "Existing Facilities" (as defined herein) that form the base of the "Phase 1 Facilities" (as defined herein) available to the Watermaster for the purpose of implementing the WMP on a permanent basis subject to the capacity reservation for existing customers in the amount described in Subparagraph C.4.a.(I)below, and to join with the -7- other participating Public Agencies to share the costs of the construction of the "Additional Facilities" (as defined herein) required to provide the necessary capacities, said sharing to be based on percentage shares stated in this Agreement. The Parties understand that the Phase 1 Facilities will be needed to provide the capacity to import water required to offset current overdraft and to provide water to accommodate future growth even if the Settlement Agreement is not finalized. The Parties desire that the provisions of this Agreement relating to the financing, construction and operation of the Additional Facilities shall be unaffected by the fate of the Settlement Agreement. 9. EMWD has assumed responsibility for providing the financing for the construction of the Additional Facilities through the issuance and sale of bonds and EMWD has assumed responsibility for the construction of the Additional Facilities. In order to share in the benefits of the Additional Facilities, the other participating Public Agencies agree, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit "D" of this Agreement, to pay to EMWD an amount equal to their respective prorata shares of the financing obligations incurred by EMWD. 10. The Parties desire that the Phase 1 Facilities, upon completion of the Additional Facilities, will be operated as a single unit and agree that it is therefore appropriate that EMWD hold title to the Phase 1 Facilities and that in consideration of the agreement by each participating Party to pay to EMWD that Party's stated share of the financial obligations assumed by EMWD, EMWD is willing to hold title to the Phase 1 Facilities in trust for the Public Agencies hereto during the term of this Agreement and to make capacity in the Phase 1 Facilities available according to the priorities established herein by the parties. -8- if. Each of the Participating Agencies is willing to provide its prorata share of the $7,000,000.00 payment due to the Tribe on the conditions as to the terms set forth in Exhibit 12. Each of the Participating Agencies is willing to provide its prorata share of the $3,302,000.00 due to the environmental related costs on the conditions as to the terms set forth in Exhibit"D." 13. The Public Agencies hereby agree to propose to the Watermaster when the latter is appointed by the Court, that the Watermaster shall assume full responsibility for any participating Agency's payments required under Recital 9 and Recital I above that remain unpaid at that point; but if the Watermaster is not appointed or declines to assume such responsibility, then each Party shall continue to be responsible for its prorata share of said required payments. 14. Recital 5 above describes the provisions in the Settlement Agreement regarding the Tribe's water right and the purchase from MWD by EMWD, on behalf of the WMP, of the 7,500 afa to be made available to the Tribe. Each participating Agency is willing to assume its responsibility for the payment of its prorata share of the cost of such water purchases, either indirectly through payments by the Watermaster on its behalf, or directly by reimbursement made to EMWD. AGREEMENT IT IS THEREFORE AGREED, A. RECITALS INCORPORATED The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. -9- B. DEFINITIONS 1. Additional Facilities - the additions and expansions to the Existing Facilities described on the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "A" necessary to provide 42 cubic-feet per second delivery and recharge capacity for the Imported Water and recovery wells. 2. Base Production Right - for each of the Public Agencies, the following right based upon average production during 1995 - 1999, as adjusted: LHMWD - 34.2%; EMWD - 33.7%; HEMET - 19.6"k; SAN JACINTO - 12.5%. 3, Existing Facilities -EMWD's Grant Street ponds and pipeline thereto and that portion of EMWD's raw water system that forms the base component of the Phase 1 Facilities as described on the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit. "B 4. Phase 1 Facilities - collectively, the Existing Facilities and the Additional Facilities. 5. Prorata Share - the prorata share of each Public Agency shall be its relative share of the total base production rights of the Public Agencies, expressed as a percentage as follows: LHMWD - 34.2%; EMWD - 33.7%; CITY OF HEMET - 19.6%; CITY OF SAN JACINTO- 12.5%. 6. Revised Prorata Share - a revised determination of prorata shares of participating Agencies after one or more agencies opts out at the end of the term. -10- V. Settlement Agreement- the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Settlement Agreement between the Tribe, the federal government as Trustee for the Tribe, MWD, EMWD and LHMWD. C. CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF PHASE 1 FACILITIES 1. Role of EMWD EMWD, on behalf of the WIMP, has undertaken the financing of the construction of the Additional Facilities through the issuance and sale of bonds and will undertake the construction of the Additional Facilities. EMWD shall act as the lead agency for the purposes of completing any review of such facilities required under the California Environmental Quality Act and for obtaining and maintaining any permits or approvals required from any local state or federal governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project and for implementing, g monitoring and compliance with respect to CEQA mitigation except to the extent such duties are assumed by the Watermaster. The other Public Agencies shall satisfy any requirements imposed on there as Responsible Agencies by said Act. 2. Construction Cost Estimates The current estimate of the cost of constructing the Additional Facilities and cost of the environmental related activities is approximately$24,806,000.00, as reflected in the budget set out in Exhibit"C." a. To the extent federal or state grant monies are obtained to offset the construction cost of the Additional Facilities, other than monies from the federal Restoration Fund established by H.R. 4841 and Public Law 110-297, such funds will be applied to reduce the contributions required from the public agencies as provided in this Paragraph C. -11- b. Subject to the provisions of Subparagraphs C.2.c and C.2.d below, LHMWD, HEMET and SAN JACINTO will each provide EMWD its prorata share of the funds as set forth in Exhibit "D" required for construction of the facilities described on Exhibit"A." C. The foregoing Subparagraph b notwithstanding, in the event that construction and the environmental related costs exceed the budget of$24,806,000.00, as set forth in Exhibit "C" (and as adjusted pursuant to Subparagraph C.2.a) by not more than Tel Percent (10%), then each party hereby agrees, without further need for approval by its Board or Council, that the Agency will pay such increase according to its prorata share of the costs in the same manner and on the same conditions and terms set forth in Exhibit "D." d. In the event that construction costs for the Additional Facilities exceed the budget of$24,806,000.00, as set forth in Exhibit "C" (and as adjusted pursuant to Subparagraph C.2.a) by more than Ten Percent(10% then each party shall determine whether to pay its share of the increased cost or to pay only its original prorata share. If one or more parties determine to pay only their original prorata share, then the prorata share of the other parties shall be redetermined and the parties assuming the increase in costs shall be assigned a proportionately higher percentage share of the capacity of the Phase 1 Facilities. 3. Biological Mitigation The parties estimate the cost of providing mitigation required tinder Biological Opinion FWS-WRIV-08B0106-1OF0045 issued on December 23, 2011 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the Additional Facilities is estimated to be 53,302,000. This cost has been incorporated into the cost of the Additional Facilities and the parties have agreed to pay their pro rata share of such amount as provided in Section C.2 of this Agreement. In the event that mitigation costs exceed this -12- estimate in the future, due to unknown or changed circumstances, by not more than Ten Percent (10%), then each party hereby agrees, without further need for approval by its Board or Council, that the Agency will pay such increase according to its prorata share of such amount as provided in Section C.2 of this Agreement. In the event that mitigation costs exceed this estimate in the future, due to unknown or changed circumstance, by more than Ten Percent(10% then each party shall determine whether to pay its share of the increased costs or to pay only its original share. If one or more parties determine to pay only their original prorata share, then the prorata share of the other parties shall be redetemined and the parties assuming the increase in costs shall be assigned a proportionately higher percentage share of the capacity of the Phase I Facilities. 4. Title to and Use of Phase 1 Facilities EMWD shall hold title to the Phase I Facilities in trust, as a single unit, for the benefit of the Parties hereto for the term of this Agreement. At the termination of this Agreement, EMWD will hold title to the Phase I Facilities,free of said trust. During the Term of this Agreement, EMWD will make the capacity in such facilities available according to the following priorities: a. Imported Water Conveyance The use of the Phase 1 Facilities to import water shall be subject to the following priorities: (1) First, for deliveries to EMWD's existing customers, up to 26 cfs; (2) Second, for delivery of Imported Water purchased from MWD in such quantities as may, from time to time, be delivered by MWD as provided in the agreement between EMWD and MWD for purchase and delivery of such Imported Water; -13- (3) Third, for delivery of other water purchased by or on behalf of the Watermaster; and (4) Fourth, for delivery of water purchased by or on behalf of any Party; provided, however, that if all such proposed purchases exceed the remaining capacity available in the facilities, the capacity shall be apportioned among the Parties seeking to use that capacity, according to their prorata base rights. b. Recovery/Extfaction Facilities The use of the Phase 1 recovery wells shall be subject to the following priorities and obligations: (1) Allocation Allocation of recovery capacity shall be in the following order of priority: (a) 7,500 afa Capacity The first 7,500 afa shall be allocated among the Parties based on the prorata shares established in the Water Management Plan (LHMWD-34.2%; EMWD-33.7%; HEMET-19.6°Io; SAN JACINTO-I2.5°Io); or, in the event that an Agency opts out at the end of the term, the adjusted prorata shares of the remaining Agency or Agencies will be determined as set forth in Subparagraph H.2 below. (b) Excess Capacity Recovery capacity in excess of 7,500 afa shall be available to the Parties according to their prorata shares established in Subparagraph C.4.b.(1)(a) above; any unsubscribed excess capacity will be assigned by the Watermaster based on need. (c) Limit on Use -14- No Party shall be entitled to receive more than fifteen percent (15%) of that Party's entitlement to capacity in the Phase 1 wells in any one calendar month. (d) Obligation to Use The recharge of Imported Water will result in mounding of the recharged water centering around the recharge site. Avoidance of potential adverse impacts related to groundwater levels in the area will require the use of Phase 1 recovery wells to pump water from the immediate area. The amount of such production will vary, depending upon the amount of Imported Water that is recharged. Pending appointment of the Watermaster by the court, EMWD shall determine the amount of production by the Phase 1 recovery wells required feJ each year to avoid potential adverse effects of mounding; the Watermaster shall make this determination following its appointment. Once said determination has been made each year, each Party will be responsible for the costs of pumping its prorata share of said amount and for the disposition of its share of the water produced, either by use of the water by that Party or through transfer to another Party. A Party that has met this annual obligation may use its own well(s) for production of additional amounts of groundwater, whether said additional amounts would, when combined with that Party's share of the water produced by the Phase 1 recovery wells, be within its Base Production Right or in excess thereof, and therefore subject to a replenishment assessment charge. C. Distribution Facilities -15- Delivery of water produced by the Phase I recovery wells to each Party will be through EMWD's existing distribution system (which is not a part of the Phase 1 Facilities). Existing delivery and distribution connections between EMWD and the other Parties shall remain in place. Maintenance for each such connection shall be the responsibility of the Party maintaining same prior to the effective date of this Agreement. d. Budgeting Costs of Use EMWD shall submit proposed budgets with a detailed breakdown of costs to the Watermaster for each ensuing year for operational, maintenance, repair and replacement costs reflecting anticipated use of(a) the Phase 1 Facilities (adjusted for the proposed use by EMWD for its own purposes); and (b) EM WD's delivery system. C. Invoicing by EMWD and Watermaster EMWD shall submit invoices to the Watermaster for costs described in Subparagraphs (1) and (2) of this Subparagraph C.4.e below at such intervals as EMWD and the Watermaster shall determine are appropriate; payments will be due upon receipt of the invoice. The Parties will jointly recommend that the Watermaster thereupon invoice each Party for its prorata share of costs as follows: (1) Import Conveyance and Recharge Facilities The Watermaster will invoice each Party for its prorata share of operational, maintenance, repair and replacement costs based on a long-term average of 7,500 acre-feet per year, with such periodic adjustments as the Watermaster deems necessary. In the event that a Party uses excess capacity in the Phase 1 Facilities per Subparagraphs CA.a.(4) and CA.b.