Pump Station Improvements 2011 - PDR - 201407231644149204

PUMPSTATIONIMPROVEMENTS2011PRELIMINARYDESIGNREPORTFINAL
10/62010,Page1
CITYOFSHASTALAKE
Date:
October6,2010
By:
JoeRiess,P.E.
AndrewBorgic,P.E.
MikeFisher,P.E.
ReviewedBy:
TableofContents
1.
2.
Purpose..............................................................................................................................................................3
Background........................................................................................................................................................3
2.1. PumpStationNo.4ConversionandPumpStationNo.4ADecommissioningandAbandonment..........3
2.2. PumpStationNos.1and2ConversionOptions.......................................................................................4
2.3. PumpStationNos.1,2and3RoofUpgrade.............................................................................................5
3. DesignFlows......................................................................................................................................................5
3.1. PumpStationNo.1....................................................................................................................................5
3.2. PumpStationNo.2....................................................................................................................................5
3.3. PumpStationNo.4....................................................................................................................................5
4. DesignAssumptionsandGoals.........................................................................................................................6
5. PumpStationNo.1............................................................................................................................................7
5.1. Alternative1WetPitwithSubmersiblePumps.....................................................................................7
5.2. Alternative2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps.......................................................................................8
5.3. Alternative3NewWetPitwithSubmersiblePumps.............................................................................9
5.4. CostAnalysis............................................................................................................................................12
5.5. RecommendedAlternative......................................................................................................................12
6. PumpStationNo.2..........................................................................................................................................13
6.1. Alternative1WetPitwithSubmersiblePumps...................................................................................13
6.2. Alternative2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps.....................................................................................14
6.3. CostAnalysis............................................................................................................................................18
7. PumpStationNo.4..........................................................................................................................................19
7.1. HydraulicAnalyses...................................................................................................................................19
7.1.1. GravitySewer(MHK1tojustbeforeMHK1Atheoldgravityalignment)................................22
7.1.2. ForceMain(PumpStationNo.4toWWTP)....................................................................................24
7.2. Alternative1WetPitwithSubmersiblePumps...................................................................................25
7.3. Alternative2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps.....................................................................................27
7.4. CostAnalysis............................................................................................................................................29
8. ProjectConstraints..........................................................................................................................................30
WaterWorksEngineers,LLC
10/62010,Page2
8.1. Constructability.......................................................................................................................................30
8.1.1. PumpStationNo.1..........................................................................................................................30
8.1.2. PumpStationNo.2..........................................................................................................................30
8.1.3. PumpStationNo.4..........................................................................................................................30
8.1.4. PumpStationNo.4A.......................................................................................................................30
8.2. Environmental.........................................................................................................................................31
8.2.1. BiologicalResources........................................................................................................................31
8.2.2. ArcheologicalResources..................................................................................................................32
8.3. AsbestosandLeadHazards.....................................................................................................................32
9. Appendices......................................................................................................................................................33
9.1. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.1toMHK32)..................................................34
9.2. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.2toMHB7)....................................................35
9.3. HydraulicCalculationsGravitySewer(MHK1BtoPumpStationNo.4)..............................................36
9.4. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.4toWWTP)....................................................37
9.5. PreliminaryCostEstimatesand20YearNPWCostAnalysis..................................................................38
9.6. EnvironmentalConstraintsReport..........................................................................................................39
9.7. Asbestos/LeadTestingReport.................................................................................................................40
R:\Projects\10018ShastaLakePSImprovements2011\14Deliverables\PDR\10018CoSLPDR_FINAL.docx
10/62010,Page3
1. Purpose
ThepurposeofthePumpStationImprovements2011Project(Project)istoidentifyalternativesandassociated
coststorehabilitateorreplacefivesewageliftstationsownedandoperatedbytheCityofShastaLake(City).Of
thesefiveliftstations,oneisplannedtobedecommissioned(PumpStation4A)andreplacedwithonethatis
plannedtoberetrofitted(PumpStation4)in2011.ThisPreliminaryDesignReportincludes;
projectdesigncriteria;
considers reuse of existing infrastructure (including CCTV review for pipe condition and survey/model
forcapacityassessment);
providesprojectalternativesbasedonlongtermplanningrequirementsandshorttermreliabilityneeds;
and
allows for City input on project alternatives, such as equipment selection, facility layout, electrical
classification,etc.
2. Background
TheCityowns,operatesandmaintainssevensewerliftstationsstrategicallylocatedtoconveywastewaterto
adjacent basins or directly to the Citys wastewater treatment facility. The stations vary in size, type, age and
condition. Due to a combination of deteriorating condition and operational reliability concerns, the City is
moving forward with varying degrees of rehabilitation and replacement at five of its older lift station sites. A
summaryofthesitesandtherequiredupgradesateachisprovidedbelow.
2.1. PumpStationNo.4ConversionandPumpStationNo.4ADecommissioningand
Abandonment
PumpStationNo.4(originallycalledEjectorStationNo.3)wasconstructedaspartoftheinitialsystembuildout
inthemidtolate1970sandwasdesignedtocollectsewagebygravityfromtheeastsideoftheCity.Thepump
stationconveyssewageapproximately400feetthrougha6inchforcemaintotheCityswastewatertreatment
plant (WWTP). The pump station originally included two 150 gpm ejector pot pumps and associated piping,
valves and controls that were housed in 400 ft2 two story concrete and CMU building. The ejector pots were
locatedinthelowerlevel,andthecompressors,MotorControlCenter(MCC),andbackupemergencygenerator
werehousedintheupperlevel.
Overtimetheoperationalreliabilityofthepumpstationdecreasedsignificantlyduetoairpotfailure,andCity
staff installed drypit centrifugal pumps. However, due to inadequate wet well volume and pump sizing, this
retrofit did not provide sufficient pumping capacity. Therefore, in the late 1980s/early 1990s, the City
constructed Pump Station No. 4A across Churn Creek, approximately 300feet from Pump Station No. 4, to
replace it. Currently, Pump Station 4A is the primary pump station, and Pump Station 4 is only used during
emergencies,providingextremelylimitedcapacityandreliabilityasabackup.
PumpStationNo.4Aisapackageduplexsubmersiblesewagepumpstationwithasteelwetwell.Themaximum
pumping capacity is approximately 800 gpm (1.15 mgd) and a firm capacity of 400 gpm (0.58 mgd). Pump
Station4A collectssewagebygravityfromManholeK1Bandpumpsthesewagethrough a10inchFMtothe
WWTP. The City maintains a gravity relief connection (10inch VCP) between Pump Station No. 4 and Pump
Station No. 4A to provide some backup to Pump Station No. 4A in high flow conditions. However, during
10/62010,Page4
construction ofthenewPineGroveAvenueBridge overChurnCreek,therelieflinewascrushed,significantly

