U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management DOI ------BLM NV S010 2018 0051 EIS GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2: Appendices A - J

i

The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the stewardship of our public lands. The BLM’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.

CONTENTS Appendices Appendix A. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Appendix B. Glossary Appendix C. Index Appendix D. Figures Appendix E. Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans Appendix F. Cultural Resources Support Information Appendix G Best Management Practices Appendix H. Mitigation, Monitoring, Reporting Measures Appendix I. References Appendix J. Preparers

Contents-i

This page is intentionally left blank.

Contents-ii

APPENDIX A List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations AC alternating current

ACEC Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

AFB Air Force Base

AGL above ground level

APE area of potential effect

APLIC Avian Power Line Interaction Committee

Applicant Solar Partners, XI, LLC

AQ Air Quality

BBCS Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BMP Best Management Practices

BSBCB Bitter Springs Back Country Byway

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second

CH4 methane

CHU critical habitat units cKOPs candidate key observation points cms cubic meter per second

CO carbon monoxide

CO2 carbon dioxide

CO2e units of equivalent carbon dioxide

COC Corridor of Concern

CPV concentrated photovoltaic

CR Cultural Resources

CRMMP Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations dBA A-weighted decibel scale

DC Direct current

DoD Department of Defense

DOI Department of the Interior

DWMA Desert Wildlife Management Areas

E. coli Escherichia coli

EEA Environmental Exclusion Area

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EMF electric and magnetic field

ERMA extensive recreation management area

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 gen-tie generation-tie lines

GHG greenhouse gas

GIS geographic information systems

GLO General Land Office

GS Geology and Soils

H2S hydrogen sulfide

HFCs hydrofluorocarbons

HPRSEG High Potential Route Segment

HPTP Historic Properties Treatment Plan

I-15 Interstate 15

IPP DC Line Intermountain Power Project Direct Current Line

KOP key observation point kV kilovolt

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

LADWP Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level

Leq equivalent sound level

Lmax maximum sound level

LOS Level of Service

LU Land Use

LWRFS Lower White River Flow System

MCL mean carapace length

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter mm millimeter

MM mitigation measures

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

MSHCP Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan

MTR military training route

MW megawatt mya million years ago

N2O nitrous oxide

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAC Nevada Administrative Code

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

NDEP Nevada Division of Environmental Protection

NDOT Nevada Department of Transportation

NDWR Nevada Division of Water Resources

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NNHP Nevada Natural Heritage Program

NNPS Nevada Native Plant Society

iii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

NO2 nitrogen dioxide

NOA Notice of Availability

NOI Notice of Intent

NOx nitrogen oxide

NPS National Park Service

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

NRS Nevada Revised Statutes

NTP Notice to Proceed

NVCRIS Nevada Cultural Resources Information System

O&M operations and maintenance

O3 ozone

OHV off-highway vehicle

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Act

OSNHT Old Spanish National Historic Trail

OSTA Old Spanish Trail Association

Pb lead

PCE Passenger Car Equivalent

PCS power conversion station

PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

PFCs perfluorocarbons

PFYC Potential Fossil Yield Classification

PM particulate matter

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter

PM2.5 fine particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter

POD Plan of Development

PR Paleontological Resources

PRMMP Paleontological Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Program

iv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

Project Gemini Solar Project

PS Public Services

PUP Pesticide Use Proposal

PV photovoltaic

PVCS Photovoltaic Combining Switchgear

Qa Holocene-age young alluvium

RCB reinforced concrete box culvert

RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model

REC Recreation

RMP Resource Management Plan

RMPA Resource Management Plan Amendment

ROD Record of Decision

ROW rights-of-way

SAAQS state ambient air quality standards

SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition

SEZ solar energy zone

SF6 sulfur hexafluoride

SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas

SFL significant fossil locality

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

SLRU Sensitivity Level Rating Units

SNIP Southern Nevada Intertie Project

SO2 sulfur dioxide

SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure

SQRU Scenic Quality Rating Unit

SR State Route

SRMA special recreation management area

v GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

SUA special use airspace

SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan

TCP traditional cultural property

US 93 United States Route 93

US 95 United States Route 95

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USC United States Code

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS United States Geographical Survey

VG Vegetation

VOC volatile organic compound

VR Visual Resources

VRI Visual Resource Inventory

VRM Visual Resource Management

VSOI Visual Sphere of Influence

WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Plan

WILD Wildlife

WR Water Resources

WTAQ Water Table Aquifer

vi APPENDIX B Glossary

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Glossary

100-year floodplain: The area that would be inundated by water during a flood event, having a one- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in magnitude, in any given year.

Acceleration (peak horizontal): A measure of earthquake acceleration (i.e., shaking) on the ground surface expressed in g, the acceleration due to the Earth’s gravity Access roads: Gravel or dirt roads (rarely paved) that provide access to the solar facility and gen-tie lines and facilities for construction, inspection, maintenance, and decommissioning. Acre: A unit of land measure equal to 43,560 square feet. Adverse environmental effects: Impacts that are determined to be harmful to the environment. See also Effects. Affected Environment: For an environmental impact statement, a description of the existing environment covering information necessary to assess or understand the impacts. It must contain enough detail to support the impact analyses and must highlight environmentally sensitive resources (e.g., floodplains, wetlands, threatened and endangered species, and archeological resources). Air pollutant: Any substance in the air which could, if in high enough concentration, harm humans, other animals, vegetation, or material. Pollutants may include almost any natural or artificial composition of matter capable of being airborne. Air quality: Measure of the health-related and visual characteristics of the air to which the general public and the environment are exposed. Air quality standards: The legally prescribed level of constituents in the outside air that cannot be exceeded during a specific time in a specified area. Alluvial: Formed by the action of running water; of or related to river and stream deposits. Alternating current (AC): An electric current that reverses its direction at regularly recurring intervals. Ambient air: The surrounding atmosphere as it exists around people, plants, and structures. Ambient Air Quality Standards: Regulations prescribing the levels of airborne pollutants that may not be exceeded during a specified time in a defined area. American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (AIRFA): Act requiring federal agencies to consult with tribal officials to ensure protection of religious cultural rights and practices. Archaeological site: Any location where humans have altered the terrain or discarded artifacts during prehistoric or historic times.

Area of Potential Effect (APE): The geographic area or areas within which an undertaking (project, activity, program, or practice) may cause changes in the character or use of any cultural resources that are present.

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs): These areas are managed by the Bureau of Land Management and are defined by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as having significant historical, cultural, and scenic values, habitat for fish and wildlife, and other public land resources, as identified through the Bureau of Land Management’s land-use planning process.

Arid: A region that receives too little water to support agriculture without irrigation. Less than ten inches of rainfall a year is typically considered arid.

Artifact: An object produced or shaped by human beings and of archaeological or historical interest.

Attainment: An area considered to have air quality as good as or better than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for a given pollutant. An area may be in attainment for one pollutant and in nonattainment for others.

Attenuation: The reduction in level of sound.

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): A measurement representing the total number of vehicles passing a given location, based upon 24-hour counts taken over an entire year. Mechanical counts are adjusted to an estimate of annual average daily traffic figures, taking into account seasonal variance, weekly changes, and other variables.

Background level noise: Noise in the environment (other than noise emanating from the source of interest).

Bajada: A broad sloping deposit caused by the joining together of alluvial fans. These occur on the lower slopes of mountains and are often characterized by loose sediment and poor soil development.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: This Act was originally enacted in 1940 as the Bald Eagle Protection Act to protect bald eagles and later amended to include golden eagles. It prohibits the taking or possession of and commerce in bald and golden eagles, parts, feathers, nests, or eggs, with limited exceptions. The definition of take includes pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest, or disturb. Bald eagles may not be taken for any purpose unless a permit is issued prior to the taking. Permits must be obtained from the U.S. Department of the Interior to relocate nests that interfere with resource development or recovery.

Basin: (1) A depression in the Earth’s surface that collects sediment. (2) The area of land that drains to a particular river.

Battery: Two or more electrochemical cells enclosed in a container and electrically interconnected in an appropriate series and/or parallel arrangement to provide the required operating voltage and current levels. Under common usage, the term battery also applies to a single cell if it constitutes the entire electrochemical storage system.

Battery capacity: The maximum total electrical charge, expressed in ampere-hours, which a battery can deliver to a load under a specific set of conditions.

Best Management Practices (BMP): A practice or combination of practices that are determined to provide the most effective, environmentally sound, and economically feasible means of managing an activity and mitigating its impacts.

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Biocrust: Commonly found in semiarid and arid environments, biological soil crusts are formed by living organisms and their by-products, creating a crust of soil particles bound together by organic materials. Crusts are predominantly composed of cyanobacteria (formerly called blue-green algae), green and brown algae, mosses, lichens, and bryophytes, which live within or on top of the uppermost millimeters of soil. Biological soil crusts are also known as cryptogamic, microbiotic, cryptobiotic, and microphytic crusts.

B.P.: Before present year.

Braided streams: Braided streams have multiple channels that are interlaced in a braided pattern, with very low stream gradient (<0.5% channel slope) and high sediment loading. Braided streams generally have broad, shallow valleys, with well-defined floodplains.

Burrow: A hole made by an animal, usually for shelter or to move through by digging.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM): An agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior that is responsible for managing public lands.

Cancer: A group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled cellular growth. Increased incidence of cancer can be caused by exposure to radiation and some chemicals.

Candidate Species: Plants and animals for which the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service has sufficient information on their biological status and threats to propose them as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act, but for which development of a listing regulation is precluded by other higher priority listing activities.

Carbon dioxide (CO2): A colorless, odorless, nonpoisonous gas that is a normal part of the Earth’s atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a product of fossil fuel combustion as well as other processes. It is the most prominent greenhouse gas that traps heat radiated into the atmosphere.

Carbon monoxide (CO): A colorless, odorless gas that is toxic if breathed in high concentrations over an extended period of time. Carbon monoxide is listed as a criteria air pollutant under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

Cenozoic: An era of geologic time from the beginning of the Tertiary period (65 million years ago) to the present. Its name is from the Greek and it means “new life.”

Channel incision: The process of downcutting into a stream channel leading to a decrease in the channel bed elevation. Incision is often caused by a decrease in sediment supply and/or an increase in sediment transport capacity. A decrease in base level can cause headcutting that migrates upstream and produces incision upstream and initiating aggradation downstream.

Class I Area: As defined in the Clean Air Act, the following areas that were in existence as of August 7, 1977: national parks with more than 6,000 acres, national wilderness areas, national memorial parks with more than 5,000 acres, and international parks.

Class II Area: Areas of the country protected under the Clean Air Act but identified for somewhat less stringent protection from air pollution damage than a Class I area, except in specified cases.

Clay: A very fine-grained rock or mineral fragment of any composition that has a diameter of less than 0.002 mm. Moist clay is sticky and forms a ribbon when pressed between the thumb and forefinger.

iii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Clean Air Act (CAA): The comprehensive federal law which regulates air emissions. The goal of the law was to develop a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) that protects public health and the environment. The original CAA was passed in 1963, but the national air pollution control program is actually based on the 1970 version of the law. The 1990 CAA Amendments, in large part, were intended to deal with previously unaddressed or under-addressed problems such as acid rain, ground level ozone, ozone depletion, and air toxics.

Clean Water Act (CWA): Requires National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for discharges of effluents to surface waters, permits for storm water discharges related to industrial activity, and notification of oil discharges to navigable waters of the United States.

Climate: The composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): A publication in codified form, of all federal regulations in force.

Collection: The capture or obtaining of plant or animal specimens or paleontological resources. This can include obtaining specimens for scientific study, pets, or illegal trade.

Community: An assemblage of plant and animal populations occupying a given area.

Concentration: Amount of a chemical in a particular volume or weight of air, water, soil, or other medium.

Contrast: Opposition or unlikeness of different forms, lines, colors, or textures in a landscape.

Contrast level: A description of the relative amount of visual contrast resulting from a change in the visible landscape. Contrast levels define the degree to which a management activity affects the visual quality of a landscape and provides a means for determining visual impacts and for identifying measures to mitigate these impacts. Contrast levels are determined as part of th Visual Contrast Rating procedures BLM utilizes to analyze potential visual impacts of proposed projects and activities. In the Visual Contrast Rating process, contrast levels are defined as None, Weak, Moderate, or Strong. In this PEIS, an additional contrast level (minimal) is used.

Corona/corona noise: The electrical breakdown of air into charged particles. The phenomenon appears as a bluish-purple glow on the surface of and adjacent to a conductor when the voltage gradient exceeds a certain critical value, thereby producing light, audible noise (described as crackling or hissing), and ozone.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ): Established by National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), CEQ regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) describe the process for implementing NEPA, including preparation of environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, and the timing and extent of public participation.

Criteria air pollutants: Six common air pollutants for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). They are sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM10), and lead. Standards were developed for these pollutants on the basis of scientific knowledge about their health effects.

iv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Critical habitat: The specific area within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed as endangered or threatened. The area in which physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species is found. These areas may require special management or protection.

Cultural Resources: Archaeological sites, structures, or features; traditional use areas; and Native American sacred sites or special use areas that provide evidence of the prehistory and history of a community.

Cumulative impacts: The impacts assessed in an environmental impact statement that could potentially result from incremental impacts of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal), private industry, or individual undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

Decibel (dB): A standard unit for measuring the loudness or intensity of sound. In general, a sound doubles in loudness with every increase of 10 decibels.

Decibel, A-weighted (dBA): A measurement of sound approximating the sensitivity of the human ear and used to characterize the intensity or loudness of a sound.

Decommissioning: All activities necessary to take out of service and dispose of a facility after its useful life.

Demand side management: Specific actions taken by utility companies, their regulators, and other entities to induce, influence, or compel consumers to reduce their energy consumption, particularly during periods of peak demand.

Deposit: Earth material that has accumulated by some natural process. For example, a flowing mixture of water and rock debris is called a debris flow, but when the flow ceases to move, a layer of fine and coarse rock is left, which is called a debris-flow deposit.

Desert: Arid region receiving less than 10 inches of precipitation annually.

Desert pavement: A surface layer of closely packed, loosely cemented pebbles.

Desert wash: A usually dry desert streambed that flows only after periods of heavy rain.

Design features: Measures or procedures incorporated into the proposed action or alternatives which could avoid or reduce adverse impacts. Potential mitigation measures selected as required are then considered to be design features.

Designated Roads and Trails: Specific roads and trails identified by the agencies where some type of motorized vehicle use is appropriate and allowed, either seasonally or yearlong.

Direct Current (DC): A steady current that flows in one direction only. The current from batteries is an example of direct current.

Direct effects: Effects on the environment which occur at the same time and place as the initial cause or action.

v GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Distance zones: A subdivision of the landscape as viewed from an observer position. The BLM defined zones include foreground, middleground, background, and seldom seen.

Distributed generation: The installation of small-scale solar energy facilities at individual locations that are at or near the point of consumption (e.g., use of solar PV panels on a business or home to generate electricity for on-site consumption). Distributed generation systems typically generate less than 10,000 kW. Other terms for distributed generation include on-site generation, dispersed generation, and distributed energy.

Dry lake: An ephemeral lake of an arid or semiarid region, typically found at low elevation points in desert valleys. They are topographically flat areas, support sparse vegetation, and contain fine-grained, consolidated sediments that are deposited during precipitation runoff events where the water temporally ponds and then infiltrates to groundwater aquifers or evaporates. The surface sediments of dry lakes can often have high concentrations of dissolved minerals.

Dry wash: A natural drainage channel that is typically dry, but conveys water following significant rainfall events and is subject to rapid flow during flash flooding.

Dune: Mounds of unconsolidated sand grains shaped by wind. Often temporary and non-stationary.

Earthquake: Ground shaking caused by the sudden release of energy stored in rock beneath the Earth’s surface.

Effects: Environmental consequences (the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives) as a result of a proposed action. Effects may be either direct, which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place, or indirect, which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable, or cumulative.

Efficiency: Ratio of “power out” divided by “power in.” The definitions of power out and power in are specific to a given technology and depend on whether the efficiency value describes a total system efficiency or an individual component’s efficiency.

Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs): Electric and magnetic fields are generated when charged particles (e.g., electrons) are accelerated. Charged particles in motion produce magnetic fields. Electric and magnetic fields are typically generated by alternating current in electrical conductors. Also referred to as electromagnetic fields.

Emissions: Substances that are discharged into the air from industrial processes, vehicles, and living organisms. A release into the outdoor atmosphere of air contaminants.

Endangered Species: Any species (plant or animal) that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant part of its range. Requirements for declaring a species endangered are found in the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). See also Special Status Species.

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA): Requires consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service to determine whether endangered or threatened species or their habitats will be impacted by a proposed activity and what, if any, mitigation measures are needed to address the impacts.

vi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): A document required of federal agencies by the National Environmental Policy Act for major proposals or legislation that will or could significantly affect the environment.

Environmental Justice: The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

Ephemeral stream: A stream that flows only after a storm or during snowmelt, and whose channel is, at all times, above the water table; groundwater is not a source of water for the stream. Many desert streams are ephemeral.

Erosion: The wearing away of land surface by wind or water, intensified by land-clearing practices related to farming, residential or industrial development, road building, or logging.

Exceedance: A measured level of an air pollutant that is higher than the national or state ambient air quality standards. See also NAAQS and CAAQS.

Executive Order: A president’s or governor’s declaration which has the force of law, usually based on existing statutory powers, and requiring no action by the Congress or state legislature.

Expansive soils: Soils generally contain fine-grained clays that can absorb greater amounts of water than other soils, which swell and expand the soils volume during the wet season. Shrinking and swelling of soils cause damage to building foundations, roads, and other structures.

Fault: A fracture along which blocks of the Earth’s crust on either side have moved relative to one another.

Federal land: Land owned by the United States, without reference to how the land was acquired or which Federal agency administers the land, including mineral and coal estates underlying private surface.

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA): Act requiring the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations to manage public lands and the property located on those lands for the long term.

Federal Register: The official daily publication for rules, proposed rules, and notices of Federal agencies and organizations, as well as executive orders and other presidential documents.

Fill: Man-made deposits of soil and rock and/or waste material.

Floodplain: A generally flat, low-lying area adjacent to a water body that is subjected to inundation during high flow or rainfall events. The relative elevation of floodplain areas determines their frequency of flooding, which ranges from rare, severe, storm events to flows experienced several times a year.

Fossil: Remains of ancient life forms, their imprints or behavioral traces (e.g., tracks, burrows, or residues) and the rocks in which they are preserved.

Fossil fuels: Natural gas, petroleum, coal, and any form of solid, liquid, or gaseous fuel derived from such materials for the purpose of creating useful heat.

vii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Fragmentation: Process by which habitats are increasingly subdivided into smaller units, resulting in their increased insularity as well as losses of total habitat area.

Fugitive dust: The dust released from any source other than a definable point source such as stack, chimney, or vent. Sources include construction activities, storage piles, roadways, etc.

Geographic Information System (GIS): A computer system for performing geographical analysis. GIS has four interactive components: an input subsystem for converting into digital form (digitizing) maps and other spatial data; a storage and retrieval subsystem; an analysis subsystem; and an output subsystem for producing maps, tables, and answers to geographic queries.

Geology: The science that deals with the study of the materials, processes, environments, and history of the Earth, including the rocks and their formation and structure.

Geotechnical: Refers to the use of scientific methods and engineering principles to acquire, interpret, and apply knowledge of earth materials for solving engineering problems.

Glare: The sensation produced by luminances within the visual field that are sufficiently greater than the luminance to which the eyes are adapted, which causes annoyance, discomfort, or loss in visual performance and visibility.

Glint: A momentary flash of light resulting from a spatially localized reflection of sunlight.

Great Basin: An area covering most of Nevada and much of western Utah, as well as portions of southern Oregon and southeastern California, consisting primarily of arid, high elevation, desert valleys, sinks (playas), dry lake beds, and salt flats. The Great Basin is characterized by the fact that all surface waters drain inward to terminal lakes or sinks. The Great Basin cultural area extends beyond the physiographic Great Basin to include traditional areas of tribes who speak languages related to those spoken in the Great Basin and who traditionally pursued a similar lifestyle. These include the Utes of the Colorado Plateau in eastern Utah and western Colorado.

Greenhouse gases (GHGs): Heat-trapping gases that cause global warming. Natural and human-made greenhouse gases include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides, ozone, and chlorofluorocarbons.

Groundwater: The supply of water found beneath the Earth’s surface, usually in porous rock formations (aquifers), which may supply wells and springs. Generally, it refers to all water contained in the ground.

Groundwater basin: (1) A general term used to define a groundwater flow system that has defined boundaries and may include permeable materials that are capable of storing or furnishing a significant water supply. The basin includes both the surface area and the permeable materials beneath it. (2) The underground area from which groundwater drains. The basins could be separated by geologic or hydrologic boundaries.

Groundwater recharge: Inflow of water to a ground-water reservoir from the surface. Infiltration of precipitation and its movement to the water table is one form of natural recharge. Also, the volume of water added by this process.

Habitat: The place, including physical and biotic conditions, where a plant or animal lives.

viii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Habitat alteration: A change in the particular environment or place where an organism or species lives. Usually implies changes made to the environment that adversely affect the function of the ecosystem, although not completely or permanently.

Habitat degradation: Decline in habitat quality that accompanies non-natural forms of disturbance.

Harassment: The intentional or unintentional disturbance of individual animals causing them to flee a site or avoid use of an area.

Hazardous material: Any material that poses a threat to human health and/or the environment. Hazardous materials are typically toxic, corrosive, ignitable, explosive, or chemically reactive.

Hazardous waste: By-products of society that can pose a substantial or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly managed. Possesses at least one of four characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity) or appears on special U.S. Environmental Protection Agency lists.

Headwater: (1) The source and upper reaches of a stream; also the upper reaches of a reservoir; (2) the water upstream from a structure or point on a stream; (3) the small streams that come together to form a river. Also may be thought of as any and all parts of a river basin other than the mainstream river and main tributaries.

Herbicide: Chemicals used to kill undesirable vegetation.

Historic: The time period after the appearance of written records. In the New World, this generally refers to the time period after the beginning of European settlement at approximately 1600 A.D.

Historic properties: Any prehistoric or historic districts, sites, buildings, structures, or objects included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. They include artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties.

Historic resources: Material remains and the landscape alterations that have occurred since the arrival of Euro-Americans.

Historic trails: A general term used to define a groundwater flow system that has defined boundaries and may include permeable materials that are capable National Historic Trails.

Holocene: The past 10,000 years of geologic time. The most recent epoch of the Quaternary period. Together the Holocene and Pleistocene make up the Quaternary Period.

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs): Man-made chemicals, many of which have been developed as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances (ODS) for industrial, commercial, and consumer products.

Hydrology: The study of water that covers the occurrence, properties, distribution, circulation, and transport of water, including groundwater, surface water, and rainfall.

In attainment: In compliance with air-quality standards. Areas that are in attainment have air quality that is as good as or better than specified in the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for a given pollutant. An area may be in attainment for one pollutant and non-attaining for others.

Incidental take permit: A permit issued under Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act to private parties undertaking otherwise lawful projects that might result in the take of an endangered or

ix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary threatened species. Application for an incidental take permit is subject to certain requirements, including preparation by the permit applicant of a conservation plan, generally known as a Habitat Conservation Plan or HCP.

Indirect effects: Secondary effects which occur in locations other than the initial action or significantly later in time.

Interpretive site: Information communicated via plaques, markers, and other methods, about the natural and/or cultural resources, their history and values, that are found at a specific site or along a trail. Tours, signs, brochures, informational kiosks, and other means can be used to interpret a particular resource.

Invasive species: Any species, including noxious and exotic species, that is an aggressive colonizer and can out-compete indigenous species.

Inverter: An electrical device that converts direct current (DC) into alternating current (AC).

Key observation point(s) (KOPs): One or a series of points on a travel route or at a use area or a potential use area, where the view of a management activity would be most revealing. KOPs are typically used as viewpoints for assessing potential visual impacts resulting from a proposed management activity.

Kilowatt: A unit of electrical power equal to 1,000 watts (W).

Land Use: A characterization of land surface in terms of its potential utility for various activities.

Land Use Plan: A set of decisions that establish management direction for land within an administrative area, as prescribed under the planning provisions of FLPMA; an assimilation of land-use-plan-level decisions developed through the planning process outlined in 43 CFR 1600, regardless of the scale at which the decisions were developed. See also Resource Management Plan.

Landscape character: The arrangement of a particular landscape as formed by the variety and intensity of the landscape features and the four basic elements of form, line, color, and texture. These factors give the area a distinctive quality which distinguishes it from its immediate surroundings.

