section 3.7 biological resources · 2014-09-04 · 5 vegetation mapping 6 vegetation mapping was...

Section 3.7Biological Resources

Comprehensive Groundwater Cleanup Strategy for Historical Chromium Discharges from PG&E’s Hinkley Compressor Station Draft Environmental Impact Report

3.7‐1 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7 Biological Resources 1

3.7.1 Introduction 2

Thissectionincludesthemethodologyfordeterminingbiologicalresourcespresentintheproject3areaandadescriptionoftheenvironmentalandregulatorysetting,summarizedfromtheBiological4ResourcesReportpreparedbyICF(AppendixC).Italsodescribestheimpactsonbiologicalresources5fromimplementationoftheproject,andmitigationmeasuresthatwouldreducethoseimpacts.6

Growth‐inducingandcumulativeimpactsarediscussedseparatelyinChapter4,OtherCEQA7Analyses.8

3.7.1.1 Summary of Impacts 9

Table3.7‐1presentsasummaryoftheimpactsonbiologicalresources.SeeSection3.7.6,Impacts,10andSection3.7.7,MitigationMeasures,foradetaileddiscussionofallimpactsandmitigation11measures.12

Table 3.7‐1. Summary of Biological Resources Impacts 13

ImpactApplicableAlternative

SignificancebeforeMitigation MitigationMeasures

SignificanceafterMitigation

BIO‐1a:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitatforDesertTortoise

AllAlternatives

Significant BIO‐MM‐1a:ConstructionMeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigateImpactstoDesertTortoise.BIO‐MM‐1b:LimitFootprintofDisturbanceAreaswithinSpecial‐StatusSpeciesHabitatsBIO‐MM‐1c:ImplementPre‐ConstructionandOngoingAwarenessandTrainingProgram.BIO‐MM‐1d:ConductOngoingBiologicalConstructionMonitoring.BIO‐MM‐1e:MinimizePotentialConstructionHazardstoSpecial‐StatusSpeciesBIO‐MM‐1f:MinimizeConstructionand/orOperationalPracticesand/orFacilitiestoPreventAttractionofProject‐RelatedPredators.BIO‐MM‐1g:ReductionofProject‐RelatedSpreadofInvasivePlantSpeciesBIO‐MM‐1h:CompensateImpactstoDesertTortoiseandMohaveGroundSquirrel

Lessthansignificant(otherthandeserttortoisemovement)LessthanSignificant(NoProjectAlternative,deserttortoisemovement)PotentiallySignificant(allactionalternatives,deserttortoisemovement)

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Biological Resources


3.7‐2 August 2012

ICF 00122.11




BIO‐MM‐1i:IntegratedPestManagementandAdaptiveManagementPlanforAgriculturalTreatmentUnitsBIO‐MM‐1j:ReductionofNightLightSpillover

BIO‐1b:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitatforMohaveGroundSquirrel

AllAlternatives

PotentiallySignificant

BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐1h,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1j,BIO‐MM‐1k:OtherMeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigateImpactstoMohaveGroundSquirrel

LessthanSignificant

BIO‐1c:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitatforBurrowingOwlandAmericanBadger,andMortalityofDesertKitFox

AllAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐1h,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1j,BIO‐MM‐1l:OtherMeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigateImpactstoBurrowingOwlBIO‐MM‐1m:MinimizeImpactstoAmericanBadgerNatalDensandDesertKitFoxOccupiedDens

LessthanSignificant

BIO‐1d:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitattoLoggerheadShrikeandNorthernHarrier

NoProject LessthanSignificant

NoneRequired ‐‐

AllActionAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1n:AvoidImpactstoLoggerheadShrike,NorthernHarrier,andOtherNestingMigratoryBirds(includingRaptors)

LessthanSignificant

BIO‐1e:MortalityandLossofHabitattoMojaveRiverVole

AllAlternatives

LessthanSignificant

NoneRequired ‐‐

BIO‐1f:MortalityandLossofHabitatforMojaveFringe‐ToedLizard

AllAlternatives

Lessthansignificant

BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐2:HabitatCompensationforLossofSensitiveNaturalCommunities

LessthanSignificant

BIO‐1g:LossofOtherSpecial‐StatusBirds

AllAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1n LessthanSignificant

BIO‐1h:LossofIndividualPlantsorDisturbancetoSpecial‐StatusPlants

AllAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐1o LessthanSignificant



3.7‐3 August 2012

ICF 00122.11




BIO‐2:ReductionorLossofFunctionofRiparianHabitatorSensitiveNaturalCommunities

AllAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐2 LessthanSignificant

BIO‐3:LossorDisturbanceofFederaland/orStateJurisdictionalWaters(includingwetlands)

AllAlternatives


BIO‐MM‐3:MeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigateImpactstoWatersand/orWetlandsundertheJurisdictionoftheState

LessthanSignificant

BIO‐4:ConflictswithWildlifeMovement

NoProjectAlternative

LessthanSignificant

NoneRequired ‐‐



BIO‐MM‐1a,BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐1h,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1j,BIO‐MM‐1k,BIO‐MM‐1lBIO‐MM‐4:ImplementApplicableMitigationtoAddressLocationswithintheProjectAreathatOverlapDWMAs(orConservationAreas)oftheWestMojavePlan

LessthanSignificantPotentiallySignificant(deserttortoiseonly)

BIO‐5:RemovalofProtectedTrees

AllAlternatives

LessthanSignificant

NoneRequired ‐‐

BIO‐6:ConflictswithWestMojavePlanConservationRequirementsonBLMLand

NoProjectAlternative

NoImpact NoneRequired ‐‐



BIO‐MM‐1a,BIO‐MM‐1b,BIO‐MM‐1c,BIO‐MM‐1d,BIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1f,BIO‐MM‐1g,BIO‐MM‐1h,BIO‐MM‐1i,BIO‐MM‐1j,BIO‐MM‐1k,BIO‐MM‐1lBIO‐MM‐4

LessthanSignificant



3.7‐4 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7.1.2 Methods Used to Identify Biological Resources 1

Themethodsusedtoidentifybiologicalresourcesintheprojectareaconsistedofpre‐fieldliterature2reviewandfieldsurveys.3

Pre‐field Literature Review 4

Priortofieldsurveys,ICFbiologistsconductedacomprehensiveliteraturereviewrelatedtothe5projectareatoidentifypotentialspecial‐statusspeciesthatmaybefoundintheprojectarea.6Pertinentsourcesreviewedwere:7

CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase(CNDDB)(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011)8forthenine7.5‐minuteU.S.GeologicalSurveyquadranglemapsintheprojectvicinity:Hinkley,9Barstow,BarstowSE,MudHills,WaterValley,Lockhart,TwelveGaugeLake,WildCrossing,and10Hodge.11

CaliforniaNativePlantSociety(CNPS)InventoryofRareandEndangeredPlants(California12NativePlantSociety2011).13

UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService(USFWS)Specieslistfortheprojectareawasgenerated14usingtheonlineInformation,PlanningandConservationSystem(IPaC).15

Literaturedetailingthehabitatrequirementsofspecial‐statusspecies.16

MostrecentUSFWScriticalhabitatmaps(USFWS2011b).17

U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture(USDA)NaturalResourcesConservationService(NRCS)WebSoil18Survey(USDA/NRCS2011).19

ReviewofbiologicalsurveydatacollectedbyCH2MHillandprovidedbyHaley&Aldrich(Pacific20GasandElectric2011).21

TheWestMojavePlan(BLM2005).22

Field Survey 23

ICFbiologistsconductedreconnaissance‐levelfieldsurveysinDecember2011toidentifyand24evaluatevegetationcommunitiesandhabitatassessmentsforspecial‐statusplantsandwildlife25presentwithintheprojectarea.26

Reconnaissancefieldsurveysincludedon‐groundevaluationforthepresence,absence,orlikelihood27ofoccurrenceofspecial‐statusspeciesandvegetationtypes,andformoregeneralbiological28resourceswithintheprojectarea.Althoughfocusedprotocolsurveysforplantsorwildlifewerenot29performedduringthisfieldsurvey,habitatassessmentswereperformed.Parametersevaluatedfor30special‐statusplantsincludedtopography,soilconditions,elevation,hydrology,thesite’s31operationalactivities,andlifehistoryneedsforthespecificspecies.Parametersevaluatedfor32special‐statuswildlifeincludedconnectivitytodocumentedandpotentiallyoccurringhabitat,33hydrology,accesstothesite,foragingandnestinghabitat,thesite’soperationalactivities,andlife34historyneedsforeachspecies.35

Onlyaportionofthestudyareacouldbesurveyedduetoaccessrestrictions,therefore,muchofthe36reconnaissancewasdonebyvisualobservationfrompublicroadsonly.37



3.7‐5 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Aformaljurisdictionalwetlanddelineationwasnotconductedfortheprojectarea;however,1potentialjurisdictionalfeatureswerenotedandmappedduringthehabitatassessment.2

AmoredetaileddescriptionoffieldsurveymethodsisprovidedintheBiologicalResourcesStudy3(AppendixC).4

Vegetation Mapping 5

Vegetationmappingwasconductedinthefieldusingapproximate1inchto400‐footscaleaerials6(aerialdatedJanuary31,2009),whichwerelatertransferredtoadigitalfileusingGoogleEarthand7thenconvertedtoGeographicInformationSystemshapefiles.Sincethefieldvisit,onepolygonwas8addedtothestudyareainthenortheastportion.Forthispolygon,aGoogleEarthaerial(dated9January31,2009)wasusedwithreferencetothevegetationmappingcompletedinthefieldto10aeriallyinterpretthevegetation.Wherepossible,thevegetationmappingfollowedthe11classificationsdefinedinAManualofCaliforniaVegetation(Sawyeretal.2009);however,Holland12(1986)wasalsoconferred.Acomponentofaerialinterpretationwasrequiredforsomeofthe13remoteandinaccessiblelocationsofthestudyarea,andwasbasedoncolorationsandpatternsas14distinguishingfeaturesontheaerialphotography.15

Geographic Information System Analysis 16

Geographicinformationsystemanalysiswascompletedbyoverlayingtheproject’sdirectimpact17footprintonthevegetationcommunitiestocalculatethenumberofacresofeachplantcommunity18thatareestimatedtoberemovedbytheproject.Inaddition,ascalingfactorwasusedforpotential19directimpactsthatareexpectedbutarenotcurrentlydefinedingeographicspace.Scaling20approachestoadjusttheareasofpotentialimpactupfromtheFeasibilityStudy/Addendanumbers21aredescribedinChapter2,ProjectDescription.22

3.7.2 Regulatory Setting 23

Thefederal,state,andlocalplans,policies,andlawsrelevanttobiologicalresourcesarediscussedin24thissection.25

3.7.2.1 Federal Regulations 26

Federal Endangered Species Act 27

ThefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct(ESA)(U.S.GovernmentCode[USC],Title16,Sections1530et28seq.)protectsfishandwildlifespeciesandtheirhabitatsthathavebeenidentifiedbytheUSFWSas29threatenedorendangered.Endangeredreferstospecies,subspecies,ordistinctpopulation30segmentsthatareindangerofextinctionthroughallorasignificantportionoftheirrange;31threatenedreferstospecies,subspecies,ordistinctpopulationsegmentsthatarelikelytobecome32endangeredinthenearfuture.33

USFWSregulatesthe“take”(i.e.,killing,harassing,orhabitatdestruction)offederallylistedspecies34throughSection9oftheESA.TakeoflistedspeciescanbeauthorizedthrougheithertheESA35Section7consultationprocessforactionsbyfederalagenciesortheESASection10permitprocess36foractionsbynonfederalagencies.Federalagencyactionsincludeactivitiesthatare:37

Onfederalland,38

Conductedbyafederalagency,39



3.7‐6 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Fundedbyafederalagency,or1

Authorizedbyafederalagency(includingissuanceoffederalpermitsandlicenses).2

UnderSection7,thefederalagencyconducting,funding,orpermittinganaction(thefederallead3agency)mustconsultUSFWStoensurethattheproposedactionwillnotjeopardizeendangeredor4threatenedspeciesordestroyoradverselymodifydesignatedcriticalhabitat.Ifaproposedproject5“mayaffect”alistedspeciesordesignatedcriticalhabitat,theleadagencyisrequiredtopreparea6biologicalassessmentevaluatingthenatureandseverityoftheexpectedeffect.Inresponse,USFWS7issuesabiologicalopinionwithadeterminationthattheproposedactioneither:8

Mayjeopardizethecontinuedexistenceofoneormorelistedspecies(jeopardyfinding)or9resultinthedestructionoradversemodificationofcriticalhabitat(adversemodification10finding),or11

Willnotjeopardizethecontinuedexistenceofanylistedspecies(nojeopardyfinding)orresult12inadversemodificationofcriticalhabitat(noadversemodificationfinding).13

UnderSection10,whichappliestoprojectswherefederalactionisnotinvolvedandtakeofalisted14speciesmayoccur,theprojectproponentmayseekanincidentaltakepermitunderSection10(a)of15theESA.Section10(a)ofESAallowsUSFWStopermittheincidentaltakeoflistedspeciesifsuch16takeisaccompaniedbyahabitatconservationplanthatensuresminimizingandmitigationof17impactsassociatedwiththetake.18

ThebiologicalopinionissuedbyUSFWSmaystipulatediscretionary“reasonableandprudent”19conservationmeasures.Iftheprojectwouldnotjeopardizealistedspecies,USFWSissuesan20incidentaltakestatementtoauthorizetheproposedactivity.21

TheESAappliestotheprojectareaduetothepresenceofoneESAlistedthreatenedspecies:the22deserttortoise.Deserttortoiseisknowntooccurintheprojectarea,whichcontainsmanyareasof23suitablehabitatforthisspecies.24

The Recovery Plan for the Mojave Population of the Desert Tortoise 25

TheRecoveryPlanfordeserttortoise(USFWS2011a)identifiessixrecoveryunits,inwhichoneto26fourDesertWildlifeManagementAreas(DWMAs)weredesignated,anddescribesthedevelopment27andimplementationofspecificrecoveryactionsfocusedwithintheDWMAs.BLMadministersthe28DWMAsonfederallandtoprotectimportantwildlifeandnaturalresources,suchasthedesert29tortoise.Maintaininghighsurvivorshipofadultdeserttortoisewasidentifiedasthekeyfactorin30recovery(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2011a).Theprojectareaoccurswithinaportionofthe31Superior‐CroneseDWMA(seeFigure3.7‐2).32

Therecoveryplanisconsideredbyregulatoryagenciesinestablishingcompensatorymitigationor33otherrequirementsduringtheESApermittingprocess.Therecoveryplanisusedinthiscapacityin34thisEIRasaguideindevelopingmitigationratiosintheimpactanalysis.35

Migratory Bird Treaty Act 36

TheMigratoryBirdTreatyAct(MBTA)(16USC703)enactstheprovisionsoftreatiesbetweenthe37UnitedStates,GreatBritain,Mexico,andJapan;andauthorizestheU.S.SecretaryoftheInteriorto38protectandregulatethetakingofmigratorybirds.Itestablishesseasonsandbaglimitsforhunted39speciesandprotectsmigratorybirds,theiroccupiednests,andtheireggs(16USC703;50CFR1040



3.7‐7 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

21).Mostactionsthatresultintakingorinpermanentortemporarypossessionofaprotected1speciesconstituteviolationsoftheMBTA.Examplesofpermittedactionsthatdonotviolatethe2MBTAarethepossessionofahuntinglicensetopursuespecificgamebirds,legitimateresearch3activities,displayinzoologicalgardens,bird‐banding,andothersimilaractivities.USFWSis4responsibleforoverseeingcompliancewiththeMBTA,andtheU.S.DepartmentofAgriculture’s5AnimalDamageControlOfficermakesrecommendationsonrelatedanimalprotectionissues.6

Theprojectareasupportshabitatforthepresenceofnestingbirdsandmigratorybirdsprotected7undertheMBTA.8

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 9

TheBaldandGoldenEagleProtectionAct(16U.S.C.668‐668c),enactedin1940,andamended10severaltimessincethen,prohibitsanyone,withoutapermitissuedbytheSecretaryoftheInterior,11from“taking”baldeagles,includingtheirparts,nests,oreggs.TheActprovidescriminalpenalties12forpersonswho“take,possess,sell,purchase,barter,offertosell,purchaseorbarter,transport,13exportorimport,atanytimeoranymanner,anybaldeagle…[oranygoldeneagle],aliveordead,or14anypart,nest,oreggthereof.”TheActdefines“take”as“pursue,shoot,shootat,poison,wound,kill,15capture,trap,collect,molestordisturb.”Forpurposesoftheseguidelines,“disturb”means:“to16agitateorbotherabaldorgoldeneagletoadegreethatcauses,orislikelytocause,basedonthe17bestscientificinformationavailable,1)injurytoaneagle,2)adecreaseinitsproductivity,by18substantiallyinterferingwithnormalbreeding,feeding,orshelteringbehavior,or3)nest19abandonment,bysubstantiallyinterferingwithnormalbreeding,feeding,orshelteringbehavior.”20

Inadditiontoimmediateimpacts,thisdefinitionalsocoversimpactsthatresultfromhuman‐21inducedalterationsinitiatedaroundapreviouslyusednestsiteduringatimewheneaglesarenot22present,if,upontheeagle’sreturn,suchalterationsagitateorbotheraneagletoadegreethat23interfereswithorinterruptsnormalbreeding,feeding,orshelteringhabits,andcausesinjury,death24ornestabandonment.25

Theprojectareadoesnotincludesuitablenestingorforaginghabitatforbaldeagles.Theproject26areaalsodoesnotincludeanynestinghabitatforgoldeneagles,althoughtheprojectareadoes27includepotentialforaginghabitatforgoldeneagles.28

Federal Noxious Weed Act 29

PublicLaw93‐629(7U.S.C.2801etseq.;88Stat.2148),enactedJanuary3,1975,establisheda30Federalprogramtocontrolthespreadofnoxiousweeds.TheSecretaryofAgriculturewasgiventhe31authoritytodesignateplantsasnoxiousweedsbyregulation,andthemovementofallsuchweedsin32interstateorforeigncommercewasprohibitedexceptunderpermit.TheSecretarywasalsogiven33authoritytoinspect,seizeanddestroyproducts,andtoquarantineareas,ifnecessarytopreventthe34spreadofsuchweeds.TheSecretarywasalsoauthorizedtocooperatewithotherFederal,Stateand35localagencies,farmersassociationsandprivateindividualsinmeasurestocontrol,eradicate,or36preventorretardthespreadofsuchweeds.37

Section1453ofP.L.101‐624,the1990FarmBill,enactedNovember28,1990(104Stat3611)38amendedtheActbyrequiringeachFederalland‐managingagencyto:39

Designateanofficeorpersonadequatelytrainedinmanagingundesirableplantspeciesto40developandcoordinateaprogramtocontrolsuchplantsontheagency’sland;41



3.7‐8 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Establishandadequatelyfundthisplantmanagementprogramthroughtheagency’sbudget1process;2

Completeandimplementcooperativeagreements(requirementsforwhichareprovided)with3theStatesregardingundesirableplantsonagencyland;and4

Establishintegratedmanagementsystems(asdefinedinthesection)tocontrolorcontain5undesirableplantstargetedunderthecooperativeagreements.6

Thelawalsorequiresthatanyenvironmentalassessmentsorimpactstatementsthatmaybe7requiredtoimplementplantcontrolagreementsmustbecompletedwithin1yearofthetimethe8needforthedocumentisestablished.9

Theprojectareacontainsnoxiousweedsandpotentialfortheproliferationofnoxiousweedsdueto10projectimplementation.11

TheFederalNoxiousWeedActdoesnotrequirespecificpermitstoconductactionswherenoxious12weedsarepresent,providedthatnoxiousweedsarenotmoved.However,theassessmentof13impactsinthisEIRtakesintoaccounttheconcernsintheanalysis.BLMimplementstheFederal14NoxiousWeedActfortheportionsoftheprojectareathatareonfederalland.15

Clean Water Act 16

ThefederalCleanWaterAct(CWA)istheprimaryfederallawthatprotectsthequalityofthe17nation’ssurfacewaterswhentheyaretraditionallynavigablewaters,aretributaryoradjacentto18traditionallynavigablewaters,orareinterstatewaters.WatersunderthejurisdictionoftheCWA19arereferredtoas“watersoftheUnitedStates.”TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersregulatesfillin20watersoftheUnitedStatesunderSection404oftheCleanWaterAct.Pointdischargestowatersof21theUnitedStatesareregulatedunderSection402oftheCleanWaterActthroughNationalPollutant22DischargeEliminationSystem(NPDES)permits;inCaliforniatheregionalWaterBoardshavebeen23delegatedtheauthoritytoissueNPDESpermits.UnderSection401oftheCleanWaterAct,state24agenciesreviewpermitsissuedbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersfortheireffectsonwater25quality.Ingeneral,theU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineerstakesjurisdictionoverwatersthatare26traditionallynavigable,thatdraintoatraditionallynavigablewater,orthatareadjacentor27otherwisehaveasignificantnexustoatraditionallynavigablewater.28

TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineershaspreviouslyidentifiedthattheMojaveRiverisawaterofthe29UnitedStates.ForthisEIR,watersthatdraintotheMojaveRiver,includingprojectareadesert30washes,areconsideredtobepotentialwatersoftheUnitedStates.Mostoftheprojectareathat31wouldbeaffectedbyremedialactionsdrainsnorthwardtonearbyHarperLake.TheU.S.Army32CorpsofEngineershaspreviouslyidentifiedthatHarperLakeisanintrastatewater,andthatits33tributaries,includingprojectareadesertwashes,arenotconsideredwatersoftheUnitedStates.34However,tributariestoHarperLakeareconsideredwatersofthestateanddischargestothem35wouldberegulatedunderthestatePorter‐CologneWaterQualityControlAct.Section3.7.5.8below36describesthejurisdictionalwaterswithintheprojectarea.37

The West Mojave Plan 38

TheWestMojavePlanisafederallanduseplanthatoutlinesthestrategytoconserveandprotect39morethan100sensitiveplantandanimalspecies,aswellasprovideguidanceforcompliancewith40requirementsoftheStateandfederalEndangeredSpeciesActs,respectively(BureauofLand41



3.7‐9 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Management2005).TheWestMojavePlanplanningareaextendsthroughportionsofSan1Bernardino,LosAngeles,Kern,andInyoCounties.TheWestMojavePlanoriginallystartedasa2broaderefforttoestablishaHabitatConservationPlanthatwouldcoveractivitiesonbothprivate3andpubliclandthroughoutthewesternMojaveDesert.However,theWestMojavePlanwasonly4adoptedasafederallandmanagementplanforfederallandsunderthejurisdictionoftheBLM.The5WestMojavePlandoesnotapplytoareasoutsideoffederalland.6

