Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project. Initial Study

Transcription

1 June 2013 Prepared For: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District 5469 East Olive Avenue Fresno CA Prepared By: URS Corporation 30 River Park Place West Suite 180 Fresno, CA

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS... v 1.0 INTRODUCTION Project Title Lead Agency Contact Person: Purpose and Authority Organization of the Determination PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Project Location Background Project Description Best Management Practices Air Quality Cultural Resources Paleontological Water Quality Nationwide Permit Hazardous Materials Noise Traffic and Transportation Environmental Setting: (General Plan Designation and Zoning) Project Objectives Intended Uses of the ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Determination EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Regulatory Setting - Federal Regulatory Setting - State Regulatory Setting - Local Environmental Setting BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULTURAL RESOURCES Geology and Soils GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Regulatory Setting - State Regulatory Setting - Local Environmental Setting HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx i

4 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING MINERAL RESOURCES NOISE POPULATION AND HOUSING PUBLIC SERVICES RECREATION TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE MITIGATION MEASURES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULTURAL RESOURCES HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY PERSONS AND SOURCES CONSULTED REFERENCES LIST OF PREPARERS LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Air Emissions and Health Risk Analysis Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Biological Resource Report LIST OF TABLES Table Table Table Table Table Table Table A-1 Table A-2 Table A-3 Table A-4 Table A-5 Table A-6 Table B-1 Table B-2 Existing Land Use, General Plans, and Zoning, Big Dry Creek Dam Project Federal and State Construction-Related Air Pollutant Thresholds of Significance SJVAPCD Air Quality Attainment Plans Summary San Joaquin Valley Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Attainment Status Project Construction Emissions Construction-Related GHG Emissions (metric tons/year) SJVAPCD Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Construction-Related CAP and Precursors Construction Schedule and Equipment Project Construction Emissions Summary (tons/year) Construction-Related GHG Emissions (metric tons/year) Relative Emissions Comparison Special Status Species CNDDB Results and Potential to Occur On Site Land Use Setting Big Dry Creek Dam Project H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx ii

5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure B-1 Regional Location of Big Dry Creek Dam Project Vicinity Map Proposed Project Cross-Section View Toe Drain Proposed Staging Area California Natural Diversity Database Special Status Species Record Location H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx iii

6 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx iv

7 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AB APCD APCO AQAP BMP BPS CAA CAAQS Caltrans CARB CCAA CCAP CDFW CEQA cfs CGC CO CO 2 CO 2 e County CRWQCB CWA dba District DPM EPA GAMAQI GHG Guidelines mg/kg/day mph NAAAQS NO 2 NO O 3 OEHHA PM 2.5 PM 10 PRC Assembly Bill air pollution control district Air Pollution Control Officer air quality attainment plan best management practice Best Performance Standard Clean Air Act California Ambient Air Quality Standards California Department of Transportation California Air Resources Board California Clean Air Act Climate Change Action Plan California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Environmental Quality Act cubic feet per second California Government Code carbon monoxide carbon dioxide carbon dioxide equivalent Fresno County California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region Clean Water Act decibels A-scale Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District diesel particulate matter United States Environmental Agency Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts greenhouse gas Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act milligram per kilogram of body weight-day miles per hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards nitrogen dioxide nitrogen oxide ozone Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment inhalable particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller inhalable particulate matter 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller California Public Resources Code H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx v

8 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Continued) REL SB SIP SJVAB SJVAPCD SNPDES SO 2 SWPPP TAC TAF USACE USFWS VOC reference exposure level Senate Bill state implementation plan San Joaquin Valley Air Basin San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District State National Pollution Discharge Elimination System sulfur dioxide Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan toxic air contaminants thousand acre-feet United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Fish and Wildlife Service volatile organic compound F degrees Fahrenheit 3H:1V 3 horizontal to 1 vertical H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx vi

9 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT TITLE Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project 1.2 LEAD AGENCY Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District 5469 E. Olive Avenue Fresno, California CONTACT PERSON: Daniel Rourke Environmental Resources Manager Or Kristine Johnson, Staff Analyst IV Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District 5469 E. Olive Avenue Fresno, California Ph. (559) Fax. (559) PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY This initial study has been prepared under the direction of the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (District) pursuant to under Section 15000, Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Guidelines) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of this initial study is to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with actions taken by the District to ensure the long-term structural integrity of Big Dry Creek Dam. As lead agency, the District is the public agency responsible for performing or approving the project (Public Resources Code Section 21067). The District is authorized to require feasible changes to any and all activities involved in the project to substantially lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. This document is the initial study for the proposed Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project. Figures 1 and 2 serve as location maps. Figure 1 is a regional location map that illustrates the location of the proposed project in relation to the cities of Clovis and Fresno/Fresno County. Figure 2 is a project vicinity map that presents the location of the proposed project proximate to the city limits of Clovis. Pursuant to Section 15074(a) of the Guidelines, this initial study will be sent to the State Clearinghouse for review by public agencies. The review period will be for 30 days. 1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY This initial study is organized into the following sections: Section 1.0: Introduction: This section identifies the lead agency, and contact person, and provides information on the purpose and authority under CEQA. Section 2.0: Project Summary: This section describes the proposed project, location, description, environmental setting and intended uses of the initial study. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 1-1

10 Section 3.0: Environmental Checklist: This section summarizes the environmental factors that may be potentially affected by the project, presents the determination of the lead agency, and evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Section 4.0 Mitigation Measures and Environmental Permits: This section recapitulates the mandatory actions that will avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce or compensate the impacts of a project to a less-than-significant level. Section 5.0: Agencies and Sources Consulted: This section lists the names of agencies consulted and documents evaluated for the analysis. Section 6.0: List of Preparers: This section lists the individuals who assisted in preparing this initial study. Appendices: The appendices contain various technical reports that were reviewed during the preparation of this initial study. 1.6 DETERMINATION Based on the information in this initial study, it is recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be prepared for the proposed for the Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 1-2

11 H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 1-3

12

14

15 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROPOSED PROJECT The following section describes the location, background, and project description. In addition, best management practices (BMPs) are described and are incorporated into the project description. The environmental setting is also defined in this section. 2.2 LOCATION Big Dry Creek Dam is just north of the City of Clovis on the north side of Shepherd Avenue and generally east of the alignment of Temperance Avenue (Figure 3). The dam and reservoir span smaller drainages immediately to the north of Big Dry Creek. Downstream of the dam, Big Dry Creek continues on to the southwest, passing through Clovis and Fresno, for a distance of approximately 18 miles before it becomes the Dry Creek Canal, which services areas southwest of Fresno. 2.3 BACKGROUND Big Dry Creek Dam is a homogeneous rolled earthfill-type structure with a crest length of approximately 25,300 feet. The dam was constructed in 1948 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), turned over to the California State Reclamation Board, and finally transferred to Fresno County. It is currently owned and operated by the District. The District operates the facility to control flooding. The dam was originally constructed with a crest at an elevation of 435 feet (elevation 435) above mean sea level and a gross pool storage capacity of 16.5 thousand acre-feet (TAF). In 1993, the dam crest was raised to elevation and the reservoirs storage capacity was increased to 30.2 TAF with a gross pool at elevation (U.S. Bureau Reclamation, 2003). The upstream slope of the embankment from the toe to elevation is a ratio of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3H:1V) and from elevation to crest is 2H:1V. The downstream slope of the embankment from the toe to elevation is 2.25H:1V, and from elevation to the crest is 2H:1V. Seepage control measures incorporated in the 1992 modifications included an inclined toe drain at the base of the downstream slope of the dam embankment and a drainage blanket beneath the downstream berm (BSK Associates 2008). Six pressure relief wells were constructed and tested by USACE in On April 7, 2006, sustained seepage and small sand boils were observed during a storm event. A preliminary seepage study was conducted in 2008 (BSK Associates 2008). The study concluded that unconfined seepage discharge into the drainage blanket and apron and subsequent discharge into the shallow drainage is estimated to represent the bulk of the seepage with confined seepage, in the lessor amounts, and small diameter (1/4 to ½ inch) sand boils are suspected to represent purging of air contained within the soil mass and the attendant transport of soil pore water present in shallow zones near the ground surface (BSK Associates, 2008). Further seepage studies, (BSK Associates, 2009; 2010) recommended adjusting the existing toe drain, placement of perforated pipe and pump sumps in the toe drain to provide more effective control of seepage. In 2011, seepage values were updated. In summary, estimated seepage flow for discharge downgradient of the dam is comprised of two components: (1) 0.16 cubic feet per second (cfs) collected at the toe drain and conveyed to Big Dry Creek outlet channel, and (2) 0.49 cfs, which discharge downgradient of the H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-1

16 dam toe, the majority of which is in the form of shallow seepage and soil saturation (BSK Associates, 2011). USACE estimated discharge for the conditions described in the BSK report as 0.22 cfs (collected at the toe drain) and 0.14 cfs, (discharges downgradient of dam toe) respectively. These quantities were based on the maximum Gross Pool Elevation ; of feet. The BSK report concluded that in the event toe drain modifications and upstream blanket construction is implemented, the increase in flow rate collected at the toe drain and discharged into Dry Creek drainage is estimated to be the difference between 0.16 and 0.2 cfs or 0.04 cfs. For a design-level major flood event with 7-day storage at the maximum pool elevation of feet, the increased volume of discharge to Dry Creek would be 0.56 acre-feet. 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION In an effort to assure the long-term structural integrity of the dam, the District proposes to modify the existing toe drain constructed in 1993 (Figure 4). The proposed enhanced toe drain will be located approximately 3 feet away from the downstream base of the dam. The enhanced toe drain will run along the downstream toe of the dam for an approximate length of 7,000 feet and will measure 15 feet deep by 1.5 feet wide. Perforated pipe will be placed into the drain and a small dewatering pump will be installed near the outlet channel. The perforated pipe will be installed by jack and bore under the outlet channel, and a utility trench for electrical conduit will be cut from a power source located about 50 feet away to the pump station. A temporary bridge will be constructed to allow equipment to cross the outlet channel. The purpose of the toe drain is to intercept water that would normally surface from underneath the dam and have the potential to move soil from under the dam. The water pumped from the toe drain will be discharged into the Big Dry Creek outlet channel. Because of the soil makeup of the Big Dry Creek outlet channel, intercepted seepage water is expected to percolate into the groundwater. Discharges from the dam s outlet channel of less than 5 cubic feet per second typically percolate into the Big Dry Creek outlet channel floor within 6,500 feet downstream of the dam. The proposed action area is a 10-foot-wide corridor bounded by the toe of the dam on the north and east, and a gravel maintenance road on the west. The length of the action area is 7,000 feet. The proposed action area includes two staging areas adjacent to the outlet works (Figure 5). The two staging areas are 1.1 and 1.8 acres in size, respectively. Construction is expected to last 30 days with construction activities occurring on weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with up to 8 constructions workers on site at any one time. Project construction would take place during the summer months to avoid potential routing of flood waters and accidental water release in the event of a catastrophic failure of the dam during construction. 2.5 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES The following BMPs are drawn from Fresno County and the City of Clovis ordinances, other statutory authorities or guidelines. They are hereby incorporated into the project s description and shall be implemented during project construction and operation Air Quality The project will meet all state and federal permitting requirements and will be consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District s Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI) (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District [SJVAPCD], 2002). H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-2

18

20

22

23 The District will implement the following measures as required by Regulation VIII, Rule 4102, and Rule 4641 (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2013a). Prewater site sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20 percent opacity. Phase work to reduce the amount of disturbed area at any one time. During active operations, apply water or chemical/organic stabilizers/suppressants sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20 percent opacity. Construct and maintain wind barriers sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20 percent opacity. Apply water or chemical/organic stabilizers/suppressants to unpaved haul/access roads and unpaved vehicle/equipment traffic areas sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20 percent opacity. During periods of inactivity, restrict vehicular access to the area. Limit speeds to 15 miles per hour (mph) for vehicles traveling on uncontrolled unpaved access/haul roads. Post speed limit signs at minimum of every 500 feet along uncontrolled unpaved access/haul roads. Materials used for chemical/organic stabilization of soils, including petroleum resins, asphaltic emulsions, acrylics, and adhesives shall not violate State Water Quality Control Board standards for use as a soil stabilizer. Materials accepted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the United States Environmental Agency (EPA), and which meet state water quality standards, shall be considered acceptable to the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO). Any material prohibited for use as dust suppressant by EPA, CARB, or other applicable law, rule, or regulation is also prohibited under Regulation VIII. Use of hygroscopic materials may be prohibited by the APCO in areas lacking sufficient atmospheric moisture of soil for such materials to effectively reduce fugitive dust emissions. The atmospheric moisture of soil is considered to be sufficient if it meets the application specifications of the hygroscopic product manufacturer. Use of such materials may be approved in conjunction with sufficient wetting of the controlled area. Any use of dust suppressants or gravel pads, and paving materials such as asphalt or concrete for paving, shall comply with other applicable District rules Cultural Resources California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section , California Government Code (CGC) Section and Health and Safety Code Section provide for provisions for accidentally discovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the processes to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a project location other than a dedicated cemetery. In the event of the accidental discovery or disturbance of human remains, cultural or unique archaeological resources, all work will be suspended and District staff will be contacted. A qualified cultural resource specialist will be retained and will perform necessary investigations to determine the significance of the find. The District will then implement measures deemed necessary for the recordation H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-6