Landslide: downward and outward movement of slope-forming materials composed of rock, soils, artificial fills, or a combination of these

Ldn: The day-night average sound level. It is the average A-weighted sound level over a 24-hour period that gives additional weight to noise that occurs during the night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) to account for the greater sensitivity of most people to nighttime noise.

Lead: A gray-white metal that is listed as a criteria air pollutant. Health effects from exposure to lead include brain and kidney damage and learning disabilities. Sources include leaded gasoline and metal refineries.

Lease: A contract in legal form that provides for the right to develop and produce resources within a specific area for a specific period of time under certain agreed-upon terms and conditions.

Liquefaction: Refers to a sudden loss of strength and stiffness in loose, saturated soils. It causes a loss of soil stability and can result in large, permanent displacements of the ground.

Lithic: Relating to stone or rock.

x GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Low-income population: Persons whose average family income is below the poverty line. The poverty line takes into account family size and age of individuals in the family. For any family below the poverty line, all family members are considered to be below the poverty line.

Megawatt: A unit of power equal to one million watts (equivalent to one joule per second). One megawatt serves about 300 homes in the western United States based on national data.

Megawatt hour (MWh): The equivalent of one million watts of electrical power used for one hour.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA): The MBTA implements various treaties and conventions between the United States, and Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. The MBTA made it illegal for people to “take” migratory birds, their eggs, feathers, or nests. See also Take.

Mineral: A naturally occurring inorganic element or compound having an orderly internal structure and characteristic chemical composition, crystal morphology, and physical properties such as density and hardness. Minerals are the fundamental units from which most rocks are made.

Mining claim: That portion of the public mineral lands which a miner, for mining purposes, takes and holds in accordance with the mining laws. A mining claim may be validly located and held only after the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit.

Minority population: Includes Hispanic, American Indian, or Alaskan Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; Black (not of Hispanic origin) or African American. “Other” races and multi- racial individuals may be considered as separate minorities.

Miocene: An epoch of the upper Tertiary period, 23 to 5.3 million years ago.

Mitigation: A method or process by which impacts from actions can be made less injurious to the environment through appropriate protective measures.

Mitigation measures: Methods or actions that will reduce adverse impacts from solar facility development. Mitigation measures can include best management practices, stipulations in BLM ROW agreements, siting criteria, and technology controls.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): Air quality standards established by the Clean Air Act, as amended. The primary NAAQS are intended to protect the public health with an adequate margin of safety; and the secondary NAAQS are intended to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA): Requires federal agencies to prepare a detailed statement on the environmental impacts of their proposed major actions that are significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA): A federal law providing that property resources with significant national historic value be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. It does not require permits; rather, it mandates consultation with the proper agencies whenever it is determined that a proposed action might impact an historic property.

xi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

National Historic Trails: These trails are designated by Congress under the National Trails System Act of 1968 and follow, as closely as possible, on federal land, the original trails or routes of travel that have national historical significance.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: A federal permitting system controlling the discharge of effluents to surface water and regulated through the Clean Water Act, as Amended.

National Recreation Area: An area designated by Congress to assure the conservation and protection of natural, scenic, historic, pastoral, fish, and wildlife values, and to provide for the enhancement of recreational values.

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP): A comprehensive list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. The NRHP is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of the Department of the Interior.

Native American: Of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is indigenous to the United States.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA): This act established the priority for ownership or control of Native American cultural items excavated or discovered on federal or tribal land after 1990 and the procedures for repatriation of items in federal possession. The act allows for the intentional removal or excavation of Native American cultural items from federal or tribal lands only with a permit or upon consultation with the appropriate tribe.

Natural drainages: Natural systems that convey water (such as a stream channel) that may be perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral.

Nitrogen dioxide: (NO2): A toxic, reddish-brown gas that is a strong oxidizing agent, produced by combustion (as of fossil fuels). It is the most abundant of the oxides of nitrogen in the atmosphere and plays a major role in the formation of ozone. NO2 is one of the six criteria air pollutants specified under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

Nitrogen oxides (NOx): Nitrogen oxides include various nitrogen compounds, primarily nitrogen dioxide and nitric oxide. They form when fossil fuels are burned at high temperatures and react with volatile organic compounds to form ozone, the main component of urban smog. They are also a precursor pollutant that contributes to the formation of acid rain.

Noise: Any unwanted sound that interferes with speech and hearing, causes damage to hearing, or annoys a person.

Nonattainment area: The EPA’s designation for an air quality control region (or portion thereof) in which ambient air concentrations of one or more criteria pollutants exceed National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Noxious weeds: Those plants regulated by law or those that are so difficult to control that early detection is important.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA): Congress created the OSHA under the Occupational Safety and Health Act on December 29, 1970. Its mission is to prevent work- related injuries, illnesses, and deaths.

xii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Off-Highway Vehicles (OHV) or Off-Road Vehicles: Any motorized vehicle designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other natural terrain; except that such term excludes (A) any registered motorboat, (B) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle when used for emergency purposes, and (C) any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the respective agency head under a permit, lease, license, or contract. See also Off-Road Vehicle Designations.

Off-Road Vehicle (OHV) Designations: OPEN: Vehicles are allowed without restrictions. LIMITED: Vehicle travel off existing roads and trails would be allowed only for authorized or permitted uses. CLOSED: Vehicle travel is closed in the area including existing roads and trails, except for authorized uses.

Old Spanish Trail: The land route traveled by traders from 19th-century Mexico - today's New Mexico - and California. From 1829 to 1848, this trail was the shortest-known route from Santa Fe to Los Angeles, through red-rock mesas, below snow-capped peaks, and fording untamed rivers, following a loose network of Native American footpaths across the Colorado Plateau and Mojave Desert.

Old Spanish National Historic Trail: Congressionally-designated corridor of the Old Spanish Trail, officially established as a national trail under the authorities of the National Trails System Act.

Old Spanish Trail Road: Generally adjacent, but up to a mile to the east of the Congressionally- designated corridor of the Old Spanish National Historic Trail (OSNHT), is Old Spanish Trail Road. The road is not linked historically to the OSNHT, nor to historical events associated with the trail, but provides proximal access.

Ozone (O3): A strong-smelling, reactive, toxic, chemical gas consisting of three oxygen atoms chemically attached to each other. Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by chemical reactions involving NOx and volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight. Ozone is a criteria air pollutant under the Clean Air Act and is a major constituent of smog.

Paleontological Resources: Fossilized remains, imprints, and traces of plants and animals preserved in rocks and sediments since some past geologic time.

Particulate matter: Fine solid or liquid particles such as dust, smoke, mist, fumes, or smog, found in air or emissions. The size of the particulates is measured in micrometers (μm). One micrometer is 1 millionth of a meter or 0.000039 inch. Particle size is important because the EPA has set standards for PM2.5 and PM10 particulates.

Perennial waterbody: Waterbodies that flow continuously, because they lie at or below the groundwater table which constantly replenishes them.

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs): Compounds consisting of carbon and fluorine. They do not deplete the stratospheric ozone but are very strong greenhouse gases with long lifetimes in the atmosphere.

Pesticide: Substances or mixtures thereof, intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest. Also, any substance or mixture intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant.

xiii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Photovoltaic (PV) array: An interconnected system of PV modules that function as a single electricity- producing unit. The modules are assembled as a discrete structure, with common support or mounting. In smaller capacity systems, an array can consist of a single module.

Photovoltaic (PV) module: An assembly of solar cells (flat-plate type) or receiver(s) and optics (concentrator type) and ancillary parts, such as interconnects and terminals, enclosed in a weatherproof container, intended to generate DC power under unconcentrated sunlight. (Note: A CPV module is a concentrator type PV module.) The structural (load carrying) member of a module can either be the top layer (superstrate) or the back layer (substrate).

Photovoltaic (PV) panel: A collection of modules, either flat-plate or concentrator type, mechanically fastened, electrically interconnected, and designed to provide a field-installable unit.

Photovoltaics (PV): Technologies that utilize semiconducting materials that convert sunlight directly into electricity.

Photovoltaic Combining Switchgear (PVCS): Collect and combine the medium voltage power and communication from multiple PCSs for transmission to a substation.

Playa: Flat areas that contain seasonal or year-to-year shallow lakes that often evaporate, leaving minerals behind. Playas form in arid basins where rivers merge, but do not drain.

Pleistocene: The oldest epoch of the Quaternary period, ranging from 2.6 million to 10,000 years ago. Together the Pleistocene and the Holocene make up the Quaternary period.

PM2.5: Particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers (0.0001 in.) or less. Particles less than this diameter can lodge deeply in the lungs. PM2.5 is one of the six criteria pollutants specified under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

PM10: Particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (0.0004 in.) or less. Particles less than this diameter can be inhaled and accumulate in the respiratory system. PM10 is one of the six criteria pollutants specified under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC): Initially developed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Region 2 Paleo Initiative in May 1996, the PFYC system provides baseline guidance for assessing the relative occurrence of important paleontological resources and the need for mitigation. Specifically, it is used to classify geologic units, at the formation or member level, according to the probability that they could yield paleontological resources of concern to land managers.

Power, electrical: A unit of electrical energy, usually expressed in watts (W), kilowatts (kW), or megawatts (MW). One watt equals 3.14 Btu/hr.

Power Conversion Station (PCSs): Contains inverters and transformers as well as other electrical equipment and collects power from array blocks

Prehistoric: The time period before the appearance of written records. In the New World this generally refers to indigenous, precontact societies.

Public Land: Any land and interest in land (outside of Alaska) owned by the United States and administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management.

xiv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Quaternary: The most recent period of the Cenozoic era, spanning the time between 2.6 million years ago and the present. It contains two epochs: the Pleistocene and the Holocene.

Rangeland: Land on which the native vegetation, climax, or natural potential consists predominately of grasses, grasslike plants, forbs, or shrubs. Rangeland includes lands that are revegetated naturally or artificially to provide a plant cover that is managed similar to native vegetation. Rangelands may consist of natural grasslands, savannas, shrub lands, most deserts, tundra, alpine communities, coastal marshes, and wet meadows. (blm4)

Receptor: A location where environmental resources such as air concentration or noise level are evaluated, e.g., property boundaries, residences, schools, hospitals, libraries, etc.

Record of Decision (ROD): A document separate from but associated with an environmental impact statement (EIS) that publicly and officially discloses the responsible agency’s decision on the EIS alternative to be implemented.

Resource Management Plan (RMP): A land use plan that establishes land use allocations, multiple use guidelines, and management objectives for a given planning area. The RMP planning system has been used by the Bureau of Land Management since about 1980.

Right-of-Way (ROW): The legal right to cross the lands of another. Also used to indicate the strip of land for a road, railroad, or power line. In BLM, a permit or an easement which authorizes the use of public lands for certain specified purposes. Also, the lands covered by such an easement or permit. The authorization to use a particular parcel of public land for specific facilities for a definite time period. Authorizes the use of a ROW over, upon, under, or through public lands for construction, operation, maintenance, and termination of a project.

Roost: An area where birds or bats rest or sleep. Birds often use branches or tree cavities for roosts while bats use tree bark, tree hollows, caves, mines, buildings, bridges, or rock crevices.

Sacred sites: Any specific, discrete, narrowly delineated location on federal land that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its established religious significance to, or ceremonial use by, an Indian religion; provided that the tribe or appropriate authoritative representative of an Indian religion has informed the agency of the existence of such a site.

Sand: A rock or mineral fragment of any composition that has a diameter ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 mm. Sand has a gritty feel.

Scenic quality: A measure of the intrinsic beauty of landform, water form, or vegetation in the landscape, as well as any visible human additions or alterations to the landscape. Scenic resources: The visible physical features on a landscape (e.g., land, water, vegetation, animals, structures, and other features). Also referred to as visual resources.

Scenic value: The importance of a landscape based on human perception of the intrinsic beauty of landform, water form, and vegetation in the landscape, as well as any visible human additions or alterations to the landscape.

xv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Scoping: The process of inviting public comment on what should be considered prior to preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS). Scoping assists the preparers of an EIS in defining the proposed action, identifying alternatives, and developing preliminary issues to be addressed in an EIS.

Sedimentation: The removal, transport, and deposition of sediment particles by wind or water.

Seismic: Pertaining to any earth vibration, especially that of an earthquake.

Seismic shaking: The movement of the Earth’s surface from earthquakes. Ground motion is produced by seismic waves that are generated by a sudden slip on a fault and travel through the Earth and along its surface.

Sensitive Species: A plant or animal species listed by the state or federal government as threatened, endangered, or as a species of special concern. The list of BLM sensitive species varies from state to state, and the same species can be considered sensitive in one state but not in another. Also, a species that is adversely affected by disturbance or altered environmental conditions, such as sedimentation.

Sensitivity level (analysis): Measures (e.g., high, medium, and low) of public concern for the maintenance of scenic quality.

Slope failure: The downward and outward movement of a mass of rock or unconsolidated materials as a unit. Landslides and slumps are examples.

Slope stability: The resistance of an inclined surface to failure by sliding or collapsing.

Socioeconomics: The social and economic conditions in the study area.

Solid waste: All unwanted, abandoned, or discarded solid or semisolid material whether or not subject to decomposition, originating from any source.

Special Status Species (Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive, Rare): Includes both plant and animal species that are proposed for listing, officially listed as threatened or endangered, or are candidates for listing as threatened or endangered under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act; those listed by a state in a category such as threatened or endangered, implying potential endangerment or extinction; and those designated by each BLM State Director as sensitive.

Specially Designated Areas: Includes a variety of areas that have received recognition or designation because they possess unique or important resource values. While these areas would not be available for development of solar energy resources, they could be located near solar development areas and could be affected by solar development. Examples of BLM-administered specially designated areas include components of the BLM National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs), special recreation management areas, and areas with wilderness values. These areas may have been designated by Congress or by the BLM. The majority of specially designated areas discussed in this PEIS are located on BLM-administered public lands; however, some specially designated areas managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Park Service, and states also are included in the analysis when they could be affected by solar development on public lands.

Staging area: A designated area where construction equipment is temporarily stored (usually only during the construction phase).

xvi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs): The State officer charged with the identification and protection of prehistoric and historic resources in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act.

Subsidence: Sinking or settlement of the land surface, due to any of several processes. As commonly used, the term relates to the vertical downward movement of natural surfaces although small-scale horizontal components may be present. The term does not include landslides, which have large-scale horizontal displacements, or settlements of artificial fills.

Substation: A substation consists of one or more transformers and their associated switchgear. It is used to switch generators, equipment, and circuits or lines in and out of a system. It is also used to change AC voltages from one level to another.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2): A gas formed from burning fossil fuels, notably from coal-fired power plants. Sulfur dioxide is one of the six criteria air pollutants specified under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2): Pungent, colorless gas that is formed primarily by fossil fuel combustion, notably from coal-fired power plants. Sulfur dioxide may damage the respiratory tract, as well as plants and trees.

Take: Under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, it means to pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy, molest, or disturb. Disturb means to agitate or bother a bald eagle or a golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.

Threatened species: Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Requirements for declaring a species threatened are contained in the Endangered Species Act.

Topography: The shape of the Earth’s surface; the relative position and elevations of natural and human- made features of an area.

Toxicity: Harmful effects to an organism through exposure to a hazardous substance. Environmental exposures are primarily through inhalation, ingestion, or the skin.

Tracking system: A PV panel array system that follows the path of the sun to maximize the solar radiation incident on the PV surface. The two most common orientations are (1) single-axis where the array tracks the sun east to west and (2) dual-axis tracking where the array changes position seasonally as well as diurnally to allow the panels to directly face the sun at all times of the year. Tracking arrays use both the direct and diffuse sunlight. Dual-axis tracking arrays capture the maximum possible energy.

Traditional cultural property: A property that is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places because of its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community’s history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community. An example would be a location associated with the traditional beliefs of a Native American group about its origins, its cultural history, or the nature of the world.

Translocation: The intentional capture, movement, and release of individuals of a species into a different area, usually to prevent harm to the individuals or to establish populations elsewhere.

xvii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Transmission corridor: An electric or pipeline transmission corridor is a route approved on public lands, in a BLM or other federal agency land use plan, as a location that may be suitable for the siting of electric or pipeline transmission systems.

Transmission line: A set of electrical current conductors, insulators, supporting structures, and associated equipment used to move large quantities of power at high voltage, usually over long distances (e.g., between a power plant and the communities that it serves).

Tribal land: In NAGPRA, tribal land is defined as: (a) all lands within the exterior boundaries of any Indian reservation; (b) all dependent Indian communities; (c) any lands administered for the benefit of Native Hawaiians pursuant to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, and section 4 of Public Law 86-3. In NHPA, tribal land is defined as: (a) all lands within the exterior boundaries of any Indian reservation; and (b) all dependent Indian communities.

Tribe: Term used to designate a Federally recognized group of American Indians and their governing body. Tribes may be comprised of more than one band.

Tributary: A stream that flows into another stream, river, or lake.

United States Environmental Protection Agency: The independent federal agency, established in 1970, that regulates federal environmental matters and oversees the implementation of federal environmental laws.

Valley floor: The gently sloping to nearly level bottom surface of a valley.

Viewpoint: A point from which a landscape view is analyzed and/or evaluated.

Viewshed: The total landscape seen or potentially seen from all or a logical part of a travel route, use area, or water body.

Visual contrast: Opposition or unlikeness of different forms, lines, colors, or textures in a landscape.

Visual impact: Any modification in land forms, water bodies, or vegetation, or any introduction of structures, which negatively or positively affect the visual character or quality of a landscape through the introduction of visual contrasts in the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture.

Visual resources: Refers to all objects (man-made and natural, moving and stationary) and features such as landforms and water bodies that are visible on a landscape.

Visual Resource Inventory (VRI): Consists of a scenic quality evaluation, sensitivity level analysis, and a delineation of distance zones. Based on these three factors, BLM-administered lands are placed into one of four visual resource inventory classes.

Visual Resource Inventory (VRI) Classes: VRI Classes are assigned to public lands based upon the results from the Visual Resource Inventory. They do not establish management direction and should not be used as a basis for constraining or limiting surface disturbing activities. Inventory classes are informational in nature and provide the basis for considering visual values in the RMP process. There are four classes (I, II, III, and IV).

xviii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Glossary

Visual Resource Management (VRM) Classes: Categories assigned to BLM lands, utilizing the Visual Resource Inventory Classes in the RMP process, with an objective which prescribes the amount of change allowed in the characteristic landscape. All actions proposed during the RMP process that would result in surface disturbances must consider the importance of the visual values and the impacts the project may have on these values. Management decisions in the RMP must reflect the value of visual resources. The value of the visual resource may be the driving force for some management decisions. There are four VRM classes: I, II, III and IV.

Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class Designations: Class I objective is to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape should be very low and must not attract attention. Class II objective is to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape should be low. Management activities may be seen but must not attract the attention of the casual observer. Any changes must repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant natural landscape features. Class III objective is to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape should be moderate. Management activities may attract attention but should not dominate the view of the casual observer. Changes should repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant natural landscape features. Class IV objective is to provide for management activities that require major modification of the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape can be high.

Visual Resource Management (VRM) System: BLM’s system for minimizing the visual impacts of surface-disturbing activities and maintaining scenic values for the future. The inventory and planning actions taken to identify visual values and to establish objectives for managing those values; and the management actions taken to achieve the visual management objectives.

Visual sensitivity: Public concern for the maintenance of scenic quality in a particular landscape setting.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): Any organic compound that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions except those designated by the EPA as having negligible photochemical reactivity. Sources include certain solvents, degreasers (benzene), and fuels. Volatile organic compounds react with other substances (primarily nitrogen oxides) to form ozone, which contributes significantly to photochemical smog production and certain health problems.

Wash: A normally dry stream bed that occasionally fills with water.

Water quality: A term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water, usually with respect to its suitability for a particular purpose.

Watershed: A region or area bounded peripherally by a water parting and draining ultimately to a particular water-course.

Watt (W): A basic unit of power; one joule of energy consumed per second. When used to describe electrical power, one watt is the product of voltage times current.

Weed: A plant considered undesirable, unattractive, or troublesome, usually introduced and growing without intentional cultivation.

Wildfires: Any non-structure fire that occurs in the wildland.

xix APPENDIX C Index

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Index

Index

1 100-year flood, 3-34, 3-36, 3-40, 3-11, 3-14, 3-17 100-year floodplains, 3-40 1998 Las Vegas RMP, ES-2, 2-10, 3-69

A Areas of Critical Environmental Concern/ACEC, 2-10, 3-9, 3-13, 3-15, 3-17, 3-31, 3-35, 3-38, 3-44, 3-86 Acoustics, ES-3, ES-8, 1-2, 3-2, 3-44, 3-85 air quality, ES-3, ES-8, 1-3, 1-6,3-2, 3-26, 3-7, 3-15, 3-20, 3-21, 3-27, 3-28,3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-56, 3-57, 3-61, 3-62, 3-63, 3-65, 3-68, 3-141, 3-142, 3-144, 4-2 area of potential effect/APE, 3-90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-97, 3-103

B basin, 2-6, 3-10, 3-22, 3-29, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-38, 3-43, 3-44, 3-47, 3-48, 3-50, 3-54, 3-101, 3-109 best management practices/BMPs, ES-5, ES-6, ES-7, 3-24, 3-26, 3-27, 3-36, 3-41, 3-43, 3-12, 3-14, 3-18, 3-25 Bitter Springs Back Country Byway/BSBCB, ES-5, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 3-12, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3- 20, 3-69, 3-70, 3-74, 3-76, 3-79, 3-80, 3-81, 3-129

C candidate KOPs/cKOPs, 3-104, 3-105, 3-106, 3-108 Class I area, 3-55 Class III area, ES-8, 3-69 corona/corona noise, 3-85, 3-88 Corridor of Concern/COC, ES-5, 3-8, 3-12, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16 cultural resources, ES-3, ES-9, 1-3, 3-3, 3-90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 3-96, 3-97, 3-98, 3-99, 3-103, 3-104, 3-107, 3-110, 3-121

D Desert Wildlife Management Areas/DWMA, 2-10

E eagle, 3-5, 3-28, 3-29, 3-46, 3-135 electric and magnetic fields/EMF, ES-10, 3-136, 3-137, 3-138, 3-142, 3-143 Endangered Species Act of 1973/ESA, 3-4, 3-8, 3-40 Environmental Exclusion Areas/EEA, 3-94, 3-95, 3-98, 3-99, 3-104 extensive recreation management area/ERMA, 3-17, 3-18

i

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Index

F Federal Aviation Administration/FAA, ES-5, 1-5, 3-10, 3-11, 3-13, 3-14, 3-32, 3-80, 4-2 Federal Emergency Management Agency/FEMA, 3-34, 3-38, 3-39 Federal Highway Administration/FHWA, 3-86 Federal Land Policy and Management Act/FLPMA, ES-1, ES-3, 1-1, 1-2, 1-5, 3-68

G glare, ES-5, 2-11, 3-14, 3-68, 3-71, 3-72, 3-73, 3-77, 3-80, 3-81, 3-82, 3-83, 3-84 glint, ES-5, 3-14, 3-68, 3-71, 3-72, 3-73, 3-80, 3-81, 3-82, 3-83, 3-84 greenhouse gas/GHG, ES-1, 1-1, 3-53, 3-55, 3-56, 3-57, 3-61, 3-62, 3-65, 3-66, 3-68 groundwater, ES-3, ES-6, 1-2, 1-6, 3-2, 3-6, 3-23, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-41, 3-42, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 3- 46, 3-47

H habitat, ES-3, ES-7, ES-8, ES-9, 1-2, 1-3, 2-8, 2-10, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 3-11, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 3-22, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 3- 32, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 3-39, 3-41, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 3-46, 3-47, 3-49, 3-50, 3-51, 3-52, 3-98, 3-102, 3-103, 3-126 hazardous waste, ES-4, ES-10, 3-136, 3-139, 3-142 herbicide, 7, 2-6, 3-37, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-14, 3-15, 3-20, 3-21, 3-22, 3-23, 3-31, 3-33, 3-34, 3-37 historic, 3, 9, 1-3, 3-3, 3-10, 3-68, 3-90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 3-96, 3-102, 3-103, 3-105, 3-106, 3- 107, 3-108, 3-110, 3-112, 3-114, 3-115, 3-117, 3-118, 3-119, 3-120, 3-121, 3-137, 4-2

J jurisdictional waters, ES-3, ES-6, 1-2, 2-10, 3-1, 3-2, 3-13, 3-25, 3-27, 3-31, 3-33, 3-37, 3-40, 3-53, 3-74, 3-84, 3-101

