The NCCP/HCP, Joint EIR/EIS and Implementation Agreement were distributed under a single cover by the County of Orange to facilitate public review of the project, The Overall project documentation is presented in several parts:

• Introduction (PART 1) that provides planning and regulatory background information.
• NCCP/HCP (PART II) that contains the substance of the adopted subregional conservation strategy
• Joint EIR/EIS (PART 3) that evaluates environmental consequences of the alternatives
• Implementation Agreement (PART 4) that outlines specific enforceable measures and mechanisms that are required to effectively implement the NCCP/HCP
• a MAP Section, separately bound, containing all figures referenced in the texts of Parts I through IV; and
• appendices.

Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts 1 & 11: NCCP/HCP page ES-1

NCCP approved for Coastal/Central Subregion Implementation Agreement signed by 

• California Natural Resources Agency
• California Department of Fish and Game
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
• California Department of Parks and Recreation
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service
• County of Orange
• Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency
• San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency
• The Irvine Company
• Irvine Ranch Water District
• Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
• Southern California Edison
• The Orange County Fire Authority
• Santiago County Water District
• The Regents of the University of California
• Chandis Securities Company
• Sherman Foundation
• M.H. Sherman Company
• Orange County Flood Control District
• City of Irvine
• City of Tustin

Natural Community Conservation Plan for the Central/Coastal Orange County Subregion of the Coastal Sage Scrub Natural Community Conservation Program Implementation Agreement

California Department of Fish and Wildlife: NCCP Plan Summary- County of Orange (Central/Coastal) NCCP/HCP

In 1995-96, a combination of the lengthy recession and a need by RMV to re-think its estate planning resulted in the program going into hiatus, a pause that lasted until the middle of 1997. During this pause in the process, RMV and the County re-considered the overall scope of the NCCP/HCP process and decided to expand the overall planning process to address aquatic resources concurrent with upland resources through preparation of a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) under the direction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) under the direction of CDFG as companion pieces to the NCCP/HCP. Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.¹ 

It should be noted that in late 2004, the participating landowners decided to transfer the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP while leaving the SAMP as a stand-alone Federal document. The decision to make the MSAA a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP document meant that the County of Orange became the Lead agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for both the NCCP and the MSAA. The USACE continued to be the Lead agency under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the SAMP document.

Lead Agency for CEQA for NCCP/MSAA is the County of Orange

Lead Agency for SAAMP is the US Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 5

Southern Subregion Reserve Design Principles prepared by Science Advisors 

In 1997, The Nature Conservancy convened a team of “Science Advisors” to assist in restarting the NCCP /HCP process. The purpose of the Science Advisors’ effort was to provide program participants with recommended guidance on matters relating to the design of a subregional Habitat Reserve, principles for preparing and implementing an adaptive management program, and recommendations concerning future regulatory decisions by the USFWS and CDFG regarding Take authorizations for threatened and endangered species and other species of interest. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-14

San Juan Partnership No. I sold two parcels of land to the Capistrano Unified School District to  build Chiquita Canyon High School, aka Tesoro High School. 

Instrument No: 19970143928 was a Grant Deed recorded on March 31, 1997

See also: Capistrano Unified School District Toll Road Facts 

Legal Description:

"That portion of Parcel 3 of Certificate of Compliance CC95-01 in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Orange, State of California recorded March 21, 1995 as Instrument No 95-0112516" 

Certificate of Compliance CC 95-01 originated from Certificate of Compliance CC-82-2.

The Capistrano Unified School District paid $4.85 million for a total of [75.1539 acres]

Parcel 125-096-69 Lot for Main Campus: [65.19 acres], plus

Parcel 125-096-82 Lot for Road and Utility Purpose: [4.8519 acres], plus

Parcel 125-096-82 Lot for Slope Drainage [5.112 acres]

Valuable Consideration:

On 5/13/1997 CUSD paid $2.6 million through Fund 13 which at that time was the State School Building Fund

On 5/21/1997 CUSD paid $2.25 million from CFD 90-1

Large portions of Parcel 125-096-69 and Parcel 125-096-82 are contained in the Habitat Reserve south of Oso Parkway and west of "Modified "F" Street". 