reducingitscapacity(toalmostzeropassableflowarea)andreliability.
After 20 years of operation, the steel wet well of Pump Station No. 4A is significantly corroded and must be
replaced.Additionally,thePumpStationNo.4pumpsareinpoorconditionandunreliableasabackup,and
the City prefers centrifugal pumps versus ejector pot pumps due to limited (almost zero) availability of spare
parts. Growth projections within this basin indicate peak wastewater flows in excess of the Pump Station 4A
capacity.
The City intends to address these issues (infrastructure condition, operational reliability, and future capacity
needs),byconvertingPumpStationNo.4toawetpitordrypitpumpstationwithcapacitytomeetultimate
buildout flows. Once the improvements to Pump Station No. 4 are completed, Pump Station No. 4A will be
decommissionedanddemolished,withallwastewaterflowsdivertedfromPumpStationNo.4AtoPumpStation
No.4.Figure6depictstheexistingfacilitiesatPumpStationNos.4and4A.
2.2.
PumpStationNos.1and2ConversionOptions
During the same initial system buildout in the late 1970s, Pumps Station Nos. 1 and 2 were constructed
(originally called Ejector Station Nos. 1 and 2). These stations are ejector pot pump stations and are still
operatingassuchtoday.
PumpStationNo.1islocatedattheintersectionofPoplarStreetandParkStreet.PumpStationNo.1collects
sewagebygravityfromthenorthwestsideoftheCityofShastaLakeandpumpsthesewageapproximately700
feetthrough a6inchPVCforcemaintoMHK32throughtheuseoftwoejectorpotpumps.Eachejectorpot
pump has a pumping capacity of approximately 100 gpm. The pumps are housed in an underground 13foot
deepconcretevaultthatcontainsthepumps,andassociatedvalvesandpiping.Anapproximately185ft2CMU
wallbuildingcoversthevaultandcontains,twocompressors,theMCC,aroofmountedexhaustblower,anda
steel stairs to the vault. An approximately 1,200 gallon steel air storage tank for the pumps is located on the
southsideofthebuilding.
PumpStationNo.2islocatedapproximately400feetnortheastoftheintersectionofCascadeBoulevardand
KennettStreetonCascadeBoulevard.PumpStationNo.2collectssewagebygravityfromthenortheastsideof
theCityofShastaLakeandpumpsthesewageapproximately 425feetthrougha6inch forcemaintoMHB7
throughtheuseoftwoejectorpotpumps.Eachejectorpotpumphasapumpingcapacityofapproximately40
gpm.Thepumpsarehousedinanunderground8footdiameterprecastconcretevaultthatcontainsthepumps,
andtheassociatedvalvesandpiping.Anapproximately175ft2CMUbuildingcoversthevaultandcontainsthe
compressedairsystem,theMCC,anexhaustblower,andasteelaccessladdertothevault.
TheCityhasrequestedareviewofpotentialoptionsforconversionoftheejectorpotliftstationtoeitherawet
pit or drypit design because of equipment reliability and limited access (almost zero) to spare parts for the
existingequipment.Insomeinstancessparepartsforthisequipmentisnolongercommerciallyavailable,and
City staff must fabricate from scratch replacement parts. The City intends to identify, analyze and develop
preliminaryplansforreplacingthepumpsateachstationinthemostcosteffectivemanner,soastoavoidcostly
replacementofthesystemunderemergencyconditions.
10/62010,Page5
2.3. PumpStationNos.1,2and3RoofUpgrade
PumpsStationNos.1,2,3,and4haveexistingbuildingsthathousethemechanicalandelectricalequipmentfor
each station. These buildings were constructed with the initial system buildout and have had no significant
structuralupgradessincethattime.Assuch,theflatroofstructuresareshowingsignsofsignificantdegradation,
such as leaks, dry wall problems, and wood rotting. Wastewater staff spends significant time making interim
repairstoaddresstheseissues.Inadditiontothelosttimeandcostofmakingtheserepairs,theleakscanresult
inanunsafeworkingenvironment(i.e.,leaksinthevicinityofolderelectricalequipment).Thereplacementof
theroofstructuresatPumpStationNos.1,2,and3withpitchedroofsiscurrentlyunderway,andisexpectedto
becompletedbytheendoffall,2010.ReplacementofPumpStationNo.4roofwillbecompletedaspartofthe
PumpStationNo.4improvementsproject.
3. DesignFlows
ThedesignflowsforPumpStationNos.1,2,and4aredescribedbelow.
3.1. PumpStationNo.1
ThecurrentfirmcapacityofPumpStationNo.1is0.14mgd.Peakwetweatherflows(PWWF)in2003reacheda
highof0.23mgd(Source:CityofShastaLake2005WastewaterSystemMasterPlan(MasterPlan);PaceCivil,
April2005).PertheMasterPlan,PumpStationNo.1istobedecommissionedandabandonedonce
developmentresultsinconstructionoftheproposedUpperChurnCreekLiftStation(nearAshbyRoadandPine
Grove)andnewtrunksewersouthoftheTwinLakesMobileHomeParktothenewstation.Inthemeantime,
theCityintendstocontinueusingPumpStationNo.1,butwouldliketoimprovethepumpstationequipment
reliability.ThecurrentejectorpotequipmentisantiquatedandtheCitycannolongerobtainsparepartsforthe
equipment,thusjeopardizingthepumpstationsreliability.AnticipatingtheeventualdecommissioningofPump
StationNo.1,aminimalfirmcapacityforPumpStationNo.1of0.23mgdshouldbeprovided.
ThecurrentfirmcapacityofPumpStationNo.2is0.06mgd.PWWFin2003reachedahighof0.04mgd(Master
Plan).ThoughthecurrentfirmpumpcapacityisadequatetohandlethecurrentPWWF,theCitywouldliketo
improvethepumpstationequipmentreliability.LikePumpStationNo.1,PumpStationNo.2isalsooutfitted
withejectorpotpumpsthattheCitycannolongerobtainsparepartsforeasily.PertheCity(MaterPlan),the
UltimateBuildOut(UBO)PWWFof2.73mgdaccountsforconsiderabledevelopmenttotheNorthofthestation
(PeriProperty).ItisproposedintheMasterPlanthatPumpStationNo.2beupgradedandconnectedtoan
existing10inchforcemainthatwasinstalledinCascadeBlvdin1995.However,giventheextremelylimited
propertyavailableatPumpStationNo.2site,itisunlikelythattherequiredupgradecouldbeaccommodated
costeffectively.TheCityiscurrentlyoftheopinionthatasdevelopmentoccurstheNorth,thedeveloperwould
masterplan,designandconstructinfrastructurethatwouldallowforconnectiontotheexistingsystemata
locationdeemedacceptabletotheCity,butthatwouldnotrequireanupgradetoPumpStation2.Takingthese
conditionsintoaccount,theminimalfirmcapacityforPumpStationNo.2correspondstotheanticipated2025
PWWFflowrateof0.31mgd(MasterPlan).
PumpStationNo.4currentlyoperatesasabackuptoPumpStation4A,whichwasinstalledasareplacement
forPumpStation4.ThecurrentfirmcapacityofPumpStationNo.4issupposedtobe0.43mgd,butthepump
currentlyinstalleddemonstratesextremelylowoperationalreliability.PWWFconveyedtoPumpStationNo.4A
in2003reachedahighof0.90mgd(MasterPlan).PumpStationNo.4willbeupgradedandmodifiedunderthis
10/62010,Page6
ProjecttoreplacePumpStationNo.4A.Takingtheseconditionsintoaccount(aswellastheUBOflows
describedintheMasterPlan),theminimalfirmcapacityforPumpStationNo.4correspondstotheanticipated
UBOPWWFflowrateof1.44mgd.ThissizingassumesthatPumpStationNo.1willbedecommissionedand
flowsreroutedtothenewUpperChurnCreekPumpStationpriortodevelopmentincreasingflowsabovethis
designlimit.
AsummaryofthedesignflowsforeachofthepumpstationsthatwillbeimprovedinthisProjectisprovidedin
Table1.
Table1.DesignFlowSummary,mgd
PumpStation
CurrentFirm
Capacity
2003a
PumpStationNo.1
PumpStationNo.2
PumpStationNo.3
PumpStationNo.4
PumpStationNo.4A
0.14
0.06
1.5
0.43
1.15
0.23
0.04
0.92
NAc
0.90
EstimatedPeakWetWeatherFlow(PWWF)
UltimateBuild
Project
2025a
Outa(UBO)
Design
b
NA
0.23
0.31
2.73
0.31
1.2
3.00
NA
0.87
1.44
1.44
NAd
Source:CityofShastaLake2005WastewaterSystemMasterPlan,PaceCivil,Inc.,April2005.
PumpstationtobedecommissionedandabandonedonceanewtrunksewerisconstructedsouthoftheTwinLakes
MobileHomePark;Source:CityofShastaLake2005WastewaterSystemMasterPlan,PaceCivil,Inc.,April2005.
c
BackuppumpstationtoPumpStationNo.4A.Approximatecapacityof0.43mgd.
d
Pumpstationtobedecommissionedandabandonedduringthe2011PumpStationImprovementsProject.
b
4. DesignAssumptionsandGoals
ThepumpstationconfigurationsforPumpStationNos.1,2,and4wereevaluatedassumingthefollowing:
Maintaintheexistinghydraulicgradelines
Manningscoefficientoffriction,n,of0.013.
CostAnalysis:
o DesignContingency=25%
o ContractorOverheadandProfit=15%
o ContractorBondsandInsurance=4%
o ConstructionContingency=10%
o 20YearNetPresentWorthInterestRate=6%
o OperationsandMaintenanceCosts:
CostofElectricity=$0.11/kWhr.
MaintenancePersonnelHourlyRate=$60/hr.
WeeklyMaintenanceTasks=1personhrs./week
MonthlyWetPitwithSubmersiblePumpsTasks=4personhrs./month
MonthlyDryPitwithSubmersiblePumpsTasks=3personhrs./month
Eachalternativewasdevelopedtomeetthefollowingdesigngoals:
Reducecapitalbudgetimpactbymaximizingtheuseofexistinginfrastructure
Provideacceptableapproachhydraulicstothepumpintakes
Preventsedimentandsurfacescumaccumulation
Maintainlessthan6motorstartsperhourperpumpatallflows
10/62010,Page7
5. PumpStationNo.1
PumpStationNo.1willbemodifiedandupgradedtoprovideafirmPWWFdesigncapacityof0.23mgd.Three
pumpstationdesignalternativesarepresentedandanalyzedbelowtoprovidetheCitywiththemostcost
effectivedesignfortheupgradeofPumpStationNo.1.
ThefollowingthreepumpstationconfigurationswereevaluatedforPumpStationNo.1:
Alternative1:WetPitwithSubmersiblePumps
o 26.5hpsubmersiblepumps
o 1,700gallonwetwell
Alternative2:DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps
o 212hpsubmersiblepumps
o 100ft2pumproom
o 930gallonwetwell
Alternative3:NewSubmersiblePumpStation
o 6diameterx12deep(700gallon)precastwetwellwithliner
o Valvevault
PumpStationNo.1willpumprawsewagetoMHK32throughtheexisting700foot,6inchPVCforcemain.To
assesstheforcemaincapacityandsizethePumpStationNo.1pumps,ahydraulicmodelofthesystemwas
created.Theforcemainhydraulicmodelwasusedtocalculatethetotaldynamichead(TDH)ofthepumpsfor
eachofthethreePumpStationNo.1pumpstationalternativesasprovidedinAppendix9.1.
5.1. Alternative1WetPitwithSubmersiblePumps
Alternative1utilizestheexistingundergroundrectangularconcretevaultasawetwell.Theconcretevault(13
4Lx114Wx116D)hasatotalvolumeof1,740ft3.Thewetwellstoragevolumeatadepthof3feetis1,700
gallons.Aconcretecoatingwillbeappliedtotheinterioroftheconcretevaulttoprotecttheconcretefrom
chemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthevaultsumppumppitandwillbeusedto
shapethebottomofthevaulttodirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthesubmersiblepumps.Anewraised
concreteslabwillbepouredtoseparatethewetwellfromtheabovegradestructure.AnewCMUpartitionwall
willbeconstructedbetweentheelectricalroomandthepumpaccessroom.Thepartitionwallwillbeaddedto
avoidtheneed(andadditionalcost)ofprovidingNECClassI,Div1or2approvedelectricalequipment.
Thewetwellwillhousetwo6.5hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby).Thepumpscanbelifted
fromthewetwellthroughtheuseofaliftingchain,guiderails,andapumpaccesshatch.Thepumpshavea3
inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoa6inchdischargepipepriortoleavingthewetwelltothevalve
vault.
Theprecastconcretevalvevault,locatedonthenorthsideofthepumpstationbuilding,issizedtohousea
checkvalve,isolationvalve,dismantlingjointforeach6inchdischargepipe,andtoprovideadequateroomfor
maintenance.Thevalvevaultisapproximately6Lx6Wx4D.
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillberemovedandsalvaged.
The1,200gallonsteelairstoragetanklocatedonthesouthsideofthepumpstationwillberemovedand
salvaged.Theconcretesupportsfortheairstoragetankwillbedemolished.Aportionofthesouthpumpstation
10/62010,Page8
CMUwallwillbedemolishedtoinstalladoublemetaldoorthatwillbeusedtoaccessthepumpaccesshatch.A
portablefloorcraneisusedtoliftthepumpsfromthewetwell.
Itisanticipatedthatconstructionofthisoptionwouldrequireapproximately4weeksofbypasspumpingat
significantadditionalcosttotheproject.Intheinterestofcomparingcompleteprojectcosts,bypasspumping
hasbeenincludedwithinthecostestimate.OnecostsavingsoptionwouldbeiftheCityoperatedand
maintaineditsownbypasspumpingsetup.
TheproposedPumpStationNo.1Alternative1layoutisshowninFigure1.
5.2. Alternative2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps
Alternative2utilizestheexistingundergroundrectangularconcretevaultasbothawetwellandpumproom.
Theconcretevault(134Lx114Wx116D)hasatotalvolumeof1,740ft3.Thewetwellstoragevolumeata
depthof3.5feetisapproximately930gallons.Aconcretecoatingwillbeappliedtotheinterioroftheconcrete
wetwelltoprotecttheconcretefromchemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthebottom
ofthewetwelltodirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthesubmersiblepumpintakes.Anewraisedconcrete
slabwillbepouredtoseparatethepumproomfromtheabovegradestructure.AnewCMUpartitionwallwill
beconstructedbetweentheelectricalroomandthepumpaccessroom.Thepartitionwallwillbeaddedto
avoidtheneed(andadditionalcost)ofprovidingNECClassI,Div1or2approvedelectricalequipment.
Thepumproomwillhousetwo12hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby)mountedonconcrete
pedestals.Thepumpscanbeliftedfromthepumproomthroughtheuseofaliftingchainandapumpaccess
hatch.Thepumpshavea6inchintakeanda4inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoa6inchdischarge
pipepriortoleavingthepumpstation.
Alloftheisolationvalves,checkvalves,andotherpipingappurtenancesforthepumpsarelocatedwithinthe
pumproom.Accesstothepumproomfromtheabovegroundstructurewillbeprovidedthroughanaccess
hatchandladderwithaSafTClimbLadderFallPreventionSystemtypeofdevice.
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillberemovedandsalvaged.
salvaged.Theconcretesupportsfortheairstoragetankwillbedemolished.Aportionofthesouthpumpstation
CMUwallwillbedemolishedtoinstalladoublemetaldoorthatwillbeusedtoaccessthepumpaccesshatch.A
portablefloorcraneisusedtoliftthepumpsfromthewetwell.
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillbedemolished.In
accordancewithNFPA820,Table4.2,Row19,theretrofitpumpstationwouldbecategorizedasaBelowgrade
orPartiallyBelowgradeWastewaterPumpingStationDrywell,inwhichthepumproomisphysicallyseparated
fromthewetwell.Becausethecodelistthepotentialforignitionofflammablegasesthroughleaksfromthe
pumpsandpipingforthispumpstationlayout,theentirespace(lowerandupperlevels)mustbeventilatedat6
airchangesperhourtobeconsideredanunclassifiedspace.
10/62010,Page9
5.3. Alternative3NewWetPitwithSubmersiblePumps
Alternative3eliminatestheneedforbypasspumpingbyconstructinganewduplexsubmersiblewetwelland
manholeindrivewayonwesternsideofthebuilding.Thisoptionassumesthatthenewstationcouldbe
constructedwhilemaintainingoperationoftheexistingstation.
Thenew6footdiameterlinedprecastconcretewetwellhasastoragevolumeatadepthof4feetof700
gallons.Thewetwelllinerisdesignedtoprotecttheconcretefromchemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcrete
willbeplacedinthewetwellandwillbeusedtodirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthesubmersible
pumps.Thewetwellwillhousetwo6.5hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby).Thepumpscanbe
liftedfromthewetwellthroughtheuseofaliftingchain,guiderails,andapumpaccesshatch.Thepumpshave
a3inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoa6inchdischargepipepriortoleavingthewetwelltothe
valvevault.
Theprecastconcretevalvevault,locatedonthesouthsideofthenewpumpstation,issizedtohouseacheck
valve,isolationvalve,dismantlingjointforeach6inchdischargepipe,andtoprovideadequateroomfor
salvaged.Theconcretesupportsfortheairstoragetankwillbedemolished.Aportablefloorcraneortruck
boomcanbeusedtoliftthepumpsfromthewetwell.
Oncethenewstationisconstructedandtested,temporarycontrolscouldbeusedtorunthenewstationwhile
theinterioroftheexistingstationisdecommissionedandpermanentcontrolsconstructedontheinsideofthe
building
TheproposedPumpStationNo.1Alternative3layoutisshowninFigure2intheSITEPLAN.Alsoprovidedisan
excerptfromaparcelmapshowingtherecordedpropertysizeofPumpStation1.
10/62010,Page10
Figure1.PumpStationNo.1AlternativeNo.1PlansandSections(WetPitAlternative)
10/62010,Page11
Figure2.PumpStationNo.1AlternativeNo.2PlansandSections(DryPitAlternative)
ALTERNATIVE3 PRELIMINARYLAYOUT
(WETWELL,MANHOLEANDVALVEVAULT)
PARCELMAPOFPUMPSTATION1FROMPARCELQUEST
APN006210027
10/62010,Page12
5.4. CostAnalysis
The capital costs of Pump Station No. 1 Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 were and used along with annual costs to
computerthe20yearnetpresentworth(NPW)cost.Thefollowingoperationsandmaintenancecostelements
wereincludedinthe20yearNPWanalysis:
ElectricalCosts(Pumpoperation)
WeeklyMaintenance(visualinspectionofthepumpstationequipment)
MonthlyMaintenance(preventativemaintenance)
The20yearNPWcostestimateforPumpStationNo.1AlternativeNos.1,2and3arepresentedinAppendix
9.5, in 2010 dollars, and summarized in Table 2. 20year NPW costs for Operational and Maintenance of
AlternativeNo.3isthesameasNo.1becauseofsimilartypeoffacility(submersible)andpumpsizing.
Table2.PumpStationNo.1:20YearNPWCostEstimates
OperationsandMaintenanceCosts
20Year
Alternative
CapitalCost
Annual
Weekly
Monthly
NPWa
Electrical
Maint.Tasks
Maint.Tasks
$310,000b
$3,120
$12,480
$540,000
AlternativeNo.1
$4,700
b
AlternativeNo.2
$320,000
$10,000
$3,120
$9,360
$580,000
AlternativeNo.3
$280,000
$4,700
$3,120
$12,480
$510,000
a
Interestrateof6%.
$60,000forbypasspumpingincluded,couldbereducedsignificantlyifCityoperatesbypass.
5.5. RecommendedAlternative
TherecommendedPumpStationNo.1alternativeisAlternativeNo.3NewWetPitwithSubmersiblePumps.
Thewetwellarrangementhasthelowestcapitaland20yearNPWcostofthethreealternatives.
However,shouldtheCitychoosetoprovidebypasspumpingwithCitycrewsandequipment,thenrehabilitation
oftheexistingstationsusingAlternative1appearstopresentcostsavingscomparedtoAlternatives2and3.By
passsetupforthissizefacilityisrelativelysmall,couldbecompletedwithexistingCityequipmentandriskcould
bepartiallymitigatedifconnectedtoautodialer.
10/62010,Page13
6. PumpStationNo.2
PumpStationNo.2willbemodifiedandupgradedtoprovideafirmPWWFdesigncapacityof0.31mgd.Two
pumpstationdesignalternativesarepresentedandanalyzedbelowtoprovidetheCitywiththemostcost
effectivedesignfortheupgradeofPumpStationNo.2.
ThefollowingtwopumpstationconfigurationswereevaluatedforPumpStationNo.2:
o 940gallonwetwell
o 23.7hpsubmersiblepumps
o 175ft2pumproom
o 280gallonwetwell
AnewsubmersibleduplexstationsimilartothesizingofthepumpsshowninAlternativeNo.1andlayoutofthe
newwetwellshowninAlternativeNo.2waseliminatedfromfurtheranalysisduetothelimitedlotspace
availableandthelikelyhighercapitalcost.However,ifadditionalpropertyprocurementisfeasiblefortheCity,
thisoptioncouldbecomefeasiblebecauseitsignificantlyreduces(andpossiblyeliminatescompletely)theneed
forbypasspumpingdependingonthelimitsofadditionalpropertyprocurement.
PumpStationNo.2willpumprawsewagetoMHB7throughtheexisting425foot,6inchforcemain.Toassess
theforcemaincapacityandsizethePumpStationNo.2pumps,ahydraulicmodelofthesystemwascreated.
TheforcemainhydraulicmodelwasusedtocalculatetheTDHofthepumpsforeachofthetwoPumpStation
No.2pumpstationalternativesasprovidedinAppendix9.1.
Alternative1utilizestheexistingundergroundprecastconcretecircularvaultasawetwell.The11.5footdeep,
8footdiameterconcretevaulthasatotalvolumeof580ft3.Thewetwellstoragevolumeatadepthof3feetis
940gallons.Aconcretecoatingwillbeappliedtotheinterioroftheconcretevaulttoprotecttheconcretefrom
chemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthevaultsumppumppitandwillbeusedto
shapethebottomofthevaulttodirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthesubmersiblepumps.An
approximately8footdiameteraluminumplatecoverwillbeinstalledtoseparatethewetwellfromtheabove
gradestructure.
Thewetwellwillhousetwo5hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby).Thepumpscanbelifted
inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoa6inchdischargepipepriortoleavingthewetwelltothevalve
vault.
Theprecastconcretevalvevault,locatedonthenorthwestsideofthepumpstationbuilding,issizedtohousea
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillberemovedandsalvaged.A
portionofthepumpstationsouthCMUwallwillbedemolishedtoinstalladoublemetaldoorthatwillbeused
toaccessthepumpaccesshatch.Aportablefloorcraneisusedtoliftthepumpsfromthewetwell.
10/62010,Page14
Becauseaccesstothewetwellwillbefromwithinthebuilding,theretrofitpumpstationwouldbecategorized
asanAbovegradeWastewaterPumpingStation,inwhichthepumproomorequipmentisnotphysically
separatedfromthewetwellinaccordancewithNFPA820,Table4.2,Row19.Asaresult,theentirespace
(includingwetwellandupperlevel)wouldbeclassifiedasClass1,Division1(ifnotventilated),orClass1,
Division2(ifcontinuouslyventilatedat12airchangesperhour).Ineithercase,allelectricalequipmentwould
needtocomplywithassociatedclassification.Sincetherewillberelativelylittleelectricalequipmentassociated
withthepumpstation,thecoststoprovideclassifiedequipmentarenotexpectedtobeexcessive.However,itis
likelythatthesecostsarecomparabletothecosttodemolishtheentirebuildingandinstalltheelectrical
equipmentinexterior,weatherproofenclosures.ForthisReport,itisassumedthatallnewelectricalequipment
willmeetClass1,Division1criteria,andallexistingequipmentwouldbereplacedtomatch.
Alternative2utilizestheexistingundergroundprecastconcretecircularvaultasadrypitpumproom.The11.5
footdeep,8footdiameterconcretevaulthasatotalsquarefootageofapproximately50ft2.Anapproximately
8footdiameteraluminumplatecoverwillbeinstalledtoseparatethepumproomfromtheabovegrade
structure.
Thepumproomwillhousetwo3.7hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby)mountedonconcrete
pedestals.Thepumpscanbeliftedfromthepumproomthroughtheuseofaliftingchainandapumpaccess
hatch.Thepumpshavea4inchintakeanda4inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoa6inchdischarge
pipepriortoleavingthepumpstation.
pumproom.Accesstothepumproomfromtheabovegroundstructurewillbeprovidedthroughanaccess
hatchandladderwithaSafTClimbLadderFallPreventionSystemtypeofdevice.
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillberemovedandsalvaged.A
portionofthesouthpumpstationCMUwallwillbedemolishedtoinstalladoublemetaldoorthatwillbeused
toaccessthepumpaccesshatch.Aportablefloorcraneisusedtoliftthepumpsfromthewetwell.
Anewwetwellwillbeconstructedonthewestsideoftheexistingpumpstation.Thewetwellwillbea4foot
diameter,11.5footdeeplinedprecastconcretewetwellwithatotalvolumeof580ft3.Thewetwellstorage
volumeatadepthof3.5feetis280gallons.Thewetwellwillbelinedtoprotecttheconcretefromchemical
attack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthewetwelltoshapethebottomofthewetwelltodirect
sewageandsettledsolidstowardsthedrypitsubmersiblepumpintakeslocatedinthewetwell.
10/62010,Page15
10/62010,Page16
10/62010,Page17
10/62010,Page18
6.3. CostAnalysis
The capital costs of Pump Station No. 2 Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 were and used along with annual costs to
computerthe20yearnetpresentworth(NPW)cost.Thefollowingoperationsandmaintenancecostelements
wereincludedinthe20yearNPWanalysis:
ElectricalCosts(Pumpoperation)
WeeklyMaintenance(visualinspectionofthepumpstationequipment)
MonthlyMaintenance(preventativemaintenance)
The20yearNPWcostestimateforPumpStationNo.2AlternativeNos.1and2arepresentedinAppendix9.5,
in2010dollars,andsummarizedinTable3.
OperationsandMaintenanceAnnualCosts
20Year
Alternative
CapitalCost
Weekly
Monthly
NPWa
Electrical
Maint.Tasks
Maint.Tasks
$320,000b
$3,120
$12,480
$540,000
AlternativeNo.1
$3,800
b
AlternativeNo.2
$310,000
$2,800
$3,120
$9,360
$490,000
a
Interestrateof6%.
$60,000forbypasspumpingincluded,couldbereducedsignificantlyifCityoperatesbypass.
TherecommendedPumpStationNo.2alternativeisAlternativeNo.2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps.The
drypitarrangementhasthelowestcapitaland20yearNPWcosts.
10/62010,Page19
7. PumpStationNo.4
PumpStationNo.4willbemodifiedandupgradedtoprovideafirmPWWFdesigncapacityof1.44mgd.
HydraulicanalysesontheinfluentgravitysewerenteringthepumpstationandtheforcemaintotheWWTP
wereperformedtoverifythehydrauliccapacityofthesystemandsizethepumps.Twopumpstationdesign
alternativesarepresentedandanalyzedtoprovidetheCitywithacosteffectivedesignfortheupgradeofPump
StationNo.4.
7.1. HydraulicAnalyses
ThegravitysewerenteringPumpStationNo.4andtheassociatedforcemain(FM)totheWWTPwereanalyzed
toverifytheirhydrauliccapacitytoservetheUBOdesignflowof1.44mgd.
Currently,PumpStationNo.4AreceivessewagebygravityfromgravitysewerbasinupstreamofMHK1B.Pump
StationNo.4Apumpsthesewagethroughan8inchPVCFMunderPineGroveAvenueandChurnCreek,where
ittransitionstoa10inchPVCFMandcontinuesupthehillthroughoneoftheWWTPsprayfieldsanddischarges
intothewestsideoftheWWTPheadworks.IfflowexceedsthecapacityofPumpStationNo.4A,theinfluent
gravitypipelinebacksupandoverflowstoa10inchVCPemergencyoverflowgravitypipelinethatflowsfrom
MHK1BtoMHK1AunderPineGroveAvenuetoaMHonthesouthsideofroadthenunderChurnCreekinto
MHK1andintoPumpStationNo.4.AsdiscussedpreviouslyPumpStation4hasanunreliablepumpingsystem
whichmovessewagethroughanold6inchductileironpipeupthehilltotheWWTPheadworks.
Originally,theoverflowlineconsistedofa10inchVCP/DIPpipelinedirectlyconnectedbetweenMHK1Band
MHK1.However,toallowforconstructionofthenewPineGrove/ChurnCreekBridge,anewgravitypipeline
aroundthebridewasconstructed(asdescribedinpreviousparagraph).ThisincludedinstallationofMHK1Aand
theMHonthesouthsideofthebridgeandthelineconnectingthoseandMHK1.Italsoincludedabandonment
oftheupstreamendofthe10VCP/DIPlinejustsouthwestofMHK1Awithaconcreteplug.Duringthe
constructionofthenewPineGroveAvenueBridgeoverChurnCreek,theemergencyoverflowgravitypipeline
wascrushedatapointapproximatelyhalfwayacrossanddirectlybelowPineGroveAvenue,significantly
reducingitscapacityandreliability.
TheexistingPumpStationNos.4and4AgravityandforcemainsystemlayoutisshowninFigure5.
InordertobringPumpStationNo.4backintofulloperationastheprimarypumpstation,theexisting
approximately187feetofabandonedinfluentgravitysewerpipelinebetweenMHK1AandMHK1willbe
broughtbackintoservicebyremovingtheplugandconnectingthepipetoMHK1A.Theexisting10inch
overflowunderPineGroveAvenuewillbepluggedatMHK1A.The8inchFMfromPumpStationNo.4Awillbe
abandonedalongwiththeentirePumpStationNo.4Afacility.
AtthedownstreampumpdischargesideofPumpStationNo.4,approximately50feetof8inchforcemainwill
beinstalledtoconnectPumpStationNo.4totheexisting10inchPVCforcemainthatgoesupthehilltothe
WWTPheadworks.Theexisting6inchDIPforcemainthatservesPumpStationNo.4willbedisconnectedjust
outsidetheWWTPheadworks.ThislinecannotbecompletelydisconnectedattheWWTPheadworksbecause
anotherCityPumpStation(BusinessPark)dischargesintotheheadworksviathatforcemain.
TheimprovedPumpStationNos.4and4AgravityandforcemainsystemlayoutisshowninFigure6.
10/62010,Page20
Figure5.ExistingPumpStationNos.4and4ASystemLayout
10/62010,Page21
Figure6.PumpStationNos.4and4ASystemImprovementsLayout
10/62010,Page22
7.1.1. GravitySewer(MHK1tojustbeforeMHK1Atheoldgravityalignment)
ToconfirmtheapparentstructuralintegrityofthegravitysewerbetweenMHK1tojustbeforeMHK1Athe
oldgravityalignmentitwasinspectedin2010byCitycrewsusingClosedCircuitTelevision(CCTV)sewer
inspectionequipment.TheCCTVinspectionstartedatMHK1andproceededupstreamtotheplugjustbefore
MHK1A.ThefollowingsummarizesreviewoftheCCTVvideofile,whichwasprovidedbytheCity.
StartMHK1
010.5:10VCPrelativelygoodcondition,minimaldebrisinline,waterlevel1,flatslope
10.520:VCPrelativelygoodcondition,nodebris,smallflowinbottomofpipe,moreslopethan
first10ofpipe
2066:DIP,appearstohaveasphalticorpossibleceramicepoxy(Protecto401)coating,coating
showingsomesignsofdelimitation,especiallyatornearjoints,underlyingpipeappearstobein
acceptablecondition,pipejointsatapproximately30,48and66(anecdotalconversationwithCity
O&Mstaffindicatesthatthissectionofpipeisincreekandtrenchwascutthroughrockandbackfilled
withconcreteslurry)
66145:VCP,minimalinfiltrationatbottomofseveraljoints,wetbottomalongentirealignment
indicatessomecontinuousgroundwaterinfiltrationalongpipe,56pipesegments,waterlevel
approximatelyflowing
145150:VCP,materialbuildup,debris5to7oclock(gravel,sand,aggregate),appearstobepipe
slopechangeresultinginflatslopedsegmentofpipe
150168:VCP,waterlevelhigh,1,likelyduetomaterialbuildupdownstream
168188:VCP,stillwetonbottom,butnolongeratelevatedlevel,flowing
188:VCP,concreteplug,infiltration(seepage)apparentatbottomofplug
TheCCTVinspectionalsoindicatessomeminimallevelofgroundwaterinfiltration.GiventhattheCCTV
inspectionwascompletedduringthewetseasonandnosignificantgusherlevelinfiltrationdefectswere
identified,itisanticipatedthatinfiltrationislimitedandthereisaffectivelyverylittledirectrainwaterinflow
fromapossiblestormdraincrossconnectionoropenjointundertheactivecreekchannel.
Anyrehabilitationofthepipetominimizepotentialstructuraldamageorreduceinfiltrationwouldrequirelining
thepipe,whichcouldpresentaconcernatUBOflowsbecauseoflostpipelineflowarea.Toaddressthepossible
structuralandinfiltrationreductionissuesidentifiedintheCCTVinspectionwhilealsomaintainingcapacityin
thepipeline,atotalofsiximprovementalternativesweredevelopedandcompared.Thesiximprovement
alternativeswerecomposedofthefollowingthreeapproaches:
Approach1DoNothing:Reconnecttheexistingabandoned10inchVCPgravityseweratMHK1A.
Approach2NonstructuralCIPPLiner:Linetheexisting10inchVCPgravitysewerwithanonstructural
CuredinPlacePipe(CIPP)linerfromMHK1AtoMHK1.
Approach3StructuralCIPPLiner:Linetheexisting10inchVCPgravitysewerwithastructuralCIPP
linerfromMHK1AtoMHK1.
Eachofthesegravitysewerrehabilitationapproacheswereanalyzedundervariousconditions(Manningsn
andinsidepipediameter)toassessthemaximumhydrauliccapacityofeachimprovementalternative.Thepipe
length(204)andslope(0.0294ft/ft)werecalculatedbasedonfieldsurveyandinvertmeasurements.Slope
calculationassumedcontinuousslopefromMHK1AtoKHK1usingsurveyedinvertsandlength,eventhough
CCTVdatadoesindicatesomeminorslopevariationinpipe.
10/62010,Page23
AlternativesAandBwithineachapproachrepresentmanufacturingtolerancesofVCPandDIPpipealongpipe
lengthtoensurethelower(moreconservative)rangeofpipediametersistakenintoaccount.Manningsn
valuesfornonstructuralliningisless(0.013comparedto0.012)thanexistingbarepipe(VCP/DIP)linermaterial
isaffectivelysmoother,howeversomeroughpointsremaininpipewheninstallingrelativelythinnonstructural
liner.Manningsnforstructurallinerisless(0.011comparedto0.012)thannonstructuralbecausealmostall
roughnessirregularitiesofexistingpipeareremovedwhenstructural(CIPPorslipline)piperehabilitationis
complete.ThehydrauliccalculationsforeachimprovementalternativeareprovidedinAppendix9.3,andare
summarizedinTable4.
Table4.GravitySewer(MHK1BtoPumpStationNo.4)HydraulicAnalysisSummary
PWWFMaximum
Improvement
Mannings PipeID
HydraulicCapacitya
Description
Alternative
n
(inches)
(mgd)
(gpm)
(SFEC)b
DoNothing
1,130
1A
10.0
1.96
1,360
0.013
10inchVCPincurrentcondition
1B
9.625
1.82
1,260
1,050
2A
NonstructuralCIPPLiner
9.6
1.92
1,330
1,110
0.012
Lined10inchVCP
2B
9.3
1.80
1,250
1,040
9.4
1.96
1,360
1,130
3A
StructuralCIPPLiner
0.011
Lined10inchVCP
3B
9.1
1.84
1,280
1,070
a
Watersurfaceatcrownofpipe(100%full)overtheentirepipespan.
SFECSinglefamilyEquivalentConnection.1SFEC=1.2gpmatPWWF(Basedon2003PWWFof6.0mgdwithapprox.
3,600attributingSFECs;MasterPlan,2003).
AscanbeseeninTable4,ImprovementApproach3hasthehighestrangeofmaximumhydrauliccapacitiesfrom
1.84to1.96mgd,closelyfollowedbyImprovementApproach1.ImprovementAlternativeNos.1Aand3Ahave
thehighesthydrauliccapacityof1.96mgd(1,130SFECs).TheUBOdesignflowrateforthispipelineis1.44mgd
(830SFECs).ImprovementApproach1canaccommodateanadditional220to300SFECsabovetheUBOdesign
of830SFECs.ImprovementApproach3canaccommodateanadditional230to300SFECsabovetheUBO
design.UBOflowsdonotnecessarilytakeintoaccountdiurnalpeakingfactors.However,giventhelocationof
thepipelineatthemostdownstreamendofagravitysewerbasin,itislikelythatpeakingfactorswillbe
dampened.Thecurrentpipesizing(andpossiblerehabilitationalternatives)isconsistentwiththecapacity
needsstatedintheCitysWastewatermasterPlan.
7.1.1.1. GravitySewer(OldAlignment)RehabilitationRecommendation
Generallythepipeisingoodconditionanddoesnotappeartoneedimmediatestructuralrehabilitationtobe
putbackinserviceasgravitysewermaintoPumpStationNo.4.DelaminationofthecoatingontheDIP
presentssomeconcern,sothepipeshouldremainonaroutineinspectionschedule(6monthafterstartupand
annualthereafter)untilCityconfirmsthatintroductionofrawsewagebacktopipealignmentdoesnotresultin
accelerateddegradationofpipe.Ifitdoes,thencleaningandinstallationofacuredinplacepipeliner(CIPP)is
recommended.Itshouldbenoted,thereisacostsavings(nobypasspumping)associatedwithcompletingthe
pipelinerehabilitationnowversusputtingitinserviceandfindingthroughsubsequentinspectionthat
rehabilitationisnecessary.Asummaryofcurrentcostsforthevariousoptionswithandwithoutbypass
pumpingisprovidedbelow.GiventheCitysdefinedbudgetexpectationsforthisproject,itisrecommended
thattheCityincludenonstructuralrehabilitationofthislineasandAdditiveAlternativeBidItem.TheCitycan
thenincludethisworkintheprojectonifContractorBidsarewithintheavailableprojectbudget.Ifnot,theCity
shouldplantofundstructuralrehabilitationofthepipelineinthe1520yearplanninghorizon.
NonStructuralLinerApproximateCosts=
StructuralLinerApproximateCosts=
$11,000(nobypass)
$17,000(nobypass)
$19,000(withbypass)
$25,000(withbypass)
10/62010,Page24
7.1.2. ForceMain(PumpStationNo.4toWWTP)
PumpStationNo.4willpumprawsewagetotheWWTPthroughtheexisting400foot,10inchPVCforcemain.
A40footsectionofnew8inchductileironpipeandfittingswillbeconstructedaspartoftheProjecttotie
PumpStationNo.4intotheexistingforcemainasshowninFigure6.Toassesstheforcemaincapacityandsize
thePumpStationNo.4pumps,ahydraulicmodelofthesystemwascreatedusingaclosedconduithydraulic
modelingsoftware(basedontheNewtonRaphsonmatrixiterationmethod),AFTFathomVersion7.0.
ThefollowingPumpStationNo.4pumparrangementoptions,showninTable5,weredevelopedand
investigatedtoidentifyacosteffectivedesignfortheupgradeofPumpStationNo.4.
Table5.PumpStationNo.4PumpArrangementOptionSummary
Improvement
DesignFlowrate
NumberofPumps
Option
Timing
(gpm/pump)
Total(duty/standby)
CurrentProject
2(1/1)
A
625a
FutureProject
3(2/1)
B
CurrentProject
500
3(2/1)
C
CurrentProject
1,000
2(1/1)
a
TotalFirmCapacity
(gpm)
625(0.9MGD)
1,250(1.8MGD)
1,000(1.44MGD)
1,000(1.44MGD)
Designflowrateof625gpm(0.9mgd)correspondstothecurrentPWWF.
OptionAprovidestheminimalpumpingcapacityforthecurrentPWWFof625gpm(0.9mgd),withtheabilityto
addathirdidenticalpumpinthefuturetopumptheUBOPWWFof1,000gpm(1.44mgd).Thisoptionis
includedtogivetheCitytheoptiontominimizecapitalcostsintheneartermandprovidethefullUBOpumping
capacityofthepumpstationwithtwoseparateconstructionprojects,ratherthanone.OptionBandCprovide
thepumpstationwiththeUBOcapacityunderthecurrentproject,whilealsocomparingduplex(2larger
pumps)versustriplex(3smallerpumps)design.
TheFMhydraulicmodelwasusedtocalculatethetotaldynamichead(TDH)ofthepumpsforeachofthethree
PumpStationNo.4pumparrangementoptionsattheirrespectivedesignflowrates,asprovidedinAppendix
9.4.Pumprecommendationsandpreliminarybudgetarycostestimateswererequestedfromandprovidedby
ITTFlygtforcomparisonpurposes.Asummaryofthehydraulicdesignandresultingpumpselectionforeach
optionaresummarizedinTable6.
Table6.PumpStationNo.4PumpArrangementOptionSummary
Design
TotalFirm
TDH
NumberofPumps
Option
Flowrate
Capacity
(feet) Total(duty/standby)
(gpm/pump)
(gpm)
2(1/1)
625
A
625
73
3(2/1)
1,250
B
500
78
3(2/1)
1,000
C
1,000
78
2(1/1)
1,000
a
PumpPower
(hp)
20
20
34
BudgetaryCost
Estimatea
$28,000
$42,000b
$42,000
$43,000
2010Dollars;Includespumps,dischargeelbows,guiderailbrackets,alarmrelays,andliftingchains.
Totalcostofall3pumpsin2010dollars(equipmentcostonly,installationcostnotincluded).
OptionC,providingtwo1,000gpmpumps,istherecommendedpumparrangementforPumpStationNo.4.The
budgetarycostsofthethreeoptionstoprovideatleast1,000gpmofcapacityforUBOareapproximately
equivalent.However,OptionCprovidestheUBOpumpingcapacitywithonlytwopumpscomparedtotheother
optionsrequiringthreepumps.OptionsAandBhaveadditionalcosts(e.g.,electricalandcontrolequipment,
valving,piping,operationandmaintenance,etc.)associatedwithprovidingthreepumpsratherthantwopumps
thatarenotcapturedinTable6.
10/62010,Page25
Twopumpstationdesignalternatives(basedonprovidingtwo1,000gpmsubmersibletypesewagepumps)are
presentedandanalyzedbelowtoprovidetheCityacosteffectivedesignfortheupgradeofPumpStationNo.4.
ThefollowingtwopumpstationconfigurationswereevaluatedforPumpStationNo.4:
o 250ft2pumproom
Alternative1utilizestheexistingundergroundrectangularconcretevaultasawetwell.Theconcretevault(20L
x16Wx166D)hasatotalvolumeof5,280ft3.Thewetwellstoragevolumeatadepthof4feetis
approximately6,700gallons.Aconcretecoatingwillbeappliedtotheinterioroftheconcretevaulttoprotect
theconcretefromchemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthevaultsumppumppitand
willbeusedtoshapethebottomofthevaulttodirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthesubmersible
pumps.Anewraisedconcreteslabwillbepouredtocloseanexistingfloorpenetrationtoseparatethewetwell
fromtheabovegradestructure.AnewCMUpartitionwallwillbeconstructedbetweentheelectricalroomand
thepumpaccessroom.Thepartitionwallwillbeaddedtoavoidtheneed(andadditionalcost)ofprovidingNEC
ClassI,Div1or2approvedelectricalequipment.
Thewetwellwillhousetwo34hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby).Thepumpscanbelifted
inchdischarge.
Theprecastconcretevalvevault,locatedonthesouthsideofthepumpstationbuilding,issizedtohousea
maintenance.Anemergencybypassconnectiononthedownstreamsideoftheisolationvalvesonthe8inch
forcemainwillprovidealocationforCitystafftobypasspumpsewagefromthewetwellintoasewagepump
truckinanemergency.Thevalvevaultisapproximately6Lx6Wx4D.
Theexistingmechanicalequipmentandpipinglocatedintheundergroundvaultwillbedemolished.Awater
tightmetalcoverwillbeinstalledovertheexistingParshallflumechannel.
10/62010,Page26
10/62010,Page27
Alternative2utilizestheexistingundergroundrectangularconcretevaultasadrypitpumproom.The16Wx
20Lx166Hconcretevaulthasatotalsquarefootageofapproximately320ft2.A20Lx10Hconcretewallbe
constructedwithinthevaulttoseparatethespaceintoapumproomanddrypit.Thedrypitwillhaveatotal
operatingvolume(atawaterdepthof3.4feet;maximumwatersurfaceelevationof691.4feetattheinvertof
theinfluentchannel)ofapproximately2,500gallons.Thewetwellwillbelinedtoprotecttheconcretefrom
chemicalattack.Anonstructuralfillconcretewillbeplacedinthewetwelltoshapethebottomofthewetwell
todirectsewageandsettledsolidstowardsthedrypitsubmersiblepumpintakes.Anaccesshatchwillbe
installedbetweenthewetwellandexistingexteriorvaultinwhichtheparshallflumeislocated.Anaccess
platformwillbeprovidedforpersonnelaccessfromtheoutside.Accesstothewetwellisnotrecommended
fromthedrypitarea,sincethiswouldresultintheentireinteriorspaceofthebuildingbeingclassifiedasClass1,
Division2andrequireallelectricalequipmenttobeupgradedtomeettheserequirements.
Thepumproomwillhousetwo34hpcentrifugalsubmersiblepumps(1duty,1standby)mountedonconcrete
pedestals.Thepumpscanbeliftedfromthepumproomthroughtheexisting4x4accesshatchlocatedinthe
controlroomfloor.Thepumpshavea6inchintakeanda6inchdischargethatisimmediatelyincreasedtoan8
inchdischargepipepriortoleavingthepumpstation.
pumproom,withtheexceptionoftheemergencybypassconnection.Theemergencybypassconnectiononthe
southsideofthepumpstationwillprovidealocationforCitystafftobypasspumpsewagefromthewetwell
intoasewagepumptruckinanemergency.Accesstothepumproomfromthecontrolroomwillbeprovided
throughtheuseoftheexistingmetalstairway.
SimilartoatPumpStationNos.1,2and3,theexistingroofstructureisshowingsignsofsignificantdegradation
(e.g.,leaks,drywallproblems,andwoodrotting)andshouldbereplacedinasimilarfashion.Anewtruss
framedpitchedroofstructurewillbeconstructedatthesametimeastheabovedescribedpumpstation
improvements.Theexistingroofmountedexhaustmufflerontheenginegeneratorwillberelocatedtowithin
thebuilding,suspendedfromtheceiling,insulated,andventedtotheoutsidethroughtheCMUwall.
10/62010,Page28
10/62010,Page29
7.4. CostAnalysis
ThecapitalcostofPumpStationNo.4AlternativeNos.1and2wereevaluatedtodeterminethepumpstation
designandlayoutthatwouldprovidethe20YearNPWcost.
The20yearNPWcostestimateforPumpStationNo.4AlternativeNos.1and2arepresentedinAppendix9.5,
in2010dollars,andsummarizedinTable7.
OperationsandMaintenanceAnnualCosts
20Year
Alternative
CapitalCost
Weekly
Monthly
NPWa
Electrical
Maint.Tasks
Maint.Tasks
$330,000
$3,120
$12,480
$720,000
AlternativeNo.1
$18,200
AlternativeNo.2
$310,000
$18,200
$3,120
$12,480
$700,000
a
Interestrateof6%.
Thecapitalcostofthegravitysewerimprovementalternativesandforcemainimprovementswereestimatedas
presentedinAppendix9.5,in2010dollars,andsummarizedinTable8.
Table8.PumpStationNo.4GravitySewerandForceMainImprovementsCostEstimates
Facilities
Alternative
1
GravitySewer
(MHK1AtoMHK1)
2
3
ForceMain
NA
Description
DoNothing
10inchVCPincurrentcondition
NonstructuralCIPPLiner
Lined10inchVCP
StructuralCIPPLiner
Lined10inchVCP
Abandonexisting8inchFMs;
Connectnew8inchFM
CapitalCost
$7,000
$18,000
$24,000
$7,000
TherecommendedPumpStationNo.4alternativeisAlternativeNo.2DryPitwithSubmersiblePumps.The
drypitarrangementhasthelowestcapitalandlower20yearNPWcostthanAlternativeNo.1.TheGravity
SewerAlternative1approachisalsorecommendedasdescribedinsection7.1.1.1
10/62010,Page30
8. ProjectConstraints
Keyprojectconstraintsincludethefollowingtopics:constructability,electricaldesign,safety,environmental,
andfutureexpansion.Eachofthesetopicsiscoveredbelow.
8.1. Constructability
Variousconstructionconstraintscanbeexpectedateachpumpstation.Adescriptionofconstruction
constraintsforeachpumpstationisprovidedbelow.
8.1.1. PumpStationNo.1
DuringtheconstructionofthePumpStationNo.1improvements,influentrawsewagewillneedtobediverted
aroundthepumpstation.Thiscanbeaccomplishedthroughbypasspumpingfromtheinfluentmanholelocated
tothenorthofthepumpstationtoatemporarytieinconnectiontotheexisting6inchFMapproximately10
feeteastoftheinfluentmanhole.
Fromaconstructabilityandoperationandmaintenancestandpointitmaybeadvantageoustodemolishthe
existingCMUwallsonthesouthsideofthenewCMUpartitionwallafterthenewpartitionwallisconstructed.
ThiswouldallowCitystafftomoreeasilyaccessandmaintainthepumpswithouttherestrictionsofanenclosed
space.
DuringtheconstructionofthePumpStationNo.2improvements,influentrawsewagewillneedtobediverted
aroundthepumpstation.Thiscanbeaccomplishedthroughbypasspumpingfromtheinfluentmanholelocated
tothenorthwestofthepumpstationtoatemporarytieinconnectiontotheexisting6inchFMapproximately
10feetsouthoftheinfluentmanhole.
DuringtheconstructionofthePumpStationNo.4improvements,influentrawsewagewillcontinuetobe
divertedaroundPumpStationNo.4throughtheuseofPumpStationNo.4A.Thiswillallowfortheremovaland
demolitionoftheexistingPumpStationNo.4equipment.AplugmustbeinstalledontheoverflowlineatMH
K1BtoensurenoflowisdivertedtoPumpStationNo.4duringconstruction.
SpecialmeasuresmayberequiredasdescribedinSection8.5ofthisReporttoprotectthebiologicalresources
locatedintheChurnCreekwatershedadjacenttothepumpstationandatthegravitysewertieinlocationnear
MHK1A.
8.1.4. PumpStationNo.4A
ThedecommissioningofPumpStationNo.4AwilloccurafterPumpStationNo.4hasbeensuccessfully
constructedandallfunctionalitytestssuccessfullypassed.Atemporaryyconnectionandvalvingattheexisting
10FMlinegoingupthehillwillbeinstalledtoaccommodatetestingandcontinuedoperationofPumpStation
No.4A.Thiscanthenberemovedandreplacedwith8inchconnectionforPumpStationNo.4onlyaftertesting.
10/62010,Page31
8.2. Environmental
Oftheproposedimprovements,onlyworkatPumpStationNo.4Ahaspotentialtoresultineffectstothe
environmentthatwouldrequirespecialenvironmentalpermitting.Forallotherproposedimprovements,the
limitofdisturbedareaandthelocationofthatdisturbedareaeliminatetheneedforspecialpermitting,aslong
astypicalindustrystandardpermits,includingstormwaterBestManagementPractices(BMPs)aremet.
InordertodecommissionPumpStationNo.4A,anexisting,thedecommissioned10inchsewerlinethat
connectstoPumpStationNo.4willneedtobereconnectedinordertoredirectflows.ChurnCreekislocated
directlywestofPumpStationNo.4A,soconstructionactivitiescouldhavethepotentialtonecessitatespecial
environmentalpermitting.Theassumedareaofexcavation(nomorethana10ftby10ftx10ftdeep)is
locatedwithinanareathatwaspreviouslydisturbedwhenPumpStationNo.4andtheconnectingsewer
pipelineswereconstructed.AlimitedEnvironmentalConstraintsAssessmentoftheproposedimprovements
wasconductedtoevaluatetheneedforspecialenvironmentalpermittingbasedonthisexcavationlimitation.
Theactualareaofexcavationmaybeasmuchas20ftby10ftby10ftdeepbasedonsurveyandCCTVresults,
butthisappearsfromsurfacemeasurementstostaywithintheareaanalyzedbytheenvironmentalanalysis.A
summaryoftheEnvironmentalConstraintsAssessmentaredescribedherein.
8.2.1. BiologicalResources
AbiologicalresourcescharacterizationoftheexcavationsitewasinvestigatedandreportedonbyNorthState
Resources,Inc.(NSR),inatechnicalmemorandumtitled,CityofShastaLakePumpStationImprovements2011
Project:BiologicalResourcesCharacterization(NSRNo.51220),attachedinAppendix9.6.Thefindingsofthis
technicalmemorandumfortheproposedareaofconstructionaresummarizedbelow:
Nodocumentedoccurrencesofspecialstatusspeciesorplantspecies(CNDDBdatabase)
Proposedareaofconstructiondidnotsupportanywetlandparameters.
Section404permitisnotrequirednoraSection404waterqualitycertificationwiththeRWQCB.
No federally listed threatened or endangered species are expected to occur in the proposed area of
construction. Thus formal Section 7 consultation under the federal ESA with the USFWS and
consultationwiththeCDFGisnotrequired.
Neitherbaldeaglenorgoldeneaglesareexpectedtooccurintheproposedareaofconstruction.
Nostatejurisdictionalfeaturesarepresentwithintheproposedconstructionarea.
SincenoconstructionactivitywilloccurwithinChurnCreek,aStreambedAlterationAgreementisnot
required.
ARWQCBGeneralPermitforStormWaterDischargesAssociatedwithConstructionActivities(General
Permit)isnotrequired.
No species which are designated as fully protected by CDFG are expected to occur in the proposed
areaofconstruction.
RecommendedconservationmeasurestoensurethattherearenowetlandorstormwaterimpactstoChurn
Creekarelistedonpages11and12intheCityofShastaLakePumpStationImprovements2011Project:
BiologicalResourcesCharacterization(NSRNo.51220).
Althoughtheproposedconstructionactivitiesdonotincludetheremovaloftreesorshrubsthatcouldbe
utilizedfornestinghabitat,indirectimpactsduetoconstructionnoisewouldimpactbirdsnestingwithinthe
adjacentripariancorridorandoakwoodlands.Recommendedmeasuresthatmaybeinstitutedtohelpensure
compliancewiththeMigratoryBirdTreatyActandreduceimpactstobirdsofpreyunderSection3503.5ofthe
10/62010,Page32
CDFGCodearelistedonpage13intheCityofShastaLakePumpStationImprovements2011Project:Biological
ResourcesCharacterization(NSRNo.51220).
8.2.2. ArcheologicalResources
AnarchaeologicalsurveyoftheexcavationsitewasinvestigatedandreportedonbyNSR,inatechnical
memorandumtitled,CityofShastaLakePumpStationImprovements2011ArcheologicalResourcesTechnical
Memorandum,attachedinAppendix9.6.Thefindingsofthistechnicalmemorandumshowthatthereareno
prehistoricorhistoricresources(e.g.,artifacts,features,sites,etc.)locatedintheproposedconstructionarea
duringthearcheologicalsurvey.
Recommendedmitigationmeasuresduringconstructionactivitiestohelpavoidorminimizethepotentialfor
significantaffectstounknownburiedorobscuredarcheologicaldepositsarelistedonpage18intheCityof
ShastaLakePumpStationImprovements2011ArcheologicalResourcesTechnicalMemorandum.
8.3. AsbestosandLeadHazards
AnasbestosandleadsurveyPumpStationNos.1,2,3,and4wasconductedandreportedonbyEntek
ConsultingGroup,Inc.,inareporttitled,AsbestosandLeadSurveyFinalReportCityofShastaLakePump
Stations1,2,3&4(AsbestosandLeadReport),attachedinAppendix9.7.Thefindingsofthisreportare
summarizedbelow:
Asbestoswasfoundatvaryinglevelsateachofthepumpstations(seetablesintheAsbestosandLead
Report,pages57.
There are no US EPA NESHAP regulated materials present in excess of 160ft2, therefore a 10day
notificationforasbestosrelatedworkwillnotberequired.
TheCAT1andCal/OSHA asbestoscontainingconstruction materialsfoundwouldnot beregulatedby
the US EPA unless the Category 1 materials are expected to become friable, in the course of the
demolition.
Because it has been determined that ACM and ACCM does exist, a licensed Asbestos Contractor,
certified by the State of California, and registered with Cal/OSHA is required to perform any asbestos
relatedremovalwork.
Projectconsideredleadrelatedconstructionwork
Thedemolitionrelatedrequirementsarelistedonpage9intheAsbestosandLeadReport.Thesewere
incorporatedintotheCitysPumpStationRoofReplacementProjectConstructDocuments(Bidno.201103)and
similarspecificationsshouldbeusedforthisprojectwithrespecttoroof,materialsandequipmentreplacement.
9. Appendices
10/62010,Page33
9.1. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.1toMHK32)
10/62010
Hydraulic Analysis
Project: 10-018 COSL Pump Station Improvements 2011
Case: Pump Station No.1
Flowrate
160 gpm
0.357 cfs
Hydraulic Element
Starting W.S. Elevation
Exit Loss
Pipe, PVC
Tee, Flow thru Run
Pipe, PVC
Tee, Branch to Run
Pipe, PVC
Valve, Plug
Valve, Check (Swing)
Pipe, PVC
90-deg bend, Standard
Pipe, PVC
Increaser, d/D=1/2
Hydraulics_PS1.xls
Further Description
MH K32
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
FM - PVC
4" x 6" Increaser
Pump Bend
Date:
24-Aug-10
Calc By: AJB
Nominal
Pipe Class Size, in.
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
Flow, cfs
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
TDH =
Static Head =
Power =
56.4 feet
53.0 feet
2.3 hp
Inside
Diameter or
Water
Height, ft Width, ft Depth, ft Length, ft
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
Page 1 of 1
700
3
4.5
5
7
Area, sf
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.09
0.09
PVC Manning's 'n' =
Hyd.
Velocity,
Radius, ft
fps
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.08
0.08
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
4.09
4.09
Vel.
Head, ft
Coefficient
(n, K or C)
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.0512
0.2592
0.2592
1.000
0.013
0.500
0.013
1.200
0.013
1.000
2.500
0.013
0.300
0.013
0.560
0.300
Exponent
for Weir
Head
Loss, ft
0.0512
2.8106
0.0256
0.0120
0.0614
0.0181
0.0512
0.1280
0.0201
0.0154
0.0281
0.1451
0.0777
Weir or
Invert EL,
ft
882.00
839.25
839.25
839.25
839.25
839.25
839.25
839.25
839.25
0.013
Water
Surface
EL or
HGL, ft
885.000
885.051
887.862
887.887
887.899
887.961
887.979
888.030
888.158
888.178
888.194
888.222
888.367
888.445
9/16/2010
9.2. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.2toMHB7)
10/62010
Hydraulic Analysis
Project: 10-018 COSL Pump Station Improvements 2011
Case: Pump Station No.2
Flowrate
215 gpm
0.479 cfs
Hydraulic Element
Exit Loss
Pipe, PVC
Tee, Flow thru Run
Pipe, PVC
Tee, Branch to Run
Pipe, PVC
Valve, Plug
Valve, Check (Swing)
Pipe, PVC
Pipe, PVC
Increaser, d/D=1/2
Hydraulics_PS2.xls
Further Description
MH B7
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
FM - VCP
4" x 6" Increaser
Pump Bend
Date:
24-Aug-10
Calc By: AJB
Nominal
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
Flow, cfs
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
TDH =
Static Head =
Power =
26.7 feet
22.5 feet
1.5 hp
Inside
Diameter or
Water
Height, ft Width, ft Depth, ft Length, ft
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.33
0.33
Page 1 of 1
425
3
4.5
5
7
Area, sf
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.09
0.09
PVC Manning's 'n' =
Hyd.
Velocity,
Radius, ft
fps
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.08
0.08
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
2.44
5.49
5.49
Vel.
Head, ft
Coefficient
(n, K or C)
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.0924
0.4679
0.4679
1.000
0.013
0.500
0.013
1.200
0.013
1.000
2.500
0.013
0.300
0.013
0.560
0.300
Exponent
for Weir
Head
Loss, ft
0.0924
3.0813
0.0462
0.0218
0.1109
0.0326
0.0924
0.2311
0.0363
0.0277
0.0508
0.2620
0.1404
Weir or
Invert EL,
ft
769.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
754.00
0.013
Water
Surface
EL or
HGL, ft
769.000
769.092
772.174
772.220
772.242
772.353
772.385
772.478
772.709
772.745
772.773
772.823
773.086
773.226
9/16/2010
9.3. HydraulicCalculationsGravitySewer(MHK1BtoPumpStationNo.4)
10/62010
Hydraulic Analysis
Project: COSL_PS Improvements 2011
Case: Improvements
Date:
24-Aug-10
Calc By: AJB
Flowrate =
Hydraulic Element
Further Description
Pump Station No. 4
Exit Loss
22.5-deg bend
Pipe, Ductile Iron w/ CM Lining
Tee, Branch to Run
Entrance Loss, Pipe Flush with Tank
Channel, Rectangular, Concrete
Influent Channel
Parshall Flume (3-inch Throat)
Channel, Rectangular, Concrete
Influent Channel
Exit Loss
PS No. 4
MH K1
MH K1A
MH K1B
Influent Sewer Hydraulics.xls
Nominal
CIP
CIP
CIP
CIP
CIP
CIP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
8
8
8
8
8
8
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1.44 mgd
1,000 gpm
Flow, cfs
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
2.23
Slope 1 =
-0.01225 (PS No. 4 to MH K1)
Slope 2 = -0.029412 (MH K1 to MH K1A)
Slope 3 =
-0.01931 (MH K1A to MH K1B)
Inside
Diameter
or Height,
ft
Width, ft
Water
Depth, ft Length, ft
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
3.25
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
1.50
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
0.67
2.58
3.25
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
1.00
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
1.77
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.72
0.58
0.50
0.48
0.47
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.50
0.52
0.52
0.53
0.53
0.53
2
1
1.5
Area, sf
Hyd.
Velocity,
Radius, ft
fps
Length (ft)
40
204
58
Vel. Head,
ft
Coefficient
(n, K or C)
Exponent
for Weir
Head
Loss, ft
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
3.87
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.58
6.39
6.39
6.39
6.39
6.39
6.39
0.58
0.6349
0.6349
0.6349
0.6349
0.6349
0.6349
0.0052
1.000
0.150
0.013
1.200
0.013
0.500
0.013
0.6349
0.0952
0.0679
0.7618
0.0339
0.3174
0.0001
1.77
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.50
0.40
0.34
0.32
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.34
0.35
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.39
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.25
0.25
0.23
0.23
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
1.26
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.09
4.48
5.56
6.47
6.93
7.11
7.17
7.17
7.19
7.21
7.19
7.21
7.19
7.19
7.21
7.21
7.19
7.19
6.55
6.31
6.21
6.15
6.14
6.13
0.0248
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.2601
0.3111
0.4801
0.6501
0.7462
0.7860
0.7986
0.7986
0.8028
0.8071
0.8028
0.8071
0.8028
0.8028
0.8071
0.8071
0.8028
0.8028
0.6658
0.6177
0.5984
0.5878
0.5852
0.5827
0.013
1.000
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.0032
0.2601
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.1015
0.0957
0.1530
0.2232
0.2666
0.2852
0.2912
0.2912
0.2932
0.2953
0.2932
0.2953
0.2932
0.2932
0.2953
0.2953
0.2932
0.1173
0.2301
0.2091
0.2009
0.1964
0.1953
0.1554
1.6853
7.58
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
4
10
10
10
10
10
8
Page 1 of 1
Weir or
Invert EL,
ft
691.42
691.42
691.42
691.42
692.33
692.25
Water
Surface
EL or
HGL, ft
692.087
692.722
692.817
692.885
693.646
693.680
693.998
693.998
694.015
694.019
692.25
692.37
692.50
692.62
692.74
693.03
693.33
693.62
693.92
694.21
694.50
694.80
695.09
695.39
695.68
695.98
696.27
696.56
696.86
697.15
697.45
697.74
698.03
698.33
698.62
698.74
698.93
699.13
699.32
699.51
699.71
699.86
694.120
694.221
694.323
694.424
694.526
694.627
694.729
694.830
694.926
695.079
695.302
695.569
695.854
696.145
696.436
696.730
697.025
697.318
697.613
697.907
698.200
698.495
698.791
699.084
699.201
699.431
699.640
699.841
700.038
700.233
700.388
% Full
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
100%
100%
100%
79%
#DIV/0!
54%
#VALUE!
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
86%
69%
60%
57%
56%
56%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
55%
60%
62%
63%
63%
63%
63%
9/16/2010
9.4. HydraulicCalculationsForceMain(PumpStationNo.4toWWTP)
10/62010
AFT Fathom 7.0 Output