K Key Observation Points/KOPs, ES-8, 3-69, 3-70, 3-71, 3-72, 3-74, 3-77, 3-78, 3-79, 3-80, 3-81, 3-82, 3- 83

L land use, ES-3, 1-2, 2-10, 3-1, 3-2, 3-6, 3-8, 3-11, 3-15, 3-16, 3-40, 3-71, 3-82, 3-84, 3-86, 4-1 landslide, ES-5, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25 level of service, 3-126, 3-133 liquefaction, 5, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25 LOS, ES-10, 3-130, 3-132, 3-133, 3-135, 3-136 low-income population, ES-4, ES-10, 1-3, 3-122, 3-123, 3-124, 3-125, 3-126, 3-127, 3-128, 3-129

M minority population, ES-10, 3-122, 3-123, 3-125, 3-126 Moapa Band of Paiutes, 3-2, 3-35, 3-42, 3-92, 3-100, 3-101, 3-102, 3-126, 3-128, 4-1, 4-2

ii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Index

Moapa River Indian Reservation, 10, 3-34, 3-39, 3-42, 3-30, 3-102, 3-112, 3-117, 3-122, 3-123, 3-124, 3- 126, 3-127, 3-128, 3-129 Mojave desert tortoise/tortoise, ES-3, ES-8, 1-3, 2-2, 2-3, 2-6, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 3-2, 3-3, 3-7, 3-10, 3- 18, 3-25, 3-28, 3-29, 3-40, 3-41, 3-44, 3-45, 3-42, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 3-46, 3-47, 3-48, 3-49, 3-50, 3-51, 3-52, 3-101, 3-102, 3-104, 3-118, 3-120

N National Ambient Air Quality Standards/NAAQS, 3-54, 3-55, 3-56, 3-58, 3-59, 3-61, 3-62, 3-64, 3-65, 3- 67, 3-68 National Historic Preservation Act/NHPA, 1-5, 3-90, 3-93, 3-94, 3-103, 4-1 National Register of Historic Places/NRHP, ES-9, 3-90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 3-96, 3-97, 3-98, 3- 99, 3-103, 3-110, 3-114, 3-115, 3-118, 3-120, 3-121 Nellis Air Force Base/Nellis AFB, 1-5, 3-5, 3-11, 3-81, 3-108, Notice of Availability/NOA, 2, 4-1 Notice of Intent/NOI, ES-2, 1-2, 1-5, 3-5, 3-6, 3-24, 4-1 Notice to Proceed/NTP, ES-5, 2-6, 3-30, 3-33, 3-36 Nye milkvetch, 7, 2-8, 2-10, 3-4, 3-5, 3-9, 3-12, 3-13, 3-16, 3-18, 3-21, 3-22, 3-26

O Occupational Safety and Health Administration/OSHA, 3-24, 3-25, 3-138, 3-140, 3-141 off-highway vehicle/OHV, ES-3, ES-5, 1-2, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 3-2, 3-7, 3-8, 3-20, 3-70, 3-78, 3-113 Old Spanish Trail, ES-3, ES-7, 1-3, 1-4, 3-105, 3-124, 3-125, 3-126, 3-127, 3-130, 3-131, 3-132, 3-138, 3-139, 3-140 Old Spanish Trail Road, ES-4, 3-6, 3-7, 3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-105, 3-110, 3-112, 3-113, 3-114, 3-115, 3-121, 3-129, 3-139 Old Spanish National Historic Trail/OSNHT, ES-3, ES-5, ES-9, 1-3, 3-3, 3-10, 3-12, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3- 17, 3-20, 3-40,3-69, 3-72, 3-78, 3-80, 3-82, 3-92, 3-93, 3-95, 3-97, 3-106, 3-107, 3-108, 3-109, 3-110, 3-111, 3-122, 3-112, 3-113, 3-114, 3-115, 3-116, 3-118, 3-119, 3-120, 3-121,

P Paleontology, 3-3 Pesticide Use Proposal/PUP, 2-6, 3-37, 3-41, 3-7, 3-9, 3-15, 3-16, 3-22, 3-23, 3-31, 3-32, 3-33, 3-34, 3- 36, 3-37, 3-39, 3-46, 3-49, 3-52, 3-139, 3-141 Plan of Development/POD, ES-1, 1-1, 2-5, 2-6, 2-7, 3-24, 3-55, 3-130, 3-140

R rangeland, ES-5, 3-8, 3-10, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16 recognized environmental conditions, 3-137, 3-139 recreation, ES-3, ES-5, ES-9, 1-2, 1-3, 3-2, 3-4, 3-5, 3-8, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 3-70, 3-76, 3- 95, 3-107, 3-108, 3-113, 3-118, 3-120, 3-121, 3-129 Resource Management Plan/RMP, ES-2, ES-3, ES-7, 1-2, 2-1, 2-2, 2-10, 3-17, 3-28, 3-68, 3-70, 3-80, 3- 113, 3-114, 3-146 Resource Management Plan Amendment/RMPA, ES-1, ES-2, 1-1, 1-5, 2-2

iii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Index

Right-of-Way/ROW, ES-1, ES-2, ES-5, ES-9, 1-1, 1-2, 1-5, 1-6, 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, 2-10, 2-11, 3-4, 3-8, 3-11, 3-12, 3-13, 3-15, 3-16, 3-18, 3-19, 3-23, 3-24, 3-26, 3-27, 3-7, 3-8, 3-10, 3-13, 3-15, 3-20, 3-22, 3-30, 3-68, 3-105, 3-115, 3-118, 3-121, 3-132, 3-136, 3-140, 4-3

S sacred sites, 3-90, 3-101 scenic, 3-10, 3-12, 3-68, 3-69, 3-70, 3-71, 3-72, 3-73, 3-78, 3-81, 3-82, 3-83, 3-105, 3-108, 3-109, 3-110 seismic, ES-5, 3-22, 3-24, 3-25 socioeconomics, ES-4, ES-9, 1-3, 3-122, 3-123, 3-126,3-127 special status species, ES-3, ES-7, ES-8, 3-2, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 3-11, 3-13, 3-23, 3-24, 3-27, 3-28, 3-29, 3- 31, 3-35, 3-38, 3-39, 3-40, 3-53, 3-102 State Implementation Plan, 3-54 subsidence, 3-23, 3-24

T traditional cultural properties/TCPs, ES-9, 3-90, 3-92, 3-96, 3-101, 3-102, 3-103, 3-104 threecorner milkvetch, 3, 7, 1-2, 2-8, 2-10, 3-26, 3-39, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-11, 3-13, 3-15, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 3-22, 3-25, 3-26, 3-27, 3-41 transmission, ES-1, ES-5, ES-8, ES-10, 1-1, 1-6, 2-3, 2-4, 2-10, 2-11, 3-3, 3-6, 3-8, 3-9, 3-11, 3-12, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-18, 3-10, 3-23, 3-27, 3-32, 3-35, 3-38, 3-47, 3-70, 3-79, 3-81, 3-87, 3-88, 3-108, 3- 111, 3-112, 3-114, 3-117, 3-135, 3-137, 3-138, 3-143 tribal land, 3-7, 3-21 Tributary, 3-33, 3-37, 3-38, 3-39, 3-40, 3-44, 3-11

U United States Environmental Protection Agency/USEPA, ES-2, ES-6, 2-10, 3-54, 3-56, 3-87, 4-1, 4-2

V vegetation, ES-2, ES-3, ES-5, ES-6, ES-7, ES-8, ES-9, ES-10, 1-2, 2-2, 2-5, 2-6, 2-7, 2-8, 3-1, 3-2, 3-18, 3-20, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-27, 3-31, 3-33, 3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 3-40, 3-41, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3- 5, 3-6, 3-7, 3-9, 3-10, 3-11, 3-12, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 3-22, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-27, 3-30, 3-31, 3-32, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 3-39, 3-44, 3-46, 3-47, 3-49, 3- 50, 3-51, 3-52, 3-57, 3-60, 3-62, 3-65, 3-67, 3-69, 3-72, 3-73, 3-74, 3-75, 3-76, 3-77, 3-78, 3-80, 3-82, 3-83, 3-84, 3-98, 3-101, 3-102, 3-103, 3-104, 3-108, 3-109, 3-110, 3-111, 3-112, 3-113, 3-114, 3-115, 3-116, 3-117, 3-118, 3-119, 3-120, 3-121, 3-128, 3-142, 3-143 viewpoints, 3-69 viewshed, 3-69, 3-70, 3-71, 3-105, 3-106 Visual Resource Inventory/VRI, 3-69, 3-70, 3-71 Visual Resource Management/VRM, ES-8, 2-2, 3-68, 3-71, 3-73, 3-79, 3-82, 3-83 visual resources, ES-3, ES-8, 1-3, 3-2, 3-3, 3-13, 3-16, 3-19, 3-21, 3-68, 3-69, 3-70, 3-71, 3-72, 3-78, 3- 80, 3-81, 3-84, 3-105, 3-106, 3-108, 3-109, 3-113,3-115, 3-119, 3-120, 3-121

W waters of the United States, ES-3, ES-7, 1-2, 1-5, 3-32, 3-40, 3-11, 3-12, 3-13, 3-17, 3-18, 3-25

iv

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Index watershed, 3-2, 3-27, 3-37, 3-43 weeds, 7, 10, 2-5, 2-6, 3-25, 3-1, 3-3, 3-5, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 3-12, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-18, 3-20, 3- 21, 3-22, 3-23, 3-25, 3-26, 3-34, 3-37, 3-45, 3-47, 3-49, 3-51, 3-115, 3-119, 3-139, 3-143 wildfire, 3-2, 3-7, 3-20, 3-138, 3-141, 3-142, 3-143 wildlife, ES-3, ES-7, ES-8, ES-9, 1-3, 1-5, 2-10, 3-2, 3-7, 3-10, 3-11, 3-14, 3-20, 3-27, 3-28, 3-30, 3-31, 3-32, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 3-39, 3-44, 3-53, 3-101, 3-102, 3-103, 3-113, 3-115, 3-117, 3- 118, 3-119, 3-120, 3-142, 4-1, 4-2 Worker Environmental Awareness Program/WEAP, 3-7, 3-9, 3-10, 3-15, 3-16, 3-22, 3-23, 3-31, 3-33, 3- 34, 3-37, 3-40, 3-44, 3-45, 3-49, 3-52, 3-53

v

APPENDIX D Figures

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Table of Figures Figure 2-1 Regional Map of Project ...... 4 Figure 2-2 Gemini Solar Project Location and Regional Transmission Infrastructure ...... 5 Figure 2-3 Gemini Solar Project Proposed Action Site Layout...... 6 Figure 2-4 Resource Constraint Map ...... 7 Figure 2-5 Proposed Action and Additional Development Areas Surveyed for Consideration of Alternatives ...... 8 Figure 2-6 Typical Section of an Array Block ...... 9 Figure 2-7 Elevation Drawing of a Single-Axis Tracker...... 9 Figure 2-8 Example Battery Energy Storage System ...... 10 Figure 2-9 Photographs of a Typical Power Conversion Station/Inverter ...... 11 Figure 2-10 Typical 34.5 kV Distribution Pole...... 12 Figure 2-11 Photograph of a Typical Photovoltaic Combining Switchgear...... 12 Figure 2-12 Cross Section of Typical Roads ...... 13 Figure 2-13 Operations and Maintenance Building Layout ...... 13 Figure 2-14 Example Desert Tortoise Exclusion and Security Fencing...... 14 Figure 2-15 Typical Substation Layout ...... 15 Figure 2-16 Typical Gen-Tie Structures...... 16 Figure 2-17 Typical Sections of Drainage Features Under the Proposed Action...... 17 Figure 2-18 Proposed Action Construction Phasing and Staging Areas ...... 18 Figure 2-19 All Mowing Alternative ...... 19 Figure 2-20 All Mowing Alternative Construction Phasing and Staging Areas ...... 20 Figure 2-21 Typical Mowing Equipment ...... 21 Figure 2-22 Hybrid Alternative ...... 22 Figure 2-23 Hybrid Alternative Construction Phasing and Staging Areas...... 23 Figure 3.0-1 Cumulative Projects in Study Area ...... 24 Figure 3.0-2 Local Cumulative Projects in the Project Area...... 25 Figure 3.0-3 Geographic Extent of Analysis for Cumulative Impacts ...... 26 Figure 3.1-1 Land Use Authorizations in the Project Area ...... 27 Figure 3.1-2 Corridors in the Project Area...... 28 Figure 3.1-3 Specially Designated Areas within 25 Miles of the Project Area...... 29 Figure 3.1-4 Military and Civilian Airspace in the Project Area ...... 30 Figure 3.2-1 Recreation Management Areas within 25 miles of the Project Area...... 31 Figure 3.2-2 Recreation Features and Access in the Project Area ...... 32 Figure 3.3-1 Terrain and Elevation Map in the Project Area ...... 33 Figure 3.3-2 Geologic Unit Map in the Project Area ...... 34 Figure 3.3-3 Soil Series Map in the Project Area ...... 35 Figure 3.3-4 Map of Regional Faults ...... 36 Figure 3.4-1 Paleontological Sensitivity ...... 37 Figure 3.5-1 Drainages in Project Area ...... 38 Figure 3.5-2 California Wash Basin and the Lower White River Flow System...... 39 Figure 3.5-3 100-Year Flood Pre-Development Maximum Flow Depth ...... 40 Figure 3.5-4 100-Year Flood Applicant Proposed Action Maximum Flow Depth ...... 41 Figure 3.5-5 100-Year Flood Hybrid Alternative Maximum Flow Depth...... 42 Figure 3.6-1 Weed Sampling Results on Transects– Sahara Mustard...... 43 Figure 3.6-2 Weed Sampling Results on Transects – African Mustard ...... 44 Figure 3.6-3 Weed Sampling Results on Transects – Halogeton ...... 45 Figure 3.6-4 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Silver Cholla ...... 46 Figure 3.6-5 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Pencil Cholla ...... 47 Figure 3.6-6 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Cottontop Cactus ...... 48 Figure 3.6-7 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Strawberry Hedgehog...... 49 Figure 3.6-8 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Beavertail ...... 50

1 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-9 Belt Transect Results for Areas with Biocrust...... 51 Figure 3.6-10 Belt Transect Results for Areas with Desert Pavement ...... 52 Figure 3.6-11 Vegetation Communities in the Project Area ...... 53 Figure 3.6-12 BLM Weed Inventory Data (2014)...... 54 Figure 3.6-13 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 1 of 4 ...... 55 Figure 3.6-14 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 2 of 4) ...... 56 Figure 3.6-15 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 3 of 4) ...... 57 Figure 3.6-16 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 4 of 4) ...... 58 Figure 3.6-17 General Locations and Densities of Rare Plants Found During Surveys...... 5 9 Figure 3.6-18 Nussear (2018) Modeled Habitat for Threecorner Milkvetch ...... 60 Figure 3.6-19 Hamilton and Kokos (2011) Modeled Habitat for Threecorner Milkvetch ...... 6 1 Figure 3.6-20 Jurisdictional Waters in Development Areas A, B, B1, B2, C, D, E, and G ...... 62 Figure 3.7-1 Golden Eagle Nests Located during the Phase 1 Occupancy Survey in the Project Area ...... 63 Figure 3.7-2 Golden Eagle Nests Located during the Phase 2 Occupancy Survey in the Project Area ...... 64 Figure 3.7-3 Golden Eagle Flight Paths ...... 65 Figure 3.8-1 Live Tortoise Located during the Occupancy Survey in the Project Area ...... 66 Figure 3.9-1 Hydrographic Basins in the Project Area ...... 67 Figure 3.9-2 Wind Rose for Las Vegas McCarran International Airport ...... 68 Figure 3.10-1 Project Viewshed ...... 69 Figure 3.10-2 Candidate Key Observation Points ...... 70 Figure 3.10-3 Key Observation Points ...... 71 Figure 3.10-4 Representative Photographs of Existing Landscape Characteristics ...... 72 Figure 3.10-5 KOP 4 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 78 Figure 3.10-6 KOP 8 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 78 Figure 3.10-7 KOP 9 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 79 Figure 3.10-8 KOP 11 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 79 Figure 3.10-9 KOP 14 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 80 Figure 3.10-10 KOP 15 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 80 Figure 3.10-11 KOP 19 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 81 Figure 3.10-12 KOP 24 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 81 Figure 3.10-13 KOP 32 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 82 Figure 3.10-14 KOP 33 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 82 Figure 3.10-15 KOP 34 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 83 Figure 3.10-16 KOP 37 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 83 Figure 3.10-17 KOP 38 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 84 Figure 3.10-18 KOP 39 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 84 Figure 3.10-19 KOP 40 – Existing Visual Conditions ...... 85 Figure 3.10-20 KOP 4 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 86 Figure 3.10-21 KOP 4 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 87 Figure 3.10-22 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the All Mowing Alternative ...... 88 Figure 3.10-23 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 89 Figure 3.10-24 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 90 Figure 3.10-25 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 91 Figure 3.10-26 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 92 Figure 3.10-27 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 93 Figure 3.10-28 KOP 11 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 94 Figure 3.10-29 KOP 11 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 95 Figure 3.10-30 KOP 14 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 96 Figure 3.10-31 KOP 14 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 97 Figure 3.10-32 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 98

2 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-33 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 99 Figure 3.10-34 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 100 Figure 3.10-35 KOP 19 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 101 Figure 3.10-36 KOP 19 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 102 Figure 3.10-37 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative...... 103 Figure 3.10-38 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 104 Figure 3.10-39 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 105 Figure 3.10-40 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative...... 1 06 Figure 3.10-41 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 107 Figure 3.10-42 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 108 Figure 3.10-43 KOP 32 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 109 Figure 3.10-44 KOP 32 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 110 Figure 3.10-45 KOP 33 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 1 11 Figure 3.10-46 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 112 Figure 3.10-47 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 1 13 Figure 3.10-48 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 1 14 Figure 3.10-49 KOP 37 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 115 Figure 3.10-50 KOP 37 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 116 Figure 3.10-51 KOP 38 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 117 Figure 3.10-52 KOP 38 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 118 Figure 3.10-53 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 119 Figure 3.10-54 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 120 Figure 3.10-55 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 1 21 Figure 3.10-56 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative ...... 122 Figure 3.10-57 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) ...... 123 Figure 3.10-58 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative ...... 1 24 Figure 3.10-59 Glint and Glare Model Observation Points ...... 125 Figure 3.14-1 Old Spanish National Historic Trail and HPRSEG Alignment within the Project Area...... 126 Figure 3.14-2 Inventory Area for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail ...... 127 Figure 3.14-3 Original and Subsequent Routes of the Old Spanish Trail in the Project Area as Digitized from Steiner 1999 ...... 128 Figure 3.16-1 Roads in the Project Area ...... 129

3 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Chapter 2 Applicant Proposed Action and Alternatives Figure 2-1 Regional Map of Project

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, Esri 2006, USGS 2017, The National Map and USGS 2017, Ventyx 2010, Tele Atlas 2010a, Tele Atlas 2010b)

4 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-2 Gemini Solar Project Location and Regional Transmission Infrastructure

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, Esri 2006, USGS 2017, The National Map and USGS 2017, Ventyx 2010, Tele Atlas 2010a, Tele Atlas 2010b)

5 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-3 Gemini Solar Project Proposed Action Site Layout

Source: (University of Montana 2010, Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017)

6 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-4 Resource Constraint Map

Sources: (BLM and NPS 2017b, BLM 2018b, Phoenix Biological Consulting 2018g, Phoenix Biological Consulting 2018e, BLM 1998a, Knight & Levitt Associates 2018, FEMA 2018) Note: Proposed California Wash ACEC is proposed in the Clark County Public Lands Proposal

7 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-5 Proposed Action and Additional Development Areas Surveyed for Consideration of Alternatives

Sources: (University of Montana 2010, Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

8 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-6 Typical Section of an Array Block

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

Figure 2-7 Elevation Drawing of a Single-Axis Tracker

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

9 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-8 Example Battery Energy Storage System

Source: (Dynapower n.d.)

10 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-9 Photographs of a Typical Power Conversion Station/Inverter

Source: (Luminous Energy n.d.)

Source: (Fotowatio Renewable Ventures 2017)

11 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-10 Typical 34.5 kV Distribution Pole

Figure 2-11 Photograph of a Typical Photovoltaic Combining Switchgear

Source: (APT n.d.)

12 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-12 Cross Section of Typical Roads

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

Figure 2-13 Operations and Maintenance Building Layout

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

13 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-14 Example Desert Tortoise Exclusion and Security Fencing

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018d)

14 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-15 Typical Substation Layout

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

15 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-16 Typical Gen-Tie Structures

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

16 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-17 Typical Sections of Drainage Features Under the Proposed Action

Source: (Solar Partner XI, LLC. 2018)

17 GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-18 Proposed Action Construction Phasing and Staging Areas

Sources: (Louis Berger 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

18

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-19 All Mowing Alternative

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

19

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-20 All Mowing Alternative Construction Phasing and Staging Areas

Sources: (Louis Berger 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

20

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-21 Typical Mowing Equipment

21

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-22 Hybrid Alternative

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

22

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 2-23 Hybrid Alternative Construction Phasing and Staging Areas

Sources: (Louis Berger 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018)

23

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3.0 Cumulative Figure 3.0-1 Cumulative Projects in Study Area

Sources: (Esri 2006, USGS 2017, The National Map and USGS 2017, Ventyx 2010, Tele Atlas 2010a, Tele Atlas 2010b, Louis Berger Group 2018) 24

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.0-2 Local Cumulative Projects in the Project Area

Sources: (Esri 2006, USGS 2017, The National Map and USGS 2017, Ventyx 2010, Tele Atlas 2010a, Tele Atlas 2010b, Louis Berger Group 2018) 25

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.0-3 Geographic Extent of Analysis for Cumulative Impacts

Sources: (Esri 2006, USGS 2017, The National Map and USGS 2017, Ventyx 2010, Tele Atlas 2010a, Tele Atlas 2010b, Louis Berger Group 2018)

26

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.1 Land Use Figure 3.1-1 Land Use Authorizations in the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, BLM 2018c, BLM 2010a, EnviroMINE, Inc. 2018, BLM 1998a, BLM 1998b) 27

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.1-2 Corridors in the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, BLM 2018c, BLM 2010b, BLM 1998a)

28

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.1-3 Specially Designated Areas within 25 Miles of the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, BLM 2017, BLM and NPS 2017b, USGS 2016, The National Map and USGS 2017)

29

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.1-4 Military and Civilian Airspace in the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Clark County 2018, USGS 2012, TomTom North America, Inc. 2017, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017, FAA and AIS 2015, FAA and AIS 2018b, FAA and AIS 2018a, NDOT 2018)

30

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.2 Recreation Figure 3.2-1 Recreation Management Areas within 25 miles of the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, USGS 2016, BLM 2011)

31

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.2-2 Recreation Features and Access in the Project Area

Sources: (Esri 2006, Esri 2018, Esri 2017, Leslie 2018, BLM and NPS 2017a)

32

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.3 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources Figure 3.3-1 Terrain and Elevation Map in the Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013)

33

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.3-2 Geologic Unit Map in the Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Beard , et al. 2010)

34

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.3-3 Soil Series Map in the Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Clark County 2018, USDA NRCS 2017)

35

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.3-4 Map of Regional Faults

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS 2015, USGS and NBMG 2010, USGS and NGTOC 2017, Tele Atlas 2010a)

36

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.4 Paleontological Resources Figure 3.4-1 Paleontological Sensitivity

Source: (Paleo Solutions 2018)

37

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.5 Water Resources Figure 3.5-1 Drainages in Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group, Arevia Power 2018)

38

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.5-2 California Wash Basin and the Lower White River Flow System

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, NDWR 2017, Clark County 2018)

39

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.5-3 100-Year Flood Pre-Development Maximum Flow Depth

Sources: (Louis Berger Group, Arevia Power 2018)

40

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.5-4 100-Year Flood Applicant Proposed Action Maximum Flow Depth

Sources: (Louis Berger Group, Arevia Power 2018)

41

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.5-5 100-Year Flood Hybrid Alternative Maximum Flow Depth

Sources: (Louis Berger Group, Arevia Power 2018)

42

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.6 Vegetation and Wetlands Figure 3.6-1 Weed Sampling Results on Transects– Sahara Mustard

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

43

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-2 Weed Sampling Results on Transects – African Mustard

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

44

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-3 Weed Sampling Results on Transects – Halogeton

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

45

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-4 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Silver Cholla

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

46

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-5 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Pencil Cholla

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

47

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-6 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Cottontop Cactus

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

48

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-7 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Strawberry Hedgehog

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

49

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-8 Belt Transect Cacti Sampling for Beavertail

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

50

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-9 Belt Transect Results for Areas with Biocrust

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

51

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-10 Belt Transect Results for Areas with Desert Pavement

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018a)

52

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-11 Vegetation Communities in the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018g)

53

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-12 BLM Weed Inventory Data (2014)

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018b)

54

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-13 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 1 of 4

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018b)

55

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-14 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 2 of 4)

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018b)

56

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-15 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 3 of 4)

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018b)

57

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-16 Weed Inventory Data and Vectors (Map 4 of 4)

Source: (Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018b)

58

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-17 General Locations and Densities of Rare Plants Found During Surveys

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018g, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018f)

59

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-18 Nussear (2018) Modeled Habitat for Threecorner Milkvetch

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, Clark County 2018, Clark County 2017, Nussear 2018)

60

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-19 Hamilton and Kokos (2011) Modeled Habitat for Threecorner Milkvetch

Source: (Hamilton 2011)

61

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.6-20 Jurisdictional Waters in Development Areas A, B, B1, B2, C, D, E, and G

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018g)

62

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.7 Wildlife, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Species Figure 3.7-1 Golden Eagle Nests Located during the Phase 1 Occupancy Survey in the Project Area

Source: (Dugan Biological Services, LLC and Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018) 63

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.7-2 Golden Eagle Nests Located during the Phase 2 Occupancy Survey in the Project Area

Source: (Dugan Biological Services, LLC and Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018)

64

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.7-3 Golden Eagle Flight Paths

Source: (Dugan Biological Services, LLC and Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018)

65

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.8 Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species Figure 3.8-1 Live Tortoise Located during the Occupancy Survey in the Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, Clark County 2018, Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2018c)

66

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.9 Air Quality and Climate Change Figure 3.9-1 Hydrographic Basins in the Project Area

Source: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USDA-FSA-APFO 2017, NDWR 2017)

67

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.9-2 Wind Rose for Las Vegas McCarran International Airport

Source: (RCH Group 2019)

68

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.10 Visual Resources Figure 3.10-1 Project Viewshed

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Clark County 2018, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017, University of Montana 2010, USGS 2012) 69

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-2 Candidate Key Observation Points

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, BLM 2018a, Clark County 2018)

70

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-3 Key Observation Points

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, BLM 2018a, Clark County 2018)

71

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-4 Representative Photographs of Existing Landscape Characteristics

1. This photograph shows a typical view of the valley floor in the Project area. Typical of the Basin and Range Province, mountain ranges surround the broad and flat alluvial valley floor.