TheWestMojavePlanincludes,butisnotlimitedto,thefollowingspeciesforconservation:7

Deserttortoise(Gopherusagassizii).8

Mohavegroundsquirrel(Xerospermophilusmohavensis).9

Burrowingowl(Athenecunicularia).10

Mojavefringed‐toedlizard(Umascoparia).11

Desertcymopterus(Cymopterusdeserticola).12

Mojavemonkeyflower(Mimulusmohavensis).13

TheprojectareapartiallyoverlapshabitatconservationareasonBLMlanddesignatedfordesert14tortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelbytheWestMojavePlan.Withintheprojectarea,thedesert15tortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelconservationareasintheWestMojavePlanarethoseportions16oftheSuperior‐CroneseDWMAlocatedonfederalland.17

TheWestMojavePlanlistscertainrequirementsforimplementingprojectswithinhabitat18conservationareasonfederalland(BLMManagement2006).Theserequirementsareconsideredin19theidentificationofmitigationforconservationareasonfederallandthatfallwithintheproject20area.21

3.7.2.2 State Regulations 22

California Endangered Species Act 23

TheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct(CESA)(FishandGameCodeSections2050–2097)is24administeredbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame(CDFG)andprohibitsthetakeofplant25andanimalspeciesdesignatedbyCDFGaseitherthreatenedorendangeredinthestateofCalifornia.26“Take”inthecontextoftheCESAmeanstohunt,pursue,kill,orcapturealistedspecies,aswellas27anyotheractionsthatmayresultinadverseimpactswhenattemptingtotakeindividualsofalisted28species.29

Sections2091and2081oftheCESAallowCDFGtoauthorizeexceptionstothestate’sprohibition30againsttakeofalistedspecies.Section2091allowsstateleadagenciesthathaveformallyconsulted31withCDFGtotakealistedspecies,ifthetakeisincidentaltocarryingoutanotherwiselawfulproject32thathasbeenapprovedunderCEQA.Section2081allowsCDFGtoauthorizetakeofalistedspecies33foreducational,scientific,ormanagementpurposes.Privatedeveloperswhoseprojectsdonot34involveastateleadagencyunderCEQAmaynottakealistedspecieswithoutformallyconsulting35withCDFGandagreeingtostrictmeasuresandstandardsformanagingthelistedspecies.36

TheCESAappliestotheprojectareaduetothepresenceoftwoCESAlistedthreatenedspecies,the37Mohavegroundsquirrelanddeserttortoise,whichhavebeendocumentedintheprojectareaand38suitablehabitatforthesespeciesisfoundinmanypartsoftheprojectarea.39



3.7‐10 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

California Department of Fish and Game Regulations 1

Protected Species in the Fish and Game Code 2

TheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeprovidesprotectionfromtakeforavarietyofspecies,referredto3asfullyprotectedspecies.Section5050listsfullyprotectedamphibiansandreptilesandprohibits4thetakeofsuchreptilesandamphibiansexceptasprovidedinSections2081.7or2835.Section55515prohibitstakeoffullyprotectedfishspeciesexceptasprovidedinSections2081.7or2835.6FullyprotectedbirdsarelistedunderSection3511,andfullyprotectedmammalsarelistedunder7Section4700;bothofthesesectionsprohibittakeexceptasprovidedinSections2081.7and2835.8Exceptfortakerelatedtoscientificresearch,alltakeoffullyprotectedspeciesisprohibited.9

Theprojectareadoesnotincludehabitatforanyfullyprotectedspecies.10

Mammal Hunting Regulations 11

TheMammalHuntingRegulations2011–2012,Subdivision2.GameandFurbearers,Chapter5.12FurbearingMammals,§460statesthatfisher,marten,riverotter,desertkitfoxandredfoxmaynot13betakenatanytime.14

Theprojectareahassuitablehabitatfordesertkitfox.15

California Native Plant Protection Act and Natural Community Conservation Planning Act 16

TheCaliforniaNativePlantProtectionAct(FishandGameCodeSections1900–1913)andthe17NaturalCommunityConservationPlanningActprovideguidanceonthepreservationofplant18resources;thesetwoactsunderliethelanguageandintentofSection15380(d)oftheCEQA19Guidelines.20

TheprojectareaplantcommunitieshavethepotentialtosupportCaliforniaNativePlantProtection21Act–qualifyingplants,whicharedescribedinSection3.7.5.3below.22

Streambed Alteration Agreements 23

CDFGhasjurisdictionalauthorityoverrivers,streams,andlakesunderCaliforniaFishandGame24CodeSection1602.CDFGhastheauthoritytoregulateallworkunderthejurisdictionofCalifornia25thatwould:substantiallydivert,obstruct,orchangethenaturalflowofariver,stream,orlake;26substantiallychangethebed,channel,orbankofariver,stream,orlake;orusematerialfroma27streambed.28

Inpractice,CDFGmarksitsjurisdictionallimitatthetopofthestreamorlakebankortheouteredge29oftheriparianvegetation,wherepresent,andsometimesextendsitsjurisdictiontotheedgeofthe30100‐yearfloodplain.Becauseriparianhabitatsdonotalwayssupportwetlandhydrologyorhydric31soils,wetlandboundaries,asdefinedbyCWASection404,sometimesincludeonlyportionsofthe32riparianhabitatadjacenttoariver,stream,orlake.Therefore,jurisdictionalboundariesunder33Section1602mayencompassagreaterareathanthoseregulatedunderCWASection404.34

CDFGentersintoaStreambedAlterationAgreementwithanapplicantandcanrequestconditionsto35ensurethatnonetlossofwetlandvaluesoracreagewillbeincurred.Thestreambedorlakebed36alterationagreementisnotapermitbut,rather,amutualagreementbetweenCDFGandthe37applicant.38



3.7‐11 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

CaliforniaFishandGameCodeSection1602mayapplytotheprojectareaiftheprojectincludes1constructionoroperationoffacilitiesinstatejurisdictionalwaters,suchasdrainagechannelsand2desertwashes,whicharepotentiallypresentattheprojectsite.3

Bird/Raptor Protections in the Fish and Game Code 4

SimilartothefederalMBTA,Section3503oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeprohibitstake,5possession,ordestructionofeggsandnestsofallbirds.Section3503.5prohibitsthekillingofraptor6speciesandthedestructionofraptornests.Takeorpossessionofanymigratorynon‐gamebirdas7designatedintheMBTAisprohibitedunderSections3513and3800.Section86oftheFishand8GameCodedefines“take”as“hunt,pursue,catch,capture,orkill,orattempttohunt,pursue,catch,9capture,orkill.”10

Theprojectareaincludeshabitatthatsupportsraptorspecies.11

California Desert Native Plants Act 12

TheCaliforniaDesertNativePlantsAct(Division23oftheCaliforniaFoodandAgricultureCode)13regulatestheunlawfulharvestingonbothpublicandprivatelyownedlandsofspecifieddesert14nativeplants.Anyspecifieddesertnativeplantsrequireapermitissuedbythecommissionerofthe15countyinwhichtheplantsaregrowing.16

TheCaliforniaDesertNativePlantsActregulatesthefollowingdesertnativeplantswhichcannotbe17harvestedexceptunderapermit:18

AllspeciesofBurseraceaefamily(elephanttree).19

Saguarocactus(Carnegieagigantea).20

Californiabarrelcactus(FerocactuscylindraceussynonymFerocactusacanthodes).21

Crucifixionthorn(Castelaemoryi).22

Panamintdudleya(Dudleyasaxosa).23

Bristleconepine(Pinuslongaeva).24

Californiafanpalm(Washingtoniafilifera).25

Althoughacompletesurveyhasnotbeenconductedoftheprojectarea,todatenoneofthe26speciesregulatedbytheCaliforniaDesertNativePlantsActhavebeenobservedintheproject27area.28

Porter‐Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969 29

ThePorter‐CologneWaterQualityControlActestablishedtheStateWaterResourcesControlBoard30(SWRCB)anddividedthestateintonineregionalbasins,eachwitharegionalwaterqualitycontrol31board.TheSWRCBistheprimarystateagencyresponsibleforprotectingthequalityofthestate’s32surface‐andgroundwatersupplies,whiletheregionalboardsareresponsiblefordevelopingand33enforcingwaterqualityobjectivesandimplementationplans(asdiscussedindetailinSection3.1,34WaterResourcesandWaterQuality).Thisactisrelevanttobiologicalresourcesthatmaybeaffected35instatewatersbecausetheWaterBoardregulatesdischarges,includingconstructionrunoffand36sediment,intostatewaters,includingwatersthatmaybeoutsidefederaljurisdictionunderthe37CWA.SeeSection3.7.5.9belowforadescriptionofwaterswithintheprojectarea.38



3.7‐12 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7.2.3 Local Regulations 1

San Bernardino County Plant Protection and Management 2

Chapter88.01(PlantProtectionandManagement)oftheSanBernardinoCountyPlantProtection3andManagementchapterregulatestheremovalorharvestingofspecifieddesertnativeplantsand4theremovalofvegetationwithin200feetofthebankofastream,orinanareaindicatedasa5protectedriparianareaonanoverlaymaporSpecificPlan.AnyRemovalofspecifieddesertnative6plantsorvegetationwithin200feetofabankorstreamrequiresapprovalofaTreeorPlant7RemovalPermitincompliancewith§Section88.01.050(TreeorPlantRemovalPermits).8

Thefollowingdesertnativeplants,oranypartofthem,exceptfruit,shallnotberemovedexcept9underaTreeorPlantRemovalPermitincompliancewith§Section88.01.050:10

Thefollowingdesertnativeplantswithstemstwo2inchesorgreaterindiameterorsix6feetor11greaterinheight:Smoketree(PsorothamnusspinosasynonymDaleaspinosa)andallspeciesof12thegenusProsopis(mesquites).13

AllspeciesofthefamilyAgavaceae(centuryplants,nolinas,yuccas).14

Creosoterings,ten10feetorgreaterindiameter.15

AllJoshuatrees(Yuccabrevifolia).16

Anypartofthefollowingspecies,whetherlivingordead:desertironwood(Olneyatesota),all17speciesofthegeneraProsopis(mesquites)andCercidium(palosverdes).18

TheSanBernardinoCountyPlantProtectionandManagementordinanceappliestotheprojectarea19duetothepresenceofJoshuatrees.Theotherlocally‐protecteddesertnativeplantswerenot20observedduringfieldsurveys.However,manyoftheprojectareavegetationcommunities(suchas21thecreosotebushscrubthatmaysupportcreosoterings)havethepotentialtosupportthespecies22regulatedbytheSanBernardinoCountyPlantProtectionandManagementordinances.23

3.7.3 Environmental Setting 24

TheprojectareaislocatedwithintheunincorporatedcommunityofHinkleywithasmallarea25extendingintothecitylimitsofBarstow.TheprojectareaissituatedinHinkleyValleyeastand26southeastofLynxCatMountain,westandsouthwestofMountGeneral,andsouthofBlackandOpal27Mountains.Themajorityoftheprojectareaisunderprivateownership(includinglandsownedby28PG&E)butalsoincludesasmallerportionwithinBLM‐managedlands,StateRoute58whichisa29Caltransrightofway,anumberofCounty‐maintainedroadways,andtheHinkleySchool.30Topographically,theprojectareaisrelativelyflatandcontainsonehighpointinthenorth,RedHill.31(U.S.GeologicalSurvey1971).Elevationswithintheprojectarearangefromapproximately2,100to322,300feetabovemeansealevel(amsl).Additionally,theMojaveRiverislocatedinthesouthern33portionoftheprojectarea.34

Theprojectareaisvegetatedwithamosaicofdesertscrubcommunities(whichcontainavarietyof35scrubcommunitytypes)mixedwithagriculturalareas,developedresidentialareasandsmall36privatepropertyholdings.Thelandslocatednortheast,northandwestoftheprojectareaare37primarilyundeveloped.TheWestMojaveDesertEcologicalReserve,ownedandmanagedbyCDFG,38occursnorthof,butoutside,theprojectarea.39



3.7‐13 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7.3.1 Vegetation Communities 1

Thirteendistinctvegetationcommunitiesweremappedwithintheprojectarea(Figure3.7‐1and2Table3.7‐2).Adetaileddescriptionforeachvegetationcommunityisprovidedbelow.3

Table 3.7‐2. Vegetation Communities 4

VegetationCommunity Acres

AllscaleScrub 10,143

AllscaleScrub‐SparsePlaya 1,736

AllscaleScrub‐Disturbed 428

FourwingSaltbushScrub 2

CreosoteBushScrub 2,306

CaliforniaJointFirScrub 263

MojaveRiverWash 702

DesertDunes 721

TamariskThickets 22

RedBromeorMediterraneanGrassGrasslandSemi‐NaturalHerbaceousStands 25

Ruderal/Disturbed/Barren 2,157

Agriculture 1,263

Developed 1,264

Total 21,032

Allscale Scrub 5

Thisvegetationcommunityispresentthroughouttheprojectarea(Figure3.7‐1).Typicalconditions6whereallscalescruboccurswithintheprojectareaincludewashes(orsurfacedrainages,primarily7seasonalintheprojectarea),dissectedalluvialfans,rollinghills,terraces,andedgesoflarge,low‐8gradientwashes.Soilsarecarbonaterich,alkaline,sandy,orsandyclayloams.Withintheproject9areaallscalescrub(Atriplexpolycarpa)ischaracterizedasdominantintheshrubcanopy.Other10shrubsincludecreosotebush(Larreatridentata),whitebur‐sage(Ambrosiadumosa),four‐wing11saltbush(Atriplexcanescens),burrobush(Ambrosiasalsola),spinyhopsage(Grayiaspinosa),sticky12snakeweed(Gutierreziamicrocephala),andpeachdesertthorn(Lyciumcooperi).Theherbaceous13layerisvariablewithseasonalannualsandnon‐nativegrassessuchasEriastrum(Eriastrumsp.),14red‐stemmedfilaree(Erodiumcicutarium),redbrome(Bromusmadritensisssp.rubens),cheatgrass15(Bromustectorum),andcommonMediterraneangrass(Schismusbarbatus).16

Allscale Scrub — Sparse Playa 17

Thisvegetationcommunityispresentinthenorthernandeasternportionsoftheprojectareaandis18associatedwithanunnamedwashthatconveysflowsnorthwestthroughtheprojectareatoHarper19DryLake(Figure3.7‐1).Thiscommunitygenerallycomprisesthesamespeciescompositionasthe20allscalescrubvegetationcommunity;however,thedensityofshrubandherbcoverisnotablyless.21Inaddition,thiscommunitycontainsareasofwashesandplayalakebedsandshoresthatcontain22finesilty,cracked,alkalinesoilssupportingonlyafewscatteredshrubs(e.g.,allscale)andherbs23(e.g.,red‐stemmedfilaree,cheatgrass,andcommonMediterraneangrass).Mojavespineflower24(Chorizanthespinosa)wasobservedwithinseveralofthenorthernplayafeatureswithinthishabitat.25



3.7‐14 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Allscale Scrub — Disturbed 1

Thisvegetationcommunityispresentinthenorthernportionoftheprojectareawherethereare2developedlands(Figure3.7‐1).Basedonfieldobservations,thedisturbedareahasbeenclearedto3variousdegreeswithre‐vegetationofallscalescruboccurringpresently.Thiscommunitygenerally4comprisesthesamespeciescompositionastheun‐disturbedallscalescrubvegetationcommunity;5however,thedensityofshrubandherbcoverisnotablylessduetothedisturbednatureofthearea.6

Fourwing Saltbush Scrub 7

TheFourwingSaltbushScrubvegetationcommunityisdistributedinasmallareainthecentral8portionoftheprojectareaimmediatelynorthofSantaFeAve(Figure3.7‐1).Habitatswithinthe9projectareaincludeplayas,dissectedalluvialfans,androllinghills.Soilsarecarbonate‐rich,10alkaline,sandy,orsandyclayloams.Four‐wingsaltbushisthedominantorco‐dominantvegetation11intheshrubcanopywithcreosotebush,whitebur‐sage,orallscale.Othershrubsincludeburrobush,12spinyhopsage,stickysnakeweed,winterfat(Krascheninnikovialanata),peachdesertthorn,and13bushseepweed(Suaedamoquinii).Theshrublayercanopyisopenorintermittent.Theherbaceous14layerisvariablewithseasonalherbsandnon‐nativegrassessuchasgalletagrass(Pleuraphisrigida),15Indianricegrass(Stipahymenoides),redbrome,cheatgrass,andcommonMediterraneangrass.16

Creosote Bush Scrub 17

Creosotebushscrubisdistributedinthenorthernandsouthwesternportionsoftheprojectarea18(Figure3.7‐1).Habitatswithintheprojectareaincludealluvialfans,uplandslopes,andminor19intermittentwasheswithwell‐drainedsoils.Thisvegetationcommunityischaracterizedbythe20presenceofcreosotebushasthedominantorco‐dominantintheshrubcanopywithfour‐wing21saltbush,whitebur‐sage,orallscale.Othershrubsincludeburrobush,spinyhopsage,sticky22snakeweed,Californiajointfir(Ephedracalifornica),andpeachdesertthorn.Canopyoftheshrub23layerisintermittenttoopen.Theherbaceouslayerisvariablewithseasonalannualsorperennial24grassessuchasgalletagrass,Indianricegrass,redbrome,cheatgrass,andcommonMediterranean25Grassgrassland.26

California Joint Fir Scrub 27

Thisvegetationcommunityisdistributedinthesouthernportionoftheprojectarea(Figure3.7‐1).28Habitatswithintheprojectareaincludeintermittentlyfloodedarroyos,washes,andadjacent29alluvialfans.Soilsarecoarsetomediumsands,loamysands,andsandyclayloams.Thisvegetation30communityischaracterizedwithCaliforniajointfirasthedominantorco‐dominantintheshrub31canopywithfour‐wingsaltbush,whitebur‐sage,orallscale.Canopyoftheshrublayerisopento32intermittent.Theherbaceouslayerisvariablewithseasonalannualsorperennialgrassessuchas33galletagrass,Indianricegrass,redbrome,cheatgrass,andcommonMediterraneangrass.34

Mojave River Wash 35

MojaveRiverwashislocatedalongthesouthernendoftheprojectarea(Figure3.7‐1).Thearea36surroundingtheMojaveRiverissubjecttoannualrainfalleventsthatcancauseheavyfloodingand37scouring,therebykeepingthechannellargelyclearofvegetation.38

State Highway 58

yel

kni

H

nots

gni

viL

State Highway 58

eixiD

Community Blvd

weiV

niatn

uo

M

Riverview

arreS

Highcrest

weivriaF

Coon CanyonMountain General

yel

kni

H

Alcudia

Mountain General

no

yn

aC

no

oC

Fossil Bed

Holstead

tesr

em

mu

S

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

arrei

S

Sunset

Manacor

Mo

un

tain

Vie

w

Plymouth

Acacia

arreS

Sonoma

PG&E HinkleyCompressorStation

HinkleyElementary

School

MO

JA

VE

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

Mount

General

NO

RT

H A

RE

AC

EN

TR

AL

AR

EA

SO

UT

H A

RE

A

Figure 3.7-1Existing Vegetation Communities

K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Fig

_3

.7-1

_V

eg

eta

tion

_co

lor.

mxd

Da

te:

8/6

/201

2

19

16

7

Legend

Project Study Area

OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway

±0 0.5 10.25

Miles

Sources: Based on information from PG&E 2011.

Vegetation

Agriculture

Allscale Scrub

Allscale Scrub - Sparse Playa

Allscale Scrub - Disturbed

Fourwing Saltbush Scrub

Creosote Bush Scrub

California Joint Fir Scrub

Mojave River Wash

Desert Dunes

Tamarisk Thickets

Red Brome or Mediterranean Grass Grassland Semi-Natural Herbaceous Stands

Ruderal/Disturbed/Barren

Developed



3.7‐15 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Desert Dunes 1

ThisvegetationcommunityisdistributedadjacentandsouthoftheMojaveRiver.Thesewind‐blown2sandformationsrangefromsparselyvegetatedtomoderatelyvegetated.Theaerialphotography3analysisrevealedthatthiscommunitycanbehighlyvariableontheamountofvegetationthatis4supportedfromyeartoyear(basedonmajorfloodandwindevents).Vegetativecoverrangedfrom5lowtomoderateduringthefieldassessmentforthisEIR.6

Tamarisk Thickets 7

ThisvegetationcommunityisdistributedwithintheMojaveRiverintheprojectarea.This8vegetationcommunityischaracterizedbysaltcedar(Tamarixramosissima)asthedominantshrub.9Canopyoftheshrublayerisopenandtheherbaceouslayerissparse.10

Noremedialactivitiesareproposedinthiscommunity.11

Red Brome or Mediterranean Grass Grassland Semi‐Natural Herbaceous Stands 12

ThisvegetationcommunityisdistributedinthecentralportionoftheprojectareanorthofSantaFe13Avenueandischaracterizedbyredbrome,commonMediterraneangrass,orArabianschismus14(Schismusarabicus)asdominantorco‐dominantwithothernon‐nativesintheherbaceouslayer.15Withintheprojectarea,theseareasaretypicallyonoradjacenttodevelopedareasand/orhave16beenexposedtoanthropogenicdisturbancesincludinggrazingandoff‐roadvehicles.17

Ruderal/Disturbed/Barren 18

Thisvegetationcommunityisdistributedthroughouttheprojectareaandcharacterizedbymostly19baredisturbedsoilsdominatedbylowgrowingruderal(weedy)vegetationandfewnativespecies.20Thisvegetationcommunityisassociatedwithanthropogenicdisturbances,includingagricultural21practices,residentialclearingandgrubbing,refusedumping,dirtroads,andpowerlineeasements.22

Agriculture 23

Agriculturallandsaredistributedinthecentralandsouthernportionsoftheprojectarea.Thereare24bothactiveorrecentlyactiveagriculturalfieldsandorchardscurrentlyinoperation.Theselands25includetheexistingagriculturaltreatmentunits,whichcurrentlysupportalfalfa.26

Developed 27

Developedareasaredistributedthroughouttheprojectarea.Theseareashavebeenphysically28alteredandtypicallyincludehardscapefeaturesandadjacentlandcommonlyobservedin29associationwiththevariousdevelopmenttypeslocatedwithintheprojectarea(i.e.,suchashouses,30yards,barnsandstockponds),aswellasornamentalplantingassociatedwithsuchfeatures.31

3.7.3.2 Sensitive Natural Communities 32

Sensitivenaturalcommunitiesarethosethatareknowntohavelimiteddistributionintheregion,33supportspecial‐statusplantorwildlifespecies,orreceiveprotectionfromlocalordinances.The34Californiajointfirscrubanddesertdunesplantcommunitiesarelocatedintheprojectareaand35listedbyCDFGashighpriorityforinventory,whichtypicallymeanstheyarerare.Forthisreason,36thesecommunitiesareconsideredsensitivenaturalcommunities.37