24 and/or the protection of the cultural resource. If the remains are determined to be Native American, guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission will be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains Paleontological In the event that paleontological resources are discovered, the District will be notified and will subsequently notify a qualified paleontologist who will document the discovery. The paleontologist will evaluate the potential resource and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in Section of the Guidelines. If fossil or fossil bearing depositions are discovered during construction, excavations within 50 feet of the find will be temporarily halted or diverted until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, 1995). The paleontologist will notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that will be followed before construction is allowed to resume. If the District determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist will prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the project. The plan will be submitted to the District for review and approval prior to implementation Water Quality The District complies with California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Region, Waste Discharge Requirements for Order R The District implements erosion-control measures as part of standard construction practices Nationwide Permit 3 Nationwide Permit 3 issued by the USACE is required for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable structure, or fill, of any currently serviceable structure provided that the structure is not to be put to uses differing from those due to specified or contemplated for it in the original permit Hazardous Materials Construction activities will comply with the requirements set forth in the Fresno County Hazardous Waste Management Plan and Hazardous Material Incident Response Plan (County of Fresno, 2000) Noise Prior to commencement of any construction activities, the construction contractor must submit documentation and/or specifications that all construction equipment and vehicles used on site are maintained and operating properly and are equipped with mufflers and or sound dampening apparatuses. Construction activities will occur on an intermittent basis typically between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays. On rare occasions, construction activities may start before 7:00 a.m. and end later than 5:00 p.m., with permission from the City of Clovis. However, noise level from the contractor s operations, will be required to not exceed 86 dba at a distance of 50 feet between the hours of 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-7

25 2.5.8 Traffic and Transportation Where necessary, temporary road markings will be provided on local streets surrounding the project site, guiding traffic to move through construction areas unimpeded. When required, flagmen will be provided in accordance to California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. 2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: (GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING) Big Dry Creek Dam is immediately north of the City of Clovis within an area that transitions between the rolling foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and the flat agricultural and urbanized landscape of the San Joaquin Valley. The project area is on primarily level to gently undulating terrain. North and east of the project area the terrain raises in elevation as the landscape becomes dominated by the rolling foothills of the Sierra Nevada. West of the dam, the project area transitions gradually from its rural character to a mix of rural residential neighborhoods until ultimately dominated by the urbanized portions of Clovis and Fresno. Two rural residences are approximately 300 feet west of the dam (Figure 3). Immediately south of the project area, across Shepherd Avenue is the Harlan Ranch residential subdivision. Table below describes the existing land uses and current general plan and zoning designations for the project site and surrounding area. Because the project site is on the outskirts of the City of Clovis, the area carries both a city and county general plan land use designation. Area Project Site North South East West Table Existing Land Use, General Plans, and Zoning, Big Dry Creek Dam Project Existing Land Uses and Features Big Dry Creek Dam and Reservoir Annual grassland, Owens Mountain, Friant-Kern Canal, Harlan Ranch residential subdivision and agricultural lands Annual grassland, Friant- Kern Canal, and foothills Rural residences and agricultural lands. Current General Plan Designations 1 County of Fresno: Agriculture City of Clovis: Open Space (Future Regional Park) County of Fresno: Agriculture City of Clovis: Low and Medium Density Residential, Mixed Use/Business Center, and Public Facilities County of Fresno: Agriculture City of Clovis: Low and Medium Density Residential, Mixed Use Village, Rural Residential, and Open Space County of Fresno: Northeast Rural Residential Area City of Clovis: Rural Residential, Low, Medium, and Medium High Density Residential Current Zoning County of Fresno: AE-20 County of Fresno: AE-40 City of Clovis: R-1, R-3, P-F County of Fresno: AL-40 and AE-40 County of Fresno: AL-20 and RR 1 Sources: Fresno County General Plan, October 2000; City of Clovis General Plan, Draft Land Use Diagram, PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed project is to assure the structural integrality of the dam by enhancing the existing toe drain. An enhanced toe drain will intercept subsurface water that occasionally appears at the toe or base of the dam. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-8

26 2.8 INTENDED USES OF THE INITIAL STUDY Public agencies other than the District, including responsible and trustee agencies (as defined under CEQA), may use this initial study during their review of various permit and other discretionary approval requests. Potential agencies that might use this initial study for such purposes include: California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Department Water Resources (CDWR) City of Clovis Fresno County San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SVAPCD) State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 2-9

27

28 3.3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to aesthetics. The setting is described in Section 2.4. Scenic vistas and resources are more fully described below the following table. Would The Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a: The Sierra foothills east of the Dry Creek Dam are visible and considered a scenic vista by individuals living in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project consists of the construction of an existing toe drain at the base of the downstream portion of the dam. As such, no above ground structures would be constructed. Therefore, the project would not interfere with the scenic vista by blocking existing views of the surrounding Sierra foothills. There is no impact. Response b: No trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings or other significant scenic resources are located on or near the proposed project site. There are no officially designated state scenic highways located in Fresno County. However, State Route 168 is an eligible State Scenic Highway, (Caltrans, 2013 [ State Route 168 is approximately 1 mile south of the project site. It is not visible from the dam. Therefore, project implementation will not result in the alteration of or damage to scenic resources. There is no impact. Response c: The visual character of the project site and its surroundings could be affected in the shortterm by construction activities. Construction related activities such as excavating, stockpiling, and storage of material and equipment could result in temporary impacts to the visual character of the site. Visual disturbances are short-term and would cease once construction is completed. Upon completion of the project, there would be no noticeable difference between the pre- and post-construction visual character of the site. The impact is less than significant. Response d: No new source of lighting is proposed as part of the project. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-2

29 3.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to agriculture and forestry resources. The setting has been described in Section 2.4 of this initial study. Agriculture and forestry resources are more fully described below the following table. Would The Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by California Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to no-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Responses a, b, and e: Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program data (California Department of Conservation, 2013 [ was reviewed; the dam and reservoir is considered Farmland of Local Importance. No Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance exists on the site; therefore, implementing the proposed project would not result in the conversion of farmland. Fresno County General Plan identifies the area as AE-20 (Exclusive Agriculture) zone district (County of Fresno, 2000). While the project site is zoned for agricultural use, the property is owned by the District for the purpose of providing flood control facilities in accordance with the mission of the District. As such, the project site is not currently under nor planned for agricultural use. None of the parcels within the project site are under Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, conflict with a Williamson Act contracted lands, or involve changes in the existing environment which could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use. There is no impact. Responses c and d: There is no forestland or timberland on the project site. The nearest forestlands and timberlands are east of the project site within the Sierra Nevada Mountains and foothills. The project would not result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non-forest use, nor would it conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forestlands or timberlands. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-3

30 3.3.3 Air Quality This section provides a detailed description of the regulatory setting and evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to air quality during construction. Would the Project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Regulatory Setting - Federal Clean Air Act The federal 1970 Clean Air Act (CAA) authorized the establishment of national health-based air quality standards, and also set deadlines for their attainment. The federal CAA Amendments of 1990 made major changes in deadlines for attaining National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and in the actions required of areas of the nation that exceeded these standards. Under the CAA, state and local agencies in areas that exceed the NAAQS are required to develop state implementation plans (SIP) to show how they will achieve the NAAQS for ozone by specific dates (United States Code, Title 42, Sections 7409 and 7411). EPA is responsible for enforcing the NAAQS primarily through reviewing SIPs prepared by each state. EPA has established and continues to update the NAAQS for specific criteria air pollutants: ozone (O 3 ), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), lead, inhalable particulate matter 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller (PM 10 ), and fine particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller (PM 2.5 ). The federal thresholds of significance for these pollutants are listed in Table 3.3-1, following the description of state regulations Regulatory Setting - State California Clean Air Act, California Air Resources Board, and State Standards The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) establishes an air quality management process that generally parallels the federal process. However, the CCAA focuses on attainment of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) that, for certain criteria air pollutants and averaging periods are more stringent than the comparable NAAQS. The CCAA also requires attainment designations with respect to the CAAQS. The CAAQS also includes standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility. CARB is H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-4

31 the oversight agency responsible for regulating statewide air quality, including preparing and enforcing the federally required SIP. The NAAQS and CAAQS are listed in Table Ozone Pollutant Carbon Monoxide Nitrogen Dioxide Sulfur Dioxide (See footnote 12) Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) Particulate Matter - Fine (PM 2.5 ) Table Federal and State Construction-Related Air Pollutant Thresholds of Significance 8 Hour 1 Hour 8 Hour 1 Hour 1 Hour Averaging California Standards 1 National Standards 2, 3 Time (Concentration) (Concentration) 3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 24 Hour 1 Hour Annual Arithmetic Mean ppm (137µg/m 3 ) ppm 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m 3 ) 9.0 ppm 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) (10 mg/m3) 20 ppm 35 ppm (23 mg/m 3 ) (40 mg/m 3 ) 0.18 ppm ppm (339 µg/m 3 ) (see footnote 11) ppm ppm (57 µg/m 3 ) (100 µg/m 3 ) 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m 3 ) 0.25 ppm ppm (655 µg/m 3 ) (196 µg/m 3 ) ppm (80 µg/m 3 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m 3 24 Hour 50 µg/m µg/m 3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m 3 12 µg/m 3 24 Hour 35 µg/m 3 See footnote 10 Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m 3 30 day Average 1.5 µg/m 3 - Lead (See Footnote 13) Calendar Quarter µg/m 3 Rolling 3 Month µg/m 3 Average 14 Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-5

32 Pollutant Vinyl Chloride (chloroethene) Visibility Reducing particles 24 Hour 8 Hour Table (Continued) Averaging California Standards 1 National Standards 2 Time Concentration Concentration 3 (10:00 to 18:00 PST) 1) A=Attainment N=Nonattainment U=Unclassified ppm (26 µg/m 3 ) See Footnote 8 mg/m 3 =milligrams per cubic meter ppm=parts per million µg/m 3 =micrograms per cubic meter Source: : ARB, 2012; EPA, 2012; SJVAPCD, 2012, Footnotes: 1. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate matter - PM 10, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. The standards for sulfates, Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide, lead, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or exceeded. If the standard is for a 1-hour, 8-hour or 24-hour average (i.e., all standards except for lead and the PM 10 annual standard), then some measurements may be excluded. In particular, measurements are excluded that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) determines would occur less than once per year on the average. The Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide (CO)standard is 6.0 ppm, a level one-half the national standard and two-thirds the state standard. 2. National standards shown are the primary standards designed to protect public health. National standards other than for ozone, particulates and those based on annual averages are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 1-hour ozone standard is attained if, during the most recent 3-year period, the average number of days per year with maximum hourly concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one. The 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 4th highest daily concentrations is ppm (75 part per billion) or less. The 24-hour PM10 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of monitored concentrations is less than 150 µg/m3. The 24-hour PM2.5 standard is attained when the 3-year average of 98th percentiles is less than 35 µg/m3. Except for the national particulate standards, annual standards are met if the annual average falls below the standard at every site. The national annual particulate standard for PM10 is met if the 3-year average falls below the standard at every site. The annual PM2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of annual averages spatially-averaged across officially designed clusters of sites falls below the standard. 3. National air quality standards are set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at levels determined to be protective of public health with an adequate margin of safety. 4. Final designations effective July 20, The national 1-hour ozone standard was revoked by EPA on June 15, In April 1998, the Bay Area was redesignated to attainment for the national 8-hour CO standard. 7. In June 2002, CARB established new annual standards for PM2.5 and PM Statewide visibility-reducing particles standard (except Lake Tahoe Air Basin): Particles in sufficient amount to produce an extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer when the relative humidity is less than 70 percent. This standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range. 9. The 8-hour California ozone standard was approved by CARB on April 28, 2005, and became effective on May 17, EPA lowered the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 µg/m3 to 35 µg/m3 in EPA designated the Bay Area as nonattainment of the PM2.5 standard on October 8, The effective date of the designation is December 14, 2009, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District has 3 years to develop a plan, called a State Implementation Plan, that demonstrates the Bay Area will achieve the revised standard by December 14, The State Implementation Plan for the new PM2.5 standard must be submitted to EPA by December 14, To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average at each monitor within an area must not exceed ppm (effective January 22, 2010). 12. On June 2, 2010, EPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard, effective August 23, 2010, which is based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The existing ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); however, must continue to be used until 1 year following EPA initial designations of the new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 13. CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as toxic air contaminants with no threshold level of exposure below which there are no adverse health effects determined. 14. National lead standard, rolling 3-month average: final rule signed October 15, Final designations effective December 31, On December 14, 2012, EPA revised the NAAQS for PM2.5 to 12.0 µg/m3. The existing standards for PM10 were retained. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-6

33 The CCAA has substantially increased the authority and responsibilities of the local air pollution control districts (APCDs). The CCAA requires that each air district in the state prepare an air quality attainment plan (AQAP) if air quality within the district violates CAAQS for ozone, CO, SO 2, PM 2.5 or NO 2. Such plans must describe strategies for and progress towards attaining the CAAQS for each criteria air pollutant for which the air district is in non-attainment. These plans are required to be updated every 3 years. In some cases, the local APCD combines the strategies for attainment of both federal and state standards into one air quality attainment plan document. The relevant AQAPs are listed in Table following the description of SJVAPCD regulations Regulatory Setting - Local Fresno County General Plan The Fresno County General Plan (County of Fresno, 2012), as revised, includes county-wide/communitywide goals, policies, and implementation measures to address air quality issues. The General Plan provides goals and policies to guide development while protecting prime agricultural lands, open space, recreational opportunities, and environmental quality. The General Plan consists of a county-wide general policy document and regional, community, and specific plans. The Open Space and Conservation section of Chapter 2 lists 17 goals (OS-G.1 through OS-G.17) related to air quality within Fresno County. Specifically, OS-G.1, G.2, G.3, G.4, and G.6 apply to this proposed project (County of Fresno, 2012). OS-G.1 Air Quality Evaluation Fresno County (County) shall develop standard methods for determining and mitigating project air quality impacts and related thresholds of significance for use in environmental documents. The County will do this in conjunction with SJVUAPCD and the cities in Fresno County. OS-G.2 Air Quality Impact Assessment The County shall ensure that air quality impacts identified during the CEQA review process are fairly and consistently mitigated. The County shall require projects to comply with the County's adopted air quality impact assessment and mitigation procedures. OS-G.3 Regional Coordination The County shall participate with cities, surrounding counties, and regional agencies to address crossjurisdictional and regional transportation and air quality issues. OS-G.4 Air Quality Impact Coordination The County shall consult with SJVUAPCD during CEQA review for projects that require air quality impact analysis and ensure that SJVUAPCD is on the distribution list for all CEQA documents. OS-G.6 Climate Action Plan The County shall develop and maintain a Climate Action Plan that includes an inventory of 1990 and 2010 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, determines project air quality impacts using analysis methods and significance thresholds recommended by SJVAPC, and identifies strategies to achieve State emission reduction targets. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-7