2. This photograph shows views to the Muddy Mountains south of the Project area. The jagged silhouette of the greyish limestone mountains is visually striking and scenic against the desert sky. The distinctive form of Muddy Peak is in the left center of this view.

72

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3. This photograph shows the North Muddy Mountains east of the Project area. This extension of the Muddy Mountain range is not as distinctive; however, the silhouette is also striking against the desert sky and a scenic element for a large number of viewers entering Valley of Fire State Park.

4. This photograph shows the Arrow Canyon Range north of the Project area, another distinctive mountain range that creates a striking silhouette against the desert sky. Behind the Arrow Canyon Range is the larger Las Vegas Range.

73

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

5. This photograph shows the Dry Lake Range located west of the Project area. This mountain range is the least prominent surrounding the Project area and the silhouette is noticeably less jagged than the other ranges that surround the valley.

6. This photograph shows a view southward into the Muddy Mountains from a portion of the Bitter Springs Backcountry Byway. This view is facing away from the Project area in an area called Colorock Quarry and is representative of dispersed recreation opportunities within the Muddy Mountains.

74

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

7. This photograph shows the Bitter Spring Back Country Byway corridor in an area called Buffington Pockets located roughly 3 miles south of the Project area. The area has dramatic red sandstone formations that contrast with the predominantly grey limestone of most of the Muddy Mountains. The Project area is not visible in Buffington Pockets.

8. This photograph shows the Reid Gardner coal-fired power plant located approximately 15 miles northeast of the Project area. The site is a major industrial complex visible from portions of the Moapa Reservation and I-15. The Muddy Mountains are visible in the background.

75

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

9. This is photograph shows a northerly view from the Project area. Tractor trailers and other vehicles traveling along I-15 are visible in the middleground. Further into the middleground, dark solar panels and white inverter boxes associated with the 2,000-acre Moapa Solar Project are also visible.

10. This photograph shows NV Energy’s Crystal Substation. The substation is one of several major energy facilities and transmission infrastructure areas visible from the I-15 corridor in the Project region.

76

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

11. This photograph shows examples of transmission infrastructure, solar development (Playa Solar Project), and other industrial energy facilities that dominate northward views from I-15, particularly between Highway 93 and Crystal Substation. The kiosk in the immediate foreground is an informational sign for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail, where an NRHP- eligible segment is located.

77

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-5 KOP 4 – Existing Visual Conditions

South Southwest West

M u d d y M o u n t a i n s D r y L a k e R a n g e

Travel Plaza Moapa Solar Project

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-6 KOP 8 – Existing Visual Conditions

Northwest North Northeast

A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e

Travel Plaza Moapa Solar Project

Simulated View

78

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-7 KOP 9 – Existing Visual Conditions

Southwest West Northwest

D r y L a k e R a n g e A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e

Travel Plaza Moapa Solar Project

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-8 KOP 11 – Existing Visual Conditions

Southwest West Northwest

A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e

Moapa Solar Project Travel Plaza

Simulated View

79

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-9 KOP 14 – Existing Visual Conditions

West Northwest

A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e

D r y L a k e R a n g e Travel Plaza Moapa Solar Project

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-10 KOP 15 – Existing Visual Conditions

West Northwest

A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e Travel Plaza (obscured)

Bitter Springs Back Country Byway

Simulated View

80

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-11 KOP 19 – Existing Visual Conditions

North

D r y L a k e R a n g e A r r o w C a n y o n R a n g e

Travel Plaza Moapa Solar Project Bitter Springs Back Country Byway

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-12 KOP 24 – Existing Visual Conditions

East Southeast South

N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a ins M u d d y M o u n t a i n s Travel Plaza

Simulated View A Simulated View B

81

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-13 KOP 32 – Existing Visual Conditions

North Northeast

D r y L a k e R a n g e N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a i n s M u d d y M o u n t a i n s

Travel Plaza Old Spanish Trail Road

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-14 KOP 33 – Existing Visual Conditions

Northeast East Southeast

N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a i n s M u d d y M o u n t a i n s

Old Spanish Trail Road

Simulated View

82

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-15 KOP 34 – Existing Visual Conditions

East Southeast South

N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a i n s M u d d y M o u n t a i n s

California Wash

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-16 KOP 37 – Existing Visual Conditions

Southeast South Southwest

M u d d y M o u n t a i n s California Wash

Simulated View

83

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-17 KOP 38 – Existing Visual Conditions

North Northeast

D r y L a k e R a n g e N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a i n M u d d y M o u n t a i n s

Travel Plaza (obscured) Old Spanish Trail Road

Simulated View

Figure 3.10-18 KOP 39 – Existing Visual Conditions

East Southeast South

N o r t h M u d d y M o u n t a i n s M u d d y M o u n t a i n s

Valley of Fire Road

Simulated View

84

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-19 KOP 40 – Existing Visual Conditions

South Southwest West

D r y L a k e R a n g e

California Wash

Simulated View

85

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-20 KOP 4 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: Southwest (221°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 10:30am Camera Elevation: 1,998 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area C (5.6 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

86

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-21 KOP 4 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: Southwest (221°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 10:30am Camera Elevation: 1,998 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible project features are located in development area C (5.6 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

87

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-22 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: North-northwest (342°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,135 feet Simulation Notes: • View shows Valley of Fire Road from its intersection with Bitter Springs Backcountry Byway in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B (0.6 mile) • Solar panels, posts, perimeter fence, and the O&M building would be moderately visible in middleground • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Moapa Solar Project is very visible in the distance (4.2 miles)

88

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-23 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: North-northwest (342°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,135 feet Simulation Notes: • View shows Valley of Fire Road from its intersection with Bitter Springs Backcountry Byway in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B (0.6 mile) • Solar panels, posts, perimeter fence, and the O&M building would be moderately visible in middleground • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Moapa Solar Project is very visible in the distance (4.2 miles) • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color and surface treatment of array blocks and perimeter fence

89

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-24 KOP 8 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: North-northwest (342°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,135 feet Simulation Notes: • View shows Valley of Fire Road from intersection with Bitter Springs Backcountry Byway in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B (0.6 mile) • Solar panels, posts, perimeter fence, and O&M building would be moderately visible in middleground • Moapa Solar Project is visible in the distance (4.2 miles)

90

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-25 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: West (267°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 33:00pm Camera Elevation: 2,319 feet Simulation Notes: • Valley of Fire Road is visible in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.7 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

91

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-26 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: West (267°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 3:00pm Camera Elevation: 2,319 feet Simulation Notes: • Valley of Fire Road is visible in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.7 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color treatment of array blocks, slight off-set of block grid, and distant gen-tie modifications

92

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-27 KOP 9 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: West (267°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 3:00pm Camera Elevation: 2,319 feet Simulation Notes: • Valley of Fire Road is visible in foreground • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.7 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

93

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-28 KOP 11 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: Northwest (312°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 2:04pm Camera Elevation: 2,332 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features located in development area C (4.3 miles) • Arrays, poles, and the O&M building would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

94

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-29 KOP 11 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: Northwest (312°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 2:04pm Camera Elevation: 2,332 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area C (4.3 miles) • Arrays, poles, and the O&M building would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

95

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-30 KOP 14 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: West-northwest (293°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 1:25pm Camera Elevation: 2,491 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (2.3 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

96

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-31 KOP 14 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: West-northwest (293°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 1:25pm Camera Elevation: 2,491 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (2.3 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

97

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-32 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: Northwest (314°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 12:45pm Camera Elevation: 2,622 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area D (2.7 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

98

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-33 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: Northwest (314°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 12:45pm Camera Elevation: 2,622 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area D (2.7 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color and surface treatment

99

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-34 KOP 15 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: Northwest (314°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 12:45pm Camera Elevation: 2,622 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.0 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

100

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-35 KOP 19 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: North (360°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 11:05am Camera Elevation: 2,833 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (4.1 miles) • Arrays would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

101

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-36 KOP 19 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: North (360°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/5/2018, 11:05am Camera Elevation: 2,833 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (4.1 miles) • Arrays would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

102

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-37 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: East-southeast (60°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie pole is in view, located approximately 800 feet from point • Fence in foreground is existing • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

103

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-38 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: East-southeast (60°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie tower is in view, located approximately 800 feet from point • Fence in foreground is existing • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes gen-tie realignment and potential structure modifications (towers instead of monopoles)

104

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-39 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “A” of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: East-southeast (60°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie pole is in view, located approximately 800 feet from point • Fence in foreground is existing

105

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-40 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: East-southeast (108°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie poles are in view, located approximately 1,200 feet from point • Fence in foreground is existing • Substation and arrays in development area A are located approximately 0.7 mile from point • Poles and conductor would be highly visible • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

106

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-41 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: East-southeast (108°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie poles in view are located approximately 1,200 feet from point • Substation and arrays in development area A are located approximately 0.7 mile from point • Lattice towers and conductor would be highly visible • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color treatment of facilities and cleared areas, surface treatment of facilities, slight off-set of block grid, and potential gen-tie structure modifications (towers instead of monopoles)

107

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-42 KOP 24 – Visual Simulation “B” of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: East-southeast (108°) Photograph Date/Time: 4/6/2018, 9:40am Camera Elevation: 2,093 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest gen-tie poles in view are located approximately 1,200 feet from point • Substation and arrays in development area A are located approximately 0.7 mile from point • Poles and conductor would be highly visible

108

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-43 KOP 32 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: North-northeast (25°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 10:08am Camera Elevation: 2,559 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B (2.5 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

109

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-44 KOP 32 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: North-northeast (25°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 10:08am Camera Elevation: 2,559 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B2 (2.1 miles) • Arrays and poles would be slightly visible in distant valley floor

110

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-45 KOP 33 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: Northeast (47°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 12:45pm Camera Elevation: 2,287 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area D (1,300 feet) for the Action Alternative; however, this road would likely terminate near this point under this alternative. Alternative access would correspond to the California Wash up to where it connects to Valley of Fire Road or would be along Rte 167 to the south to where it connects with BSBCB or Valley of Fire Road. • Poles and arrays may be visible in the distance above vegetation in the foreground- middleground (partial array shown in left side of image) • Note: No simulation is included for the Proposed Action or the Hybrid Alternative because KOP 33 would be within development area D and surrounded by solar panels. Alternative access would be along the California Wash or Arrowhead Trail.

111

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-46 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: East (270°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 11:28am Camera Elevation: 2,254 feet Simulation Notes: • Fence and solar panels in view are located approximately 650 and 1,000 feet away, respectively, in development area D • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor differences within view • Under the Hybrid Alternative, panels in foreground would be approximately 3 feet taller due to mowing development methods and may appear marginally taller than shown

112

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-47 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: East (270°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 11:28am Camera Elevation: 2,254 feet Simulation Notes: • Fence and solar panels in view are located approximately 650 and 1,000 feet away, respectively, in development area D • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor differences within view • Under the Hybrid Alternative, panels in foreground would be approximately 3 feet taller due to mowing development methods and may appear marginally taller than shown • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color and surface treatment of array blocks and perimeter fence

113

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-48 KOP 34 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: East (270°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 11:28am Camera Elevation: 2,254 feet Simulation Notes: • Solar panels visible in distance are located approximately 1 mile away in development area D • Panels for the All Mowing Alternative would be approximately 3 feet taller (as shown) than the Proposed Action due to mowing development methods

114

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-49 KOP 37 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: South (177°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/1/2018, 7:30am Camera Elevation: 2,011 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.0 miles); views of development area C at the point would be obstructed by vegetation • Arrays in the distance would be barely visible beyond vegetation in the wash • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

115

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-50 KOP 37 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: South (177°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/1/2018, 7:30am Camera Elevation: 2,011 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area E (3.0 miles) • Arrays in the distance would be barely visible beyond vegetation in the wash

116

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-51 KOP 38 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: North-northwest (31°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 9:30am Camera Elevation: 2,683 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development areas B and D (approximately 5.5 miles) • Arrays and poles would be barely visible in the distant valley floor that are unobstructed by foreground- middle ground topography • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

117

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-52 KOP 38 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: North-northwest (31°) Photograph Date/Time: 8/2/2018, 9:30am Camera Elevation: 2,683 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest visible Project features are located in development area B (approximately 5.5 miles) • Arrays and poles would be barely visible in the distant valley floor that are unobstructed by foreground- middle ground topography

118

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-53 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: South (180°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:04pm Camera Elevation: ~2,025 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest features in view are located in development area B (250 feet from perimeter fence; 550 feet from O&M building; and 950 feet from panel arrays) • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Note: two cars on parked on Valley of Fire Road were digitally removed from the base image (see Figure 3.2-16)

119

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-54 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: South (180°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:04pm Camera Elevation: ~2,025 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest features in view are located in development area B (250 feet from perimeter fence and 600 feet from panel arrays) • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color treatment of arrays and perimeter fence, applying surface treatments to the fence to reduce glare, and setting back O&M area from Valley of Fire Road • Note: two cars on parked on Valley of Fire Road were digitally removed from the bae image (see Figure 3.2-16)

120

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-55 KOP 39 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: South (180°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:04pm Camera Elevation: ~2,025 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest features in view are located in development area B (250 feet from perimeter fence; 550 feet from O&M building; and 950 feet from panel arrays) • Panels for the All Mowing Alternative would be approximately 3 feet taller (as shown) than the Proposed Action and Hybrid Alternative due to mowing development methods in view • Note: two cars on parked on Valley of Fire Road were digitally removed from the bae image (see Figure 3.2-16)

121

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-56 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative View Direction: South-southwest (210°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:39pm Camera Elevation: ~2,100 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest panels in view are located in development area B (0.4 mile) • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view

122

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-57 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative (After Mitigation) View Direction: South-southwest (210°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:39pm Camera Elevation: ~2,100 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest panels in view are located in development area B (0.4 mile) • The Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative would result in similar visual conditions with minor unnoticeable differences within view • Visible mitigation in simulation includes color treatment of array blocks

123

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-58 KOP 40 – Visual Simulation of the All Mowing Alternative View Direction: South-southwest (210°) Photograph Date/Time: 2/3/2019, 12:39pm Camera Elevation: ~2,100 feet Simulation Notes: • Closest panels in view are located in development area B (0.4 mile) • Panels for the All Mowing Alternative would be approximately 3 feet taller (as shown) than the Proposed Action and the Hybrid Alternative due to mowing development methods in view

124

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.10-59 Glint and Glare Model Observation Points

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Clark County 2018)

125

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.14 Old Spanish National Historic Trail Figure 3.14-1 Old Spanish National Historic Trail and HPRSEG Alignment within the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017, BLM and NPS 2017b, Knight & Leavitt Associates 2018)

126

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.14-2 Inventory Area for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017, BLM and NPS 2017b)

127

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Figure 3.14-3 Original and Subsequent Routes of the Old Spanish Trail in the Project Area as Digitized from Steiner 1999

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, USGS and NGTOC 2017, National Atlas of the United States and USGS 2017, BLM and NPS 2017b, Steiner 1999)

128

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

3.16 Transportation Figure 3.16-1 Roads in the Project Area

Sources: (Louis Berger Group 2018, USGS 2013, Clark County 2018, USGS 2012)

129

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

References

APT (Advanced Power Technologies). n.d. 15A-Series 2.4kV-15kV MetalClad Switchgear. https://www.apt-power.com/products/medium-voltage-metalclad-switchgear-paralleling-transfer- distribution-peak-shaving-microgrid/15a-series-5kv-15kv-metalclad-switchgear/.

Beard, L. W., R. E. Anderson, D. L. Block, R. G. Bohannon, R. J. Brady, S. B. Castor, E. M. Duebendorfer, et al. 2010. "Preliminary Geologic Map of the Lake Mead 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Clark County, Nevada, and Mohave County, Arizona." USGS.

BLM. 1998a. "Energy Corridors GIS dataset." Las Vegas Resource Management Plan.

BLM. 1998b. "Potential Oil and Gas Lease Areas." Las Vegas Resource Management Plan.

BLM. 2010a. "BLM Cadastral Survey." Public Land Survey System (PLSS). June 1.

BLM. 2010b. "Solar Energy Designations GIS dataset." Landowner. Reno, NV: USDOI-BLM.

BLM. 2011. "Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs)/Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs) for the Southern Nevada Field Office - Las Vegas and Pahrump – Resources Management Plan (RMP) Revision GIS dataset." February.

BLM. 2017. "BLM NV Designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Polygons GIS dataset." November 1.

BLM. 2018a. "BLM Nevada Visual Resource Inventory Polygon File Geodatabase Feature Class." February 13.

BLM. 2018b. "GIS Data Layer for Proposed California Wash Area of Critical Environmental Concern."

BLM. 2018c. "Transmission Line Right-of-Way (ROW) Authorizations."

BLM and National Parks Service (NPS). 2017a. "Old Spanish National Historic Trail (OSNHT) Comprehensive Administrative Strategy." December.

BLM and NPS. 2017b. "Old Spanish National Historic Trail Route GIS dataset." OSNHT Conservation Strategy.

Clark County. 2017. "Habitat Suitability for Threecorner Milkvetch Raster Digital Data Set." 2011- SWECO-901B.

Clark County. 2018. "Street Centerline Database." Clark County Nevada GIS Management Office.

Dugan Biological Services, LLC and Phoenix Biological Consulting, Inc. 2019. "Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Survey Report for the Gemini Solar Project." Biological Report.

Dynapower. n.d. Behind the Meter (BTM)-250 Integrated 250kW Energy Storage System. https://www.dynapower.com/products/energy-storage-inverter-solutions/integrated-power- systems/btm-250-kw-energy-storage-system/#1476296633680-3b840381-89a8.

130

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

EnviroMINE, Inc. 2018. "Mining Claims and Oil & Gas Lease Information." Arevia Due Diligence Report.

Environmental Systems Research Institute (Esri). 2006. "Global_Imagery_N_S_America_2006\shaded_relief." Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Shaded Relief (Western North).

Esri. 2017. "GIS vector data of major roads and highways."

Esri. 2018. "GIS vector data for major water weatures."

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Aeronautical Information Systems (AIS). 2015. "Flight Exclusion Zones GIS dataset." Digital Aeronautical Flight Information File. National Geospatial- Intelligence Agency.

FAA and AIS. 2018a. "Military Training Routes GIS dataset." May.

FAA and AIS. 2018b. "Special Use Airspace GIS dataset." United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration-Aeronautical Information Services, May.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2018. Flood Hazard Zones. https://hazards.fema.gov/gis/nfhl/rest/services/public/NFHLWMS/MapServer.

Fotowatio Renewable Ventures. 2017. "ABB Supplies Central Inverter Solutions For Two PV Power Plants In Jordan." Utilities Middle East , August 17.

Hamilton, M.E., and S.R. Kokos. 2011. Clark County Rare Plant Habitat Modeling. model, Las Vegas: Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office.

Knight & Leavitt Associates. 2018. "National Register for Historic Places (NRHP)-Eligible Trace of the Old Spanish Trail Location." Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of Approximately 11,050 Acres for the Gemini Solar Project, Near Crystal, Clark County, Nevada.

Leslie, Steve. 2018. "Email correspondence between Steve Leslie, BLM, and Tania Treis, Panorama Environmenal, Inc." July 13.

Louis Berger Group. 2018. "Gemini Solar Project Elements CAD datasets." October.

Louis Berger Group, Arevia Power. 2018. "Conceptual Drainage Report Gemini Solar Report." Accessed November.

Luminous Energy. n.d. Inverters and Transformers. http://www.luminousenergy.com.au/solar-farm- components.html.

National Atlas of the United States and USGS. 2017. "United States National Atlas Federal and Indian Land Areas." Esri® Data & Maps: StreetMap™. Redlands, CA: Esri, December 21.

Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). 2018. "Airport Buffer Zones."

Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR). 2017. "Hydrographic Basins (areas) of Nevada GIS dataset." 131

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

Nevada Division of State Parks. 2018. "GIS vector data for Nevada State Parks." ArcGIS Online.

Nussear, Ken. 2018. Covered Species Analysis Support; Report for 2011-SWECO-901B - submitted to the Clark County Conservation Program. Final Report, Southwest Ecology.

Paleo Solutions, Inc. 2018. "Paleontological Technical Study for the Gemini Solar Project." May 7.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018a. "Biology Transect Datasets."

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018b. "Botanical Resources Report Gemini Solar Project."

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018c. "Desert Tortoise Survey GIS dataset." June 3.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018d. "Field photographs taken by Senior Biologist Ryan Young."

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018e. "Jurisdictional Waters Delineation GIS dataset."

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018f. "Rare Plant Survey Locations for the Gemini Solar Project GIS dataset." May 22.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018g. "Vegetation Delineation GIS datset." Tehachapi.

RCH Group. 2019. "Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report." Gemini Solar Project N-84631. March.

Solar Partners XI, LLC. 2018. "Plan of Development, Gemini Solar Project N-84631."

Steiner, Harold. 1999. The Old Spanish Trail Across the Mojave Desert. Las Vegas: The Haldor Company.

Tele Atlas North America, Inc. 2010a. "United States and Canada City Points." Esri® Data & Maps: StreetMap. Redlands, CA: Esri, June 30.

Tele Atlas North America, Inc. 2010b. "United States and Canada Lakes." Esri® Data & Maps: StreetMap™. Redlands, CA: Esri, June 30.

The National Map and USGS. 2017. "The National Atlas: Federal and Indian Land Areas." Redlands, CA: Esri, December 21.

TomTom North America, Inc. 2017. "United States Airports GIS dataset." Data and Maps for ArcGIS. December 21.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)-Farm Service Agency (FSA)-Aerial Photography Field Office (APFO). 2017. "Nevada National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) Imagery 2017 ."

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2017. "Soil Survey Areas for Clark County Area, Nevada and Virgin River Area, Nevada and Arizona GIS dataset2017." USDA.

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2012. "National Hydrography Dataset."

132

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Figures

USGS. 2013. "USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1/3 Arc Second Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Raster dataset."

USGS. 2015. "National Hydrography Database Stream and Canal GIS dataset."

USGS. 2016. "National Hydrography Dataset Waterbodies GIS dataset."

USGS and National Geospatial Technical Operations Center (NGTOC). 2017. "USGS National Transportation Dataset (NTD) for Nevada 20170814 State or Territory FileGeodatabase (GDB) 10.1." August 14.