3.7‐16 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

NoremedialactivitiesareproposedwithintheareaofCaliforniajointfirscrub.However,if1freshwaterwellsandpipelinesareconstructedtoprovidefreshwaterforremedialactivities,those2wellsandpipelinesmaybewithinareasofCaliforniajointfirscrubsouthofthePG&ECompressor3Station.Newfreshwaterwellsandpipelineswouldbeconstructedtoprovidewatersupplyfor4replacementofdomesticoragriculturalwellsthatmightbeaffectedbyremediation.5

Stateandfederalregulatoryagenciesalsoconsiderriparianhabitatsandwetlandstobesensitive6anddecliningresources.Noriparianhabitatwasobservedwithintheprojectareaduringfield7surveys.8

3.7.3.3 Common Species 9

Theprojectareasupportshabitatforseveralcommonplantandwildlifespecies,AppendixCofthe10BiologicalResourcesStudysummarizesthesespecies.Commonspeciesareabletoadapttochanging11environmentalconditionsandassuchtheirpopulationanddistributionarereadilyavailablewithin12largeareas.13

3.7.3.4 Biological Resources with Special Status 14

Forthepurposeofthisdocument,special‐statusspeciesareplantsandanimalsarethosethatare15legallyprotectedunderthefederalESA,CESA,orotherregulations,aswellasspeciesconsidered16sufficientlyrarebythescientificcommunitytoqualifyforsuchlisting.Special‐statusspeciesare17definedasspeciesthatare:18

listed,proposedforlisting,orcandidatesforlistingunderthefederalESAasthreatenedor19endangered;20

listedorcandidatesforlistingundertheCESAasthreatenedorendangered;21

listedasrareundertheNativePlantProtectionAct;and22

astatespeciesofspecialconcernorfullyprotectedspecies23

Astatespeciesofspecialconcernisaspecies,subspecies,ordistinctpopulationofafish,24amphibian,reptile,bird,ormammalnativetoCaliforniathatcurrentlysatisfiesoneormoreof25thefollowing(notnecessarilymutuallyexclusive)criteria:26

isextirpatedfromtheStateor,inthecaseofbirds,initsprimaryseasonalorbreedingrole;27

islistedasFederally‐,butnotState‐,threatenedorendangeredormeetstheStatedefinition28ofthreatenedorendangeredbuthasnotformallybeenlisted;29

isexperiencing,orformerlyexperienced,serious(non‐cyclical)populationdeclinesorrange30retractions(notreversed)that,ifcontinuedorresumed,couldqualifyitforStatethreatened31orendangeredstatus;32

hasnaturallysmallpopulationsexhibitinghighsusceptibilitytoriskfromanyfactor(s)that,33ifrealized,couldleadtodeclinesthatwouldqualifyitforStatethreatenedorendangered34status.35

TheCaliforniaNativePlantSociety(CNPS)maintainslistsofplantsasrareorendangered.Unless36separatelylistedbythestateorfederalgovernmenttheplantsontheCNPS’listsarenotformally37protectedinlaw.TheCNPSlistsareasfollows:38



3.7‐17 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

CaliforniaRarePlantRankList1A:plantspresumedextinct1

CaliforniaRarePlantRankList1B:plantsrare,threatened,orendangeredinCaliforniaand2elsewhere3

CaliforniaRarePlantRankList2:plantsrare,threatened,orendangeredinCalifornia,butmore4numerouselsewhere5

CaliforniaRarePlantRankList3:plantsaboutwhichmoreinformationisneeded—areviewlist6

CaliforniaRarePlantRankList4:plantsoflimiteddistribution—awatchlist7

PlantslistedonCNPSList1A,1B,or2meetthedefinitionofSection1901,Chapter10(NativePlant8ProtectionAct)andSections2062and2067(CESA)oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCode.Thus,for9thepurposesofthisEIR,plantsonCNPSList1A,1B,or2areconsidered“rare”plantsforthe10purposesofimpactevaluation.11

Special‐statusspeciesarethusalsodefinedasincludingplantspecieswithCaliforniaRarePlant12Ranks(CRPR)of1A,1B,or2species.13

State‐ and Federally‐Listed Plants 14

Onefederallythreatenedplantspecieswasidentifiedashavingpotentialtooccurintheproject15area:LaneMountainmilk‐vetch(Astragalusjaegerianus).Adetailedspeciesdescriptionisprovided16intheBiologicalResourcesStudy(AppendixC).17

Therelikelyarenostate‐listedendangeredorthreatenedplantspecieswithpotentialtooccurinthe18projectarea.19

Lane Mountain Milk‐Vetch 20

LaneMountainmilk‐vetchisknowntooccuratthreedistinctlocationsnorthofBarstowonthe21slopesofLaneMountainandwithinParadiseValley(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011,22ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012).Criticalhabitatformilk‐vetchwasdesignatedonMay19,232011.Criticalhabitatconsistsofthemixeddesertscrubcommunitywithintherangeofmilk‐vetch24thatischaracterizedbyshallowsoilsatelevationsbetween3,100and4,200feet(945to1,280m)25andhostshrubsatthosesameelevations(FinalRevisedDesignationofCriticalHabitatfor26AstragalusJaegerianus,76Fed.Reg.29,108,29,127(May19,2011)(tobecodifiedat50C.F.R.pt.2717)).Thedesignatedcriticalhabitatformilk‐vetchislocatedseveralmilesfromtheprojectarea.28

Theprojectareaprovidespotentiallysuitabledesertscrub,whichsupportstheseplants;however,29theprojectareaisbelowtheknownelevationrangeofthespecies.Duetothecloseproximityofthe30historicalrecordsandgiventherelativelylargeamountofdesertscrubonthesite,itwas31determinedthatLaneMountainmilk‐vetchhasalowtomoderatepotentialtooccurwithinthe32allscaleandcreosotescrubhabitatswithintheprojectarea,particularlyontheeasternsideofthe33projectareainassociationwithlowerCoonCanyonandthewesternslopesofMountGeneral(see34Figure3.7‐1).However,remedialactivitiesarelikelylimitedtothelowerelevationsofHinkley35Valley,whichmaylimitpotentialtoactuallyaffectthisspecies.36

Non‐Listed Special‐Status Plants 37

Non‐listedspecial‐statusspeciesarespeciesthatarenotlistedundertheCaliforniaEndangered38SpeciesActorthefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct,butaresufficientlyraretorequirespecial39



3.7‐18 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

considerationandareeithertrackedintheCaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase(CNDDB)or1designatedas“sensitive”bytheBureauofLandManagement.Thirteennon‐listedspecial‐status2plantswereidentifiedintheliteraturesearchandhabitatassessmentasoccurringinthevicinityof3theprojectarea(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame42011,CaliforniaNativePlantSociety2011).Basedonobservedconditionsduringthefieldsurvey,5eightweredeterminedtohaveamoderateorhigherpotentialtooccurwithintheprojectarea:6

Clokey’scryptantha(Cryptanthaclokeyi),7

Desertcymopterus(Cymopterusdeserticola),8

Barstowwoollysunflower(Eriophyllummohavense),9

Mojavemenodora(Menodoraspinescensvar.mohavensis),10

Creamyblazingstar(Mentzeliatridentata),11

Mojavemonkeyflower(Mimulusmohavensis),12

BeaverDambreadroot(Pediomelumcastoreum),and13

Parish’sphacelia(Phaceliaparishii).14

Clokey’s Cryptantha 15

Severalcollectionsofthisspeciesweremadeinthe1930simmediatelynorthofBarstow;however,16nonewcollectionshavebeenmadeintheareasince(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012,17CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).Theprojectareasupportspotentiallysuitabledesert18scrubwhichcansupportthisplantspecies.Assuch,itwasdeterminedthatthisspecieshaslowto19moderatepotentialtooccurwithintheprojectarea,particularlyinassociationwiththeallscale20scrubhabitatonthewestfacingslopesofMountGeneral.21

Desert Cymopterus 22

Severalcollectionsofdesertcymopterushavebeenmadeinthevicinityoftheprojectarea.In23particular,desertcymopteruswascollectednorthoftheprojectareaeastofHarper’sDryLake24(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).The25projectareasupportspotentiallysuitabledesertscrub.Assuch,duetothecloseproximityof26Harper’sDryLaketotheprojectarea,andtherelativelylargeamountofdesertscrubhabitatonsite,27itwasdeterminedthatthisspecieshasmoderatetohighpotentialtooccurintheallscaleand28creosotescrubhabitatswithintheprojectarea.29

Barstow Woolly Sunflower 30

SeveralcollectionsofthisspecieshavebeenmadeeastandnorthoftheprojectareanearBarstow31(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).The32projectareasupportspotentiallysuitableallscaleandcreosotescrubhabitatforthisspecies.As33such,itwasdeterminedthatthisspecieshasmoderatetohighpotentialtooccurwithintheallscale34andcreosotescrubhabitatsintheprojectarea.35

Mojave Menodora 36

ThisspecieshasbeencollectednortheastoftheprojectareaatthehighpointofWatermanHills37(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).The38



3.7‐19 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

projectareasupportspotentiallysuitabledesertscrubhabitat.Assuch,itwasdeterminedthatthis1specieshaslowtomoderatepotentialtooccuronsitewithintheallscaleandcreosotescrub2habitats,particularlytheeasternportionoftheprojectareaassociatedwiththewesternslopesof3MountGeneral.4

Creamy Blazing Star 5

ThisplanthasbeencollectedeastoftheprojectareaintheWatermanHills(Consortiumof6CaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).Theprojectareasupports7potentiallysuitabledesertscrubinassociationwithrocky,gravelly,andsandysubstrates.Assuch,it8wasdeterminedthatthisspecieshasamoderatepotentialtooccurwithintheprojectareainthe9allscaleandcreosotescrubhabitats,particularlytheeasternportionoftheprojectareaassociated10withthewesternslopesofMountGeneral.11

Mojave Monkeyflower 12

Thisspeciesisknowntooccurintheprojectareafromasingle1941collection.Thiscollectionwas13madejusteastoftheintersectionofLenwoodRoadandSantaFeAvenueontheeasternsideofthe14projectarea.Severalotheroccurrencesaremappedinthevicinityoftheprojectarea(California15DepartmentofFishandGame2011).Theprojectareasupportspotentiallysuitablerockytosandy16desertscrub.Assuch,itwasdeterminedthatthisspecieshasmoderatetohighpotentialtooccuron17thesiteintheallscaleandcreosotescrubaswellasinthedesertduneandMojaveriverwash18habitatswithintheprojectarea.19

Beaver Dam Breadroot 20

Severalcollectionsofthisspecieshavebeenmadebothsouthandeastoftheprojectarea21(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).The22projectareasupportspotentiallysuitabledesertscrub.Assuch,itwasdeterminedthatthisspecies23hasmoderatepotentialtooccurwithintheallscaleandcreosotescrubhabitatintheprojectarea.24

Parish’s Phacelia 25

SeveralcollectionsofthisspecieshavebeenmadeeastoftheprojectareainthevicinityofBarstow26(ConsortiumofCaliforniaHerbaria2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).The27projectareacontainspotentiallysuitabledesertscrubandplayahabitat.Assuch,itwasdetermined28thatthisspecieshaslowtomoderatepotentialtooccurwithintheallscaleandcreosotescrub29habitatswithintheprojectarea.30

State‐ and Federally Listed Wildlife 31

Sixfederallyand/orstate‐listedthreatenedandendangeredwildlifespecieshaveapotentialto32occurwithinthegeographicalvicinityoftheprojectareabasedonbackgroundresearch(California33DepartmentofFishandGame2011)butonlytwoweredeterminedtohavesomepotentialtooccur34basedonobservedconditionsduringthefieldevaluation.Thesewerethedeserttortoiseandthe35Mohavegroundsquirrel.DetailedspeciesdescriptionsareprovidedintheBiologicalResourcesStudy36(AppendixC).37

Desert Tortoise 38

TheMojavepopulationofdeserttortoise(Gopherusagassizii)waslistedasthreatenedunderthe39federalEndangeredSpeciesActonApril2,1990(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1990)andwaslisted40



3.7‐20 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

asthreatenedundertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesActin1989.ThroughoutmostoftheMojave1Desert,tortoisesoccurmostcommonlyongentlyslopingterrainwithsandy‐gravelsoilsandwhere2thereissparsecoveroflow‐growingshrubs,whichallowsestablishmentofherbaceousplants.Soils3mustbelooseenoughfordiggingofburrows,butfirmenoughsothatburrowsdonotcollapse.4

TheprojectareapartiallyoverlapsportionsoftheSuperior‐CroneseDWMA,whichisdesignatedby5BLMasAreasofCriticalEnvironmentalConcern(ACEC)(Figure3.7‐2),andislocatedwithinthe6westernrecoveryunitfordeserttortoise(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2011a).7

Deserttortoiseisthoughttohavethepotentialtooccurthroughouttheprojectarea(California8DepartmentofFishandGame2011)(Figure3.7‐3).CNDDBalsoincludedtwolocationsfordesert9tortoisesightings:oneoccurringjusteastoftheprojectareaonthewesternslopesofMount10General,andthesecondoccurringwestoftheprojectareaontheeastsideofIndianWellsRoadjust11northofStateHighway58(Hwy58).12

DeserttortoiseobservationdatawerealsoprovidedbyHaley&AldrichonFebruary15,2012,based13onbiologicalsurveyscompletedbyPG&Eintheprojectarea.Itisnotedthatsomeoftheobserved14deserttortoisecouldbedomesticatedindividuals(notwild).Figure3.7‐3showsthesedesert15tortoisesightings.16

Basedonthehabitatconditionswithintheprojectareaandthepreviousdeserttortoiselocations,17thedeserttortoisewasdeterminedtohavelowtohighpotentialtooccurthroughoutthe18undevelopedportionsoftheprojectarea,withsomeareasbeingoccupiedbythespecies.Figure3.7‐219showsabroadoverviewofthesuitabilityofthehabitatbasedonthefollowingbreakdownof20mappedplantcommunities:moderate‐qualitytohigh‐qualitysuitablehabitatincludesallscale21scrub,allscalescrub—sparseplaya,allscalescrub—disturbed,fourwingsaltbushscrub,creosote22bushscrub,andCaliforniajointfirscrub;low‐qualitysuitablehabitatincludes,MojaveRiverwash,23desertdunes,tamariskthickets,redbromeorMediterraneangrassgrassland,semi‐natural24herbaceousstands,andruderal/disturbed/barren;unsuitabledeserttortoisehabitatincludes25developedandagricultureareas.26

Vegetationcommunitiesconsideredtohavealowpotentiallackthequantityandqualityof27characteristicstypicallyassociatedwithoccupieddeserttortoisehabitats.Forexample,desert28tortoiserequireaburrowingsubstrate;however,communitiessuchasMojaveRiverWashand29desertdunesaredynamicandmaylackstabilizedsoilssuitableforburrowing,althoughburrowing30remainspossibleintheseareas.Althoughtheseconditionsmightprecludeanoccupiedburrow,31foragingandmovementmayoccur.Othervegetationcommunitieswithintheprojectarea,suchas32tamariskthickets,redbromeorMediterraneangrassgrasslands,semi‐naturalherbaceousstands,33andruderal/disturbed/barren,areofsuchpoorqualityintermsofforagingmaterial,soils,and34magnitudeofdisturbancesthatoccupationmightbeprecludedoroccuratalowlevel.However,if35theselow‐qualityhabitatsarelocatedadjacenttoandinterspersedwithmoderate‐tohigh‐potential36vegetationcommunities,asisthecaseintheprojectarea,thelikelihoodofoccurrenceisincreased.37

Criticalhabitatforthedeserttortoisewasdesignatedin1994.Thiscriticalhabitatconsistsofthe38followingprimaryconstituentelements:(1)sufficientspacetosupport‐viablepopulationsand39provideformovements,dispersal.andgeneflow;(2)sufficientquantityandqualityofforage40speciesandthepropersoilconditionstoprovideforthegrowthofsuchspecies;(3)suitable41substratesforburrowing,nesting,andoverwintering;(4)burrows,calichecaves,andothershelter42sites;(5)sufficientvegetationforshelterfromtemperatureextremesandpredators;and(6)habitat43protectedfromdisturbanceandhuman‐causedmortality.Designatedcriticalhabitatforthedesert‐44

State Highway 58

yel

kni

H

nots

gni

viL

State Highway 58

eixiD

Community Blvd

weiV

niatn

uo

M

Riverview

arreS

Highcrest

weivriaF

Coon Canyon

Mountain General

yel

kni

H

Alcudia

Mountain General

no

yn

aC

no

oC

Fossil Bed

Holstead

tesr

em

mu

S

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

arrei

S

Sunset

Manacor

Mo

un

tain

Vie

w

Plymouth

Acacia

arreS

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

MO

JA

VE

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

Mount

General

Hin

kle

y R

d

NO

RT

H A

RE

AC

EN

TR

AL

AR

EA

SO

UT

H A

RE

A

Figure 3.7-2Suitable Desert Tortoise and Mohave Ground Squirrel Habitat

K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Fig

_3

.7-2

_H

ab

itat_

colo

r.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

012

1

91

67

Legend

Project Study Area

OU1

OU2

OU3

Existing Agricultural Units

Roads

Santa Fe Railway

Desert Tortoise Critical Habitat (2010)

Desert Wildlife Management Area

Habitat

Low Quality Habitat

Moderate to High Quality Habitat

Unsuitable

±0 0.5 10.25

Miles


"/

"/"/"/

&-&-

&-&-

&-

&-

&-

&-

&-

&-

&- &-&-

&-

&-&-

&-

&-

State Highway 58

yel

kni

H

nots

gni

viL

State Highway 58

eixiD

Community Blvd

weiV

niatn

uo

M

Riverview

arreS

Highcrest

weivriaF

Coon Canyon

Mountain General

yel

kni

H

Alcudia

Mountain General

no

yn

aC

no

oC

Fossil Bed

Holstead

tesr

em

mu

S

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

arrei

S

Sunset

Manacor

Mo

un

tain

Vie

w

Plymouth

Acacia

arreS

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

MO

JA

VE

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

Mount

General

Hin

kle

y R

d

NO

RT

H A

RE

AC

EN

TR

AL

AR

EA

SO

UT

H A

RE

A

Mohave ground squirrel

Mojave fringe-toed lizard

Figure 3.7-3Special-Status Species Occurrences

K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Fig

_3

.7-3

_S

pe

cia

lSta

tusS

pe

cie

s_co

lor.

mxd

Da

te:

8/6

/20

12

1

91

67

Legend

Project Study Area

IRZ Area

OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway

Haley & Aldrich

&- Live desert tortoise

&- Shelter-class 1: active occupied

&- Shelter

&- Shelter-inactive

"/ Burrowing Owl

Personal Observations

") Desert Tortoise (PG&E Staff)

") Mojave Ground Squirrel (PG&E Staff)

") Northern Harrier (ICF Staff)

") Mojave Spineflower (ICF Staff)

") Loggerhead Shrike (ICF Staff)

") Burrowing Owl (ICF Staff)

CNDDB Data

Mojave monkeyflower

Chaparral sand verbena

Mojave Fringe-toed Lizard

Mojave Ground Squirrel


Superior-Cronese DWMA

±0 0.5 10.25

Miles

Mojave fringe-toed lizard

Chaparral sand verbena

Mojave monkeyflower




3.7‐21 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

tortoiseencompassesportionsoftheMojaveandColoradoDeserts(59Fed.Reg.5,820,5,822(Feb.18,1994)).BasedonareviewofUSFWSCriticalHabitatdocumentationandmaps,criticalhabitatfor2thedeserttortoiseismappedwithinasmallportionoftheprojectarealocatedontheeastern3boundaryjustsouthofMountGeneral(Figure3.7‐2)(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2011b).4

Mohave Ground Squirrel 5

Mohavegroundsquirrel(Xerospermophilusmohavensis)waslistedasthreatenedunderCESAin61993.Thereiscurrentlynofederallistingforthisspecies.TheMohavegroundsquirreldoesnot7appearhaveaplantcommunitypreference,asitoccursintheexactproportionasthedistributionof8plantcommunitieswithinitsrange(BureauofLandManagement2005).Theplantcommunities9withthehighestpercentageofoccurrenceandthereforethehighestpercentageofMohaveground10squirreloccurrenceareMojavecreosotebrushscrub,desertsaltbushscrub,andMojavemixed11woodyscrub(BureauofLandManagement2005).TheMohavegroundsquirrelisabsentfromsteep,12veryrockyareasandplayas(i.e.,asandy,salty,ormud‐cakedflatfloorofadesertdrainagebasin13thatisperiodicallycoveredwithwater).SoilcharacteristicsareimportantbecauseMohaveground14squirrelsconstructburrowstoshelterfromtemperatureandhumidityextremes,toescape15predators,andtogivebirth(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2010a).16

Mohavegroundsquirrelhasbeenrecordednearbyandintheprojectarea.TheCNDDBliststwo17historicrecordsforthisspeciesasoccurringwithintheBarstow,HinkleyandWaterValleyUSGS18quads(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).Onerecorddated1982isfromtheBarstow19area,whereoneMohavegroundsquirrelwasdetectedjustnorthwestoftheFortIrwinRoad/SR5820junction.Asecondreportdated1990wasrecordedasoccurringwithintheprojectareaatthe21junctionofLenwoodRoadandCommunityBoulevard(Figure3.7‐3)whereallscalescrubwas22mappedduringthishabitatassessment.Thisrecordstatesthatanunknownnumberofindividuals23wererecordedintheareabetweenMarch1andApril30.AbiologicalconsultantworkingforPG&E24biologistsobservedananimalthatwaspotentiallyaMohavegroundsquirrelinearly2012near25FrontierRoadwithintheprojectarea.Finally,Leitner(2008)describesanon‐specificlocationof26MohavegroundsquirreldetectedattheedgeofanalfalfafieldnearHarperDryLake.Duetothe27historicrecordsandthepresenceofsuitablehabitat,itisconcludedthatMohavegroundsquirrel28hasthepotentialtooccurthroughouttheprojectarea.29

Non‐Listed Special‐Status Wildlife 30

Therearefivenon‐listedspecial‐statusspecieswithpotentialtooccurwithintheprojectarea31(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011)(AppendixC).Burrowingowl,loggerheadshrike,32northernharrier,Americanbadger(Taxideataxus),Mojaverivervole(Microtuscalifornicus33mohavensis),andMojavefringe‐toedlizardweredeterminedtohavemoderatetohighpotentialfor34occurrencebasedoncurrenthabitatconditionswithintheprojectarea.Non‐listedspecial‐status35speciesdetectedwithintheprojectareaduringfieldsurveysinDecember2011includeloggerhead36shrikeandnorthernharrier.DetailedspeciesdescriptionsareprovidedintheBiologicalResources37Study(AppendixC).Thesespeciesaresummarizedbelow.38