(I)(b) above, Watermaster shall invoice that Party for a charge that the Watermaster determines to be adequate to recover the operational, maintenance, repair and replacement costs -16- on a per-acre-foot basis. Payment shall be made directly to EMWD upon receipt of the invoice by the Watermaster. (2) Phase 1 Recovery Facilities and EMWD's Distribution System The Watermaster shall establish a per-acre-foot "postage stamp" rate or charge each year, based on the budget submitted by EMWD, which rate or charge shall be sufficient to cover the estimated operational, maintenance, repair and replacement costs and Watermaster shall invoice each Party based on water delivered to that Party through the Phase 1 recovery facilities and the EMWD distribution system. Payment shall be made directly to EMWD upon receipt of the invoice by the Watermaster. EMWD shall maintain a separate account for the portions of payments received that are attributable to repair and replacement of the facilities. 5. Nonappointment of Watermaster or Failure of Settlement Agreement The Parties acknowledge that EMWD will undertake the planning, financing, construction and operation of the Phase 1 Facilities described herein and the financing of the payments to the Tribe, if required, and the payments to MWD, if required, on behalf of the Watermaster and agree that if the Watermaster is not appointed or if the Settlement Agreement with the Tribe is not finalized, the terms of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in effect. D. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS RE USE OF TRIBE'S UNUSED WATER 1. Settlement Payments to or for the Benefit of the Tribe A direct payment to the Tribe under the Settlement Agreement in the amount of 57,000,000.00 is required when the Settlement Agreement becomes effective. In addition, it is agreed that the$10,000,000.00 to be contributed to EMWD by the federal -17- government to pay or reimburse costs associated with the constructing, operating and maintaining that portion of the Phase I Facilities (as defined in the WIMP) necessary to accommodate deliveries of Imported Water will be used by EMWD to offset the payments to the Tribe, leaving the net payment due to the Tribe in the amount of$7,000,000.00 described above. Each other Agency agrees to provide its prorata share of the $7,000,000.00 payment due to the Tribe subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit "D." 2. Payment of Purchase Price of MWD's Imported Water Each of the other Agencies that elects to participate shall reimburse EMWD for that Agency's prorata share of each payment made by EMWD to MAID pursuant to the contract to purchase the imported Water for the Tribe described in Recital 5.-e, which payments will be made on the basis of average deliveries of 7,500 acre-feet per year, except to the extent that such reimbursement is made on behalf of that Agency by the Watermaster. EMWD shall first invoice the Watermaster for reimbursement of each payment to MWD and if full payment is not received within thirty (30) days of the date of mailing of the invoice, shall invoice each other part-icipating Agency for that Agency's prorata share of the reimbursement due, less a reduction for an appropriate prorata share of any payment received by EMWD from the Watermaster. Amounts not paid within thirty(30) days of the date of mailing the invoice shall bear interest at the legal rate. 3. Use of Unused Tribal Water As consideration for the satisfaction of the obligation set forth in the preceding Paragraphs D.l and D.2, a participating public agency shall be entitled to its prorata share of the unused tribal water that is available for use by the public agencies as provided in -18- Article 4 of the Settlement Agreement, Section 5.4 of the Stipulated Judgment, and Paragraph 8.6.2 of the Water Management Plan. E. SHARING TRIBAL WATER SHORTAGE OBLIGATIONS It is agreed that the obligation of EMWD and LHMWD to the Tribe in the event of water supply shortage, as described in Recital 5-f, shall not be shared by the other Parties hereto, but any groundwater pumped by EMWD and/or LHMWD in fulfillment of this obligation shall not be charged against the base or adjusted production rights of either EMWD or LHMWD provided such production has been reported to the Watermaster. F. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT The enactment by Congress of legislation approving the Settlement Agreement and the legal effectiveness of the Settlement Agreement are each a condition precedent to the effectiveness of Paragraph D of this Agreement. If these conditions precedents are not satisfied, provisions of this Agreement regarding the financing, construction, operation and use of the Phase 1 Facilities shall nevertheless remain in effect. G. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS In the event of a dispute between two or more Parties hereto in connection with any obligation arising hereunder, a Party may initiate Dispute Resolution Proceedings ("DRP") by sending written Notice of Request to Initiate DRP to each other Party involved in the dispute. The General Manager or City Manager and attorney for each Party to the Dispute shall meet and confer regarding the dispute within thirty (30) days of the date of the Notice. If the dispute is not resolved, the Parties will proceed to nonbinding mediation within the next 60 days and shall use their best efforts to have it completed within 90 days thereafter. If such mediation fails to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days after the 90-day mediation period, the Parties will -19- submit the dispute to binding arbitration conducted by the American Arbitration Association or agree to an equivalent organization and shall use their best efforts to have the arbitration completed within 180 days thereafter. The DRP shall be deemed terminated when the dispute has been resolved by written agreement or when a final decision is issued following binding arbitration. I1. TRANSFER OF INTEREST IN CAPACITY OR UNUSED WATER 1. Failure to Pay If a Party fails to pay or reimburse EMWD its prorata share of amounts described in Paragraphs C.2, C.3, CA, D.1 or D.2 above, and does not file a written request to initiate Dispute Resolution Proceedings regarding the amount of said payment as described in Paragraph F above within sixty(60) days of the date of mailing of an invoice for payment by EMWD, then on the 61st day after the date of mailing said invoice, that Party's rights to that portion of the capacity in the Phase 1 Facilities that has not been paid for or in the unused tribal water for the period for which payment is not made shall be automatically temporarily assigned to EMWD and such of the other Agencies as agree to he responsible, on a revised prorata basis, for the defaulting Agency's obligation(s), upon notice thereof by EMWD, until payment or reimbursement is made by the defaulting Agency to the appropriate parties, including interest at the legal rate. If said Party remains in default, said assignment shall become permanent on the 1.80th day after said written demand for payment by EMWD, unless Dispute Resolution Proceedings have been initiated. If Dispute Resolution Proceedings are initiated, issues that are the subject of such proceedings that involve nonpayment of an obligation arising under Paragraphs C.2, C.3, CA D.1, or D.2 shall include temporary and/or permanent disposition of the share in the -20- `s facilities, in the operation, maintenance and replacement costs thereof and/or in the unused tribal water for which payment has not been made. I. TERM 1. Initial Term This Agreement shall remain in effect for the duration of the useful life of the Phase I Facilities, currently estimated to be thirty(30) years; said period shall be known as the "Initial Term." This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect after the Initial Term, if the Phase 1 Facilities are maintained, repaired or replaced and approved from time to time, thereby extending their useful life, until all of the Parties to this Agreement agree that the Phase 1 Facilities no longer have any useful life and that this Agreement may be terminated. 2. Withdrawal by Party After all financial obligations described in Exhibit "D"have been satisfied, any Party to this Agreement shall have the option to withdraw. In such event, and if the term of this Agreement is extended, the remaining Parties to this Agreement shall assume all obligations of this Agreement, revised prorate shares shall be proportionately increased, for so long as the extended Agreement remains in effect. 3. Dispute Resolution In the event that there is disagreement among the Parties to this Agreement regarding whether the useful life of the facilities has ended, such matters shall be resolved according to the Dispute Resolution Proceedings set forth in Paragraph G above. J. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 1. Debt Limitation f -21- The obligation of each Party to make any payments of any amounts due and payable hereunder shall be a special obligation of that Party limited solely to the revenues of that Party's water enterprise and subject to al I existing restriction and debt covenants existing at the time this Agreement is entered into, the obligations which are now entered into, refunding obligations of those obligations, and parity obligations so long as that Party can demonstrate to EMWD that the ability to pay the obligation to EMWD is not impaired. Under no circumstances shall a Party be required to advance moneys derived from any other source of income other than water utility revenues, nor shall any other funds or property of a Party be liable for the payment of any amounts coming due and payable hereunder. 2. Counterparts This Agreement may be signed in counterparts by the Parties, and those counterparts, when taken together, shall have the same force and effect as if a single, original document had been signed by all Parties. 3. Notices All notices required by or regarding this Agreement shall be in writing and sent, first-class mail and facsimile transmission, as follows: -22- TO: EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT P.O. Box 8300 Perris, CA 92572-8300 ATTENTION: General Manager COPY: GERALD D. SHOAF REDWINE AND SHERRILL 1950 Market St. Riverside, CA 92501 TO: LAKE HEMET MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 26385 Fairview Ave. Hemet, CA 92544 ATTENTION: General Manager COPY: JEFF FERRE BEST, BEST & KRIEGER 3750 University Ave. Riverside, CA 92502 TO: CITY OF HEMET 450 E. Latham Ave. Hemet, CA 92543 ATTENTION: City Manager COPY: ERIC VAIL BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN 2280 Market St., Suite 300 Riverside, CA 92501 TO: CITY OF SAN JACINTO 595 S. San Jacinto Ave. San Jacinto, CA 92583 -23- ATTENTION: City Manager COPY: ROBERT W. HARGREAVES BEST, BEST & KRIEGER 74-760 Highway 111, 200 Indian Wells, CA 92210 4. Amendments. Modifications This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a writing .signed by the Parties hereto. EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT By Its LAKE HEMET MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT By Its CITY OF HEMET By Its CITY OF SAN JACINTO By Its LAKE HEMET MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT By Its f, -24- CITY OF HEMET By Its CITY OF SAN JACINTO By Its -25- r yz N N r r r Q N N N_ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r p REV£ ° 00- c � c ° a ° - z QLE CL lee, � c LLLI o S f� �'} 0 n F Q O O O N C U MAP U � 'x N (6 ova 3 ✓ O R3 N Q >. >, cu a. a C O O O N Q O CO a Q Q Q t �,'-; ,C W 'V Q ti O O) a Q Oa: C op ro U N ul N U) Q p N m O N N v, ° E w E ° ° n p o uS I�r N 1- r a w cu O O r N CI)" T M CLm a c 0 —0d a° 0 i rn o 0 0 cu ROOM p LU N N Q L C C Cp CL N N N a °(� 3 rn rn rn 0-1rn .Q o o m 0 0 0 �- CCI C 7N N N N N 7N r N M U U13, U m E IL a E d m s E m CC m m CC CC U m CC CC CC ro LL LL m Cc m m OC c LC CC CC LL +en 'z pNj > y U " i N N N U m m 0' !(3 0 0 .O N N N 01 '� c6 O O O " C O O U- Q- O_ Q _O O O > Q U ro L "t Co (n Co m co LO N co Lo co commm mm i. rn rn rn rnm 0) 0) 0) rn cc) s r r r r r zp t , AA O,Gi�r d Tp 4�R O CN q / (D W �!, CA O ,_., O 7 N cts �# k'j U C Ems. m VS LL r b p g; c F) o m. C O U O U Q LLJiF Mom-sQls6 m O O +, ' m O C ® Q c C� g,. m Uy OC 0 0 s n # N O '— C O m O O C i- C QJ' C UJ C O- '_� C O N cif lSf O ' sc.3x fGS = O C N C �' r C CO C a) O N N .0 CD a) O r N CL LLI ID a) co W cu m (b C co O ` m N > 0 0 `� , N .a cme a m C7 �07 a `'h r i N E N C '':' 3 N co CO s x `ems W d U 0_ `O tt!}f C.) W C3 C3 W r L co N N UI N O O 'c N L C to N ca C O O O C O U O O m R z O O J ILL m :ram:: O <, O AM9O` O Q On ® Q* Ad, j�X A tyI� 3 do M fir`` N d N LO 4 N c» , O , UyiW 4 iw LL 0 0 0 O 0' 0 O O o '� 0. f/!e, � Lo m CO 0 0 o try CB d 0 C O N tc1 �€ O N u N M tb 0 N' CZA b9 •.. (� ir3 i+ q e� ds ca CCv �r r p �` a RA W Z., n p X�-�41 O C, tC 0 0 0 p o .o m err t/! ►+�' rn � R3 s Z310 q r x,+- a FL is �'� rr Gr x M. LL aR N lg O s t.` N N „2- 3 � U- O t 2-1 r W � s > czEr R( d w ate, �A (1 O C x s U N 1 � r n _U Lt_ LL. W x f Exhibit D - Financial Obligations A. Construction and Envirominental Activities Pam The current estimate of the cost of constructing the Additional Facilities plus the initial environmental activities required for the project is $24,806,000. The net estimated cost of the construction and initial environmental activities less two grants for $5,2.00,000 is $19,606,000, as defined in Exhibit C. A final reconciliation will be undertaken by EMWD at the completion of the Construction and adjustments will be made to the Parties prorate share of the project. The Parties shall pay their respective prorate share of these costs based on the payment schedules outlined in this Exhibit. 1) EMWD will pay its prorata share of S19,606,000, as defined in Exhibit C, using bonds issued under its 2008H Certificates of Participation. 