Water Works Engineers
(1 of 2)
9/16/2010
AFT Fathom Model
General
Title: AFT Fathom Model
Analysis run on: 9/16/2010 10:45:37 PM
Application version: AFT Fathom Version 7.0 (2009.08.19)
Input File: T:\Projects\10-018 Shasta Lake PS Improvements 2011\08 Calculations\LS4_Hydraulics.fth
Scenario: Base Scenario/2 Pumps
Output File: T:\Projects\10-018 Shasta Lake PS Improvements 2011\08 Calculations\LS4_Hydraulics_1.out
Execution Time= 0.08 seconds
Total Number Of Head/Pressure Iterations= 0
Total Number Of Flow Iterations= 2
Total Number Of Temperature Iterations= 0
Number Of Pipes= 6
Number Of Junctions= 6
Matrix Method= Gaussian Elimination
Pressure/Head Tolerance= 0.0001 relative change
Flow Rate Tolerance= 0.0001 relative change
Temperature Tolerance= 0.0001 relative change
Flow Relaxation= (Automatic)
Pressure Relaxation= (Automatic)
Constant Fluid Property Model
Fluid Database: AFT Standard
Fluid: Water at 1 atm
Max Fluid Temperature Data= 212 deg. F
Min Fluid Temperature Data= 32 deg. F
Temperature= 70 deg. F
Density= 62.30841 lbm/ft3
Viscosity= 2.36004 lbm/hr-ft
Vapor Pressure= 0.36157 psia
Viscosity Model= Newtonian
Atmospheric Pressure= 1 atm
Gravitational Acceleration= 1 g
Turbulent Flow Above Reynolds Number= 4000
Laminar Flow Below Reynolds Number= 2300
Total Inflow= 1,000 gal/min
Total Outflow= 1,000 gal/min
Maximum Static Pressure is 48.39 psia at Pipe 3 Inlet
Minimum Static Pressure is 14.70 psia at Pipe 1 Inlet
Pump Summary
Jct
2
X5
Name
Vol.
Mass
dP
Flow
Flow
(gal/min) (lbm/sec) (psid)
Pump
1,000
138.8 33.93
Pump
0
0.0
N/A
dH
Overall
Speed
Overall
BEP
% of
NPSHA NPSHR
Efficiency
Power
BEP
(feet) (Percent) (Percent)
(hp)
(gal/min) (Percent)
(feet)
(feet)
78.41
100.0
N/A
19.79
N/A
N/A
33.13
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Reservoir Summary
Jct
1
6
Name
PS4 Wetwell
Headworks
Pipe Output Table
Type
Liq.
Liq.
Surface
Liquid
Liquid
Net
Net
Height Elevation Pressure Volume Mass Vol. Flow Mass Flow
(feet)
(feet)
(psia)
(feet3)
(lbm)
(gal/min)
(lbm/sec)
Infinite
N/A
688.0
14.70
N/A
N/A
-1,000
-138.8
Infinite
N/A
756.8
14.70
N/A
N/A
1,000
138.8
AFT Fathom 7.0 Output