USGS, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology (NBMG). 2010. "qfaults2010105 GIS dataset." Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States. USGS, January 5.

United States National Atlas and USGS. 2017. "United States National Atlas Federal and Indian Land Areas." Esri Data & Maps: StreetMap. Redlands, CA: Esri, December 21.

University of Montana. 2010. "National Wilderness Preservation System shapefile." University of Montana, College of Forestry and Conservation, Wilderness Institute.

Ventyx. 2010. "United States Counties." The Counties Intelligent Map. Boulder, CO: Ventyx, March 26.

133

APPENDIX E Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

List of Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans Considered in the Development of the Gemini Solar Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and abbreviations used throughout this appendix are provided below.

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

BGEPA Bald and Gold Eagle Protection Act

BLM Bureau of Land Management

CAA Clean Air Act

CERCLA Compensation, and Liability Act and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CWA Clean Water Act

DHS Department of Homeland Security

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act

FLPMA Federal Land Management and Policy Act

FMP Fire Management Plan

FMUs Fire Management Units

GHGs greenhouse gases

HSPD-7 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAC Nevada Administrative Code

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

NHTs National Historic Trails

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRS Nevada Revised Statutes

NTSA National Trails System Act

OEM Office of Emergency Management

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

PRPA Paleontological Resources Preservation Act

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

ROW right-of-way

RMP Resource Management Plan

RWQCBs Regional Water Quality Control Boards

SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

SDSs safety data sheets

SIP State Implementation Plan

SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure

UEPA Utility Environmental Protection Act

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USC United States Code

USDOT United Stated Department of Transportation

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

VRM Visual Resource Management

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

Introduction The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has considered and developed the Gemini Solar Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement to be consistent with applicable laws, regulations, policies, and plans including but not limited to those listed in this section.

Federal Laws and Regulations

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668) The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) prohibits the take, defined as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest, or disturb,” of any bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) or golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) published the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Eagle Rule Revision (USFWS 2016), which addresses BGEPA regulations regarding incidental take permits for bald and golden eagles. The BLM also provides specific guidance for renewable energy projects in their Instructional Memorandum 2010-156, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act – Golden Eagle National Environmental Policy Act and Avian Protection Plan Guidance for Renewable Energy.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (42 USC § 9601) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (CERCLA) (42 USC § 9601), also known as Superfund, created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries to provide for response and cleanup of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA established requirements for the treatment of abandoned hazardous waste sites and provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites.

CERLA - The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (42 USC § 103) The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (42 USC § 103) amended CERCLA to increase state involvement and required Superfund actions to consider state environmental laws and regulations. The applicable part of SARA for the Gemini Solar Project is Title III, otherwise known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) (42 USC §§ 11004-11049). EPCRA establishes requirements for federal, state, and local governments, as well as Indian Tribes and industry members, regarding emergency planning and reporting on hazardous and toxic chemicals.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 United States Code [USC] § 2000d et seq.) prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in all programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is responsible for enforcing the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) were established by the federal CAA of 1970 and amended in 1977 and 1990. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state with non-attainment areas to prepare

iii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards.

On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court found in Massachusetts v. USEPA that greenhouse gases (GHGs) are air pollutants under the CAA. The USEPA, therefore, has the authority to regulate GHG emissions. The Supreme Court found that the CAA authorizes the USEPA to regulate motor vehicle GHG emissions if the USEPA determines they cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.

Regulations under the CAA (42 USC § 7401 et seq.; 49 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 68) are designed to prevent accidental releases of hazardous materials. The regulations require facilities that store a threshold quantity or greater of listed regulated substances to develop a risk management plan that includes hazard assessments and response programs to prevent accidental releases of listed chemicals.

Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 USC 1344) The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 and subsequent amendments, under the enforcement authority of the USEPA, were enacted “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The CWA gave the USEPA the authority to implement pollution control programs, such as setting wastewater standards for industry. It also set water quality standards for surface waters and established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to protect water quality.

Section 404 of the CWA authorizes the United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the U.S. and adjacent wetlands. USACE issues individual site specific or general (Nationwide) permits for such discharges.

Under Section 402 of the CWA, discharge of contaminants to navigable waters is prohibited unless the discharge is in compliance with a NPDES permit. Implementation and enforcement of the NPDES program is conducted through the State Water Resources Control Board and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs).

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended The Endangered Species Act defines and lists species as “endangered” or “threatened,” and provides regulatory protection and conservation for listed species. The federal Endangered Species Act provides a program for conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species. Section 7(a)(2) directs all federal agencies to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carryout does not jeopardize the continued existence of an endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated or proposed designated critical habitat for listed species.

Energy Policy Act of 2005 Section 368 Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 sets forth provisions that change the way certain federal agencies coordinate to authorize the use of public land for a variety of energy-related purposes. Section 368 requires the designation of energy corridors on federal lands in 11 western states, including Nevada; the establishment of procedures to ensure that additional corridors are identified and designated as necessary; and to expedite applications to construct or modify oil, gas, and hydrogen pipelines and electricity transmission and distribution facilities.

iv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (Title V) The Federal Land Management and Policy Act (FLMPA) of 1976 (43 USC 1701 and 43 CFR 2800) governs the manner in which public lands are managed. This act, also known as the BLM “organic act”, establishes the agency’s “multiple-use mandate to serve and protect future generations”. The concept of “multiple-use” management is defined within the act (43 USC 1702) as “management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people.”

Section 302 of FLPMA and other applicable laws and regulations pursuant to 43 Code of CFR 2900 provide the BLM the authority to issue leases and permits for the use, occupancy, and development of public lands. Leases and permits are issued for both commercial and noncommercial uses, including croplands, apiaries, commercial filming, harvesting, temporary or permanent facilities for commercial purposes, construction equipment storage sites, assembly yards, oil rig stacking sites, energy facilities, and water pipelines and well pumps related to irrigation and non-irrigation facilities. Issuance of leases and permits are a discretionary action.

Section 503 of FLPMA directs the Secretary of the Interior to designate right-of-way (ROW) corridors to minimize adverse environmental impacts and the proliferation of separate ROWs, promote ROWs in common, and reserve to the Secretary the right to grant additional ROWs for compatible uses. The FLPMA mandates the management of public lands including the identification and protection of their scenic quality and values (43 USC 1701 et. seq.; §§ 102 (a)(8), 103 (c), and 201 (a)). ROW grants on federal lands must contain terms and conditions that would minimize damage to scenic quality and aesthetic values (Section 505 (a)).

Federal Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (15 USC §§ 2601–2629) The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (15 USC §§ 2601–2629) and The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) established a program administered by the USEPA for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste.

Hazardous Materials Transport Act The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), in conjunction with the USEPA, is responsible for enforcement and implementation of federal laws and regulations pertaining to transportation of hazardous materials. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974 (49 USC §§ 5101- 5127) directs the USDOT to establish criteria and regulations regarding the safe storage and transportation of hazardous materials. 49 CFR Parts 171–180 regulate the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of material that are defined as hazardous, and the marking of vehicles transporting hazardous materials.

Heavy-Duty Truck and Bus Standard In August 2011, the USEPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced the first-ever program to reduce GHG emissions and improve the fuel efficiency of heavy-duty trucks and buses and reduce carbon dioxide emissions over the life of applicable heavy-duty vehicles. The program includes standards for fuel consumption and emissions for combination tractors and vocational vehicles, nitrous oxide and methane emissions standards applicable to all heavy-duty engines, pick-ups, and vans, and standards for leakage of hydrofluorocarbon refrigerants from air conditioning systems.

v GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

Healthy Forests Restoration Act The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 contains a variety of provisions to expedite hazardous-fuel reduction and forest-restoration projects on specific types of Federal land that are at risk of wildland fire or insect and disease epidemics. The act helps rural communities, states, Tribes, and landowners restore healthy forest and rangeland conditions on state, Tribal, and private lands.

Light-Duty Vehicle Standards In collaboration with the NHTSA, the USEPA finalized the program to reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for light-duty vehicles to reduce GHGs in 2010 and then extended the project in 2012. Standards include fuel economy targets and improvements in vehicle technologies including improved vehicle aerodynamics, reduced vehicle weight, lower tire rolling resistance, and expanded production of electric and hybrid vehicles.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC § 703–711) The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC § 703–711) of 1918 states that it is unlawful to “pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take capture or kill; possess; offer to or sell, barter, purchase, or deliver; or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, or received any native migratory bird, part, nest, egg, or product.” The MBTA is enforced by USFWS and protects all MBTA-listed migratory birds, including their nests and eggs, within the United States from intentional take. Based on recent United States Department of Interior Memorandum, the MBTA has been re-interpreted to allow incidental take for commercial projects; only intentional killing of birds, such as hunting or trapping, can be prosecuted.

Minerals Materials Disposal (43 CFR 3600) Mineral materials within BLM land are public property and administered by the BLM pursuant to 43 Code of CFR 3600, Mineral Materials Disposal. The regulations at 43 CFR 3600 establish procedures for the exploration, development, and disposal of mineral material resources on the public lands, and for the protection of the resources and the environment.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 United States Code [U.S.C.] 4321) requires the federal government to take a “hard look” and to evaluate and disclose the anticipated environmental consequences that would occur if major federal actions are implemented. This analysis includes an articulation of what action is to be considered (the Proposed Action), where it will occur (the affected environment), a reasonable range of alternatives for accomplishing the Project, and a description of the environmental consequences associated with the Project. The purpose of NEPA is to allow the decision maker and the public to have information sufficient to understand the environmental consequences of major federal actions. This information is disclosed in the context of an Environmental Assessment or EIS. NEPA requires identification of resources and evaluation of the environmental consequences associated with the action to approve the ROW requested for construction of the Project.

NEPA, as amended, requires analysis of potential environmental impacts to important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage (USC, § 431 et seq.; 40 CFR, § 1502.25). NEPA directs federal agencies to use all practicable means to “Preserve important historic,

vi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage...” (§ 101(b) (4)). Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA are found in 40 CFR 1500 1508.

NEPA, 43 USC 4321 et. seq. §§ 101 (b) and 102, requires federal agencies to implement necessary measures to protect scenic quality and aesthetic values, including their surroundings, during the land use planning and decision-making process.

National Flood Insurance Program and National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 Title 44 CFR Part 63 implements section 1306(c) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The Act provides for benefit payments under the Standard Flood Insurance Policy for demolition or relocation of a structure insured under the Act that is subject to imminent collapse or subsidence as a result of erosion or undermining caused by flows exceeding anticipated cyclical levels. Guidelines were established for states to obtain the approval of the Federal Insurance Administrator to make these certifications and prescribes the procedures and data requirements. In addition, Title 44 CFR Part 65 provides guidelines for mapping of special hazard areas. The supporting data for a revision of base flood evaluation determinations by performing new hydrologic and hydraulic analysis and delineation of new floodplain boundaries is required to be submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for review.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 USC 306108) requires that the federal agency permitting the undertaking “take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register” and provide the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to comment. “Effect” is defined in the implementing regulations for Section 106 (36 CFR 800.16(i)) as “alteration to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligibility for the National Register.” Section 106 requires the lead federal agency to consult with the State Historic Preservation Office, members of the public, affected Native American tribes, and the ACHP throughout the process of identification, evaluation, and resolution of effects. Section 106 compliance is considered satisfied with the execution of a Programmatic Agreement, a legal document that describes the lead federal agency’s (in this case, the BLM’s) process of identifying and evaluating impacts on historic properties and its plans for resolving adverse effects.

National Trails System Act of 1968 The National Trails System Act (NTSA) of 1968 provides for the establishment of a system that includes recreational, scenic, and historic trails. A national historic trail must meet three criteria identified within the NTSA. To qualify as a national historic trail, the trail must be a trail or route established by historic use and must be historically significant as a result of that use, the trail must be of national significance with respect to any of several broad facets of American history, and the trail must have significant potential for public recreational use or historical interest based on historic interpretation and appreciation. The purpose of a national historic trail is the identification and protection of the historic route and the historic remnants and artifacts for public use and enjoyment. A national historic trail is managed in a manner to protect the nationally significant resources, qualities, values, and associated settings of the areas through which such trails may pass, including the primary use or uses of the trail.

vii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

According to the NTSA of 1968, federal agencies must consider the effects of proposed actions on National Historic Trails (NHTs). The NTSA states that the Secretary charged with administration of the NHT may permit other uses along the trail provided that they do not “substantially interfere with the nature and purpose of the trail” (16 USC 1246). In this regard, “reasonable efforts shall be made to provide sufficient access opportunities to such trails and, to the extent practicable, efforts shall be made to avoid activities incompatible with the purposes for which such trails were established” (16 USC 1246). Easements or ROWs granted by the Secretary of the Interior or Secretary of Agriculture must comply with laws applicable to the national park system and national forest system and conditions established in the easements or rights-of-ways must reflect the policy and purposes of the NTSA (16 USC 1248).

NHTs, which are authorized and designated only by an act of Congress, commemorate historically significant routes (i.e., historic routes of exploration, migration, trade, communication, and military action) whose location is known sufficiently to permit public recreation and historical interest. To be designated by Congress, NHTs must follow as closely as possible the actual route of historic use, be of national significance, and have significant potential for public recreation and/or interpretation opportunities (16 USC 1242).

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 provides guidelines for the administration and management of the national wildlife refuge system. Specific areas were identified for designation as the National Wildlife Refuge System. In August 2009, the USFWS completed a Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and EIS pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 and NEPA. The plan and EIS are programmatic documents that include an analysis of proposed management actions on a conceptual level, except in cases where sufficient information was available to provide project-specific analysis. Management actions addressed in the plan and EIS focus on restoration of and/or visitor services for the refuges.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 USC 3001 et seq.) The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 USC 3001 et seq.) provides a process for federal agencies and museums that receive federal funds to repatriate or transfer from their collections certain Native American cultural items -- human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony -- to lineal descendants, and to Indian tribes, Alaska Native Corporations, and Native Hawaiian organizations.

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 CFR 1910) The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) administers the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 USC § 651), which requires special training of handlers of hazardous materials, notification to employees who work in the vicinity of hazardous materials, and acquisition from the manufacturer of safety data sheets (SDSs). SDSs provide workers and emergency response personnel with information about potentially harmful materials and procedures for safe handling of them in the workplace. OSHA Occupational Health and Safety Standards (29 CFR § 1910) outlines specific occupational health and safety standards, including but not limited to standards for exit routes and emergency planning, machinery and hand-held equipment, materials handling and storage, environmental controls, and medical and first aid. The Act requires the training of employees for hazardous substance handling, storage, and disposal,

viii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

and for remediation of any hazardous material accidental releases (29 CFR § 1910.120). Additional training regarding the use of personal protective equipment is required under the OSHA Hazard Communication requirements.

Oil Pollution Prevention regulation (40 CFR 112) The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation (40 CFR 112), published under the authority the Clean Water Act, sets forth requirements for the prevention of, preparedness for, and response to oil discharges at specific non-transportation-related facilities. The regulation requires these facilities to develop and implement Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans and establishes procedures, methods, and equipment requirements. Facilities with above ground storage tanks holding oils of any kind may be subject to the SPCC regulation.

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009; Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA) The Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 refines NEPA and FLMPA guidelines and strictures, as well as outlines minimum punishments for removal or destruction of fossils from federal/public lands. Paleontological Resources Preservation, Title VI, Subtitle D in the Omnibus Public Lands Act of 2009, Public Law 111-011 Purpose: The Secretary (Interior and Agriculture) shall manage and protect paleontological resources on federal land using scientific principles and expertise. With the passage of the PRPA, Congress officially recognizes the importance of paleontological resources on federal lands (USDOI, USDA) by declaring that fossils from federal lands are federal property that must be preserved and protected using scientific principles and expertise.

Prevention of Significant Deterioration The Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of air quality regulations are designed to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas where existing air quality is better than the national standards (40 CFR 52.21). These regulations apply to a major new source or modification of an existing major source within an attainment or unclassified area. The PSD regulations provide special protection for Class I areas, which include national wilderness areas, national parks, and national memorial parks of specific sizes that are granted special air quality protections under the federal CAA.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 USC § 6901 et seq.) RCRA (42 USC § 6901 et seq.), enacted in 1976, governs the management and disposal of solid and hazardous waste. Congress enacted RCRA to address the increasing problems the nation faced from its growing volume of municipal and industrial waste. RCRA amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965. It set national goals for:

(1) Protecting human health and the natural environment from the potential hazards of waste disposal (2) Promoting conservation of energy and natural resources (3) Reducing the amount of waste generated, through source reduction and recycling (4) Ensuring the management of waste in an environmentally sound manner. RCRA set standards for the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste in the United States.

ix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

The USEPA has published waste management regulations, which are codified in Title 40 CFR Parts 239 through 282. Regulations regarding management of hazardous waste begin in Part 260. As noted below, RCRA statute authorizes states to carry out many of the functions of the federal law through their own hazardous waste programs if such programs have been approved by the USEPA.

Subtitle C directs the USEPA to establish controls on the management of hazardous wastes from their point of generation, through their transportation and treatment, storage and/or disposal. Because RCRA requires controls on hazardous waste generators (i.e., sites that generate hazardous waste in the first place), transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (i.e., facilities that ultimately treat and/or dispose of or recycle the hazardous waste), (40 CFR Parts 260 through 264) the overall regulatory framework has become known as the “cradle to grave” system. The program exacts stringent recordkeeping and reporting requirements on generators, transporters, and operators of treatment, storage and disposal facilities handling hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments, which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 Section 5 The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 was created to preserve certain rivers with outstanding natural, cultural, and recreational values in a free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future generations. Section 5(d)(1) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act directs federal agencies to consider the potential for national wild, scenic, and recreational river areas in all planning for the use and development of water and related resources. River segments are deemed eligible if they are free-flowing and possess one or more outstandingly remarkable values, including scenic, recreational, geological, fish and wildlife, historical, cultural, or other river-related values.

Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 The Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971, and the 4700 series of the CFR, require the BLM to protect wild horses and burros as well as manage herd populations and health in a manner to achieve certain objectives. The primary management efforts are focused on maintaining rangeland health in Herd Management Areas.

Wilderness Act of 1964 Section 2 The Wilderness Act of 1964 defines wilderness characteristics, the uses of wilderness, and the activities prohibited within its boundaries. Wilderness areas are managed for public use and enjoyment in a manner that will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, for their protection, and to preserve their wilderness character. Congress established the National Wilderness Preservation System to ensure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States. Wilderness designation is intended to preserve and protect certain lands in their natural state. Only Congress, with presidential approval, may designate areas as wilderness.

Federal Policies and Manuals

Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L sets forth standards for marking and lighting obstructions that have been deemed to be a hazard to air navigation.

x GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

BLM Manual 524 DM 1 – Invasive Species Policy BLM Manual 524 DM 1 lays out the authorities for invasive species management, including, but not limited to: Executive Order 13112 Invasive Species, Plant Protection Act of 2000; Noxious Weed Control and Eradication Act of 2004, and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

BLM Manual 620 DM 1 – Wildland Fire Management BLM Manual 620 DM 1 updates the policies and program principles for the Wildland Fire Management Program.

BLM Manual MS-1112 – Safety

BLM Manual MS-1112 sets forth the policies, minimum requirements, and roles and responsibilities for establishing and implementing a Safety and Occupational Health Management Program in the BLM.

BLM Manual MS-1170 – Emergency Management

BLM Manual MS-1170 provides policies and guidance on emergency management.

BLM Handbook H-1601-1 – Land Use Planning Handbook BLM Manual H-1601-1, Land Use Planning Handbook, provides specific guidance for preparing, amending, revising, maintaining, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating BLM land use plans including the procedures necessary for the NEPA review process.

BLM Manual 1613 – Areas of Critical Environmental Concern BLM Manual 1613 provides criteria to evaluate relevance and importance of land to determine whether designation as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern in a Resource Management Plan (RMP) is appropriate.

BLM Handbook H-1740-2 – Integrated Vegetation Management

BLM Handbook H-1740-2 describes and clarifies agency expectations for a more consistent and unified approach to managing vegetation on public land. It further clarifies multi-program goals, objectives and priorities relative to maintaining and restoring ecologically diverse, resilient and productive native plant communities.

BLM Technical Reference 1743-6 – Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health BLM uses Technical Reference 1743-6, Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, to qualitatively assess “the degree to which the integrity of the soil, vegetation, water, and air, as well as ecological processes of the rangeland ecosystem, are balanced and sustained”. This assessment, combined with qualitative monitoring, offer health indicators used to make herd management decisions.

BLM Manual MS-4180 – Land Health BLM Manual MS-4180 established policy, provides guidance, and assigns management structure and responsibility for conducting land health evaluations.

xi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

BLM Manual MS-5714 – Seeding BLM Manual MS-5714 provides guidelines and standards for reforestation by artificial seeding.

BLM Manual MS-5716 – Protective Measures BLM Manual MS-5716 provides standards and guidelines for protecting seedling and sapling size stands from animals, insects, and disease.

BLM Manual 6250 – National Scenic and Historic Trail Administration BLM Manual 6250 fulfills the requirements of and achieves the policy and purposes set forth in the NTSA. The manual provides guidance on administering congressionally designated National Trails and describes BLM's roles, responsibility, agency interrelationships, and policy requirements for National Trail Administrators. The manual also provides guidance on conducting National Scenic or Historic Trail Feasibility Studies.

BLM Manual 6280 – Management of National Scenic and Historic Trails and Trails Under Study or Recommended as Suitable for Congressional Designation BLM Manual 6280 states that NEPA analysis for a Proposed Action must (1) be able to identify reasonable alternative project locations with potentially less or no adverse impact, (2) document the resources, qualities, values, associated setting, and primary uses that support the nature and purposes for which the trail was designated, and (3) assess potential impacts to the landscape elements of potentially affected designated NHTs (e.g., OSNHT).

The BLM Manual 6280 requires an inventory and analysis in order to:

• Make informed decisions regarding proposed uses within National Trail areas. • Identify opportunities to safeguard the nature and purposes of National Trails. • Allocate the resources, qualities, values, and associated settings and the primary use or uses of the trail during land use planning (NTSA and FLPMA). • Establish a National Trail Management Corridor through the land use planning process. • Identify the area of potential adverse impact for proposed actions, until such time as a National Trail Management Corridor is established. • Recommend possible Federal Protection Components (high potential historic sites and high potential route segments) for inclusion within updates to the trail-wide Comprehensive Plan.

BLM Manual 6310 – Conducting Wilderness Characteristics Inventory on BLM Lands BLM Manual 6310 provides guidance for conducting wilderness characteristics inventories under Section 201 of FLPMA.

BLM Manual 6320 – Considering Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in the BLM Land Use Planning Process BLM Manual 6320 provides guidance for BLM land use and planning decisions related to lands with wilderness characteristics.

xii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

BLM Manual 6330 – Management of Wilderness Study Areas BLM Manual 6330 provides procedures for management and protection of Wilderness Study Areas to preserve wilderness characteristics so as not to impair the suitability of such areas for designation by Congress as wilderness.

BLM Manual 6340 – Management of Designated Wilderness Areas BLM Manual 6340 provides general policies for the administration and management of BLM Wilderness Areas designated by Congress.

BLM Manual 6400 – Wild and Scenic Rivers – Policy and Program Direction for Identification, Evaluation, Planning, and Management BLM Manual 6400 contains policies and guidance for the identification, evaluation, planning, and management of eligible and suitable wild and scenic rivers and the management of designated components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System

BLM Manual 6500 – Fish and Wildlife Conservation BLM Manual 6500 provides guidance for the wildlife and fisheries program.

BLM Manual 6720 — Aquatic Resource Management BLM Manual 6720 provides guidance for aquatic resource management.

BLM Manual 6840 – Special-status Species Management The purpose of BLM Manual 6840 is to provide policy and guidance for the conservation of BLM special-status species and the ecosystems upon which they depend on BLM-administered lands. BLM special-status species are: 1) species listed or proposed for listing under the ESA, and 2) species requiring special management consideration to promote their conservation and reduce the likelihood and need for future listing under the ESA; those in the latter category are designated as BLM sensitive.

BLM Manual MS-7300 – Air Resource Management BLM Manual MS-7300 sets forth the authority, policy, objectives, program structure, roles and responsibilities for the BLM Air Resource Management Program.

BLM Manual 8353 – Trail Management Areas – Secretarially Designated National Recreation, Water, and Connecting and Side Trails BLM Manual 8353 fulfills the requirements of and achieves the policy and purposes set forth in the NTSA. The manual provides guidance on identification, evaluation, and recommendation of qualifying trails for designation. The manual also provides guidance on preparation of application packages to nominate recommended trails for designation as National Recreation Trails, and Connecting and Side Trails.