2) The City of San Jacinto will pay San Jacinto's prorata share of$19,606,000, as defined in Exhibit C, using EMWD's already issued 2008H Certificates of Participation. The debt service payments shall coincide with the semi-annual repayment schedule of the bond, and must be received by EMWD 10 days prior to the bond payment date. First payment shall include all past payments made by EMWD on behalf of the San Jacinto since January 1, 2009.The payment schedule is shown in paragraph C of Exhibit D. 3) The City of Hemet will pay Hemet's prorate share of$19,606,000, as defined in Exhibit C, using EMWD's already issued 2008H Certificates of Participation. The semi-annual payments will be of equal payments over the life of the repayment schedule. The excess funds paid above the 2008H bond debt service payments in the early years will be put in a separate interest bearing account to offset the large payments in the future. This will result in a repayment schedule that will be depleted with the last payment. The semi- annual payments shall be based on a mutually agreed upon dates by EMWD and the City of Hemet. First payment shall include all past payments since January 1, 2009. The payment schedule based on an estimated four percent (461o) interest on the excess funds is shown in paragraph C of Exhibit D. 4) Lake Hemet will pay LHMWD's prorate share of$19,606,000, as defined in Exhibit C, using EMWD's already issued 2008H Certificates of Participation. The semi-annual payments wil I be of equal payments over the life of the repayment schedule. The excess funds paid above the 2008H bond debt service payments in the early years will be put in a separate interest bearing account to offset the large payments in the future. This will result in a repayment schedule that will be depleted with the last payment. The semi- annual payments shall be based on a mutually agreed upon dates by EMWD and LHMWD. First payment shall include all past payments since January 1, 2009, The (� payment schedule based on an estimated four percent (4%) interest on the excess funds is shown in Paragraph C of Exhibit D. B. Settlement Payments The net payment due to the Tribe in the amount of$7,000,000.00 described in subparagraph D.l shall be paid by each Agency based on its prorata share of the $7,000,000,00 Settlement Payment within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date the Settlement Agreement becomes effective. The respective prorate shares and obligations are: LHMWD (34 2%) 52,394,000 EMWD(33.7%) S2,359,000 CITY OF HEMET(19.6%) 51,372,000 CITY OF SAN JACINTO(12.5%) S 875,000 7 C � M Q fA U3 H" lHl fA fA E9 fA fA!fi!fi d3 KI f9(H fA fA tf C9 63-•.H ffJ ffr tf VY fA!�( (F.fA d3 f9 m N NI NNN gNiN NNNN N•t(1 t(i t(1NNm N'^ NNN M1•N NNNNOm V G r r r h r P r r r r r r r i r r r r r h h h h h M �+ ti^•q eCi mgmmmm rmm NCq q Cq NNmro Co aq mm C, o mm Mm .- o N N.N N N N ? N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O 0 CQ N Q d3!9!9 lA f9 E5 63i fA M!fi Oi fA H3!9 M!A!fi K f9'63 64 H3 fA(fl E9 fR fA l�fA(iY VY N 65 r� m N N N N N 'n Y'J Y'J N N N N N ` m N N N N V: m N M1 t(1 R^• v N P h h I�r r, h h r: r r r; r r, h r r, r, • r: r:'r h m G Oi N M z �O Nt4 Nmt ONN CCN cNO NqO N :c N0 0 cG0q g m0 . dO O9 mD mm q N cq t r oO N N N N N N N N N N O O lc� N N G EA fl349 fAK M 6363�t9 NUl U3 US Ul 63 b3 NMIq tfi�[iY U3 Mfg fA VS M� FAY! q P W. r- 'mfi MN lO ? N,',,,Oi r V t0 N tMS :9 t00 M 0 N C m e t0(i � Ng m 1 N 1 N r N', S (7 P OI N VI O N h; N W q S C N M M Ids M M diM MMd31M dsM MfA M'MiIM F»`»f»es an i»�w in vas»iE in is is N o o G o o N o 0 0 0 0 0• o O c ai O o 0 0 oio 0 0 0 0 0 o m m m uR e e e R P m e e m e oe of of e v e e K of of aioi of t+i ai of ai of cs of ai of of of qi of of of of of of ci of of m m N' emm 0 0�cg�n �mlm m0O mmm cg m mc8 mmmm 0 0 0 0 ml,cg000000 ci°+s in E 0.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , O N(O O (q <O N GOUI p lO OI 01 m m 01 m 0] M O) O 01 01 0] Ol M G M M OI T O Ql N N T m N W M f9 E9 EA ER di 4A 4A Vl lA f5 69 d3 d3 d3 F9 bl cA d3 FA H(f M(A fA Vi 49 d3 fil th H}M 4r O m V N N h O O m M N m m T > M N N N m N N N r N m 0 y M O O IL O C N CJ O U) O It4f CV tz !h O mfC O U y, q7 r O 16 6 Oi y p N m h Oi O N m e N [O L.�� .- N N :V N N N N N N M m.(•'J N (i?63 d)Ya 69 f9 d3 63 69 ffl f9 V)Vl d5(ii fn!n d3 V3 U>M d3 tsi l>111 K dl wi H HS M 6A',,q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OO O O O O O O S O O O O O S O O O O O O O O'!O d M m ccgcG+mm mMm $ m �`i � $c9i `e'$m mCoi-ro coi r��coilro m m m m _m m m m m m m _m m m M M__m ' M_ M_c2 _M M_ V � Idi Vi ER di M 'FA Mfg FA(A ds d3 d3M d3 � MWd3 f9l WW(9 dT iLT b3+A fA di a O N h N h +n m � O h N lO lO Ntg No O h m N m m fp (q (p 0 0 N tD V m m OI m q d' O m tMp O m M tt: N N (O m N m C`Y O :O N M N(7 m N V1 O> r N m O m h :q E y -Cl pq N N lO Im m C O — N m R N — h q — O � N m g R 1p h r q (,J N N N N N N N N N N r M(9 f9 W fA M W I d)d!Vi W V!IA d3(A dT 1A t9 E9 fR V)N W3 S4:A dl U"'W�yd�mOV'��G)-+'• a_����(✓yyiO�rO�rU6dnsn^((I mml ddmmm)s f«m I dOrNmNlmm�NCGdNOMmmmmN9]t ONrd.mm�em i. NNdOrONNMmmrr fONO�»N6mrm rOmN�MQmn iNOsOm�mohrH»dONNE^COmAY M(ONrNNVPm£ONMNNNqmtmA?MONM^mNhmtm?NMNNOmmhNfmmM?ONNdMmeONMmtmm?l MOmNdme0 MOO(6MrmmmhM7] lMN.ONNNOmMmROmr»fNOdOqMOWmOMmthn903] erONd(mm M mm�mm m nrr cm rr r;� M N N O0 r O 7 m Vnj N m m O NM1 Of6NTm- mrtOm7Or-NVOM(N(TrOMMmfhrq•OJl MCNMhq:mRNmm(OMrpO]p�NMCMOhOm(m(Wtn`•qJ MONTMONqMNmOmMmt[�9I MNON O OOO O O OOO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M M [] ] [� C] M NdOOumNrNN_MOM�qrq3 ONUOMVrONNVrMoOmS tONNOdOONNNlPNarf9s m m M m m m m M M M q(7 mm Mm m mmmmmmm mlmm m mm dim mm CJ � IgNNNNNNN�NNNNNNNN NI N'N NNNNNNNN d)HY 69j YJ V)HY ffi M f9 b3 69 f9 H!9 dt dt tf V3 fft M M W t9 N M(f5 N N Ul'M M fA G I V m 0 ZPWON4q d' N LV i r N (ooN '�m (om M ' d' nlM d' omm I c� .- mmmco oMM � o� �I rMr rn � r r �mmy [y mci r rcoo � mn co mmmco a r m C m O M M �-m N N I W7 m N W t2 O (O r N O V N O M r ID I W O N l7 (OI N (O M m FA US HN 6A f9(!3 W(9I(N (fl fA fA K£R H H K H 43 N mom oM MIN d' nM d'a o m .- m im m mcm rn6rm nnw Irgi'om o co (Mp WK K6lx W(R Nj y69 W V}W 69 y�yy�H' W ERV N m 7 ID M nMn C n O W.I N r d' r_ M p N O n N `a� M ID .- m m m (T N OJ M d' O j CJ p N r O m q OJ N N r r r m m N (O t0 i � Vf M ID M Y N M N N n CO N M (� W m 41 m m CO m CD 41 CO:IH m O CO N M O .- r M M ;m F 16 n nm000 o .- m inn - m C M lD M O m O N « m N N N N N N N CD N lD lD N m N' Hi f9 IA tR tlJ IA lfJ lA lA ff;N lA M U]lA Hi 3 fh (O m CT r A C (O CO m M N (A W tD �-'M m N O O lD N M lI m N n l7 n M ICJ M m (A M N m m CO {D y (p (D M O M N M N m N O O_CO m Ip (p V Q M C) M m lD N r CJ an d q CJ N N N O N O N O N O N VI n O�N ID r r O(D I D I M d3 l9�69 t9 Vi f9 b9 t9 29 fA N N3 6➢Vi Vi Vi t9(5 V3 IA N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O OO O O O O OO O OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M M Mi.M N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N ad'"' 4�7 � a a6vH M M M M M M M M M M M M M M_ M M M_ N - - N_ {A tli V)Yi V1 fA to N3!t9 Vi t9 CH M b!69 t9 fH 64 fA G9 V3 n m ? m r n N M m a M � 1D � IN 1 � r O m N m N O N m �- n m N m N .- N O C!I W N �- m m M m r M N 10 CD t`1 N m V] N M N m mj m N m n m n M N n O 6 N o6 c6 oiM a.o MN mn mm o d'�n N N O Q m C n M N V N O m m m ? m 0 n o r m (D m ID d (D m (O m N R n m tO m N N N N N I- V3 63 lA bJ(9 M M to t9 fA IH fA f9 63 f9 f9 fA N. fA C9 E9 N O r V m N m O n g m M m N m O 1D m r 1p ID m 4� d' m (O ID m mI N M O d' T()i m m O M N P m C- O n m m m 1D 1D m �j O r m (O N M m n M a a O V v><n yam m���<a v>m cn rn rn»M"n m.n M Fn in O M Cl r O m M t0 m r O m m N O m N N m m O V M 0 m C N m r m N d' CO I� N N m CI N M m 4 N[J O m m d n M Cp O T C O C M m O m N N �c�M w � lo m M vI m m n m m O N �r mM �i N m Ll I m of�6 vi mi vi VI Ill NIID m In YI N N N I(1 7 a C M l7 N M 1 m VfK N(9 f1r AW ViVi:f}Ifl CRN d3 W VI Vi I� 63 Vi N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O!O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OiO O O O O O 1(j Ill 41 I(I Ip Il1 1!) N N ID m In tD tD m vl i VI N N tD tD O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N'N N N N Cl N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MGM M M M M N d'e mm MY d' 6a 6v dd"a a!a dd'd d M M M M M �M M MM M M M M M M M M M ID N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N cJ N N N CO r t9 C/i(fi+A t9 w�l+9 fA H�69 64 6?6?f9 fA(A 69 b9 M N Exhibit "E" Stipulated Judgment Exhibit"E" I GERALD D. SHOAF, SBN 41084 REDWINE AND SHERRILL 2 1950 MARKET ST. RIVERSIDE. CA 92501 3 (951) 684-2520 4 Attorneys for Plaintiff EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 5 6 $ SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 10 12 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, ) CASE NO.: A California Municipal Water District, ) 13 ) STIPULATED JUDGMENT Plaintiff, ) 14 vs. ) 15 ) CITY OF HEMET; CITY OF SAN JACINTO; ) 16 LAKE HEMET MUNICIPAL WATER ) DISTRICT; ) 17 and DOES 1 through 1,000, inclusive, ) 1s ) Defendants. ) 19 ) 20 71, TABLE OF CONTENTS 22 Findings ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 1. Complaint ------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Parties ------------------------------------------------------- 24 A. Eastern------------------------------------------- - ---------------- B. Lake Hemet ------------------------ 25 C. Hemet --------------------- ------------------------ 26 D. San Jacinto -------------------------------------------------- E. (Pumpers) --------------------------------------- 27 3. Answers and Stipulation for Judgment ------------------------- 4. Sole Producers ---------------------------------------------------- 2s Stipulated Judamunt -I- 1 5. Importance of Surface Water and Groundwater ---------------- 2 6. Overdraft ----------------- 7. Importance of Judgment ------------------------ ------- 3 8. Jurisdiction ---------------------------------------------------- 4 JUDGMENT 5 1. Definition ---------------------------------------------------- 6 1.1 Adjusted Production Right ---------------------------------- 1.2 Administrative Assessment ---------------------------------- 7 1.3 Administrative Expenses ------------------------- a1.4 Advisor ---------------------------------------------------- 1.5 Annual Basin Yield ------------------------------------------- 9 1.6 Base Production Right ---------------------------------- 1.7 Catry-Over Credit ---------------------------------- 10 1.8 Class A Participant ------------- ------------------------------ 11 1.9 Class B Participant ---------------------------------- 1.10 Fiscal Year ---------------------------------------------------- 12 1.11 Fruitvale Documents ------------------------------------------- (a) Fruitvale Judgment ---------------------------------- 13 (b) Fruitvale Mutual Water Company -------------- la Sale of Assets ------------------------------------------- (c) Fruitvale Mutual Water Company ---------------- 15 Agency Agreements -------------- 1.12 Groundwater ------------------------------------------- 16 1.13 Groundwater Degradation -------- -- -- - - -------------------- 17 1.14 Imported Water ---------------------------------- 1.15 In-Lieu Water ------------------------------------------- 1s 1.16 Management Area ---------------------------------- 19 1.17 Metropolitan ------------------------------------------- 1.18 Natural Recharge ----------- 20 1.19 New Pumper ------------------------------------------- 1.20 Non-Participant ---------------------- 21 1.21 Overdraft 22 1.22 Overlying Right ---- ------- 1.23 Party or Parties ----------------------- 23 1.24 Person -------------------------------------------------- 1.25 Physical Solution ------------------------------------------- 24 1.26 Private Pumper ------- ------------------------------------ 2 5 1.27 Public Agency or Agencies --------- 1.28 Recharge or Replenish ----------------------- 26 1.29 Recharge Right ------ - 1.30 Recycled Water ------------------------------------------- 27 1.31 Replenishment Assessment -------- ------------------------- ,S 1.32 Replenishment Expenses ------------- r' Stipulated Judgment '- l.33 Safe Yield ------------------------------------------- 2 1.34 Settlement Agreement------------------------------------------- 1.35 Soboba Tribe ---------------------------------------------------- 3 1.36 Soboba Action---------------------------------------------------- 1.37 Storage Agreement ------------------------------ --- 1.38 Storage Right ---------------------------- ------------------------ 5 1.39 Stored Water ---------------------------------------------------- 1.40 Supplemental Water --------------------- --- 6 1.41 Surface Water ----------------- -------------- 1.42 Transfer ----------- ------- 1.43 Tribal Water Rights --------------- --------------------------- 8 1.44 Tunnel ---------- ----------------------- 1.45 Watermaster ------------------------------------------- 9 1.46 Water Management Plan ------------------ 2. Exhibits --------------------------------------------- - 10 "A"-Management Area and u Management Area Watershed -------------- "B" Parties to this Judgment ----- - 12 "C" Description of each Public Agency's and Class B Participant's Base Production Right 3 3. Public Agencies' Water Rights 14 3.1 Base Production right --- ---------------------------- 3.1.1 Eastern 15 3.1.2 Lake Hemet 16 3.1.3 Hemet -------------------------- 3.1.4 San Jacinto ------ ------------------- 17 3.1.5 Adjustments ------------- 3.2 Adjusted Production Rights ------ ------------------ 18 3.3 Public Agency Production Assessments ---------------- 19 3.4 Surface Rights---------------------------------------------------- 3.5 Fruitvale Judgment, Sale of Assets, and Agreements------- Zc 3.6 Fruitvale Agency Rights ---------------------------------- 4. Private Pumpers' Water Rights ---------------------------------- 2 1 4.1 Recognition of Rights--------------------------------------- zz 4.2 Non-Participation ------- 4.3 Class A Participation ------------------------------------------- 23 4.4 Class B Participation ------------------------------------------- 4.5 In-Lieu Water Use -------- -------------- 24 4.6 Future Production Participation ------------------------- 25 4.7 Replacement Wells --------------------------- 5. Tribal Water Rights --------------------------------- 26 5.1 Senior Right -------------- ---------- 5.2 Metropolitan Water ------------------------------------------- L7 5.3 Settlement Payment -------- -- -------------------------------- 28 5.4 Capital Facilities ---------------------------------- Stipulated Judgment -3- 1 5.5 Public Agencies' Use of Facilities ------- 2 5.6 Acknowledgment of Soboba Tribe Settlement -- 6. Physical Solution ------------------------------------------- 3 6.1 Purpose and Objective ---------------------------------- 6.2 Need for Flexibility ------------------------------------------- 4 6.3 Rights to Groundwater --- 6.4 Resolution of Priorities ---------------------------------- 6.5 Water Management Plan ------------------------- 6 6.6 Replenishment Program ---------------------------------- 7 6.7 Storage Right ------------------------------------------- 6.8 Recycled Water ---------------------------------- 8 6.9 Assessment Program ------------------------------------------- 6.10 Export ------------------------------------------- 9 6.11 Capital Facilities ------------------------------------------- 10 7. Injunction ---------------------------------------------------- 8. Continuing Jurisdiction ------------------------------------------- 11 8.1 Full Jurisdiction ------------------------------------------- 8.2 Motion to Interpret ------------------------------------------- 12 9. Watermaster ------------------------------------ 9.1 Composition ---------------------------------------------------- 13 9.2 Temis ---------------------------------------------------- 14 9.3 Removal and Replacement ---------------------------------- 9.4 Voting------------------------------------------------------------- 15 9.5 Court Review --------------- ------------------ 16 9.6 Powers and Duties ------------------------------------------- 9.6.1 Water Management Plan ------------------------- 17 9.6.2 Independent Counsel ---------------------------------- 9.6.3 Advisor ---------- -------- 18 9.6.4 Operations and Other Functions----------------------- 19 9.6.4.1 Operations-Phase I Facilities 9.6.4.2 Operations -Other Facilities ------------- 2 0 9.6.4.3 Purchase of Water for Groundwater Recharge ----- z 1 9.6.4.4 Data Collection 22 9.6.4.5 Accounting ----------------------------------- 9.6.5 Technical Advisory Committee ----------------- 23 9.6.6 Reservation of Rights ----------------------------------- 9.6.7 Rules and Regulations----------------------------------- 24 9.6.8 Reports to Court 25 9.6.9 Notice to Parties -------------------------- 9.7 Watermaster Records ------------------- 2 6 10. Miscellaneous -------------------------------------------------------------- 10.1 Intervention After Judgment ---------------------------------- z� 10.2 Loss of Rights------------------------ ---- ------------------------- 28 10.3 Attorney's Fees and Costs ----------------------------------- Stipulated Judgment .4- 1 FINDINGS 2 3 After consideration of the pleadings and the Stipulation for Entry of Judgment, the Court finds that: 5 1. Complaint. On , 2010, Plaintiff Eastern Municipal Water District 6 ("Eastern")filed a Complaint against Defendants Lake Hemet Municipal Water District("Lake 7 Hemet"), City of Hemet ("Hemet"), City of San Jacinto ("San Jacinto"), , 8 . The Complaint requests a declaration of Plaintiffs and Defendants' individual and 9 collective rights to Surface Water and Groundwater in the Canyon Subbasin,the San Jacinto 10 Upper Pressure Subbasin downstream to Bridge Street, and the Hemet Basin("Management 11 Area") and the imposition of a Physical Solution to achieve the optimum, reasonable,beneficial 12 use of the waters of the Management Area pursuant to section 2 of article X of the California -3 Constitution. A map describing the boundaries of the Management Area is attached to this Judgment as Exhibit"A" and to the Complaint. 