(2 of 2)
9/16/2010
AFT Fathom Model
Pipe
1
2
3
4
5
6
Name
False Pipe
False Pipe
Pump Discharge Piping
False Pipe
Pump Discharge Piping
Pipe
Pipe
dH
1
2
3
4
5
6
(feet)
0.000
0.000
2.703
0.000
0.000
6.263
Vol.
Velocity
P Static P Static Elevation Elevation dP Stag. dP Static
dP
Flow Rate
Max
Min
Inlet
Outlet
Total
Total
Gravity
(gal/min)
(feet/sec)
(psia)
(psia)
(feet)
(feet)
(psid)
(psid)
(psid)
1,000
0.1773
14.70
14.70
688.0
688.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
1,000
0.1773
14.70
14.70
688.0
688.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
1,000
5.8871
48.39
41.60
688.0
701.0
6.795
6.795
5.625
0
0.0000
14.70
14.70
688.0
688.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0
0.0000
47.45
41.83
688.0
701.0
5.625
5.625
5.625
1,000
6.4455
41.55
14.70
701.0
756.8
26.855
26.855 24.145
P Static P Static
In
Out
(psia)
(psia)
14.70
14.70
14.70
14.70
48.39
41.60
14.70
14.70
47.45
41.83
41.55
14.70
HGL
HGL
Dyn. Head
dH
Inlet
Outlet
(feet)
(feet)
(feet)
(feet)
688.0 688.0 0.0004885 0.000
688.0 688.0 0.0004885 0.000
765.9 763.2 0.5385971 2.703
688.0 688.0 0.0000000 0.000
763.7 763.7 0.0000000 0.000
763.1 756.8 0.6456148 6.263
dH
(feet)
0.000
0.000
2.703
0.000
0.000
6.263
P Stag. P Stag.
In
Out
(psia)
(psia)
14.70
14.70
14.70
14.70
48.62
41.83
14.70
14.70
47.45
41.83
41.83
14.98
All Junction Table

Jct
1
2
3
4
X5
6
Name
PS4 Wetwell
Pump
Branch
Branch
Pump
Headworks
P Static P Static P Stag. P Stag.

Vol. Flow
Mass Flow
Loss
In
Out
In
Out
Rate Thru Jct Rate Thru Jct Factor (K)
(psia)
(psia)
(psia)
(psia)
(gal/min)
(lbm/sec)
14.70
14.70
14.70
14.70
1,000
138.8
0.000
14.70
48.39
14.70
48.62
1,000
138.8
0.000
14.70
14.70
14.70
14.70
N/A
N/A
0.000
41.72
41.72
41.83
41.83
N/A
N/A
0.000
14.70
47.45
14.70
47.45
0
0.0
0.000
14.70
14.70
14.70
14.70
1,000
138.8
1.000
9.5. PreliminaryCostEstimatesand20YearNPWCostAnalysis
10/62010
CityofShastaLake
PumpStationImprovements2011
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 9Sep10
SummaryofCostsbyPumpStation(TotalConstructionBid)
Facility
TotalProject
PumpStationNo.1;Alt.1
GravitySewer;Alt.1
GravitySewer;Alt.2
GravitySewer;Alt.3
ForceMain(PSNo.4)
DecommisionPSNo.4A
2011Project
$310,000
$320,000
$ 280,000
$ 320,000
$310,000
$330,000
$ 310,000
$ 6,000
$ 18,000
$ 23,000
$ 7,000
$25,000
$310,000
$6,000
$7,000
$25,000
LeastCostSubtotal: $978,000
$348,000
$978,000
$ 97,800
$ 1,075,800
$
$ 1,075,800
$348,000
$34,800
$382,800
$
$
382,800
ConstructionBidTotala
ConstructionContingency
TOTAL
GRANDTOTAL
a
IncludesDesignContingency,ContractorON&PandBondsandIns.
Contingencies
DesignContingency
ContractorOverheadandProfit
ContractorBondsandInsurance
ConstructionContingency
20%
15%
4%
10%
ConcreteUnitCosts
SlabonGrade
Wall
RaisedSlab
$ 550
$ 950
$ 1,100
SummarybyFacility
1of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
PumpStationNo.1;Alternative1WetPitSubmersible
Items
Qtys
Division1GeneralRequirements
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
Removal/SalvageExst.Equip.
Demo.Stairs,compressor,airtanksuppor
ByPassPumping,redundant
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
100
100
1
1
4
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
LS
Wk
UnitPrice
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 2.00
$ 2.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 15,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$3,000
$8,000
$ 200
$ 200
$8,000
$ 10,000
$ 60,000
$ 89,400
11 cuyd
6 cuyd
5 cuyd
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 226
$ 119
$ 107
$
$ 452
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
RaisedSlab
PrecastValveVault(6'x6'x4')
AccessHatch
1.68 cu.yd
1 LS
2 LS
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
CMUWall
Grout
$ 1,100
$1,846
$ 10,000.00
72 $80 $ 15,760
$ 3,000.00 incl
$6,000
$
$ 23,606
105 SF
4 cu.yd
$15 incl
$1,572
$ 250
8 $80 $1,757
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
Alum.AccessLadderw/SafeTClimb
$ 3,329
1 ea.
$ 3,000
32 $80 $5,560
DIV5Subtotal
Division6WoodandPlastics
$ 5,560
DIV6Subtotal
Division7ThermalandMoistureProtection
DIV7Subtotal
Division8DoorsandWindows
MetalDoor
$
$
2 ea.
DIV8Subtotal
PS1;Alt1
$1,500 incl
$3,000
$ 3,000
2of38
9/16/2010
Items
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
DIV9Subtotal
Division10Specialities
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
6.5hppump
PumpAccessories
Qtys
Units
1 LS
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$5,000 incl
869 SF
$ 20.00
$ 17,385
$ 17,385
2 EA
2 LS
$ 5,180 120 $80 $ 19,960

$ 1,200
$2,400
$ 22,360
$
$
DIV12Subtotal
Division13SpecialConstruction
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
Division14ConveyingSystems
DIV15Subtotal
Division16ElectricalandInstrumentation
ElectricalControlPanel
FloatSwitches
Instrumentation/SpareParts
$
$
47
2
2
1
1
LF
EA
EA
EA
LS
$36
$2,000
$1,500
$300
$ 3,000
incl
12 $80
12 $80
12 $80
incl
$1,692
$4,960
$3,960
$1,260
$3,000
$ 14,872
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
$ 20,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
CONTRACTOROVERHEADANDPROFIT
CONTRACTORBONDSANDINSURANCE
TOTALCONSTRUCTIONBID
CONSTRUCTIONCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
PS1;Alt1
$5,000
$ 5,000
DIV11Subtotal
Division12Furnishings
DIV14Subtotal
Division15Mechanical
6"DIPPiping
6"CheckValve
6"PlugValve
Cleanout
Misc.Fittings
Total
20%
15%
4%
10%
3of38
incl
incl
incl
$ 20,000
$5,000
$ 10,000
$ 35,000
$219,964
$ 43,993
$ 32,995
$8,799
$ 305,749
$ 30,575
$ 336,324
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS1;Alt1
6
6
4
305
11.2963
4of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
PumpStationNo.1;Alternative2DryPitSubmersible
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
Demo.Stairs,compressor,airtanksuppor
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
0
0
1
1
4
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
LS
Wk
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 1.00
$ 2.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 15,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$3,000
$8,000
$
$
$8,000
$ 10,000
$ 60,000
$ 89,000
0 cuyd
0 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
RaisedSlab
Wall
Wall(Pumppedestals)
AccessHatch
1.68
3.26
0.89
2
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
CMUWall
Grout
105 SF
5 cu.yd
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
Alum.AccessLadderw/SafeTClimb
UnitPrice
cu.yd
cu.yd
cu.yd
LS
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$
$
$
$
$
$ 1,100
$ 950
$ 950
$ 3,000.00 incl
$1,846
$3,101
$ 844
$6,000
$
$ 11,792
$15 incl
$1,572
$ 250
16 $80 $2,565
$ 4,137
1 ea.
$ 3,000
32 $80 $5,560
DIV5Subtotal
$ 5,560
DIV6Subtotal
DIV7Subtotal
MetalDoor
ExhaustVentilation
PS1;Alt2
$
$
2 ea.
1 LS
5of38
$1,500 incl
$5,000 incl
$3,000
$5,000
9/16/2010
Items
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
DIV9Subtotal
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
12hppump
PumpAccessories
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$ 8,000
1 LS
$7,000 incl
512 SF
$ 20.00
$ 10,234
$ 10,234
2 EA
2 LS
$12,900 120 $80 $ 35,400

$ 400
$ 800
$ 36,200
$
$
DIV12Subtotal
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
$
$
106
2
4
1
LF
EA
EA
LS
$36
$2,000
$1,500
$ 6,000
incl
12 $80
12 $80
incl
$3,816
$4,960
$6,960
$6,000
$ 21,736
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
$ 25,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
PS1;Alt2
$7,000
$ 7,000
DIV11Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
6"CheckValve
6"PlugValve
Misc.Fittings
Total
20%
15%
4%
10%
6of38
incl
incl
incl
$ 25,000
$5,000
$ 10,000
$ 40,000
$233,660
$ 46,732
$ 35,049
$9,346
$ 324,787
$ 32,479
$ 357,266
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS1;Alt2
0
0
0
0
0
7of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 15Sep10
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
SitePaving(4"ACon12"AB)
NewFencing
Demo.Stairs,compressor,airtanksuppo
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
600
600
400
40
1
1
LS
LS
SF
SF
SF
LF
LS
LS
UnitPrice
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 2.00
$ 2.00
$ 12.00
$ 20.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 7,500.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$ 3,000
$ 8,000
$ 1,200
$ 1,200
$ 4,800
$ 800
$ 8,000
$ 7,500
$34,500
201 cuyd
166 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
PrecastWetwellSections(6'ID)
Precast Wetwell Base (6' ID)
PrecastWetwellBase(6'ID)
PrecastWetwellLid(6'ID)
AccessHatch
PrecastManholeSections(4'ID)
PrecastManholeBase(4'ID)
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
CMUWall
Grout
0 SF
1 cu.yd
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 12,000.00
48
$
$
5 000 00
5,000.00
48
$ 2,500.00
24
$ 10,000.00 144
$ 3,000.00 incl
$ 6,000.00
48
$ 2,000.00
48
$ 2,000.00
24
$ 4,022
$ 3,329
$
$
$ 7,351
$80
$
$
80
$80
$80
$ 15,840
$
$
8 840
8,840
$ 4,420
$ 21,520
$ 6,000
$80 $ 9,840
$80 $ 5,840
$80 $ 3,920
$
$76,220
$ 15 incl
$
$ 250
8 $80 $ 815
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
$ 815
DIV5Subtotal
DIV6Subtotal
$
$
PS1;Alt3
8of38
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
DIV7Subtotal
MetalDoor
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
$
0 ea.
$1,500 incl
$
$
1 LS
$5,000 incl
$ 5,000
DIV9Subtotal
$ 5,000
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
6.5hppump
PumpAccessories
$
2 EA
2 LS
$ 5,180 120 $80 $ 19,960

$ 1,200
$ 2,400
DIV11Subtotal
$22,360
$
$
DIV12Subtotal
$
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
DIV
13 Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
6"CheckValve
6"PlugValve
Cleanout
Misc.Fittings
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
$
$
95
2
2
1
1
LF
EA
EA
EA
LS
$ 36
$2,000
$1,500
$300
$ 3,000
$ 3,420
$ 4,960
$ 3,960
$ 1,260
$ 3,000
$16,600
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
$ 20,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
PS1;Alt3
incl
12 $80
12 $80
12 $80
incl
20%
15%
4%
9of38
incl
incl
incl
$ 20,000
$ 5,000
$ 10,000
$35,000
$ 197,846
$ 39,569
$ 29,677
$ 7,914
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
GRANDTOTAL
10%
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
$ 275,006
$ 27,501
$302,507
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS1;Alt3
6
6
4
305
11.2963
10of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
150
100
1
4
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
Wk
UnitPrice
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 1.00
$ 2.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 15,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$ 3,000
$ 8,000
$ 150
$ 200
$ 8,000
$ 60,000
$79,350
11 cuyd
6 cuyd
5 cuyd
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 226
$ 119
$ 107
$
$ 452
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
AccessHatch
1 LS
2 LS
DIV3Subtotal
DIV
3 Subtotal
Division4Masonry
Grout
$ 10,000.00
72 $80 $ 15,760
$ 3,000.00 incl
$ 6,000
$
$
$
21 760
21,760
1 cu.yd
$ 250
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
SafeTClimb
AlumplateMHcover
8 $80 $ 902
$ 902
1 ea.
50.3 SF
$ 500
$ 30
4 $80 $ 820
4 $80 $ 1,828
DIV5Subtotal
$ 820
DIV6Subtotal
DIV7Subtotal
MetalDoor
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
PS2;Alt1
$
$
2 ea.
$1,500 incl
$ 3,000
$ 3,000
1 LS
$5,000 incl
11of38
$ 5,000
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
DIV9Subtotal
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
5hppump
PumpAccessories
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$ 5,000
339 SF
$ 20.00
$ 6,786
$ 6,786
2 EA
2 LS
$ 5,010 120 $80 $ 19,620

$ 1,200
$ 2,400
DIV11Subtotal
$22,020
$
$
DIV12Subtotal
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
4"DIPPiping
4"CheckValve
4" Plug Valve
4"PlugValve
Cleanout
Misc.Fittings
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
Class1,Division1equipmentadder
$
$
48
2
2
1
1
LF
EA
EA
EA
LS
$ 24
$2,000
$1 500
$1,500
$300
$ 3,000
incl
12 $80
12 $
$
80
12 $80
incl
$ 1,152
$ 4,960
$
$
3 960
3,960
$ 1,260
$ 3,000
$14,332
1
1
1
1
LS
LS
LS
LS
$ 20,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 40,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
PS2;Alt1
Total
20%
15%
4%
10%
12of38
incl
incl
incl
incl
$ 20,000
$ 5,000
$ 10,000
$ 40,000
$75,000
$ 229,421
$ 45,884
$ 34,413
$ 9,177
$ 318,896
$ 31,890
$350,785
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS2;Alt1
6
6
4
305
11.2963
13of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
150
100
1
4
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
Wk
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 1.00
$ 2.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 15,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$3,000
$8,000
$ 150
$ 200
$8,000
$ 60,000
$ 79,350
268 cuyd
212 cuyd
56 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
PrecastWetwellSections(4'ID)
PrecastWetwellBase(4'ID)
AccessHatch
1
1
1
1
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
Grout
1 cu.yd
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
SafeTClimb
UnitPrice
LS
LS
LS
LS
$ 10.00 incl
$ 10.00 incl
$ 10.00 incl
$2,681
$2,125
$ 556
$
$ 5,362
$ 6,000.00
48 $80
$ 2,000.00
48 $80
$ 2,000.00
24 $80
$ 3,000.00 incl
$ 16,215
$6,340
$4,420
$3,000
$
$ 29,975
$ 250
8 $80 $ 902
$ 902
1 ea.
$ 500
4 $80 $ 820
DIV5Subtotal
$ 820
DIV6Subtotal
DIV7Subtotal
MetalDoor
ExhaustVentilation
$
$
2 ea.
1 LS
DIV8Subtotal
PS2;Alt2
$1,500 incl
$5,000 incl
$3,000
$5,000
$ 8,000
14of38
9/16/2010
Items
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
DIV9Subtotal
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
3.7hppump
PumpAccessories
Qtys
Units
1 LS
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$7,000 incl
352 SF
$ 20.00
$7,037
$ 7,037
2 EA
2 LS
$ 5,906 120 $80 $ 21,412

$ 400
$ 800
$ 22,212
$
$
DIV12Subtotal
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
$
$
25
88
2
4
1
LF
LF
EA
EA
LS
$36
$24
$2,000
$1,500
$ 6,000
incl
incl
12 $80
12 $80
incl
$ 900
$2,112
$4,960
$6,960
$6,000
$ 20,932
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
PS2;Alt2
$7,000
$ 7,000
DIV11Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
4"DIPPiping
4"CheckValve
4"PlugValve
Misc.Fittings
Total
$ 25,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
20%
15%
4%
10%
15of38
incl
incl
incl
$ 25,000
$5,000
$ 10,000
$ 40,000
$221,590
$ 44,318
$ 33,238
$8,864
$ 308,010
$ 30,801
$ 338,811
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS2;Alt2
6
6
4
305
11.2963
16of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 30Aug10
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
Demo.CMUwall
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1
1
800
800
1
1
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
LS
UnitPrice
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 1.00
$ 2.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
Total
$ 3,000
$ 8,000
$ 800
$ 1,600
$ 15,000
$ 2,000
$30,400
11 cuyd
6 cuyd
5 cuyd
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 20.00 incl
$ 226
$ 119
$ 107
$
$ 452
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
FillerforHolesinFloor
AccessHatch
0.33 cu.yd
1 LS
2 LS
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
CMUWall
Grout
$ 1,100
$ 367
$ 6,000.00
8 $80 $ 6,640
$ 3,000.00 incl
$ 6,000
$
$
$13,007
148 SF
25 cu.yd
$ 15 incl
$ 2,220
$ 250
8 $80 $ 6,862
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
Metalplatecover(Parshallflume)
DIV5Subtotal
RoofDemoandReplacement
$ 9,082
14 SF
$ 50
$ 1,020
1 LS
$16,000 incl
DIV6Subtotal
DIV7Subtotal
ExhaustVentilation
$ 16,000
$16,000
$
$
1 LS
$250 incl
DIV8Subtotal
PS4;Alt1
4 $80 $ 1,020
$ 250
$ 250
17of38
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
DIV9Subtotal
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
34hppump
PumpAccessories
GeneratorExhaustMuffler
Units
1 LS
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$1,000 incl
1828 SF
$ 20.00
$ 36,560
$36,560
2 EA
2 LS
1 LS
$19,200 120 $80 $ 48,000

$ 2,100
$ 4,200
$ 2,000
$ 2,000
$54,200
$
$
1 LS
$ 7,000
$ 7,000
DIV13Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
DIV
14 Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
6"CheckValve
6"PlugValve
Cleanout/BypassConnection
Misc.Fittings
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
$ 7,000
$
$
$
61
2
2
1
1
LF
EA
EA
EA
LS
$ 36
$2,000
$1,500
$300
$ 5,000
incl
12 $80
12 $80
12 $80
incl
$ 2,196
$ 4,960
$ 3,960
$ 1,260
$ 5,000
$17,376
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
$ 30,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 15,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
PS4;Alt1
$ 1,000
$ 1,000
DIV11Subtotal
DIV12Subtotal
AsbestosRemoval(440SF)
Total
20%
15%
4%
10%
18of38
incl
incl
incl
$ 30,000
$ 5,000
$ 15,000
$50,000
$ 236,347
$ 47,269
$ 35,452
$ 9,454
$ 328,522
$ 32,852
$361,374
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS4;Alt1
6
6
4
305
11.2963
19of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 9Sep10
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
SiteGravelSurfacing
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
SuspendedSlaboverWetwell
WetwellWall
Units
1
1
800
800
1
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
UnitPrice
$ 3,000.00
$ 8,000.00
$ 1.00
$ 2.00
$ 15,000.00
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
incl
incl
incl
incl
incl
DIV5Subtotal
RoofDemoandReplacement
0 cuyd
0 cuyd
0 cuyd
1.85 cu.yd
7.41 cu.yd
$ 8.00 incl
$ 5.00 incl
$ 4.00 incl
$
$
$
$
$
$ 1,500
$ 1,500
$ 2,778
$ 11,111
$
$13,889
$
$
14 SF
$ 50
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
Painting(piping)
1 LS
$20,000 incl
$ 20,000
$20,000
$
$
1 LS
$5,000 incl
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
1 LS
$5,000 incl
DIV9Subtotal
PS4;Alt2
4 $80 $ 1,020
$ 1,020
DIV6Subtotal
DIV7Subtotal
ExhaustVenitlation
$ 3,000
$ 8,000
$ 800
$ 1,600
$ 15,000
$28,400
DIV3Subtotal
Division 4 Masonry
Division4Masonry
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
Metalplatecover(Parshallflume)
Total
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
20of38
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
WetwellLinerSystem
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
34hppump
PumpAccessories
GeneratorExhaustMuffler
Units
700 SF
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$ 20.00
$ 14,000
$14,000
2 EA
2 LS
1 LS
$19,200 120 $80 $ 48,000