34 City of Clovis General Plan (1993) The Clovis Air Quality Element of the Clovis 1993 General Plan establishes a policy foundation for implementation of local government control measures (City of Clovis, 1993). The Element also provides the framework for coordination of air quality planning efforts with surrounding jurisdictions. Goal 1: Improvement of air quality through proper land use planning in Clovis. Policy 1.1: Encourage new development that provides employment opportunities for residents of Clovis to improve the balance of jobs relative to housing. Policy 1.2: Encourage in-fill development near activity centers and along transportation corridors. Policy 1.3: Minimize land use conflicts between emission sources and sensitive receptors. Policy 1.4: Reduce air pollutant emissions by mitigating air quality impacts associated with new development projects to the greatest extent feasible. Goal 2: Enhanced mobility to minimize air pollutant emissions. Policy 2.1: Implement transportation demand management techniques to reduce motor vehicle trips, including walking, bicycling, ridesharing, local transit support, compressed work schedules and telecommunications. Policy 2.2: Maintain an orderly flow of traffic and improve mobility through the use of transportation systems management techniques. Policy 2.3: Pursue development of a public transit system including local shuttle and bus routes that are linked to regional light rail. Policy 2.4: Promote alternatives to motorized transportation by establishing a convenient and efficient system of bicycle routes and pedestrian walkways linked to multi-modal stations. Policy 2.5: Promote the use of alternative clean fueled and/or electric powered vehicles for personal and business use. Policy 2.6: Encourage programs that reduce local traffic congestion at peak hours and during special events. Goal 3: Incorporate energy conservation practices and recycling to reduce emissions. Policy 3.1: Encourage community-wide reductions in energy consumption through conservation practices. Policy 3.2: Promote local recycling of wastes and the use of recycled materials. Goal 4: Effective coordination of air quality improvement efforts in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. Policy 4.1: Coordinate planning efforts with other local, regional and state agencies, including SJVAPCD in their efforts to improve regional air quality. Policy 4.2: Encourage participation of local citizens, the business community and interested groups and individuals in air quality planning and implementation efforts. Policy 4.3: Promote programs which educate the public about regional air quality issues. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-8

35 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Local APCDs are responsible for granting permits for construction and operation of new sources of air pollution. In addition, local APCDs establish rules and regulations for limiting pollution emissions. The project site is within the jurisdiction of SJVAPCD. The SJVAPCD GAMAQI is an advisory document that provides lead agencies, consultants, and project applicants with uniform procedures for addressing air quality in environmental documents (SJVAPCD, 2002). The GAMAQI was used in preparing this air quality section. SJVAPCD is in the process of updating the GAMAQI, which currently does not have quantitative thresholds for construction emissions. However, the current practice at SJVAPCD is to apply the operational emissions thresholds to construction emissions (10 tons per year of nitrogen oxide [NO ], 10 tons per year of volatile organic compounds [VOCs], and 15 tons per year of PM 10 (Siong, pers. comm.). The current GAMAQI guidance also requires the implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures for construction-related PM 10 emissions in accordance with Regulation VIII. Applicable requirements are listed as mitigation measures in the air quality impact discussion. Rules 4102 and 4641 of the SJVAPCD may also apply to the proposed project (SJVAPCD, 2013a). Rule 4102 requires that a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property. Rule 4641 requires that a person shall not manufacture for sale nor use any of the following for penetrating prime coat, tack coat, dust palliative, or other paving and maintenance operations: rapid cure cutback asphalt, medium cure cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt which as produced for application and contains more than 0.5 percent of organic compounds which evaporate at 500 degrees Fahrenheit ( F) or lower, or emulsified asphalt containing organic compounds in excess of 3 percent by volume and evaporate at 500 F or lower. SJVAPCD prepares and submits AQAPs in compliance with the requirements set forth in the federal CAA and the CCAA. AQAPs contain strategies to reduce ozone precursors (VOCs and NO ), PM 10, and PM 2.5 from stationary, area, and mobile sources. Table summarizes the status of the SJVAPCD s AQAPs Environmental Setting The project is within the SJVAPCD jurisdictional area and within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). The SJVAB is bounded on three sides by mountain ranges: the Sierra Nevada to the east, the Coast Ranges to the west, and the Tehachapi Mountains to the south. SJVAB is open to the north to the Sacramento Valley. The San Joaquin Valley is approximately 250 miles long and averages approximately 35 miles in width. The mountains surrounding the SJVAB restrict air movement through and out of the basin. Most of the surrounding mountains are above the height of normal summer inversion layers and vertical airflow is typically blocked by high barometric pressure over the San Joaquin Valley. As a result, the dispersion of pollutants from the basin is impeded and the region is susceptible to pollutant accumulation over time. Table lists the federal and state attainment status for criteria air pollutants and other pollutants in SJVAPCD. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-9

36 Table SJVAPCD Air Quality Attainment Plans Summary Plan Title Date Status Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan, San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Plan Demonstrating Attainment of Federal 1-hour Ozone Standards 1 Draft Staff Report, 8-hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP) Analysis 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan for the San Joaquin Valley 2010 Ozone Mid-Course Review 2004 Revision to the California SIP for Carbon Monoxide Updated Maintenance Plan for Federal Planning Areas 2007 PM 10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation PM 2.5 Plan October 2004, Adopted March 2010 Adopted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in October Submitted to the United States Environmental Agency (EPA) in November On August 21, 2008, the SJVAPCD adopted Clarifications for the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan for 1-hour Ozone. On March 8, 2010, EPA approved San Joaquin Valley's 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Plan for 1-hour ozone. April 2006 Adopted by SJVAPCD on August 17, April 2007 June 2010 Adopted by SJVAPCD in April Adopted by CARB in June EPA lowering of PM 2.5 NAAQS and 8-hour ozone standards will require new PM 2.5 and ozone plans by This review lays the groundwork for that effort. July 2004 Adopted by CARB July September 2008 December 2012 Adopted by SJVAPCD September 20, Approved by CARB in October Approved by EPA in September EPA revised the 24-hour average PM 2.5 standard to 35 micrograms per cubic meter in October EPA designated the Valley as non-attainment of the 2006 PM 2.5 standard in 2009, effective December 14, The District s attainment plan must be submitted through CARB to EPA by December 14, Effective June 15, 2005, EPA revoked the national 1-hour ozone ambient air quality standard, including associated designations and classifications. Sources: SJVAPCD 2013a, 2013b; 2013c, CARB, 2011a. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-10

37 Table San Joaquin Valley Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Attainment Status Attainment Status Pollutant Federal a State b Ozone 1 Hour No Federal Standard f Nonattainment/Severe Ozone 8 Hour Non-attainment/Extreme Non-attainment PM 10 Attainment Non-attainment PM 2.5 Non-attainment Non-attainment Carbon Monoxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment Sulfur Dioxide Attainment/Unclassified Attainment Lead (Particulate) No Designation / Classification Attainment Hydrogen Sulfide No Federal Standard Unclassified Sulfates No Federal Standard Attainment Visibility Reducing Particulates No Federal Standard Unclassified Vinyl Chloride No Federal Standard Attainment a See 40 CFR Part 81 b See CCR Title 17 Sections c On September 25, 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) redesignated the San Joaquin Valley to attainment for the PM 10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and approved the PM 10 Maintenance Plan. d The San Joaquin Valley is designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley as nonattainment for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009 (effective December 14, 2009). e Though the San Joaquin Valley was initially classified as serious nonattainment for the hour ozone standard, EPA approved San Joaquin Valley reclassification to extreme nonattainment in the Federal Register on May 5, 2010 (effective June 4, 2010). f Effective June 15, 2005, EPA revoked the federal 1-hour ozone standard, including associated designations and classifications. EPA had previously classified the San Joaquin Air Basin (SJVAB) as extreme nonattainment for this standard. EPA approved the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan on March 8, 2010 (effective April 7, 2010). Many applicable requirements for extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas continue to apply to the SJVAB. Sources: SJVAPCD, 2012 Responses a: The proposed project would result in construction of a toe drain along approximately 7,000 feet of the downstream toe of the dam, as well as the installation of a small dewatering pump. The proposed project would not result in land use inconsistent from that listed in the Fresno County nor City of Clovis General Plans. The proposed project includes relevant mitigation requirements that are contained within the SJVAPCD AQAP and will comply with air district regulations, including SJVAPCD s Regulation VIII, Rule 4102, and Rule 4641 (SJVAPCD, 2013a). Finally, the proposed project would not promote further growth in the region. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the SJVAPCD AQAPs or relevant General Plans. The impact is less than significant. Responses b: As described in Table 3.3-3, SJVAPCD is currently designated as a nonattainment area for federal and state ozone and PM 2.5 standards, and state PM 10 standards. Construction emissions are described as short term or temporary in duration. Project activities including excavation, infill, and grading would generate fugitive dust, including PM 10 and PM 2.5. Fugitive dust emissions are primarily associated with site preparation and vary as a function of such parameters as soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and miles traveled by construction vehicles on and off site. Operation of diesel-engine construction equipment on site, hauling of exported and imported soils H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-11

38 and materials to and from the site, and construction crew traffic would generate emissions of ROG, NO, CO, SO, PM 10, and PM 2.5. Construction activities are anticipated to take place during fall 2013 and are expected to last 30 days. Table shows the project s estimated construction emissions. Project construction would not exceed SJVAPCD reactive organic gas, NO, PM 10, or PM 2.5 thresholds, and would comply with all requirements of Regulation VIII. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. Project Construction Emissions (tons/year) Table Project Construction Emissions NO ROG CO SO Total PM 10 Exhaust PM 10 Total PM 2.5 Exhaust PM Emissions SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance N/A N/A 15 N/A BPS a BPS a Exceeding Threshold of Significance? No No No No No No No No Note: CALEEMOD was utilized to calculate emission estimates. See Appendix A, Air Quality Emission Estimates, for methodology. Also, see Appendix A for detailed emission calculations. Source for Thresholds of Significance: SJVAPCD, a Best Performance Standards Responses c: As described in Table 3.3-3, SJVAPCD is currently designated as a non-attainment area for the federal and/or state ozone, PM 10, and PM 2.5 standards (see Table 3.3-3). The proposed project would result in temporary increases in ozone precursor and particulate matter emissions during construction. However, these emission increases are less than SJVAPCD s significance thresholds. The SJVAPCD s significance thresholds are also used by SJVAPCD to determine the significance of a project s contribution to cumulative emissions. Consequently, the proposed project s cumulative impacts would also be less than significant. As discussed in air quality question (a) above, the proposed project would be consistent with the SJVAPCD s Air Quality Management Plans, which are designed to ultimately achieve attainment of air quality goals and standards. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. Responses d: As defined by the SJVAPCD GAMAQI, sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants (SJVAPCD, 2002). Listed examples of sensitive receptors include hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residential areas. No sensitive receptors lie within significant proximity of the project site to the north and east of the proposed project. To the west of the project site, there are rural residences and agricultural lands. The nearest sensitive receptors are rural residences located adjacent to the southeastern end of the proposed toe drain. In addition, a residential community is approximately 1/6 of a mile south of the dam off of Shepherd Avenue (reference Figure 3). The control of particulates and fugitive dust will be managed through the use of BMPs (Section 2.5 of this initial study), and SJVAPCD Regulation VIII would also be implemented to minimize exposure to fugitive dust. The construction period for the project is approximately 30 days and would not involve the use of substantial quantities of construction equipment. Thus, the proposed project would not pose long-term or significant health risks to nearby residents and workers in the project vicinity. The impact on sensitive receptors from fugitive dust and other pollutants would be less than significant. No long-term operational emissions would occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, future toxic air contaminants (TAC) H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-12

39 emissions would be similar to current conditions, and the proposed project would not cause or contribute to significant cumulative health risks. The impact is less than significant. Responses e: The proposed project would not result in the generation of permanent or long-term objectionable odors. Odors associated with construction of the toe drain and intermittent operation of diesel-powered equipment may be detected by nearby workers during construction. However, these would be of short duration and would not affect a substantial number of people. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-13

40 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to biological resources. Appendix B provides results of a biological survey of the project area. Would The Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a: The project action area is maintained and highly disturbed. There is possible incidental occurrence of the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) and San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) (Appendix B). However suitable habitat is lacking. Both species are listed as threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act and the California Endangered Species Act. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-14