1-5 2. Parties. 16 A. Eastern. Eastern is a California municipal water district formed pursuant 17 to the Municipal Water District Law, California Water Code Sections 71000-73001 (West 1966), lE with its principal place of business in Riverside County, California. Eastern diverts Surface 19 Water from the San Jacinto River, and pumps Groundwater from the Management Area for use 10 by its customers within its boundaries. 21 D, Lake Hemet, Lake Hemet is a California municipal water district formed �2 pursuant to the Municipal Water District Law, California Water Code Sections 71000-73001 23 (West 1966), with its principal place of business in Riverside County, California. Lake Hemet 2' diverts Surface Water from the Santa Jacinto River and its tributaries, and pumps Groundwater 25 from the Management Area for use by its customers within its boundaries. 26 C. Hemet. Hemet is a California municipal corporation providing utility 27 services pursuant to the California Constitution, article XI, section 9. Hemet pumps 2' Groundwater from the Management Area for use by its customers within its boundaries. Stiplated Iudgment I D. San Jacinto. San Jacinto is a California municipal corporation providing 2 utility services pursuant to the California Constitution, article XI, section 9. San Jacinto pumps 3 Groundwater from the Management Area for use by its customers within its boundaries. 4 E. _ and are Persons 5 who own farms or other property within the Management Area, and pump Groundwater from the 6 Management Area. 3. Answers and Stipulation for Judgment. On , 2010, Defendants 8 filed Answers. On 2010, the Parties filed a Stipulation for Entry of Judgment. 9 4. Sole Producers. Other than the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, and certain 10 overlying users not Parties to this litigation, the Parties claim essentially all of the rights to 11 produce Surface Water and Groundwater in the Management Area. 12 5. Importance of Surface Water and Groundwater. Surface water and 13 Groundwater from the Management Area are important water supplies for agriculture, domestic 14 and municipal use. The Parties have a mutual and collective interest in the coordinated t 15 management of such water resources to ensure that the common resource is used efficiently and 16 reasonably, and that it is sustained and replenished. 17 6. Overdraft. It is estimated that the Overdraft of the Management Area is 1$ approximately 10,000 acre-feet per year. This estimate will be refined through further studies to 19 be completed pursuant to the Water Management Plan, including data on the several subbasins 20 within the Management Area. Studies confirm that in recent years the total Groundwater 21 production from the Management Area, including pumping by those Persons not Parties to this 27 litigation, has averaged approximately 54,800 acre-feet per year. 23 7. Importance of Judgment. The Parties have an interest in the Physical Solution 24 imposed by this Judgment to promote the efficient and coordinated management of Surface 25 Water and Groundwater, to avoid problems from Overdraft, to assist in protecting the rights of 26 the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, to sustain and enhance water resources, and to resolve 27 competing claims to Surface Water and Groundwater. 78 S. ,Jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction to enter this Judgment declaring and stipulated Judgment -6- 1 adjudicating the rights of the Parties to the reasonable and beneficial use of Surface Water and 2 Groundwater in the Management Area, and to impose a Physical Solution pursuant to law, 3 including California Constitution, article X, section 2. 4 5 JUDGMENT 6 7 IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 8 1. DEFINITIONS. 9 1.1 Adjusted Production Right—the Base Production Right of each Public 10 Agency, as adjusted pursuant to Sections 3.2 to 3.2.5. 1 1.2 Administrative Assessment— an acre-foot charge to be levied against 12 each Public Agency for water pumped up to its Adjusted Production Right, including any unused 3 amount of such Right that is pumped in a following year(Carry-Over Credit). Such assessments 14 shall be used for Administrative Expenses, and for the purchase of Supplemental Water after 15 Administrative Expenses have been paid. No Administrative Assessment shall be levied on a 16 Party's pumping of its share of Imported, Supplemental, or Stored Water. 17 1.3 Administrative Expenses— Include, but are not limited to, Watermaster's i8 expenses for office rental, personnel, supplies, office equipment, general overhead, preparing an 19 collecting assessments, monitoring well pumping, measuring water levels, sampling and 20 analyzing water quality, compiling and interpreting collected data, conducting special studies, 21 litigation, and such other expenses as are reasonable and necessary for the Watermaster to carry 22 out its duties under the Physical Solution and Water Management Plan. 23 1.4 Advisor. An independent engineering firm or qualified individual as 24 provided in Section 9.6.3. 25 1.5 Annual Basin Yield— the quantity of Groundwater that Watermaster 26 determines the Parties may Produce from the Management Area in a calendar year without a 27 replenishment obligation under the Physical Solution. 28 1.6 Base Production Right—a water right of a Public Agency or Crass B Stipulated Judgment -7- 1 Participant. 2 1.7 Carry-Over Credit—a Public Agency's or a Class B Participant's credit 3 against the Replenishment Assessment in a Fiscal Year, based on the Agency's Adjusted or Base 4 Production Right or share-of Imported Water not produced in prior calendar years. 5 1.8 Class A Participant—a Private Pumper who stipulates to this Judgment 6 and participates in the Water Management Plan as defined in Sections 4.3 to 4.3.5. 7 1.9 Class B Participant— a Private Pumper who stipulates to this Judgment 8 and participates in the Water Management Plan as defined in Sections 4.4 to 4.4.6. 9 1.10 Fiscal Year— the period from July 1 through June 30 of the following 710 calendar year. 11 111 Fruitvale Documents— 12 (a) Fruitvale Judgment—The Judgment and Decree entered in the 3 Superior Court for the County of Riverside on June 4, 1954, in an action titled The City of San 14 Jacinto, et al. v. Fruitvale Mutual Water Company, et al., Case No. 51-546; 15 (h) Fruitvale Mutual Water Company Sale of Assets to Eastern— 16 That certain "Agreement for the Sale of Assets of the Fruitvale Mutual Water Company to 17 Easter Municipal Water District" dated September 10, 1971 ("Purchase Agreement"); 18 (c) Fruitvale Mutual Water Company Agency Agreements—The la Agreement Between the City of San Jacinto and Eastern Municipal Water District dated 20 November 2, 1971, the Agreement Between Lake Hemet Municipal Water District and Eastern 21 Municipal Water District dated June 9, 1972, and the Agreement Between the City of Hemet and 22 Eastern Municipal Water District dated June 13, 1972, all providing for recognition of ownership G3 of stock in Fruitvale Mutual Water Company by the Cities and by Lake Hemet, and making 24 provision for the continued sale of water produced through the Fruitvale facilities by Eastern to 21 the Cities and to Lake Hemet. 26 1.12 Groundwater— all water within and beneath the ground surface of the 27 Management Area. 28 1.13 Groundwater Degradation (also "groundwater quality degradation" and stipulated Judgment -8- 1 "water quality degradation," "Degradation" and"Degraded Groundwater")—Water 2 contamination as defined in state and/or federal law, and other conditions of reduced water 3 quality as determined by the Watermaster to be harmful or undesirable for the operation of the 4 Management Area. 5 1.14 Imported Water—An average of 7,500 acre feet annually of water sold 6 by The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to Eastern pursuant to Section 4.4 of 7 the Soboba Band of Luiseho Indians "Settlement Agreement." B 1.15 In-Lieu Water—Groundwater that is not pumped, but which would have 9 otherwise been pumped by the holder of an Overlying or Appropriative Right within the to Management Area, by virtue of the pumper's agreement with a Agency or the Watermaster to 11 receive and use Recycled Water or other nonpotable water in lieu of Groundwater. 12 1.16 Management Area—the Canyon Subbasin, the San Jacinto Upper 13 Pressure Subbasin downstream to Bridge Street, and the Hemet Basin, as delineated on the map 14 attached as Exhibit "A." r 15 1.17 Metropolitan —The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 16 1.18 Natural Recharge—Groundwater replenishment within the Management 17 Area occurring from precipitation on the surface, percolation from surface flows of the San 18 Jacinto River and its tributaries, spreading or injection of such surface flows, return flows from 19 irrigation, and subsurface inflows. 20 1.19 New Pumper— a Private Pumper who pumps for die first time after entry 21 of Judgment herein. 22 1.20 Non-Participant—a Private Pumper who elects not to participate in the 23 Management Plan, or to be a Party to this Judgment. 24 1.21 Overdraft— a condition whereby pumping in the Management Area 25 exceeds the Safe Yield thereof. 26 1.22 Overlying Right— the appurtenant right of an owner of land overlying the 27 Management Area to pump water from such land for beneficial use thereon. 2B Stipulated Jud-ment -9- 1 1.23 Party or Parties—Eastern. Lake Hemet, Hemet, San Jacinto and the other 2 Persons listed in the attached Exhibit "B." 3 1.24 Person— any individual, partnership, association, corporation, trust, 4 government agency or other organization. s 1.25 Physical Solution — the Court decreed method of managing the water 6 supply of the Management Area to maximize the reasonable and beneficial use of the waters 7 thereof pursuant to the California Constitution, article X, section 2, to eliminate Overdraft 8 pursuant to the provisions of this Judgment, to protect the prior rights of the Soboba Tribe, and t 9 provide for the substantial enjoyment of all water rights recognizing their priorities. 10 1.26 Private Pumper— a Person who owns land with an Overlying Right or 11 other right in the Management Area and pumps more than 25 acre-feet per year. Private Pumper 12 includes New Pumpers. 13 1.27 Public Agency or Agencies —Eastern. Lake Hemet, Hemet and San 14 Jacinto. 15 1.28 Recharge or Replenish —to sink, spread or inject water directly or 16 indirectly underground in the Management Area. 17 1.29 Recharge Right—the rights of Eastern and Lake Hemet to pump and use 18 water previously replenished to the Management Area as provided in Section 6.7.4. 19 1.30 Recycled Water—treated wastewater which is processed and suitable for =0 controlled use in the Management Area, including Recharge. 21 1.31 Replenishment Assessment— a charge to be levied against each Public 22 Agency for each acre foot, or portion thereof, of Groundwater pumped in excess of the sum of its 23 respective Adjusted Production Right, its share of Imported Water, Stored Water, Supplemental 24 Water, and applicable Carry-Over Credits and Recharge Rights; and against each Class B 25 Participant for pumping in excess of its 1995-99 average production, i.e., its Base Production 26 Right. The rate of such assessments shall be determined by the Watermaster and shall be used `' for Replenishment Expenses. 2s r' Stipulated Judgment to 1 1.32 Replenishment Expenses—Watermaster expenses, including, but not 2 limited to, the acquisition of Supplemental Water supplies, development of In-Lieu Water 3 projects, acquisition or improvement of land, and for the construction, maintenance and 4 operation of facilities necessary to replenish Groundwater in the Management Area, or otherwise 5 to provide water to Parties within the Management Area. 6 1.33 Safe Yield—the long term, average quantity of water supply in the 7 Management Area that can be pumped without causing undesirable results, including the gradual 8 reduction of natural Groundwater in storage over long-terra hydrologic cycles. The initial Safe 9 Yield of the Management Area is estimated to be approximately 45,000 acre feet per year. 10 1.34 Settlement Agreement— that Agreement titled "The Soboba Band of 1.1 Luiserio Indians Settlement Agreement" among the Soboba Tribe, the United States, as Trustee 12 for the Tribe, Eastern Municipal Water District, Lake Hemet Municipal Water District, and The 13 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, _4 1.35 Soboba Tribe (sometimes the"Tribe")—the Soboba Band of Luiseiio 15 Indians. 16 1.36 Soboba Action—the lawsuit entitled Soboba Band of Mission Indians, 17 etc., v. Metropolitan, etc., et al, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Case No. 00- ls 84208 GAF(MANx). 