Burrowing Owl 39

BurrowingowlisdesignatedaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernbyCDFGandaBLMsensitive40species.Theburrowingowlrequireshabitatwiththreebasicsoilandvegetalattributes:open,well‐41drainedterrain;short,sparsevegetation;andundergroundburrowsorburrow‐likeopenings.42



3.7‐22 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Throughouttheirrange,mostburrowingowlsrelyonburrowsexcavatedbygroundsquirrels,1badgers,foxes,deserttortoise,andcoyotes.2

Burrowingowlshavebeenrecordedinthevicinityoftheprojectarea,withseveralrecordedtothe3westandsouthoftheprojectareain2007(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).They4havealsobeenobservedwithintheprojectareaneartheintersectionofAcaciaStreetandtheSanta5FeRailroad(Knutsonpers.comm.).Inaddition,burrowingowloccurrencedatawereprovidedby6Haley&AldrichonFebruary15,2012,basedonbiologicalsurveysimplementedbyPG&Eand7conductedbyCH2MHillintheprojectarea(seeFigure3.7‐3).8

Themajorityoftheprojectarea(outsideofdevelopedareasbutincludingalfalfafields)provides9low‐tohigh‐qualityforaginghabitatforthisspecies,andanyareaswithsuitableburrowswould10providepotentialnestinghabitat,shelter,andrefuge.Alfalfafieldscanprovidehigh‐qualityforaging11habitatforburrowingowl:suchfieldsmightbeparticularlyattractivetoburrowingowlasforaging12areasintheprojectarea.13

Loggerhead Shrike 14

LoggerheadshrikeisdesignatedaspeciesofspecialconcernbyCDFGonlywhennesting.Allother15non‐nestingoccurrencesofloggerheadshrikearenotconsideredsensitive.Loggerheadshrikes16breedmainlyinshrublandsoropenwoodlandswithafairamountofgrasscoverandareasofbare17ground.Theyrequiretallshrubsortrees(andalsousefencesorpowerlines)forhuntingperches,18territorialadvertisement,andpairmaintenance;openareasofshortgrasses,forbs,orbareground19forhunting;andlargeshrubsortreesfornestplacement.Theyalsoneedimpalingsitesforprey20manipulationorstorage;suchsitescanincludesharp,thorny,ormulti‐stemmedplantsandbarbed‐21wirefences(Yosef1996).Nestsaregenerallywellhiddenintallershrubsorlowintrees,andare22oftenlocatedinareaswherethereisabreakinthelandscape,suchasatthebaseofslopesoredgeof23awoodlandorclumpoftrees(Yosef1996).24

Theliteraturesearchprovidedtwoobservationrecordsforloggerheadshrikeslocatedsouthof25HarperDryLakeapproximatelysixmileseastoftheprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand26Game2011).DuringtheDecember20,2011fieldsurvey,ICFstaffobservedloggerheadshrikesin27twoseparatelocationsinthenorthernportionoftheprojectareaalongHinkleyRoad(Figure3.7‐3).28Theseindividualswereobservedperchedontheoverheadtelephonelinelocatedonthewestsideof29HinkleyRoadandappearedtobeforagingtotheeastwithintheprojectarea.30

Themajorityoftheprojectarea(outsideofthedevelopedareas)provideshigh‐qualityforagingand31nestinghabitatforloggerheadshrike.32

Northern Harrier 33

NorthernharrierisdesignatedaspeciesofspecialconcernbyCDFGonlywhennesting.Allother34non‐nestingoccurrencesofnorthernharrierwouldnotbeconsideredtobesensitive.Thisspeciesis35knowntobreedandforageinavarietyofhabitatsthatprovideappropriatevegetationcover,36abundanceofpreyandsuitableperchsites(GardaliandShuford2008).Thesehabitatstypically37includefresh,brackish,andsaltwatermarshes;meadows,lakemargins,rivers,andstreams;38grasslands,openfields,pastures,andsomecroplandssuchasalfalfaandgrain;sagebrushflats,and39desertsinks(GardaliandShuford2008).Thenorthernharrierisaground‐nestingbirdandoften40nestswithinareasofdense,tallundisturbedvegetation.Thenorthernharrierpreysonavarietyof41small‐tomedium‐sizedvertebratessuchasrodentsandpasserines.42



3.7‐23 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Duringthefieldsurvey,asinglemalenorthernharrierwasobservedwithinthenorthernportionof1theprojectareaattheintersectionofMountainViewRoadandTindallRoad(Figure3.7‐3).Gardali2andShuford(2008)concludethatwhilenorthernharrierishistoricallyknowntobreednorthwest3oftheprojectareaatHarper’sDryLake,nobreedingactivityhasbeenobservedatthelakesincethe4mid‐1990s.Itispossiblethatnorthernharriersmightoccasionallynestinagriculturalareasinthe5WestMojave(GarrettandMolinaundated).6

Themajorityoftheprojectareaprovidessuitableforaginghabitatforthenorthernharrier.Suitable7nestinghabitatintheprojectareaisnearlyabsentduetothelackofdense,tall‐undisturbed8vegetation,althoughtheagriculturalareasmayprovidesuitablenestinghabitat.9

American Badger 10

AmericanbadgerisalsodesignatedaspeciesofspecialconcernbyCDFGthatismostabundantin11drieropenstagesofmostshrubandherbaceoushabitats,withfriablesoils(Ahlborn1988–1990).12Badgersdigburrowsinfriablesoilforcoverandfrequentlyreuseoldburrows,althoughsomemay13diganewdeneachnight,especiallyinsummer(MessickandHornocker1981).Long(1973)and14Jageretal.(2006)haveshownthatbadgersarebornapproximatelyinlateMarchandearlyApril15andleavethenataldeninlateJuneandearlyJuly.16

TheliteraturesearchprovidedtwoobservationrecordsforAmericanbadgerlocatedapproximately172.5and3mileswestoftheprojectareaandnorthofHwy58.18

Themajorityoftheprojectarea(outsideofdevelopedareas)providesmoderatequalityforaging19anddenninghabitatforthisspecies.20

Mojave River Vole 21

MojaveRivervoleisdesignatedaspeciesofspecialconcernbyCDFG.Thisspeciesoccursinhabitat22thatismoist,includingmeadows,freshwatermarshes,andirrigatedpastures,inlocationsinthe23vicinityoftheMojaveRiver.Suitablehabitatisassociatedwithpondsandirrigationcanalsalong24withtheMojaveRiverproper,aswellasadjacentirrigatedland,suchasalfalfafields(Williams251986).IntheMojaveRiver,thisvolehasbeenrecordedincattailmarsh/wetlandhabitatthatis26subjectedtoannualfloodingandriparian‐associatedhabitatsthatproviderefugeduringannual27flooding.Theyalsoutilizeadjoininguplandhabitatduringunusuallyhighwaterlevels.28

TheclosestrecordedlocationofMojaveRivervoleis7milestothenorthwestoftheprojectarea29(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).TheclosestsuitablenativehabitatintheMojave30River(basedonaerialphotographyanalysis)appearstobeapproximately5milestothesouthwest.31Alfalfafieldslocated1.6milessouthwestoftheMojaveRivercouldprovidesuitablehabitatforthis32vole.33

TheobservedareasoftheMojaveRiverthatoccurintheprojectareaprovidedonotprovide34suitablemoisthabitatsfortheMojaveRivervole.However,numerousareasofalfalfafieldsand35otherfallowfieldsincloseproximitytotheMojaveRivercouldprovidesuitablehabitat.Withinthe36projectarea,irrigatedlandinpastureorusedtogrowalfalfahavelowpotentialtosupportMojave37Rivervole.38



3.7‐24 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Mojave Fringe‐Toed Lizard 1

Mojavefringe‐toedlizardisdesignatedanspeciesofspecialconcernandaBLMsensitivespecies.2Thisspeciesisrestrictedtoareaswithfine,aeoliansand(orsandsthatareformedbywinds),3includingbothlargeandsmalldunes,marginsofdrylakebedsandwashes,andisolatedpockets4againsthillsides.Theseareasaregenerallywithincreosotescrubdesertbetweenelevationsof300–53,000feet(90–10m).Sandduneecosystems,includingtheirsourcesandandsandcorridors,are6necessaryforthelong‐termsurvivorshipofaeoliansandspecialists,suchasfringe‐toedlizards7(Barrows1996).BreedingactivityoccursbetweenAprilandJuly(Mayhew1964).Femaleslay1to58eggsinhummocksorsandyhillsduringthemonthsofMaythroughJuly.Hatchlingsappearin9September(MillerandStebbins1964).10

AsshowninFigure3.7‐3,Mojave‐fringe‐toedlizardswererecordedattwolocationsinthe11southwesternportionoftheprojectareain2010(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011),12specificallywithinCaliforniajointfirscrubanddesertdunescommunities(Figure3.7‐1).13

Basedoninformationinrecentrecords,areaswithinthestudyareaclassifiedasCaliforniajointfir14scrub,desertdunes,andtheinterveningMojaveriverwashareconsideredhighlysuitablehabitat15forMojave‐fringe‐toedlizards.16

Other Wildlife Species 17

Raptors 18

Avarietyofraptorspecieswereobservedduringthefieldsurvey,includingred‐tailhawk(Buteo19jamaicensis),prairiefalcon(Falcomexicanus)andAmericankestrel(Falcosparverius).Theprimary20agriculturalcropgrowninthestudyareaisalfalfa,whichhasbeenshowntohaveapositive21relationshipwithraptorspeciessuchasSwainson’shawk(Smallwood1995,Pandolfinoetal.2011).22Duetotherelativelyopennatureofthedesertscrubwithintheprojectareaincombinationwiththe23patchworkofactiveagriculturalandnon‐activedisturbedfields,theprojectareawasdeterminedto24providequalityforagingopportunitiesforraptorspeciesintheregion.25

Desert Kit Fox 26

Desertkitfoxoccursindesertareaswithannualgrasslandsorgrassyopenstagesofvegetation27dominatedbyscatteredbrush,shrubs,andscrub.Coverisprovidedbydensthatareduginopen,28levelareaswithloose‐textured,sandyandloamysoils.Egoscue(1962)reportsthatmostpupsborn29FebruarythroughApril,followingagestationperiodof49to55days.30

Themajorityoftheprojectarea(outsideofdevelopedareas)providesmoderatequalityforaging31anddenninghabitatforthisspecies.32

3.7.3.5 Wildlife Corridors 33

Theopennatureoftheprojectareaprovidestheopportunityforwildlifemovement.Thespecies34expectedtomoveacrosstheprojectareincludesmall‐tomedium‐sizedmammals,birds,and35reptiles,includingthedeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrel.Wildlifemovementisexpectedto36behigheralongthenaturalcorridorsoftheprojectarea,suchastheeast‐westcorridoralongthe37MojaveRiver.Additionally,thelargeopenareasofdesertscrubhabitatproviderelatively38unrestrictedmovementacrosstheprojectarea.39



3.7‐25 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7.3.6 Jurisdictional Waters 1

TheonlysurfacewatersintheprojectareaaretheMojaveRiver,smalldesertwashesthatflowsouth2totheMojaveRiveranddesertwashesthatflownorthtoHarperLake.AsdescribedinSection3.1,3WaterResourcesandWaterQuality,nearlyalloftheprojectareawhereremedialactivitieswould4occurdraintothenorth.Inaddition,tributarywashescollecttoadesertwashinthecenterofthe5HinkleyValleywherewatercollectsduringinfrequentlargeraineventsandflowstoHarperLake.6HarperLakeisadrylakeexceptimmediatelyduringandafterstormeventsandsurfacewatereither7evaporatesorpercolate.8

TributariestotheMojaveRiver,includingdesertwashes,maybewatersoftheUnitedStates,butno9jurisdictionaldeterminationfortheprojecthasbeenpreparedtodate(delineationsand10determinationsareusuallydoneatthepermittingphasefollowingCEQA).TheU.S.ArmyCorpsof11EngineershaspreviouslydeterminedthattheMojaveRiverisawateroftheUnitedStates,buthas12notmadeaformaldeterminationrelativetothisproject.DrainagestoHarperLake,whicharethe13bulkofthedrainagesintheprojectarea,areconsideredstatewatersandaresubjecttostate14jurisdictionunderthePorter‐CologneWaterQualityControlAct.TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers15haspreviouslydeterminedthatHarperLakeandtributariestoitarenotwatersoftheUnitedStates.16

3.7.4 Significance Criteria 17

TheStateCEQAGuidelinesAppendixG(14CCR15000etseq.)haveidentifiedsignificancecriteriato18beconsideredwhendeterminingwhetheraprojectcouldhavesignificanteffectsonexisting19biologicalresourceswithintheprojectarea.Forthisanalysis,animpactpertainingtobiological20resourceswasconsideredsignificantunderCEQAifitwouldresultin:21

Asubstantialadverseeffect,eitherdirectlyorthroughhabitatmodifications,onanyspecies22identifiedasacandidate,sensitive,orspecial‐statusspeciesinlocalorregionalplans,policies,23orregulations,orbyDFGorUSFWS.24

Asubstantialadverseeffectonanyriparianhabitatorothersensitivenaturalcommunity25identifiedinlocalorregionalplans,policies,regulationsorbyDFGorUSFWS26

AsubstantialadverseeffectonfederallyprotectedwetlandsasdefinedbySection404ofthe27CWA(including,butnotlimitedto,marshes,vernalpools,etc.)throughdirectremoval,filling,28hydrologicalinterruption,orothermeans.29

Interferesubstantiallywiththemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfishorwildlife30speciesorwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,orimpedetheuseof31nativewildlifenurserysites.32

Conflictwithanylocalpoliciesorordinancesprotectingbiologicalresources,suchasatree33preservationpolicyorordinance;or34

Conflictwiththeprovisionsofanadoptedhabitatconservationplan,naturalcommunity35conservationplan,orotherapprovedlocal,regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan.36

3.7.5 Methodology 37

Thesignificancecriterialistedabovewereusedtodeterminewhetheranimpactwouldbe38significant.TheentireareaofOperableUnit3(OU3,includingOU1andOU2)wasconsideredthe39geographicalextentofphysicaldisturbancerelatedtoremedialactions.Potentialeffectsonspecial‐40



3.7‐26 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

statusspeciesandnaturalcommunitieswithintheprojectareawereevaluatedaccordingtothe1highestlikelihoodofoccurrenceofeachresource.2

Theimpactanalysiscomparesallprojectalternativestoexistingconditions,whichistheCEQA3baseline.Bothdirectandindirectimpactstobiologicalresourceswereconsideredintheanalysis.4Directimpactsarethoseimpactsthatarecausedbytheprojectandoccuratthesametimeandplace5astheactionsthatmaycausetheimpacts(Cal.CodeRegs§15358).Indirectimpactsareimpacts6causedbytheprojectandarelaterintimeorfartherremovedindistancefromtheactionsthat7causetheimpacts,butarestillreasonablyforeseeable(Cal.CodeRegs.§15358).Forexample,8indirectimpactsincludechangedlandconditionsthatinduceforeseeablephysicaleffectsonnatural9systemsincludingecosystems.10

InOU1andOU2wherethefootprintforremedialactivitieswasdefinedintheFeasibility11Study/Addenda,spatialanalysiswasusedtoidentifyhabitatimpactsforthedeserttortoiseand12Mohavegroundsquirrel(asnotedabovemanyoftheotherwildlifespecieshavehabitat13requirementsthatoverlapwiththesetwospecies).Spatialdatabasedonthefeasibility14study/addendaalternativedesignswasusedtoestimatethehabitatimpactsoftheagricultural15units,pipelinesandwellsforallalternatives.TheFeasibilityStudy/Addendadocumentsonly16includedactivitiesinOU1andOU2toaddresstheplumeasitexistedinFebruary2011.Inorder17toaccountfortheexpansionofinfrastructuretoaddressthepotentialexpansionoftheplume18(assumedtobe15%largerthantheQ4/2011plume),additionalacreagewasaddedtothe19FeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdatabasedonthetotalinfrastructureamountsbyalternative20(assummarizedinChapter2,ProjectDescription)includingacreageforagriculturalunits,piping,21wellsandroads.Fortheexpansionareasorwherespatialdatawasnotavailable,twoscenarios22wereusedThefirstscenarioassumedthecharacterofthevegetationcommunities/species23habitatintheexpansionareaswouldhavethesamepercentagehabitatcharacteristicsasinthe24areasidentifybytheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata).Thesecondscenarioassumedthat25theexpansionareaswouldallbesuitable,moderatetohighqualitysuitablespecieshabitatandis26theworst‐casescenario.Theworst‐casescenariomayoverstatethelevelofimpacttoareasof27habitatforthedeserttortoiseandMojavegroundsquirrelassomeareasoflowqualityhabitat28andunsuitablehabitatoccurwithinareaswherepotentialinfrastructuremaybeconstructedas29showninFigure3.7‐2butthisrangeisthoughttobeappropriatefordisclosurepurposesinthis30EIR.Table3.7‐3showstheestimatedvegetationcommunityimpactsbytype,usingaproportional31scaledscenario.32

Duetothelongtimeframerequiredwhenrestoringvegetationandsoilcharacteristicsinthe33desert,allareasofdisturbanceareassumedtobepermanentimpactstohabitat.Inaddition,since34theactionalternativesallhave30to40yeardurationsorlongerandnewinfrastructurewill35requiremaintenanceoverthedurationofremedialactivities,forthepurposesoftheimpact36analysisitisreasonabletoassumepermanentlossofhabitatwheredisturbanceofnativehabitats37isnecessary.38



3.7‐27 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Table 3.7‐3. Potential Vegetation Impacts by Community, Proportional Scaled Scenario (Acres) 1

AllscaleScrub(alltypes)

FourwingSaltbushScrub

Ruderal/Disturbed/Barren Agricultural Developed Total

NoProjectAlternative 4 0 3 0 1 9

Alternative4B 33 1 247 6 17 304

Alternative4C‐2 292 0 130 2 10 434

Alternative4C‐3 301 0 136 2 11 450

Alternative4C‐4 831 0 446 1 1 1,278

Alternative4C‐5 294 0 131 1 10 436

Notes:Totalsmaynotaddduetorounding.Fortheactionalternatives,theareasofpotentialimpactwerescaledupfromfootprintacresfromtheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdataasdescribedinthemethodology.Thus,fortheactionalternatives,theseacreageswillnotmatchthefootprintareasshowninFigures3.7‐5through3.7‐9asthefiguresonlyshowtheareasidentifiedbasedonFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata.AreasscaledupwereassumedtocontainthesameproportionofvegetationcommunitiesasintheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata.Itshouldbenotedthattheprojectmayaffectothernativevegetationtypespresentwithintheprojectareaoverall(suchascreosotebushscrub,Californiajointfirscrub)andnon‐nativevegetationtypes(suchastamariskthickets,orredbromeorMediterraneangrassgrasslandandsemi‐naturalherbaceousstands).ThesevegetationtypesarenotpresentwithinthedisturbanceareasbasedontheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata,butmayneverthelessbeaffectedbyremedialactionsintheexpansionarea.

3.7.6 Impacts 2

Thissectionprovidestheimpactanalysisandmitigationmeasuresrelatedtobiologicalresources.3Theimpactsareorganizedbytopic,whichcorrespondwiththesignificancecriteria.4

3.7.6.1 Special‐Status Species 5

ImpactBIO‐1a:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitatforDesertTortoise(Lessthan6SignificantwithMitigation,NoProjectAlternative;SignificantandUnavoidableforTortoise7Movement,AllActionAlternatives)8

Overview of Impact 9

Theproposedremediationactivitiesunderallalternativeshavethepotentialtoremovehabitatthat10supportsthefederallyprotecteddeserttortoisetherebyresultinginpotentiallysignificantimpacts.11Deserttortoisehabitatisdistributedthroughouttheprojectarea(asshowninFigure3.7‐2).As12explainedinsection3.7.5.5above,criticalhabitathasbeendesignatedforthedeserttortoise.13

Bothconstruction‐relatedandoperationsandmaintenanceactivitiesmaycontributetopotentially14significantimpactsthatcouldresultinthelossofdeserttortoiseindividualsandremovalofdesert15tortoisehabitat.Specifically,theseimpactstodeserttortoisecouldoccurtopotentiallyoccupied16burrowsasaresultofcollision,crushing,entrapment,andremovalofhabitatduetohuman17activitiesduringprojectimplementation.18



3.7‐28 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Table3.7‐4aand3.7‐4bbelowsummarizethepotentialacreagesofhabitatlossofthisspeciesunder1allalternatives,andFigures3.7‐4through3.7‐9showthehabitatimpactareasofeachalternative.2Theseacreagesarescaledtocapturethepotentialextentofbothknownandunknownareaswhere3remediationactivitiescouldoccur,includingpotentialfutureactivities(asdescribedaboveinthe4methodology).Inthetextbelowthetables,onlytheworst‐caseacreagesarecited.5

Table 3.7‐4a. Potential Desert Tortoise and Mohave Ground Squirrel Habitat Impacts, Proportional 6Scaled Scenario (Acres) 7

AlternativeSuitable,LowQuality

Suitable,ModeratetoHighQuality

TotalHabitat(low,Moderate,High) Unsuitable

NoProjectAlternative 3 5 7 2

Alternative4B 247 34 281 23

Alternative4C‐2 130 292 423 12


Alternative4C‐4 446 831 1,276 1


Notes:Totalsmaynotaddduetorounding.Fortheactionalternatives,theareasofpotentialimpactwerescaledupfromfootprintacresfromtheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdataasdescribedinthemethodology.Thus,fortheactionalternatives,theseacreageswillnotmatchtheareasshowninFigures3.7‐5through3.7‐9asthefiguresonlyshowtheareasidentifiedbasedonFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata.Areasscaledupwereassumedtocontainthesameproportionofhabitattypes(unsuitable,lowquality,moderatetohighquality)asintheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata.

Table 3.7‐4b. Potential Desert Tortoise and Mohave Ground Squirrel Habitat Impacts, Worst‐Case 8Scaled Scenario (Acres) 9

Suitable,LowQuality

Suitable,ModeratetoHighQuality

Totalhabitat(low,Moderate,High) Unsuitable

NoProjectAlternative 3 5 7(rounded) 2

Alternative4B 30 271 301 3



Alternative4C‐4 254 1,023 1,277 1


Note:FortheNoProjectAlternative,areasofpotentialimpactareknown,sothisscenarioisthesameastheproportionalcase.Fortheactionalternative,theareasofpotentialimpactwerescaledupfromfootprintacresfromtheFeasibilityStudy/Addendaasdescribedinthemethodology.Thus,fortheactionalternatives,theseacreageswillnotmatchtheareasshowninFigures3.7‐5through3.7‐9asthefiguresonlyshowtheareasidentifiedbasedonFeasibilityStudy/Addendaspatialdata.Areasscaledupwereassumedtocontainmoderatetohighqualitysuitablehabitat.