41 In 2006, a California tiger salamander occurrence was reported within 1.25 miles of the project site (Appendix B). Upland habitat quality for the tiger salamander is poor due to low abundance of burrows and extensive maintenance. One burrow was observed during the biological survey of the toe drain site. Very few burrows were observed and are generally concentrated around the bases of telephone poles or along a fence line or the staging area. Aquatic breeding habitat is not present on site. Foraging habitat quality for the San Joaquin kit fox is poor, due to a small prey base as indicated by the paucity of rodent burrows on site. No dens or kit fox sign were observed on site, nor are there any California Natural Diversity Database records in the area (Appendix B). The construction of the toe drain would not degrade the existing habitat quality for San Joaquin kit foxes. Construction activities such as excavation, stockpiling, vehicle use, storage of materials may temporarily affect upland habitat for California tiger salamander and San Joaquin kit fox and require consultation with the USFWS and CDFW. As such impacts to candidate, sensitive or special status species is less than significant with the following mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure Before any work (including grading), occurs, a qualified biologist shall conduct an environmental awareness class for all project staff. The training shall include general measures that are being implemented to conserve these species as they relate to the proposed action, the penalties for noncompliance, and the boundaries of the action area. Mitigation Measure Project-related vehicles will observe a 10 mph speed limit on the unpaved road in the action area. All vehicle parking will be restricted to the staging areas identified in Figure 5. Mitigation Measure Construction activities shall cease 0.5 hour before sunset and shall not begin prior to 0.5 hour before sunrise. Mitigation Measure During construction, the District or its agent shall provide closed garbage containers for the disposal of all food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps). All garbage will be removed daily from the project site. Mitigation Measure Vehicles or construction equipment will be serviced in the designated areas. Mitigation Measure A representative shall be appointed by the District to be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a California tiger salamander or San Joaquin kit fox or who finds a dead, injured, or entrapped individual. Mitigation Measure The excavated steep-walled toe drain shall be covered with plywood or similar materials or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks at the end of each workday. All trenches will be inspected by the biological monitor daily to insure that California tiger salamanders and San Joaquin kit fox have not become entrapped. Mitigation Measure The District shall retain a qualified biologist, to conduct a preconstruction survey no fewer than 14 days and no more than 30 days before the beginning of ground disturbance or any activity likely to affect special status species. Mitigation Measure All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-15

42 thoroughly inspected for kit foxes prior to commencing construction activities for the day, or, at the latest, before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved. Response b: No riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities exist within the project area. Riparian habitat located to the east of the project site will be completely visually obstructed and at least partially audibly obstructed from the project site by the structure of Big Dry Creek Dam. The impact is less than significant. Response c: No federally protected wetlands occur on the project site. Subsurface seepage under Big Dry Creek Dam, estimated at a maximum of 5 cfs, will be captured by the toe drain system and channeled back into the outlet channel. There it is expected to percolate back into the groundwater within a distance of 6,500 feet from the discharge point at the base of the dam. Thus, hydrological interruption of groundwater seepage to any wetland features south-west (downstream) of the dam is not expected to be significant. Response d: There is no indication or records that the project area is used as a terrestrial wildlife movement corridor, and Big Dry Creek is not a fish-bearing stream. Construction of a, subsurface toe drain would not impede the movements of any native or resident terrestrial wildlife. The presence of construction personnel and equipment during the daylight hours of operation could be expected to divert wildlife away from the construction zone, but this effect would be very localized and temporary. No native wildlife nursery sites are located in or adjacent to the project area. Wildlife using the wetlands to the east of the project area would be completely visually obstructed and at least partially audibly obstructed from the construction site by the structure of Big Dry Creek Dam. The impact is less than significant. Response e: The project site is wholly within existing grasslands that have been previously impacted by the initial construction of Big Dry Creek Dam and experience continued maintenance operations. Current land use zoning in the project vicinity includes residential, agricultural, and open space. The impact is less than significant. Response f: No Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or any other local, regional or statewide conservation plans pertain to the project area. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-16

43 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to cultural, historical or paleontological resources. Would The Project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Government Code Section ? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to California Government Code Section ? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact A cultural resources record search for archaeological and historic sites was requested on January 17, 2013 from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System at California State University, Bakersfield. The record search included the entire project area, including the toe drain and the two staging areas, with a ½-mile buffer around the area. Four previously cultural resource studies were conducted within the project area (Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. 2013).Three additional studies were within ½ mile outside the area. No cultural resources were recorded within the project area, and one prehistoric site was identified ½-mile from the project area. No cultural resources listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Historic Property Data File of the California Register, the California Historical Landmarks, the California Inventory of Historic Resources and California Points of Interests were identified in the project area by the SSJVIC. Response a and b: Big Dry Creek Dam is an earthen dam constructed in 1948 as a flood control structure for Dry Creek, which feeds water into local irrigation canals. While the dam is over 50 years old, the dam will not be impacted by the project. In 1993, the existing inclined toe drain was constructed below the downstream slope of the dam. The project will widen the existing toe drain, a non-historic, less -than- 50-year-old structure. The project will have no impact to the historic-period dam or toe drain. There are no recorded archaeological sites in the project area, and the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on archaeology in the event a resource is exposed, providing the following mitigation measure is incorporated: Mitigation Measure In the event of the accidental discovery or disturbance of cultural or unique archaeological resources, all construction will be suspended and District staff will be contacted. A qualified cultural resource specialist will be retained and will perform necessary investigations to determine the significance of the find. The District will then implement any measure deemed necessary for the recordation and/or the protection of the resource. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-17

44 Response c: The substrate is large-grained alluvium, which has high oxygen content and, thus, is not favorable for the formation of fossils. There is no impact. Response d: Although there are no recorded cultural resources within the proposed project area, it is possible that human remains may be inadvertently disturbed during excavation of the toe drain. The impact is less than significant with the following mitigation measure incorporated. Mitigation Measure In the event of the accidental discovery or disturbance of human remains, all construction will be suspended and District staff will be contacted. Pursuant to Sections and of the PRC and Section of the California Health and Safety Code, the County Coroner will be immediately notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American, guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission will be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. A qualified cultural resource specialist will be retained and will perform necessary investigations to determine the significance of the find. The District will then implement any measure deemed necessary for the protection of the remains. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-18

45 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to geology and soils. The setting is described in Section 2.4. Geologic setting at the dam consists of bedrock to large grained alluvial formations, residual soil, and recent streambed material. The area lies within Seismic Zone 3.Geological and soil resources more fully described below the following table. Would The Project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a-i to a-ii: The project area is subject to relatively low seismic hazards. The primary seismic hazard is ground shaking produced by earthquakes generated on regional faults lying outside the immediate area. The nearest source for causing damage is the Owens Valley Fault Group located 68 miles northeast (City of Clovis, 1993). Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis shows the overall seismic hazard potential at the site is low (U.S. Bureau Reclamation, 2003). Construction of the toe drain would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects including injury of death due to seismic events. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-19

46 Response a-iii: The depth to groundwater averages over 100 feet (City of Clovis, 1993). Liquefaction is considered to be unlikely where groundwater depth exceeds 30 feet. The impact is less than significant. Response a-iv: The terrain is fairly level, construction of the toe drain would not cut into the face of the dam. There would be no risk of landslides. The impact is less than significant. Response b: A SWPPP is required. BMPs presented in the SWPPP would minimize soil erosion. The impact is less than significant. Response c: Construction of the proposed project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? There is no impact. Response d: The proposed project does not involve the construction of buildings or other structures. Accordingly, the project will not result in substantial risks to life or property as a result of expansive soil characteristics. There is no impact. Response e: The proposed project does not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-20

47 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS This section provides a detailed description of the regulatory setting and evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to GHG emissions. This setting and analysis focuses on pollutant emissions produced during construction. Would The Project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gas? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Regulatory Setting - State Assembly Bill 1493 (2002) In 2002, the signing of Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 required that CARB develop and adopt, by January 1, 2005, regulations that achieve the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and other vehicles determined by CARB to be vehicles whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation. Legal challenges delayed the implementation of AB 1493 by CARB. On June 30, 2009, EPA granted California the authority to implement GHG emission reduction standards for new passenger cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles. Executive Order S-3-05 On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S The goal of this Executive Order was to reduce California s GHG emissions to: (1) 2000 levels by 2010; (2) 1990 levels by 2020; and (3) 80 percent below 1990 levels by Assembly Bill 32 (2006), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 In 2006, the goals of S-3-05 were further reinforced with the passage of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions reduction goals while further mandating that CARB create a plan (including market mechanisms), and implement rules to achieve real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases. Executive Order S further directs state agencies to begin implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the state s Climate Action Team. CARB must adopt regulations identifying the establishment, administration, and enforcement of the California GHG Cap-and-Trade Program, which became effective on January 1, 2012 (California Administrative Code Title 17, Section 95801). The program applies an aggregate GHG allowance budget on covered entities and provides a trading mechanism for compliance instruments, no later than January 1, 2012, rules and regulations to implement the GHG emissions reductions. Climate Change Scoping Plan Pursuant to AB 32, CARB adopted a Scoping Plan in 2008, outlining measures to meet the 2020 GHG reduction limits. To meet these goals, California must reduce its GHG emissions by 30 percent below projected 2020 business as usual emissions or approximately 15 percent from today s levels. The Scoping Plan estimates a reduction of 174 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) equivalent (CO 2 e) from the H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-21

48 transportation, energy, agriculture, forestry, and high global warming potential sections. CARB has identified an implementation timeline for the GHG reduction strategies in the Scoping Plan. Some measures may require new legislation to implement, some would require subsidies, some have already been developed, and some would require additional effort to evaluate and quantify. Senate Bill 97 In 2007, Senate Bill (SB) 97 was adopted to provide greater certainty to lead agencies that GHG emissions and the effects of GHG emissions are appropriate subjects for CEQA analysis. Pursuant to SB 97, the state s Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines to address analysis and mitigation of the potential effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents and processes. These amendments became effective on March 18, The two GHG checklist questions listed above are part of the additions to the CEQA checklist adopted by the Natural Resources Agency Regulatory Setting - Local SJVAPCD Climate Change Action Plan The SJVAPCD s Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP), adopted in 2008, directed the District Air Pollution Control Officer to develop guidance to assist lead agencies, project proponents, permit applicants, and interested parties in assessing and reducing the impacts of project specific GHG emissions on global climate change. On December 17, 2009, SJVAPCD adopted Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA (SJVAPCD, 2013d). To assess significance of project-specific construction-related GHG emissions on global climate change, the guidance document relies on the use of performance based standards, otherwise known as Best Performance Standards (BPS). Use of BPS is a method of streamlining the CEQA process of determining significance and is not a required emission reduction measure. Projects implementing BPSs would not require quantification of project specific GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guideline, such projects would be determined to have a less-than-significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions. Otherwise, projects not implementing BPSs must demonstration of a 29 percent reduction in GHG emissions, from business-asusual, to determine a less than cumulatively significant impact. The guidance does not limit a lead agency s authority in establishing its own process and guidance for determining significance of projectrelated impacts on global climate change Environmental Setting Climate change results from the accumulation in the atmosphere of GHGs produced primarily by the burning of fossil fuels for energy. Because GHGs (CO 2, methane, and nitrous oxide) persist and mix in the atmosphere, emissions anywhere in the world affect the climate everywhere. Anthropogenic emissions of GHG are widely accepted in the scientific community as contributing to global warming. According to Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007), there is no doubt that the Earth s climate system is warming. Global average air and ocean temperatures, as well as global average sea level, are rising. Of the years 1995 through 2006, 11 years ranked as among the warmest on record since While some of the increase is explained by natural occurrences, the 2007 report asserts that the increase in temperature is very likely (greater than 90 percent) due to human activity, most notably the burning of fossil fuels. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-22

49 For California, similar effects are described in Our Changing Climate 2012 (California Climate Change Portal, 2012). Based on projections using state of the art climate modeling, temperatures in California are expected to rise between approximately 4.1 and 8.6 F (2.3 and 4.8 degrees Celsius) by the end of the century, dependent on how much California and the rest of the world s population are able to reduce their GHG emissions. The report states that these temperature increases would negatively impact public health, water supply, agriculture, plant and animal species, and the coastline. Responses a: The project would generate GHG emissions during construction, as summarized in Table Construction of the proposed project would include the transport of workers to and from the project site and the operation and idling of heavy equipment, temporarily increasing CO 2 emissions and generating heat. These construction-related impacts are limited in scope and short-term in duration. Construction activities would generate approximately metric tons CO 2 -equivalents during the 3 weeks of construction equipment and vehicle operations during the fall 2013 (California Emission Estimator Model, 2011). In addition, these estimates are conservative estimates that assume higher than likely use of the construction equipment. These emissions are less than SJVAPCD s approved zero equivalency value of 230 metric tons of CO 2 e per year (SJVAPCD, 2009; Siong, pers. comm.). The impact is less than significant. Table Construction-Related GHG Emissions (metric tons/year) CO 2 e Construction Total Construction SJVAPCD Zero Equivalency Value 230 Notes: Construction emissions based on CALEEMOD modeling results. Zero equivalency value and its application based on information supplied by SJVAPCD (SJVAPCD 2009; Siong, pers. comm.). Responses b: Construction activities would not include stationary GHG sources. However, emissions from the construction activities would be consistent with SJVAPCD s recommended BPSs. Consequently, the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-23

50 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project associated with hazardous and hazardous materials. Would The Project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Pursuant to California Government Code Section , the following databases were reviewed: EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation Liability Information Systems. Accessed February 26, H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-24

51 California Department of Toxic Substance. Hazardous Waste and Substance List (Cortese List) Accessed February 26, EnviroStor Accessed February 26, California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Geo Tracker (Central Valley Region 5) Response a: There is no routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated construction of the toe drain. There is no impact. Response b: Hazardous materials would not be used by construction workers on the project site. There is no impact. Response c: Bud Rank Elementary School is approximately 0.5 mile south east of the project area. There is no impact Response d: The project area is not located on a site listed as a hazardous material site. There is no impact. Response e: Fresno Yosemite International Airport is more than 6 miles southwest of the project site. There is no impact. Response f: There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the project site. There is no impact. Response g: The project area is not located within an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan area (City of Clovis, 1993). There is no impact. Response h: The project would not expose people or structures to wildland fires. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-25

52 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to hydrology and water quality. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Potentially Significant Would The Project: Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less Than Significant Impact No Impact H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-26