Parcel 125-096-69 Lot for the Main Campus is shown below:

Parcel 125-096-82 is two pieces:

Lot for Road and Utility Purpose: Parcel 125-096-82 [4.8519 acres]

Lot for Slope Drainage Parcel 125-096-82 [5.112 acres]

During this pause in the Southern Subregion process, RMV and the County re-considered the overall scope of the NCCP/HCP process and decided to expand the overall planning process to address aquatic resources concurrent with upland resources through preparation of a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) under the direction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) under the direction of CDFG as companion pieces to the NCCP/HCP. Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.

Four Lead Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The County of Orange, California Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures.

On May 14, 1998, a second public Scoping Meeting was held for the Southern Subregion NCCP planning process. After conducting the 1998 Scoping meeting the local participants (County and landowners) reviewed the submitted public comments and the recent regulatory experience of participating landowners in the Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP/HCP program to assess whether it was advisable to conduct the NCCP/HCP planning process without also initiating a watershed-level planning and permitting program capable of addressing impacts to aquatic resources subject to the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) (Section 404) and the state Fish and Game Code (Sections 1600-1603). It was determined that a future NCCP/HCP for the Southern Subregion should be prepared either concurrently or in close coordination with the preparation of a Special Area Management Plan and a Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAMP/MSAA) that would address the need to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate potential impacts to aquatic resources on a watershed level. 

After meeting with the state and federal agencies (CDFG, USFWS and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE]) that would be involved in preparing and coordinating the preparation and approval of the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA documents, the County and participating landowners began coordinating NCCP/HCP planning with preparation of a SAMP/MSAA that would cover those portions of both the San Juan Creek Watershed and San Mateo Creek Watershed located within the County of Orange. Coordinated planning was facilitated by the initiation of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change process for the 22,815-acre Rancho Mission Viejo property, the only large unplanned private ownership remaining within the Subregion.

 Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-14

Second scoping meeting held for Southern Subregion 

Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.1

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures.

The AROE prepares a draft SAMP for the San Juan Creek and Western parts of San Mateo Creek Watersheds consists of a comprehensive wetland planning effort. The draft SAMP identified wetlands and Waters of the United States. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-10

VIOLATION OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT

Tesoro High School sits on four parcels of land: Parcel 125-096-59, Parcel 125-096-60, Parcel 125-096-69 and Parcel 125-096-82.

Parcel 125-096-82 and portions of Parcel 125-096-69 are in the Habitat Reserve.

All the waste water discharge for "F" Street, the Oso Bridge Project and the Oso Bridge Gap Closure Project is designed to flow onto Parcel 125-096-82 and underneath Tesoro High School creating a permant tresspass of water onto and underneath the School.

In May 1999; due to environmental restrictions (It appears that RMV sold CUSD land that was dedicated to the Habbitat Reserve), CUSD had to alter the design of Tesoro High School. The design of the school was flipped, and CUSD was forced to purchase two additional parcels of land in order to build sports fields.

On July 1, 1999 DMB San Juan Investment North, LLC a successor-in-interest to San Juan Partnership No. I, LLC  sold for valuable consideration Parcel A (aka 125-096-59) and Parcel B (aka 125-096-60) to the Capistrano Unified School District. 

Instrument No: 20000330046 was a Grant Deed recorded on June 23, 2000.

See also: Capistrano Unified School District Toll Road Facts 

Legal Description for the Additional Area Tesoro High School: "That portion of Parcel 3 of Certificate of Compliance CC95-01 in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Orange, State of California recorded March 21, 1995 as Instrument No 95-0112516".

The Capistrano Unified School District paid $1.944 million to San Juan Partnership No I, LLC.

Sports Field Parcel A aka Parcel #125-096-59 [2.439 acres] 

Sports Field Parcel B aka Parcel #125-096-60 [7.576 acres] 

Valuable Consideration: 

On 7/31/1999 CUSD paid $1.94 million from CFD 98-2

Capistrano Unified School District owned four parcels of land which comprised the entire Tesoro High School Campus.

Parcel 125-096-59

Parcel 125-096-60

Parcel 125-096-69

Parcel 125-096-82

The school opened in September 2001.

Parcel 125-096-82 and portions of 125-096-69 have been used and continue to be used as Habitat Reserve.

Baseline data/studies prepared. 