10

28096

Rectangle



3.7‐29 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Construction Impacts 1

Constructionofnewwellsandallassociatedinfrastructure(i.e.,wellpads,extractionpumps,2transmissionpipelines,in‐situtreatmentequipmentsuchaspumpsanddosingequipment,fencing3tosecureequipmentareas),newaccessroads,above‐groundtreatmentfacilities,andnew4agriculturaltreatmentunitswouldrequirelandclearance,trenching,paving,concretelaying,and5cropplanting.Theseactivitieswouldalsoincreasepresenceofconstructionworkersandstorage6anduseoflargeconstructionvehiclesandequipmentthatmayconflictwiththeexistingopen,7undisturbedareasandadjacentareasthatareinhabitedbydeserttortoiseorwhichcouldserveas8futuresuitablehabitatfordeserttortoise.9

Themajorityofconstructionimpactswouldoccurduringtheinitialbuildoutofwells(all10alternatives),agriculturallandtreatmentunits(allactionalternatives),andabove‐groundtreatment11facilities(Alternatives4C‐3and4C‐5only).Asaresult,deserttortoisemayenterthedisturbedareas12orbecomeentrapped,leadingtoshort‐termandlong‐termremovalorlossofindividualsand13burrowingareas.Continuedconstructionofthesecomponents(insubsequentphases)wouldalso14resultinthesameimpacts.15

Constructionofwellsandassociatedabove‐groundinfrastructureandabove‐groundtreatment16facilitieshasthepotentialtoincreasetheareawheredisturbedlandscapesandnativehabitats17interface.Thisinterfaceareaissubjectedtoedgeeffects1,whichwouldbeunfavorabletodesert18tortoiseoccupancyiftheedgeeffectisadjacenttodeserttortoisehabitat.19

Constructioncouldattractpredatorsbyprovidingpotentialsourcesoffoodandwaterduetotrash,20andconstructionwatering,aswellasperchesprovidedbynewstructuresandperimeterfencing.21Increasedpredatorsintheprojectarea,especiallythecommonraven,couldresultinincreased22predationratesondeserttortoisethatareoccupyingareaswithinandadjacenttodirectareasof23disturbance.24

Constructionofnewaccessroads(bothpavedandunpavedgravel),aswellasincreaseduseof25existingaccessroadsforequipmenthaulingandworkeraccess,wouldcontributetoanincreasein26disturbanceandinfringementofareasoccupiedbydeserttortoise,interruptcrossingand27potentiallyresultinvehicle‐collisionswithindividuals.28

Useofconstructionequipmentwouldcreatenewsourcesofnoiseand/orvibrationaboveexisting29conditions.Thesensitivityofdeserttortoisetonoiseisnotwelldocumented,butBowlesetal.30(1999)showedverylittlebehavioralorphysiologicaleffectontortoisesofloudnoisesthat31simulatedjetfly‐oversandsonicbooms.Inaddition,deserttortoiselargelyresideunderground,32whichwouldincreasesoundattenuation.Finally,theprojectisnotexpectedtoproducesoundlevels33thatwouldbeabove93Leqat50feet.Thustherewouldbelessthansignificantimpacttodesert34tortoisefromconstructionnoise.Itispossiblethattherecouldbeadversevibrationimpactsasa35resultofequipmentandvehicleoperations(Section3.6,Noise,discussesnoiseandvibrationimpacts36ofprojectimplementation)sincegroundvibrationscancausedeserttortoisetoemergefromtheir37burrows(USFWS1994).However,thespecificvibrationthresholdthatmaycauseabehavioral38responseindeserttortoisehasnotbeenstudied.39

1Edgeeffectsaretheunfavorableinteractionbetweennativeanddisturbed/developedhabitatedgeswhereaspectsofthedisturbed/developedareaspillsintothenative/naturalarea.



3.7‐30 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Constructionofallnewremediationfacilitiesalsohasthepotentialtoresultinintroductionand1colonizationofnon‐nativespecies.Proliferationofinvasiveplants(particularlynon‐nativegrasses)2isrecognizedasathreattodeserttortoisehabitatbecausetheyhavealowernutritionalvaluewhen3comparedtonativeforbsandotherplants,andcannegativelychangethenaturalfireregimeby4increasingfirefrequency(duetopresenceofnewvegetation).5

Construction‐relatedimpacts(otherthannoise,butincludingvibrationasapotentialimpact)are6consideredsignificantforallalternativesduetothepotentialfordirectandindirectlossof7individualdeserttortoiseandtheirexistinghabitatsintheprojectarea.However,implementationof8theMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1hwouldavoidorminimizespeciesloss9andhabitatdisturbanceimpactsthroughrequirementstofollowfederalprotocolsforprotection,10limitingareasofdisturbance,eliminatingorreducingconstructionhazardsandopportunitiesfor11predatorestablishment,andconstructionworkertrainingandconstructionmonitoring.12Compensatorymitigationratiosareproposedtomitigateforpermanentremovalofsuitablehabitat13forthisspeciesasdescribedinMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1h.Withimplementationof14mitigation,thepotentiallysignificantconstruction‐relatedimpactstodeserttortoiseareconsidered15lessthansignificant.16

Operations and Maintenance 17

Operationsandmaintenanceactivitieswouldbegenerallysimilaracrossalltreatmentmethods.18Theseactivitiesprimarilyinvolvethefollowingactivities,andallfacilitieswouldbeaccessedfrom19existingornewlyconstructedaccessroads.20

Dailysystemchecks,potentialtroubleshootingandrepair(andreplacementofcomponents)21andgeneralmaintenanceofallequipment,andinfrastructureassociatedwithremediation22facilities.23

Periodicwellrehabilitationandredevelopment.24

Removal,cleaning,andmaintenanceofwellpumps,valves,pipelines,tanks,andappurtenances.25

Planting,coordinatingharvestschedulingandevaluatingcrophealth.26

Collectionofoperatingdataofalloperatingcomponentsatallfacilitysites.27

Measuring,trackingandadjustingofin‐situ,agriculturallandtreatmentandex‐situoperational28processes(pumps,flowrates,etc.).29

Collectionofwaterqualitysamplesforlaboratoryanalysis.30

Completingin‐situremediationcarboninjection.31

Materialsdeliveries.32

Trashandlabwastepickupforoff‐sitetransportation.33

Deserttortoisearenotexpectedtoberegularoccupantsoftheagriculturaltreatmentunits34(includedinallactionalternatives)becausetheyarelargelyunsuitableforthespecies.However,35thereisthepossibilitythattortoisescouldonrareoccasionmovethroughtheseareasandbecome36exposedtoagricultural‐relatedherbicides,pesticides,and/orrodenticidesiftheyareused.37

Atpresent,thereisnodataonlong‐termexposureofwildlifetowaterbornehexavalentchromium38andpotentialadverseeffects.Impactonanimalshasonlybeendemonstratedinlaboratorystudies39wheretheexposurehasbeenintherangeof20,000partsperbillion,whichismanythousandsof40



3.7‐31 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

timesmoreconcentratedthananyconcentrationofchromiumwhichmightappearforashorttime1inanyirrigationwaterusedforagriculturaltreatment.Giventhelackofevidenceforthisimpact,it2isnotidentifiedasasignificantimpact.3

Above‐groundtreatmentfacilities(includedinAlternatives4C‐3and4C‐5)wouldbestaffed244hoursadayatalltimes,andtherewouldbenighttimelightingofallbuildingsatthesefacilities.5Therecouldbeemergencymaintenanceactivitiesduringnighttimehoursrequiringintroductionof6newlightingattheaffectedfacilities.Sincetheentireprojectareaisinterspersedwithmoderateto7highqualitydeserttortoisehabitat,itispossiblethattherecouldbedirectandindirectdisturbance8tobothindividualtortoisesandhabitatasaresultofcollision,crushing,andentrapmentdueto9operationsandmaintenanceactivities.Thefrequencyofoperationsandmaintenanceactivitymay10decreaseascertainfacilitiesarebroughtofflineinlateryears;however,thepotentialforadverse11impactstodeserttortoisewouldstillexist.12

Therefore,theseimpactsareconsideredpotentiallysignificantforallalternatives.Mitigation13MeasuresBIO‐MM‐1ithroughBIO‐MM‐1jwouldminimizepotentialexposureoftortoisesto14agriculturaltreatment‐relatedcontaminantsanddisturbancefromnighttimeactivities.Inaddition,15aspectsofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1fcouldcontinuetobeused16whenevertherearepre‐plannedoperationsormaintenanceactivitiesthoughttopossiblyaffect17tortoisesortheirhabitatasdeterminedbyaqualifiedbiologist.Withimplementationofthese18measures,thisimpactwouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant,withtheexceptionofdesert19tortoisemovement.20

AsexplainedinImpactBIO‐4,theNoProjectAlternativewouldresultinlessthansignificantimpacts21ontortoisemovement,butallactionalternativeswouldresultinperhapsa2‐milecontiguous22corridorofactiveagriculturewhichmayimpedeeast‐westmovementofdeserttortoiseacrossthe23centralpartHinkleyValleyInaddition,thenewagriculturalareaswouldbecontiguoustoother24areasofexistingnon‐projectagriculturealongtheMojaveRiver,whichwouldincreasetheareaof25potentialobstaclestodeserttortoisemovement.Thus,relativetowildlifemovement,allaction26alternativesareconsideredtoresultinasignificantimpacttothedeserttortoise.Feasiblemitigation27wasconsideredforthisimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4),butnofeasiblemitigationwasidentifiedthat28wouldmeetmostoftheprojectgoalobjectivesandwouldreducethisimpacttoalessthan29significantlevel.Assuch,theactionalternativesareconsideredtoresultinasignificantand30unavoidableimpactrelatedtodeserttortoisemovement.31

No Project Alternative 32

TheNoProjectAlternativewouldinvolvecontinuedimplementationofplumecontainmentand33reductionoftheCr[VI]plumeconcentrations.TheprimarydifferencesbetweentheNoProject34Alternativeandexistingconditionsareincreasedin‐situremediationandassociatedwellsandwell35infrastructure.TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotincreaseagriculturaltreatmentunitsor36agriculturaltreatmentoperationsaboveexistingconditions.37

AlthoughtheNoProjectAlternativewouldbelimitedtotheexistingauthorizedareaofremedial38activity,thereispotentialforadverseimpactstodeserttortoisebecausenewoccurrencesofdesert39tortoiseobservanceshavebeenrecordedintheprojectareasince2008(seeFigure3.7‐3).The40primaryareawherenewwellswouldbeconstructediswithinOU1wherethreeSCRIAextraction41wellswouldbeconstructedasshowninFigure3.7‐4.Theseareasarecurrentlydisturbedand/or42urbanized,andthereiscurrentlyahighdegreeofwildlandinterface.Therearealsobothlowand43



3.7‐32 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

moderatetohighqualitysuitablehabitatareasinterspersedbetweentheurbanizedlocales.As1showninTable3.7‐4b,therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofanestimated7acresofsuitablehabitat2undercontinuedremediationactivities.Additionally,recentobservationsconfirmthatdesert3tortoisecouldoccurwithinoradjacenttotheareaswherenewfacilitieswouldbeconstructed.4Theseobservationssuggestthatactive,occupiedandinactiveshelterslikelyexistwithinoradjacent5totheareaswherenewfacilitiesmaybeconstructed.Potentialtoencounterthesespeciesduring6construction,operationsandmaintenancesactivitiesisconsideredtobelikelyeventhoughthe7degreeofdisturbedland‐wildlandinterfacewouldnotchangesignificantlyfromexistingconditions.8ImplementationoftheNoProjectAlternativeisthereforeconsideredtohavepotentiallysignificant9impactsonthedeserttortoiseanditssupportinghabitat.Theseimpactswouldbethesameas10describedintheoverview.WithimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athrough11BIO‐MM‐1j,impactstodeserttortoiseasaresultoftheNoProjectAlternativewouldbeconsidered12lessthansignificant.13

Alternative 4B 14

Alternative4Bwouldexpandtheareaofagriculturallandtreatment(upto264newacres)and15otherremedialinfrastructureincomparisontoexistingconditionsandtheNoProjectAlternative.It16ispossiblethatfutureremediationactivitiescouldoccurinthenorthern,southwestandsoutheast17areasofOU3.AreaswithinOU1andOU2wherenewagriculturalextractionwellsandthenew18agriculturalunitwouldbeconstructedarefairlyurbanizedandthereisahighdegreeofdisturbed19land‐wildlandinterfaceunderexistingconditions.AreasofOU3wherefutureremediationactivities20couldoccuralsocontainurbanizedordisturbedareasbutalsocontainthemajorityofthemoderate21tohighqualitysuitabledeserttortoisehabitatintheprojectarea.Table3.7‐4bshowsthatthere22couldbeaworst‐casedirectlossofupto301acresofsuitablehabitatifAlternative4Bwas23implemented.Additionally,recentfieldobservationshavefoundoccurrencesoflivetortoisesand24occupiedandinactiveshelterswithinoradjacenttotheareaswherethenewagriculturaltreatment25unitandextractionwellswouldbeconstructedaswellasinthenorthernandsoutheasternareas26withinOU3.Figure3.7‐5showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance.Additionaldisturbance27couldoccurinotherareasgenerally.28

Potentialtoencounterdeserttortoiseduringconstruction,operationsandmaintenancesactivitiesis29consideredtobelikelyintheentireprojectarea,eventhoughtheproposedexpansionof30agriculturaltreatmentislimitedtotheexistingdisturbedareasofOU1andOU2.Therefore,impacts31tothisspeciesanditshabitatwouldbethesameasdescribedintheoverview,whichareconsidered32potentiallysignificant.WithimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐33MM‐1j,impactstodeserttortoiseasaresultofAlternative4Bwouldbeconsideredlessthan34significantwiththeexceptionofdeserttortoisemovement,whichisconsideredasignificantand35unavoidableimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4).36

Alternative 4C‐2 37

Alternative4C‐2includesadditionalagriculturallandtreatmentunits(upto392newacres)and38otherremedialinfrastructurethanunderexistingconditions.Itinvolvessimilarcomponentsto39Alternative4B,withtheexceptionofincreasednumberofagriculturalunitsandyear‐round40operationofagriculturallandtreatmentthroughtheadditionofwintercrops(winterryeorsimilar41crop)tomostoftheexistingandnewagriculturalunits.Assuch,theareaofdisturbanceand42encroachmentontomoderatetohighqualitysuitabledeserttortoisehabitat(bothknownandfuture43unknownareasofnewremedialactivity)underthisalternativeissignificantlyexpandedfrom44

!!!!

!

!!!! ! !

!! !

!!

!! !

!!

!! ! ! ! !

! ! !

!! ! !

! !

!

!

!

State Highway 58Hink

ley

Living

ston

State Highway 58 Dixie

Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA

Figure 3.7-4No Project Alternative

Potential Areas of Direct Impacts

K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-4

_Im

pa

cts_

No

Pro

ject

.mxd

Da

te:

8/6

/20

12

1

91

67

LegendProject Study Area

OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable

Potential Direct Impacts (Ag Units, Wells, and Piping)!

Note 1. Impact areas for wells and piping areslightly exaggerated for graphical display.Note 2. Where new wells are proposed withinnew agricultural units, pipelines are excludedfrom acreage calculations (Table 3.7-3) to avoidduplication of habitat impacts. New pipelines areshown for graphical display.

PotentialFuture

RemedialActivity Area

PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


±0 0.5 10.25

Miles

!!!!

!

!!!! ! !

!! !

!!

!! !

!!

!! ! ! ! !

! ! !

!! ! !

! !

!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!

!

!

!

!


ley

Living

ston


Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA

Figure 3.7-5Alternative 4B


K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-5

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4B

.mxd

Da

te:

8/6

/20

12

1

91

67


OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable


Note 1. Impact areas for wells and piping areslightly exaggerated for graphical display.Note 2. Where new wells are proposed withinnew agricultural units, pipelines are excludedfrom acreage calculations (Table 3.7-3) to avoidduplication of habitat impacts. New pipelines areshown for graphical display.Note 3: Number of new wells shown on thisfigure are according to FS/Addenda estimates.It is expected additional infrastructure will benecessary to address the expanded plume.See discussions in text.

PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


±0 0.5 10.25

Miles



3.7‐33 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

existingcondition.Figure3.7‐6showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditional1disturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,2therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofupto430acresofsuitablehabitat.Impactstodeserttortoise3underthisalternativewouldbesimilartobutgreaterthanunderAlternative4Bandsubstantially4morethanexistingconditions;theseimpactsareconsideredpotentiallysignificant.Implementation5ofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1jwouldreducetheseimpactstoaless‐6than‐significantlevelwiththeexceptionofdeserttortoisemovement,whichisconsidereda7significantandunavoidableimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4).8


Alternative4C‐3includesallofthesamenewagriculturaltreatmentunits(upto392acres)andIRZ10infrastructureasAlternative4C‐2,butaddsex‐situtreatmentattwoabovegroundtreatment11facilities,onelocatedintheSourceAreain‐situremediationzoneneartheCompressorStationand12oneinOU2adjacenttotheexistingDesertViewDairylandtreatmentunit.Theproposednew13treatmentinfrastructuresignificantlyexpandstheareaandintensityofremediationactivities14comparedtoexistingconditions.Althoughthenewabovegroundtreatmentfacilitiesareboth15locatedindevelopedareas,theproximitytoadjacentsuitablehabitatcanstillresultinindirect16impacts.Figure3.7‐7showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditionaldisturbance,only17indicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,therecouldbea18worst‐caselossofupto445acresofsuitablehabitat.Impactstodeserttortoiseunderthis19alternativewouldbethesimilartoAlternative4C‐2andareconsideredpotentiallysignificant.20ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1jwouldreducethese21impactstoaless‐than‐significantlevelwiththeexceptionofdeserttortoisemovement,whichis22consideredasignificantandunavoidableimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4).23


Alternative4C‐4wouldsignificantlyincreasetheareaofagriculturaltreatment(byupto1,21225acres)andwouldhaveotherremedialinfrastructurecomparedtoexistingconditions.This26alternativewouldhavethegreatestamountofhabitatimpactstodeserttortoisewithintheOU1and27OU2areasofknownremedialactivitiesandwouldalsohavethegreatestlikelyimpactswithinareas28ofOU3duetoexpandedagriculturaltreatmentnecessarytoaddresstheexpandedplume.Figure293.7‐8showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditionaldisturbance,onlyindicatedin30generalonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,therecouldbeaworst‐caselossof31upto1,277acresofsuitablehabitatfordeserttortoise.Therefore,impactstothisspeciesunderthis32alternativeareconsideredpotentiallysignificantandimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐33MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1jwouldreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevelforall34impactstothisspeciesotherthanwildlifemovementwiththeexceptionofdeserttortoise35movement,whichisconsideredasignificantandunavoidableimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4).36


Alternative4C‐5hasallofthesameagriculturallandtreatment(upto392newacres)asAlternative384C‐2and4C‐3,butaddsex‐situtreatmentatoneabove‐groundtreatmentfacilitylocatedinthe39SourceAreain‐situremediationzone.ItwouldhavesimilarimpactstoAlternatives4C‐2and4C‐3in40comparisontoexistingconditions.Figure3.7‐9showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,but41additionaldisturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable423.7‐4b,therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofupto436acresofsuitablehabitatfordeserttortoise.43



3.7‐34 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Therefore,impactstothisspeciesunderthisalternativeareconsideredpotentiallysignificantand1implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1jwouldreducethese2impactstoaless‐than‐significantlevelwiththeexceptionofdeserttortoisemovement,whichis3consideredasignificantandunavoidableimpact(seeImpactBIO‐4).4

ImpactBIO‐1b:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofhabitatforMohaveGroundSquirrel(Less5thanSignificantwithMitigation,AllAlternatives)6

Overview of Impact 7

OverallconstructionandoperationsandmaintenanceimpactsofallalternativesonMohaveground8squirrelwouldbesimilartothoseofthedeserttortoiseasproposedremediationactivitiesunderall9alternativeshavethepotentialtoinfringeonlowandmoderatetohighqualityMohaveground10squirrelhabitatthroughouttheentireprojectarea(asshowninFigure3.7‐2andTable3.7‐4).11Mohavegroundsquirrelsareknowntoinhabitareasnearagriculturalfieldstofeedoncropssuchas12alfalfa.Theirinhabitanceintheseareasposesasignificantadverseriskoflossofindividualsand13habitatsincetheyconstructanduseburrowsforshelter,whichcouldberemovedduringland14clearingactivitiesforcropplanting,mowingandharvesting.Establishmentofnewagricultural15treatmentunitsmayalsoattractMohavegroundsquirreltoanewfoodsourcetherebyfurther16increasingtheriskofadverseimpactsfromcollision,crushing,andentrapmentduetohuman17activitiesfromprojectimplementation.Predationrisksarenotashighastheyareforthedesert18tortoisesinceMohavegroundsquirrelsspendmostoftheyeardormantandunderground.19

Aswithdeserttortoise,bothconstruction‐relatedandoperationsandmaintenanceactivitiesmay20contributetopotentiallysignificantimpactsthatcouldresultinthelossofMohavegroundsquirrel21individualsandremovalofMohavegroundsquirrelhabitat.ImplementationofMitigationMeasures22BIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1kwouldreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.23

No Project Alternative 24

AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,therecouldbeanestimatedlossofupto7acresofsuitablehabitatfor25Mohavegroundsquirrel(theseareasarethesameasforthedeserttortoiseasbothspeciesshare26thesametypeofsuitablehabitatrequirements).Potentialtoencounterthesespeciesduring27construction,operationsandmaintenancesactivitiesisconsideredtobelikelyeventhoughthe28degreeofwildlandinterfacewouldnotchangesignificantlyfromexistingconditions.29ImplementationoftheNoProjectAlternativeisthereforeconsideredtohavepotentiallysignificant30impactsontheMohavegroundsquirrelanditssupportinghabitat.Theseimpactswouldbethesame31asdescribedintheoverview.WithimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthrough32BIO‐MM‐1k,impactstoMohavegroundsquirrelasaresultoftheNoProjectAlternativewouldbe33consideredlessthansignificant.34

Alternative 4B 35

Alternative4Bwouldexpandtheareaofagriculturallandtreatmentandassociatedagricultural36extractionwellsbetweenSR58andThompsonRoad(withinOU1andOU2).Itispossiblethatfuture37remediationactivitiescouldoccurinthenorthern,southwestandsoutheastareasofOU3.This38alternativewouldalsoincreasetheamountofin‐situremediationandassociatedinfrastructure.39Table3.7‐4bshowsthattherecouldbeaworst‐casedirectlossofupto301acresofsuitablehabitat40forMohavegroundsquirrelunderthisalternative.Figure3.7‐5showstheknownareasofhabitat41

!!!!

!

!!!! ! !

!! !