53 The drainage area for the Big Dry Creek Reservoir includes the drainages of two primary streams, Dry Creek and Dog Creek. Their combined drainage is approximately 82 square miles. Big Dry Creek Reservoir has the capacity of 30,200 TAF. However, the reservoir has never been filled to a level greater than 15,000 TAF during any flood event. The dam is designed to provide standard project flood protection to the Fresno-Clovis area. Current flood operation procedures direct most floodwater (up to 700 cfs) to the San Joaquin River through the Little Dry Creek Channel (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 2003). Waste discharge requirements and water quality standards for Big Dry Creek Dam and Reservoir have been permitted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (CRWQCB), in Order No Response a: Construction activities would involve soil-disturbing activities such as trenching, grading and jack and boring. Disturbed soil would be exposed to wind and water generated erosion. Accumulated sediment, debris, new or additional rip-rap may be placed in the outlet channel during construction of the pump station. A temporary bridge would be installed over the outlet channel to provide a crossing for equipment. Some discharge of dredged or fill material into the outlet channel places such material into waters of the United States could occur and is a violation of the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act (RHA). The impact is less than significant with the following mitigation measure: Mitigation Measure The District shall comply with the following measures: During construction, work over or under the outlet channel shall be scheduled by the District to occur during the non-rainy season. Construction plans shall meet the requirements of USACE 404 permit and State Water Resources Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. The District shall submit for review and approval to CRWQCB a construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to construction the District will develop a restoration and monitoring plan for temporarily disturbed areas along the toe drain and the outlet channel. The restoration and monitoring plan will be implemented by the District after construction activities have been completed. The final plan will be prepared and submitted prior to the appropriate resource agency for approval. Response b: As described in Section 2.0, the toe drain would capture up to 0.56 acre-feet of seepage at a maximum pool elevation of feet. Implementing the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The impact is less than significant. Response c: As described in Section 2.0, the toe drain would intercept water that would normally surface from underneath the dam and potentially move soil from under the dam. The water pumped from the toe drain will be discharged into the Big Dry Creek outlet channel and used for beneficial use downstream. The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-27

54 Response d: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site. The impact is less than significant. Response e: The proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The impact is less than significant. Response f: The District operates flood releases in compliance with CRWQCB Order No The proposed project would not otherwise substantially degrade water quality. The impact is less than significant. Response g: The proposed project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. There is no impact. Response h: The proposed project would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. There is no impact. Response i: Big Dry Creek Reservoir has capacity to store up to 30,200 TAF of stormwater; it has never been filled to a level greater than 15,000 TAF during any flood event. The dam is designed to provide standard project flood protection to the Fresno-Clovis area. The impact is less than significant. Response j: Big Dry Creek Dam is in located in the San Joaquin Valley, more than 100 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, the nearest source of a tsunami type event. A seiche event could occur if water is present in the reservoir during a very strong wind storm event. Seiche may be caused by a seismic event. However as described in Section 3.6, the project area is subject to relatively low seismic activity. The toe drain is near the downstream embankment of the dam. Any oscillation of water within the reservoir would not inundate the project area or create mud floods. The site is relatively level, thus eliminating the possibility of mudflows. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-28

55 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to land uses and planning. Existing land use features, general plan designation and zoning is present in Section 2.0, Table 2.6-1, of this initial study. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Would The Project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Response a: The proposed project does not involve the construction of a new roadway or other physical feature that would physically divide an established community. There is no impact. Response b: Big Dry Creek Dam was originally constructed in 1948 for the purpose of providing protection of life and property during a flood event. The dam also allows for the beneficial use of flood runoff by controlled releases to infiltration basins located downstream. The proposed project consists of the construction of a toe drain at the base of the downstream portion of dam for the purpose of ensuring the long-term structural integrity of the dam. Constructing the toe drain would not result in a change to the current use of the dam or the introduction of new land uses within the project area. Therefore, the project will not conflict with the existing general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance applicable to the project area. There is no impact. Response c: The project site is not within an area affected by a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the project will not conflict with any such plans. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-29

56 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to mineral resources. Would The Project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Responses a and b: The project site is not within an area delineated as a mineral resource zone or locallyimportant mineral resources recovery site (County of Fresno, 2000; City of Clovis, 2012, as amended). Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-30

57 3.12 NOISE This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project due to noise. Would The Project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a: Construction of the proposed project would result in temporary increases in noise levels. No unusual noisy equipment, such as pile drivers or blasting, will be used. The project site is approximately 500 feet north of and across the street (Shepherd Avenue) of a residential subdivision. The there is a block fence on the northern boundary of the subdivision. Two rural houses are located next to the project site. There would be a short-term increase in the existing ambient noise level associated with the construction activities. Construction is anticipated to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. No construction would take place on the weekends. The impact is less than significant. Response b: During construction, some equipment would be used to roll over and/or vibrate the geotextile encapsulation fill in the toe drain. This work may cause ground-borne vibrations. The two rural residences, located approximately 300 feet from the proposed action area, may experience some vibration during compaction. The impacts would not be excessive and would be temporary. The impact is less than significant. Response c: Construction is temporary and would not generate significant permanent noise or other disturbances in excess of ambient noise levels without the project. The impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-31

58 Response d: Construction is temporary and would not generate significant temporary noise or other disturbances in excess of ambient noise levels without the project. The impact is less than significant. Response e: As stated in Section 3.8, the Fresno Yosemite International Airport is more than 6 miles southwest of the project site. There is no impact Response f: The nearest airport is Fresno Yosemite International Airport; there are no private airports near the project site. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-32

59 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to population and housing. Would The Project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a: The project does not involve the construction of new housing or new commercial or industrial development nor will it result in the construction of new or extension of existing roads or other infrastructure which could result in population growth. There is no impact. Responses b and c: There are no homes located on the project site. Therefore, the project will not result in the displacement of existing housing or people. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-33

60 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to public services. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Would The Project: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i. Fire protection? ii. Police protection? iii. Schools? iv. Parks? v. Other public facilities? Response a-i: The nearest Clovis Fire Department station is at the corner of Alluvial and Temperance avenues, approximately 2 miles south of the project site. The proposed project does not provide for the construction of a new government facility or alter an existing facility. The proposed action would not affect emergency response times or performance objectives. There is no impact. Response a-ii: Clovis Police Department is at 1233 Fifth Street, approximately 3 miles southwest of the project site. The proposed action would not affect police response times or performance objectives. There is no impact. Response a-iii: Bud Rank Elementary School is approximately 0.5 mile south east of the project area. The proposed action would not affect the school or affect student education performances. There is no impact. Response a-iv: Two parks, Town and Country Park and Deauville Park, are small neighborhood parks in the Harlan Ranch residential subdivision. The parks are within 0.5 mile of the project site. There is no impact. Response a-v: There are no other public facilities in the vicinity of the project area. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-34

61 3.15 RECREATION This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to recreational use or facilities. Would The Project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Responses a and b: The project does not involve the construction of new housing or new commercial or industrial development, uses that would normally result in increased use of neighborhood or regional parks and recreational facilities. As such, the project would not result in physical deterioration of such facilities or construction new facilities. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-35

62 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to traffic, air traffic, emergency access or alternate transportation plans. Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Would The Project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Responses a and b: As stated in Section 2.4, there would be up to eight construction workers on site at any one time. As a result the number of vehicles travelling to and from the site would not cause an increase in traffic. There is no impact. Response c: As stated in Section 3.8, the project site is more than 6 miles north east of Fresno Yosemite International Airport. There is no impact. Response d: The project does not involve road design features. There is no impact. Response e: Access to the construction site is provided via Shepherd Avenue (See Figure 3). Construction would not impede emergency access. Furthermore, the project would not impede routine or emergency vehicle access to the construction site. There is no impact. Response f: As stated in Section 2.4, there would be up to eight construction workers on site at any one time. The project does not involve construction of parking facilities. There is no impact. Response g: There is no conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-36

63 3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to utilities and service systems. Would The Project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project s projected demand in addition to the provider s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projects solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Responses a through e: The proposed project would not require any water, wastewater, or stormwater drainage services. Therefore, the project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board, result in the expansion of water or wastewater treatment facilities, require construction of stormwater drainage facilities, or require new water entitlements. Therefore, there is no impact. Responses f and g: Construction of the proposed project would result in the excavation of materials; however, the materials, consisting mainly of topsoil, would be stockpiled on site and backfilled into the trench and re-spread after the project is completed. The amount of construction waste that would be generated that would need to go to a landfill would be minimal and would have a less than significant impact on landfill capacity. Accordingly, this impact is less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-37

64 3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project to the quality of the environment, including cumulative impacts. Would The Project: a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Response a: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. There is no impact. Response b: The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. The project is consistent with the District s manual, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Standard Plans and Specifications, April 2011(District, 2011). There is no impact. Response c: Implementation of the proposed project addresses unconfined seepage discharge of an existing structure. It would not contribute substantially to adverse cumulative conditions; therefore cumulative impacts are not cumulatively considerable. There is no impact. Response d: Analysis of environmental issues contained in this initial study indicates that the project is not expected to have substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Construction of the extended toe drain project would minimize potential adverse effects on human beings. There is no impact. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 3-38

65 4.0 MITIGATION MEASURES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS Section of CEQA as amended, requires a public agency to adopt a reporting or monitoring program in those cases where the public agency finds that changes or alteration have been required in, or incorporated into, a project, and that those changes mitigate or avoid a significant effect on the environment. A public agency may delegate the monitoring or reporting responsibilities to another public agency or private entity that accepts the delegation, but the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measures have been implemented. The California Endangered Species Act mandates that public agencies not approve a project that would jeopardize the continued existence of species if reasonable and prudent alternatives or mitigation measures are provided. The federal Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to consult with the USFWS to ensure that actions they fund or authorize, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the USACE regulates the discharge of dredged and fill materials into waters of the United States. Project sponsor such as the District must obtain approval from the USACE through the issuance of a nationwide permit. A Programmatic Stream Maintenance Agreement by and between the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the District (California Department of Fish and Wildlife Programmatic Stream Maintenance Agreement, Stream Alteration Notification No R4 Fresno County Stream Group, Fresno County [Agreement]) delineates and defines routine maintenance activities under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. The District will comply with the Agreement before any construction begins. 4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure Before any work (including grading), occurs, a qualified biologist shall conduct an environmental awareness class for all project staff. The training shall include general measures that are being implemented to conserve these species as they relate to the proposed action, the penalties for noncompliance, and the boundaries of the action area. Mitigation Measure Project-related vehicles will observe a 10 mph speed limit on the unpaved road in the action area. All vehicle parking will be restricted to the staging areas identified in Figure 5. Mitigation Measure Construction activities shall cease 0.5 hour before sunset and shall not begin prior to 0.5 hour before sunrise. Mitigation Measure During construction, the District or its agent shall provide closed garbage containers for the disposal of all food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps). All garbage will be removed daily from the project site. Mitigation Measure Vehicles or construction equipment will be serviced in designated areas. Mitigation Measure A representative shall be appointed by the District to be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a California tiger salamander or San Joaquin kit fox or who finds a dead, injured, or entrapped individual. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 4-1

66 Mitigation Measure The excavated steep-walled toe drain shall be covered with plywood or similar materials or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks at the end of each workday. All trenches will be inspected by the biological monitor daily to insure that California tiger salamanders and San Joaquin kit fox have not become entrapped. Mitigation Measure The District shall retain a qualified biologist, to conduct a preconstruction survey no fewer than 14 days and no more than 30 days before the beginning of ground disturbance or any activity likely to affect special status species. Mitigation Measure All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes prior to commencing construction activities for the day, or, at the latest, before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved. 4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure In the event of the accidental discovery or disturbance of cultural or unique archaeological resources, all construction will be suspended and District staff will be contacted. A qualified cultural resource specialist will be retained and will perform necessary investigations to determine the significance of the find. The District will then implement any measure deemed necessary for the recordation and/or the protection of the resource. Mitigation Measure In the event of the accidental discovery or disturbance of human remains, all construction will be suspended and District staff will be contacted. Pursuant to Sections and of the California PRC and Section of the California Health and Safety Code, the County Coroner will be immediately notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American, guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission will be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. A qualified cultural resource specialist will be retained and will perform necessary investigations to determine the significance of the find. The District will then implement any measure deemed necessary for the protection of the remains. 4.3 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Mitigation Measure The District shall comply with the following measures: During construction, work over or under the outlet channel shall be scheduled by the District to occur during the non-rainy season. Construction plans shall meet the requirements of USACE 404 permit and State Water Resources Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. The District shall submit for review and approval to CRWQCB a construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to construction the District will develop a restoration and monitoring plan for temporarily disturbed areas along the toe drain and the outlet channel. The restoration and monitoring plan will be implemented by the District after construction activities have been completed. The final plan will be prepared and submitted prior to the appropriate resource agency for approval. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 4-2

67 5.0 PERSONS AND SOURCES CONSULTED Agencies Consulted On January 14, 2013, a request for consultation was sent via to Responsible and Trustee Agencies. The following agencies were contacted: California Department of Conservation California Department of Wildlife California Department of Public Health California Department of Water Resources City of Clovis City of Fresno Department of Public Works Fresno County Farm Bureau Fresno Irrigation District Fresno Mosquito & Vector Control District Kings River Conservation District San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service Native American Heritage Commission H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 5-1

68 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 5-2

69 6.0 REFERENCES BSK Associates Preliminary Seepage Study Big Dry Creek Dam Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District BDR-18. BSK Associates Supplemental Preliminary Seepage Study Big Dry Creek Dam Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District BDR-18. BSK Associates Seepage Control Alternatives, Dry Creek Dam Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District BDR-18. BSK Associates Seepage Analysis Big Dry Creek Dam Fresno, California Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District BDR-18. California Air Resources Board. 2011a. California State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Carbon Monoxide. Available: < Aaccessed: February 21, California Air Resources Board. 2011b. California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for Available: < 26.pdf>. Accessed: February 18, California Air Resources Board. 2012a. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Avaible < Accessed: February 18,2013. California Air Resources Board. 2012b. Sustainable Communities. Available: Accessed: February 18, California Climate Change Portal Our Changing Climate California Department of Conservation Available online at: < Accessed on March 14, California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Developed by ENVIRON International Corporation in collaboration with SCAQMD and other California air districts. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment List of Acute, 8-hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Levels (chrels) and Cancer Potency Factors as of February Available: Accessed: March 28, California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Sustainable Communities. Available: < Accessed: February 18, Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available on line at: < Accessed March 14, 2013 City of Clovis Clovis General Plan: Chapter 9. Available online at: < 1993>. Accessed: February 18, H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 6-1