BLM Manual H-8410-1 – Visual Resource Inventory Visual values are identified through the Visual Resource Management (VRM) inventory in accordance with BLM Manual 8410 and are considered with other resource values in the RMP process. Visual management objectives are established in the RMP in conformance with the land use allocations made in the plan. Specific objectives provide the standards for planning, designing, and evaluating future management projects. The VRM system provides a means to

xiii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

identify visual values; establish objectives through the RMP process for managing these values; and to provide timely inputs into proposed surface disturbing projects to ensure that these objectives are met.

BLM Handbook H-8431-1 – Visual Contrast Rating The contrast rating system, identified in BLM Manual 8431, provides a systematic way to evaluate proposed projects and determine whether projects conform with the approved VRM objectives. It also provides a means to identify mitigating measures that can be taken to minimize adverse visual impacts.

BLM Handbook H-9011-1 and BLM Manual 9011 - Chemical Pest Control BLM Handbook H 9011-1 and Manual 9011 provide guidelines for use of chemicals related to management of pests.

BLM Manual 9015 – Integrated Weed Management BLM Manual 9015 provides guidelines for management of invasive plant species and weeds.

BLM Manual 9211 – Fire Planning BLM Manual 9211 provides overall objectives, authorities, responsibilities and policies for fire management planning in the BLM.

BLM Manual MS-9200 – Fire Program Management BLM Manual MS-9200 provides consistent fire program management direction and guidance to BLM users and managers. The objective of this direction and guidance is to guide the philosophy, direction and implementation of fire management planning, activities and projects on BLM lands, and to ensure compliance with Federal wildland fire management policy.

BLM Manual MS-9214 – Fuels Management and Community Assistance BLM Manual MS-9214 provides responsibilities for reviewing and reporting on fuel treatment effectiveness. Community assistance undertakes and supports activities that improve and sustain both community and individual responsibilities to adapt to, prepare for, and respond to wildfire.

BLM Manual 9220 – Integrated Pest Management BLM Manual 9220 provides guidelines for management of pests.

BLM Manual MS-9238 – Fire Trespass BLM Manual MS-9238 provides policy for unauthorized use of fire on or threatening lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management.

BLM Manual 9400 – Aviation Management BLM Manual 9400 sets forth policy governing BLM's Aviation Management Program. The Aviation Management Program provides direction to promote the safe and efficient use of aircraft supporting the BLM mission.

Executive Order 11644 – Use of Off-road Vehicles on the Public Lands Executive Order 11644 issued on February 8, 1972, establishes policies and provide for procedures to ensure control and direction of off-road vehicle use on public lands. The executive

xiv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

order seeks to protect resources on public lands, promote safety of all users on public lands, and minimize conflicts among various uses on public lands.

Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, (59 FR 7629) Executive Order 12898, enacted February 16, 1994, focuses federal attention on the environment and human health conditions of minority and low-income communities and calls on agencies to achieve environmental justice as part of its mission. The order requires the USEPA and all other federal agencies to develop strategies to address this issue as part of the NEPA process. The agencies are required to identify and address, as appropriate, any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations.

Executive Order 13186 – Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds Executive Order 13186, enacted January 10, 2001, directs federal agencies that directly or indirectly effect migratory birds to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). A 2010 MOU between BLM and USFWS to promote the conservation of migratory birds was entered into in response to EO 13186, entitled “Responsibilities of Federal agencies to Protect Migratory Birds.” The MOU outlines a collaborative approach to promote the conservation of migratory bird populations, but does not alter the agencies legal obligations under the MBTA or BGEPA and does not authorize the take of migratory birds.

Executive Order 13855 - Promoting Active Management of America’s Forests, Rangelands, and Other Federal Lands to Improve Conditions and Reduce Wildfire Risk Executive Order 13855 directs the Interior and Agriculture departments to actively manage forests to reduce the risk of wildfires.

Executive Order 11988 – Floodplain Management (42 FR 26951) Executive Order 11988, enacted May 24, 1977, requires federal agencies to avoid adverse impacts associated with occupancy and modification of flood plains, to the extent possible.

Secretarial Order 3372 - Reducing Wildfire Risks on Department of the Interior Land through Active Management Secretarial Order 3372 sets out a series of deadlines to "identify and remove" environmental hurdles for forest management projects, identify salvage logging projects and begin other measures aimed at reducing wildfire risks.

Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy was developed in 1995 and updated in 2001 by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group, a federal multi-agency group that establishes consistent and coordinated fire management policy across multiple federal jurisdictions. An important component of the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy is the acknowledgement of the essential role of fire in maintaining natural ecosystems. The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and its implementation are founding on the following guiding principles:

(1) Firefighter and public safety is the first priority in every fire management activity.

xv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

(2) The role of wildland fire as an essential ecological process and natural change agent will be incorporated into the planning process. (3) Fire management plans, programs, and activities support land and resource management plans and their implementation. (4) Sound risk management is a foundation for all fire management activities. (5) Fire management programs and activities are economically viable, based upon values to be protected, costs, and land and resource management objectives. (6) Fire management plans and activities are based upon the best available science. (7) Fire management plans and activities incorporate public health and environmental quality considerations. (8) Federal, state, tribal, local, interagency, and international coordination and cooperation are essential. (9) Standardization of policies and procedures among federal agencies is an ongoing objective.

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD-7), signed by President Bush on December 17, 2003, establishes a national policy that affirms the responsibility of federal departments and agencies to identify and prioritize United States critical infrastructure and key resources and to protect them from terrorist attacks. Under that directive, “federal departments and agencies will identify, prioritize, and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructure and key resources in order to prevent, deter, and mitigate the effects of deliberate efforts to destroy, incapacitate, or exploit them. Federal departments and agencies will work with state and local governments and the private sector to accomplish this objective.”

HSPD-7 resulted in the June 2006 publication of the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (DHS, 2006), the development of which was coordinated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The current National Infrastructure Protection Plan (DHS, 2013) comprises 16 sector-specific plans, each addressing a category of critical infrastructure and key resources. The energy plan is specifically relevant to protection of critical infrastructure of solar energy facilities and transmission lines (DHS, 2015). The Department of Energy serves as the sector-specific agency for energy and is primarily responsible for the development and implementation of the energy plan.

Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health (Technical Reference 1734-6) The Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health (Technical Reference 1734-6) is a protocol for how to qualitatively assess rangeland health and conditions. The assessment can provide valuable information to land managers and aid in making informed land management decisions.

Federal Plans and Programs

National Infrastructure Protection Plan The National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) was developed to manage risk, resilience, and security in critical infrastructures and key resources. NIPP outlines how government and the private critical infrastructure sector work together to manage these risks.

xvi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

Comprehensive Administrative Strategy for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail Congress added the Old Spanish National Historic Trail to the National Trail System in December 2002. The NTSA requires that a comprehensive plan be developed for all designated NHTs. The 2017 Comprehensive Administrative Strategy for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail was developed to establish the administrative objectives, protocols, processes, and management guidelines necessary to fulfill preservation and public-use goals for the trail.

1998 Las Vegas Resources Management Plan The 1998 Las Vegas RMP provides management guidance and identifies land use decisions to be implemented for management of 3.3 million acres of public lands in Clark and Southern Nye Counties. The 1998 Las Vegas RMP has been amended several times by the Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) and Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States PEIS. Implementation of the goals and objectives of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan are identified as the highest priority.

2011 Revised Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan The 2011 Revised Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan identifies the action and strategies needed for the recovery of the federally endangered desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii). The plan addresses renewable energy including:

• Landscape level effects of renewable energy development on the desert tortoise. • This includes identifying how such development may contribute to tortoise habitat loss and/or fragmentation. • The role that desert tortoise translocation may play in mitigating potential impacts to desert tortoises as a result of renewable energy development. • Other ongoing conservation strategies that have run parallel to Plan development (for example, the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, and the Bureau of Land Management’s Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement) to ensure that desert tortoise recovery moves forward in a well-coordinated manner.

BLM Back Country Byways Program The BLM Back Country Byways Program was developed as a component of the National Scenic Byway Program. BLM scenic byways highlight the spectacular nature of western landscapes. BLM scenic byways complement the National Scenic Byway Program by focusing on scenic corridors along major primary and secondary highways. BLM Back Country Byways focus primarily on corridors along backcountry roads with high scenic, historic, archaeological, or other public interest values. The roads may vary in width from a single-track bike trail to a low-speed, paved road that traverses backcountry areas, and access on the road may be year-round or limited to a few months. BLM byways must go through a nomination and designation process. Byways are designated through adoption of an RMP or RMP amendment, or by completing a site-specific environmental assessment.

BLM Fire Management Plan The Southern Nevada District Office fire management program provides comprehensive fire response to areas managed by multiple field offices including the Red Rock/Sloan, Las Vegas, and Pahrump Field Offices, as well as multiple jurisdictions through agreements with interagency

xvii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

partners. The BLM Fire Management Plan (FMP) for the Southern Nevada Fire Planning Unit addresses fire suppression, prescribed fire, non-fire fuel treatments, and community assistance and education on every acre of burnable vegetation under BLM administrative jurisdiction within the Field Office. The FMP also identifies objectives and strategies to improve wildfire prevention and suppression, reduce hazardous fuels, restore fire adapted ecosystems, and promote community assistance.

The Southern Nevada Fire Planning Unit is composed of Fire Management Units (FMUs), which are specific land management areas defined by fire management objectives, fire management objectives, management constraints, topographic features, access, values to be protected, political boundaries, fuel types, and major fire regime groups. The FMUs are assigned a classification to define its primary resource management objective and fire protection values. The Project site is located within the NV050-01 Tortoise – Moderate Density FMU, which is classified as High Value Habitat.

BLM Las Vegas Field Office Noxious Weed Plan The Noxious Weed Plan was prepared to provide guidance for an active integrated weed management program using best management practices. The BLM-managed land in southern Nevada is impacted by invasive, non-native plants. These species outcompete native plants and displace them as well as increasing wildland fires in areas infested by cheatgrass/red brome.

State Laws, Programs, and Policies

The Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) are all the current codified laws of the State of Nevada. Nevada law consists of the Constitution of Nevada and Nevada Revised Statutes. Nevada has its own code of rules and regulations called the “Nevada Administrative Code” (NAC).

NRS Chapter 407 - State Parks and Monuments The state of Nevada has the authority to designate state-controlled land as a state park, monument, landmark, or recreational area based on their historic, cultural, scenic, or recreational values. The Nevada Division of State Parks manages the state park system.

NRS Chapter 444 - Sanitation Regulations for the management of solid waste are contained here.

NRS Chapters 459.400 to 459.856 - Hazardous Substances Transportation, handling, storage, cleanup and disposal of hazardous substances are regulated.

NAC Chapter 445A.347 - Release of Hazardous Substance Protocols for the event of a hazardous substance release to the soil or groundwater are provided here.

NRS Chapter 501.105 - Wildlife This chapter covers administration and enforcement of wildlife resources within the State. The administering agency is the Nevada Department of Wildlife. The establishment of policies for the management of big and small game mammals, upland and migratory game birds, fur-bearing

xviii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

mammals, game fish, and protected and unprotected mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians is provided for in NRS Chapter 501.181.

NAC Chapter 503.093 - Classification and Taking of Wildlife The desert tortoise and other selected wildlife are protected by this code.

NRS Chapters 503.584 to 503.589 - Protection and Propagation of Native Fauna A program for the conservation, protection, restoration and propagation of selected species of native fish and other vertebrate wildlife, including migratory birds is provided for in these chapters. These statutes provide that the Legislature of Nevada has an interest in protecting native species from extinction and set forth the authority to establish programs to protect designated species. However, if a native species is found to be destructive under the statutes, the statutes provide for removal if appropriate. Under statute, the ultimate responsibility for management rests with the governor for reviewing state programs and entering into interstate and federal agreements.

NRS 527.270 - Protection of Selected Species of Native Flora A selected species of native flora are protected; a special permit is required for removal or destruction.

NRS 555 - Control of Insects, Pests and Noxious Weeds Preventing the spread of noxious weeds is regulated by implementing inspections, establishing weed control districts, controlling nursery stock, and managing the application of pesticides.

NAC 445B - Air Controls Air pollution is regulated by this chapter. State standards for ambient air, including ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter as PM10 and PM2.5, lead, and hydrogen sulfide, are listed in NAC Chapter 445B.22097.

NRS Chapters 445A.300 to 445A.730 - Nevada Water Pollution Control Law This Law establishes Nevada’s compliance with the federal CWA described above.

NRS Chapters 532 to 538 – Groundwater Basin Regulations These chapters of the NRS establish the role of the State Engineer in adjudication and appropriation of water rights in the state, including beneficial uses, restrictions, and approval processes for issuance and transfers of water appropriations.

NRS Chapter 533.372 - Appropriation of Public Waters Based upon the public interest and the economic welfare of the State of Nevada, the State Engineer may approve or disapprove any application of water to beneficial use or any application which contemplates a change in the place or beneficial use of water to a use involving the industrial purpose of generating energy to be exported out of this state.

NAC Chapter 445A - Water Controls Standards for water quality are listed by region in Chapters 445A.11704 through 445A.2234. Regulations for water permits are provided in Chapters 445A.228 through 445A.272. On-site sewage disposal system regulations are provided in Chapters 445A.950 through 445A.9706.

xix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

NAC Chapter 618 - Occupational Safety and Health Workers constructing and operating the Project are protected by the Occupational Safety and Health laws.

NAC Chapter 484 - Traffic Laws Regulations for the equipment of vehicles, transportation of loads, and permitting vehicles in Nevada are provided in NAC Chapters 484.010 through 484.580.

State of Nevada Division of Water Resources Nevada Floodplain Management Program The Floodplain Management Program consists of the Community Assistance Program, flood mitigation assistance, and flood hazard mapping assistance to communities.

Nevada Division of Forestry Wildland Fire Protection Program The Wildland Fire Protection Program allows the State to provide financial assistance with wildland fire costs, increased suppression resources and coordination, incident management assistance, and technical expertise to participating counties during a wildfire. The Division also operates under cooperative agreements with federal agencies and other states.

Utility Environmental Protection Act The Utility Environmental Protection Act (UEPA) was enacted in 1971 to address environmental issues related to the construction of utility facilities. UEPA permits granted by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada apply to:

• Conventional power plants • Renewable energy power plants rated over 70 Megawatts (nameplate) • Electric transmission facilities rated over 200 kilovolts • Gas transmission lines and associated facilities • Water transmission lines and associated facilities • Sewer transmission and treatment facilities

Local Plans

Clark County Emergency Management Plan The Clark County Office of Emergency Management (OEM) is responsible for disaster planning and emergency management coordination. The OEM is the lead and point of coordination for public safety projects in Clark County, including emergency management planning, preparation activities, response support coordination during emergencies and coordination of recovery programs following emergencies. The Clark County Emergency Management Plan, implemented by the OEM, outlines the concept of operations, organizational plan, and responsibilities for management and coordinating the occurrence or immediate threat from natural or made-made causes. The plan provides guidance for the government of Clark County, local jurisdictions, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and the public involved in the management of incidents, emergencies, or disasters within the geographic boundaries of Clark County.

xx GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

The Clark County Local Emergency Planning Committee, under the OEM, implements the Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan for Clark County. The Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan provides guidance for hazardous materials response and is the basis for future planning and training. Recommendations and suggestions made by local government officials, industry representatives, emergency managers, environmental organizations, and members of the public actively concerned with hazardous materials preparedness, response, and prevention have been incorporated into the plan.

Clark County Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan The Clark County Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan, prepared by the Clark County Local Emergency Planning Committee, provides guidance for hazardous materials emergency response in accordance with The SARA Title III, “Emergency Planning and Community Right-to Know.” The responsibility of implementing the plan begins immediately upon the notification of authorities by any person discovering a hazardous materials release.

Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan The Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan is a long-term, general policy plan for the physical development of unincorporated Clark County. The Master Plan includes the following elements: Conservation, Historic Preservation, Housing, Land Use, Public Facilities and Services, Recreation and Open Space, Safety, and Transportation Elements.

Northeast Clark County Land Use Plan The Northeast Clark County Land Use Plan provides plans and policies for the northeast portion of Clark County to guide growth.

Regional Transportation Plan 2013-2035 The Regional Transportation Plan is a comprehensive and long-range plan for the transportation system in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. It details the transportation investment needed between now and the year 2035 for road, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian projects.

Southern Nevada Strong Regional Plan Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada along with 13 regional partners, administer the Southern Nevada Strong Regional Plan. The purpose of the plan is to develop regional support for long-term economic success and stronger communities by integrating reliable transportation, quality housing for all income levels, and job opportunities throughout Southern Nevada.

Clark County Regulations

Site Environment Standards (Chapter 30.68) The purpose of Chapter 30.68 is to protect adjacent uses and the community against objectionable noise, light, smoke, particulate matter, odors, and hazardous materials generated on property by uses conducted on the property.

xxi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Plans

Clark County Air Quality Regulations The Project is required to comply with Section 94 of the Clark County Air Quality Regulations, which specify that a Dust Control Permit is required during construction. The permit must include a Dust Mitigation Plan and appropriate control measures as specified per the regulations.

Clark County Fire Code The Clark County Fire Code stipulates minimum requirements to prevent fire risk from storage, handling, or use of dangerous materials, or other hazardous conditions such as in buildings.

Uniform Regulations for the Control of Drainage (Chapter 15.0) The regulation establishes the Hydrologic and Design Criteria Manual to provide a minimum standard for analysis and design of storm drainage facilities within the Clark County Regional Flood Control District jurisdiction. Provision of the minimum standard assures that all drainage facilities are consistent in design and construction and provides an integrated system which acts to protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, welfare, property and commerce.

xxii APPENDIX F Cultural Resources Support Information

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Cultural Resources Support Information

Prehistory

Overview Researchers have created cultural sequences over the years with many being developed as units of time based upon assumptions about cultural development and lifeways. The useful construction of temporal units does not necessarily correspond to the actual cultural developments, and furthermore, should not be considered an expression of cultural homogeneity in any region. Warren and Crabtree express that these time periods do not denote a cultural uniformity in time or space but are noteworthy in their temporal and spatial distinctions, even when these distinctions cannot be described (Warren and Crabtree 1986). Cultural overviews restate and synthesize these chronologies, and these overviews sometimes contribute to confusion by adding terminology to already existing sequences (Warren and Crabtree 1986)

Reassessments have been made recently of New World prehistory, including the Great Basin. One of the most noteworthy is the general acceptance of pre-Clovis humans in the New World. Some of the general temporal periods used by archaeologists have been adjusted based upon some of the new lines of evidence. There is an on-going discussion about the length and name of some of these previously defined archaeological periods.

The timeline presented in Table 1 is constructed upon more standardized time periods for southern Nevada as outlined in A Prehistoric Context for Southern Nevada (HRA, Inc., Conservation Archaeology, and Gnomon, Inc. 2012). Additional information has been added to summarize some of the diagnostic artifacts for the time periods along with the broad periods of time.

Paleo-Archaic (ca. 15,000 – 7,000 BP) For several decades, the established viewpoint in New World archaeology was that the first inhabitants of the Americas were the Clovis people. Clovis people were big-game hunters, who used distinctive fluted points called the Clovis point. Over the last several decades, however, numerous studies are providing evidence of a pre-Clovis population (Dillehay 1997, Gilbert, et al. 2008, Wagner and McAvoy 2004, Waters and Stafford, Jr. 2007). These pre-Clovis finds have been scattered, with limited distribution, making it difficult to provide a detailed discussion of the temporal or spatial distribution of the pre-Clovis populations or to discuss their potential lifeways. In the Great Basin, this is true with Paisley Cave. The Site has possibly produced evidence for pre-Clovis populations (Gilbert, et al. 2008), however, more recent studies from the site indicates that this may be a more contemporaneous population with Clovis that used Western Stemmed Projectile points instead of Clovis points. This could indicate a separate population migration along with evidence for a different technology between western and eastern population migrations during early prehistoric times (Jenkins 2012, Dennis, et al. 2012, University of Oregon 2012, Dziebel 2012).

Clovis points, in the Southwest and Plains, are clearly associated with the hunting of extinct megafauna, such as mammoths (Cordell 1997). Most Clovis sites are not, however, associated with the remains of the extinct megafauna (Elston and Zeanah 2002, Hill 2007). Haynes (2008) provides a fairly tight range for the dates of Clovis points in the Plains and Southwest (11,500 – 10,900 BP). Waters and Stafford (2007) argue that Clovis are restricted to an even narrower 200-year period (11,050 – 10,800), with the

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information occupation dates of Clovis and non-Clovis sites (including sites with non-fluted points) overlapping. Because of the narrow range of dates, and the overlap between Clovis and non-Clovis sites, Water and Stafford argue that people were present in the New World prior to the appearance of Clovis technology (Beck and Jones 1997).

Table 1 Generalized Cultural Chronology for Southern Nevada

Date Select Diagnostic Major Period Sub-Period Date Range Range Artifacts Historic – Numic and 174 BP – Glass, Metal N/A Euro-American, etc. Present

Post-Puebloan (Late Desert Side-Notched Prehistoric/Protohistoric Point, Cottonwood 650 BP – N/A Triangular Point, 174 BP Brownware Ceramics, Basketry

Puebloan (Formative) 750 BP – Rose Spring Point, Pueblo III 650 BP Eastgate Point (Rosegate), Grayware Ceramics, Black/Gray 800 BP – Late Ceramics, Black/White 750 BP Ceramics, Corrugated 900 BP – Grayware, Black-on- Pueblo II Middle 800 BP Red Ceramics 1750 BP – 950 BP – 650 BP Early 900 BP

1150 BP – Pueblo I 950 BP

1450 BP – Basketmaker III 1150 BP

1750 BP – Late Basketmaker II 1450 BP Archaic (Middle and Late) 2150 Elko Series Point, Terminal 4000 Late BP – Gypsum Point, Late BP – Archaic 1750 (Gatecliff Series) Archaic 1750 (Gypsum) BP Humboldt Point, Slab 7500 BP – BP Metate 1750 BP

Pinto Point, Leaf- Middle Archaic 7500 BP – Shaped Knives, Flat (Pinto) 4000 BP Milling Stones

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Date Select Diagnostic Major Period Sub-Period Date Range Range Artifacts Paleo-Archaic (Clovis) STEMMED POINTS

13100 BP 11000? BP Silver Lake Point, Early Archaic – 7500 BP – 7500 BP Lake Mojave Point, Crescents, Large Flake Tools

FLUTED POINTS 13100 BP – Paleo-Indian 12800 BP Clovis Point, Folsom Point

Most researchers in the Great Basin divide Paleo-archaic into two phases based upon the dominant point style: fluted and stemmed (Roberts and Ahlstrom 2007). The fluted points found in the Great Basin and Mojave Desert are not necessarily Clovis points, nor is it known if they are restricted to the same temporal range as Clovis points (Beck and Jones 1997). In addition, there are a few sites from this period in the Great Basin and Mojave Desert that are clearly associated with the extinct megafauna. The above discussion about stemmed points at Paisley Cave adds to this dialogue about the Great Basin region.

Beck and Jones (2010) argue that artifacts associated with the Clovis culture are only found in the eastern portion of the Great Basin, and that stemmed points in the Intermountain West are as early as Clovis points are in the Great Plains. If this portrayal is accurate, then the division of the Paleo-archaic period into two phases based solely on projectile point type (fluted vs. stemmed) is inaccurate. Beck and Jones believe that the Clovis and stemmed points represent separate populations that spread through migration, coming into contact with one another in the eastern Great Basin. In their model, the current project area could contain sites associated with both Clovis and Stemmed point populations. As noted above, they also argue that most, but not all, of fluted points found in the Great Basin are not true Clovis points.

The Paleo-archaic period is often characterized as the big game hunting period of North American prehistoric (Cordell 1997). More recent research has shown highly variable strategies used by the earliest known inhabitants of the interior of the New World, with regional variability in the subsistence patterns (Hill 2007). Because Paleo-archaic sites are often found on Pleistocene lake terraces, Kelly (1997) argues that wetland resources were important in their diet. The terraces also would have been attractive to early humans because of the close proximity to water sources which would attract a variety of land animals.

A major logistical strategy that these populations most likely followed was group mobility. This was due to climate fluctuations and drops in local supplies of resources. Such fluctuations would have required populations to change location when resources became scarce.

