• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Central California Irrigation District and Del Puerto Water District Orestimba Creek Groundwater Recharge Project Del Puerto Water District U.S. Department of the Interior Central California Irrigation District Patterson, California Bureau of Reclamation Los Banos, California Mid Pacific Region Sacramento, California April 2017 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and manages the Nation's natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated Island Communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Table of Contents Page Section 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................1 1.1 Background/ Project Overview ........................................................................ 1 1.2 Need for Project/ Project Objectives ............................................................... 1 1.3 Purpose of the EA/IS ......................................................................................... 3 Section 2 Alternatives and Proposed Action .................................................................5 2.1 No Action Alternative ........................................................................................ 5 2.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................................... 5 Section 3 Environmental Consequences ........................................................................8 3.1 Analysis of No Action Alternative .................................................................... 8 3.2 Analysis of Proposed Action ........................................................................... 8 3.3 Federal Disclosure Requirements ................................................................. 39 Section 4 Consultation and Coordination .....................................................................40 4.1 State Historic Preservation Officer ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................................ 40 4.3 Public Review Period ...................................................................................... 40 Section 5 References ..........................................................................................................41 Appendices Appendix A: California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks in the Central Valley of California ....42 Appendix B: Endangered Species Act Compliance .......................................................43 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Compliance .................................................................49 Appendix D: Indian Trust Assets Compliance .................................................................57 i Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration List of Acronyms and Abbreviations afy acre feet per year Air Basin San Joaquin Valley Air Basin APE area of potential effects BMP best management practices CCID Central California Irrigation District CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CFR Code of Federal regulations CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base CO2 carbon dioxide CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CVP Central Valley Project DPWD Del Puerto Water District District Central California Irrigation District DMC Delta Mendota Canal EA Environmental Assessment EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act GHG greenhouse gases Gpm gallons per minute IS Initial Study ITA Indian Trust Assets NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NRHP National Register of Historic Places NOx nitrogen oxides PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer State State of California SWPPP storm water pollution prevention plan USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ii Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Section 1 Introduction This Environmental Assessment (EA) / Initial Study (IS) was jointly prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) as the lead Federal agency and Central California Irrigation District (CCID) as lead State agency and Del Puerto Water District (DPWD) as a responsible agency to satisfy the requirements of both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Throughout this document, Proposed Action and Proposed Project are used interchangeably and both terms reflect the project as described below. 1.1 Background/ Project Overview The Orestimba Creek Groundwater Recharge Project (Proposed Project) is located in western Stanislaus County, approximately 3 miles west of the community of Newman (Figure 1). The project area is located north of Orestimba Road, and ½ mile west of Eastin Road, and within the boundary of DPWD. The Proposed Project is the construction of a 20 acre groundwater recharge facility near Orestimba Creek that would allow the recharge of 500 acre feet per year (afy) of surface water to the local groundwater basin. Existing connections to the Delta-Mendota Canal (DMC) would deliver up to 500 afy to the groundwater recharge facility. A production well would be constructed to recover the banked water during dry periods. The recharge water source would vary from year to year but could include excess winter flows from CCID. Reclamation would provide $600,000 in grant funds through the Bay-Delta Restoration Program: CALFED Water Use Efficiency Grant to CCID for the development of a groundwater recharge facility. The CALFED Water Use Efficiency Grant Program was established to accelerate the implementation of cost-effective actions that provide state-wide benefits of water conservation. CCID and DPWD (Project Proponents) would provide the remaining funding for the project and complete the construction of the groundwater recharge facility. 1.2 Need for Project/ Project Objectives Surface water supplies in the San Joaquin Valley are subject to severe restrictions caused by recurring dry conditions and regulatory pumping restrictions. During these dry periods, growers within CCID and DPWD rely on groundwater or other sources of supply to meet their irrigation needs. Excessive groundwater pumping strains aquifers that are already in a state of overdraft, dropping the water level in some wells by more than 100 feet and causing other wells to go dry. When California’s climate cycles into wetter periods, surface water supplies become available to growers again and the reliance on groundwater is reduced. However, excess flows caused by storm events or rapid snow melt, are often discharged to the ocean and lost. 1 Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map 2 Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration The Proposed Project would help to provide a long-term solution by banking excess water during wet periods into the regional aquifer. The Proposed Project would divert excess water and store it in the proposed recharge ponds, accelerating the rate of groundwater recharge for the local aquifer. A production well would pump the banked water into the DMC during dry periods. Monitoring or observation wells would be installed at key locations to monitor the rate of groundwater recharge. This data would also be used to determine the volume of water allowed to be extracted so that the rate of recharge would always exceed the rate of extraction. 1.3 Purpose of the EA/IS This EA/IS was prepared to describe the existing environmental and cultural resources in the project area; analyze the potential impacts from the construction and operation of the Proposed Project; and propose measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects to less than significant. An Environmental Checklist has been included in Section 3. Operation of the project would include conveyance of up to 500 afy of high quality water from the DMC to recharge the local aquifer and the extraction of water from the production well. Well extraction will be managed so that the volume pumped from the well would always be less than the volume recharged. Figure 2 shows the project area with preliminary layout and pipeline alignments. 3 Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 2. Project Area and Features 4 Draft Environmental Assessment / Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Section 2 Alternatives and Proposed Action This EA/IS considers two alternatives: the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative reflects future conditions without the Proposed Action and serves as a basis of comparison for determining potential effects to the human environment. For purposes of analysis, the No Action Alternative is the same as existing conditions. 2.1 No Action Alternative

Load more

  81

Copy Link