19 1.37 Storage Agreement—an agreement between Watermaster and a Party to ?0 store Supplerental Water (other than a Party's share of Imported Water) by sinking, spreading, 21 injecting or in-lieu procedures in the Management Area, and to establish a manner of accounting 22 for the credit therefore and subsequently to recover such water, without payment of 23 Administrative or Replenishment Assessments. 24 1.38 Storage Right—a Party's right to store and pump Supplemental Water 25 (not required for a Party's share of Imported Water) pursuant to a Storage Agreement. 26 1.39 Stored Water— Supplemental Water(other than a Party's share of 27 Imported Water) stored by a Party pursuant to a Storage Agreement. 28 Stipulated Judgment -It- 1 1.40 Supplemental Water—nontributary water imported into the Management 2 Area, including imported water(i.e., other than or in addition to Imported Water as defined in 3 Section 1.14), Recycled Water, In-Lieu Water, and other nonpotable water. 4 1.41 Surface Water-- all water tributary to the Management Area and flowing 5 above the ground surface. 6 1.42 Transfer—a temporary or permanent conveyance, assignment, sale, 7 contract or lease of part or all of a Party's Adjusted Production Right, Carry-over Credit, Storage e Right or Recharge Right to any other Party, or a temporary assignment, contract, lease or sale of 9 part of the Soboba Tribe's quantified water right. 10 1.43 Tribal Water Rights —the Soboba Tribe's rights to water set forth in 11 Section 4.1 of the Settlement Agreement and Section 5 of this Stipulated Judgment. -� 1.44 Tunnel —the San Jacinto Tunnel in Riverside County, California, 3 constructed by Metropolitan in the 1930s. 14 1.45 Watermaster—the Board with the powers and duties defined in Section 15 9. 16 1.46 Water Management Plan (sometimes the"Plan")—the Plan adopted by 17 the Watermaster, as it may be modified from time to time, to implement the Physical Solution, to 1s ensure an adequate and reliable source of future water supply for the Management Area, and to 19 protect the prior rights of the Soboba Tribe. 20 2. EXHIBITS. 21 The following exhibits are attached to this Judgment and incorporated in it: 22 "A." Map of the Management Area and the Management Area Watershed. 23 "B." List of Parties to this Judgment. 24 "C." Description of each Public Agency's and Class B Participant's Base 25 Production Right. 26 27 28 Stipulated Judgment -12- 1 3. PUBLIC AGENCIES' WATER RIGI-ITS. 3.1 Base Production Rig! t. The Public Agencies are owners of rights to 3 pump Groundwater from the Management Area as set forth in Exhibit "C." These rights are for 4 calendar year and were calculated as follows: 5 3.1.1 The Base Production Right of Eastern is based upon its respective 6 average pumping for calendar years 1995-1999, less an adjustment of 1800 acre-feet 7 representing a portion of a credit which it receives from Metropolitan for seepage into 8 Metropolitan's San Jacinto Tunnel, for Eastern's use of Fruitvale water elsewhere, and for use of 9 Fruitvale water by Lake Hemet, San Jacinto, and Hemet. The 1995-1999 period was chosen to 10 reflect recent production prior to the commencement of negotiations leading to this Stipulated '1 Judgment. 12 3.1.2 The Base Production Right of Lake Hemet is based on its average 13 production for calendar years 1995-1999. 14 3.1.3 The Base Production Right of Hemet is based on its average is production for calendar years 1995-99, plus an adjustment of 900 acre feet per year representing 16 a portion of the seepage credit referenced in Section 3.1.1. 17 3.1.4 The Base Production Right of San Jacinto is based upon its 18 average Production for calendar years 1995-1999, plus 500 acre-feet per year, and plus an 19 adjustment of 900 acre feet per year representing a portion of the seepage credit referenced in 20 Section 3.1.1. The 500 acre-feet per year has been added because San Jacinto's recent pumping 11 does not reflect its historic production, due to water purchases and other factors. 22 3.1.5 The Base Production Rights of Hemet and San Jacinto each 23 include 900 acre-feet per year that have been added to their respective amounts of pumping for 24 calendar years 1995-1999. These amounts have been added to provide Hemet and San Jacinto a 25 fair share of water from, and to resolve disputes regarding, Eastern's use of tunnel seepage, 26 Eastern's use of Fruitvale waters, and Lake Hemet's surface stream diversions. These additional 27 amounts of 900 acre-feet per year shall be treated as the first amounts pumped by Hemet and San 28 Jacinto, shall not be subject to reduction by the Watermaster as provided in Sections 3.2 to 3.2.2, Stipulated Judament -13- 1 and shall not be subject to any Administrative or Replenishment Assessments as provided in 2 Sections 3.3 to 3.3.2, or to any other fee or charge imposed under the Management Plan. 3 3.2 Adiusted Production Rights. It is the goal of the Physical Solution to 4 adjust the Base Production Rights of the Public Agencies over time on a pro-rata basis to a level 5 consistent with the Watermaster's determination of Safe Yield. The reduction will be based on 6 periodic demand, hydrology,Recharge, and the community's ability to pay for Supplemental Water, and protection of the Tribal Water Rights. In order to implement this reduction in a $ phased manner, each Public Agency's Base Production Right shall be subject to adjustment as 9 follows: 10 3.2.1 Subject to Section 3.1.5, a 10% reduction from each Base 11 Production Right in the first full year after entry of this Judgment. 12 3.2.2 Until Adjusted Production Rights are consistent with the Public 13 Agencies' share of Safe Yield, Watermaster shall determine the required reductions in Adjusted 14 Production Rights in each subsequent year to achieve Safe Yield within a reasonable period of 15 time as determined by the Watermaster, considering the extent of the Overdraft, the economic 16 impact on the Parties bound by this Judgment, and other relevant factors. The goal is to achieve 17 Safe Yield over a six (6) year period assuming an annual Overdraft of 10,000 acre feet. In the 18 event the extent of the Overdraft is greater or lesser than assumed, then the period of time 19 reasonably required to reach Safe Yield may be extended or reduced accordingly. However, in 20 no event shall any reduction be more than 10%0 of the Adjusted Production Rights of the prior 21 year. 22 3.2.3 A Public Agency Party may pump in excess of its Adjusted 23 Production Right, without any additional Administrative or Replenishment Assessment, by an 24 amount equal to its share of the 7,500 acre feet of Imported Water that is not used by the Tribe 25 provided such water has been previously delivered and is stored or will be delivered during the 26 current water year. The amount of the Tribe's unused portion of the 7,500 acre feet shall be L7 determined annually by the Watermaster. Shares of unused Imported Water shall be allotted to 28 Stipulated Judgment -14- I the Public Agency Parties in proportion to Base Production Rights, and shall be acquired and 2 paid for pursuant to contract with Eastern. 3 3.2.4 A Base Production Right of a Public Agency serving the land of a 4 Class B Participant shall be increased in an amount equal to such Participant's Base Production 5 Right, adjusted and reduced pursuant to Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, when the Participant's land is 6 converted from agricultural use to water service from the Public Agency, pursuant to Section 4.4.3. 8 3.2.5 The Adjusted Production Rights of the Public Agencies may be 9 increased by the Watermaster on a prorata basis to the extent that pumping by Class A `0 participants, or pumping by Persons not Parties to this Judgment,may decrease, and the 11 Watermaster finds that achieving the goal of maintaining the Management Area in a Safe Yield i2 condition can still be met. 13 3.3 Public Agency Production Assessments. Public Agency pumping shall 14 be subject to the following assessments: 15 3.3.1 An Administrative Assessment as provided in .Section 1.2. The 6 Administrative Assessment will be$50.00 per acre-foot of a Party's Adjusted Production Right 17 pumped after entry of this Judgment. The Watermaster shall set the Administrative Assessment 18 rate annually thereafter. The first 900 acre feet per year of Adjusted Production Right pumped 19 by Hemet and San Jacinto shall not be subject to such assessment. 20 3.3.2 A Replenishment Assessment will be levied on each Public 21 Agency as provided in Section 1.31. However, a Public Agency may pump Groundwater in 22 excess of the sum of its Adjusted Production Right, its share of Imported Water, Supplemental 23 Water applicable Carry-Over Credits per Section 6.9.2,Recharge Rights, and production of 24 Stored Water, in order to meet increasing demands, provided that such excess extractions shall 25 be subject to Replenishment Assessments. 26 3.4 Surface Rights. Eastern holds License Number 016667 from the State 27 Water Resources Control Board to divert, spread and recover surface flows of the San Jacinto 28 River within the Management Area. Lake Hemet holds pre-1914 appropriative rights to divert Stipulated Judgment -15- I and store surface flows in Lake Hemet, and to divert surface flows tributary to but outside of the 2 Management Area from Strawberry Creek and from the North and South Forks of the San 3 Jacinto River. All Parties acknowledge such Eastern and Lake Hemet rights, and the fact that 4 they are not subject to any assessments under this Judgment; provided that any water pumped by 5 Eastern tinder its License shall be included in its Adjusted Production Right. 6 3.5 Fruitvale judgment,Sale of Assets,and Agreements. The Court 7 hereby finds that Eastern purchased all of the water rights and assets of the Fruitvale Mutual 8 Water Company ("Fruitvale") pursuant to the Agreement described in Section 1.11(b) hereof. 9 and is now the owner thereof. Eastern, as the successor in interest to Fruitvale, is also a 10 defendant in the action described in Section 1.11(a) hereof. The Court finds that the only other 11 remaining Party in such action is the plaintiff City of San Jacinto. The Court retained continuing 12 jurisdiction in such action, and Eastern has made annual reports pursuant to the Fruitvale 13 Judgment. Pursuant to stipulation between Eastern and San Jacinto, and in accord with the 14 Physical Solution and terms of this Judgment, the Court hereby finds that the rights and 15 obligations of the Fruitvale Judgment have been subsumed in, and superseded by, this Judgment 16 and are no longer enforceable; that the limitations upon the place and amounts of water use in the 17 Fruitvale Judgment, the Purchase Agreement(including the provisions regarding domestic water 16 rates within the Fruitvale Improvement District) and the Agency Agreements, all described in 19 Sections 1.11(a), (b) and (c) are no longer applicable or enforceable; and that the continuing 20 jurisdiction of the Court under the Fruitvale Judgment and the obligations of Eastern to report 21 thereunder, are hereby terminated; provided, however, that any service area agreements or ?2 agreements related to mutual aid or system interties between any of the Public Agency Parties 23 are not affected by this Judgment. 24 3.6 Fruitvale Agency Rights. The water rights of Hemet, San Jacinto and 25 Lake Hemet under the several agreements with Eastern described in Section L I I(c) hereof have 26 been incorporated in their respective Base Production Rights under this Judgment. 27 28 Stipulated Judgment -16- 1 4. PRIVATE PUMPERS' WATER RIGHTS 2 4.1 Recognition of Rights. The Private Pumpers are owners of Overlying or 3 other water rights to pump from the Management Area. The Public Agencies recognize these a rights, and do not intend to take or adversely impact these rights without an agreement with the 5 owner of such rights. There is no intent to affect water use that is consistent with the historical 6 use of the Private Pumpers. 4.2 Non-Participation. A Private Pumper can elect not to participate in the $ Water Management Plan and not to formally acknowledge its existence. Such Pumpers are 9 referred to as Non-Participants. Non-Participants shall continue to exercise whatever water to rights they may hold under California law unaffected by the Plan. However, the Parties do not 11 waive their rights to challenge any new or expanded use of water or water rights. Non- 12 Participants will not have the option of intervening as a Party under the Judgment at a later date. 13 4.3 Class A Participation. A Private Pumper can become a Party to the 14 Judgment as a Class A Participant colder the following terms: 15 4.3.1 A Class A Participant who or which approves this Physical 16 Solution may vote for and/or be elected to serve as the Private Pumper representative on the 1? Watermaster, but other than as set forth in Sections 4.3.4 and 4.3.5, shall not otherwise have any 18 obligation for the implementation of the Physical Solution or the Water Management Plan. 19 4.3.2 A Class A Participant may, without any assessment by the 20 Watermaster, pump from the Participant's property within the Management Area the amount of 21 water that can be put to reasonable and beneficial use in the Participant's historic place of use or 22 as authorized under California law. 23 4.3.3 A Class A Participant shall have the right to convert to Class B 24 Participation during a grace period that shall end 3 years after the entry of this Judgment and 25 upon payment of the total assessments, without interest, that the Class A Participant would have 26 paid had the Class A Participant elected to be a Class B Participant from the later of the initial 27 production of Groundwater or the entry of the Judgment herein. 28 Stipulated Judgment -17- 1 43.4 A Class A Participant hereby authorizes the installation of water 2 meters, and the collection and reading of Groundwater production, level and water quality data 3 from the Class A Participant's well(s) by personnel authorized by the Watermaster. The a metering, meter reading, and other related monitoring efforts shall be at no cost to the Class A 5 Participant, and the Class A Participant shall receive copies of the reports and information 6 obtained upon request. 7 4.3.5 A Class A Participant shall describe or otherwise identify the 8 Participant's land and wells within the Management Area. The heirs, successors and assigns of 9 such land and wells shall succeed to the benefits of the Participant's rights under the Judgment, 10 and be bound by the obligations thereof, provided that such successor intervenes as a Party under 11 the Judgment. Absent such intervention, the successor will be treated as a Non-Participant. 