In the early 2000s, the alignment for the southern portion of the FTC (a 16-mile segment from Oso Parkway to the Route 5 south of San Clemente). The six possible alignments, included three that went around the east side of the City of San Clemente and connected to Route 5 south of San Clemente as set forth in Streets and Highways Code section 541. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program (SOCTIIP) Volume I: Eecutive Summary page ES-3

Lead Agencies specified

The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) was to oversee compliance of the RMV development with the California Endangered Sepcies Act (CESA) through the NCCP and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) pursuant to Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) were engaged in a cooperative effort, in overseeing compliance with the Federal Endangered Speciaes Act (ESA) throught the preparation of the NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (50 C.F.R Section 13.0) and the CWA through Section 404 Permit Process (33 C.F.R. Section 230).

The Primary undeveloped area in south Orange County is RMV, which is why the NCCP and SAMP Plans are being concurrently processed with the RMV development proposal.

The County of Orange is the lead agency, in cooperation with CDFG, for preparation of the Southern Subregion NCCP.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program (SOCTIIP) Volume I: Eecutive Summary page ES-9

SCAG is the federally designated (MPO) Metropolitan Planning Organization for the six county region which includes Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties.As the MPO, SCAG is required to adopt and periodically update a RTP. The FTC-S is shown in the 2001 RTP as an extension of the existing FTC-N from the San Diego County line to Oso Parkway, with two mixed flow lanes in each direction by 2010 and two additional mixed flow lanes in each direction by 2015. AN alignment similar to the alignment of the FEC-M Alternative is mapped in the RTP as a programed part of the transportation network baseline and is assumed in the modeling for the RTP.

Any SOCTIIP alignment would also need to be consistent with The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) and SANDAG the State and Federally designated MPO responsible for regional transportation planning for San Diego County.

The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) develops and implements unified transportation programs and services for Orange County. The OCTA administers the County's MPAH. Projects must be on the MPAH to be implemented. Any SOCTIIP alinment would have to be consisten with the FTC-S as shown on the MPAH  Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-11

Scoping Meeting

The public participation process for the Southern Subregion involved three separate and independent elements:

1) public workshops conducted by the four lead agencies (Service, County, CDFG, USACE);

2) convening of an “Ad Hoc” group by The Nature Conservancy (TNC); and

3) creation of a citizen outreach program by the County Supervisor with responsibility over the District that includes the 22,815-acre (ac) (9,233-hectare (ha)) RMV property.

On July 23, 2001, the Capistrano Unified School District recorded a Grant Deed to Rancho Santa Margarita Water District for 0.287 acres of land for the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility. Current Land Records show that the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility currently sits on Parcels 125-096-04 and 125-096-68.

These parcels never belonged to the Capistrano Unified School District. 

Current Orange County Land Records show that the land that the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility sits on originated from:

CC 82-2 Instrument No. 198200313505

CC 95-01 Instrument No. 199500112516 

CC 2001-01 Instument Number 200100508635

CC 2004 Instrument Number 2004000978175  is also associated with these same parcels

CC 2011-01 Instrument Number 201100677171 is also associated with these same parcels

Why is the Capistrano Unified School District executing a Grant Deed for Parcel 125-096-68 (land it never owned) to Santa Margarita District on July 21, 2001? Three days before RMV transferred all of these Parcels into CC 2001-01 (The Right of Way for SR 241)

RMV, CUSD and the Santa Margarita Water District need to Quiet Title on all the Parcels south of Oso Parkway Bridge. They have been placed into the Habitat Reserve, sold to the Capistrano Unified School District and the Right of Way for SR 241.

Current County of Orange Land Records do not show the existance of the July 23, 2001 Grant Deed from the Capistrano Unified School District to the Santa Margarita Water District.

See below: 

The July 23, 2001 Grant Deed 

In July 2001 all four of CUSDs' parcels were transferred into Certificate of Compliance CC 2001-01 by entities that did not own them.

The owner of record for Parcels 125-095-59, 125-096-60 and 125-096-69 is DMB San Juan Investment North, LLC

The owner of record for Parcel 125-096-82 is San Juan Partnership III.

CC-2001-01 is the Right-of-Way for the Tesoro Extension of the 241 Toll Road from the Oso Parkway continuing south towards the Orange County/ San Diego County line 

In 2001 San Juan Partnership No. 1 and DMB San Juan Investment North LLC entered into an agreement to transfer land owned by the Capistrano Unified School District to the TCA as part of the right-of-way for the 241 Extension of the Toll Road.

San Juan Partnership No. 1 and DMB San Juan Investment North LLC had no legal right to claim ownership and encumber all four parcels of land under Tesoro High School.