$ 2,100
$ 4,200
$ 2,000
$ 2,000
DIV11Subtotal
DIV12Subtotal
AsbestosRemoval(440SF)
$54,200
$
$
1 LS
$ 7,000
$ 7,000
DIV13Subtotal
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
6"CheckValve
6" Plug Valve
6"PlugValve
Cleanout/BypassConnection
Misc.Fittings
DIV15Subtotal
FloatSwitches
Total
$ 7,000
$
$
50
2
6
1
1
LF
EA
EA
EA
LS
$ 36
$2,000
$1 500
$1,500
$300
$ 5,000
incl
12 $80
12 $
$
80
12 $80
incl
$ 1,800
$ 4,960
$
$
9 960
9,960
$ 1,260
$ 5,000
$22,980
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
$ 30,000.00
$ 5,000.00
$ 15,000.00
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
20%
15%
4%
10%
incl
incl
incl
$ 30,000
$ 5,000
$ 15,000
$50,000
$ 221,489
$ 44,298
$ 33,223
$ 8,860
$ 307,870
$ 30,787
$338,657
Excavation
PS4;Alt2
21of38
9/16/2010
Items
Qtys
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
PS4;Alt2
Units
UnitPrice
8
8
4
0
0
22of38
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 30Aug10
20YearNetPresentWorth(NPW)Analysis
Inputs
InterestRate=
Period=
CapitalRecoveyFactora(P/A)=
Facility
PSNo.1
PSNo.2
PSNo.4
a
Alternative
Alt.No.1WetPitSubmersible
Alt.No.2DryPitSubmersible
Alt.No.3WetPitSubmersible(New)
6%
20 years
11.4699
CapitalCost
$310,000.00
$320,000.00
$280,000.00
$320,000.00
$310,000.00
$ 330,000.00
$ 310,000.00
OperationandMaintenanceCosts
Electrical
WeeklyTasks
MonthlyTasks
$4,700.00 $3,120.00 $12,480.00
$10,000.00 $3,120.00 $9,360.00
$4,700.00 $3,120.00 $12,480.00
$3,800.00 $3,120.00 $12,480.00
$2,800.00 $3,120.00 $9,360.00
$ 18,200.00 $ 3,120.00 $12,480.00
$ 18,200.00 $ 3,120.00 $12,480.00
20YearNPW
$540,000.00
$580,000.00
$510,000.00
$540,000.00
$490,000.00
$720,000.00
$700,000.00
Source:CivilEngineeringRefernceManual;10thEd.,Lindeburg,2006
20YearNPW_Summary
23of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
20YearNetPresentWorth(NPW)Analysis:PSNo.1;Alt.1
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
#oftimesWetwellfilled=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
6.5
4.85
50%
160
2
80
755
5,648
20.4
35.4
12.0
4,380
CostofElectricity= $ 0.11
TotalAnnualCost= $ 4,700
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
HourlyRate= $ 60 $/hr.
TotalAnnualCost= $ 3,120 $/year
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
4.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS1;Alt1
24of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
12
8.95
43%
160
2
80
156
1,165
98.7
7.3
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
3.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS1;Alt2
25of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 15Sep10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
6.5
4.85
50%
160
2
80
94
703
163.5
4.4
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
4.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS1;Alt3
26of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
5
3.73
47%
215
2
108
101
752
206.1
3.5
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
4.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS2;Alt1
27of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 26Aug10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
3.7
2.76
47%
215
2
108
101
752
206.1
3.5
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
3.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS2;Alt2
28of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 30Aug10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
34
25.35
67%
1,000
2
500
960
7,181
100.3
7.2
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
4.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS4;Alt1
29of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 9Sep10
Electrical
PumpPower=
MotorEfficiency=
DesignPumpRate=
PF(PWWF/AAF)=
InfluentFlowrate=
OperatingVolume=
Timetoemptywetwell=
Operatingtime=
34
25.35
67%
1,000
2
500
240
1,795
401.1
1.8
12.0
4,380
hp
kW
gpm
gpm
ft^3
gal.
filled/day
min.
hrs./day
hrs./year
$/kWhr.
$/year
WeeklyTasks
WeeklyMaintenance=
W
kl M i
1
1.0
0 personhrs./week
h /
k
MonthlyTasks
MonthlyMaintenance=
4.0 personhrs./mo.
20YrNPW_PS4;Alt2
30of38
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 31Aug10
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative1DoNothing
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1 LS
1 LS
100 SF
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$
incl
$ 2,000.00 incl
$ 1.00 incl
Total
$
$2,000
$ 100
$ 2,100
37 cuyd
37 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
$ 8.00 incl
$ 5.00 incl
$ 4.00 incl
$ 296
$ 185
$
$ 481
$
$
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
$
$
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
DIV5Subtotal
DIV6Subtotal
$
$
$
DIV7Subtotal
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
DIV9Subtotal
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
DIV11Subtotal
$
$
GravSS;Alt1
31of38
9/16/2010
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative1DoNothing
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
DIV12Subtotal
Total
$
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
$
$
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
ReconnectExst.10"VCPtomanhole
0 LF
1 LS
$36
$ 2,000
incl
incl
$
$2,000
DIV15Subtotal
$ 2,000
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
$
$ 4,581
$ 916
$ 687
$ 183
$ 6,368
$ 637
$7,005
20%
15%
4%
10%
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
GravSS;Alt1
10
10
10
1000
37.03704
32of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 31Aug10
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative2NonStructuralCIPP
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1 LS
1 LS
100 SF
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$
incl
$2,000.00 incl
$1.00 incl
Total
$
$2,000
$ 100
$ 2,100
37 cuyd
37 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
$8.00 incl
$5.00 incl
$4.00 incl
$ 296
$ 185
$
$ 481
$
$
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
$
$
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
DIV5Subtotal
DIV6Subtotal
$
$
$
DIV7Subtotal
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
DIV9Subtotal
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
DIV11Subtotal
$
$
GravSS;Alt2
33of38
9/16/2010
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative2NonStructuralCIPP
Items
Qtys
DIV12Subtotal
NonStructuralCIPPLining(10")
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
$
204 LF
$ 40
incl
DIV13Subtotal
$8,160
$ 8,160
$
$
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
0 LF
1 LS
$ 36
$ 2,000
incl
incl
$
$2,000
DIV15Subtotal
$ 2,000
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
$
$12,741
$2,548
$1,911
$ 510
$ 17,711
$1,771
$ 19,482
20%
15%
4%
10%
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
GravSS;Alt2
10
10
10
1000
37.03704
34of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 31Aug10
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative3StructuralCIPP
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1 LS
1 LS
100 SF
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$
incl
$2,000.00 incl
$1.00 incl
Total
$
$2,000
$ 100
$ 2,100
37 cuyd
37 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
$8.00 incl
$5.00 incl
$4.00 incl
$ 296
$ 185
$
$ 481
$
$
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
$
$
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
DIV5Subtotal
DIV6Subtotal
$
$
$
DIV7Subtotal
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
DIV9Subtotal
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
DIV11Subtotal
$
$
GravSS;Alt3
35of38
9/16/2010
GravitySewerImprovements;Alternative3StructuralCIPP
Items
Qtys
DIV12Subtotal
NonStructuralCIPPLining(10")
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
Total
$
204 LF
$ 60
incl
DIV13Subtotal
$ 12,240
$ 12,240
$
$
DIV14Subtotal
6"DIPPiping
0 LF
1 LS
$ 36
$ 2,000
incl
incl
$
$2,000
DIV15Subtotal
$ 2,000
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
$
$16,821
$3,364
$2,523
$ 673
$ 23,382
$2,338
$ 25,720
20%
15%
4%
10%
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
GravSS;Alt3
10
10
10
1000
37.03704
36of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
CityofShastaLake
By: AJB
Checked:
Date: 31Aug10
FMImprovements
Items
Qtys
Mobilization
SitePreparation
SiteGrading
DIV1Subtotal
Division2EarthWork
Excavation
Backfill
Hauling
Units
1 LS
1 LS
0 SF
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
$
incl
$ 2,000.00 incl
$ 1.00 incl
Total
$
$2,000
$
$ 2,000
13 cuyd
13 cuyd
0 cuyd
DIV2Subtotal
Division3Concrete
$ 8.00 incl
$ 5.00 incl
$ 4.00 incl
$ 107
$ 67
$
$ 173
$
$
DIV3Subtotal
Division4Masonry
$
$
DIV4Subtotal
Division5Metals
DIV5Subtotal
DIV6Subtotal
$
$
$
DIV7Subtotal
DIV8Subtotal
Division9Finishes
DIV9Subtotal
DIV10Subtotal
Division11Equipment
DIV11Subtotal
$
$
FM
37of38
9/16/2010
FMImprovements
Items
Qtys
Units
UnitPrice
Labor
Hrs.
Rate
DIV12Subtotal
Total
$
$
$
DIV13Subtotal
$
$
DIV14Subtotal
8"DIPPiping
ConcCapon8"FM
20 LF
2 LS
$48
$ 1,000
incl
incl
$ 960
$2,000
DIV15Subtotal
$ 2,960
DIV16Subtotal
SUBTOTAL
DESIGNCONTINGENCY
GRANDTOTAL
$
$ 5,133
$1,027
$ 770
$ 205
$ 7,135
$ 714
$7,849
20%
15%
4%
10%
Excavation
Width=
Length=
Depth=
Volume=
FM
3
20
6
360
13.33333
38of38
feet
feet
feet
ft3
CY
9/16/2010
9.6. EnvironmentalConstraintsReport
10/62010
CITY OF SHASTA LAKE PUMP STATION

IMPROVEMENTS 2011 PROJECT
Archaeological Resources Technical Memorandum, City of
Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California
Prepared by:
Clint R. Cole, Ph.D. (Candidate)
Principal Archaeological Investigator
and
Kristina Crawford, B.A.
Co-Principal Archaeological
Investigator
North State Resources, Inc.
500 Orient Street, Suite 150
Chico, CA 95928
Prepared for:
1405 Victor Avenue, Suite A
Redding, CA 96003
Telephone: (530) 243-2113
Fax: (530) 243-2114
7.5 USGS Quadrangle:

Shasta Dam, California (1956; revised
1978)
Acreage:
<0.1 acres
June 2010
51220
City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Summary of Findings
Abstract
This technical memorandum documents the intensive archaeological survey and archival research
conducted for the proposed <0.1 acre Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project in the City of
Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California. The undertaking area lies approximately 1.2 miles west
of the interchange of Pine Grove Avenue and Interstate 5, approximately 1 mile east of the
intersection of Pine Grove Avenue and Lake Boulevard in Newtown, and approximately 1 mile
south of the center (city hall) of the City of Shasta Lake. This location lies within Section 1 in
Township 32 North and Range 5 West, on the Shasta Dam, California USGS 7.5 minute
topographic quadrangle (Figure 1).
Proposed Undertaking
The purpose of the undertaking is to improve wastewater treatment facilities, specifically, Pump
Station 4 will be converted to a submersible or dry pit pump, and Pump Station 4A will be
decommissioned. To achieve the decommission of Pump Station 4A, an out-of-service 10-inch
sewer line will be reconnected to Pump Station 4 so flows can be redirected from Pump Station
4A. Excavation of a 10-foot by 10-foot area, with a maximum depth of 6 to 8 feet, will take place
south and west of Pump Station 4A to reach the out-of-service sewer line for the reconnection
process. The undertaking is a categorical exemption and the purpose of this technical
memorandum is to identify possible constraints to the project.
Constraints to the Survey Effort
Thick riparian vegetation impeded survey efforts immediately along the Churn Creek corridor
and reduced ground surface visibility. Rock armoring located at the Pine Grove Avenue bridge
abutments hampered visibility. Overall, ground surface visibility varied from 25 to 90 percent.
Identified Resources
No prehistoric or historic artifacts or features were located in the undertaking area.
North State Resources

June 2010
City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project
Undertaking Location
Public Land Survey:

Section: 1
Township: 32N
Range: 05W
USGS 7.5 Quad:
Shasta Dam - 1969
2,000
1,000
Shasta County,
California
(
(
Burney
(
(
2,000
(
(
Feet
1:24,000
(
(
( Shasta
(
(
G:\Projects\51220_COSL_Pump_Station\GIS\Working_Mxds\51220_Figure_1_Arch.mxd Created: 2010-06-10 edouglas
Lake
Redding
Anderson
(
(
(
Cottonwood
Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements Project

99
Figure 1
Project Location and Vicinity Map
Table of Contents
CITY OF SHASTA LAKE PUMP IMPROVEMENTS 2011 PROJECT
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM, CITY OF
SHASTA LAKE, SHASTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................. i
1.0
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0
Undertaking Location and Description......................................................................................... 1
3.0
Sources Consulted ........................................................................................................................ 3
4.0
Background................................................................................................................................... 6
5.0
Field Methods............................................................................................................................. 16
6.0
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................... 16

National Register of Historic Places Significance Criteria ........................................................ 16
Potential Impacts and Recommended Measures........................................................................ 18
7.0
References .................................................................................................................................. 17
Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Undertaking Location and Vicinity Map ............................................................................... ii

Archaeological Survey Coverage Map .................................................................................. 2
1901 US Geological Survey Redding, California 30-minute quadrangle map ...................... 4
1944 US Geological Survey Redding, California 15-minute quadrangle map ...................... 5
Soils Map ............................................................................................................................... 8

June 2010
iii
City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
1.0
Introduction
On behalf of Water Works Engineers, North State Resources, Inc. (NSR) has completed an
archaeological resources and archival investigation for the <0.1 acre City of Shasta Lake Pump
Station Improvement 2011 Project (undertaking area) located in the City of Shasta Lake, Shasta
County, California. On June 8, 2010, NSR archaeologist Kristina Crawford conducted a
complete strategy pedestrian reconnaissance survey of the undertaking area.
2.0
Undertaking Location and Description
The undertaking area lies approximately 1.2 miles west of the interchange of Pine Grove Avenue
and Interstate 5, approximately 1 mile east of the intersection of Pine Grove Avenue and Lake
Boulevard, and approximately 1 mile south of the center (city hall) of the City of Shasta Lake.
This location lies within Section 1 in Township 32 North and Range 5 West, on the Shasta Dam,
California USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 1).
The purpose of the undertaking is to improve wastewater treatment facilities, specifically, Pump
Station 4 will be converted to a submersible or dry pit pump, and Pump Station 4A will be
decommissioned. To achieve the decommission of Pump Station 4A, an out-of-service 10-inch
sewer line will be reconnected to Pump Station 4 so flows can be redirected from Pump Station
4A. Excavation of a 10-foot by 10-foot area, with a maximum depth of 6 to 8 feet, will take place
south and west of Pump Station 4A to reach the out-of-service sewer line for the reconnection
process.
The undertaking is a categorical exemption and the purpose of this technical memorandum is to
identify possible constraints to the project. To this end, the archaeological resources assessment
was designed and implemented to locate any potentially significant archaeological resources or
historic properties visible on the ground surface of the undertaking area which could be affected
by project-related activities, and to summarize the results of previous archaeological
investigations (Jensen and Associates 1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1993a, 1993b, 1997a, 1997b, 1999,
2004a, 2004b, 2004c; North State Resources 2007) that have been performed within or adjacent
to the undertaking area (Figure 2). After reviewing previous survey coverage, NSR
archaeologists completed a field survey for the entirety of the undertaking area.
A copy of this report will be sent to the Northeast Information Center (NEIC) in accordance with
the Agreement of Confidentiality, signed by NSR archaeologist Kristina Crawford on June 7,
2010. A signed Agreement of Confidentiality is required by the NEIC prior to conducting a
records search. Submittal of the report to the NEIC provides formal documentation that the
undertaking area has received an archaeological resource reconnaissance. This report meets the
archaeological survey requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

June 2010
Jensen & Associates 1991A

Jensen & Associates 1991B
Jensen & Associates 1991C
!
! Jensen & Associates 1993A

Jensen & Associates 1999
Jensen & Associates 2004C
NSR 2007
NSR 2010
Public Land Survey:

Section: 1
Township: 32N
Range: 05W
USGS 7.5 Quad:
Shasta Dam - 1969
2,000
1,000
Shasta County,
California
Burney
(
(
2,000
(
(
Feet
1:24,000
(
(
( Shasta
(
(
Redding
Anderson
(
Lake
Cottonwood

99
Figure 2
Previous Archaeological Survey Coverage map
3.0
Sources Consulted
Summary of Methods and Results

A review of the archaeological records housed at the NEIC at California State University, Chico
was conducted on June 7, 2010 (Records Search No. W10-60). The search included all records
and documents pertaining to archaeological resources and inventories located within a 0.5-mile
radius of the undertaking area. The purpose of the archaeological records search was to:
Determine the presence or absence of any known archaeological sites or cultural and/or
historical resources within the undertaking area;
Define specific portions of the undertaking area requiring field survey; and
Determine the research context (e.g., previous investigations, historical background);
As a result of the NEIC records search, it was determined that:
Eleven surveys (Jensen and Associates 1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1993a, 1993b, 1997a,
1997b, 1999, 2004a, 2004b, 2004c; North State Resources 2007) have been conducted
within the undertaking area (Figure 2), and
No archaeological or historical resources have been recorded in the undertaking area.

One archaeological resource has been identified or recorded immediately adjacent (under
0.1 mile) to the undertaking area.
P45-004418: This isolated find is one basalt primary reduction flake and one small obsidian
pressure flake located together in the bed of a dirt road that parallels the eastern side of Churn
Creek.
The archaeological survey reports noted the presence of isolated prehistoric artifacts and historic
mining tailings piles throughout the 0.5 mile search radius (Jensen and Associates 1991a, 1991c,
1993b, 2004b; North State Resources, Inc. 2007). The isolated prehistoric artifacts were most
commonly small obsidian waste flakes and larger basalt waste flakes. Isolated flakes, common
throughout the wider region, are as a rule not considered eligible for the National register of
Historic Places or for the California Register of Historical Resources. They do, however, provide
indications of land use for a considerable duration of time, and they can indicate the nearby
location of larger concentrated archaeological deposits. The historic mining tailings piles were
noted along Churn and Newtown Creeks and several unnamed drainages in the 0.5 mile search
radius. Small scale placer mining operations have been sporadically conducted throughout the
Newtown-Churn Creek-Central Valley area since 1849 (Frank and Chappel 1881). Renewed
interest in placer mining came again in the 1930s and the 1950s. Mining tailing piles area nontime diagnostic, and are generally not considered eligible for the National register of Historic
Places or for the California Register of Historical Resources. They do, however, provide
indications of land use of a specific industry of regional and state-wide importance.
A records search of the National Register of Historic Places (United States Department of the
Interior, National Park Service 2010), the California Historical Landmarks Listing, the California
Register of Historical Resources, and the California Points of Historical Interest (State of
California Office of Historic Preservation 2009a, 2009b, 2009c) was conducted on June 4, 2010.
No resources listed on the California Historical Landmarks Listing, the California Points of
June 2010
Historical Interest, the California Register of Historical Resources, or the National Register of
Historic Places are located in or near the undertaking area.
A review of the General Land Office land patents available on-line revealed a Recreation and
Public Purposes land patent held by the Shasta Dam Area Public Utility for most of the northeast
quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 1, Township 32 North, Range 5 West (141 acres)
(Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office 1971). Three small portions of the northeast
quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 1 are patented to other entities, including a power
transmission line patent, and two mining claim occupation patents (see below).
A review of the General Land Office land patents available on-line revealed Mining Claim
Occupation patents held by Leroy W. Koeller (2.5 acres; 1965) and Elsie C. Koeller and the Heirs
of Herman A. Koeller (2 acres; 1965). These two patents are located in the northeast quarter of
the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 1 east of Churn Creek (Bureau of Land
Management, General Land Office 1965a 1965b).
A review of the Affidavit of Labor and Improvements on Mining Claims of Shasta Co., CA
1891-1941, available on-line revealed a mine claim named Elbow Placer 1 and 2 (with variations)
owned by H.A. Koeller from 1937 to 1940 (Shasta County Resources 2010). Koeller made a
total of 600 dollars of improvements to the claim during this time period.
A review of the Index to Mineral Locations and Contests (2005) revealed 14 named placer
mining claims, located in the northeast quarter of Section 1, Township 32 North Range 5 West,
were declared null and void on November 22, 1965.
A review of the 1890 US Geological Survey Red Bluff 60-minute quadrangle map shows the
historical location of Buckeye (west of the undertaking area) and Churntown (northwest of the
undertaking area), as well as several generally located road alignments. No historical features are
noted in the undertaking vicinity.
A review of the 1901 US Geological
Survey Redding 30-minute quadrangle
map (Figure 3) shows the historical
location of Newtown (west of the
undertaking area), Buckeye (southwest of
the undertaking area) and Churntown
(northwest of the undertaking area). The
map also notes the historical corridor of
Churn Creek, and the location of several
road alignments, including a minor road
closely approximating the modern-day
alignment of Pine Grove Avenue, and
major roads closely approximating
modern-day Ashby Road and Lake
Boulevard.
Figure 3: 1901 U.S. Geological Survey Redding,

California 30-minute quadrangle map. The undertaking
area is in the red circle.
A review of the 1944 US Geological

Survey Redding 15-minute quadrangle
map (Figure 4) shows the historical location of Newtown (west of the undertaking area), as well a
the historical corridor of Churn Creek. The map also notes the location of several road
June 2010
alignments, including a minor road closely approximating the modern-day alignment of Pine
Grove Avenue, and major roads closely
approximating modern-day Ashby Road
and Lake Boulevard.
A review of the 1902 California Mining
Bureau Map of Shasta County indicates
the presence of a mine located
approximately 1 mile south of the
undertaking area at the confluence of
Buckeye and Churn Creeks. The map also
notes the historical location of Newtown
(west of the undertaking area) and
Buckeye (southwest of the undertaking
area), and the generally located historic
road alignments (California State Mining
Bureau 1902). No historical features or
mines are noted in the immediate
undertaking vicinity.
Figure 4: 1944 U.S. Geological Survey Redding,

California 15-minute quadrangle map. The
undertaking area is in the red circle.
A review of the 1904 Dennys Map of Shasta County shows the historical location of Newtown
(west of the undertaking area), Buckeye (southwest of the undertaking area) and Churntown
(northwest of the undertaking area), as well as the approximate historic alignment of Churn Creek
and generally located historic road alignments (Denny 1904). No historical features are noted in
or near the undertaking area.
A review of the 1914 Punnett Brothers map of Shasta County, California shows the historical
location of Newtown (west of the undertaking area), Buckeye (southwest of the undertaking area)
and Churntown (northwest of the undertaking area), as well as the approximate historic alignment
of Churn Creek. Several generally located historic road alignments closely approximating
modern-day Ashby Road and Lake Boulevard run between Buckeye, Newtown, and Churntown
(Punnett Brothers 1914). No historical features are noted in or near the undertaking area.
A review of the 1940 Shasta National Forest Map shows the historical location of Newtown (west
of the undertaking area) , Buckeye (southwest of the undertaking area) and Churntown (northwest
of the undertaking area), as well as the approximate historic alignment of Churn Creek. Several
generally located historic road alignments that run between Buckeye, Newtown, and Churntown
closely approximate modern-day Ashby Road and Lake Boulevard run between Buckeye,
Newtown, and Churntown (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service 1940). No historical
features are noted in or near the undertaking area.
A review of the 1949 Rand McNally Map of Shasta County, California shows the historical
location of Newtown (west of the undertaking area) and Buckeye (southwest of the undertaking
area), as well as the approximate historic alignment of Churn Creek and generally located historic
road alignments (Rand McNally 1949). No historical features are noted in or near the
undertaking area.

June 2010
A review of the 1915 California State Mining Bureau, Mines and Mineral Resources of Shasta
County, Siskiyou County, and Trinity County, revealed no mines in Section 1 of Township 32
North, Range 5 West.
A review of the California Division of Mines and Geology County Report 6, Mines and Mineral
Resources of Shasta County revealed no mines in Section 1 of Township 32 North, Range 5 West
(Lydon and OBrien 1974). One small scale gold placer mine was noted in Section 12, Township
32 North, Range 5 West. This mine likely corresponds with the mine noted on the 1902
California Mining Bureau Map of Shasta County (California State Mining Bureau 1902).
The results of the archival search indicate there is a moderate to low potential for historical
archaeological sites or isolates related to early placer mining activities or historic homesteading
and agricultural activities to be located in the undertaking area.
The results of the archival search indicate there is a moderate to low potential for prehistoric
archaeological sites or isolates to be located in the undertaking area.
Summary of Others Consulted/ Native American Consultation
Due to the City of Lake Shasta determination that the Pump Station Improvements 2001 project is
a categorically exempt activity, Native American outreach was not conducted for this project.
4.0
Background
Physiography
Regionally, the undertaking area is located in the northern portion of the Northern California
Interior Coast Ranges geologic province, on a dissected plain termed the Tehama Terraces
subsection located between the Great Valley province, Klamath Mountains and Coastal
Mountains (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service 1998). The undertaking is located
approximately 5 miles northeast of the Keswick Dam on the Sacramento River and 1 mile south
of the center (city hall) of the City of Shasta Lake.
The elevation in the immediate area ranges from approximately 700 to 720 feet above mean sea
level. Current land use in and around the undertaking includes the present alignment of Pine
Grove Avenue, wastewater treatment facilities, residential housing tracts, and undeveloped
greenway along Churn Creek.
Climate and Hydrology
Average air temperatures range from July highs of 97 F and January lows of 37 F. Average
annual precipitation is approximately 39.23 inches; most precipitation falls between October and
April as rain (Western Regional Climate Center 2010).
The hydrology on the site is limited to Churn Creek, which flows perpendicular through the
undertaking area and under Pine Grove Avenue. Churn Creek flows into the Sacramento River
approximately 15 river miles southeast of the undertaking area. This portion of Churn Creek is
characterized as perennial. Some riparian and fresh emergent vegetation occurs within the
ordinary high water mark of the creek.
June 2010
Flora
The primary vegetation communities within the undertaking area are the valley foothill riparian,
blue oak-foothill pine, barren (roadway), and urban (USDA Forest Service 1998). Vegetation
found within the undertaking area includes blue oak (Quercus douglasii), gray pine (Pinus
sabiniana), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), California black oak (Q. kelloggii), valley oak (Q.
lobata), poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), buck brush (Ceanothus cuneatus), common
manzanita
(Arctostaphylos manzanita), white-leaf manzanita (A. viscida), toyon
(Heteromeles arbutifolia), willows (Salix sp.), California grape (Vitis californica), mugwort
(Artemisia douglasiana), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), soaproot (Chlorogalum
pomeridianum), cattail (Typha latifolia), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), teasel
(Dipsacus sylvestris), and other forbs and grasses common to foothill grasslands and riparian
corridors.
Soils
The undertaking area contains one soil type; Auburn loam, 8 to 30 percent slopes (Figure 5).
Auburn loam (AnD) is a well drained soil with a depth of 24 to 28 inches to lithic bedrock. It is
derived from residuum (the remaining material) weathered from metavolcanic materials and is
most commonly found on shoulders, slopes, and flanks of mountains (U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources 2010).
The Geologic Map of California, Redding Sheet (1962) indicates the geology of the undertaking
area is comprised of Devonian and pre-Devonian rocks (416-374 mya) of igneous and metaigneous origin (State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology
1962).
The soil profiles and geologic map for the undertaking area suggest that ancient igneous rock
creation and weathering processes have shaped the region in which the undertaking area lies for a
considerable period of time. The soils in the undertaking area are derived from the weathering
processes on the igneous rock laid down millions of years ago. These types of soils and outcrops
have moderately shallow depths, and consequently archaeological resources are likely readily
visible on the ground surface.
Prehistory
The earliest known and least understood occupation of Northern California is in the Paleolithic
Period (11,500 to 8000 B.P.). Artifacts associated with this pattern include a Clovis-like fluted
concave-base projectile point most likely used in conjunction with an atlatl, and chipped stone
crescents (Moratto 1984).
The Early Archaic Period (8000-5000 B.P.) widely known as the Borax Lake Pattern is typified
by large lanceolate, corner-notched, and wide-stemmed projectile points. These points, along
with large blade-like flakes and unifacial flaked stone tools, are typically manufactured from local
obsidians, cherts and basalts. Manos (handstones) and milling slabs are the most common form
of milling equipment (Moratto 1984).