70 City of Clovis Citywide Draft Land Use Diagram. Available online at: < 1993>. Accessed: February 18, County of Fresno Fresno County General Plan: Public Review Draft Policy Document. Available: < Accessed: February 21, Environmental Protection Agency National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available: March 18, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Standard Plans and Specifications, April Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis - Chapter 9: Understanding and Attributing Climate Change. S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H.L. Miller (Eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Available: < port_the_physical_science_basis.htm>. Accessed: November 5, Pacific Gas and Electric Company California State GHG Emissions Inventory (2009) San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Fresno, CA. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency. Fresno, CA. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Ambient Air Quality Standards and Valley Attainment Status. Available: < Accessed: February 18, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2013a. Current District Rules and Regulations. Available: < Accessed: February 21, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2013b. Ozone Plans. Available: < >. Accessed: August 23, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2013c. Particulate Matter Plans. Available: < >. Accessed: August 23, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Standards. Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project, Clovis. January 17, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, Big Dry Creek Modification. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 6-2

71 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS David K. Young, CPM, Senior Project Planner Gabriel Gutierrez, Senior Environmental Planner Tim Rimpo Suzanne McFerran, Environmental Scientist Ronald Cummings, Biologist Trevor Burwell, Ph.D., Biologist Eddy Teasdale, PG, CHG, Project Hydrologist H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 7-1

72 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx 7-2

73 APPENDI A Air Emissions and Health Risk Analysis

74

75 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 APPENDI A Air Emissions and Health Risk Analysis This appendix describes the methodology and assumptions used to estimate emissions associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project. Data sources are also provided. Methodology and results of a screening-level health risk analysis of the proposed project s emissions are also provided. A-1 BACKGROUND The project is within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) jurisdictional area and within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). SJVAPCD is responsible for establishing rules and guidelines to maintain healthy air quality within the basin and ensure that new projects will not negatively impact air quality or the attainment of air quality goals for the region. The following subsections discuss the attainment status of the region for criteria pollutants and the thresholds established by which to determine the relative significance that a proposed project will have on air quality. A-1.1 Area Designations and Pollution Descriptions SJVAPCD is designated as a federal and state nonattainment area for ozone (O 3 ) and PM 2.5 (inhalable particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller),as state nonattainment for PM 10 (inhalable particulate matter 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller), and as attainment or unclassified for all other pollutants. Nonattainment designations are categorized into four levels of severity: (1) moderate, (2) serious, (3) severe, and (4) extreme. The following are descriptions of the attainment classifications: Unclassified: a pollutant is designated unclassified if the data are incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment. Attainment: a pollutant is designated attainment if the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for that pollutant was not violated at any site in the area during a 3-year period. Nonattainment: a pollutant is designated nonattainment if there was at least one violation of a NAAQS or CAAQS for that pollutant in the area. Nonattainment/Transitional: is a subcategory of the nonattainment designation. An area is designated nonattainment/transitional to signify that the area is close to attaining the NAAQS or CAAQS for that pollutant. Table A -1 lists the criteria pollutants and their relative attainment status. Serious or worse nonattainment areas are required to prepare air quality management plans to include specified emission reduction strategies in an effort to meet clean air goals. Brief descriptions of the various regulated pollutants and others of concern follow the table. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-1

76 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 Table A-1. SJVAPCD Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status Pollutant Averaging California Standards 1 National Standards 2 Time Concentration Attainment Attainment Status Concentration 3 Status Ozone 8 Hour ppm N ppm N 4 (137µg/m 3 ) 1 Hour 0.09 ppm N See footnote 5 (180 µg/m 3 ) Carbon Monoxide 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) A 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) A6 1 Hour 20 ppm A 35 ppm A (23 mg/m 3 ) (40 mg/m 3 ) Nitrogen Dioxide 1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) A ppm (see footnote 11) U Annual Arithmetic Mean ppm ppm A (57 µg/m 3 ) (100 µg/m 3 ) Sulfur Dioxide 24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) See footnote 12 A 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3) A 1 Hour 0.25 ppm A ppm A (655 µg/m 3 ) (196 µg/m 3 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean ppm A (80 µg/m 3 ) Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m 3 N 7 24 Hour 50 µg/m 3 N 150 µg/m 3 U Particulate Matter - Fine (PM 2.5 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m 3 N 7 12 µg/m 3 N Hour 35 µg/m 3 N See footnote 10 H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-2

77 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 Table A-1. (Continued) Pollutant Averaging California Standards 1 National Standards 2 Time Concentration Attainment Attainment Status Concentration 3 Status Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m 3 A Lead See footnote day Average Calendar Quarter Rolling 3 Month Average µg/m 3 - A µg/m 3 A µg/m 3 See footnote 14 Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) U Vinyl Chloride (chloroethene) 24 Hour ppm (26 µg/m 3 ) No information available Visibility Reducing particles 8 Hour (10:00 to 18:00 PST) See footnote 8 U A=Attainment N=Nonattainment U=Unclassified mg/m = milligrams per cubic meter ppm = parts per million µg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter Source: ARB. 2012; EPA. 2012; SJVAPCD NOTES 1. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate matter - PM 10, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. The standards for sulfates, Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide, lead, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or exceeded. If the standard is for a 1-hour, 8-hour or 24-hour average (i.e., all standards except for lead and the PM 10 annual standard), then some measurements may be excluded. In particular, measurements are excluded that California Air Resources Board (CARB) determines would occur less than once per year on the average. The Lake Tahoe CO standard is 6.0 ppm, a level one-half the national standard and two-thirds the state standard. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-3

78 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 Table A-1. (Continued) 2. National standards shown are the "primary standards" designed to protect public health. National standards other than for ozone, particulates and those based on annual averages are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 1-hour ozone standard is attained if, during the most recent 3-year period, the average number of days per year with maximum hourly concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one. The 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year average of the fourth highest daily concentrations is parts per million (ppm) (75 parts per billion) or less. The 24-hour PM 10 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of monitored concentrations is less than 150 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m 3 ). The 24-hour PM 2.5 standard is attained when the 3-year average of 98th percentiles is less than 35 µg/m3. Except for the national particulate standards, annual standards are met if the annual average falls below the standard at every site. The national annual particulate standard for PM 10 is met if the 3-year average falls below the standard at every site. The annual PM 2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of annual averages spatially-averaged across officially designed clusters of sites falls below the standard. 3. National air quality standards are set by United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at levels determined to be protective of public health with an adequate margin of safety. 4. Final designations effective July 20, The national 1-hour ozone standard was revoked by EPA on June 15, In April 1998, the Bay Area was redesignated to attainment for the national 8-hour carbon monoxide standard. 7. In June 2002, CARB established new annual standards for PM 2.5 and PM Statewide VRP Standard (except Lake Tahoe Air Basin): Particles in sufficient amount to produce an extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer when the relative humidity is less than 70 percent. This standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range. 9. The 8-hour CA ozone standard was approved by the Air Resources Board on April 28, 2005, and became effective on May 17, EPA lowered the 24-hour PM 2.5 standard from 65 µg/m3 to 35 µg/m3 in EPA designated the Bay Area as nonattainment of the PM 2.5 standard on October 8, The effective date of the designation is December 14, 2009, and the Air District has 3 years to develop a plan, called a State Implementation Plan (SIP), that demonstrates the Bay Area will achieve the revised standard by December 14, The SIP for the new PM 2.5 standard must be submitted to the EPA by December 14, To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average at each monitor within an area must not exceed ppm (effective January 22, 2010). 12. On June 2, 2010, EPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard, effective August 23, 2010, which is based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The existing ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour SO 2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), however; must continue to be used until 1 year following EPA initial designations of the new 1-hour SO 2 NAAQS. EPA expects to designate areas by June ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as toxic air contaminants with no threshold level of exposure below which there are no adverse health effects determined. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-4

79 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 Table A-1. (Continued) 14. National lead standard, rolling 3-month average: final rule signed October 15, Final designations effective December 31, On December 14, 2012, EPA Revised the NAAQS for PM 2.5 to 12.0 µg/m 3. The existing standards for PM 10 were retained. A-1.2 SJVAPCD Criteria Air Pollutant Thresholds of Significance CEQA allows for the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess impacts of a project on air quality. SJVAPCD has established emission quantity thresholds of significance (measured in pounds per day) for air quality for project operations. Because no specific construction-related thresholds of significance have been established, it is the current practice of SJVAPCD to apply the operation emissions thresholds to construction emissions, as listed in Table A-2. Table A-2. SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance for Construction-Related CAP and Precursors Thresholds of Significance for Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors Pollutant/Precursor Daily Average Emissions (tons/year) ROG 10 NOx 10 PM PM 2.5 PM 10 / PM 2.5 Fugitive Dust N/A Best Management Practices * Applies to construction exhaust emissions only. Notes: CO = carbon monoxide lb/day = pounds per day NOx = oxides of nitrogen PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less ROG = reactive organic gases SO2 = sulfur dioxide Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, A-1.3 Health Risk Analysis In addition to the criteria air pollutants listed above, toxic air contaminants (TACs) or hazardous air pollutants are air pollutants that may lead to serious illness or increased mortality, even when present in relatively low concentrations. There are hundreds of different types of TACs with varying degrees of toxicity. Many TACs are confirmed or suspected carcinogens, or are known or suspected to cause birth defects or neurological damage. Secondly, many TACs can be toxic at very low concentrations. For some chemicals, such as carcinogens, there are no thresholds below which exposure can be considered risk- H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-5

80 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 free. SJVAPCD has established an ambient impact threshold for TACs of not causing more than 10 in 1 million increased cancer risk or non-cancer health effects with a hazard index greater than 1.0. Industrial facilities and mobile sources are significant sources of TACs. Automobile exhaust also contains TACs such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene. Most recently, diesel particulate matter (DPM) was identified as a TAC by CARB. DPM differs from other TACs in that it is not a single substance but rather a complex mixture of hundreds of substances. For the proposed project, the TAC of concern is DPM that would be emitted by heavy construction equipment or diesel powered trucks. Emissions from construction equipment would include particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) as well as DPM, which represents a portion of the overall particulate emissions. As shown in Table A-3, emissions of PM 10 and PM 2.5 in equipment exhaust would not exceed the significance criteria for regional emissions of criteria pollutants. However, localized PM 2.5 and DPM emissions could expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations, resulting in health risks. These pollutants were evaluated to identify potential cancer risk and chronic non-cancer hazards. The health risk analysis evaluates the potential risk to existing sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed project areas. Risk characterization and model results are discussed below. The thresholds for individual project risks and hazards are: An excess lifetime cancer risk level of more than 10 in 1 million A non-cancer (chronic) risk greater than 1.0 An incremental increase in the annual average PM 2.5 concentration greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 ) A Exposure Assumptions The exposure assessment estimates human exposure to substances that can increase cancer risk or cause chronic non-cancer health risks. The TAC (DPM) evaluated in this health risk assessment is emitted into the air, so the primary exposure pathway is through inhalation. Dose-response assessment is the process of characterizing the relationship between exposure to an agent and incidence of an adverse health effect in exposed populations. In quantitative carcinogenic risk assessments, the dose-response relationship is expressed in terms of a potency slope that is used to calculate the probability or risk of cancer associated with an estimated exposure. Cancer potency factor is expressed as the 95th percent upper confidence limit of the slope of the dose response curve, and assumes continuous lifetime exposure to a substance at a dose of 1 milligram per kilogram of body weight-day (mg/kg/day), commonly expressed in units of inverse dose (i.e., mg/kg/day-1). It is assumed in cancer risk assessments that risk is directly proportional to dose and that there is no threshold for carcinogenesis. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has compiled cancer potency factors, which should be used in risk assessments (OEHHA, 2012). For non-carcinogenic effects, dose-response data developed from animal or human studies are used to develop chronic non-cancer reference exposure levels (RELs). The chronic RELs are defined as the concentration at which no adverse non-cancer health effects are anticipated. The most sensitive health effect is chosen to determine the REL if the chemical affects multiple organ systems. Unlike cancer health effects, non-cancer chronic health effects are generally assumed to have thresholds for adverse effects. In other words, chronic injury from a pollutant will not occur until exposure to that pollutant has reached or H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-6

81 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 exceeded a certain concentration (i.e., threshold). The chronic RELs are intended to be below the threshold for health effects for the general population. Risk characterization is the final step of risk assessment. Modeled concentrations and public exposure information, which are determined through exposure assessment, are combined with potency factors and RELs that are developed through dose-response assessment. A Cancer Risk The maximum incremental cancer risk from exposure to DPM was calculated by estimating exposure to carcinogenic chemicals and multiplying the dose times the cancer potency factor. The following equation was used to determine cancer risk: Cancer Risk = (Dose * CRAF), where: Cancer Risk = risk (potential chances per million) Dose = dose through inhalation (mg/kg-day) CRAF = Cancer risk adjustment factor (exposure period for project activity (2 years for construction or 70 years for operation)/total exposure period (70 years) Dose is estimated using the following equation: Dose = (Cair * DBR * EF * ED * CF * Slope Factor)/AT, where: Dose = dose through inhalation (mg/kg-day) Cair = annual air concentration (μg/m 3 ) from the SCREEN3 model at each sensitive receptor location DBR = daily breathing rate (393 L/kg body weight-day for maximum rate over a 70-year exposure duration) EF = exposure frequency (350 days/year, recommended default value) ED = exposure duration (70 years, recommended default value) CF = conversion factor (10-6 ([mg/μg] * [m 3 /L]) Slope Factor = the OEHHA-established cancer potency slope factor of 1.1 (mg/kg-day)-1 for DPM. AT = averaging time (25,550 days or 70 years) A Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index The potential for exposure to result in chronic non-cancer effects is evaluated by comparing the estimated annual average air concentration (which is equivalent to the average daily air concentration) to the chemical-specific non-cancer chronic RELs. The chronic REL is the inhalation exposure concentration at which no adverse chronic health effects would be anticipated following exposure. When calculated for a single chemical, the comparison yields a ratio termed a hazard quotient (HQ). The chronic risk level is calculated as follows: Inhalation chronic risk = Cair / crel, where: Cair = annual concentration (μg/m 3 ) crel = Chronic non-cancer REL (μg/m 3 ) H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-7