!!

!! !

! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

! !

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!

!

!

!

!


ley

Living

ston


Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA

PotentialFuture


Figure 3.7-6Alternative 4C-2


K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-6

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4C

-2.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

01

2

19

167


OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable


K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-6

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4C

-2.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

01

2

19

167

±0 0.5 10.25

Miles


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


! !! !! !! !!!!! !!

!!!! ! !

!! !

!!

!! !

! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!!

!!

! !!

!!

!

!! !

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!


ley

Living

ston


Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


±0 0.5 10.25

Miles



K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-7

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4C

-3.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

01

2

19

167


OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable


!!!!

!

!!!! ! !

!! !

!!

!! !

! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

! !

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!


ley

Living

ston


Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


±0 0.5 10.25

Miles



K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-8

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4C

-4.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

01

2

19

167


OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable


! !! !! !!! !

!

!! !!

! ! !

! ! !

! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !! !

!! ! ! ! !

!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!

!

!

!

!


ley

Living

ston


Community Blvd

Moun

tain

Vi

ew

Riverview

Serra

Highcrest

Fairv

iew


Hink

ley

Alcudia

Mountain General

Coon

C

anyo

n

Fossil BedHolstead

Summ

erse

t

Salinas

Burnt Tree

Acacia

Thompson

Sierra

Sunset

Manacor

Moun

tain V

iew

Plymouth

Acacia

Serra

Sonoma


HinkleyElementary

School

M O J A V E

R I V E R

Santa Fe Railway

Santa Fe Railway

MountGeneral

Hink

ley R

d

NORT

H AR

EACE

NTRA

L ARE

ASO

UTH

AREA


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


PotentialFuture


±0 0.5 10.25

Miles



K:\

Pro

ject

s_3

\PG

E\0

08

98

_1

0_

Hin

kle

y\m

ap

do

c\F

igu

res\

Bio

\EIR

\Im

pa

cts\

Fig

_3

.7-9

_Im

pa

cts_

Alt_

4C

-5.m

xd D

ate

: 8

/6/2

01

2

19

167


OU1

OU2

OU3

Roads

Santa Fe Railway



Low Quality Habitat


Unsuitable




3.7‐35 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

disturbance,butadditionaldisturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.1BecausetheMohavegroundsquirrelisknowntousealfalfaasafoodsource,theexpansionof2agriculturalunitswithintheknownandfutureremedialactivityareascouldmakethesquirrelmore3susceptibletopotentiallysignificantimpactsfromincreasedagriculturaltreatmentactivitiesin4comparisontoexistingconditions.Potentialtoencounterthespeciesduringconstruction,5operationsandmaintenancesactivitiesisconsideredtobelikelyintheentireprojectarea,even6thoughtheknownexpansionofagriculturaltreatmentislimitedtotheexistingdisturbedareasof7OU1andOU2.Therefore,impactstothisspeciesanditshabitatwouldbethesameasdescribedin8theoverviewandtheseimpactsareconsideredpotentiallysignificant.Withimplementationof9MitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1k,impactstoMohavegroundsquirrelasa10resultofAlternative4Bwouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant11


Alternative4C‐2includesadditionalagriculturallandtreatment,andadditionalassociated13extractionandinjectionwellscomparedtoexistingconditionsandaddsyear‐roundoperationof14agriculturallandtreatment,throughtheadditionofwintercrops(winterryeorsimilarcrop)to15mostoftheexistingandnewagriculturalunits.Thisalternativewouldalsoincreasetheamountof16in‐situremediationandassociatedinfrastructure.Assuch,theareaofdisturbanceand17encroachmentontomoderatetohighqualitysuitableMohavegroundsquirrelhabitat(bothknown18andfutureunknownareasofnewremedialactivity)underthisalternativeissignificantlyexpanded19fromexistingconditions.Figure3.7‐6showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditional20disturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,21therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofupto430acresofsuitablehabitat.ImpactstoMohaveground22squirrelunderthisalternativewouldbesimilarincharacterasAlternative4Bbutatagreaterlevel23andsignificantlymorethanexistingconditions;theseimpactsareconsideredpotentiallysignificant.24ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1kwouldreducethese25impactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.26


Alternative4C‐3includesallofthesamenewagriculturaltreatmentcomponentsandIRZwellsas28Alternative4C‐2,butaddsex‐situtreatmentattwoabovegroundtreatmentfacilities,onelocatedin29theSourceAreaIRZneartheCompressorStationandoneinOU2adjacenttotheexistingDesert30ViewDairylandtreatmentunit.Thenewfacilitiessignificantlyexpandtheareaandintensityof31remediationactivitiescomparedtoexistingconditions.Theareaofdisturbanceandencroachment32ontomoderatetohighqualitysuitablehabitatoverexistingconditionswouldbesimilartothat33underAlternative4C‐2.Figure3.7‐7showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditional34disturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐5b,35therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofupto445acresofsuitablehabitat.ImpactstoMohaveground36squirrelunderthisalternativewouldbesimilartoAlternative4C‐2andisthereforeconsidered37potentiallysignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1k38wouldreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.39


Alternative4C‐4significantlyincreasesthenumberofagriculturaltreatmentareascomparedto41existingconditions.Thisalternativewouldalsoincreasetheamountofin‐situremediationand42associatedinfrastructure.Figure3.7‐8showstheknownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditional43



3.7‐36 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

disturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthefigure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,this1alternativewouldhavethegreatestpotentialamountofimpactstoMohavegroundsquirrel(worst‐2casedirectlossofupto1,277acresofsuitablehabitat).Itwouldhavesimilarimpactsasallother3actionalternativeswithinthefutureremedialactivityareasincomparisontoexistingconditions.4Therefore,impactstothisspeciesunderthisalternativeareconsideredpotentiallysignificantand5implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1kwouldreducethese6impactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.7


Alternative4C‐5hasallofthesameagriculturallandtreatmentcomponentsasAlternative4C‐2and9addsex‐situtreatmentatoneabovegroundtreatmentfacilitylocatedintheSourceAreain‐situ10remediationzone.Thisalternativewouldalsoincreasetheamountofin‐situremediationand11associatedinfrastructure.Incomparisontoexistingconditions,similarimpactstoMohaveground12squirrelwouldoccurunderthisalternativeasunderAlternatives4C‐2.Figure3.7‐9showsthe13knownareasofhabitatdisturbance,butadditionaldisturbance,onlyindicatedingeneralonthe14figure,wouldalsooccur.AsshowninTable3.7‐4b,therecouldbeaworst‐caselossofupto43215acresofsuitablehabitat.Therefore,impactstothisspeciesunderthisalternativeareconsidered16potentiallysignificantandimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐171kwouldreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.18

ImpactBIO‐1c:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitatforBurrowingOwlandAmerican19Badger,andMortalityofDesertKitFox(LessthanSignificantwithMitigation,All20Alternatives)21

Overallconstructionandoperationsandmaintenanceimpactsofallalternativesonboththe22burrowingowlandAmericanbadgerwouldbesimilartothoseofthedeserttortoiseasproposed23remediationactivitiesunderallalternativeshavethepotentialtoinfringeonlowandmoderateto24highqualityhabitatofthesespeciesthroughouttheentireprojectarea(asshowinFigure3.7‐2).25

AsdescribedintheEnvironmentalSetting,burrowingowlsareknowntoinhabitawidevarietyof26disturbedandnaturalhabitatareasincludingactiveandnon‐activeagriculturallands.Theyhave27moderatetohighpotentialtooccurwithintheprojectareaandhavebeenrecordedinrecentfield28observationswithinthecentralagriculturaltreatmentareasasshowninFigure3.7‐3.Burrowing29owlshavethepotentialtousetheprojectareaforforaging,nestingandtouseexistingburrows30excavatedbygroundsquirrels,badgersanddeserttortoise.Burrowingowlsmayalsonestwithinor31immediatelyadjacenttotheagriculturalareas.Agriculturalunitsmayattractandsupport32populationsofinvertebratesandsmallmammals,whichinturnmaycreatehighqualityburrowing33owlforaginghabitatthatcouldbealong‐termbeneficialimpact.However,agriculturetreatment‐34relatedactivitiessuchaslandclearingforcropplanting,routinemowing,andharvestingmayresult35inpotentialdirectandindirectpermanentlossofburrowingowlsandtheirsupportinghabitat.If36burrowingowlsutilizetheagriculturaltreatmentunitsforaportionoftheirlifecycle,theymay37becomeexposedtowaterbornehexavalentchromium,aswellasexposuretoherbicide/rodenticide38andpesticideapplications.39

SimilartothedeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrel,thesensitivityofburrowingowltonoise40(andvibration)isnotwelldocumented,butthemale(whoislargelyabove‐groundduringthe41nestingcycle)couldexhibitnegativereactionstoincreasesinnoiseandvibrationlevelsabove42existingconditionsthatcouldcausenestabandonmentanddeathofyoungorlossofreproductive43



3.7‐37 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

potentialatactivenests.Newfacilitiescouldalsoincreasespredationriskstotheburrowingowl1similartotheDeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrel.Burrowingowlsarealsoknowntobe2activeduringboththedaytimeandnighttimeandthereforemaybedisruptedintheeventtheyare3affectedbynightlightingoffacilitiesoremergencyoperationsandmaintenanceactivitiesthereby4furtherincreasingtheriskofadverseimpactsfromcollision,crushing,andentrapmentdueto5humanactivitiesfromprojectimplementation.6

TheAmericanbadgeralsowasdeterminedtohavemoderatetohighpotentialtooccurwithinthe7projectareaforbothforaginganddenning.ImpactstoAmericanbadgerwouldbesimilartothoseof8theburrowingowl;however,inregardstonoiseimpacts,theAmericanbadgerlargelyresides9underground,whichwouldincreasesoundattenuationandlimittheirexposuretonoise‐related10disturbances.Ground‐bornevibrationmaystillcauseadverseimpactstothebadger.Overall,noise11andvibrationimpactsareconsideredpotentiallyadverseiftheyresultinabandonmentofnesting12sites.Americanbadgershavefewnaturalpredatorsandwouldnotbesubjecttopredationand13harassmentbyaspeciessuchasthecommonraven.Americanbadgerisnotexpectedtobearegular14occupantoftheagriculturaltreatmentunitsbecausetheyarelargelyunsuitablehabitat.15Additionally,thereisahighpotentialfordesertkitfoxtooccurwithintheprojectarea,andtheloss16ofindividualswouldbeconsideredapotentiallysignificantimpactbecauseitwouldviolateaCDFG17mammalhuntingregulation.18

WiththeNoProjectAlternative,impactstothesespecieswouldstillbeconsideredhigherthan19underexistingconditionsduetotheincreasesinhumanrelatedactivitiesfromnewremediation20facilities.UnderAlternative4BtherewouldbemoresignificantimpactsthantheNoProject21Alternativewhencomparedtoexistingconditionsduetotheexpandedagriculturaltreatmentareas.22ImpactsunderallotheractionalternativeswouldbemorethanAlternative4Bincomparisonto23existingconditionsduetolargerareasofagriculturaltreatmentandotherremedialactivities.24Alternative4C‐4hasthepotentialtohavethegreatestimpactstothesespeciesasitwould25implementthelargestacreageofagriculturalunitswithinthecentralprojectarea.26

ForAmericanbadgeranddesertkitfox,bothconstruction‐relatedandoperationsandmaintenance27activitieswouldcontributetopotentiallysignificantimpactsthatcouldresultinthelossof28individuals.HabitatimpactstotheAmericanbadgeranddesertkitfoxarenotconsideredsignificant29duetotheabundanceofhabitatforthesespeciesintheprojectvicinityandthroughouttheMojave30desert.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1e,BIO‐MM‐1i31throughBIO‐MM‐1j,andMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1mwouldreduceimpactstothesetwo32speciestoalessthansignificantlevelbyreducingprojectdisturbanceareas,environmental33education,minimizingconstructionhazards,predator,integratedpestmanagement,light34management,andsurveysandavoidanceofactionbadgeranddesertkitfoxdens.35

Fortheburrowingowl,bothconstruction‐relatedandoperationsandmaintenanceactivitieswould36contributetopotentiallysignificantimpactsthatcouldresultinthelossofindividualsandremoval37ofmoderatetohighqualityhabitat.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthrough38BIO‐MM‐1jwouldreduceconstruction‐relatedandoperationsandmaintenanceimpactsto39burrowingowltoaless‐than‐significantlevel.MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1lwouldrequirepre‐40constructionsurveysincoordinationwithregulatoryagenciestoidentifypresenceorabsenceof41burrowingowlwithintheprojectareatofurtheravoidorminimizeimpactstoburrowingowl.42



3.7‐38 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

ImpactBIO‐1d:Disturbance,Mortality,andLossofHabitattoLoggerheadShrikeand1NorthernHarrier(LessthanSignificant,NoProjectAlternative;LessthanSignificantwith2Mitigation,AllActionAlternatives)3

Theloggerheadshriketypicallyinhabitsshrublandssuchasthosethatarepresentthroughthe4projectarea.Theyalsousefencesandpowerlinesasperchingareas;themajorityoftheprojectarea5ishighqualityforagingandnestinghabitatfortheloggerheadshrike.Thisspecieswasrecently6observedinthenorthwesternareaoftheprojectarea(nearHinkleyRoadandSunsetRoad/7PlymouthRoad)(seeFigure3.7‐3),andwasidentifiedasusingtheareastotheeastforforaging.8

Thenorthernharrierisknowntobreedandforageinavarietyofhabitats,includingagricultural9areas,suchasalfalfafields.Northernharrierwasobservedintheareaadjacenttotheupperlimitof10OU2atSalinasandMountainViewRoads(seeFigure3‐7.3).Northernharrierhasalsobeenknown11historicallytobreednorthwestofprojectareaatHarperLake,andalsomayoccasionallybreedin12westtheMojavearea,butnobreedingactivityhasbeenrecordedsincethemid‐1990s.Recent13observationsofnorthernharrierhaveoccurredinthenorthwestportionoftheprojectarea.14Subsequently,thereispotentialforthesespeciestoexistwithintheprojectarea,thoughthequality15ofhabitatpresentisconsideredlow.16

TheNoProjectAlternativedoesnotincludeexpansionofagriculturalactivitiesandonlyincludes17limitedgrounddisturbancefornewremedialfacilitiessopotentialforadverseimpactstothese18speciesisconsideredtobelessthansignificant.Bothspecieshavethepotentialtooccurwithin19futurepotentialremedialactivityareas;therefore,therewouldbeanincreasedimpacttothese20speciesiftheNoProjectAlternativewasimplementedincomparisontoexistingconditions,but21giventhelimitedareaofdisturbance,itwouldstillbealessthansignificantimpact.22

Overallconstructionandoperationsandmaintenanceimpactsoftheotheralternativesonboththe23loggerheadshrikeandnorthernharrierwouldbesimilartothoseforburrowingowlandbadger.24Proposedremediationactivitieshavethepotentialtoremovehabitatwherethesespeciescurrently25occurormayoccurintheprojectarea(asshowinFigure3.7‐2).Onepotentialimpacttologgerhead26shrike,aswellasotherbreedingbirds,wouldbeanincreasedthreattosuccessfulbreedingfrom27establishmentofnewagriculturaltreatmentunitsthatmayattractthebrown‐headedcowbirds.The28brown‐headedcowbirdisknowntooccupysimilaragriculturalareasandincreasedoccurrencesof29thebrown‐headedcowbirdcanleadtoareductionintheabilityforsomebirdspeciestoproduce30young.Cowbirdparasitismisknowntodecreaseproductivityofbirdspeciesingeneral,and31expansionofagriculturaltreatmentunitsundertheactionalternativeshasthepotentialtoincrease32significantadverseimpactstotheexistingbirdspecies(Kus1999).Comparedtoexistingconditions33andtheNoProjectAlternative,thisadverseeffectwouldbegreaterwithAlternatives4C‐2,4C‐3,34and4C‐5andthegreatestwithAlternative4C‐4becauseithassubstantiallymorenewagricultural35treatment.36

Forloggerheadshrikeandnorthernharriers,bothconstruction‐relatedandoperationsand37maintenanceactivitieswouldcontributetopotentiallysignificantimpactsthatcouldresultinthe38lossofindividualsandremovalofsuitableforagingandnestinghabitatforallactionalternatives.39ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1f,andBIO‐MM‐1i40minimizeoverallimpactsfromprojectimplementation.MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1nwould41furtheravoidorreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevelbylimitingconstructionto42occuroutsidebreedingseasonandestablishexclusionaryareasforproject‐relateddisturbance.43



3.7‐39 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

ImpactBIO‐1e:PotentialLossofHabitattoMojaveRiverVole(LessthanSignificantAll1Alternatives)2

TheMojaveRivervoleistypicallyfoundinmoisthabitatssuchaswetlandandmarshhabitats3associatedwithpondsandirrigatedpasturesaswellaswithintheMojaveRiver.TheMojaveRiver4volehasbeenknowntoinhabittheMojaveRiverduringannualfloodingevents.Thisspecieshasthe5potentialtoinhabitalfalfafieldsneartheMojaveRiver,butsuitablehabitatisnotpresentwithin6observedportionsoftheMojaveRiverintheproject.Theseareasareconsideredlowtomoderately‐7qualitypotentialforsupportingtheMojaveRivervole.8

TheactiveremedialagriculturaltreatmentareasarecurrentlylocatedwellnorthoftheMojave9River,anditisassumedthatcurrentagriculturaltreatmentactivities(suchasmowinganduseof10herbicides/rodenticides)wouldnotresultinsignificantadverseimpactstothisspeciesduetothe11lowpotentialfortheirpresenceinexistingagriculturaltreatmentareas.12

TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotincludeexpansionofagriculturaltreatmentunits;therefore,13impactstothisspeciesarenotconsideredsignificantandadversecomparedtoexistingconditions14forthisalternative.15

Implementationofallactionalternatives(4B4C‐2,4C‐3,4C‐4,4C‐5)couldresultinexpansionof16agriculturaltreatmentunitsincludingwithinproximitytotheMojaveRiver.Theexpansionofnew17agriculturaltreatmentunitsmayattractandsupportpopulationsofMojaveRivervoleduetothe18introductionofsuitablemoisthabitatsoftheagriculturalunitsandresultingirrigationfields.19Plantingofalfalfacropswithinnewagriculturaltreatmentunitsmayalsoincreasethepotentialfor20thesespeciestoinhabittheseareas.Althoughitispossiblethatindividualsofthisspeciesmightbe21affectedbyagriculturalequipmentinnewagriculturaltreatmentareas,giventhattheprojectwould,22ifanything,increasehabitatforthisspeciesduringprojectactivities,theprojectwouldbeexpected23tosupportincreasesinpopulationsofthisspecies,ifanythingandthustheprojectisnotexpectedto24resultinasignificantimpacttothisspecies.25

ImpactBIO‐1f:MortalityandLossofHabitatforMojaveFringe‐ToedLizard(Lessthan26Significant,AllAlternatives)27

AsdescribedinSection3.7.4.1above,twosensitivenaturalcommunitieslistedbyCDFGarelocated28intheprojectarea:theCaliforniajointfirscrubanddesertdunes(seeFigure3.7.1).TheCalifornia29jointfurscrubislocatedinthesouthern‐centralportionoftheprojectarea,generallybetween30HighcrestRoadandtheMojaveRiverasitpassesthroughtheprojectarea.Desertduneshabitatis31locatedinthesouthbelowtheMojave(seeFigure3.7.1).TheMojavefringe‐toedlizardhasthe32potentialtoinhabittheseCaliforniajointfirscrubanddesertdunesplantcommunitiesoftheproject33area(CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase2011).34

Twoexistingfreshwaterextractionwells(FW‐01andFW‐02)thatarecurrentlyusedtoimplement35hydrauliccontroloftheplumeoccurwithintheCaliforniajointfirscrubhabitatarea,whichis36suitableforMojavefringe‐toedlizard.Therearecurrentlynootherexistingremediationactivities37occurringwithinthisarea.38

However,giventhatthislocationisupgradientofthechromiumplumeandwheregroundwateris39mostreadilyrechargedfromtheMojaveRiver,itispossiblethatnewwellsandpipelinemaybe40proposedinthisareatoprovidealternativewatersuppliestodomesticandagriculturalwellsthat41arecurrentlyaffectedbytheplumeormaybeaffectedbyfutureremedialactions(seediscussionin42



3.7‐40 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Section3.1,WaterResourcesandWaterQuality).Asaresult,remedialactionsandmitigationmay1affectasmallportionofCaliforniajointfirscrubhabitatareaandtheMojavefringe‐toedlizard,if2present.Thisimpactwillbesmallinareaandwouldhavethepotentialtoaffectonlyveryfew3Mojavefringe‐toedlizardindividuals.Therefore,thisimpactisconsideredlikelytobelessthan4significantbutMitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1bthroughBIO‐MM‐1gandBIO‐MM‐2are5recommendedtoensurethattheseimpactsremainatalessthansignificantlevel.6

Thisspeciesalsohasknownpotentialtooccurinthedesertduneshabitat(southoftheMojave7River)(CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase2011).However,therearecurrentlynoremediation8activitiesoccurringwithinthedesertduneshabitatandnoneareplannedinanyofthealternatives.9

ImpactBIO‐1g:LossofOtherSpecial‐StatusBirds(LessthanSignificantwithMitigation,All10Alternatives)11

Severalraptorshavethepotentialtooccurthroughouttheprojectareaduetothepresenceofhigh12qualityforagingandpotentialnestinghabitatsforthesespecies.Underallalternatives,construction13andoperationsandmaintenanceofnewremediationfacilitieswouldbeexpandedoverexisting14conditionsandmayresultinincreasedhabitatmodificationandresultingimpactstotheabilityof15raptorspeciestousetheprojectarea.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1iwould16minimizeoverallimpactsfromprojectimplementation.MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1nwould17furtheravoidorreducetheseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevelbylimitingconstructionto18occuroutsidebreedingseasonandestablishexclusionaryareasforproject‐relateddisturbance.19

ImpactBIO‐1h:LossofIndividualPlantsorDisturbancetoSpecial‐StatusPlants(Lessthan20SignificantwithMitigation,AllAlternatives)21

Theprojectareapotentiallycontainsonefederally‐threatenedplant,theLaneMountainmilk‐vetch,22andeightspecial‐statusplantslistedundertheCaliforniaNativePlantProtectionAct.Theseplants23primarilyhavethepotentialtooccurwithintheallscalescrub(primarilyallscalescrub–sparse24playa)andcreosotebushscrubcommunities.AsshowninFigure3.7‐1,allscalescrubplayaareas25occurintheeasternandnorthernportionsoftheprojectarea.Thiscommunityisinterspersed26amongtheotherallscalescrubdesertscrubcommunities(includingdisturbedscrub),which27encompassapproximately59percentoftheprojectarea.Creosotebushscrubareasoccurinthe28northeasternandnorthwesternareasandareinscatteredareasinthesoutheasternlocationsofthe29projectarea(seeFigure3.7‐1).Creosotebushscrubencompassesapproximately11percentofthe30projectarea.Collectivelythesetwovegetationcommunitiesencompass70percentoftheentire31projectareaandallofthefuturepotentialremedialactivityareasintheirentirety.32