Working Group Meetings

These meetings were established to provide coordination at a both a technical and policy level between the County, RMV, SMWD and the Service and CDFG during plan preparation. These meetings were attended by the Service, CDFG, County, RMV, occasionally SMWD, lawyers retained by RMV, and the County’s NCCP consultants. The meetings consisted of all-day working sessions to discuss schedule and progress on the plan, technical elements of species accounts, conservation analyses, implementation approaches, and policy language for incorporation into the draft and final HCP and IA. Department of the Interior Solicitor’s Office staff and the CDFG legal staff occasionally attended these meetings. In total, the Working Group held 53 meetings. Five meetings were held in 2001 beginning in October and ending in December. Seventeen meetings were held in 2002 beginning in February and ending in December. Six meetings were held in 2003 beginning in April and ending in November. Five meetings were held in 2004 beginning in January and ending in July. Fourteen meetings were held in 2005 beginning in March and ending in December. In 2006, five meetings were held between March and August.

June 14, 2001 Scoping Meeting NCCP/MSAA/HCP

In preparation for the NOP and NOI, a June 14, 2001, Scoping Meeting was conducted jointly by the County of Orange, USFWS, CDFG, and USACE for the Southern NCCP/HCP and the San Juan Creek Watershed and San Mateo Creek Watershed SAMP/MSAA. During this joint Scoping Meeting, the agencies discussed the intent to implement a coordinated planning process that would include the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA planning components. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-15 and 1-17

Public Workshops

The four lead agencies initiated a series of joint “Public Workshops.” The Public Workshops preceded and contributed information important to the completion of the “Draft” NCCP/MSAA/HCP, EIS/EIR and IA. Beginning in December, 2001, a total of six public workshops were held. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-17

USFWS and ACOE held informational meetings on Resource planning for the South Subregion NCCP and SAMP. The NCCP and SAMP are separate projects that had separate environmmental documents. Draft EIS/SEIR and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure  Improvement Project (SOCTIIP) page ES-10

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Ad Hoc Group Meetings 

In support of the Public Workshops, TNC convened an “Ad Hoc” group designed to involve representatives of the involved agencies, environmental groups and local landowners in constructive dialogue within a smaller setting that could focus on NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA issues. In total, the TNC Ad Hoc Group met seven times in 2002 beginning in March and ending in October. Attendees at the Ad Hoc Group meetings included staff from the Service, CDFG, County, the participating landowners and members of the environmental community including Endangered Habitats League, Starr Ranch Audubon Society and Sierra Club. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18 U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 6

RMV filed GPA/ZC application

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18

SCORE PROCESS South County Review and Evaluation (SCORE) program.

The overall goal of the SCORE program was to establish and maintain positive and constructive communications among all potentially interested parties including members of the RMV development team, Orange County staff and appointed officials, representatives of all the neighboring jurisdictions, representatives of specific community interest groups, and members of the public at large.

Supervisor Wilson convened two task forces to review RMV development issues, one to address land use and one to address urban runoff. Each task force was given a scope for review (the charge) and a set of ground rules for operation. The Land Use Task Force met a total of 14 times, and the Urban Runoff Task Force met 6 times. The task forces produced a joint report containing commentary based on their review of certain preliminary reserve design concepts and a list of potential solutions to address urban runoff issues. This report was presented to the Orange County Planning Commission on October 23, 2002. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18 U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 7

The following three major projects are planned in the SOCTIIP study area:

1) The Ranch Plan Development. 

2) the Southern Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and

3) (SAMP) Special Area Management Plan

the 3 plans are being developed cooperatively but are separate projects that will have separate enviornmental documents.

The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will oversee the compliance of RMV with the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) through the NCCP and watercourse alteration through the Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) puursuant to Section 1600 of the CA Fish and Game Code. The USFWS and the ACOE are engaged, in a cooperative effort, in overseeing compliance with the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) through the preparation of the NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (50 C>F>R Section 13.0) and the CWA through Section 404 Permit Process (33 C.F.R section 230). The primary undeveloped area in south Orange County is RMV, which is why the NCCP and SAMP plans are being concurrently processed with RMV development proposal. Although there are a multitude of federal and state agencies involved in the planning process, the County of Orange is the lead agency, in cooperation with CDFG, for the preparation of the Southern Subregion NCCP. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-9

Rancho Mission Viejo Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan Project Number PW0087 June 7, 2004 

Pollutants page 46 - 51

• Pathogens (bacteria indicators)
• Sediment (Total Suspended Solids)
• Nutrients (Ammonia, Nitrate, and Total Phosphorus)
• Trace Metals (Aluminum, Cadmium, Copper, Lead and Zinc)
• Hydrocarbons (Oil and Grease, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
• Pesticides
• Trash and Debris

WQMP for Canada Chiquita Sub-basin page 91

Canada Chiquita is one of the few naturlly perennial streams in the watershed and contains riparian habitat, freshwater and alkaline marsh, and slope wetlands. The relatively high proportion of permeable soils and low percentage of developed area result in a relatively low runoff and sediment yields of the sub-basins in the wtershed. Many of the laterial tributaries are chennel-less swales.