Unlike other areas the Great Basin and Southwest, there is minimal evidence for early occupation in the project vicinity in particular, and in the southeastern Great Basin in general. While fluted points have been found throughout the eastern Mojave Desert region, they tend to be isolated specimens rather than part of a specific tool assemblage. Typically, they are found on the surface along the margins or terraces of now dry lakes. In addition, isolated fluted points have been recovered from the Las Vegas Valley, in the Clark County Wetlands Park (Roberts and Ahlstrom 2000), and several collectors/looters also claim to

iii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information have recovered fluted points from southern Nevada (Dixon 1987, Perkins 1967, Ezzo 1995). Fluted points have been collected from several locations within Coyote Springs Valley, located west of proposed project area (Blair 1992, Leavitt 2005).

The period after 10,000 BP was a time of increasing fluctuations in climate, although the long-term trend was towards increasing aridity/decreasing rainfall. The pluvial terraces on the Pleistocene lakes continued to be occupied in this period, but there is an increase in the number of sites in higher elevation zones (Rafferty and Blair 1988). Architectural remains generally include cleared areas on desert pavement surfaces called ‘sleeping circles’ on rock rings that are accompanied by crude basalt tools. These are usually scrapers, large knives, retouched flakes, crescents, drills, and stemmed points that have been called, Silver Lake and Lake Mojave (Campbell, et al. 1937), San Dieguito (Rogers 1929). Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition (Hester 1973, Bedwell 1973), and more recently grouped together as Western Stemmed varieties (Willig and Aikens 1988).

A stemmed point has been collected from the vicinity on Jean Lake in southern Nevada (Roberts and Ahlstrom 2007). Also, several stemmed points have been collected from Coyote Springs Valley (Leavitt 2007, Rucso and Kuffner 1981a). Stemmed points have also been identified on a terrace of Ivanpah Playa (Bernor 1980) and several stemmed points have been recovered in the Las Vegas Valley from the surface of the Eglington Escarpment (Roberts and Ahlstrom 2007). Amick (1966) reports that at least 86 stemmed points have been identified at the Nevada Test Site.

Middle and Late Archaic (7,500 – 1,750 BP) Three subdivisions of this Period are defined: The Pinto, the Gypsum, and Terminal Archaic Period (Warren and Crabtree 1986, Ezzo 1996). The Pinto Period is typified by an artifact assemblage routinely referred to as the Pinto Complex. This consists of Pinto points and their variants, leaf-shaped knives, domed and elongated scrapers, flake scrapers, drilling/engraving tools, and flat milling stones. These sites tend to be small and limited to surface manifestations. The few middens present tend to be poorly developed. Pinto Phase sites are usually located near pluvial lake shores and valley floors (Warren and Crabtree 1986, Thomas 1981). Sites of this age are located in numerous areas of southern Nevada: the Las Vegas Valley, the Nevada Test Site/Nellis Air Force Range and the Moapa and Virgin River areas. The most significant Pinto age sites in the region are the surface components of the Tule Springs area (Susia 1964), the Corn Creek Dunes Site (Williams and Orlins 1963) north of Tule Springs, and a series of Pinto/Gypsum age sites in the northern Las Vegas Valley (Apple 1989).

The Gypsum Period is the temporal successor to the Pinto Period and is typified by the following assemblage of artifacts: Gypsum Cave, Humboldt Concave Base, and Elko projectile points; leaf-shaped points; choppers; hammerstones; flake scrapers; rectangular-based knives; and more numerous milling stones than the Pinto Period (including slab manos and metates and mortars and pestles). In addition, evident enigmatic activity occurs in the form of petroglyphs and split-twig figurines found in sites dating to the Gypsum period (Warren and Crabtree 1986). Sites of this age tend to be larger than those of the Pinto Period and occur in a wider number of environmental zones. There are numerous sites that date to this period in southern Nevada: Gypsum Cave (Gilreath 2009, Harrington 1933). Corn Creek Dunes (Williams and Orlins 1963) (Roberts and Ahlstrom 2007), and a number of sites in the Las Vegas Wash/Duck Creek area of the Las Vegas Valley (Ferraro and Ellis 1982, Rafferty 1984).

There have been sites recorded near the project area that may be attributed to these two sub-periods. A Humboldt point was found in the Coyote Springs Valley by Leavitt (Leavitt 2001). Ezzo (1996) notes that

iv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information three sites in the Moapa Valley area were distinctly Pinto in age, although no sites in the Moapa Valley area have been distinctly recorded as containing Gypsum Period assemblages (Ezzo 1996). One of the closest sites to the project area of specifically Gypsum age appears to be Stuart Rockshelter, in Meadow Valley Wash north of Moapa. Two hearths with radiocarbon dates attributed to this period were accompanied by three Humboldt points, basin metates, and a generalized artifact assemblage that can be associated with Gypsum Period sites (Shutler, Shutler and Griffith 1960). In Coyote Spring Valley, northwest of the current project area, Rusco and Kuffner (1981a, 1981b) recorded five sites dating to the Archaic based on projectile point types.

The Gypsum period, corresponding to the Late Archaic period, was characterized by a change in climate in the region, including an increase in precipitation which allowed for greater diversity of floral resources available for human exploitation (Warren, Knack and Warren 1980). Cultural characteristics of this time period involved an increased use of milling implements (Warren and Crabtree 1986), greater socioeconomic ties with other cultures throughout the region (Kelly, et al. 1990), more elaborate enigmatic artifacts, zoomorphic petroglyphs, split-twig figurines, and shell artifacts (Ezzo 1996).

The lithics from the Gypsum period are characterized by large-stemmed, notched projectile points from a variety of styles. The most common styles are the Gypsum Cave, Elko Corner-notched, Elko Eared, and Humboldt Concave base. Flake stone tools include leaf-shaped points, choppers, hammerstones, flake scrapers, and rectangular-based knives. Milling implements include manos, mortars and pestles (Warren and Crabtree 1986).

The Terminal Archaic (2,500 BP-1,500 BP) is defined by the appearance of maize in the area. Although no evidence for maize has been found in the project vicinity, recent work in the Las Vegas Valley at the Larder Site recovered both maize pollen and maize kernels from storage pits dated between 2,350 and 2,050 BP (Ahlstrom 2008). The use of maize may be associated with major changes in the subsistence practices. No distinctive temporal markers (ceramics or projectile points) are currently known to identify this phase.

Puebloan (Formative) The Basketmaker Periods correspond to the arrival of Puebloan populations into the Virgin and Muddy River Drainages in southern Nevada, southwestern Utah and northwestern Arizona. Characteristic cultural elements of the Puebloan peoples involved the construction and occupation of semi-subterranean pit structures and above ground masonry pueblos. The Puebloan culture has been more extensively documented than any other cultural group in North America in terms of geography, architectural styles, and variations in ceramics (Plog 1979). The westernmost expansion of this cultural tradition, termed the Virgin Puebloan, occupied areas in what is now southern Nevada, northern Arizona, and southwestern Utah (Lyneis 1992a). The Virgin Puebloan culture is characterized by a horticultural subsistence base, permanent architectural features, ceramic production, and tools such as hoes, digging sticks, and grinding implements suitable for processing large quantities of grain (Altschul and Fairley 1989).

Common projectile point types during this time period included a continuation of some of the points from the late Archaic, and the Rose Spring and Eastgate projectile points (Thomas 1981). Other tools included flake scrapers, rectangular knives, choppers, hammerstones, slab milling stones, and hand grinding stones. Archaeologists also believe that the bow and arrow and mortar and pestle first appeared during this time period (Warren and Crabtree 1986). These phases will be discussed in more localized time frames associated with the vicinity of the project area.

v GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Black Dog Mesa is located in Moapa Valley alongside the Muddy River. Research at this archaeological complex has been completed by several researchers. Recently mitigation efforts were accomplished by Diane Winslow and the team at the Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies (Winslow and Blair 2003a, Winslow and Blair 2003b, Winslow 2009). This archaeological complex is strongly identified with the Basketmaker Periods with radiocarbon dates as early as A.D. 90. Winslow (2009) stressed that the Black Dog Mesa Archaeological Complex is one of the most significant Ancestral Puebloan (specifically Basketmaker) sites in southern Nevada and needs much more research (Winslow 2009).

Moapa Phase (1,650 – 1,450 BP) The Moapa Phase corresponds closest to the Basketmaker II period of the Virgin Puebloan (Shutler 1961). During this time period the Virgin Puebloans were considerably more mobile; many of the sites during this time were occupied on a seasonal or temporary basis by small groups. Agricultural practices did not play as important a role as they did in later times, which is indicated by settlements not far from valley floors (Myhrer 1986). A greater emphasis was placed on horticultural subsistence compared to the past, and maize was an important crop during this time period (Lyneis 1995). Other important crops during the Moapa Phase included cucurbits (e.g. squash, pumpkin, and melons), pinenuts, agave, mesquite, amaranth, juniper berries and yucca (Lyneis 1995). Hunted game most likely included jackrabbits, cottontails, mule deer, bighorn sheep, pronghorn, reptiles, and the desert tortoise. It is possible that agricultural activities consisted of planting a crop in the spring, and then leaving the fields mind itself while the populace headed out to gather various wild crops, returning in the fall to harvest the crops that survived.

Some of the sites dating to the Moapa Phase in the project vicinity are largely confined to the lower Moapa Valley. Shutler (1961) recorded five pit houses on the high bluffs overlooking the confluence of the Muddy and Virgin Rivers. These structures are round in shape and range in size from 3.5 to 7 m with depths ranging from 0.5 to 1.7 m. Two of the pit houses contained interior hearths. No ceramics were found at these sites and the projectile points collected indicated the continued use of spears and atlatls rather than bows and arrows (Ezzo 1996). Rose Spring and Eastgate (Rosegate) projectile points began to appear in lithic assemblages around AD 450 (Lyneis 1982, Thomas 1981, Winslow 2004, Winslow and Wedding 2006).

Muddy River Phase (1,450 – 1,250 BP) The Muddy River Phase is significant in the chronology of the Virgin Puebloan in that it is linked to the introduction of ceramics and the bow and arrow into the project area. These inventions were associated with a decline in the use of cists and caves to store plant products such as seeds and in the use of basketry for additional storage and water transport. Additionally, the development of the bow and arrow resulted in a reduction in the size of projectile points. Ceramics from this time period were typically undecorated, with some occasional black paint from carbon-derived pigments (Altschul and Fairley 1989). Regardless of these new inventions, the life of the Virgin Puebloan did not substantially change from the Moapa Phase.

Clark (1984) identified and studied 17 sites from this period. Clark concluded through research on settlement patterns, water resources, landforms and the availability of agricultural land, that the sites dating to this time period were found evenly distributed across the Moapa Valley. She also concluded that foraging and the exploitation of the environment played an important role during the Muddy River phase.

Excavation of the Steve Perkins site, located in the lower Moapa Valley and west of the Muddy River, was carried out by the University of Nevada Las Vegas in the early 1970s (Myhrer 1989). Five pit houses

vi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information were excavated that appear to date to the Muddy River phase. These structures are generally circular in shape and range in size from 1 m to 7 m. Three of the pit structures are believed to have been used for storage, while the remaining two are believed to have been habitation sites. A single radiocarbon date of 1295 + 65 B.P. has been obtained from this site. A variety of ceramic types were also found, including Boulder Gray, Boulder Black-on-gray, Logandale Gray, North Creek Gray, North Creek Black-on-gray, Hurricane Black-on-gray, and Shivwits Brown (Ezzo 1996).

Lost City Phase (1,250 – 850 BP) The Lost City phase has been associated with the greatest intensity of Virgin Puebloan activity in southern Nevada. Puebloan occupation increased in the Arizona Strip, Shivwits Plateau, St. George Basin, Moapa-Virgin Valleys, and the Las Vegas Valley. Relationships between the Virgin Puebloan, other Puebloan groups, and Great Basin groups such as the Fremont, also reached their peak during this time period. The Lost City phase is characterized by population growth, increased interregional exchange networks, and notable advances in agriculture and food production coupled by a favorable environment (Ezzo 1996).

According to Shutler (1961), most of the sites recorded by Harrington in the 1920s and 1930s are associated with the Lost City phase. Pit structures, while remaining circular in shape, increased in size with an average diameter of 7 m and a depth as great as 1 m. Circular hearths have been found in almost one-quarter of the pit structures dating to this time period; these hearths were plastered with adobe and lined with slabs of sandstone. Formal entryways are often absent from the pit structures, suggesting that entry to these structures may have been through the roof. Pit structures were often built in clusters, with miniature pit houses used as storage bins found in association with many of them.

Ceramic designs varied greatly during the Lost City Phase. Types of ceramic design styles from this time period included Washington Black-on-gray, Washington Corrugated, North Creek Black-on-gray, St. George Black-on-gray, Moapa Black-on-gray, Mount Trumbull Black-on-gray, Hurricane Black-on-gray, Deadman’s Gray, and Tusayan Black –on-red. Corrugated ceramics, and a series of black-on-red ceramics known as the Little Colorado Series of San Juan Red, first appeared towards the latter half of this phase (Altschul and Fairley 1989, Dalley and McFadden 1985, Lyneis 1992a, Lyneis 1992b, Shutler 1961).

Mesa House Phase (850 – 800 BP) The most discernible difference between the Mesa House period and the Lost City phase is the presence of new types of decorated ceramics. Such types include Virgin Black-on-white and Citadel polychrome. It is believed that Virgin Black-on-white originated in the upper Virgin River drainage and that Citadel polychrome was derived from the Kayenta. Additionally, Pyramid Gray, a Patayan ceramic type, has been found in assemblages dating to the Mesa House phase, and an increased use of corrugated ware is also indicative of this time period (Ezzo 1996, Shutler 1961).

One of the more notable sites from the Mesa House Phase is the Adam 2 site (26CK2059) in the Moapa Valley. This single-component site is located on the eastern edge of Moapa Valley, approximately 12 meters above the floodplain. According to Lyneis et al. (1989:9) the site consists of “an arc of storerooms terminating in one end in a large living room, a group of rectilinear rooms of unknown extent, and perhaps a plastered floor sheltered by the arc of storerooms.”

Ezzo (1996) states that the population of the southern Nevada region began to decline during this time period. This may possibly be attributed to the migration of the Paiute into the region, which resulted in greater competition for resources and ultimately greater intergroup conflict. Interestingly, an increase in

vii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information the production of projectile points is also associated with the Mesa House phase, which Hayden (1930) interpreted as representative of an increase in warfare.

Virgin Puebloan Decline A number of different theories exist in regards to the disappearance of the southern Nevada region by the Virgin Puebloans approximately 800 years ago. As stated earlier, Hayden (1930) and Shutler (1961) believed that increased warfare led to the abandonment of the region (Hayden 1930, Shutler 1961). In contrast, Larson and Michaelson (1990) argue that a severe drought occurred in the region between A.D. 1120 and 1150, leading to climatic deterioration.

Rafferty (1990) has linked the abandonment by the Virgin Puebloan with the general collapse of a number of societies that existed between the Colorado Plateau and central Mexico during this time period, beginning with the fall of the Toltec capitol of Tula. Lyneis (1990, 1995) has argued that a variety of different issues came into play which led to the demise, including climatic and environmental change, demography, changes in trade networks, and competition with the Southern Paiute.

Post – Puebloan (Protohistoric Period) The end of the southern Nevada regional use by the Virgin Puebloan and the transition to the Late Pre- Historic Period is characterized by Paiute Brownware, Desert side-notched projectile points, Cottonwood triangular projectile points, large triangular knives, incised stones, steatite beads, slate pendants, shell beads, unshaped manos and metates, and mortars and pestles (Kelly, et al. 1990). This cultural assemblage is indicative of a return to a foraging lifestyle in conjunction with small-scale agriculture. The dominant culture during this time period was the Numic-speaking peoples, particularly the Southern Paiute in the southern Nevada region.

The approximate date of entry of the Southern Paiute people into the southern Nevada region has been debated by scholars (Ezzo 1996). Aikens and Witherspoon (1986) and Goss (1977) believe this entry occurred sometime during the early or middle Archaic period (at least 7,000 B.P.), based on similarities between Paiute and Archaic settlement patterns and the continued use of Elko projectile points throughout these time periods (Aikens and Witherspoon 1986, Goss 1977). Warren and Crabtree (1986) and Lyneis (1982) believe this entry occurred much later in the cultural chronology of southern Nevada and no earlier than A.D. 1000, while Shutler (1961) and Harrington (1933) argue that the Paiute culture co-existed with the Virgin Puebloan at least during the Lost City phase.

A lower Colorado group, the Patayan people began their occupation of southern Nevada near the end of the Basketmaker time frame (circa 1000 BP), moving in from outlying areas of the Mojave Desert (Altschul and Fairley 1989). Like the Paiute, the Patayan people were foragers who engaged in small- scale agriculture. Distinguishing characteristics of the Patayan people included features such as cleared circles, rock rings, petroglyphs, and intaglios.

An analysis of radiocarbon samples and ceramics from the Berger Site in the southern Las Vegas Valley (26CK1528) confirms that the Patayan began producing a new type of ceramic, Las Vegas Buff, in southern Nevada around 900 BP (Seymour 1997). The presence of Las Vegas Buff located in at least 19 sites in the southern Nevada region indicates a long-term presence by Patayan people. In addition to Las Vegas Buff, Topoc Buff, and Pyramid Gray are also types of ceramics unique to the Patayan. Seymour also argues that the Patayan culture was less sedentary and relied less on extensive agriculture than the Virgin Puebloan.

viii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Lower Colorado Cultural Groups Along the lower Colorado River and on the other side of the Colorado River, south of the proposed project area are the descendants of an Upland Yuman-speaking group, the Walapai (McGuire 1983), and a River Yuman-speaking group called the Mohave (Stewart 1983). Known as Patayan or Yuman in various literature; settlement patterns, buffware ceramics, and trade wares are what defines the temporal phases for this culture (Colton 1945, Rogers 1945, M. Waters 1982). Ceramic types generally correspond parallel with the drying and filling of prehistoric Lake Cahuilla in extreme southern California. Patayan I Phase (A.D. 500-1000) is best characterized by hunter and gatherers living primarily along the Colorado River in Nevada, California, and western Arizona. Patayan II Phase (A.D. 1050-1500) shows much more variation in the ceramic types present. These Patayan assemblages begin to spread away from the Colorado River basin into the deserts of California and into upland areas of western Arizona. Patayan III (A.D. 1500 and younger) is the last/final phase and is marked by ceramic continuity, population growth, and shifting settlement patters. When Lake Cahuilla eventually became dry, it may have caused the Patayan/Yuman-speaking people to move south to the Colorado River delta and west to the California coastal mountains.

Historically, the Mohave practiced flood plain horticulture along the Colorado River and they also traveled large distances practicing trade and social contact with different cultural groups as they travelled (Kroeber 1925). Even though southern Nevada is often thought of as being occupying solely by the Southern Paiute during the time, there is increasing evidence that these Yuman-speaking groups used the area regularly, likely for economic exchange and resource exploitation (Lyneis 1982, Hatzenbuehler 1992, Seymour 1997).

Ethnohistory

Southern Paiute The Nuwuvi people are generally known today as the Southern Paiutes. They are culturally related to the Shoshone, the Utes, and the Northern Paiutes; but spoke a different dialect of the Shoshonean language than these groups and have their own very separate cultural identity. The Southern Paiute are peaceful and as a general rule lived in peace with the surrounding tribes while following their traditional ancient lifeway. The Nuwuvi were closely tied to their land and the cycles of nature and were completely reliant on both. The earth, or tu-weap as the Nuwuvi called her, provided everything as long as they knew how to retrieve the provision. All the Southern Paiute thought of themselves as one people or as the term Nuwuvi means, “The Indians”. The land provided the Nuwuvi everything they needed, and they knew how to find the sources for foods, water, tool-making, clothing, and shelter. Before Euro-Americans came into the Nuwuvi territory and interfered and destroyed many of these resources, they were well-adapted and thriving. The Southern Paiute not only used hunting and gathering, but also farmed the land to contribute to their available resources (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976).

The Southern Paiute occupied a broad strip of territory extending across southern Nevada, southern Utah, and portions of southeastern California and northern Arizona. Of the 16 sub-groups identified by Kelly (1934), the Las Vegas sub-group inhabited a relatively large area extending into the Mojave Desert, including the Spring Mountain Range and roughly bounded on the west by Ash Meadows.

Probably because of their loose political organization and mobility, information concerning pre-contact Native Americans utilizing the area is confusing and generally ill-defined. This led early ethnographers to

ix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information devise conflicting divisions of the Southern Paiute groups. Isabel Kelly’s (1934) 16 Southern Paiute sub- groups, bands, or tribes that she identified were described as “dialectic units with political concomitants” (I. Kelly 1934, 550). Kelly called the westernmost Great Basin group the Las Vegas Band. Their territory includes the Kingston Range and the California Valley. Powell and Ingalls (1873), on the other hand, identified 31 separate bands or tribes of Southern Paiutes, and eight of these “tribes” occupy the same geographic location identified by Kelly as the Las Vegas Band. Kelly (1934) contended the Powell’s tribal names can be identified as names of geographic locations and can be viewed not as tribal designators, but as locations (Table 2). The boundaries of the territory of the Las Vegas Band were determined based on testimony of her informants.

Table 2 Southern Paiute “Tribes” Enumerated by Powell in Southwestern Nevada, Southeastern California

Children Tribe Locality Men Women TOTAL under 10 Mo-quats Kingston Mtns. (Horse Thief Sp.)

Ho-kwaits Invanspaw 34 34 17 85

Tim-pa-shau-wa- Providence Mtns. go-tsits

Kau-yai-chits Ash Meadows 10 12 9 31

Ya-gats Armagoza (Tecopa) 31 23 14 68

Nu-a-gun-tits Las Vegas 69 49 43 161

Pa-ga-its Colville 12 15 7 34

Kwi-en-go-mats Indian Springs 7 6 5 18

Mo-vwi-ats Cottonwood Island 24 19 14 57

No-gwats Potosi

Pa-room-pats Pa-room 22 24 10 56 Spring/Pahrump

TOTAL 209 182 119 510

Source: (Fowler and Fowler 1971)

Southern Paiute organization consisted of small economically self-sufficient groups that shared a relatively uniform culture (Euler 1966, 2, Kelly and Fowler 1986, 368). Political organization between and within groups was informal. Clusters of families formed loosely knit bands, usually with a headman who took on advisory responsibilities. Geographic boundaries between groups were fluid and allowed for

x GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information the utilization of resources “belonging” to neighboring groups. Marriage and trade took place between Southern Paiute groups, and conflicts were rare (Kelly and Fowler 1986).

The Southern Paiute did not exhibit any overall political organization between groups, nor was there any central control within the groups themselves. Each group contained a number of economic units, comprised of cluster of families, much like bands in other tribal organizations. These bands usually had a headman who took on advisory responsibilities. The headman of a band was typically a brother, grandson, or uncle of the previous headman, but was rarely, if ever, the headman’s son. Boundaries between groups were not precise and allowed for the utilization of resources typically allotted to neighboring groups. Springs, however, were private property and were inherited (Kelly and Fowler 1986, 380).

In general, relationships between Southern Paiute ethnographic groups were peaceable. Relationships with non-Southern Paiute groups, however, were more varied. A congenial relationship existed between the Southern Paiute and several neighboring groups. The Southern Paiute, for example, were friendly with the Western Shoshone to the northwest, with some Las Vegas peoples even speaking the Western Shoshone language. Other neighboring groups, however, would occasionally steal horses, children, and women, invoking fear among the Paiutes (Kelly and Fowler 1986, 369). Kroeber (1953) notes the Southern Paiute sometimes met with hostility from lower Colorado River groups (i.e. the Mohave).

Southern Paiute captives were often sold as slaves in Santa Fe or were carried off to southern California, transported by Ute captors or sold to traffickers along the Old Spanish Trail. Euler (1966, 46-48) cites historic documentation noting the absence of Southern Paiute from ecologically favorable but heavily traveled areas within their territory in the 1830s and 1840s, suggesting that they may reflect a fear of slavers. He also notes reports of open aggression and hostility among some Paiutes in the 1840s, perhaps demonstrating retaliation against slave traffickers. This is in marked contrast to the non-warlike temperament reported for the Southern Paiute in the pre-contact period (Kelly and Fowler 1986, 386). The Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada (1976, 36-51) speaks of the Old Spanish Trail and its connection to the slave trade as well.

The expansion of the Mormons into Southern Paiute territory also proved to have detrimental effects. In an effort to try to save the Southern Paiutes, church leaders advised their members to buy the “Lamanite” (Native American) children so they could be educated and taught the “gospel” so they would not be lost. Unfortunately, even though the Mormons believed their intentions good, their actions proved to be a large part of the problem. Their “purchasing” of people to save them from poverty that was to a large extent created by the expansion of the settlers into the Southern Paiute territory and taking away their most resourceful lands. These actions caused the impoverishment of the Southern Paiute, even though they believed they were saving them by purchasing them (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976, 56-68).