82 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 A-1.4 SJVAPCD Greenhouse Gas Threshold of Significance A threshold of significance for construction-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has not been established by SJVAPCD. However, it is recommended that emissions are quantified and disclosed, and analyzed in relation to meeting the Assembly Bill32 GHG reduction goals. In addition, best management practices are encouraged as a measure to reduce GHG emissions during construction. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-8

83 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 A-2 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES The proposed project would last for approximately 30 days beginning in the fall. As is described in the project description, the proposed project consists of construction of a toe drain along the downstream tow of the dam for an approximate length of 7,000 feet, measuring 15 feet deep by 1.5 feet wide, as well as the installation of a small dewatering pump. Construction would be carried out using methods and procedures intended to meet all state and local codes and environmental regulations. Staging areas for the construction activities would be contained to the Big Dry Creek Dam project site. It is anticipated that construction activities would potentially disturb a total area of less than approximately 1.6 acres, assuming the toe drain length of 7,000 feet and width of 1.5 feet, with several feet on either side of additionally disturbed area. Trenching and/or soil excavation would be required for the construction of the new toe drain. The project s construction activities would require up to 4,000 cubic yards of soil fill and approximately 900 cubic yards of rock fill. The construction of the toe drain would require excavation up to a depth of 15 feet and width of 1.5 feet for the 7,000 foot length of the toe drain. This amounts to approximately 6,000 cubic yards of excavated soil. Excavated soil would be returned to the trench. The District would require that the contractor recycle any waste materials and minimize any material disposals at a landfill. Trucks would be required for the import and export of fill material and demolition materials, and material deliveries. Approximately six vehicle trips per day are estimated for worker trips during the construction period. Staging areas for the construction activities would be adjacent to the Big Dry Creek Dam construction site. Table A-3 provides a summary of the construction schedule and equipment associated with each phase. Table A-3. Construction Schedule and Equipment Type of Equipment Estimated Quantity Estimated Duration of Operation / Vehicle Use Excavator 1 2 to 3 weeks Front End Loader 1 2 to 3 weeks Dump Truck 1 2 to 3 weeks Boring Machine 1 2 to 3 weeks Motor Grader 1 2 to 3 weeks Backhoe 1 2 to 3 weeks Water Truck 1 2 to 3 weeks Compaction Equipment 1 2 to 3 weeks 1 to 1 3/4Ton Pickup 1 2 to 3 weeks 1 to 1 1/2 Ton Flat Bed Truck 1 2 to 3 weeks Gradall Forklift 1 2 to 3 weeks Construction worker trips per day 6 2 to 3 weeks H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-9

84 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 A-3 EMISSION CALCULATIONS Emission calculations were based on the above project construction activity descriptions. Specific assumptions and calculation methods are outlined below. Emissions calculations of criteria air pollutants were calculated using CalEEMod Overall project emissions are summarized in Table A-4 as annual emissions generated by the proposed project construction activities. Conservative estimates were assumed, such as the assumption of use of all equipment for full days for 3 weeks of the proposed project s duration of vehicle and equipment operations, in order to analyze the highest impact scenario. Table A-4. Project Construction Emissions Summary (tons/year) NO ROG CO SO Total Exhaust Total Exhaust PM 10 PM 10 PM 2.5 PM Emissions SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance N/A N/A 15 N/A BPSs BPSs Exceeding Threshold of Significance? No No No No No No No No Note: CALEEMOD was utilized to calculate emission estimates. See the attached CalEEMod 2/19/2013 model report for detailed modeling assumptions. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-10

85 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 A-4 HEALTH RISK ANALYSIS To assess the health risks on sensitive receptors from the project s construction activities, the nearest medical facility, school, convalescent facility, and residential sensitive receptors were identified. The nearest sensitive receptor is a residence at the end of E. Behymer Avenue, just over 0.5 mile west of Big Dry Creek dam. Bud Rank Elementary school in Clovis is just over 1.5 miles from the proposed project site and is the nearest school. Clovis Community Medical Center is the nearest medical facility, approximately 2.5 miles south of the proposed project site. Finally, the nearest convalescent facility is A Place Called Home Residential Care, which is approximately 2.75 miles away. The control of particulates and fugitive dust will be managed through the use of Best Performance Standards, and SJVAPCD Regulation VIII would also be implemented to minimize exposure to fugitive dust. The construction vehicle and equipment operations period is approximately 3 weeks and would not involve the use of substantial quantities of construction equipment. Thus, the proposed project would not pose long-term or significant health risks to nearby residents and workers in the project vicinity. No longterm operational emissions would occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, future TAC emissions would be similar to current conditions, and the project would not cause or contribute to significant cumulative health risks. No modeled health risk assessment is required of this project and the impact on sensitive receptors from fugitive dust and other pollutants would be less than significant. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-11

86 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District March 2013 A-5 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS A-5.1 Construction-related GHG Emissions Data used to estimate GHG emissions for construction-related project activities are the same as those used in the Air Quality analysis. CalEEMod was used to model the construction-related emissions, and results are shown in Table A-5. Table A-5. Construction-Related GHG Emissions (metric tons/year) CO 2 e Construction Total Construction SJVAPCD Zero Equivalency Value 230 Notes: Construction emissions based on CALEEMOD modeling results. Zero equivalency value and its application based on information supplied by SJVAPCD (SJVAPCD 2010; Siong, pers. comm.). As a relative comparison to state emissions levels, the project emissions were compared to the California State GHG Emissions Inventory (2009) (Pacific Gas and Electric Company [PG&E], 2011). Table A-6 shows this comparison. Table A-6. Relative Emissions Comparison CA State GHG Emissions (2009) (MMT) Project emissions as percent of state GHG inventory 7.98E-08 Source: PG&E, 2011 A-5.2 Operational GHG Emissions SJVAPCD has defined operational-related GHG emissions thresholds of significance. However, as described in the project description (Section 2.4), no operational emissions will result from the project and thus, operational GHG emissions are not quantified. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx A-12

87 APPENDI B Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Biological Resource Report

88

89 Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project Biological Resource Report April 2013 Prepared For: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District 5469 East Olive Avenue Fresno, California Prepared By: URS Corporation 30 River Park Place West Suite 180 Fresno, California

90

91 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS... iii SUMMARY... B-1 B-1 INTRODUCTION... B-1 B-1.1 Project Location... B-1 B-2 STUDY METHODS... B-2 B-3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING... B-7 B-3.1 Local Setting... B-7 B-3.2 Existing Biological and Physical Conditions... B-8 B-4 SURVEY RESULTS... B-8 B-5 DISCESSION... B-10 B-6 REFERENCES... B-11 ATTACHMENT A: Field Survey Photographs of the Project Site LIST OF TABLES B-1 Special Status Species CNDDB Results and Potential to Occur On Site B-2 Land Use Setting Big Dry Creek Dam Project LIST OF FIGURES B-1 California Natural Diversity Database Special Species Record Location H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx i

92 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx ii

93 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS BO CTS CNDDB mph site URS USFWS Biological Opinion California tiger salamander California Natural Diversity Database miles per hour Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage Remediation Project site URS Corporation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service F degrees Fahrenheit H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx iii

94 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx iv

95 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 SUMMARY URS Corporation (URS) conducted an investigation of biological resources associated with the Big Dry Creek Dam Remediation Project site (site) near Clovis, California, and evaluated potential impacts of the project. This report is an analysis of impacts to the biological resources on or within the vicinity of the project area. On February 23, 2013, URS Senior Biologist Ronald Cummings surveyed the site for biotic habitats, plants, and animal species occurring in those habitats, and significant habitat values that may be protected by state or federal law. The site consists of Dry Creek Dam, a gravel service road, and annual grassland dominated by non-native grasses. The habitat/land use on the site is characterized as ruderal. Any native habitats once present on the site have been heavily altered by human enterprise such that the site no longer provides suitable habitat for locally occurring special status plant and animal species. Because such species would not occur on the site, they will not be affected by the proposed project. Also, project impacts will be absent for wildlife movement corridors, jurisdictional waters, and sensitive habitats. Project conflicts with local plans or policies regarding biological resources, including habitat conservation plans, are not apparent. B-1 INTRODUCTION This biological resource report describes the biotic resources of the site and evaluates possible impacts. B-1.1 PROJECT LOCATION Big Dry Creek Dam is immediately north of the City of Clovis on the north side of Shepherd Avenue and generally east of the alignment of Temperance Avenue. The dam and reservoir span smaller drainages immediately north of Big Dry Creek. Downstream of the dam, Big Dry Creek continues on to the southwest, passing through Clovis and Fresno, for approximately 18 miles before it becomes Dry Creek Canal, which services areas southwest of Fresno. In an effort to assure the long-term structural integrity of the dam, the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District proposes to extend the existing a toe drain. The toe drain is 3 feet from the downstream base of the dam. The enhanced toe drain will run along the downstream toe of the dam for approximate length of 7,000 feet and will measure 10 to 15 feet deep by 1.5 feet wide. A perforated pipe will be placed in the bottom of the trench and the trench will be filled with gravel and geotextile encapsulations. A new surface drainage ditch with a layer of geotextile and rip rap will be constructed between the new toe drain and the existing access road. An additional 2 feet of soil fill will be placed over the top of the toe drain, extending from the base of the dam to the edge of the new drainage ditch (see Figure 4 of the initial study). The total area of construction impact will be approximately 10 feet wide by 7,000 feet long and encompass 1.6 acres. A small dewatering pump will be installed near the existing outlet works. The purpose of the toe drain is to intercept water that would normally surface from underneath the dam and have the potential to move soil from under the dam. The water pumped from the toe drain will be discharged into the Big Dry Creek outlet channel and used for beneficial use downstream. Because of the soil makeup of the Big Dry Creek channel, intercepted water is expected to percolate into the groundwater. Discharges from the dam s outlet works of less than 5 cubic feet per second typically percolate into Big Dry Creek within 6,500 feet downstream of the dam. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-1

96 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Two equipment staging areas are proposed, adjacent to either side of the existing Big Dry Creek outlet channel, measuring 1.1 and 1.8 acres each. The total project area, including these staging areas and the construction impact area described above, is approximately 4.5 acres. Construction is expected to last 30 days with construction activities occurring on weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with up to 8 construction workers on site at any time. Project construction would take place during the summer months to avoid potential routing of flood waters and accidental water release in the event of a catastrophic failure of the dam during construction. B-2 STUDY METHODS The impacts analysis is based on the known and potential biological resources of the site. Sources of information used in the preparation of this analysis include: (1) the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), (2) a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 7 Formal Consultation, and (3) manuals, reports, and references related to plants and animals of the San Joaquin Valley region. A reconnaissance-level field survey of the site, conducted in February 2013, consisted of walking the site at 30-foot intervals. This field survey sufficiently assessed the significance of possible impacts associated with the project. Figure B-1 is the CNDDB location map illustrating locations of special status species in relation to the site. Three special status plant species, six special status animal species, and one special status habitat type are depicted. Special status species occurring near the site include: Greene s tuctoria Tuctoria greenei (plant species) San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass Orcuttia inaequalis (plant species) Succulent owl s clover Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta (plant species) California linderiella Linderiella occidentalis (animal species) Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi (animal species) Midvalley fairy shrimp Branchinecta mesovallensis (animal species) California tiger salamander (CTS) Ambystoma californiense (animal species) Western spadefoot toad Spea hammondii (animal species) Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor (animal species) Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool (habitat type) Table B-1 provides a list of these species with short habitat descriptions and an assessment of the likelihood of their occurrence on the site. A Biological Opinion (BO) prepared by the USFWS (2007) for a nearby Sewage Treatment/Water Reuse Facility Project owned by the City of Clovis was reviewed because a portion of that project area is near the vicinity of Big Dry Creek Dam. This BO addressed potential impacts and avoidance and minimization measures for the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). Therefore, this report considers the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat potential on the site. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-2

97 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Figure B-1. California Natural Diversity Database Special Status Species Record Location H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-3

98

99 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Table B-1. Special Status Species CNDDB Results and Potential to Occur On Site Scientific Name Common Name Status* Habitat Requirements Presence Rationale Plants Tuctoria greenei Greene's tuctoria FE, SR Vernal pools No No habitat present on site. Orcuttia inaequalis San Joaquin Valley orcutt grass Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta Succulent owl's clover FT, SE FT, SE Vernal pools No Vernal pools No No habitat present on site. No habitat present on site. Invertebrates Linderiella No habitat present on site. FC occidentalis California linderiella Vernal pools No Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pool fairy shrimp FT Vernal pools No No habitat present on site. Branchinecta No habitat present on site. FC mesovallensis Midvalley fairy shrimp Vernal pools No Amphibians Ambystoma californiense California tiger salamander FT, ST Vernal or seasonal pools for breeding, upland habitat with rodent burrows and/or deep surface cracks for dry season refugia and foraging. (1) Spea hammondii Western spadefoot toad SSC Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly soils, in a variety of habitats including mixed woodlands, grasslands, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, sandy washes, lowlands, river floodplains, alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats, foothills, and mountains. (2) Low No breeding habitat on site. Potential upland habitat. CNDDB siting within 1.25 miles. No No breeding habitat on site. Avian Agelaius tricolor Tricolored blackbird SSC Breeding habitat is heavy, emergent marsh vegetation in proximity to open water. Cattails, bulrushes, blackberry, and willow clumps provide suitable nest habitat. Suitable foraging habitat includes irrigated pasture, dry rangeland, and dairy operations providing successive harvest and flooding conditions. (3) (Only breeding habitat is protected.) Low No breeding habitat present on site. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-4