Cumulative Impact Analysis San Juan Creek Watershed page 319

In late 2004, the titles of the draft Southern Subregion NCCP/HCP Planning Guidelines and the SAMP/MSAA Watershed and Sub-basin Planning Principles documents were modified to delete the references to the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA, respectively, in their titles. The revised document titles now are “Draft Southern Subregion Planning Guidelines” (hereafter called the Draft Southern Planning Guidelines) and the Draft Southern Subregion Watershed and Sub-basin Planning Principles” (hereafter called the Draft Watershed Planning Principles). These document title changes were implemented in conjunction with the decision by participating landowners to move the MSAA from the SAMP program to become part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP program in order to eliminate any potential confusion concerning the evolution, purpose and content of the “guidelines” and “principles” documents. From the outset of the overall coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion, the draft “Southern Planning Guidelines” and “Draft Watershed Planning Principles” were designed to be prepared concurrently and be used to guide and evaluate Habitat Reserve alternatives and the planning, restoration and management policies contained in the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA. The transfer of the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP does not affect the application, purposes or content of either the draft Southern Planning Guidelines or Watershed Planning Principles documents and they continue to be used for their originally-intended purposes. DRAFT NCCP/MSAA/HCP Chapter 1 1-16 July 2006 The decision to make the MSAA a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP document means that the County of Orange becomes the Lead agency under CEQA for both the NCCP and the MSAA. The USACE would continue to be the Lead agency under NEPA for the SAMP document. Study area boundaries would be unaffected by this change in organization, except for the fact that the MSAA would now cover the San Clemente Hydrologic Unit (see Figure 7-M) as part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. Under the former SAMP/MSAA, the San Clemente hydrologic unit was not covered because it was not part of either the San Juan Creek or San Mateo Creek watersheds.

The decision to transfer the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP while leaving the SAMP as a stand-alone Federal document meant that the County of Orange in cooperation with (CDFG) California department of Fish and Game became the Lead agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for both the NCCP and the MSAA.

The USACE continued to be the Lead agency under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the SAMP document.

The Ranch Plan, the Southern NCCP and the SAMP were now three separate projects with separate environmental documents.

GPA/ZC approved by Board of Supervisors

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-1-YJC (Alternative Permitting Process)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-2-YJC (non- RMV Subarea)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-3-YJC (RMV Subarea)

SAMP DOCUMENT Draft SAMP released for public review:

Volume I Draft Environmental Impact Statement San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) November 2005

Volume I (2005): Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Volume II (2005): EIS Figures 

Volume III (2005): (Available Upon Request)

Participants in the SAMP:

Rancho Mission Viejo (RMV)

Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD)

(SOCTIPP) IS NOT PART OF THE SAMP Volume I page ES-IV

Permitting Process: Individual Permit/LOP

December 2005

Added April 3, 2021 (Links to actual document are broken)

Compliance With NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP

As in the case of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP, the SAMP is a voluntary process. However, after the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP are approved and permits are issued, compliance with the terms and conditions of the permits is mandatory for signatories and will be enforced by the appropriate local, state and federal agencies. The purpose of the SAMP being prepared by the USACE as lead agency is to provide for the protection and long-term management of federally regulated sensitive aquatic resources (biological and hydrological) on a landscape level. To the extent feasible, federal waters, including wetlands, will be avoided and unavoidable impacts will be minimized and fully mitigated under the SAMP. The SAMP also is designed to enable economic uses to be permitted within the study area portions of the San Juan Creek and San Mateo Creek watersheds consistent with the requirements of federal law (CWA Section 404). Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-19 1.3.2 The Need for a Coordinated Planning and Regulatory Process

Lead Agency Actions for NCCP/MSAA/HCP, SAMP and GPA/ZC

The County Board of Supervisors, acting as a lead agency, is responsible for reviewing and acting on the GPA/ZC, the NCCP and the MSAA. The County actions occur in two steps:

• • First, prior to completion of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP, the Board of Supervisors certified the EIR for the GPA/ZC component (EIR 589), and approved the DRAFT NCCP/MSAA/HCP related actions including the EIR, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Development Agreement and related entitlements; and
  • Second, after acting on the GPA/ZC and related EIR, the County Board of Supervisors would need to complete its review and decide whether to certify the EIR for the NCCP and MSAA and to approve the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the related IA.