12 4.4 Class B Participation. A Private Pumper can become a Class B 13 Participant on the following terms: 14 4.4.1 A Class B Participant's Base Production Right shall be equal to the ' 15 Participant's average annual production during the calendar years 1995 through 1999, less any 16 amount of water that had been used on land that was developed for non-agricultural purposes 17 after 1999, subject to adjustments by the Watermaster pursuant to Section 4.4.1.1. Any In-Lieu 18 Water used during said period in place of Groundwater production shall be treated as part of the 19 Groundwater production for calculating Base Production Rights. The Class B Participant shall 20 pay Replenishment Assessments on amounts in excess of its Base Production Right, subject to 21 any Carry-Over Credit adjustments pursuant to Section 6.9.2, but shall not be subject to 22 Administrative Assessments, and until transfer to a Public Agency, such Base Production Right 23 shall not be subject to reduction to Safe Yield. In the absence of production history for the entire 24 period (1995-99), the Watermaster, using all available information including power consumption 25 records and records of water use by similar farming operations in the area, will estimate the 26 average annual production for the Participant. 27 4.4.1.1 In the event that the land of a Class B Participant or of a 28 Class A Participant that requests conversion to Class B Participation did not go into fall Stipulated Judament -18- I production during the period 1995-1999, or in the absence of a sufficient production history or 2 record, the Watermaster will determine the Base Production Rights to be assigned to such 3 Participant, using all information available to it. 4 4.4.1.2 Upon written request by a Class B Participant, the 5 Watermaster shall have the authority to adjust the Class B Participant's Base Production Rights 6 for such period, and on such terms and conditions, as the Watermaster deems appropriate under 7 the circumstances. For example, but not by way of limitation, the Watermaster could increase 8 the Participant's Base Production Rights on a temporary basis to permit increased Groundwater 9 production during dry periods, or for frost protection, with or without a requirement that such 10 increased production be offset or"repaid" by a decrease in Groundwater production during 11 subsequent wet periods, or to account for added acreage or for a change in crops or use of the 12 land or for a change in ownership. Where new trees were planted during the period 1995-1999, 13 the Watermaster may calculate the Base Production Rights based on known or estimated water 14 use at maturity of such trees. 15 4.4.2 The Class B Participant approves this Physical Solution and may 16 vote for and/or be elected to serve as the Private Pumper's representative on the Watermaster. 17 4.4.3 Upon conversion of a Class B Participant's land from agricultural 18 to a use that requires water servicefrom a Public Agency, the Public Agency shall credit, to the 19 extent legally permissible, the Class B Participant's Base Production Right, adjusted pursuant to 20 the percentage reductions in Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, against any requirement then in effect for 21 any water supply assessment requirements, against any fees associated with water supply that the 22 Public Agency may then have in effect. The Public Agency serving the converted land shall 23 receive a credit added to its Base Production Right as set forth in Section 3.2.4. 24 4.4.4 A Class B Participant is eligible to enter into a contract with the 25 Watermaster, or a participating Public Agency, to sell or lease for a defined period of time the 26 unused portion of the Class B Participant's Base Production Right, under terms and conditions 27 approved by the Watermaster. Criteria used in consideration of such contract shall include: 28 Stipulated Judgment -19- 1 4.4.4.1 The Water Management Plan's need to acquire additional 2 water supplies to address Overdraft and recovery; 3 4.4.4.2 Submission of a water conservation plan, including use of a In-Lieu Water, by the Class B Participant that will reasonably guarantee conservation of water 5 that would otherwise be produced from the Management Area; and the amount of conserved 6 water transferred reflects a reduction pursuant to Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2. 4.4.4.3 Public policy considerations of local government 8 jurisdictions, including economic, land use and community impacts of any Proposed water 9 conservation plan. io 4.4.5 The Class B Participant hereby authorizes the installation of meters 1 and the collection and reading of Groundwater production, water level and water quality data 12 from the Class B Participant's well(s) by personnel authorized by the Watermaster. The 73 metering,meter reading and other related monitoring efforts shall be at no cost to the Class B 11 Participant, and the Class B Participant shall receive copies of the reports and information s 15 obtained upon request. 16 4.4.6 A Class B Participant shall describe or otherwise identify the 17 Participant's land and wells within the Management Area. The heirs, successors and assigns of 18 such land and wells shall succeed to the benefits of the Participant's rights under the Judgment, 19 and be bound by the obligations thereof, provided that such successor intervenes as a Party under 2° the Judgment. Absent such intervention, the successor will be treated as a Non-Participant. A 21 Class B Participant may transfer Base Production Rights to new or replacement land on terms 22 and conditions established by the Watermaster. 23 4.5 In-Lieu Water Use. In the event any Private Pumper receives 24 Supplemental Water from a Public Agency to serve an historic use in place of Groundwater, or 25 otherwise engages in an in-lieu program after entry of the Judgment herein, the Overlying Right 26 of the Private Pumper shall not be diminished by the receipt and use of such Supplemental Water 27 or by engaging in an in-lieu program. In the event a Class B Participant received In-Lieu Water 2s Stipulated Judgment 20_ 1 for use in place of Groundwater during the period 1995-99, for purposes of determining Base Production Rights, said use shall be considered as Groundwater use. 3 4.6 Future Production Participation. Any New Pumper after the entry of 4 this Judgment may intervene in this action and Judgment only as a Class A Participant and may 5 not thereafter convert to Class B status. 6 4.7 Replacement Wells. Re-drilling of existing wells and the drilling of new 7 wells to replace existing wells will not be considered new production as provided in Section 4.6. 8 5. TRIBAL WATER RIGHTS 9 The Tribal Water Rights have been determined as part of a settlement among the io Soboba Tribe, the United States, Eastern, Lake Hemet and Metropolitan. The settlement is 11 reflected in a Settlement Agreement, Congressional legislation and appropriation of finds, and a 12 Judgment in the Soboba Action. Such settlement includes the following provisions, which shall 13 be effective only upon fulfillment of all of the conditions precedent set forth in Article 3 of the 14 Settlement Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto. 15 5.1 Senior Right. The Soboba Tribe shall have a prior and paramount right, 16 superior to all others, to pump 9000 acre-feet per year(3000 acre feet from the Canyon Subbasin 17 and the remainder from a portion of the San Jacinto Upper Pressure Subbasin referred to as the 18 Intake Subbasin), for use on the Reservation, as defined in Article 2.20 of the Settlement 19 Agreement, and on lands now owned or hereafter acquired by the Soboba Tribe contiguous to the 20 Reservation or within the Canyon and Intake Subbasins; provided,however, that such use shall zl be limited to amounts set forth in a development schedule from 2,900 acre feet per year to 4,100 22 acre-feet per year for the first 50 years after the Effective Date as set forth in Exhibit "I" to the 23 Settlement Agreement. "The Tribe's right to pump applies to all Groundwater, whether 24 replenished by Natural Recharge or by Supplemental Water. In addition, the Tribe shall have the 25 right to purchase additional water from the Watermaster during the fifty years that its use is 16 limited according to Exhibit "I" to the Settlement Agreement at the rate then being charged to the 21 Public Agencies under the Water Management Plan_ In the event the Soboba Tribe is unable, 28 except for mechanical failure of its wells,pumps or water facililties, to produce from its existing Stipulated Judgment _21_ I wells or equivalent replacements up to 3,000 AFA production from the Canyon Subbasin and the 2 remainder of its Tribal Water Rights from the Intake Subbasin, Eastern and Lake Hemet shall 3 deliver any shortage to the Soboba Tribe as provided in Section 4.1C of the Settlement 4 Agreement. Pumping for such purpose shall not be subject to Administrative or Replenishment 5 Assessments, and shall not be counted as part of Adjusted Production Rights. 6 5.2 Metropolitan Water. The Soboba settlement provides, among other matters, that Metropolitan will use its best efforts to deliver sufficient Imported Water to yield 8 7,500 acre-feet per year, based upon 15 year averages, for Recharge in the Management Area at 9 its untreated replenishment water rate, or any successor rate of equivalent price as provided in 10 Section 4.4A of the Settlement Agreement. 11 5.3 Settlement Payment. Subject to the Effective Date of the Settlement 12 Agreement and funding by the United States, Eastern pursuant to the terms set forth in the Water 13 Management Plan, will pay the Soboba Tribe S 17 million dollars pursuant to Article 4.7A of the 14 Settlement Agreement in consideration, in part, of the Tribe's agreement to limit its water use 15 according to Exhibit "I" to the Settlement Agreement for the first 50 years after the Effective 16 Date. Subject to contracts with Eastern, the Public Agencies shall have the right to pump and 17 use all Imported Water not used by the Tribe, and the unused portion of the"Tribal Water Rights 18 shall be available for use by the Parties, pursuant to their rights herein. 19 5.4 Capital Facilities. Eastern on behalf of the Water Management Plan 20 participants will receive $10 million from the United States, to be applied to the costs of 21 constructing and operating the Phase I capital facilities necessary to import and Recharge 22 Supplemental Water as described in the Plan. 23 5.5 Public Agencies' Use of Facilities. Additional grant funds from the State 24 of California or the United States may also be available for such capital facilities. The rights of 25 the Public Agencies to the use of such facilities will be affirmed by contract as set forth in 26 Sections 9.6.4(1) and 9.6.4(3). 27 5.6 Acknowledgement of Soboba Tribe Settlement. The Parties to this 28 Judgment hereby recognize the Tribal Water Rights, as set forth above, and the applicable Stipulated Judgment -22- 1 provisions of the Soboba Tribe Settlement Agreement, and acknowledge that protection of Tribal Water Rights is one of the goals of the Water Management Plan. 3 6. PHYSICAL SOLUTION. 4 6.1 Purpose and Obiective. Pursuant to California water law and the 5 California Constitution, article X, section 2, the Court adopts this Physical Solution to maximize 6 reasonable beneficial use of Surface Water, Groundwater and Supplemental Water for water users in or dependent upon the Management Area, to eliminate Overdraft, to protect the prior 8 rights of the Soboba Tribe, and to provide the Parties with the substantial enjoyment of their 9 respective rights, including, the priorities thereof. 10 6.2 Need for Flexibility. In order to adapt to potential changes in hydrology, 11 land use, and social and economic conditions, the Physical Solution must provide some degree o 12 flexibility and adaptability. Accordingly, the Court retains broad jurisdiction to supplement the r3 discretion granted to the Watermaster herein. 14 6.3 Rights to Groundwater. Groundwater in the Management Area may 15 occur from: Natural Recharge; spreading operations of natural flows; Recharge with 16 Supplemental Water acquired with assessment funds; return flows, fallowing or in-lieu recharge 17 programs financed with assessment finds. All such Groundwater shall be available to support 18 the pumping of the Parties as allowed herein, and shall not be the property of any individual 19 Party. Subject to the provisions of Section 6.7.2, this Section does not preclude any Party, 20 pursuant to a Storage Agreement, from storing Supplemental Water at its own cost, retaining 21 title thereto, and pumping such water without assessment. 22 6.4 Resolution of Priorities. By reason of the long and continuous Overdraft 23 of the Management Area, the contribution of all Parties to the Overdraft, the economies that have 24 developed on the basis of the Overdraft, the severe economic disruption that could occur under 25 strict priorities and the doctrines of prescription and laches, the complexity of determining 26 appropriative priorities, and the need to make the maximum beneficial use of the water resources 27 of the State, the Parties are estopped and barred from asserting specific priorities or preferences 28 to the pumping of Groundwater in the Management Area, except as provided in this Judgment, Stipulated Judgment -23- I and the Court finds that the provisions of this Judgment provide for the substantial enjoyment of 2 the respective rights of the Parties. 3 6.5 Water Management Ilan. The Watermaster will approve and implement ° a Water Management Plan to enforce and implement the Physical Solution, and may modify 5 such Plan as conditions require, subject to the provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The Plan 6 will also facilitate and accommodate the settlement of the water rights of the Soboba Tribe, and 7 shall be subject to the approval of the Soboba Tribe and the United States as trustee for the Tribe. 8 The Parties agree that the Plan shall incorporate and serve to implement the following goals: 9 6.5.1 Groundwater levels within the Management Area have generally 10 been declining for a number of years, and the Management Area is presently in a condition of Overdraft. The Watermaster shall calculate the Safe Yield of the Management Area on an 2 annual basis, at least until the Overdraft is substantially eliminated. The Plan will, within a 13 reasonable period, eliminate Groundwater Overdraft and provide for excess production by 14 implementing a combination of available water resources management elements. These elements include: reduction in natural Groundwater production; enhanced Recharge with native 16 and/or Supplemental Water; increased use of Recycled Water; in-lieu replenishment; acquisition 17 and development of Supplemental Water; and water conservation programs. 