Existingremediationactivitiesprimarilyoccuroutsideofthesehabitats.Oneoftheexisting33freshwaterextractionwells(PG&E‐14)islocatedwithinapproximately0.25to0.5‐mileofasmall34portionofthesoutherninterspersedcreosotebushscrubonthesouthsideofHighcrestRoad.35Additionally,therearemonitoringwellsthroughouttheprojectarea,whichmaybelocatedwithin36ordirectlyadjacenttobothallscalesparseplayaandcreosotebushscrub.Theexisting37agriculturaltreatmentareasareconcentratedinthecentralportionsoftheoverallprojectarea.38ThetwoGormanagriculturaltreatmentunitsarelocatedsouthofanddirectlyadjacentto39ThompsonRoad;aportionoftheallscalesparseplayacommunityislocateddirectlynorthof40theseunitsonthenorthsideofThompsonRoad(approximatelywithin0.25‐mileoftheGorman41agriculturalunits)(seeFigure3.7‐1).42



3.7‐41 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Constructionofnewwells,allassociatedinfrastructure,andnewaccessroads(allalternatives);new1agriculturaltreatmentunits(allactionalternatives);andabove‐groundtreatmentfacilities2(Alternatives4C‐3and4C‐5)wouldrequirelandclearance,trenching,paving,concretelaying,and3cropplanting.Theseactivitieswouldalsoincreasepresenceofconstructionworkersandstorage4anduseoflargeconstructionvehiclesandequipment.Constructionofwellsandassociatedabove‐5groundinfrastructureandconstructionofabove‐groundtreatmentfacilitieshavethepotentialto6increasetheareawhereurbanizedlandscapesandnativeplanthabitatsinterface,especiallyinthe7futureremedialactivityareas(wherenewwellscouldbelocatedbutnotnewabove‐ground8treatmentfacilities)becausethatiswherethemajorityofthemoderatetohigherqualityspecial‐9statusplantspecieshabitatispresent.Constructionofallnewremediationfacilitieshasthe10potentialforintroduction/colonizationofnon‐nativeplantspecies(particularlynon‐nativegrasses)11whichmayinfringeonandreducesuitablehabitatforspecial‐statusplantspeciestooccur.The12majorityofconstructionimpactswouldoccurduringtheinitialbuildoutofwells,agriculturalland13treatmentunitsandabove‐groundtreatmentfacilities.Continuedconstructionofthesecomponents14(insubsequentphases)wouldalsoresultinthesameimpacts.15

Theseconstruction‐relatedimpactshavethepotentialtocausedirectandindirectpermanentlossof16individualspecial‐statusplantsintheprojectarea.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐17MM‐1gandBIO‐MM‐1owouldminimizeimpactstospecial‐statusplantspeciesandtheir18supportinghabitattoaless‐than‐significantlevel.19

Forallalternatives,operationsandmaintenanceactivitiesarenotexpectedtohaveadverseeffects20tospecial‐statusplantsortheirhabitatsincetheseactivitieswouldprimarilyoccurwithinareasthat21havealreadybeendisturbedduringconstructionofnewremediationfacilities.However,22Alternatives4C‐3and4C‐5includenewabove‐groundfacilities,theremaybeincreasedpotentialto23introducenon‐nativeplantsduetoincreasedpresenceofvehicles(formaterialsdeliveries,trash24collection)thatmaycarryremnantsofnon‐nativeplantsontheirtires.Althoughtheseimpactsare25notconsideredsignificantandadverse,implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1gwould26furtherminimizeanyoperationsandmaintenanceimpactstospecial‐statusplantswithinthe27projectarea.28

3.7.6.2 Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Communities 29

ImpactBIO‐2:ReductionorLossofFunctionofRiparianHabitatorSensitiveNatural30Communities(LessthanSignificantwithMitigation,AllAlternatives)31

Noriparianhabitatwasobservedwithintheprojectarea,andthereisnopotentialforsuchhabitat32tobeadverselyaffectedbyprojectimplementation.33

AsdescribedinSection3.7.4.1above,twosensitivenaturalcommunitieslistedbyCDFGarelocated34intheprojectareaincludingtheCaliforniajointfirscrubanddesertdunes(seeFigure3.7.1).The35Californiajointfurscrubislocatedinthesouthern‐centralportionoftheprojectarea,generally36betweenHighcrestRoadandtheMojaveRiverasitpassesthroughtheprojectarea.Desertdunes37habitatislocatedinthesouthbelowtheMojaveRiver(seeFigure3.7.1).TheMojaveRiverwash38mayalsobeconsideredasensitivenaturalcommunityandislocatedinthesouthernsectionofthe39projectarea.40

Twoexistingfreshwaterextractionwells(FW‐01andFW‐02)thatarecurrentlyusedtoimplement41hydrauliccontroloftheplumeoccurwithintheCaliforniajointfirscrubhabitatarea.Thereareno42



3.7‐42 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

existingremediationactivitiesoccurringwithintheMojaveRiverwashordesertduneshabitat1areas.Asnotedabove,thereisnoproposedremedialactivityintheMojaveRiverwashareas.2

Newremedialactivitiesandassociatedinfrastructureunderallalternativeswouldbefocusedaway3fromthesesensitivenaturalcommunities.However,giventhattheCaliforniajointfurscrubis4upgradientofthechromiumplumeandwheregroundwaterismostreadilyrechargedfromthe5MojaveRiver,itispossiblethatnewwellsandpipelinemaybeproposedinthisareatoprovide6alternativewatersuppliestodomesticandagriculturalwellsthatarecurrentlyaffectedbythe7plumeormaybeaffectedbyfutureremedialactions(seediscussioninSection3.1,WaterResources8andWaterQuality).Asaresult,remedialactionsandmitigationmayaffectasmallportionof9Californiajointfirscrubhabitatarea.Ifthesenewinfrastructureareconstructed,theremaybe10potentialforsignificantadverseimpactsduetoconstruction‐relateddisturbanceandpermanent11lossofCaliforniajointfirscrub.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐2wouldminimize12theseimpactstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.13

3.7.6.3 Jurisdictional Waters 14

ImpactBIO‐3:LossorDisturbanceofFederaland/orStateJurisdictionalWaters(including15wetlands)(LessthanSignificantwithMitigation,AllAlternatives)16

ProjectimpactsrelatedtosurfacewaterqualitycontaminationarediscussedinSection3.1,Water17ResourcesandWaterQuality.Thisanalysisfocusesonimpactstodrainagesinthecontextofhabitat18impacts.19

Aformaljurisdictionalwetlanddelineationwasnotconductedfortheprojectarea,andnofederally20protectedwetlandswereobservedduringthefieldassessment.Howevertributarywashesinthe21projectareathatdraintotheMojaveRiverhavethepotentialtobefederallyregulatedwatersofthe22UnitedStates.Themajorityofthedrainagesintheprojectarea(whichdrainnorthtoHarperLake)23areconsideredstatewatersthataresubjecttostatejurisdiction(asdescribedinSection3.7.4.9).24HarperLakesupportshabitatforvariouswaterfowlspeciesasdiscussedinImpactBIO‐1g.25

Underallalternatives,constructionactivitiescouldresultinerosionandsedimentationinto26downgradientsurfacedrainages.Itisalsopossiblethatnewpipelinesornewaccessroadsmayneed27tocrossdesertwashesandconstructioncouldaffectthesewashes.Operationsandmaintenance28activitiescouldalsoresultinerosionanddowngradientsedimentation.Sincedrainagesinthe29projectareaareeitherfederally‐orstate‐regulatedwaters,projectrelatederosionand30sedimentationcouldhavethepotentialtoresultinadverseeffectstojurisdictionalwatersandany31wildlifespeciesthatmaytemporarilyusethedrainageswhentheyflow.Thelevelofprojectactivity32underallalternativeswouldbeincreasedincomparisontoexistingconditions,andthereforethis33impactisconsideredpotentiallysignificant.AsdescribedinSection3.1,WaterResourcesandWater34Quality,PG&EisrequiredtoprepareaStormwaterPollutionPreventionPlan(SWPPP)whichwill35minimizepotentialerosionandsedimentation.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐336wouldensurethisimpactwouldremainlessthansignificantbecauseitrequiresavoidanceof37grounddisturbingactivitieswithindrainageswhereverfeasible,conductingdelineationsifany38drainagesareexpectedtobeaffected,andimplementationofcompensatorymitigationin39accordancewithfederalandstaterequirementsifdeemednecessary.40



3.7‐43 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

3.7.6.4 Wildlife Movement 1

ImpactBIO‐4:ConflictswithWildlifeMovement(LessthanSignificant,NoProjectAlternative;2PotentiallySignificant,AllActionAlternatives)3

Theprimarywildlifespeciesthatusetheprojectareaasamovementcorridorarethedeserttortoise4andMohavegroundsquirrel.5

TheMohavegroundsquirrelcanhavelargehomeranges(16.6acres)andlong‐distancemovements6(upto20,000feethasbeenrecorded),asdescribedunderImpactBIO‐1bandshowninFigure3.7‐2.7ItisassumedthatMohavegroundsquirrelcouldpotentiallyuseanysuitablehabitatareas;8therefore,theyarealsoconsideredtobeunrestrictedfrommovementwithintheprojectareaunder9existingconditions.TheMohavegroundsquirrel,aswellastheMojaveRivervole,mayutilize10agriculturalareas,butnewremediationactivitiesincludingtheagriculturaltreatmentincludedinall11actionalternativesarenotexpectedtohaveahighpotentialforrestrictingtheirmovement.12

Potentialimpactstomovementofavianspecies,suchasburrowingowlsandnorthernharrier,are13notexpected.Americanbadgerislikelycapableofcrossingthroughagriculturalunitsandno14reductioninmovementforthisspeciesisexpected.Mojavefringe‐toedlizard’smovementpotential15willnotbereducedastheareasinhabitedbythesespeciesarelargelyoutsideofwherenew16agriculturalunitswouldoccur.Forthesespecies,implementationofallprojectalternativesisnot17expectedtoresultinsignificantadverseimpactsfromintroductionofnewbarrierstomovementin18comparisontoexistingconditions.19

Thereispotentialformoderatetohighlysuitablehabitatforthedeserttortoisethroughoutthe20projectarea,whichisinterspersedwithlowqualityandurban/developed(orunsuitable)habitats,21asdiscussedunderImpactBIO‐1aandshowninFigure3.7‐2.Deserttortoisemovementoccursina22diffusedpatternacrossthelandscape;andwhereopen,expansiveareasaremaintained,theproject23wouldnotbeexpectedtoconstraindeserttortoisemovementoverall.Constructionofnewwellsand24in‐situtreatmentfacilities(includedinallalternatives)isnotexpectedtoresultinlargeareasof25disturbanceandwouldbedispersedacrossthelandscape.Newpipelineswouldbeplacedin26trenchesandbackfilledsuchthattherewouldbenoabovegroundinfrastructurepresentthatcould27disruptmovementafterconstruction.Newabove‐groundtreatmentfacilities(Alternatives4C‐3and284C‐5)wouldrequireconstructionofnewbuildings,pavedroads,andotherpaved/disturbedareas29thatcouldpotentiallyresultinpermanentchangestoopenhabitatareasthatcouldaltertheoverall30patternofmovementfordeserttortoise.However,thesenewfacilitieswouldcoveronlylimited31areasoftheoverallprojectareawithsuitableareasformovementsurroundingthelimitedareasof32above‐groundinfrastructure.Newroadwayswouldberelativelylimitedinwidthandwouldnot33incurlargeamountsoftraffic.Althoughnewruralroadswouldcreatesomeobstaclecomparedto34existingconditions,itisexpectedthattortoisewouldcrossnewruralroadsastheycrossexisting35ruralroadsintheprojectarea.36

Thelargestpotentialchangestodeserttortoisemovementfromremedialactivitieswouldbedueto37newagriculturalunits,whichmaypotentiallyrequirethelossofexistingsuitablehabitats.Itis38expectedthatdeserttortoisewouldnotlikelycrossthroughnewagriculturalunits,whichare39typicallyunattractivefortortoise,andinsteadwouldmovearoundtheareas.East‐westmovement40inthisareaispartiallyhinderedatpresentbytheDesertViewDairyandexistingagricultural41treatmentunits,butthereareareasofsuitablehabitatforeast‐westmovementnorth(northof42ThompsonRoad)andsouthoftheexistingagriculturaltreatmentunits(southofSR58).43



3.7‐44 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotincludenewagriculturaltreatmentunitsandwouldonlyhave1newdisturbancesfornewwellsandin‐situremediationfacilitieswhichwouldnotcreatecontiguous2areasofunsuitablehabitat(asshownonFigure3.7‐4).Thus,theNoProjectAlternativewouldhave3alessthansignificantimpactondeserttortoisemovement.4

AsshowninFigure3.7‐5through3.7‐8,theknownfutureareasofagriculturaltreatmentare5centeredbetweenMulinaxRoadandSerraRoad,southofSalinasRoad.Withtheexisting6agriculturalareaseastofthePG&ECompressorStationandproposedexpansionofagricultural7treatment(especiallywithAlternative4C‐4asshowninFigure3.7‐8),therecouldbeacontiguous8areaofagricultureofseveralmilesinlengthwiththeremedialalternatives.Inaddition,therewould9beadditionalagriculturalunitsinlocationsyettobedeterminedtoaddresstheexpandedplume,10butwouldlikelybeinthecenterofHinkleyValley,perhapsnorthandsouthofthoseareasshownin11Figure3.7‐4throughFigure3.7‐8.12

AlthoughtheamountofnewagriculturaltreatmentareasforAlternative4BshownonFigure3.7‐513wouldbeonlyabout40acres(basedontheremediationactivities,theFeasibilityStudy/Addenda),14asdescribedinChapter2,ProjectDescription,theamountofagriculturaltreatmentinthis15alternative(andotheractionalternative)isexpectedtobeincreasedtoaddresstheexpanded16chromiumplume.Basedonthescaledupestimates,Alternative4Bcouldrequireupto264acresof17newagriculturaltreatment.Figure3.7‐5showstheeffectofupto168newacresforAlternative4C‐218(basedontheFeasibilityStudy/Addenda,andascaledupAlternative4Bcouldrequiremoreacres19thanshownonthisfigure.Thus,dependingontheirultimateconfiguration,therecouldbe20contiguousagriculturaltreatmentareasextendingonanorth‐southaxisforperhapsupto2milesin21lengthunderallactionalternatives.22

Althoughdeserttortoisewouldbephysicallyabletomovethroughtheagriculturaltreatmentunits23andtherewouldnotbeanyphysicalbarriers(likefences)totheirmovement,theywouldlikely24avoidtheagriculturaltreatmentareasbecausetheywouldbelargelyunsuitableirrigatedparcels25thatwouldnotfavortortoiselocomotion.Thisimpactispotentiallysignificantimpactforallaction26alternativesbecauseitcouldresultinasubstantialconstraintofageneraleast‐westmovement27patternfordeserttortoiseindividuals.28

Whilefeasiblemitigationwasreviewedforthisimpact,noneofthefollowingmeasuresare29recommendedforthefollowingreasons:30

Wildlifemovementcorridors.AmitigationmeasurewasconsideredtorequirePG&Eto31segregatenewagriculturaltreatmentareas(byperhaps500to1,000feet).Thismitigationisnot32proposedbecauseitishighlyuncertainwhetherdeserttortoisewouldactuallyusesuch33corridorsandbecausespreadingout(asopposedtoconcentrating)agriculturalareaswould34actuallyincreasefragmentationofhabitatevenfurtherandwouldpushmoreagriculturalareas35furthernorth,whichisconsideredcounterproductiveintermsofmaintainhabitatforthedesert36tortoise.37

Limitthenumberofagriculturaltreatmentareas.Amitigationwasconsideredtolimittheareas38newagriculturaltreatmentsuchthatsubstantialdeserttortoiseeast‐westmovementareas39couldbemaintainedthroughouttheHinkleyValley.Forexample,ifagriculturaltreatmentunits40werelimitedtothe40acresforAlternative4BincludedintheFeasibilityStudy/Addenda(and41showninFigure3.7‐5),theneast‐westmovementareaswouldbemaintained.Thismeasureis42notrecommendedbecauseitwouldsubstantiallyslowdownremediationandmayimpede43hydrauliccontainmentoftheplume.44



3.7‐45 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Adoptoneofthealternativeswithlessagriculturaltreatment.Onemitigationoptionwouldbeto1adopttheNoProjectAlternative,butthiswouldnotmeettheprojectobjectivesandwasthus2rejected.AnotheroptionwouldbetoadoptAlternative4Bwhichwouldhavetheleastamountof3newagriculturaltreatment,butsincethisalternativemayneedtobescaleduptoprovideupto4264acresofnewagriculturaltreatment,thisalternativewouldlowerbutwouldnotavoida5potentiallysignificantimpact.6

Eliminatenewagriculturaltreatment.Onemitigationoptionwouldbetouseadifferent7remediationtechnologythannewagriculturaltreatment.Oneoptioncouldincludewide‐scale8above‐groundtreatment(“plume‐widepumpandtreat”).Whilethisoptionwouldprovidefor9hydrauliccontainmentifextractionflowsweresufficientlyhigh,asdiscussedinChapter2,10ProjectAlternatives,Section2.8,thisalternativewouldtakeapproximately50yearstoreduce11Cr[VI]concentrationsthroughouttheplumeto50ppb,approximately140yearstoreduce12Cr[VI]concentrationsto3.1ppb,and210yearstoreduceCr[VI]concentrationsto1.2ppb.This13alternativewasrejectedbecauseitdoesnotmeetthefundamentalprojectobjectivesbecauseit14doesnotcleanupchromiumingroundwaterwithinameaningfulperiodoftime.Chapter2,15ProjectAlternatives,Section2.8,alsodiscusseswhyotheralternativeswerenotcarriedforward16furfurtheranalysis.17

Sincenofeasiblemitigationwasidentifiedthatwouldmeetmostoftheprojectgoalobjectives18andwouldreducethisimpacttoalessthansignificantlevel,theactionalternativesare19consideredtoresultinapotentiallysignificantandunavoidableimpactrelatedtodesert20tortoisemovement(dependingultimatelyontheamountandconfigurationofnewagricultural21treatmentareas).22

3.7.6.5 Protected Trees 23

ImpactBIO‐5:RemovalofProtectedTrees(LessthanSignificant,AllAlternatives)24

Duringfieldsurveys,Joshuatrees,whichareprotecteddesertnativeplantsunderSanBernardino25ordinance,wereidentifiedwithintheprojectarea.IfconstructionrequiresremovalofJoshuatrees26orotherpotentiallyoccurringlocally‐protecteddesertnativeplants,PG&Ewouldberequiredto27complywiththeSanBernardinoCountyPlantProtectionandManagementordinance(Chapter2888.01oftheSanBernardinoCountyDevelopmentCodeandobtainatreeremovalpermitpriorto29initialofgrounddisturbance.Operationsandmaintenanceactivitiesunderallalternativesarenot30expectedtorequiretheremovalofindividualplants,asinfrastructurewouldalreadybeinplace31duringtheseactivities.CompliancewiththeCounty’splantprotectionordinancewouldensurethat32potentialdirectimpactstoJoshuatreeorotherlocally‐protectedplantswouldbeavoidedor33minimizedaccordingtotheprovisionsoftheCounty’spermitrequirements.Therefore,this34potentialimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.35

3.7.6.6 Conservation Plans 36

ImpactBIO‐6:ConflictswithWestMojavePlanConservationRequirementsonBLMLand(No37Impact,NoProjectAlternative;LessthanSignificantwithMitigation,AllActionAlternatives)38

TheWestMojavePlananditsprovisionsonlyapplytotheareasthatarelocatedonfederallands39ownedbytheBLMwithintheprojectarea.AportionoftheprojectareaisonBLMlandthatis40subjecttotherequirementsoftheWestMojavePlan.FortheprojectportiononBLMland,thereare41



3.7‐46 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

areasdesignatedforhabitatconservationfordeserttortoise,Mohavegroundsquirrel,burrowing1owlandfourofthespecial‐statusplantspecies(BarstowWoollysunflower,desertCymopterus,2Mojavemonkeyflower,andParish’sPhacelia)bytheWestMojavePlan.3

UndertheNoProjectAlternative,futureremedialactivitywouldcontinuewithintheconfinesofthe4existingpermittedremediationarea(e.g.,OU1/OU2).DirectconflictswiththeWestMojavePlan5conservationrequirementsonfederallandarenotexpectedbecausetheseareasarebeyondthe6extentofactivitiesunderthisalternative.Thus,theNoProjectAlternativewouldhavenoimpacton7WestMojavePlanimplementationonBLMland.8

Forallactionalternatives,therecouldbepotentialconflictswiththeconservationrequirementsof9theWestMojavePlanwhereremediationactivitiesdisturbBLMland.However,implementationof10MitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐1athroughBIO‐MM‐1landBIO‐MM‐1oandMitigationMeasure11BIO‐MM‐4wouldminimizepotentialconflictswithconservationrequirementsoftheWestMojave12PlanonBLMland.Inaddition,theprovisionsoftheWestMojavePlanthataddressspecificdesert13tortoise,Mohavegroundsquirrelandburrowingowlavoidance,minimizationandconservation14measurescouldalsobeconsideredduringagencyconsultationstoobtainfederalandstateESA15permitsifrequired.Therefore,thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificantwithmitigation.16

3.7.7 Mitigation Measures 17

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1a:ImplementMeasurestoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigate18ImpactstoDesertTortoiseduringConstruction19

Protocol‐levelsurveysfordeserttortoisewilloccurpriortoconstructioneitherinApril20throughMayorSeptemberthroughOctoberperthemostrecentprotocolissuedbythe21USFWS(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2010b).Thesurveyswillbeconductedinthearea22proposedtobedisturbedbytheprojectand1,500metersfromtheedgeoftheproposed23disturbanceareatoconfirmtheuseofthatareabydeserttortoise.Anyvariationfromthis24protocolwouldrequireapprovalbyUSFWS.Areportwillbepreparedattheendofeach25surveyperiod.26

Apreconstructionclearancesurveywillbecompletedfordeserttortoisewithineachproject27areatoensurethatalltortoiseareabsent,orthatanytortoisesthatpresentaremovedoff28siteandoutofharm’swayperthemostrecentprotocolissuedbytheUSFWS(currentlythis29isUSFWS2009).Theprotocol(USFWS2009)statesthattwoconsecutivesurveyswouldbe30conductedimmediatelypriortosurfacedisturbanceateachsitewithintheprojectarea.31