June 2010
BkD
Pine Grove Ave
AnD
BkC
BkD
BkC
AtE2
Soils
AnD - Auburn loam, 8 to 30 percent slopes
0
200
400
800
Feet
Figure 3
Soil Types
The Middle Archaic Period (5000 to 3000 B.P.), often described as the Squaw Creek Pattern for
the Redding/Upper Sacramento Valley area, is marked by the continued use of manos
(handstones) and metates (milling slabs), and the introduction of the mortar and pestle. Stone
tool forms include contracting-stem projectile points (Squaw Creek Series), unifacial flake tools
(McKee Uniface), awls, and wedges from a wider variety of obsidian sources. Atlatl weights
imply use of the atlatl as the primary hunting weapon, and net weights and fish hooks imply an
increased reliance on fishing (Basgall and Hildebrandt 1989).
The Late Archaic Period (3000 to 150 B.P.) includes two distinct patterns: the Whiskeytown
Pattern and the Augustine Pattern.
The Whiskeytown Pattern (3000-1700 B.P.) is marked by the continuation of atlatl use as a
hunting weapon. Small to large side-notched and corner-notched darts are the most common
form of projectile point. Manos and metates remain in use, and there is an increased reliance on
mortar and pestle technology as subsistence on acorn intensified (Basgall and Hildebrandt 1989).
The Augustine Pattern (1700-150 B.P.), often referred to as the Shasta Aspect for the
Redding/Upper Sacramento Valley area, is marked by the introduction of the bow and arrow and
the adoption of the hopper mortar and pestle (Johnson and Theodoratus 1984, Moratto 1984).
Small projectile points (Gunther series, Desert Side-Notched series) suitable for arrow tips are
found with increasing frequency in archaeological contexts. Hopper mortars, indicative of
intensive use of acorn, become the dominant milling equipment. Manos and milling stones are
used infrequently (Basgall and Hildebrandt 1989). The reliance on acorn and river resources such
as salmon leads to the development of food preservation and storage (e.g., granaries). Trade
networks are now well established, as evidenced by obsidian from distant sources and coastal
shell beads (Moratto 1984). Clamshell disc beads, spire lopped Olivella beads, and Haliotis
ornaments and pendants are common forms of ornamentation (Basgall and Hildebrandt 1989).
This pattern is associated with the ethnographically known Wintu.
Native Americans in the Historic Era
The Stillwater (Dau-pom) Wintu ethnographic group who inhabited the flat plateau east of the
Sacramento River and north and east of the city of Redding including the Churn Creek area were
a sedentary, foraging people who occupied permanent villages near rivers and streams (Du Bois
1935). The Wintu had dense settlement patterns, politically organized into independent tribelets,
with the largest villages containing about 250 people (Du Bois 1935). Settlements would contain
conical bark houses or temporary brush shelters in the summer, domed brush sudatory and
menstrual huts and a large earth covered semi-subterranean circular lodge for gatherings (LaPena
1978). The pre-contact population of the Wintu is estimated at around 14,250 (LaPena 1978).
The primary diet consisted of deer, rabbits, and other small mammals; quail and other birds; fish
including salmon, steelhead, Sacramento sucker, freshwater shellfish, and lamprey; grasshoppers,
salmon flies, and other insects; acorns, pine nuts, and buckeye; manzanita berries and other
berries; Brodiaea sp. and other bulbs; clovers, miners lettuce, and other greens; and grass seeds.
Sturgeon, dog, bird eggs, and angleworms were generally not consumed by the Wintu (Du Bois
1935). In addition to eating fresh fish, the Wintu preserved salmon by drying it for use
throughout the year. Dried salmon was processed into salmon flour and used in a variety of
ways. Acorns were used in a variety of ways, including roasted whole, pounded into a flour to
June 2010
make mush (similar to oatmeal or grits), or baked into bread. A specific type of acorn bread was
considered to be a specialty of the Stillwater area (Du Bois 1935). This bread consisted of acorn
flour mixed with water that had been allowed to soak in a red earth. The dough was baked
overnight in large rock-lined earth ovens. Although this black bread was baked by other Wintu
groups, it was most common among the Stillwater in part due to the relative abundance of the
necessary red earth (Du Bois 1935).
Mortars and pestles were used to grind seeds, acorns, pigment, and to soften meat. Manos
(handstone) and metates (milling slabs) were also used. Bone was used as awls for basketry,
harpoons and hooks, and wedges for wood cutting. Digging sticks for root retrieval, house
excavation, and grave digging were made from sharpened hardwood. Soaproot fibers were used
for acorn meal brushes, paintbrushes, and hair brushes. Rope and cordage were usually made
from iris fibers (Du Bois 1935). Materials such as hazel, skunkbrush, willow, grapevine, redbud,
pine root, poison-oak, maidenhair fern, porcupine quills, and some grasses were used to create
baskets and traps, including sifters, seedbeaters, trays, bowls, hats, dippers, hoppers, cooking
baskets, burden baskets, storage, and fish traps (Du Bois 1935). Bows were made from yew and
arrows made from reed or light wood with a hardwood tip. Arrowheads were made from
obsidian or basalt. Logs were used as bridges and lashed together to make rafts that were poled
across streams. At several locations along major tributaries complicated bridges lashed together
by grapevines could be found (LaPena 1978). Olivella, abalone, and clamshell were used for
adornment such as earrings and beads. Blankets and clothing were made from deer hide and
rabbit skins. A moccasin-like shoe of deer hide was worn in the winter or for long treks.
Snowshoes were used in the winter (Du Bois 1935).
Ethnographically, Wintu mortuary customs involved primary burial rather than cremation (Du
Bois 1935). The Wintu interred the dead in graveyards located near the village (approximately
100 yards away) in graves of a depth of about 4 feet (Du Bois 1935). Some plots were inclusive
of an entire village while others were reserved for a family. If during the course of excavation
other human remains were encountered they would be wrapped in a hide and re-interred with the
new burial. The body would be bound by sinew or rope in a tightly flexed position, placed in the
grave along with a basket of acorn-meal water and other items such as projectile points or beads.
The grave was lined with and the body covered by pine bark, with stones placed on the bark, and
then filled in with the excavated dirt (Du Bois 1935).
The first reported contact the Wintu had with Euro-Americans occurred in 1826 and 1827 when
expeditions of Hudsons Bay Company trappers and traders led by Peter Skene Ogden and
American trappers lead Jedediah Smith made forays into the region (Quint 1960). In the spring
of 1832, an expedition led by John Work passed through the eastern half of Wintu territory
bringing disease that resulted in the death of an estimated 75 percent of the native population,
killing hundreds or thousands and wiping out entire villages (Cook 1976). A cohesive tribal
presence appears to have largely disappeared from the Churn Creek and Redding areas by the
1860s. This is due in part to disease, reduced access to or destruction of resources, interpersonal
violence and outright genocide. The discovery of gold on Clear Creek in 1848, followed closely
by discoveries of gold on the various streams of the Stillwater Plains and the establishment and
settling of Shasta County in 1850 created a hotbed of culture clashes. Early agriculture in the
valley reduced access to fishing areas and other resources. Mining activities destroyed fishing
June 2010
10
grounds and polluted waters, and brought the miners and Wintu into direct conflict. This
antagonism became most heated during the 1860s. On October 8th, 1864 an advertisement now
known as the Millville Resolutions appeared in the Shasta Courier newspaper, which stated that
no Indians would be allowed to remain east of the Sacramento River between the Pit River and
Antelope country. This was quickly followed by another newspaper advertisement known today
as the Churntown Resolutions, which saw the resolutions of the meeting at Millville not only as
inconsistent with humanity but directly in opposition to the best interests of the people of this
portion of the county (Shasta Courier October 15th, 1864). In the 1870s and 1880s, many
displaced Wintu began to return to their traditional sites. Some found work locally in agricultural
pursuits such as ranching and grain harvesting.
History
Shasta County is one of the original 27 counties created by the formation of the State of
California in 1850. Before the formation of the State of California, the territory that became
known as Shasta County was administrated by the Spanish and later Mexican governments
through the system of land grants. Northern California was often traversed by Euro-American
trappers based out of the Hudsons Bay Company outpost of Fort Vancouver area near presentday Vancouver, Washington. Early settlement was sparse in the northern valley, nut several
Mexican land grants were laid out in the mid-19th century. The discovery of gold in 1848 created
a rapid influx of fortune seekers and settlers pursuing gold or building farms, towns, and support
infrastructure. The 20th century brought changes to the mining and agriculture focus of Shasta
County with the creation of large scale infrastructure works including the Central Valley Project.
The Fur Trade and Early Exploration: 1820 to 1848
In the early 19th century, the Hudsons Bay Companys Southern Brigade trappers and traders, led
by Alexander Roderick McLeod, John Work, Michael La Framboise, Thomas Mckay, Peter
Skene Ogden, and others, worked their way through much of northern California (Mackie 1997).
Headquartered in Fort Vancouver in modern-day Washington State, the Southern Brigade was
organized to focus the fur-trapping endeavors of the Hudsons Bay Company on modern-day
southern Oregon and California (Mackie 1997). Each expedition of the Southern Brigade was
headed by one individual and included around 20 trappers and 60 auxiliary party members,
usually including the Native American wives of the trappers, their children, and Native
Americans hired or enslaved as laborers (Mackie 1997; Hafen 1983). Between 1826 and 1845,
12 such expeditions trapped game in the watersheds of the Sacramento, Pit, and Feather rivers,
and in the delta of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. John Sutter, an early settler who
received a Mexican land grant at present-day Sacramento in 1840, recounted a visit of the
Southern Brigade in the lower Sacramento Valley as being of such a size that when they pitched
their tents it was like a village (Dana 1934; Mackie 1997).
Alexander Roderick McLeod led the initial expedition in 1828 into and through the Sacramento
Valley, eventually reaching the San Joaquin River near present-day Stockton in 1829 (Galbraith
1955). He was followed by Peter Skene Ogden in 1829 and Michael La Framboise in 1834, both
of whom trapped along the Sacramento River to San Francisco Bay. Two trapping expeditions
led by John Work in 1832-1833 and Thomas Mckay in 1836 also entered northern California
(Mackie 1997). They concentrated on trapping along the Pit River while making occasional
June 2010
11
forays into the Sacramento Valley (Mackie 1997). The early parties trapped within territory
claimed by the Spanish but under their control in name only. In essence, they were sneaking into
California and trapping without permission. Eventually their movements became noted, and the
Hudsons Bay Company began negotiations for issuance of a license to work within California
(Mackie 1997). In this way, they maintained their monopoly of trapping and fur trade in the west.
The Americans had long been aware of the Hudsons Bay Companys successes in the western
region of the continent. They had, however, been frustrated in their attempts to gain access to the
prime-fur bearing areas west of the Rocky Mountains, particularly the West Coast area including
the Spanish-controlled California. In 1830, an American fur trapping party crossed the Tehachapi
Mountains and moved into the San Joaquin Valley (Hafen 1983). The party was led by Ewing
Young and included Kit Carson on his first fur trapping expedition. The party realized the rivers
had been recently harvested of furs, and as they moved northward, they eventually overtook the
Hudsons Bay Company party led by Peter Skene Ogden (Hafen 1983). Young led a second
party in 1832 into the San Joaquin Valley and again found members of the Hudsons Bay
Company, this time a combined party led by Michael La Framboise and John Work (Hafen
1983).
The goal of the trapping parties was primarily beaver pelts, although they would take otters and
other fur-bearing mammals of economic value. The reason for this narrow focus on specific furs
was in large part due to a fashion trend for felt hats made of beaver fur that began in Europe in
the 17th century (Ray 1999). As demand for felt hats increased, more and more regions and
people became enmeshed in the fur trading economic system, and as animal supplies were
depleted in a given area, more and more regions were exploited, thus drawing diverse regions
into a single economic network, which, in turn, was linked to the expanding world economic
system centered in Western Europe (Ray 1999: vi).
This world economic system became focused on the Sacramento River watershed by the early
19th century and brought with it extreme changes to traditional Native American lifeways, as well
as habitat changes brought about by the wholesale removal of animals important from an
ecological perspective. One of the most significant changes brought by the fur trappers was an
epidemic disease thought to be malaria, which resulted in the death of an estimated 75 percent of
the native population (Cook 1976). Hundreds or thousands were killed and entire villages were
wiped out (Cook 1976).
California in the Mexican Era (1821 to 1846)
In 1821, Mexico declared independence from Spain. In an effort to increase control over its
territory, the Mexican government began granting large tracts of land to foreigners who
naturalized and became Mexican citizens. The earliest such grantee in the Sacramento Valley
was John Sutter who, in 1839, settled in the area that is present-day city of Sacramento. He
became a naturalized Mexican citizen in 1840, and in 1841 he was granted 43,466.3 acres from
the Mexican government for Rancho New Helvetia (Street 2004). Under the land grant system,
large parts of the Sacramento Valley, particularly along the Sacramento River, were granted to
naturalized Americans and other Mexican citizens, many of whom had at one time been
employed by Sutter. In the 1840s, word of the fertile land and wealth of resources available in
June 2010
12
California, accompanied by the weakening control of the territory by the Mexican government,
prompted many people to immigrate (Cleland 1922).
One of the earliest known explorers in northern California was Joseph B. Chiles in 1845. Pierson
B. Reading, who would have significant impact on California, Shasta and Trinity County history,
was a member of the Chiles expedition (Giles 1949). Reading became Sutters bookkeeper, and
when in 1845 Sutter left his rancho to aid Governor Micheltorena during the unrest caused by his
appointment to the governorship, Sutter left Reading in charge of the fort (Dana 1934). In 1844,
Reading was granted the 26,633-acre Rancho Buenaventura land grant (the undertaking area lies
approximately 5 miles north of his land grant), from the Mexican government. In 1846, the
United States and Mexico entered into a state of war, and many naturalized Californians of EuroAmerican origin took part in hostilities against Mexico, forming the Bear Flag Republic. Reading
participated in the Bear Flag Revolt in 1846, scouting and acting as Frmonts paymaster
(Bancroft 1890).
The United States gained a large territory, including California, from Mexico in the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hildago, the peace treaty agreed upon at the cessation of hostilities in the MexicanAmerican War of 1846-1848. Although the U.S. Senate removed Article X of the treaty covering
the protection of Mexican land grants, Article VIII provides for the protection of civil rights and
property of Mexican nationals residing within the ceded territory (Library of Congress, Hispanic
Division Area Studies 2008). California became the 31st state in 1850, bringing its lands under
the jurisdiction of the United States land policies and the General Land Office. On March 3,
1851, Congress passed the Act to Ascertain and Settle the Private Land Claims in the State of
California (9 Stat. 631) to settle land issues in the quickly growing state. The act created a
commission for claimants of land holdings awarded under Spanish or Mexican rule to present
evidence of ownership. In essence, the act was a registration statute under which a new title,
certified as valid by the new sovereign, was established for each successful applicant. The patent
issued by the United States, was the title deed from which any subsequent owner had to trace his
ownership (United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit 1964). The change in government
from Mexican to American rule led to an uncertain future of land ownership and property rights
for many, and ushered in a decade of litigation proving ownership and removing squatters who
claimed pre-emption rights (Clay 2005). This uncertain future was least detrimental to American
landowners who had entered California early and naturalized to gain land. After the admission of
California into the United States, the Rancho Buenaventura land grant was confirmed to Pierson
B. Reading by a United States Supreme Court decision in 1855 and a land patent granted in 1857
by the General Land Office (Howard 1866; Bureau of Land Management 1857).
California in the American Era (1846 to 1945)
The discovery of gold in 1848 at John Sutters sawmill in Coloma on the American River opened
the floodgates of immigration with nearly 100,000 people moving to California by 1849 and
nearly 250,000 people by 1852 (California State Parks 2007). In 1848, after visiting the land in
the vicinity of Coloma, Reading realized the geologic similarity between his land along the
Sacramento River and the gold bearing regions of the Sierra Nevada foothills (Hittell 1898). He
began prospecting west of his land grant with a crew of Native Americans from the local area
(Bancroft 1888), and discovered gold five or six miles up Clear Creek from its confluence at the
June 2010
13
Sacramento River (approximately 12 miles southwest of the undertaking area). Reading, along
with his crew of Wintu laborers extracted the surface gold from the gravel bar using the simplest
method of mining, the pan. After prospecting and washing the gravels of the bar for a time,
Reading and a smaller crew including three white men, one Delaware, one Chenook [sic], and
about sixty Indians from the Sacramento Valley moved further upstream (Cox 1926 [1858]: 2).
They prospected into present-day Trinity County and discovered a rich placer gold deposit at
Readings Bar on the Trinity River six miles from present-day Weaverville (Cox 1926).
After word of the discovery on Clear Creek spread, miners, transient in nature as they searched
for quick riches, moved into the Clear Creek area and worked the gravel bars along the creek
channel using pans, knives, spoons, and other basic prospect mining equipment. Almost
overnight mining camps and substantial communities sprang up in the gold producing areas.
Chief among these camps was Horsetown located at Readings discovery on Clear Creek, Shasta
located near present-day Whiskeytown Lake, and Dogtown located on Dog Creek north of
present day Shasta Lake. From these centers, prospectors spread across the landscape in pursuit
of the next rich strike, working their way west into the mountains and east across the Sacramento
River into the Stillwater Plains.
The early history the Stillwater Plains area consisted primarily of limited placer mining, followed
by homesteading and agricultural pursuits. An early account of Anglo-American settlement on
Churn Creek is related by Frank and Chappel in The History and Business Directory of Shasta
County (1881). One of the editors was a member of a company of miners who set out from the
town of Shasta (approximately 7 miles southwest of the undertaking area) in the winter of 1849,
crossing the Sacramento River at the mouth of Middle Creek and traveling to Quartz Hill where
they explored the possibility of locating placer diggings. Finding the results less than
satisfactory, the party moved on to Churn Creek, explored it and its tributaries, and by early 1850
founded Churntown (approximately 2 miles northwest of the undertaking area). Although Churn
Creek and the other drainages did not yield big strikes, enough gold was found to lure more
prospectors and small placer mines produced enough gold to maintain a constant mining presence
even into the 20th century. Limited placer mining using the most basic of mining techniques-pick
and pan, rocker, and sluice- occurred along all the major drainages and waterways of the
Stillwater Plains.
Placer mining, particularly small scale placer mining using sluices or rockers, in Shasta County
reached a height by 1860, after which new large scale, capital-intensive techniques were used and
new materials such as copper and silver were pursued. Shasta Countys copper boom lasted from
the 1890s until the Great Depression when large scale mining became too expensive to operate.
At this time many small scale placer gold mining operations sprang up (Averill 1946). These
operations were opportunistic and often involved single families working a mining claim when
not participating in other transitory work.
Although gold mining was the major focus of the mid-19th century, deposits of copper and other
precious metals as well as other materials such as lime were discovered in many locations in
Shasta County. These materials, especially copper, were not exploited until the 1890s (California
State Mining Bureau 1915). The first copper smelter was built at Keswick (approximately 5
miles southwest of the undertaking area) and before long Keswick became home to three large
June 2010
14
smelters. The smoke and fumes from these smelters, and others built elsewhere in Shasta County
created severe environmental degradation due to the toxic fumes they generated. This
degradation was not limited to the immediate area. Fish die-offs occurred in all the streams and
rivers. Fruit trees as far south as Anderson and Cottonwood, both major centers of agricultural
production, were affected. It was reported the smell was so obnoxious it could even be tasted in
the air. A period of litigation in an effort to close the smelters soon followed. However, the
copper industry experienced a boom time during WWI when it was required for munitions and
other materials associated with the war effort. After WWI the decreased demand for copper,
coupled with the litigation over environmental damage caused by smelting and the high cost
shipping the ore to other locations for refining caused many of the copper mines to close. Like
other mineral production, copper was mined sporadically during the Great Depression and World
War II (Elliott 1991).
Construction of Shasta Dam, the keystone of the Central Valley Project, was approved by U.S.
Congress and initial funds were appropriated in 1935. Before the dam could be constructed,
however, the railroad had to be rerouted through the Buckeye and Central Valley city area (the
railroad alignment is approximately 0.7 miles west of the undertaking area), and new roads built.
These construction activities enticed workers into the area long before actual dam construction
started in 1938. Many were crews from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and construction
workers from previous government projects in other states; others were men who had not had
jobs for years in part due to the Great Depression. Shasta Countys economy, already in a slump
with the closing of the copper smelters after World War I, was hard-hit by the Great Depression,
and by the end of the Depression, most of Shasta Countys businesses and labor force were
struggling to get by. Some potential workers were attracted to the excitement of the boomtowns
and the prospect of government construction jobs, and others were seasonal farm workers from
the Midwest recently left occupation-less because of the Dust Bowl. Land developers hurried to
lay out lots in new subdivisions, offering cheap residential and business lots.
The area now known as the City of Shasta Lake combined five of the six boomtown
communities that sprang up in the late 1930s. These communities: Toyon, Project City (aka
Midway), Summit City (aka Churntown), Pine Grove, and Central Valley (aka Boomtown)
catered to the needs of the workers involved in the construction of Shasta Dam and related
industries. Construction of the dam was completed in 1945, and it was expected that the
boomtowns would be temporary and with completion of the dam, the workers would move on to
other projects. The boomtowns and intervening area continued to grow and maintain a stable
population. Many workers stayed on until the dam was dedicated and filled in 1950; and then
while some sold their homes and left the area, other remained and found employment in Shasta
Countys growing lumber industry. The nationwide post-war building boom, and the popularity
of plywood and particleboard as new building materials, brought new economic prosperity to
Shasta County. Several new lumber mills were built and lumber-related businesses established.
Also, the automobile and better roads allowed workers to commute to jobs in the mills in Redding
and Anderson; and government water projects, PG&E, and a growing recreation industry, offered
a more diverse economic base for the area. Tarpaper shacks were replaced by more comfortable
homes; and following World War II, active real estate trading by land developers in the Central
Valley area resulted in property being traded among multiple owners prior to building. A quick
review of the undertaking area and vicinity on the Bureau of Land Management Plat Map for
June 2010
15
Township 32 North, Range 4 West reveals 31 small land tracts granted mostly in the 1950s and
early 1960s under the authority of the Small Tract Act of June 1, 1938 (52 Stat. 609) for the south
and western half of the western half of Section 7 (BLM 1993). This pattern of land ownership
and patenting is common for larger area encompassing the small boomtowns and coincides with
the larger national pattern of movement of people after WWII away from the inner cities into
suburbs. More recently, urban residential and commercial infilling provide the major impetus for
development in and around the undertaking area.
5.0
Field Methods
On June 8, 2009, NSR archaeologist Kristina Crawford conducted a complete strategy pedestrian
reconnaissance survey of the undertaking area (Figure 2). Ground surface visibility varied from
25 to 90 percent visibility over the entire undertaking area. Roads, dirt tracks, rodent burrows,
animal trails, and other areas of exposed mineral soil, were inspected for soil discoloration and/or
archaeological resources. The proposed 10-foot by 10-foot excavation area located south and
west of Pump Station 4A was clearly flagged and marked by City staff prior to the field survey.
Four surface scrapes measuring 50 cm to remove the vegetation and facilitate ground visibility
were cleared at the approximate four corners of the proposed 10-foot by 10-foot excavation area
located south and west of Pump Station 4A.
Cultural Resource
No prehistoric or historic resources were located in the undertaking area during the
archaeological survey.
6.0
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
The purpose of this initial investigation was to identify and characterize the nature and extent of
cultural and archaeological resources present in the undertaking area (Figure 1). To achieve this
end, archival research and intensive pedestrian survey were conducted.
Archival Results
The results of the archival research indicated no significant historic or archaeological sites under
the significance criteria of the National Register of Historic Places (e.g., buildings, structures,
objects, properties in excess of 50 years of age with significant associations and integrity) were
identified as a result of previous investigations are located in the undertaking area. The
significance criteria are listed below.
National Register of Historic Places Significance Criteria
Under the National Historic Preservation Act, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency
to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places if the resource is at least 45
years old and meets four evaluation criteria in accordance with the regulations outlined in
36 CFR 800, and identified at 36 CFR 60.4. These evaluation criteria, listed below, are used to
help determine what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or
impairment resulting from project-related activities (36 CFR 60.2). The quality of significance in
American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites,
buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association, and in resources:
June 2010
16
A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history;
B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;
C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,
or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that
represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
distinction; or;
D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history.
The soil profiles and geologic map for the undertaking area suggest that ancient igneous rock
creation and weathering processes have shaped the region in which the undertaking area lies for a
considerable period of time. The soils in the undertaking area are derived from the weathering
processes on the igneous rock laid down millions of years ago. These types of soils and outcrops
have moderately shallow depths, and consequently archaeological resources are likely readily
visible on the ground surface.
The archival investigation concluded the undertaking area possesses a moderate to low potential
for historical archaeological sites or isolates related to early placer mining activities or historic
homesteading and agricultural activities to be located in the undertaking area.
The archival investigation concluded the undertaking area possesses a moderate to low potential
for prehistoric archaeological sites or isolates to be located in the undertaking area. The presence
of a prehistoric isolated find to the south of the undertaking area indicates the possibility of other
prehistoric archaeological materials in the immediate area.
Survey Results
No prehistoric or historic resources (e.g. artifacts, features, sites, etc.) were located as a result of
the archaeological survey.
The undertaking area is heavily covered with thick grasses and riparian vegetation particularly
along the Churn Creek corridor. The proposed 10 by 10 foot excavation area is located in a
heavily disturbed context. The construction of Pine Grove Avenue, the placement of rock
armoring, and the creation of rock armored drainage channels paralleling the alignment of Pine
Grove Avenue have produced significant disturbances to the original ground surface and subsurface. The construction of the wastewater treatment auxiliary facilities, including the previous
construction and decommissioning of the to-be reconnected sewer line have also created
disturbances to the original ground surface and sub-surface. The proposed 10-foot by 10-foot
excavation area is located in a previously excavated and disturbed context. A large mammal
burrow or sinkhole that allowed for viewing of a soil profile was found located on the edge of one
of the rock armored drainage channels paralleling the alignment of Pine Grove Avenue near the
proposed 10-foot by 10-foot excavation area. The soil profile showed, from ground surface down,
a layer of reddish soil at the top, a distinct layer of grey sandy fill, and a disturbed layer of reddish
alluvium soil. It is highly unlikely that intact archaeological deposits exist in the undertaking area.