After the County completes its review and actions on the GPA EIR and GPA/ZC application, and before it approves the draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP, the USFWS and CDFG would complete their reviews of the draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP and provide comments and suggested changes to the County. USACE also would complete the SAMP after the County approves the GPA/ZC application.

After the final drafts are prepared, and circulated for public review, the state and federal agencies reviews of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP would proceed as follows:

The USFWS and CDFG would decide whether to approve the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. If approved,

• • • the USFWS would issue the Biological Opinion, Record of Decision (ROD) and FESA Section 10 permits for Incidental Take of federally-listed Covered Species under the HCP component of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP
    • CDFG would issue its permits for Incidental Take of state-listed Covered Species under the NCCP and its streambed alteration agreements under the MSAA for CDFG Jurisdictional Areas; and
    • Covered Species that are not currently “listed” at the state and federal levels also would be designated as part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP.

The USACE would complete its review and decide whether to issue final approval for the SAMP.

• • • USACE would finalize the SAMP EIS and issue the ROD and approve relevant Section 404 permits and permitting procedures, related mitigation programs and a preferred Aquatic Resources Conservation Program for activities covered by the SAMP.  A Section 7 programmatic consultation would be completed with USFWS for the SAMP permitting procedures

Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-21 1.3.4 Sequence of Lead Agency Actions for the NCCP/MSAA/HCP, SAMP and GPA/ZC

On February 23, 2006, TCA certified a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) for the SOCTIIP project and filed a Notice of Determination.

In support of the FSEIR, TCA adopted findings and a statement of overriding considerations for the SOCTIIP project- a 16 mile segment of SR-241 from Oso Parkwkay to the Orange County/San Diego county line. TCA found that impacts to wild life, fisheries and vegetation could not be mitigated to a less than significant level.  

State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 dated September 23, 2014 page 2 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 dated March 16, 2015. page 2, 

On February 23, 2006, the Petitioner adopted CEQA findings for the preferred alternative and approved construction of the sixteen mile extension of State Route 241. California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 Resolution Supporting Denial of Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-007, Waste Discharge Requirements for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, Tesoro Extension (SR241) Project, Orange County page 2

On February 23, 2006, and after a several year process involving numerous public hearings, the TCA Board adopted Resolution F2006-1 certifying Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report TCA SEIR 4 ("2006 SEIR") for the SR-241 Foothill South Extension. That same day, the TCA Board also adopted Resolution F2006- 2 selecting the locally preferred alignment (the A7C-FEC-M-Initial Alternative, commonly called the "Green Alignment") in the DEIS/SEIR for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Project ("SOCTIIP") (the "2006 Approvals"). Consistent with legislative enactments and state and regional transportation plans concerning SR 241, the Green Alignment connected to Route 5 south of San Clemente near Basilone Road in San Diego County. SR 241 has been adopted as a state highway by Resolution of the California Transportation Commission on July 9, 1993 and August 19, 1998, and has been declared to be a freeway. The Reserve Maintenance Corporation V. Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency page 16

The 2006 SEIR and 2006 Approvals were challenged under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) by certain SSOC Members, and by the People and the CSPRC, in the 2006 CEQA Lawsuits. The NAHC also filed the NAHC Lawsuit, seeking to enjoin construction, development, and permitting of the alignment approved by the 2006 Approvals under Public Resources Code §§ 5097.94 and 5097.97.  The Reserve Maintenance Corporation V. Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency page 17

Because the sixteen mile extension of State Route 241 required a Clean Water Act section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, on June 13, 2006 the TCA submitted Water Quality Certification Application No. 06C-064 for SOCTIIP. The SOCTIIP toll road extension would have added approximately 16 miles of toll road to the current terminus of State Route 241 (SR 241) at Oso Parkway in Southern Orange County and extended the SR 241 south and parallel to lnterstate-5 (1-5) before merging with 1-5 near the Orange County-San Diego County Line. California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022  page 1 and State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 2