18 6.5.2 The Management Area is expected to experience residential, 19 commercial, and industrial growth and development over the next decade. The estimated 20 amount of Supplemental Water that will be necessary to provide for and adequately serve this 21 new growth and development is 15,000 acre feet per year. The Water Management Plan shall 22 accommodate the orderly expansion of existing water production and service systems, and 23 provide a clear planning process for meeting these projected growth trends. 24 6.5.3 The Plan should be implemented in a manner to protect and/or 25 enhance Management Area water quality. 26 6.5.3.1 The Watermaster is authorized to undertake direct 27 operations in connection with reducing, controlling or dealing with Groundwater Degradation, 28 Stipulated Judgment _24_ 1 including development or purchase of water supplies of any nature (local private rights,Imported 2 Water, Recycled Water, salvaged water, and/or low quality water). 3 6.5.3.2 The Watermaster is also authorized to provide incentives to & the Pub]is Agencies or other Groundwater producers to encourage production of Degraded 5 Groundwater as the Watermaster deems appropriate. For example, the Watermaster could 6 provide that all or some portion of such production would not be charged against the producer's Base Production Rights and/or could adjust or not impose the Administrative and/or, 8 Replenishment Assessment otherwise due. The Watermaster may determine the appropriate 9 incentives on a case-by-case basis or may establish a formula or schedule that would reflect or be 10 based on benefits to the Management Area resulting from such production. 11 6.5.3.3 If implementation of certain elements of the Plan causes 12 limited localized water quality Degradation and such Degradation impedes the then current 13 beneficial uses of water by any Public Agency in the Management Area, the Watermaster shall 14 implement appropriate mitigation measures to ensure the water supply to the affected Public 15 Agency, and shall bear-the associated cost. 16 6.5.3.4 The standards for local water quality Degradation shall be 17 defined by the Watermaster, and such definitions may be amended from time to time. 18 6.5.4 The Water Management Plan should serve to support the pursuit of 19 cost-effective water supply and water treatment by the Public Agencies, both individually and 20 collectively. 21 6.5.5 The Water Management Plan should serve to protect Tribal Water 22 Rights. 23 6.5.6 The Watermaster shall implement a monitoring program to ensure 24 that Plan activities follow best management and engineering principles to protect Management 25 Area water resources, and to compile and analyze data on Groundwater production, water levels, 26 water quality and Groundwater in storage. 27 6.6 Replenishment Program. The Groundwater replenishment program shall 28 be administered by the Watermaster. The program shall include: the acquisition of Supplemental Stipulated Judgment -25- 1 Water; the collection and expenditure of Replenishment Assessments; the Recharge of the 2 Management Area; and the construction and operation of all necessary facilities, including but 3 not limited to, development of surface and subsurface percolation and injection facilities. In 4 addition, a source of Recharge Water for agencies contributing to the Settlement Payment 5 described in Section 5.3 will be Imported Water provided by Metropolitan under the Settlement 6 Agreement, and not used by the Soboba Tribe. 7 6.6.1 Priority for replenishment will be based on an equitable 8 apportionment of available replenishment water among the subbasins after full consideration of: 9 6.6.1.1 The Public Agency's participation in the payment in the 10 Settlement Payment described in Section 5.3. 11 6.6.1.2 Hydrologic conditions in the Management Area. 12 6.6.1.3 The Management Area's Water demands. 13 6.6.1.4 The availability of storage capacity to accommodate the 14 Natural Recharge of surface flows. 1s 16 6.6.1.5 The availability of appropriate conveyance facilities. 17 6.6.1.6 The availability of Supplemental Water, 18 6.6.1.7 Protection of Tribal Water Rights. 19 6.6.2 The Watermaster is encouraged to take advantage of surplus 20 Imported Water from Metropolitan that occasionally may be available at low cost, and to use 21 available assessment funds to bank.such Recharge Water against future production in excess of 22 Adjusted Production Rights. 23 6.6.3 The Public Agencies shall independently or jointly operate their 24 present facilities to maximize the existing spreading and Recharge operations of natural flow in 2s the Management Area. Such Recharge Water shall be available to support the pumping of all 26 users, and shall not be the property of the spreading Public Agency. 27 6.6.4 All water used to replenish any subbasin in the Management Area 28 shall meet the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region requirements, and the Stipulated hidgment -26- I provisions of Article 4.2 of the Settlement Agreement, and may be used in any subbasin where 2 such requirements are met. 3 6.7 Storage Rights. UnUscd storage capacity may exist in the Management 4 Area. and this capacity will be managed by the Watermaster conjunctively with natural and 5 available Supplemental Water supplies. 6 6.7.1 Subject to availability of assessment funds and unused storage 7 capacity as determined by Watermaster, the Management Area may be Recharged when water is 6 available, to be drawn upon by the Public Agencies in later years when such Supplemental Water 9 may not be available. 10 6.7.2 Unused storage capacity, as determined by Watermaster, and 11 pursuant to a Storage Agreement, may be used for "put and take" operations with Supplemental 12 Water that is paid for by any Public Agency provided that: 13 6.7.2.1 Such operations do not interfere with the rights of any 4 other pumper, or with the use of the storage capacity for Recharge and storage under the Water 15 Management Plan. 16 6.7.2.2 The Watermaster shall have the first right to purchase any 17 water available for Recharge for use tinder the Plan. 18 6.7.2.3 Later recovery of Stored Water shall exclude losses, and shall not be subject to 19 either Administrative or Replenishment Assessments. 20 6.7.2.4 Such recovered water may be used anywhere within the 21 service area of the Party. 22 6.7.2.5 Such Stored Water may be transferred while still in 23 storage. 24 6.7.3 Any conjunctive use programs within the Management Area for 21 the benefit of territory outside of the Management Area shall be subject to the Watermaster's 26 approval and the governance provisions herein. Any storage, conjunctive use programs by third 21 Parties, or in-lieu recharge programs financed with assessment funds, shall be subject to the 21 Watermaster's approval and the governance provisions herein; provided that Metropolitan has Stipulated Judgment -27- the right under the Soboba Settlement Agreement to use up to 40,000 acre-feet of storage 2 capacity in the San Jacinto Upper Pressure Subbasin for the pre-delivery of water required under 3 Section 5.2. 4 6.7.4 Eastern and Lake Hemet have previously provided water for 5 replenishment of the Management Area. As of May 1, 2005 these amounts, less losses, were 6 12,694 acre-feet for Eastern and 950 acre-feet for Lake Hemet Such Parties shall have Recharge Rights to recover these amounts, less any future losses, without either Administrative or 8 Replenishment Assessments, and may use such Rights to offset excess pumping in lieu of 9 Replenishment Assessments. The water available under such Recharge Rights shall be pumped 10 within 15 years of the entry of this Judgment, but not more than 2000 acre-feet in a single year. 11 The Public Agencies shall notify the Watermaster when such Recharged Water is being pumped, 112 and in what amounts, and the Watermaster shall keep an accounting of the amounts remaining. 13 The use of such credits shall be interpreted and administered so as not to increase the 14 replenishment obligations or assessments of those Parties without such past credits, or after such 15 credits have been fully used. i6 6.7.5 The accounting for recovery of Stored Water or Recharge Water 17 from the Management Area shall not include any water that escapes therefrom and migrates 18 downstream beyond the Management Area. Losses will be calculated based upon best 19 engineering principles. 20 6.8 Recycled Water. The use of Recycled Water produced by Eastern can be 21 of substantial benefit in providing additional water in the Management Area. The Watermaster 22 shall have a right of first refusal to purchase all Recycled Water produced from treatment 23 facilities serving the Management Area that is not subject to then existing contracts. Such 24 Recycled Water may be used for Recharge or direct use within the Management Area. 25 6.8.1 Each Public Agency may implement its own Recycled Water 26 program, for direct use, subject to the availability of Recycled Water. The Public Agency shall 27 be responsible for financing, operating and maintaining the facilities necessary for that program. 28 The Watermaster will support loan or grant applications, and the Public Agencies will work to Stipulated Judgment -28- 1 integrate Recycled Water into the Water Management Plan, to the extent economically feasible 2 while meeting regulatory standards. 3 6.8.2 Currently only Eastern has Recycled Water available for Recharge. 4 To the extent such Recycled Water is not acquired by the Watermaster for use under the Plan, 5 any such water recharged in the Management Area shall remain the property of Eastern and may 6 be pumped (less losses) without Replenishment Assessments. 7 6.9 Assessment Program. The Assessment Program contemplated by the 8 Water Management Plan and consisting of Administrative Assessments and Replenishment 9 Assessments as described in Sections 1.2, 1.30, and 3.3, respectively, shall be administered by to Eastern pursuant to a contract with the Watermaster pursuant to the provisions of Section 11 9.6.4(5). 12 6.9.1 All Assessments shall be used for Replenishment Expenses and 13 Administrative Expenses. 14 6.9.2 Subject to the limitations in this Judgment, each Public Agency 15 that produces less than its Adjusted Production Right and share of Imported Water, and any 16 Class B Participant producing less than its Base Production Right, shall have the following 17 Catty-Over Credit: 18 6.9.2.1 Catty-Over Credit shall be the difference in acre-feet 19 between a Public Agency's Adjusted Production Right and share of Imported Water and 21 Supplemental Water, and the Public Agency's actual production in a calendar year, or the Class 21 B Participant's Base Production Right and the Class B Participant's actual production in a 22 calendar year. 23 6.9.2.2 The Carry-Over Credit may be applied to reduce the 24 amount of acre feet upon which a Public Agency or Class B Participant must pay a 25 Replenishment Assessment either for the previous year or in any subsequent year. Carry-Over 26 Credits are transferable among the Public Agencies and Class B Participants (i.e., by a Public 27 Agency to another Public Agency or to a Class B Participant, or by a Class B Participant to a 28 Public Agency or the Watermaster) and maybe retained for more than one calendar year. The Stipulated Judgment -29- 1 Public Agencies and/or Class B Participants shall notify the Watermaster if a Carry-Over Credit 2 is being retained. The Public Agencies and Class B Participants shall notify the Watermaster if a 3 CatTy-Over Credit is being transferred and shall provide information requested by the 4 Watermaster regarding the transfer. 5 6.9.2.3 The Watermaster shall keep an accounting of all 6 Carry-Over Credits. 7 6.9.3 All Watermaster assessment invoices shall be payable to 8 Watermaster within 60 days of notice. Any delinquent assessments shall bear interest at a rate to 9 be set by the Watermaster. Watermaster is entitled to recover its reasonable expenses in 10 collecting any assessment, including attorney's fees and costs. 1- 6.9.4 The Watermaster is authorized to adjust assessments, where 12 deemed appropriate, to provide incentives for production of Degraded Groundwater as described 13 in Section 6.5.3. 14 6.10 Export. The Public Agencies may export water outside the Management -5 Area, on a temporary basis, upon approval by the Watermaster. However, any water exported 16 shall be replenished with an appropriate amount of similar or better quality water as determined 17 by Watermaster. Water exports by the Public Agencies shall not interfere with the Water 18 Management Plan or any other Public Agency's operations. The Water Management Plan will 19 set forth the specific criteria for the export of water, including,but not limited to, conjunctive use 20 programs. 21 6.11 Capital Facilities. Each Public Agency shall continue to own its existing 22 capital facilities for water supply and management, subject to the provisions of Section 9.6.6. 23 However, the Phase I capital facilities necessary to implement the Water Management Plan shall 24 be owned and operated by Eastern, pursuant to the Plan and in a fiduciary capacity for the benefit 25 of all Parties under this Judgment, pursuant to Sections 5.4; 9.6.4(1); 9.6.4(3). 26 6.11.1 Financing of Water Management Plan facilities may be funded by 27 assessments, regional capital fees, loans and grants, contributions for Storage Rights by 28 Metropolitan or other third-parties, and municipal bonds. Responsibility for the costs of future Stipulated Judgment -30- 1 capital facilities necessary to implement the Plan, beyond the Phase I facilities, shall be 2 determined by the Waternaster and apportioned based on relative benefit to be derived by each 3 Public Agency. 4 6.11.2 Any of the participating Public Agencies may propose projects to 5 be included in the Water Management Plan to increase the Management Area water supply. 6 Such proposals, after evaluation by the Watermaster, shall be included or rejected. If the 7 Watemlaster chooses to reject the proposal, the proposing Public Agency may implement the B rejected project at its own cost so long as it does not significantly impact the implementation of 9 the Management Plan and/or interfere with the ongoing production by the Public Agencies. 1.0 7. INJUNCTION. 11 Each Party and his, her or its officers, agents, employees, successors and assigns, 12 is enjoined and restrained from: 13 7A Producing water from the Management Area without payment of required 14 Administrative Assessments. 15 7.2 Producing water from the Management Area in excess of the Party's 16 Adjusted Production Right and share of Imported Water, or the Base Production Right in the 17 case of a Class B Participant, without payment of required Replenishment Assessments, 16 7.3 Transferring Production Rights except as authorized in this Judgment. 