June 2010
17
Unidentified Cultural Materials

Surface surveys are not infallible and buried resources might not be detected during a surface
survey. Archival research can yield general observations about archaeological sensitivity (i.e.,
the possibility of encountering archaeological deposits, buried or not). Sensitivity can be
assessed based on the characteristics and distribution of known (i.e., archived) cultural resources
and environmental factors (formational processes, landforms, slope, aspect, distance to water,
frequency of flooding/scouring, etc.).
Potential Impacts and Recommended Measures
Undertaking-related activites could affect unknown buried or obscured archaeological deposits.
Archaeological deposits may include, but are not limited to, buildings, structures, objects 50 years
of age or older, and human remains. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2A and 2B would
avoid or minimize the potential for significant effects.
Mitigation Measure 2A
In the event archaeological deposits (other than those determined to

lack eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places)
are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate
vicinity of the discovery shall be stopped immediately and the City
of Shasta Lake shall be notified. An archaeologist meeting the
Secretary of Interiors Professional Qualifications Standards in
prehistoric or historical archaeology, as appropriate, shall be retained
to evaluate the find and recommend appropriate conservation
measures. The conservation measures shall be implemented prior to
re-initiation of activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery.
Mitigation Measure 2B
If human remains are discovered during project activities, all

activities in the vicinity of the find shall be suspended and the Shasta
County Coroners Office shall be notified. If the coroner determines
that the remains may be those of a Native American, the coroner
shall contact the NAHC. Treatment of the remains shall be
conducted in accordance with further direction of the County
Coroner or the NAHC, as appropriate.

June 2010
18
7.0
References
Averill, Charles Volney

1946 Bulletin 135: Placer Mining for Gold in California. Sacramento, CA: California State
Printing Office.
Bancroft, Herbert H.
1888 History of California, Vol. XI, 1848-1859. San Francisco: The History Company.
1890
The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, Vol. XXIII: History of California, Vol. VII, 18601890. San Francisco: The History Company.
Basgall, M.E., and W.R. Hildebrandt.

1989
Prehistory of the Sacramento River Canyon, Shasta County, California. Center for
Archaeological Research at Davis Publication Number 9. University of California,
Davis.
Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office.

1857 Land Patent of Pearson B. Reading. Document No. PLC1. Accession No.
CACAAA005470. Electronic document http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/
PatentSearch/Detail.asp?Accession=CACAAA+005470&Index=169&QryID=55761.08
&DetailTab=1, accessed 2-8-2010.
1965a Mining Claim Occupation Patent of Leroy W. Koeller. Document No. 4650001,
Accession No. CAS0078412. Electronic document http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/
PatentSearch/Detail.asp?PatentDocClassCode=SER&Accession=CAS+++0078412&Inde
x=8&QryID=66642.37&DetailTab=1, accessed 6-4-2010
1965b Mining Claim Occupation Patent of Elsie C. Koeller and the Heirs of Herman A. Koeller.
Document No. 4650002, Accession No. CAS0078410. Electronic document
http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/PatentSearch/Detail.asp?PatentDocClassCode=SER&Ac
cession=CAS+++0078410&Index=6&QryID=66642.37&DetailTab=1, accessed 6-42010
1971
Recreation and Public Purposes Patent of Shasta Dam Area Public Utility. Document No.
4710138, Accession No. CAS0078682. Electronic document http://www.glorecords.
blm.gov/PatentSearch/Detail.asp?PatentDocClassCode=SER&Accession=CAS+++00786
82&Index=9&QryID=66642.37&DetailTab=1, accessed 6-4-2010.
1993
Township 33 North, Range 4 West, Mount Diablo Meridian Plat Map. Electronic
document http://www.blm.gov/ca/forms/mtp/results.php, accessed 2-8-2010.
2005
Index to Mineral Locations and Contests. Electronic document http://www.blm.gov/

ca/forms/mtp/results.php, accessed 6-4-10.
California State Mining Bureau

1902 Map of Shasta County, California. Electronic document http://cricket.csuchico.edu/
scripts/PortWeb.dll?query&field1=Filename&op1=starts+with&value1=CA_2514.JPG&
template=mapsSIDsearch&catalog=catMaps, accessed 6-4-2010.
June 2010
19
1915
Mines and Mineral Resources of Shasta County, Siskiyou County, Trinity County.
Sacramento, CA: California State Printing Office.
California State Parks

2007 Gold Rush Overview. Electronic Document http://www.parks.ca.gov/? page_id=1081,
accessed 2-8-2010.
Clay, Karen
2005 Anarchy, Property Rights, and Violence: The Case of Post Gold Rush California.
Explorations in Economic History 42(2): 155-183.
Cleland, R.G.
1922 A History of California: The American Period. The MacMillan Company: New York
Cook, Sherburne F.
1976 The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization. University of
California Press. Berkeley, California.
Cox, Isaac
1926 [1858] The Annals of Trinity County. San Francisco: Commercial Book and Job Steam
Printing Establishment.
Dana, Julian
1934 Sutter of California. Halcyon House: New York City.
Denny, Edward & Co.
1904 Denny's map of Shasta County, California and eastern portion of Trinity County.
Electronic document http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/PortWeb.dll?query&field1
=Filename&op1=starts+with&value1=CA_2486.JPG&template=mapsSIDsearch&catalo
g=catMaps, accessed 6-4-2010.
Du Bois, Cora A.
1935 Wintu Ethnography. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and
Ethnography, Vol. 36. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.
Elliott, D.R.
1991 A Brief History of the Golinsky Mine, Shasta County, California. On-file at U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Mount Shasta Ranger District.
Frank, B.F. and H.W. Chappell
1881 [1978]
The History and Business Directory of Shasta County. Redding, Calif.: Redding
Independent Book and Job Printing House.
Galbraith, J.S.
1955 A Note on the British Fur Trade in California, 1821-1846. The Pacific Historical Review
24(3): 253-260.
Giles, Rosena A.
1949 Shasta County, California: A History. Oakland, CA: Biobooks.

June 2010
20
Hafen, LeRoy R.,

1983 Trappers of the Far West: Sixteen Biographical Sketches University of Nebraska Press.
Hittell, Theodore Henry
1898 History of California Vol. 3. San Francisco, CA: N.J. Stone and Company.
Howard, B.C.
1866 Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Supreme Court of the United States:
December Term, 1855. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Jensen and Associates.
1991a Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Proposed Hazelwood Subdivision Project
Involving c. 44 acres Located near Central Valley. Shasta County, California. Report
#7429 (SH-L-263) on file at California Historical Resources Information Service, C.S.U.
Chico, California
1991b Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Shasta Dam Public Utilities Districts Proposed
Wastewater Distribution Pipeline Route, Shasta County, California. Report #7438 (SHL-377) on file at California Historical Resources Information Service, C.S.U. Chico,
California.
1991c Archaeological Inventory Survey for Future Industrial Park and Wastewater Pond
Expansion, Shasta Dam Area Public Utility District, Parcels 1-3, c. 230 acres Located
Near Central Valley, Shasta County, California. Report #7435 (SH-L-269) on file at
California Historical Resources Information Service, C.S.U. Chico, California.
1993a
Archaeological Inventory Survey of Shasta Dam Public Utilities Districts Proposed

New Water System Force Main, to be Constructed West of Interstate 5 and Pine Grove,
Shasta County, California. Report #8096 (SH-L-501) on file at California Historical
Resources Information Service, C.S.U. Chico, California
1993b
Addendum to Archaeological Inventory Survey Report Force Main Routes for

Reclamation and Sewage Lines, Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvement and
Reclamation, City of Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California. Report #8097 (SH-L-499)
on file at California Historical Resources Information Service, C.S.U. Chico, California
1997a Archaeological Inventory Survey Pine Grove Avenue Road Extension Project, City of
Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California. Report #1445 on file at California Historical
Resources Information Service, C.S.U. Chico, California.
1997b Archaeological Inventory Survey Proposed Electrical Transmission Line, c. 2.5 Miles of
Linear Corridor, City of Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California. Report #1508 on file at
2004a Archaeological Survey 70-acre Development Site, near Pine Grove Avenue, Shasta Lake,
California. Report #6380 on file at California Historical Resources Information Service,
C.S.U. Chico, California.

June 2010
21
2004b Archaeological Inventory Survey Proposed Anderson Development Project, c. 36 acres

near Salt Creek, City of Shasta Lake, Shasta County, California. Report #6027 on file at
2004c Archaeological Inventory Survey Shasta Lake Sewer Mainline Extension Project, Shasta
Lake, Shasta County, California. Report #6387 on file at California Historical Resources
Information Service, C.S.U. Chico, California.
LaPena, F. R.
1978 Wintu. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California. R.F. Heizer, ed.,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Library of Congress, Hispanic Division Area Studies
2008 The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Electronic document http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic
/ghtreaty/, accessed 6-25-2009.
Mackie, R.S.
1997 Trading Beyond the Mountains: The British Fur Trade on the Pacific 1793-1843. UBC
Press: Vancouver, British Columbia
Morratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Inc. Orlando, Florida.
North State Resources, Inc.
2007 Churn Creek Trail Improvements Project Archaeological Resources Reconnaissance
Investigation. Report #9446 on file at California Historical Resources Information
Service, C.S.U. Chico, California.
Punnett Brothers
1914 Map of Shasta County. Electronic document http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/
PortWeb.dll?query&field1=Filename&op1=starts+with&value1=CA_2480.JPG&templat
e=mapsSIDsearch&catalog=catMaps, accessed 6-4-2010.
Quint, C.B.
1960 Jedediah Strong Smith. The Covered Wagon. Shasta Historical Society, Redding,
California.
Rand McNally & Company
1949 Map of Shasta County. Electronic document http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/
Ray, Arthur J.
1999 Introductory Essay. In The Fur Trade in Canada: An Introduction to Canadian Economic
History. Adams Innis auth. University of Toronto Press: Toronto, ON.
Shasta Co., CA Resources (main page).
2010 Affidavit of Labor and Improvements on Mining Claims of Shasta County, California
1891-1941 Electronic document http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/
~shastaca/mines/mines20.html, accessed 5-7-2010.
June 2010
22
State of California, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology

1962 Geologic Map of California, Redding Sheet. Electronic Document
http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/PortWeb.dll?query&field1=Filename&op1=starts+with
&value1=CA_1751.JPG&template=mapsSIDsearch&catalog=catMaps, Accessed 6-42010.
State of California Office of Historic Preservation
2009a California Historical Landmarks, Shasta County. Electronic Document
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/listed_resources/?view=county&criteria=45, accessed 6-4-2010.
2009b California Register of Historical Resources, Shasta County. Electronic Document
2009c California Points of Historical Interest, Shasta County. Electronic Document
Street, Richard S.
2004 Beasts of the Field: A Narrative History of California Farmworkers, 1769-1913. Stanford
University Press: Stanford, California.
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit
1964 327 F.2d 219, Elinor E. PETERSEN, Carol E. Heche, and 51.424 acres of land, more or
less, in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, et al., Appellants, v.
UNITED STATES of America and the State of California, Appellees. No. 18667. The
Federal Reporter 327(2). Electronic document http://bulk. resource.org/ courts.gov/
c/F2/327/327.F2d.219.18667_1.html, accessed 2-8-2010.
United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
1940 Shasta National Forest. Electronic document http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/
1998
Ecological Subregions of California. Electronic document

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/projects/ecoregions/m261cb.htm, accessed 6-4-2010.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service

2010 Soil Map of Shasta County, California. Web Soil Survey 2.1 Electronic Document
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed 6-4-2010.
United States Geological Survey [USGS].
1890 Red Bluff, California 60-minute quadrangle map. Electronic document
http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/PortWeb.dll?query&field1=Keywords&op1=starts+wit
h&value1=red+bluff&template=mapsSID&sorton=Historic+topo&catalog=topoMaps&o
ffset=1, accessed 6-4-2010.
1901
Redding, California 30-minute quadrangle map. Electronic document

http://cricket.csuchico.edu/scripts/PortWeb.dll?query&field1=Keywords&op1=starts+wit
h&value1=Redding&template=mapsSID&sorton=Historic+topo&catalog=topoMaps&off
set=3, accessed 6-4-2010.

June 2010
23
1944
Redding 15-minute quadrangle map. Electronic document

http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/historicalmaps/us_states/california/topos/15index.htm,
accessed 6-4-10.
United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service

2010 National Register of Historic Places. Electronic document http://www.nationalregister
ofhistoricplaces.com/ca/Shasta/state.html, accessed 6-4-2010.
Western Regional Climate Center
2010 Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Available at: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?ca7296, accessed 6-4-2010.

June 2010
24
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
5000 Bechelli Lane, Suite 203 Redding, California 96002

TEL: (530) 222-5347 ext. 128 FAX: (530) 222-4958 e-mail: lanning@nsrnet.com
TO:
RE:
DATE: June 16, 2010

Attn: Mike Fisher
1405 Victor Avenue, Suite A
Redding, CA 96003
City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project: Biological Resources
Characterization (NSR No. 51220)
INTRODUCTION
This technical memorandum describes the biological resources present in and around the study area at
Pump Stations 4a of the proposed City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project (Project)
(Figure 1). This memorandum includes a brief project description, study methodology, description of the
environmental setting, consistency with pertinent regulations, and proposed conservation measures.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project study area lies approximately 1.2 miles west of the interchange of Pine Grove Avenue and
Interstate 5, approximately 1 mile east of the intersection of Pine Grove Avenue and Lake Boulevard, and
approximately 1 mile south of the center (city hall) of the City of Shasta Lake. This location lies within
Section 1 in Township 32 North and Range 5 West, on the Shasta Dam, California USGS 7.5 minute
topographic quadrangle (Figure 1).
The purpose of the project is to improve wastewater treatment facilities, specifically, Pump Station 4 will
be converted to a submersible or dry pit pump, and Pump Station 4A will be decommissioned. To
achieve the decommission of Pump Station 4A, an out-of-service 10-inch sewer line will be reconnected
to Pump Station 4 so flows can be redirected from Pump Station 4A. Excavation of a 10-foot by 10-foot
area, with a maximum depth of 6 to 8 feet, will take place south and west of Pump Station 4A to reach the
out-of-service sewer line for the reconnection process.
STUDY METHODOLOGY
INFORMATIONAL REVIEW
For the purpose of this evaluation, listed plant species are vascular plants that are (1) designated as rare,
threatened, or endangered by the state or federal governments (i.e., listed species); (2) are proposed for
rare, threatened, or endangered status; and/or (3) are state or federal candidate species.
-1-
Public Land Survey:

Section: 1
Township: 32N
Range: 05W
USGS 7.5 Quad:
Shasta Dam - 1969
2,000
1,000
Feet
1:24,000
Shasta County,
California
(
(
(
(
Burney
(
(
2,000
(
(
( Shasta
(
(
Redding
Anderson
(
Lake
Cottonwood

99
Figure 1
Project Location and Vicinity Map
Other special-status plant species are those included on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List
1A, 1B, or 2. Listed animal species include taxa that are (1) designated as threatened or endangered by
the state or federal governments (i.e., listed species); or (2) are proposed or petitioned for federal
threatened or endangered status; and/or (3) are state or federal candidate species. Other special-status
wildlife species include those that are identified by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)
as Species of Special Concern and/or California Fully Protected Species.
Using the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), a search of published accounts of these
species was conducted for the Shasta Dam, California 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangles
(Appendix A). The CNDDB is a database consisting of historical observations of special-status plant
species, wildlife species, and natural plant communities. Because the CNDDB is limited to reported
sightings, it is not a comprehensive list of species that may occur in a particular area. However, it is
useful in refining the list of special-status species that have the potential to occur on the site.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains a database that lists federally protected
species for each USGS quadrangle within the jurisdiction of the Sacramento office. The USFWS list of
endangered and threatened species that may occur, or be affected by projects, in the Shasta Dam,
California 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangles was reviewed (Appendix B).
A database search was also performed for the Shasta Dam, California 7.5-minute USGS topographic
quadrangles using CNPS Electronic Inventory, which allows users to query the Inventory of Rare and
Endangered Plants of California using a set of search criteria (e.g., quad name, habitat type, etc.)
(Appendix C). Because the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California is also limited to
reported sightings, it is not a comprehensive list of plant species that may occur in a particular area.
However, it is useful in refining the list of special-status plant species that have the potential to occur on
the site.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
A reconnaissance-level survey for special-status plant and wildlife species habitat and jurisdictional
waters was conducted by NSR on March 10, 2010 and June 3, 2010. A focused survey for special-status
plant and wildlife species was not conducted nor was a formal delineation of waters of the United States
performed.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
GENERAL SETTING
Regionally, the study area is located at the convergence of the northern Sacramento Valley near the
convergence with the Klamath Mountains, about two miles south of Shasta Lake near the confluence of
the Sacramento, McCloud, and Pit rivers. The topography of the study area is gently rolling to steep and
the elevation ranges from approximately 700 to 850 feet above mean sea level.
-3-
LOCAL SETTING
The Soil Survey of Shasta County Area, California (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1974) identifies one
mapping unit in the study area:
Auburn loam (AnD), 8 to 30 percent slopes
The study area is located within an area that was previously disturbed when Pump Station 4A and the
connecting sewer lines were constructed. A residential development is located to the north, Pine Grove
Avenue is directly adjacent to the south, and Churn Creek to the west of the study area. The riparian
corridor along Churn Creek is largely undisturbed. Average air temperatures range from July highs of 97
F to January lows of 35 F. Average annual precipitation is approximately 44.18 inches; most
precipitation falls between October and April as rain (Western Regional Climate Center 2010).
BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES
Reconnaissance-level surveys revealed one biological community within the study area, non-native
annual grassland; and three general biological communities or habitat types directly adjacent to the study
area: blue oak gray pine, valley foothill riparian, and urban. Habitat types were characterized based on
descriptions provided in A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California (Mayer and Laudenslayer Jr. 1988).
Detailed descriptions for each habitat are provided below.
Non-Native Annual Grassland

Non-native annual grassland habitats are open grasslands dominated by herbaceous plants, primarily
introduced annual grasses. This habitat type, which comprises the study area, was disturbed during prior
construction activities at Pump Station 4A. The dominant plant species included wild oat (Avena fatua),
vetch (Vicia villosa), wild mustard (Brassica nigra), suckling clover (Trifolium dubium), and rose clover
(Trifolium hirtum); other incidental species included Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. multiflorum)
and narrowleaf plaintain (Plantago lanceolata).
Annual grasslands are productive wildlife habitat. Grassland bird species, such as the mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), and white-crowned sparrow
(Zonotrichia leucophrys) as well as rodents, including the California ground squirrel (Spermophilus
beecheyi), Bottas pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), forage
on the seed crop this community provides. These species, in turn, attract predators such as the gopher
snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), red-tailed hawk (Buteo
jamaicensis), and northern harrier (Circus cyaneus). Other common grassland species include the
western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) and black-tailed hare (Lepus californicus). Reptile species
expected to occur here include the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), western skink
(Eumeces skiltonianus), western rattlesnake (Crotalis viridis), and yellow-bellied racer (Coluber
constrictor).
Blue Oak Gray Pine

The blue oakgray pine plant community typically occurs in the foothills surrounding the Central Valley.
The blue oak gray pine community is characterized by the dominance of gray pine (Pinus sabiniana)
-4-
and blue oak (Quercus douglasii). Other trees and shrubs in this community in the vicinity of the study
area include canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), manzanita (Arctostaphylos sp.), Himalayan
blackberry (Rubus discolor), toyon, (Heteromeles arbutifolia), poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum),
and redbud (Cercis occidentalis). The blue oakgray pine community is well-adapted to dry conditions.
The blue oakgray pine plant community provides breeding habitat for a large variety of wildlife species,
although no species is totally dependent on it for breeding, feeding, or cover. Acorns and gray pine seeds
are an important resource for many of the species using this habitat, such as the acorn woodpecker
(Melanerpes formicivorus), western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica), and western gray squirrel
(Sciurus griseus). The newly emerged leaves of oaks in the spring support an abundance of insects that
attract migrating and nesting warblers, vireos, flycatchers, and other insectivorous birds. In addition, the
shrubs provide habitat for birds such as spotted towhees (Pipilo maculatus), California towhees (Pipilo
crissalis), wrentits (Chamaea fasciata), and blue-gray gnatcatchers (Polioptila caerulea). Snags and trees
containing cavities provide nesting habitat for birds such as the western bluebird (Salia mexicana), tree
swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) and northern flicker (Colaptes auratus) as well as potential roost sites for
bats. Raptors, including the red-tailed hawk, American kestrel and great horned owl (Bubo virginianus),
may also nest in these woodlands. Characteristic reptiles and amphibians include western toads (Bufo
boreas), a wide variety of snakes (common garter snakes [Thamnophis sirtalis], California whipsnakes
[Masticophis lateralis], gopher snakes, and western rattlesnakes, among others), western skinks, southern
alligator lizards (Elgaria multicarinata), and western fence lizards.
Valley Foothill Riparian