100 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Table B-1 (Continued) Scientific Name Common Name Status* Habitat Requirements Presence Rationale Mammal Vulpes macrotis mutica Special Status Habitat NA Northern hardpan vernal pool San Joaquin kit fox FE, ST Annual grasslands or grassy, open areas in arid, brushy habitats. Prefers loose, sandy and loamy soils for digging extensive burrows; small mammals, rabbits, kangaroo rats, and ground squirrels provide primary prey base. Kit fox forages in agricultural areas; and some individuals adapted to heavily human-modified environments. (4) NA Old, very acidic, Fe-Si cemented hardpan soils. The microrelief typically is hummocky, with localized depressions. Winter rainfall perches on the hardpan, forming pools in the depressions. Evaporation (not runoff) empties the pools in spring (5). Low Low potential foraging habitat. No No vernal pools observed on site; soils and microrelief not suitable for vernal pool formation. (1) Nafis, (2) Stebbins, A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Third Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley; (3) Hamilton, Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor). In The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for reversing the decline of riparian-associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight. (4) Life history accounts for species in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System originally published in: Zeiner, et al California's Wildlife. Vol. I-III. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Sacramento, California. Updates are noted in accounts that have been added or edited since original publication. (5) Holland, Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Nongame Heritage Program, CDFG, Sacramento, CA. 156 pp. * Status Key: FE = Federal Endangered FT = Federal Threatened FC = Federal Candidate for Listing SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened SR = State Rare SSC = State Species of Concern H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-5

101 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 On February 23, 2013, URS Senior Biologist Ronald Cummings conducted a pedestrian survey of the entire project area including two small staging areas. Representative photographs (Appendix A) of the site were taken using a Kodak Z MP digital camera. Latitude and Longitude positions of small water features were recorded using the Mobiwia - Eclipsim GPS Status 2 application on a Samsung Stratosphere smartphone. Avian observations were assisted by Eagle Optics 8x42 power binoculars. B-3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The following section describes the local environmental setting and existing biological conditions. B-3.1 LOCAL SETTING Big Dry Creek Dam is immediately north of the City of Clovis within an area that transitions between the rolling foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and the flat agricultural and urbanized landscape of the San Joaquin Valley. The project area is on primarily level to gently undulating terrain. North and east of the project area the terrain raises in elevation as the landscape becomes dominated by the rolling foothills of the Sierra Nevada. West of the dam, the project area transitions gradually from its rural character to a mix of rural residential neighborhoods until ultimately dominated by the urbanized portions of Clovis and Fresno. Immediately south of the project area, across Shepherd Avenue, is the Harlan Ranch residential subdivision. Table B-2 describes the existing land uses and current general plan and zoning designations for the site and surrounding area. Because the site is within the outskirts of the City of Clovis, the area carries both a city and county general plan land use designation. Area Proposed Project Site North of Proposed Project Site South of Proposed Project Site East of Proposed Project Site West of Proposed Project Site Table B-2. Land Use Setting Big Dry Creek Dam Project Existing Land Uses and Features Big Dry Creek Dam and Reservoir Annual grassland, Owens Mountain, Friant-Kern Canal, Harlan Ranch residential subdivision and agricultural lands Annual grassland, Friant- Kern Canal, and foothills Rural residences and agricultural lands. 1 Fresno County General Plan (October 2000); City of Clovis General Plan, Draft Land Use Diagram (2012). Current General Plan Designations 1 Current Zoning County of Fresno: Agriculture City of Clovis: Open Space County of Fresno: AE-20 (Future Regional Park) County of Fresno: Agriculture County of Fresno: AE-40 City of Clovis: Low- and Medium-Density Residential, Mixed-Use/Business Center, and Public Facilities County of Fresno: Agriculture City of Clovis: Low- and Medium-Density Residential, Mixed-Use Village, Rural Residential, and Open Space County of Fresno: Northeast Rural Residential Area City of Clovis: Rural Residential, Low-, Medium-, and Medium-High-Density Residential City of Clovis: R-1, R-3, P-F County of Fresno: AL-40 and AE-40 County of Fresno: AL-20 and RR H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-6

102 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 B-3.2 EISTING BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Climate in the region of Big Dry Creek Dam is Mediterranean-type with relatively short, cool, moist winters, and long, warm, dry summers. The average annual precipitation of inches falls as rain primarily from October through April, with March, statistically, the wettest month of the year and July the driest. December has the coldest average low temperature of 37 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and July has the highest average high temperature of 96.6 F ( The site is in a transition zone between the floor of the San Joaquin Valley and the foothills of the central Sierra Nevada Mountains. Habitat adjacent to the project area is exclusively annual grasslands with a few, small, seasonal wetland features. Annual grassland west of the project area is fenced and used as livestock pasture. Within the project area itself, the grassland is mowed to facilitate maintenance operations of the dam and access road. Thus, natural habitats without human-related modifications do not exist within or near the project area. Although the primary species comprising this vegetation type are naturalized nonnative grasses, annual grassland vegetation provides important habitat for a variety of common wildlife species including western fence lizard, rattlesnakes, western meadowlarks, killdeer, horned lark, American kestrel, northern harrier, burrowing owl, prairie falcon, turkey vulture, pocket gopher, California ground squirrel, badger, San Joaquin kit fox, and coyote ( Big Dry Creek Reservoir, to the east of the site, is a wetland of variable extent (depending on seasonal precipitation and flood storage) with stands of wetland vegetation, brush, and groupings of trees. This area is frequented by a variety of waterfowl and other wildlife. Under normal fill levels, the closest edge of the reservoir is approximately 400 feet from the project area, on the opposite side of the dam. The structure of Big Dry Creek Dam provides an effective visual and sound barrier between wetland habitat and the project area. B-4 SURVEY RESULTS The field survey commenced at 12:20 p.m. on February 23, Weather conditions were cool with a temperature of 57 F, approximately 70 percent cloud cover, and a variable breeze of 5 to 10 miles per hour (mph) from the west-northwest. Rainfall (0.49 inch) was reported 3 days before the survey, occurring over a 2-day period (February 20 and 21). The survey concluded at 3:30 p.m. The temperature at that time was 62 F, with approximately 20 percent cloud cover, and variable breezes from 5 to 15 mph. A total of 17 photographs were taken during the survey: 8 overview photographs of the project area; 7 photographs of wetland-type features on or near the project area: 1 photograph of a rodent burrow; and 1 photograph of a mammal track. The latitude and longitude of two puddles were recorded as follows: 1. Puddle approximately 7 feet in diameter near toe drain route: N W 2. Puddle in drainage ditch area at base of dam: N W During the survey, the following wildlife species were observed: Amphibians: Sierran tree frog Pseudacris sierra Avian species: Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Turkey vulture Cathartes aura H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-7

103 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Red-tailed hawks (pair) Bueto jamaicensis American kestrel Falco sparverius Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus Mourning dove Zenaida macroura Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans Western kingbird Tyrannus verticalis Tree swallow (probable, flying overhead) Tachycineta bicolor Starling Sturnus vulgaris Western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta Savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis The following avian species observed in Big Dry Creek Reservoir (outside of project area): American coot Fulica americana Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Bufflehead (one male-female pair) Brucephala albeola Northern shoveler Anas clypeata Ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis Mammals: Small mammal burrows Raccoon tracks Procyon lotor Coyote scat Canis latrans Grey fox tracks (possible) Urocyon cinereoargenteus Domestic dog tracks Canis lupus familiaris The entire project area is annual grassland dominated by non-native grasses. The topography has been heavily modified by the prior construction of the dam, access roads, and drainage features. A few, small wet areas (puddles) were evident from a rain event prior to the surveys. Vegetation, microrelief, and hydrology indicating vernal pool habitat was not observed. No aquatic organisms were observed in the puddles. Sierran tree frogs (Pseudacris sierra) were vocalizing (and were observed) at the concrete Big Dry Creek outlet structure, where some water had ponded. Grass cover is extensive over the vegetated portions of the site (95 to 100 percent), so very little bare ground was evident outside of the access roads. The grass was generally short at the time observations, as it was early in the growing season and the prior rainy season had been drier than normal, but tracks and ruts were indications that these areas are mowed periodically. Overall, very few rodent burrows were observed across the site. A few scattered clusters of gopher mounds, some fairly fresh were observed. Burrows are generally concentrated around the bases of telephone poles or along fence lines. A few burrows were observed in the staging areas. Only a couple of smaller burrows (less than the 2-inch-diameter class for kangaroo rats or field mice) were noted over the H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-8

104 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 entire site. Only one burrow in the 4-inch-diameter class was observed near the base of the dam. No burrows were observed along or within the toe drain footprint. Observed burrows were beyond 75 feet of the centerline of the area of the toe drain extension. The lack of subterranean refugia would be an indicator of poor-quality CTS upland habitat. The project area may provide foraging habitat for the San Joaquin kit fox. However, the scarcity of rodent burrows may be an indication of a very small prey base. No sign of San Joaquin kit fox occupancy was noted during the survey. Only one track was located, which appeared to be that of a red fox due to the track size. Tricolored Blackbird, while potentially located in the project vicinity was not observed, nor was evidence of blackbird flocks or nesting sites observed in the project area. The Tricolored Blackbird lives in very large flocks and frequents marshy habitats in summer and open areas, including croplands, during other seasons. The species sometimes nests among crops, particularly grain crops such as wheat and barley. B-5 DISCUSSION The project may provide poor habitat for two special status species. California tiger salamander: The site may provide marginal upland habitat for CTS. The upland habitat is of low quality due to the scarcity of burrows in the area. Suitable breeding pools were not observed on site. Because the aquatic larval stage of CTS lasts for 2 to 3 months (USFWS, 2007), small, ephemeral pools (such as those shown in photographs #5 through 8, and 13, 14, and 15) are not adequate for breeding. However, CNDDB records from 2006 only 0.2 miles distant indicate CTS have been in the area in the recent past. Because CTS are known to travel overland up to 1 mile or more from their breeding pools (USFWS, 2007) and because this species is rarely observed due to its mostly subterranean and crepuscular mode of living, the presence of CTS in the site cannot be ruled out. San Joaquin kit fox: San Joaquin kit fox may use the area, as foraging habitat. Soils are adequate for digging burrows, and the presence of burrows indicates some prey is available (though at low levels, given the low density of burrows) (Zeiner, et al., ). Subterranean burrows with a diameter greater than 4 inches within the species range may indicate suitability as potential den. However no evidence of kit fox presence of sign was observed. The lack of recorded San Joaquin kit fox sightings in the vicinity, and the surrounding development in nearby suburban neighborhoods, may limit suitability for kit fox occupancy in the project area. While their presence cannot be ruled out, it is unlikely. B-6 REFERENCES City of Clovis General Plan, Draft Land Use Diagram. County of Fresno Fresno County General Plan. Hamilton, W. J Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor). In The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for reversing the decline of riparian-associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight. Accessed on march 16, H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-9

105 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Holland, R.F Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Nongame Heritage Program, California Department Fish and Game (CDFG), Sacramento, CA. 156 pp. Nafis, Gary California Herps.com. A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. and Accessed on March 16, Stebbins, R. C. (2006). A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Third Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 Formal Consultation on the City of Clovis Sewage Treatment/Water Reuse Facility Project (Corps File Number ), Fresno County, California. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Sacramento, California. December 6. Zeiner, D.C., W.F Laudenslayer, Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White, eds California s Wildlife, Vol. I III. CDFG, Sacramento, California. Updates are noted in accounts that have been added to or edited since original publication. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx B-10

106

107 ATTACHMENT A Field Survey Photographs of the Project Site

108

109 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photographs 1 and 2: Panorama of proposed construction staging areas on north and south sides of Big Dry Creek, photos looking southwest. Photograph 3. Staging area on south side of creek looking northwest toward dam. Photograph 4. Staging area on north side of creek looking north; dam on right. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-1

110 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 5. Adjacent wetland (beyond fence line) looking west. Mud puddle in foreground. Photograph 6. Wetland (beyond fence line) to southwest of toe drain corridor, located on adjacent property. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-2

111 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 7. Same mud puddle as in photograph 5, looking south (8.5-inch x 11-inch notebook in foreground for scale). Photograph 8. Culvert at Drainage #7 on wetland map, looking west. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-3

112 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 9. North end of proposed toe drain corridor, looking southwest. Photograph 10. Center of proposed toe drain corridor looking southeast, photograph taken from staging area. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-4

113 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 11. Southern leg of toe drain corridor, looking southeast. Photograph 12. Southern leg of toe drain corridor, looking northwest. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-5

114 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 14. Tiny puddle on southern leg of toe drain corridor, between maintenance road and private property (notebook for scale). Photograph 13. Small wet area on southern leg of toe drain corridor, adjacent to dam. Photograph 15. Looking southwest down Big Dry Creek from dam outflow structure. Sierran tree frogs were at this location. H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-6

115 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 Photograph 16. Picture of the largest burrow seen on the site. Approximately 4 inches diameter, dug into the base of the dam. No identifiable tracks or scat but assumed to be California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) due to size and proximity of other squirrels in the area (notebook for scale). Photograph 17. Probable grey fox track located near culvert at Drainage #7 (ink pen for scale). H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-7

116 Biology Resource Report Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District April 2013 This page intentionally left blank H:\Wprocess\Fresno Metro Flood Control District\Big Dry Creek Dam Seepage\\Text (DY ).docx Att-8