Deserttortoisefoundwithintheconstructionareaswillbeeitherallowedtomovepassively32awayorbephysicallyrelocatedbyanauthorizedhandlertoalocationawayfromharm’s33way,butwithintheirhomerange(definedbyUSFWS2009aslessthan1,000feet).34

Wherepossible,deserttortoiseexclusionfencingwillbeplacedalongtheperimeterofthe35proposedworkareaspriortosurfacedisturbancetopreventencounterswithdesert36tortoiseduringconstructionactivities.Thespecificationsofthedeserttortoiseexclusion37fencingwillfollowUSFWS(DesertTortoiseFieldManual:Chapter8.DesertTortoise38ExclusionFence2009c).Dailypreconstructionsweepswithintheproposedprojectareawill39beconductedbeforeconstructiontoensurethatdeserttortoiseareabsentfromtheproject40area.Deserttortoiseexclusionfencingwillalsobeplacedaroundallpermanentbuildings41andstructureswhereentrapmentornegativeinteractionswithtortoisescouldoccur.42



3.7‐47 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

Alldeserttortoisesightedwithintheproposedprojectareamustbeimmediatelyreported1andconstructionactivityjeopardizingthetortoisemustbehalteduntiltheapprovedUSFWS2andCDFGbiologistisabletorelocatetheanimal.Ifadeserttortoiseisinjuredorkilled,the3authorizedbiologistmustbenotified,theinjuryordeathdocumented,andtheanimaltaken4toaqualifiedveterinarianorthecarcassremovedbythebiologist.5

Ongoingconstructionmonitoringwillensurethatdeserttortoiseobservedwithin100feet6ofconstructionareactivelymonitoredforanegativequalitativeresponsefromvibration.7

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1b:LimitFootprintofDisturbanceAreaswithinSpecial‐8StatusSpeciesHabitats.9

Theareaofdisturbancewillbeconfinedtothesmallestpracticalarea,consideringtopography,10placementoffacilities,locationofoccupieddeserttortoise,Mohavegroundsquirrel,and11burrowingowlhabitat,publichealthandsafety,andotherlimitingfactors,andwillbelocatedin12previouslydisturbedareastotheextentpossible.AnAuthorizedBiologistorEnvironmental13Monitorwillassisttheprojectforemaninlocatingsuchareastoavoiddeserttortoise,Mohave14groundsquirrel,andburrowingowlmortality,minimizeimpactstohabitat,andensure15compliancewiththismeasureandotherpertinentregulatorydocuments.Inareaswherethe16projectsponsorisunabletoinstallexclusionaryfencing,workareaboundariesandaccessroads17willbedelineatedwithflaggingorothermarkingtominimizesurfacedisturbanceoutsideofthe18approvedworkarea.Alldisturbancelimitsneedtobeconfirmedbytheconstructionmonitor.19Specialhabitatfeatures,suchasburrows,identifiedbytheAuthorizedBiologistwillbeavoided20totheextentpossible.21

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1c:ImplementPre‐ConstructionandOngoingAwareness22andTrainingProgram.23

Allemployees,subcontractors,andotherswhoworkon‐sitewillparticipateinadeserttortoise,24Mohavegroundsquirrel,andburrowingowlawarenessprogrampriortoinitiationof25constructionactivities.PG&Eisresponsibleforensuringthattheawarenessprogramis26presentedpriortoconductingactivities.Hardhatstickerstoidentifypersonnelwhohave27attendedthetrainingandwallet‐sizedcardslistingkeybestmanagementpracticesarerequired.28Ataminimum,theawarenessprogramwillemphasizethefollowinginformationrelativeto29thesespecies:(a)distributiononthejobsite;(b)generalbehaviorandecology;(c)sensitivityto30humanactivities;(d)legalprotection;(e)penaltiesforviolatingStateorfederallaws;(f)31reportingrequirements;and(g)projectprotectivemitigationmeasures.TheAuthorized32Biologistand/orEnvironmentalMonitorwillworkwiththeprojectproponenttoensurethatall33workershavereceivedtheawarenessprogramandunderstandthevariouscomponents.34Interpretationwillbeprovidedfornon‐Englishspeakingconstructionworkers.35

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1d:ConductOngoingBiologicalMonitoringduring36Construction.37

Biologicalmonitorswillconductdailyconstructionmonitoringofthedeserttortoiseexclusion38fencing,aswellasduringclearingandgrubbing(initialgrounddisturbance)oftheworkarea.39Thismonitorwillbefamiliarwithdeserttortoise,Mohavegroundsquirrel,andburrowingowl,40aswellasnestingbirds.Onceclearingandgrubbingiscomplete,abiologicalmonitorwill41conduct,atminimum,weeklyspotcheckstodocumentcompliancewiththeHabitat42



3.7‐48 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

ConservationPlan(HCP)andothermitigationmeasurespresentedinthisEIRandelsewhere.An1on‐calldeserttortoisehandlerwillbeavailableshoulddeserttortoisebeencounteredduring2constructionactivities.3

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1e:MinimizePotentialConstructionHazardstoSpecial‐4StatusSpecies5

Nohazardstospecial‐statusspecies,particularlydeserttortoise,suchasopentrenchesand6holes,willbeleftovernightwithoutfencingorcovering,7

Nofirearmsorpetswillbeallowedattheworkarea.Firearmscarriedbyauthorized8securityandlawenforcementpersonnelareexemptfromthistermandcondition.9

Dustwillbecontrolled.Ifwatertrucksaretobeused,poolingofwaterwillbeavoidedsoto10minimizethepotentialtoattractingcommonravensorpotentialpredatorsofthedesert11tortoise.12

Exceptonpavedroadswithpostedspeedlimits,vehiclespeedswillnotexceed10milesper13hourthroughdeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelhabitatduringtravelassociated14withtheauthorizedactivity.15

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1f:ImplementMeasurestoMinimizeandPreventAttraction16ofPredatorsduringConstructionandOperation.17

Littercontrolmeasureswillbeimplemented.Trashandfooditemswillbecontainedin18closedcontainersandremoveddailytoreducetheattractivenessortheareato19opportunisticpredatorssuchascommonravens(Corvuscorax),coyotes(Canislatrans),and20feraldogs.21

Ifwatertrucksaretobeused,poolingofwaterwillbeavoidedsotominimizethepotential22toattractingcommonravensorotherpotentialpredators.23

Potentialperchesandnestsubstratesforthecommonravenwillbereducedtothegreatest24extentpracticablewithinpermanentprojectfacilities.25

AravenmanagementplanwillbedevelopedbytheprojectproponentandapprovedbyBLM26thatwillincludeataminimumestablishingacommonravenpopulationbaseline,with27ongoingandpost‐constructionmonitoringofcommonravenpopulations,andtriggersfor28adaptivemanagementactionsifravensareoccurringabovebaselineconditionsand29observedtobeutilizingfacilitiesandstructuresbuiltaspartofthisproject.30

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1g:ReductionofProject‐RelatedSpreadofInvasivePlant31Species32

Ifreseedingoftemporarydisturbanceareasorornamentallandscapingisproposed,the33proposedseedpalettewillbereviewedbyabiologisttoensureitdoesnotcontainplantsthat34areconsideredinvasiveinCalifornia(basedontheCaliforniaInvasivePlantInventory35Database).36



3.7‐49 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1h:CompensateImpactstoDesertTortoiseandMohave1GroundSquirrelHabitat2

CompensatorymitigationforthelossofdeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelhabitatwill3bedeterminedthroughconsultationwithCDFGandUSFWS.Theminimumcompensationratios4formoderatetohighqualityhabitatsuitabletodeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelare53:1forpermanentimpactsand1:1fortemporaryimpacts(althoughnotemporaryimpactshave6beenidentified).ForimpactstolowqualitydeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelhabitat,7theminimumcompensationratiois1:1forpermanentimpacts.Theminimumcompensation8ratioforimpactswithinaDWMAwillbe5:1forpermanentimpacts.Finalmitigationratioswill9bedeterminedduringconsultationwiththeappropriateresourceagency,inaccordancewith10therequirementsofaSection7orSection10permitand/oraSection2081permit.Mitigation11mayincludepurchase,restoration,enhancement,and/orcreationofdeserttortoiseandMohave12groundsquirrelhabitat.13

LandsprovidedasmitigationfordeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelmayalsobeused14toprovidemitigationforanylossofburrowingowlhabitat,ifthelandinquestionincludes15suitablehabitatfortheburrowingowl.16

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1i:IntegratedPestManagementandAdaptiveManagement17PlanforAgriculturalTreatmentUnits18

Anagriculturalunitintegratedpestmanagement(IPM)planwillbedevelopedandimplemented19forallnew(andexisting)agriculturalunits,andwillbecompliantwiththeCaliforniaStatewide20IPMyear‐roundprogramforalfalfaandanyothercropsthatmaybeproposedforuse.Theplan21willexplicitlydetailanintegratedpestmanagementplantoensurethatrisksofanyproposed22useofherbicides,pesticides,orrodenticideswillposeanegligiblerisktowildlifespecies.23Herbicides,pesticides,orrodenticideswillonlybeusedatnewagriculturalunitsifspecifically24authorizedbyUSFWSandCDFGinthetakepermitsforthedeserttortoiseandtheMohave25groundsquirrel.Theadaptivemanagementplanwilldetailthepredictedharvestofthe26agriculturalcropsandhowharvestwillbeconductedinsuchamannertoreducepotential27impactstonestingbirds.Theadaptivemanagementplanwillprovideotherpopulation28monitoringguidelinesforpredatoryspeciessuchasbrown‐headedcowbird,withmanagement29actionsthatwillberequirediffieldsarefoundtobesupportingthesespecies.Theadaptive30managementplanwillalsooutlineirrigationcontroltoavoidpooledwater,aswellasdust31controlmethods.32

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1j:ReductionofNightLightSpillover33

Exteriorlightfixturesandstandardswillbedesignedtobefullyshielded,directinglight34downwardbelowthehorizontalplaneofthefixtureheight.Adetailedlightingplanwillbe35inspectedbyabiologisttoensurethattheexpectedlightspilloverhasnopotentialtoimpact36special‐statusspecies.37

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1k:ImplementOtherMeasurestoMinimize,Reduce,or38MitigateImpactstoMohaveGroundSquirrel39

AMohavegroundsquirrelfocusedprotocolsurveywillbecompletedpriortoconstruction40inthestudyareawhereconstructionisproposedfollowingprotocolestablishedbyCDFG41(2003).Forhabitatlossofgreaterthan180acres,theDepartmentrequiresspecialsurvey42



3.7‐50 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

protocol(s)tobedevelopedthroughitsconsultationwitheithertheprojectproponentor1thelocalleadagency(ifappropriate)orbothentities.2

IfanyMohavegroundsquirrelsareuncoveredbyexcavationduringconstruction,work3muststopintheimmediateareaandtheprojectbiologistwillbeimmediatelynotified.4

IfanyMohavegroundsquirrelsareinjuredorkilledduringthecourseofconstruction,work5muststopintheimmediateareaandtheprojectbiologistwillbeimmediatelynotified.Only6theauthorizedbiologistwillhandle,andtransportinjuredanimaltoaqualifiedveterinarian.7

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1l:ImplementOtherMeasurestoMinimize,Reduce,or8MitigateImpactstoBurrowingOwl9

Toconfirmthecurrentexistingconditionforburrowingowlsinthestudyarea,afocused10nestingseasonsurveyforburrowingowlwillbecompletedforallpotentialdisturbance11limitsandaminimum400feetbufferarea,whereaccessible,priortoconstruction.This12focusedsurveywillutilizethemostrecentCDFGprotocol.13

Apreconstructionsurveyforburrowingowlswilloccurnogreaterthan14daysanda14secondpreconstructionsurveywilloccur24hourspriortocommencinggrounddisturbing15orconstructionactivities.Thelimitsofthispreconstructionsurveywillincludethe16disturbanceareaanda400‐footbuffer.17

Avoiddisturbingoccupiedburrowsduringthenestingperiod,fromFebruary1through18August31unlessitisverifiedthatthebirdshavenotbegunegg‐laying.Workmayonly19commencewhenitisdeterminedthatjuvenileowlsfromthoseburrowsareforaging20independentlyandcapableofindependentsurvival.21

Avoidimpactingburrowsoccupiedduringthenon‐breedingseason(September1–January2231)bymigratoryornon‐migratoryresidentburrowingowls.23

AnavianprotectionplanwillbedevelopedinconsultationwithCDFGtoaddressburrowing24owlsorsignsofburrowingowlsshouldtheybefoundonsiteduringthefocusednestingor25preconstructionsurveys.UnlessotherwiseapprovedbyCDFG,theminimumno26constructionbufferswillbe160feetforoccupiedburrowsduringthenon‐breedingseason27ofSeptember1throughJanuary31and250feetduringthebreedingseasonofFebruary128throughAugust31.29

Ifburrowingowlsandtheirhabitatcanbeprotectedinplaceonoradjacenttoaproject30area,theuseofbufferzones,visualscreens(suchashaybales)orotherfeasiblemeasures31whileprojectactivitiesareoccurringwillbeusedtominimizedisturbanceimpacts.These32willbeoutlinedintheavianprotectionplan.33

On‐sitepassiverelocationwillbeavoidedtothegreatestextentpracticable,andonly34implementedifavoidancecannotbemet.Passiverelocationisdefinedasencouragingowls35tomovefromoccupiedburrowstoalternatenaturalorartificialburrows.Apassive36relocationplanwillbedetailedintheavianprotectionplan.37

CompensationprovidedfordeserttortoiseandMohavegroundsquirrelwillalsoprovide38habitatforburrowingowlsshouldtherebeanunavoidableimpacttothisspecies.39



3.7‐51 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1m:MinimizeImpactstoAmericanBadgerandDesertKit1FoxOccupiedDens2

Ifthereisevidencethataburrowmaybeoccupiedbyabadgerorakitfoxduring3preconstructionsurveys(seeBIO‐1a),allconstructionactivitieswillceasewithina100‐foot4bufferoftheburrowduringthenatalseason(February–July)unlessotherwiseauthorizedby5CDFG.RemovalofanoccupiedAmericanbadgerordesertkitfoxburrowatanytimeoftheyear6willrequirecoordinationwithCDFG.7

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1n:AvoidImpactstoNestingLoggerheadShrike,Northern8Harrier,andOtherMigratoryBirds(includingRaptorsandexcludingBurrowingOwls)9

PursuanttothefederalMigratoryBirdTreatyActandCDFGcode,impactstobirdnestswillbe10avoided.Toavoidanyimpactsonmigratorybirds,resultingfromconstructionactivitiesthat11mayoccurduringthenestingseasonthenestingseason,February1throughAugust31,the12followingmeasurewillbeimplemented:13

Aqualifiedbiologistwillconductapreconstructionsurveyoftheproposedconstructionsite14and250footbufferareaaroundthesite.Thispreconstructionsurveywillcommenceno15morethan7dayspriortotheonsetofconstruction,suchasclearingandgrubbingandinitial16grounddisturbance.17

Ifanestisobserved,anappropriatebufferwillbeestablished.Fornestingpasserinebirds18theminimumbufferwillbe50‐feet.Fornestingraptors,theminimumbufferwillbe25019feet.TheseminimumbufferscouldbereducedwithapprovalbyCDFGbasedonthefield20conditionsanddisturbancetoleranceofeachspecies.21

Allno‐constructionactivitybufferareaswillbeclearlydemarcatedinthefieldwithstakes22andflaggingthatarevisibilitytoconstructionpersonnel.23

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐1o:ImplementMeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,or24MitigateImpactstoSpecial‐StatusPlants25

Toconfirmthepresence/absenceandquantifyofspecial‐statusplantspeciespopulations26(suchasLaneMountainmilk‐vetch,Mojavemonkeyflower,Clokey’scryptantha,desert27cymopterus,Barstowwoollysunflower,Mojavemenodora,creamyblazingstar,beaverdam28breadroot,andParish’sphacelia)inspecificareaswhereremedyfacilitiesmaybe29constructed,aspecial‐statusplantsurveywillbecompletedpriortoconstructioninthe30limitsofdisturbanceanda100‐footbufferthatareproposedinallscaleandcreosotescrub31habitats,desertdunehabitat,andtheMojaveRiverwashhabitat.Thefocusedsurveyfor32thesespeciesshouldbeconductedbyaqualifiedbiologistduringtheappropriateblooming33period(approximatelyMarch–July),orwhentheplantisreadilyidentifiable,priortothe34initiationofconstruction.35

Ifanylistedplantspeciesareobservedduringfocusedsurveysoftheworkareas(see36MitigationMeasuresBIO‐MM‐3andBIO‐MM‐6),theextentofthepopulationwillbeclearly37demarcatedinthefieldbyprotectivefencing,lathstakes,and/orflagging,asappropriate,38foravoidanceandtheregulatoryagencieswillbenotified.Ifprojectrelatedimpactstoa39listedplantspecieswilloccur,initiationofconsultationwithCDFGandorUSFWSwillbe40required.41



3.7‐52 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

IfanyplantspeciesthatarenotlistedunderCESAorESAbutareidentifiedasspecial‐status1species(“non‐listedplantspecies”)areobservedduringfocusedsurveysoftheworkareas,2theextentofthepopulationwillbeclearlydemarcatedinthefieldbyprotectivefencing,lath3stakes,and/orflagging,asappropriate,foravoidance.Avoidancewilloccurtothemaximum4extentfeasible.Ifimpactsareproposedtonon‐listedplantspecies,abriefanalysiswillbe5completedtodetermineiftheremovalofthoseplantspeciesisasignificantadverseimpact6underCEQAbecauseoftheirrarityatalocalorregionalscale,orbecausetheycould7compriseanimportantoruniquepopulation.Additionalmeasuresasaresultofthisanalysis8mayberequired,suchasseeding,transplanting,collectionofseedstobeusedforthefuture9conservationofthespecies,and/orcompensatorymitigationhabitat.10

Abiologicalmonitorwhohasobservedthelocationofthelistedandnon‐listedplantspecies11tobeavoidedwillconductatailgatesession,informingtheworkcrewoftheappearanceand12locationoftheplantspeciespriortoinitiationofworkactivities.13

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐2:HabitatCompensationforLossofSensitiveNatural14Communities15

Ifnewremediationactivitiesresultinthepermanentremovalandlossofsensitivenatural16communitiessuchastheCaliforniajointfirscrub,acompensatorymitigationprogramorplan17willbedevelopedandimplementedthroughconsultationwiththeUSFWS,CDFG,andthe18LahontanWaterBoard.Compensatorymitigationmayincludeafee‐basedprogramand/or19directhabitatreplacementonaminimum1:1basisandinaccordancewiththoseagencies’20recommendations.21

Landsprovidedasmitigationfordeserttortoise,Mohavegroundsquirrel,andburrowingowls22mayalsobeusedtoprovidemitigationforanylossofsensitivenaturecommunityhabitat,ifthe23landinquestionincludessensitivenaturalcommunities.24

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐3:MeasuresRequiredtoMinimize,Reduce,orMitigate25ImpactstoWatersand/orWetlandsundertheJurisdictionoftheState26

Constructionactivityandaccessroadswillbeavoidedinalldrainages,streams,drylake27beds,pools,orotherfeaturesthatcouldbeunderthejurisdictionoftheU.S.ArmyCorpsof28Engineers(USACE),LahontanWaterBoard,and/orCDFG,iffeasible.Ifimpactstothese29featuresareidentified,aformaljurisdictionaldelineationforsubmittaltotheagenciesmay30berequired.31

IfimpactstoUSACE,RWQCB,and/orCDFGjurisdictionwatersorwetlandsareidentified,32theprojectapplicantwillcomplywiththepermittingrequirementsimposedbyUSACE,33LahontanWaterBoard,and/orCDFG,asappropriate.34

MitigationMeasureBIO‐MM‐4:ImplementWestMojavePlanMeasurestoImpactsto35DWMAsonBLMLand.36

PertinentmeasurescontainedwithintheFinalEnvironmentalImpactReportandStatementfor37theWestMojavePlan(BLM2005)willbeimplementedtominimizepotentialimpactstospecial‐38statusspecieswithinconservationareaslocatedonfederalland,ifandwhereprojectactivities39wouldinfringeontheirsuitablehabitat.ConsultationwithBLMwillberequiredpriorto40implementationofanyactivities.AccordingtotheFEIRfortheWestMojavePlan,these41



3.7‐53 August 2012

ICF 00122.11

activitieswillgenerallyincludethefollowing(thedetailedlistofmitigationmeasurescanbe1foundintheFEIRfortheWestMojavePlan):2

Avoidofconstructionactivities(particularlylinearprojectsthroughTortoiseSurveyAreas)3whentortoisesaremostlikelytobeactive,whichgenerallyoccursbetweenFebruary154andNovember15.5

Conductpre‐constructionsurveys(accordingtoapprovedBLMguidelines[2005]and6USFWS’GuidelinesforHandlingDesertTortoises[USFWS2009])forpresenceorabsenceof7speciesandmonitorandreportanyviolationsofprotectivestipulations.Onlyauthorized8biologistsmayconductsurveysandhandlingofanyliveindividuals.9

Authorizebiologistsandenvironmentalmonitorswillmonitorandreportanyviolationsof10protectivestipulations,recordandreportanyinstanceswheretortoisesorothercovered11specieswereencountered,uponcompletionofconstructionactivitiesreportonthe12effectivenessandpracticalityofmitigationmeasures(includinginformationoncollected,13killedorinjuredindividuals)andtheacresofhabitatthatwereremovedordisturbed.14

Paycompensatoryfee.WithintheHabitatConservationAreasonBLMland,the15compensatoryfeewillbebasedonaratioof5:1(fivetimestheaveragevalueofanacreof16landwithinthehabitatconservationarea).17

Conductburrowingowlsurvey.ForburrowingowlhabitatwithintheDWMAs,aburrowing18owlsurveyutilizingthefour‐visitCDFGprotocolwillbeconducted.Theapplicantwill19providetoallconstructionpersonnelaninformationalbrochurewithanillustrationofa20burrowingowl,adescriptionofitsburrowsandhowtheycanberecognized,anda21summaryofthebird’slifehistory.Ifatanytimepriortogradingtheapplicantbecomes22awareofburrowingowlsonthesite,hewillbeinstructedtocallanumberwhereabiologist23canrespondquicklybyinstitutingtheminimizationmeasures.24

Conductbotanicalsurveys.ForDesertcymopterus,ifdisturbancewithinsuitablehabitat25locatedwithintheSuperiorCroneseDWMAisproposed,theApplicantwillberequiredto26performbotanicalsurveysforthisspecies,andiftheplantislocated,toavoidall27occurrencestothemaximumextentpracticable.Incidentaltakewillbelimitedto50acres.28

section 3.7 biological resources · 2014-09-04 · 5 vegetation mapping 6 vegetation mapping was...

Documents