Valley foothill riparian occurs along either side of Churn Creek, directly west of the study area. This
plant community includes buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), willow (Salix spp.), Fremont
cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and Himalayan blackberry.
Riparian communities are among the most important habitats for wildlife because of their high floristic
and structural diversity, high biomass (and therefore high food abundance), and high water availability.
The leaf litter, fallen tree branches, and logs associated with the riparian communities in the study area
provide cover for several amphibians, including the western toad and Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris
regilla). The western fence lizard, western skink, and southern alligator lizard are also expected to occur
here.
Common bird species nesting and foraging in this habitat, primarily in the riparian tree canopy, include
the chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufescens), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), and Nuttalls and
downy woodpeckers (Picoides nuttallii and Picoides pubescens respectively). Other resident species,
such as the spotted towhee and song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), nest and forage on or very close to the
ground, usually in dense vegetation. Several species of raptors, including the Coopers hawk (Accipiter
cooperii) and western screech-owl (Otus kennicottii), are year-round residents of riparian communities.
In addition to the permanent residents, numerous species of Neotropical migrants occur in this community
from spring through fall.
A variety of mammals also occur in riparian communities. Small mammals, such as the Bottas pocket
gopher and deer mouse, may burrow or find refuge in dense grass or brushy thickets. Black-tailed deer
(Odocoileus hemonius) frequently use riparian habitats, and predators, such as the raccoon (Procyon
lotor), are attracted to riparian areas by the abundance of prey and cover. In addition, the taller trees
-5-
provide daytime roosts for nocturnal species such as the raccoon and Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginiana).
Urban
Urban habitat includes roadways and residential areas. Urban areas are largely denuded of native
vegetation. The wildlife species most often associated with urban areas are those that are most tolerant of
periodic human disturbances, including several introduced species, such as European starlings (Sturnus
vulgaris), rock doves (Columba livia), and house mice (Mus musculus). Urban habitat is found outside of
the study area but directly adjacent to the north (residential subdivision) and south (Pine Grove Avenue).
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS
A search of the CNDDB database yielded no documented occurrences of special-status plant species in
the study area. Based on location and habitat parameters, eleven special-status plant species were initially
considered for evaluation. None of these species are formally protected under state or federal statutes
(i.e., state or federal Endangered Species Act, California Native Plant Protection Act), but they are listed
on CNPS lists 1B and 2, and are generally considered to be sensitive by local professional biologists and
regulatory agencies. Special-status plant species initially considered for evaluation are identified in Table
1 below.
Table 1. Special-Status Plant Species Initially Considered for Evaluation
1
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
(FED/STATE/
CNPS)
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION
Other Special-Status Species

Bellingers meadowfoam
Limnanthes floccosa ssp.
bellingeriana
//1B
Cismontane woodland, meadows and seeps/mesic; 9503,600 ft. Blooms April-June.
Cantelows lewisia
Lewisia cantelovii
//1B
Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, cismontane

woodland, lower montane coniferous forest/mesic, granitic,
sometimes serpentinite seeps; 1,260-4,500 ft. Blooms
May-October.
Canyon Creek stonecrop

Sedum paradisum
//1B
Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, lower montane

coniferous forest, subalpine coniferous forest/granitic,
rocky; 980-6,100 ft. Blooms May-June.
Fox sedge
Carex vulpinoidea
//2
Marshes and swamps (freshwater), riparian woodland; 983,937 ft. Blooms May-June.
Northern clarkia
Clarkia borealis ssp.
borealis
//1B
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane

coniferous forest; 1,310-4,400 feet. Blooms JuneSeptember.
Pink creamsacs
Castilleja rubicundula ssp.
rubicundula
//1B
Openings in chaparral, cismontane woodland, meadows

and seeps, valley and foothill grassland/serpentinite; 652,950 ft. Blooms April-June.
-6-
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
(FED/STATE/
CNPS)
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION
Red Bluff dwarf rush

Juncus leiospermus var.
leiospermus
//1B
Disturbed meadows and seeps, valley and foothill

grassland, vernal pools; 114-3,346 ft. Blooms March-May.
Sanfords arrowhead
Sagittaria sanfordii
//1B
Marshes and swamps; 0-2,000 ft. Blooms May-October.
Silky cryptantha
Cryptantha crinita
//1B
Riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland/ gravelly

stream beds; 278-3,248 ft. Blooms April-May.
Slender silver moss

Anomobryum julaceum
//2
Damp rock and soil on outcrops within broadleafed upland

forest, lower montane coniferous forest, North Coast
coniferous forest. Usually on roadcuts; 330-3,280 feet.
Oval-leaved viburnum
Viburnum ellipticum
//2
Openings in brushy forest of chaparral and cismontane

woodland; 705-4,593 ft. Blooms May-June.
Status Codes:
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Codes: List 1B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere;
List 2 = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere
None of these species were observed during the March 10 and June 3, 2010 site visits. The entire study
area is limited to an area previously disturbed when Pump Station 4A was originally constructed and does
not support suitable habitat for any of the 11 species.
SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE
Based on location and habitat parameters, there are no potentially occurring special-status wildlife species
within the study area. However, 12 special-status species were identified as having the potential to occur
in the project vicinity (Table 2). The results of the CNDDB database search identified no documented
occurrences of special-status species in the study area.
Table 2 presents a list of the special-status wildlife species initially considered for evaluation. Specialstatus designation and general habitat requirements for each species are provided in the table.
Conclusions presented in this table are based on the knowledge of local professional biologists and
historic survey information.
-7-
Table 2. Special-Status Wildlife Species Initially Considered for Evaluation

COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
(FED/STATE)
GENERAL HABITAT
DESCRIPTION
COMMENTS
Fish
Central Valley spring-run
Chinook salmon
Evolutionarily Significant
Unit (ESU)
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
T/T
Freshwater rivers and streams

(Sacramento River and its
tributaries).
The lowest reaches of Churn

Creek support seasonal nonnatal rearing habitat for this
ESU. However, Churn Creek
adjacent to the study area does
not provide suitable flow
conditions or suitable physical
habitat for spring-run spawning
and rearing. This segment of
Churn Creek is over 11 miles
upstream of designated critical
habitat.
Central Valley fall/late-fall

run Chinook salmon ESU
SC/
Freshwater rivers and streams

(Sacramento and San Joaquin
rivers and their tributaries).
Occur in the mainstem

Sacramento River and tributary
streams including Churn Creek.
Adults migrate upstream during
the fall and spawn from midOctober to February. Suitable
rearing habitat is present within
the reach adjacent to the study
area.
Sacramento River winterrun Chinook salmon ESU

E/E
Freshwater river and streams

(Sacramento River and its
tributaries).
The lowest reaches of Churn

Creek support important nonnatal rearing habitat for this
ESU. However, the portion of
Churn Creek adjacent to the
study area is outside the known
range of winter-run Chinook
salmon, well upstream of the
suitable non-natal rearing
habitat, and does not provide
any suitable spawning habitat for
this ESU.
Steelhead, California
Central Valley Distinct
Population Segment (DPS)
Oncorhynchus mykiss
T/
Spawn and rear in freshwater

rivers and streams (Sacramento
and San Joaquin rivers and their
tributaries).
Occur in the mainstem

Sacramento River and tributary
streams including Churn Creek.
Adults migrate upstream during
the fall/winter and spawn from
winter to early spring. Suitable
rearing habitat is present within
the reach adjacent to the study
area. This segment of Churn
Creek is not located within
critical habitat.
-8-
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
(FED/STATE)
GENERAL HABITAT
DESCRIPTION
T/SC
Require aquatic habitat for

breeding, also use a variety of
other habitat types including
riparian areas and upland areas.
Churn Creek, the perennial

stream adjacent to the study
area, and the adjacent riparian
community provide suitable
habitat for this species. The
species has not been detected
as part of other protocol-level
surveys within the watershed
(NSR 2010).
/SC
Slow water aquatic habitat with

available basking sites.
Hatchlings require shallow water
with dense submergent or short
emergent vegetation. Requires
an upland oviposition site near
the aquatic site.
Churn Creek and the associated

riparian corridor, adjacent to the
study area, provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Sharp-shinned hawk
Accipiter striatus
/SC
Typically nests in dense conifer

stands near water, winters in
woodlands. Forages in many
habitats in winter and migration.
Woodlands adjacent to the study

area provide suitable winter
roosting and foraging habitat.
Coopers hawk
Accipiter cooperii
/SC
Nests in woodlands, forages in

many habitats in winter and
migration.
Woodlands adjacent to the study

area provide suitable breeding
and foraging habitat.
California yellow warbler

Dendroica petechia
brewsteri
/SC
Breeds in riparian woodlands,

particularly those dominated by
willows and cottonwoods.
Riparian community along Churn

Creek, adjacent to the study
area, provides suitable breeding
Yellow-breasted chat
Icteria virens
/SC
Breeds in riparian habitats

having dense understory
vegetation, such as willow and
blackberry.
Riparian community along Churn

Creek, adjacent to the study
area, provides suitable breeding
/SC
Roosts in colonies in caves,

mines, tunnels, or buildings in
mesic habitats. The species
forages along habitat edges,
gleaning insects from bushes
and trees.
Suitable roosting habitat is not

present in the study area but the
species may forage over the
site.
COMMENTS
Amphibians
California red-legged frog
Rana aurora draytonii
Reptiles
Western pond turtle
Actinemys marmorata
Birds
Mammals
Townsends western bigeared bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
-9-
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
STATUS
(FED/STATE)
GENERAL HABITAT
DESCRIPTION
/SC
Forages over many habitats;

roosts in buildings, large oaks,
or redwoods, rocky outcrops and
rocky crevices in mines and
caves.
COMMENTS
Suitable breeding and roosting
habitat not present in the study
area.
Status Codes:
Federal and State Codes: E = Endangered; T = Threatened; SC = Species of Special Concern (State)
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

Although a formal delineation of waters of the United States was not performed, a thorough inspection for
hydric soils, hydric vegetation, and wetlands hydrology was conducted within the study area on June 3,
2010. The proposed area of disturbance, including the 10-foot by 10-foot excavation area, access, and
staging, did not support any of the three wetland parameters: hydrology, hydric soils, or hydrophytic
vegetation. The dominant plant species included wild oat, vetch, wild mustard, suckling clover, and rose
clover; other incidental species included Italian ryegrass, and narrowleaf plaintain. The soils within the
study area are compacted and may stay saturated, but not long enough to establish a dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation or hydric soil indicators.
Riparian vegetation [e.g., willow] occurs along Churn Creek to the west and outside of the proposed area
of disturbance. Given the presence of wetland vegetation, this vegetation may qualify as a wetland in
addition to Churn Creek, which would be considered an other waters of the United States. Both of
these features will be avoided during construction.
OTHER SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Migratory birds and raptors (birds of prey) may nest within, or in close proximity to, the study area.
Migratory birds and their nests are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (50 CFR 10 and
21). Most of the birds found in the study area are protected under the MBTA. Raptors are also protected
under the California Fish and Game Code. The communities in the study area provide suitable breeding
and foraging habitat for several raptors such as the red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) and great horned
owl (Bubo virginianus).
Riparian habitat, which is considered a sensitive natural community by the CDFG, is present adjacent to
the study area along the Churn Creek corridor.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

This section describes the federal and state regulation of special-status species, waters of the United
States, and other sensitive biological resources. Following each regulation is a discussion of how the
project is in compliance. Conservation measures are provided, as necessary, to ensure compliance.
- 10 -
Federal
Regulation of Activities in Wetlands and Waters of the United States
The regulations and policies of various federal agencies [e.g., ACOE, Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), and USFWS] mandate that wetland filling be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that no
practical alternatives exist. The ACOE has primary federal responsibility for administering regulations
that concern jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the United States within the study area. The
ACOE acts under two statutory authorities, the River and Harbors Act of 1899 (sections 9 and 10), which
governs specified activities in navigable waters, and the Clean Water Act (section 404), which governs
jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the United States. The ACOE requires that a permit be
obtained if a project proposes placement of structures in, under, or over navigable waters of the United
States; or proposes the placement of dredged or fill material into jurisdictional wetlands or other waters of
the United States. The EPA, USFWS, NMFS, and several other agencies provide comment on ACOE
permit applications.
Project Compliance: Since no jurisdictional features are present within the study area and project
construction activities can be sited to avoid adjacent jurisdictional features (e.g., Churn Creek), a Section
404 permit is not required. The following conservation measures are recommended to ensure that there
are no impacts to Churn Creek:
Construction access and staging should be limited to the existing access roads and disturbed
areas adjacent to Pump Station 4A.
To the maximum extent practicable, activities that increase the erosion potential shall be
restricted to the relatively dry summer and early fall period to minimize the potential for rainfall
events to transport sediment to Churn Creek. If these activities must take place during the late
fall, winter, or spring, then temporary erosion and sediment control structures shall be in place
and operational at the end of each construction day and maintained until permanent erosion
control structures are in place.
Within 10 days of completion of construction in those areas where subsequent ground

disturbance will not occur for 10 calendar days or more, weed-free mulch shall be applied to
disturbed areas to reduce the potential for short-term erosion. Prior to a rain event or when
there is a greater than 50 percent possibility of rain within the next 24 hours, as forecasted by the
National Weather Service, weed-free mulch shall be applied to all exposed areas upon
completion of the days activities. Soils shall not be left exposed during the rainy season.
Suitable BMPs, such as silt fences, straw wattles, or catch basins shall be placed below all
construction activities at the edge of surface water features to intercept sediment before it
reaches Churn Creek. These structures shall be installed prior to any clearing or grading
activities.
If spoil sites are used, they shall be located such that they do not drain directly into Churn Creek,
if possible. If necessary, a catch basin shall be constructed to intercept sediment before it
reaches Churn Creek. Spoil sites shall be graded and vegetated to reduce the potential for
erosion if they have to remain in place for several weeks.
- 11 -
Sediment control measures shall be in place prior to the onset of the rainy season and will be
monitored and maintained in good working condition until disturbed areas have been
revegetated.
Exclusionary fencing shall be installed along the western perimeter of the study area to ensure
that impacts to riparian vegetation are avoided.
Federal Endangered Species Act

Section 9 of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 prohibits acts of disturbance that result in the
"take" of threatened or endangered species. As defined by the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA),
endangered refers to any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its current range. The term threatened is applied to any species likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its current range. Take is defined as "harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct."
Violation of this section can result in penalties of up to $50,000 and up to one year of imprisonment.
Sections 7 and 10 of the federal ESA provide a method for permitting an action that may result in
"incidental take" of a federally listed species. However, no species federally listed as threatened or
endangered are expected to occur in the study area. Thus, formal consultation with the USFWS is not
required.
Project Compliance: Since habitat within the study area is not likely to support a federally threatened or
endangered species, Section 7 consultation under the federal ESA is not anticipated. Avoidance of work
within Churn Creek and adjacent riparian corridor will ensure that there are no indirect impacts to listed
salmonids (e.g., Central Valley ESU steelhead) which may be found seasonally within Churn Creek.
Bald Eagle Protection Act
The bald eagle and golden eagle are federally protected under the Bald Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c). It is illegal to take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell or purchase or barter, transport,
export or import a bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, or any part, nest or egg of these eagles unless
authorized by the Secretary of the Interior. Violators are subject to fines and/or imprisonment for up to
one year. Active nest sites are also protected from disturbance during the breeding season.
Project Compliance: Neither bald eagles nor golden eagles are expected to occur in the study area.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703-711).
The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in
50 CFR Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by
implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). Most of the birds found in the study area are protected under the
MBTA. Thus, project construction has the potential to directly take nests, eggs, young, or individuals of
protected species. Further, construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the
incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to the abandonment of nests, a violation of
the MBTA.
Project Compliance: Although proposed construction activities do not include the removal of trees or
shrubs that could be utilized for nesting habitat, indirect impacts due to construction noise would impact
- 12 -
birds nesting within the adjacent riparian corridor and oak woodlands. Measures that may be instituted
to help ensure compliance with the MBTA include the following:
Grading and other construction activities should be scheduled to avoid the nesting season to the
extent possible. The nesting season for most birds in Shasta County, including yellow warbler
and yellow-breasted chat, extends from March through August. No further action is needed if
construction activities are timed to avoid the nesting season.
If construction is to occur during the breeding season, a qualified biologist should conduct preconstruction surveys no more than 1 week prior to the initiation of construction in any given area
to ensure that no nests of species protected by the MBTA would be disturbed during project
implementation.
If vegetation is to be removed by the project and all necessary approvals have been obtained,
potential nesting substrate (e.g., bushes, trees, grass, buildings, and burrows) that will be
removed by the project should be removed before the onset of the nesting season (March) to help
preclude nesting. Pre-removal surveys are required for some species. Removal of vegetation or
structures slated for removal by the project should be completed outside of the nesting season
(i.e., between September 1 and March 1).
If an active nest more than half completed is found, a construction-free buffer zone should be
established around the nest. The size of the buffer zone should be determined by a qualified
biologist, in consultation with CDFG.
State
Regulation of Activities in Wetlands and Waters of the United States
In addition to federal laws and regulations, California government provides regulation and review of
actions regarding activities in wetlands and waterways. The states authority in regulating activities in
waters of the United States, including wetlands, resides primarily with the CDFG and the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
Project Compliance: No state jurisdictional features are present within the study area and project
construction activities can be sited to avoid adjacent jurisdictional features (e.g., Churn Creek). The
conservation measures previously described under the federal wetlands and other waters of the United
States are recommended to ensure that there are no impacts to Churn Creek.
California Department of Fish and Game. The CDFG provides comment on ACOE permit actions under
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The CDFG is also authorized under California Fish and Game
Code to develop mitigation measures and enter into Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements with
applicants who propose projects that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of a
river, stream (including intermittent and ephemeral streams), or lake.
Project Compliance: Since no construction activities will occur within Churn Creek, the City will not
need to apply for a Streambed Alteration Agreement.
- 13 -
State Water Resources Control Board. The SWRCB acting through the Regional Water Quality Control
Boards (RWQCBs) must certify that an ACOE permit action meets state water quality objectives (section
401, Clean Water Act). Applicants who have ACOE authorization for discharge into waters of the Unites
States must also obtain water quality certification from the RWQCB. The RWQCBs also regulate
wetlands and waterways that are not subject to ACOE jurisdiction by requiring a waste discharge
requirement (WDR) permit for the discharge of material into state jurisdictional wetlands and waterways.
Project Compliance: Since a Section 404 permit is not anticipated, the City will not need to apply for a
Section 404 water quality certification.
The RWQCBs regulate wastewater discharges to surface waters under the NPDES Wastewater Program;
stormwater discharges are generally regulated under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction Activities (General Permit). Projects that result in 1 acre or more or ground
disturbance must submit a Notice of Intent to be covered under the General Permit and must also prepare
and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
Project Compliance: Since the proposed area of ground disturbance is expected to be less than 1 acre,
the City will not need to apply for a General Permit. The conservation measures previously described
under the federal wetlands and other waters of the United States are recommended to ensure that there
are no impacts to Churn Creek.
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act lists species of plants and animals as threatened or endangered.
"Take" of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful activities may be authorized under Section
2081 of the California Fish and Game Code.
Project Compliance: No species which are state listed as threatened or endangered are expected to
occur in the study area. Thus, formal consultation with the CDFG is not required.
California Fish and Game Code
Birds of Prey. Under Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, it is unlawful to take,
possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take,
possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any
regulation adopted pursuant thereto.
Project Compliance: Birds of prey may nest in riparian vegetation and oak woodlands adjacent to the
study area. The measures outlined above to help ensure compliance with the MBTA would also avoid or
reduce impacts to birds of prey.
Fully Protected Species. California statutes also accord fully protected status to a number of
specifically identified birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. These species cannot be taken,
even with an incidental take permit (California Fish and Game Code, Sections 3505, 3511, 4700, 5050,
and 5515).
Project Compliance: No species which are designated as fully protected are expected to occur in the
study area.
- 14 -
REFERENCES
Mayer, K. E., and W. F. Laudenslayer Jr., eds. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California.
Sacramento: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
North State Resources, Inc. 2010. Twin View Boulevard at Churn Creek Bridge (06C-058) Replacement
Project NES. Prepared for the City of Redding.
USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1974. Soil Survey of Shasta County area, California. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Western Regional Climate Center. 2010. Redding, California (047296). Period of record monthly
climate summary, period of record: 1/11/1931 to 4/30/1979 http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?caredd+nca (accessed June 16, 2010).
- 15 -
APPENDIX A
CNDDB Query Results
QUAD NAME
SCINAME
COMNAME
FED
STATUS
CAL
STATUS
Shasta Dam
Rana boylii
foothill yellow-legged None

frog
None
Shasta Dam
Haliaeetus
leucocephalus
bald eagle
Delisted
Endangered
Shasta Dam
Martes pennanti
(pacifica) DPS
Pacific fisher
Candidate None
Shasta Dam
Anthicus sacramento Sacramento anthicid

beetle
None
None
Shasta Dam
Anthicus antiochensis Antioch Dunes

anthicid beetle
None
None
CDFG
SC
SC
CNPS
LIST
APPENDIX B
U.S. Fish and Wildlife service species list
APPENDIX C
CNPS Electronic Inventory Query Results
CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants

Shasta Dam Quads - Tue, June 16, 2010 16:00 c
COMMON
SCIENTIFIC
Northern clarkia
Clarkia borealis
ssp. borealis
FAMILY
Onagraceae
LIFE FORM BLOOMING
COMMUNITIES
ELEVATION
CNPS
annual
Jun-Sep
Chaparral
Cismontane woodland
Lower montane
coniferous forest
400 -1340
meters
List 1B.3
Silky cryptantha
Boraginaceae annual
Cryptantha crinita
herb
Apr-May
Cismontane woodland
Lower montane
coniferous forest
Riparian forest
Riparian woodland
Valley and foothill
grassland/gravelly
streambeds
85 - 1215
meters
List 1B.2
Shasta snowwreath
Neviusia cliftonii
Apr-Jun
Cismontane woodland 300 - 500

Lower montane
meters
coniferous forest
Riparian
woodland/often
streamsides; sometimes
carbonate, volcanic, or
metavolcanic
List 1B.2
Rosaceae
perennial
deciduous
shrub
9.7. Asbestos/LeadTestingReport
10/62010

Pump Station Improvements 2011 - PDR - 201407231644149204

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pump Station Improvements 2011 - PDR - 201407231644149204

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PUMPSTATIONIMPROVEMENTS2011PRELIMINARYDESIGNREPORTFINAL

construction ofthenewPineGroveAvenueBridge overChurnCreek,therelieflinewascrushed,significantly

PVC Manning's 'n' =

PVC Manning's 'n' =

Influent Sewer Hydraulics.xls

AFT Fathom 7.0 Output

AFT Fathom Model

Pipe Output Table

AFT Fathom 7.0 Output

AFT Fathom Model

All Junction Table

P Static P Static P Stag. P Stag.

$ 5,180 120 $80 $ 19,960

$12,900 120 $80 $ 35,400

$ 5,180 120 $80 $ 19,960

$ 5,010 120 $80 $ 19,620

$ 5,906 120 $80 $ 21,412

$19,200 120 $80 $ 48,000

$19,200 120 $80 $ 48,000

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE PUMP STATION

7.5 USGS Quadrangle:

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011

North State Resources

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

Public Land Survey:

G:\Projects\51220_COSL_Pump_Station\GIS\Working_Mxds\51220_Figure_1_Arch.mxd Created: 2010-06-10 edouglas

Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements Project

Undertaking Location and Description......................................................................................... 1

Sources Consulted ........................................................................................................................ 3

Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................... 16

Undertaking Location and Vicinity Map ............................................................................... ii

North State Resources

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011

Undertaking Location and Description

North State Resources

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

Jensen & Associates 1991A

! Jensen & Associates 1993A

Jensen & Associates 1993B

Public Land Survey:

G:\Projects\51220_COSL_Pump_Station\GIS\Working_Mxds\51220_Figure_1_Arch.mxd Created: 2010-06-10 edouglas

Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements Project

Summary of Methods and Results

Determine the research context (e.g., previous investigations, historical background);

As a result of the NEIC records search, it was determined that:

No archaeological or historical resources have been recorded in the undertaking area.

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

Figure 3: 1901 U.S. Geological Survey Redding,

A review of the 1944 US Geological

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

Figure 4: 1944 U.S. Geological Survey Redding,

North State Resources

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

North State Resources

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

Pine Grove Ave

G:\Projects\51220_COSL_Pump_Station\GIS\Working_Mxds\51220_Figure_1_Arch.mxd Created: 2010-06-10 edouglas

Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements Project

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project

City of Shasta Lake Pump Station Improvements 2011 Project