19 7.4 Recharging water in the Management Area except as authorized in this 20 Judgment. 21 1.5 Storing or exporting water except as authorized in this Judgment. 77 S. CONTINUING,IURISDICTION. 23 8.1 Full Jurisdiction. Full jurisdiction, power and authority is reserved to the 24 Court as to all matters contained in this Judgment, including expedited intervention by 25 successors in interest to Private Pumpers, except: 26 8.1.1 To redetermine Base Production Rights of the Public Agencies or 27 Class B Participants. 28 8.1.2 As otherwise limited bylaw. Stipulated Judgment -31- 1 8.2 Motion to Interpret. By motion to the Court, upon 30 days written 2 notice and after hearing, any Party or Watermaster may request the Court to make such further or 3 supplemental orders to interpret, enforce, carry-out or amend this Judgment. Any such motion 4 shall be reviewed de novo by the Court. Any such motion shall be served on all Parties and 5 Watermaster at the addresses on the Watermaster's notice list. 6 9. WATERMASTER. 7 9.1 Composition. The Watermaster shall consist of a board composed of one 8 elected official selected by each of the Public Agencies and one Private Pumper representative 9 selected by the Class A and Class B Private Pumpers. 10 9.2 Terms. Each member of the Watermaster shall serve until replaced by the 11 Public Agency or Private Pumpers that made the original appointment. 12 9.3 Removal and Replacement. Any Watermaster member may be removed 3 and replaced by the same procedure used in his or her appointment. 14 9.4 Voting. Each member of the Watermaster shall have one vote. Four 15 affirmative votes shall be required in order to constitute Watermaster action on each of the 16 following matters. (1) any change sought in the form of governance; (2) any change in voting -� requirements; (3) retaining the services of legal counsel and Advisor; (4) establishing, levying, 18 increasing or decreasing all assessment amounts; (5) adopting or amending an annual budget; (6) 19 determining the extent of Overdraft and quantifying Safe Yield; (7) determining Adjusted 20 Production Rights; (8) decisions regarding the financing of Supplemental Water or facilities, 21 other than any financing provisions included in this Stipulated Judgment as provided in Sections 22 5.3, 5.4, 5.5 hereof; (9) decisions regarding ownership of facilities, other than ownership of the 23 Phase 1 facilities described in the Water Management Plan, which shall be owned by Eastern 24 Municipal Water District, subject to a right of use by those Parties participating in the financing 25 thereof; (10)policies for the management of the Management Area; (11) and any decision that 26 involves a substantial commitment by the Watermaster, including any contracts for conserved ?7 water. All other actions by the Watermaster shall require three affirmative votes. 28 Stipulated Judgment 32_ 1 9.5 Court Review. Any action by the Watermaster, or any failure to act by 2 virtue of insufficient voles, may be reviewed by the Court on motion by any Party, with notice to 3 all other Parties. The Court's review shall be de novo, and the Court's decision shall constitute A action by the Watermaster. 5 9.6 Powers and Duties. In order to implement the provisions of this 6 Judgment, the Watermaster shall have the following duties and powers: 7 9.6.1 Water Management Plan. Watermaster shall develop and 8 implement a Water Management Plan, with such additions and modifications as may from time 9 to time be appropriate, and shall administer the provisions of this Judgment. The Water 10 Management Plan shall be subject to approval by the Court, by the Soboba Tribe, and by the 11 United States. 12 9.6.2 Independent Counsel. The Watermaster shall retain independent 13 legal counsel to provide such legal services as the Watermaster may direct. 14 9.6.3 Advisor. The Watermaster shall retain either an independent 15 engineering firm or qualified individual experienced in hydrology to evaluate and analyze the 6 data collected by Eastern, and any conclusions based thereon, and to make recommendations to 17 the Watermaster, referred to herein as "Advisor." The Advisor shall also provide general 18 coordination among Eastern, the Technical Advisory Committee and the Watermaster with 14 respect to their respective functions, and perform such executive functions as the Watermaster 2C may direct. The Watermaster reserves the right to refer any matter it may choose to any Person G1 it may select for assistance in carrying out its duties under this Judgment. 22 9.6.4 Operations and Other Functions. 23 9.6.4.1 Operations —Phase I Facilities. The Phase I Facilities 24 (including capital facilities and spreading basins, as more particularly defined in the Water 25 Management Plan) are either existing facilities of Eastern that will be expanded or improved as 26 part of the Water Management Plan, or are new facilities that will be integrated into Eastern's 27 existing facilities and will be owned by Eastern. Pursuant to the terns and conditions of 28 contracts to be entered into between Eastern and the Watermaster, and Eastern and the other Stipulated Judgment 33 1 Public Agencies, Eastern shall construct, install, and operate the Phase I Facilities consistent with 2 the Water Management Plan. 3 9.6.4.2 Operations —Other Facilities. The Water Management 4 Plan anticipates the need for the construction and installation of other facilities in order to 5 accomplish the goals of the Judgment. Such facilities may be constructed, installed and operated 6 under contract with the Watermaster,by a member of the Watermaster or, in circumstances 7 approved by the Watermaster, by other responsible entities. 8 9.6.4.3 Purchase of Water for Groundwater Recharge. The 9 Soboba settlement requires Metropolitan to use its best efforts to deliver an average of 7500 10 acre-feet per year of Imported Water for Recharge of the Management Area. This supply is 11 dedicated first to satisfy the rights of the Soboba Tribe as provided in the Settlement Agreement. 12 Such portion of the supply that is not used by the Soboba Tribe will be available to those Parties 13 who have participated in the cost thereof. Subject to the approval of the Watermaster, Eastern 14 shall enter into a contract with Metropolitan for the purchase and delivery of such Imported is Water supply. Eastern shall also purchase as a member agency of Metropolitan, or otherwise 16 acquire, such additional supplies of water as may be directed by the Watermaster to implement 17 the Water Management Plan, subject to availability and transmission capacity. All such water 18 delivered by Metropolitan, or otherwise acquired by Eastern, and all Eastern facilities used to 19 deliver, recharge and recapture such water, shall be subject to rights of use by the Parties entitled 20 thereto. Such rights of use shall be confirmed in detail in written contracts with Eastern. 21 Recycled water is also available for direct and indirect Groundwater Recharge from Eastern's 22 wastewater treatment facilities serving the Management Area. The Watermaster shall have a 23 right of first refusal to purchase all Recycled Water produced from such plants that is not subject 24 to then existing contracts. The Watermaster is authorized to use its funds, or funds provided by 25 the Parties, to purchase Imported Water, Supplemental Water, or other water. 26 9.6.4.4 Data Collection. The Watermaster shall provide for the 27 collection and maintenance of all production, water level, water quality, and other technical data 28 necessary under or required by the Water Management Plan ("Data"). Pursuant to the terms and Stipulated JudUmcnt -3d- 1 conditions of a contract to be entered into between Eastern and the Watermaster,Eastern shall 2 collect and maintain all such Data and transmit such Data to the Watermaster, its Advisor, and 3 the Technical Advisory Committee as directed by the Watermaster. The foregoing clause does a not restrict the ability of the Watermaster to enter into other agreements with other members of s the Watermaster and/or private firms and individuals for the collection of Data. 6 9.6.4.5 Accounting. The Watermaster shall provide for the levy, 7 billing, and collection of all assessments provided for under the Judgment, for the payment of 8 costs and expenses of the Watermaster, and for the performance of such accounting and related 9 functions as may be required in connection with those functions ("Accounting Functions"). All 10 funds collected shall be held in a segregated account. All expenses and disbursements shall be 11 separately accounted for. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of a contract to be entered into 12 between Eastern and the Watermaster, Eastern shall initially perform the Accounting Functions 13 for Watermaster. The foregoing clause does not restrict the ability of the Watermaster to enter 14 into other agreements with other members of the Watermaster and/or private firms and I individuals to provide some or all of the Accounting Functions. 16 9.6.5 Technical Advisory Committee. There has been a Technical 17 Advisory Committee that has functioned throughout the development of the Water Management 11 Principles and Plan, and this Stipulated Judgment. That Committee has been composed of such 19 managerial and technical representatives as the individual Parties decide to appoint. Each Party 11 has paid the costs of its own representatives, and shall continue to do so in the future. The 21 Technical Advisory Committee shall continue to function, and to provide such technical 22 assistance as the Watermaster may request. The Technical Advisory Committee shall make 23 recommendations to the Watermaster's Advisor and to the Watermaster on all matters requiring 24 four votes for Watermaster action, and shall receive from Eastern all data associated with such 25 matters for its review and evaluation. The Technical Advisory Committee and its members shall 26 also function as a way to keep the City Councils, Boards of Directors and participating Private 27 Pumpers fully informed about the implementation of this Judgment. 28 Stipulated Judgment -35- 1 9.6.6 Reservation of Rights. The Watermaster reserves the right to 2 assume, on its own, any functions set forth in Section 9.6.4, except as provided in Section 3 9.6.4(1), and to undertake all other acts required to implement the Plan and this Judgment, so 4 long as it is legally capable of performing such functions. The Watermaster, if it should choose, 5 may also act through or in conjunction with the other Public Agencies, or through a Joint Powers 6 Agency composed of all the Public Agencies hereunder. Except as specifically provided in Section 9.6.4(1) with respect to Eastern's facilities used in Phase I, the Watermaster shall have s no right to use or acquire the water facilities of any of the Parties, without their consent, provided 9 that it is the intent of the Parties that their individual facilities will be available where appropriate -0 to implement the Water Management Plan, upon terms equitable to all Parties, and consistent 11 with their respective obligations to their own customers. -2 9.6.7 Rules and Regulations. The Watermaster may make such rules 13 and regulations as may be necessary for its own operations as well as for the operation of the 14 Plan and this Judgment, subject to Court approval. Meetings of the Watermaster shall be subject 15 to the Brown Act . 16 9.6.8 Reports to Court. The Watermaster shall file annually with the 17 Court, and serve on all Parties, a report regarding its activities during the preceding year, 18 including an audited statement of all accounts and financial activities. 19 9.6.9 Notice to Parties. Watermaster shall maintain a current list of the 20 Parties and their addresses for notice purposes. Rules for service shall be governed by the 21 California Code of Civil Procedure and the California Rules of Court. Each Party shall notify 22 Watermaster in writing of the name and address for its receipt of notice and service under this 23 Judgment. A Party may change this information by written notice to Watermaster. Notice shall 24 be deemed sufficient if directed to the most recent address provided by the Watermaster. 25 9.7 Watermaster Records. Watermaster's records shall be kept at the office 26 of Eastern unless changed by the Watermaster and approved by the Court. These records shall 27 be treated as public records under the Public Records Act. California Government Code sections 28 6250-6277 (West 1995 and Stipp. 2002). Stipulated Judgment -36- 1 10. MISCELLANEOUS. 2 10.1 Intervention After Jndgyment. A New Pumper can intervene in this 3 action as a Class A Participant only, pursuant to Section 4.6. Any other Person who is an heir, 4 successor or assign of an existing Party, may become a Party to this action and Judgment, subject 5 to the conditions contained herein, by filing a petition in intervention. The petition may be filed 6 and approved ex parte with notice to the Water master. Such intervener shall thereafter be a Part 7 bound by this Judgment, and entitled to the rights and privileges accorded under this Judgment to 8 the Party such Person succeeds in this action. 9 10.2 Loss of Rights. No right adjudicated in this Judgment shall be lost by 10 non-use, abandonment, forfeiture or otherwise, except upon a written election by the owner of 11 the right filed with Watermaster, or by order of the Court upon noticed motion and after hearing. 12 10.3. Attorney's Fees and Costs. No Party shall recover any attorney's fees or 13 costs in this proceeding from any Party. 14 15 16 DATED: 2010 7 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulated Judgment -37- 1 EXHIBIT A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulated 7udamcm -38- 1 EXHIBIT B 2 3 List of Parties to this Judgment s 6 7 1. Public Agencies 8 9 A. Eastern Municipal Water District(`Eastern) 10 B. Lake Hemet Municipal Water District ("Lake Hemet") i1 C. City of Hemet("Hemet") 12 D. City of San Jacinto ("San Jacinto") 13 14 15 Class A Participants 16 17 A 1e B. 19 C. 20 D. 21 22 23 3. Class B Participants 24 25 A. 26 B. 27 C. 28 Stipulated Judgment -39- 1 EXHIBIT C 2 3 Base Production Rights 4 5 6 7 1. Public Agencies s 0 10 Base Production Rights 11 Agency Name (Acre-feet per year) 12 Eastern Municipal Water District 10,869 13 Lake Hemet Municipal Water District 11,063 14 City of Hemet 6,320 �-- 15 City of San Jacinto 4,031 16 17 1s 19 2. Class B Participants 20 Name Rights APN 21 22 23 24 25 26 X:AWP2000\JaneAGDS\EMWD\EMWD v Basin AdjudicationlStip Judgment-Clean copy-GDS Changes•10.13.2010.doc 27 28 Stipulated Judgment -40-