As noted above, Southern Paiute political organization was so informal that Steward declined to consider them to be true bands. He asserted that the Paiutes of Pahrump and Las Vegas regions were never unified in a single band and had no political leaders. One man, however, has often been referred to as “chief” in the historic era. Tecopa (also spelled Takopa) was probably born in Las Vegas and died in Pahrump probably sometime prior to 1905, when it was reported, “At Pahrump lies good Chief Tecopa who about a year ago died of old age” (Las Vegas Age 9/30/1905:1). Steward’s informants advised that his only functions revolved around dances or transactions with white men. According to Steward, Tecopa’s main function was to direct the autumn festival (Steward 1938).

xi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Moapa Band of Paiutes The Moapa Band of Paiutes historic lands include the flood plains of the Muddy River that flow southeasterly through the Moapa Valley into Lake Mead along with much of the surrounding land. Many of the unique geographic features in the area, including Valley of Fire, are sacred to the Moapa people. The Muddy River is fed by warm springs in the western and northern part of the Moapa Valley. The coming of the Euro-American settlers was detrimental to the Moapa people because these settlers took over the land, especially land that was used for crops along with land with reliable sources of water. This included the land the Moapa used for hundreds of years. In the 1870s, approximately 2 million acres of land was set aside for the Moapa people, but this was swindled away to about 1,000 acres by 1875 by administrators who appeared to only have the interest of Euro-American settlers in their actions (Inter- Tribal Council of Nevada 1976). Consequently, the Moapa people lost most of this land (Moapa Band of Paiutes n.d.).

Prior to the onslaught of Euro-Americans into the Moapa region, the Moapa people were well-adapted to their land utilizing natural resources by hunting and gathering in conjunction with farming. Their relationship with their land was guided by resourcefulness and knowledge. Material culture of the Moapa people included intricately designed basketry that includes water-proof jars, cradle boards, cooking baskets, seed beaters, and winnowing and parching trays. The Moapa’s skills included the use of animal skins and plants, including nutritional and medicinal uses. Once Euro-Americans began intruding onto Moapa land, diseases such as tuberculosis and measles rapidly spread and killed many of the Moapa who had no immunity to these European diseases. Any insurrection or rebellion by the Moapa, once these Euro-Americans were present, was met by brutal force by both the federal troops and the Euro-American settlers (Moapa Band of Paiutes 2014).

Today the Moapa, after approximately two centuries of disruption from Euro-Americans, have seen their traditional way of life basically demolished. The Moapa saw their land and water taken from them, their homes raided by others and their people taken as slaves, conflicts with Mormons settlers, New Mexicans, and others. The Old Spanish Trail was one of the main culprits of these dreadful acts against the Moapa people because it opened their land to explorers, traders, settlers, and anyone else using the route that became widely used in the 1830s. This caused the Moapa people to flee their land disrupting their farming, losing their homes, their independence, and their traditional lifeways (Moapa Band of Paiutes 2014).

The almost complete lack of any government oversight caused the reservation to basically become abandoned by the Moapa by the turn of the 20th century. The federal government even considered abandoning the reservation completely and moving any people to the reservation in northern Nevada with the Northern Paiute because very few Native Americans were present. This, however, did not occur. A land conflict in 1900 resulted in new government interest in the Moapa Reservation, and they decided to take charge again at Moapa. During the time of little government oversight, some Euro-Americans had taken advantage of the situation and moved into areas of the reservation that they then refused to leave after the government became involved again. These land conflicts caused the government to add land to the reservation to make up for this loss of land. This additional 103.28 acres was added by Executive Order from Theodore Roosevelt in 1903. By 1904 a new schoolhouse was built and some farming success was accomplished. Farming was not embraced by the Moapa people because they could make more money working for ranchers and farmers. Disease was a problem, and the numbers of the Moapa people continued to shrink. In 1904 there were 141, and in 1906 it was 129. The Moapa people became resigned

xii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information to their plight and had little left to defend. The spread of disease, the loss of their land, and their traditional way of life devastated the Moapa had little to preserve (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976).

Starting in 1914, land was allotted to the Moapa. This land was to provide each family approximately 12 to 25 acres of what was termed as good land. In 1918 a new school was built, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs agency headquarters returned to the reservation. The agency was led by L.B. Sandall who was a Physician and the School Superintendent. He reported that sanitary conditions were very poor and the water supply was from the irrigation ditches. Many children were sent to Ft. Mojave boarding school the next year assisting with existing food shortages and other issues. In 1925 the Moapa Day School was closed due to an epidemic of whooping cough and students were again sent away to Ft. Mojave and Sherman Institute boarding schools. During the 1920s the federal agency attempted to stop the Moapa people from practicing any traditional ceremonies or religious practices. This caused a conflict between the Moapa and the government. Threats were issued stating that anyone caught practicing traditional ceremonies or religious practices would be taken away from their people completely. Also, during the 1920s, the addition of grazing land became important to the Moapa people, and it was recommended that an additional 200 acres be added so that they could avoid losing the irrigation ditch and fence line to Euro-American ranchers (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976).

Conditions improved in the next decades and a gradual improvement was witnessed in the 1930s with health and population stabilization. In 1941, all land allotments expired that were issued and all reservation land was restored to tribal ownership. In 1942 the Moapa people authored and approved a constitution and bylaws; and the governing body was the Moapa Business Council. In the mid-1960s the Indian Claims Commission granted $7,253,165.19 to the Southern Paiute people including the Moapa people. The Moapa used their portion of this judgment for a period of significant development (Inter- Tribal Council of Nevada 1976).

In 1979, the Moapa Band of Paiutes petitioned Congress for 70,000 acres of land (approximately four percent of the original promise of two million) to strengthen the economy of the Moapa people. Ultimately this land provided more arable land, access to tourists visiting the Valley of Fire, grazing land, along with other opportunities for the people to be self-reliant and not as reliant on government assistance while preserving their traditional life (Moapa Band of Paiutes n.d.).

Muddy Mountains and Their Significance to the Moapa Band of Paiutes The Muddy Mountains are part of the traditional land of the Moapa. The Moapa people have been settled in the vicinity of the Muddy Valley and Lower Virgin Valley and the surrounding areas, including the Muddy Mountains, for all time. Their Traditional Land loosely covers all of Clark County, the southern portion of Lincoln County to the Utah and Arizona border. It also included parts of the Grand Canyon and Cottonwood Island. This land includes the Muddy Mountains and the North Muddy Mountains which surrounds the Valley of Fire to the north, west, and south with the Colorado River immediately east. The Muddy Mountains and Colorado River completely surround the Valley of Fire. The Muddy Mountains have traditionally been used extensively for the procurement of resources, including pigments for paint used by the Moapa along with plants and animals for subsistence and healing purposes.

Salt Songs are a lasting, sacred, and continuing tradition of the Moapa. These Songs are immensely important and continue a long tradition of ancestors and spirits showing the Moapa landscapes and places across the region. These ancestors/spirits travel across the landscape, along routes/trails, and point out specific and distinctive features that mark water and other important resources along these routes. These

xiii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information ancestors/spirits convey, through these Songs, what a person will see as they travel across the landscape, even if they have never been there before. The Salt Songs provide an oral map of the territory.

Many of the Salt Songs distinguish many landmarks, including the Muddy Mountains. Also, these Songs speak of the Valley of Fire which is part of the eastern portion of the Muddy Mountains. The Muddy Mountains are an entryway into these areas sung about in these Salt Songs, making the area immensely important to the Moapa. Gypsum Cave is another important traditional property located immediately south of the Muddy Mountains. This cave is one of many caves that is considered important.

Traditional Landscapes, as a whole, are incredibly important to the Moapa. These landscapes gave them everything they needed for life; including shelter, food, water, medicine, sacred places, and resources for crafting pottery, baskets, clothing, etc. The Muddy Mountains are part of the very important Moapa Traditional Landscape (Anderson 2018).

Historic Period

Exploration Although the Spanish left minimal impact on the historical presence of the southern Nevada region, several early Spanish explorers ventured through the region between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. The first non-Native Americans to venture into the region were members of Francisco de Coronado’s expedition in the 1540s (Kleinsorge 1941). The side trips from Coronado’s main expedition do not appear to have crossed to the west bank of the Colorado River, and probably never entered the area that is Nevada. After this early expedition, the region remained virtually unexplored by other non-Native Americans for over 200 years. In 1776, Father Francisco Garcés explored the Mojave Desert region moving east from California (Paher 1971). Around the same time, Fathers Silvestre Velez de Escalante and Francisco Dominguez and their party of 10 men traveled between New Mexico and California in search of a route to Monterrey. After traveling through southwestern Colorado and north-central Utah, the expedition traveled through present-day southern Nevada and encountered numerous Native American groups, including bands of Southern Paiute (Warner 1976, E. v. Warren 1974).

The era known as the Mexican period of exploration (1822-1846), is defined as the years when the Mexican government controlled much of the land in the western United States (Ezzo 1996). Although the region was controlled by Mexico during this time period, a Euro-American explorer and fur trader, Jedediah Strong Smith, was one of the most notable explorers of this region. Smith, who was part owner of the Rocky Mountain Fur Company, began his explorations of southern Utah and Nevada in August of 1826 (Ezzo 1996).

In 1829, Antonio Armijo was selected by the governor of New Mexico to lead a 60-man expedition from Santa Fe to California. This expedition followed Escalante’s route through northern Arizona, crossing the Colorado River in Utah. After reaching the Virgin River, Armijo followed Jedediah Smith’s route back across the Colorado River into Arizona, where he sent out scouts from his party to find watering holes. Following this, an alternative route was discovered through the Las Vegas Valley, passing along the Virgin and Colorado Rivers to the Las Vegas Wash, bypassing Las Vegas Springs and Cottonwood Springs (Paher 1971, E. v. Warren 1974).

The first travelers over what is now known as the Old Spanish Trail were probably fur trappers William Wolfskill and George C. Yount in 1830-1831 (Wright 1981, Ezzo 1996). However, the Wolfskill-Yount

xiv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information party did not travel the route to Las Vegas, instead moving along the Virgin and Colorado Rivers as Jedediah Smith had done. The historical record does not conclusively indicate who first shortened the final route, which traveled through the Las Vegas Valley to the Las Vegas Springs (Paher 1971, Ezzo 1996).

Following the Mexican-American War, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceded all of Mexico’s territory north of the Gila River to the US, including the land that comprises modern day Nevada. From 1848 to 1863, southern Nevada formed part of the New Mexico Territory, along with what is now Arizona and New Mexico and parts of southern Colorado (Walker and Bufkin 1979). In 1849, all of present-day Utah and Nevada, and portions of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Oregon and California, were included in a proposal to Congress for the establishment of a Mormon state of Deseret, a proposal which was denied (Walker and Bufkin 1979, Ezzo 1996). The proposal came out of Mormon expansion into the region, led by Brigham Young’s plan to missionize the region and convert its inhabitants to Mormonism. This plan extended well into present day Arizona and as far west as San Bernardino, California.

Settlement The Mormon Wagon Road, originating in Salt Lake City and traversing southern Nevada along the Muddy and Virgin Rivers, using portions of the previously established Old Spanish Trail helped to establish the region as a Mormon stronghold (Swanson 1995, Ezzo 1996). In 1855, to facilitate the use of the trail, Mormons established a settlement in the Las Vegas Valley, now known as the Old Las Vegas Mormon Fort (Hohmann 1996). The Fort was established to provide travelers along the Old Spanish Trail with food and supplies, with the Mormons cultivating crops along the Las Vegas Wash.

The Mormons who had settled in the Las Vegas Valley identified lead ore on Mt. Potosi. Subsequent to the discovery, attempts were made by the Mormons to develop a mine in the area. This was the first mining activity in the area that later became known as the Goodsprings (Potosi) Mining District. The appointment of Nathaniel Jones to supervise the extraction and smelting of the lead ore ultimately lead to conflict among the Mormons who were initially established to farm the valley and provide supplies to travelers along the Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Wagon Road. Jones and his miners had difficulty in smelting the ore and Jones eventually abandoned the project. The fort itself was abandoned by 1858 (Hohmann 1996).

Permanent settlement of the project area vicinity by Mormons did not begin until the 1860s, with settlements established at St. Thomas, St. Joseph, Mill Point, Sandy Town, Overton, Junction City, West Point and Callville (Ezzo 1996, McClintock 1985). Callville was one of several port towns established along the Colorado River from the Gulf of California to the junction of the Muddy and Virgin Rivers between 1852 and 1909 (Walker and Bufkin 1979). The northernmost settlement, Callville, was located approximately 20 miles south of the current project area (Fleming 1967). This Mormon settlement was only active from 1864-1869, with abandonment linked to the escape of three horse thieves from St. George who had wrenched four large doors from the front of the abandoned warehouse building for the construction of a raft on which to make their getaway from the local authorities (Ezzo 1996, McClintock 1985).

The Cotton Mission, Including the Muddy Section (Mission) Euro-American settlement in Southern Nevada began with the establishment of the Meadows Mission (in present day Las Vegas) in 1854 by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS). Thirty young men arrived in 1855 and were charged with building a fort, protecting immigrants and mail from the

xv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Native Americans, and teaching the Native Americans how to grow crops. The project vicinity is located northeast of downtown Las Vegas approximately 25-30 miles. The first LDS person sent to the Muddy Valley by the LDS leader, Brigham Young, was Ira Hatch who arrived alone in 1858. In two weeks, a companion arrived (Thales Haskell) to scout the area for settlement. They both returned to Utah the same year. In 1864 settlement began in the Muddy Valley (McClintock 1921). Most members of the LDS church felt that, when they were called on a mission (or any other church calling), the calling was divine. Because of this belief, their faith required them to serve the mission as directed by the church leaders, even if they did not want to go. They were able to turn down the calling if they were so inclined, however most persevered (Ellsworth 1995).

Before the Muddy Valley was settled in the mid-1860s, the Cotton Mission was established, which included the Virgin River basins located to the northeast of the Muddy Valley into present day Southwest Utah. The LDS leaders felt a great need for independence from the outside world and this was one of the primary motivations for developing the area approximately 300 miles south of Salt Lake City. The area was warmer and at a lower elevation making it an area that semitropical crops like cotton, grapes, figs, flax, hemp, rice, sugar cane, tobacco, etc. could be grown. LDS families were called to the Cotton Mission with the express directive to “grow cotton” which is just as important as preaching the gospel. The settlements in the Cotton Mission by the end of the 1850s included, Washington, St. George, Heberville (Tonaquint), Parowan, Grafton, Hurricane, Santa Clara, Harrisburg, Duncan’s Retreat, West Point, Rockville, Millersburg, Shunesburg, Northrop, Springdale, Gunlock, Harmony, Kanarra, Hebron, Middleton, Pine Valley, Pinto, Leeds, Bellevue (Pintura), Panada, Eagleville, Cedar City, and Toquerville (Evans n.d., McClintock 1921).

In the mid-1860s, the Muddy Section or Muddy Mission was added to the Cotton Mission. In 1864 several families were called to the Muddy Section to settle. Seven settlements were established including Beaver Dam, St. Thomas, Overton, St. Joseph, West Point, Mill Point, and Simonsville (McClintock 1921). Besides the need for self-support by the LDS people, there was the idea of trade on the Colorado River because of the Civil War, making the area even more desirable (Church News 1991, Holland 2011).

Arriving in the Muddy Section (Mission) in January of 1865, St. Thomas was the first settlement with St. Joseph following approximately six months later when a second group of families arrived. St. Thomas was described as very nice town with Cottonwood trees outlining the streets. The lots included as part of St. Thomas 85 city one acre lots, about the same number of vineyard lots that were 2.5 acres, and 5-acre farm lots. St. Joseph was a fort on a bluff with the town being on a level area northwest of the fort. The town had a flour mill and cotton gin, but much of it was destroyed in a fire in 1868 (Cosgrove 2011, McClintock 1921).

Fairly early into the Cotton Mission and Muddy Mission it was apparent to the LDS church that these areas would need to be subsidized to a certain extent. Conditions were harsh and the people were poor. The people had almost no money and many scarcely had clothes. Bartering was the main form of purchasing items. These communities were run under the United Order where everyone shared depending on need; however, when the community as a whole did not have enough, then everyone suffered. Brigham Young dismantled a Cotton Mill in Salt Lake City in 1866 and brought it down to Washington to help the area. It was rebuilt and running by 1869 to assist with the cotton production in the Cotton Mission (Evans n.d., McClintock 1921).

Problems were present at the Muddy Mission almost from the beginning. Problems with the Paiute likely began because the first LDS settlers on the banks of the Muddy River saw evidence of the Paiutes

xvi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information farming. These settlers saw nothing wrong with taking these Paiute farm lands and using these lands as their own. The Paiute, in turn, stole cattle and horses and were punished resulting in violence. Mosquitos caused malaria in the area, snakes and scorpions were abundant, flooding destroyed canals and irrigation ditches and heat was incredibly unbearable. The water from the Muddy River was also not good for large scale farming due to its salty nature (Cosgrove 2011, Lyman-Whitney 1992).

In 1870 when it was apparent that all was not well at the Muddy Mission, Brigham Young came to visit and saw the horrible conditions and the problems with getting the agriculture to be successful. It was during this period of time that the Nevada, Arizona, Utah borders were being shifted around and ultimately it was determined that the Muddy Mission was located in Nevada. Nevada attempted to collect back taxes from the settlers who had for years paid taxes to Utah. A letter was sent to the Muddy Mission communities from the LDS Church leaders giving the settlers permission to leave due to the horrible and harsh conditions in the area. A vote to abandon the settlements occurred in December 1870 and the mass exodus began in February 1871. These people returned to Utah and founded new towns like Glendale, Orderville, and Mount Carmel (Lyman-Whitney 1992, McClintock 1921, Wikipedia 2011).

In 1877, settlers returned to the Virgin River in the Muddy Mission area. Santa Clara had given up the United Order and consequently, Edward Bunker founded Bunkerville with LDS people who chose to continue the United Order. The United Order in Bunkerville included land owned by all members of the community, a community kitchen and dining hall, and all of the community shared in all responsibilities as a whole. However, the United Order did not last long in Bunkerville due to some people taking advantage of the system and it was dissolved in 1879. Eventually Dudley Leavitt and his family moved from Bunkerville to be one of the founding families of Mesquite in 1887. His 5 wives and 52 children struggled for about four years before abandoning this endeavor. Mesquite was resettled in 1895 successfully. In 1881 the LDS settlers returned to the Muddy as well. Nevada was much more welcoming with these subsequent settlements and the people actually received more benefits from their taxes than they paid (Lyman-Whitney 1992, McClintock 1921).

The Town of Mesquite was formally established in 1880 when a company of ten families from St. George, Utah, settled on the north side of the Virgin River, near Bunkerville. The post office name, first spelled Mesquit (July 19, 1880 - August 5, 1887) was changed to Mesquite on July 27, 1897, the date of resumption of service (Carlson 1974).

Relocation of Native Americans/Southern Paiutes to Reservations A major factor in any settlement of the region was the existence of the previous occupants, the Southern Paiute. Upon recommendation by Special Agent G.W. Ingalls of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Moapa Reservation for the Southern Paiute was established in 1873. However, settlers, miners and the Bureau of Indian Affairs wanted to relocate the Southern Paiute to an area of convenience to non-Indians (Knack 2001). Finally, the land that was decided upon was located on the Upper Muddy River in Nevada, about 25 or 35 miles above St. Thomas, containing from 700-1,000 acres of fine farming land, and good range for stock (Fenton 1869, 646).

The reservation was initially established as a farming reservation with acreage of 3,900. However, no infrastructural provisions were created to support this new reservation adequately (Clemmer and Stewart 1986). Encroaching settlement led to a reduction in area to 1,000 acres in 1875 (Royce 1899). While the population of the reservation at that time is undocumented, it is estimated that 500-600 Southern Paiutes continued to live near mining towns and in rural areas, moving in and out of the Moapa Reservation (Clemmer and Stewart 1986).

xvii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Paiutes on the Moapa Reservation were angered by this new settlement that encroached on their land and fighting ensued. The end of the confrontation was probably because the new missionary settlers were well-armed (White 1990). News of the confrontation reached Brigham Young, who in February of 1868, issued a decree ordering the abandonment of the settlement of West Point, adjacent to the reservation, by the Mormon settlers. Many families residing at West Point defied this decree and remained at the settlement (Olsen 1986, White 1990). The settlement was abandoned after severe flooding in August and September 1870 left it uninhabitable (Olsen 1986).

Growth and Transportation During the 19th century the project area vicinity was crossed by a network of roads that connected key points in the desert west. They included routes that joined future cities and now forgotten boom towns alike. The key factor to make a route feasible was the availability of water and feed for animals and man alike. The Mormon Wagon Road/Old Spanish Trail is located in the vicinity of the proposed project area. Also, other roads have been noted in the area by researching historic maps of the vicinity.

The communities along the Virgin and Muddy Rivers have families with ties going north into the Meadow Valley Wash towards Elgin. This is evident with the stage coach routes that ran from the Meadow Valley to the Lower Muddy River area (Due 1999). As the communities grew in the region, families moved to surrounding communities and still had their ties to their family remaining behind. An example of this would be the Huntsman family living in the Kane Springs area, who clearly had family ties in St. Thomas, Overton, and Bunkerville (Southwest Back Country 2009). Local roads like the present-day Carp Elgin Road are extremely important to the families and friends traveling to visit one another in these surrounding communities.

The first motor road of any importance in the project area was the unimproved Arrowhead Trail, a route promoted by the Automobile Club of Southern California in 1916. This was partially replaced by the Arrowhead Highway, a paved highway across southern Nevada. Rather than pass over the route through the Valley of Fire and Overton, this route ran to the north of the Muddy Mountains and crossed the Muddy River at what is now known as Glendale. One of the service stations at that location was known as Arrowhead Service. In 1955 it was replaced by a new alignment of US-91. Approximately ten to twelve years later, US-91 became the northbound lane of Interstate-15 (I-15) (Lyman 1991, Lyman 1999, Lyman 2004).

When the construction of the San Pedro, Los Angeles, and Salt Lake Railroad (SP, LA & SL RR) was finished in 1905, the Moapa Valley was integrated into the national system of mass and bulk transportation. Passengers and freight from the rest of the world could be loaded at the pier at San Pedro and carried on the main line to Salt Lake and points east by a single carrier (Signor 1988). Locally, the accessibility to mining properties in the region was increased (Lyman 1991, Myrick 1992, 663). The socio-economic position of Moapa Valley was drastically changed by this rapid integration into a modern transportation system. The inland west between the river and the ocean was open to extractive industrial activities. Its most important resources were sources of materials for construction and fabrication. However, until efficient and cheap methods of transportation existed, even large and pure quantities of important industrial materials could not be economically recovered.

The SP, LA & SL rail system was developed by Senator William Clark, the copper mining magnate, who had previously profited greatly by substituting railroad line for wagon roads at his Arizona operations (Peterson 1971, 124). Some products, such as borax, mined in the Muddy Mountains were worth hauling

xviii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information by freight wagon, but, in general, only the existence of the all-important rail line offered access to markets for extracted raw materials such as clay, gypsum, and silica. The availability of efficient and relatively inexpensive bulk transportation made the exploitation of these resources profitable. These common materials, found in fairly pure form in this portion of Nevada, have been a consistent and lucrative focus of mining activity since the rail links were formed. The Overton Branch line (completed in 1912) from Moapa in the project area still serves as the principal means of transportation for silica to industrial customers in the western United States (Winslow and Wedding 2006).

Mining did not begin in earnest around the project area until after 1900. The completion of the SP, LA & SL RR provided a needed impetus to mining activity in the project area. The first mine in the area, the Key West Mine, located in the Bunkerville Mining District, is located 15 miles south of Bunkerville in the foothills of the Virgin Range in northeastern Clark County (Lincoln 1923). Copper ore was discovered on the property in the late 1890s, although production did not begin in the mining town until 1903. Other mining districts in the area are the Gold Butte Mining District and the Copper King District. (Carlson 1974, Longwell, et al. 1965, Winslow and Wedding 2006).

Growth in the area required flood control measures for the local residents, ranchers, and farmers. During the 1930s several projects were underway supervised by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Soil Conservation Service (SCS), and the Forest Service. One of these privately funded projects was supervised by the Forest Service. The Bowman Reservoir (Wells Siding-Bowman Reservoir Project) was financed by the Muddy Valley Irrigation Company and Moapa Soil Conservation District. This project was originally designed to protect the lower Moapa Valley from flood damage. There were several integrated parts to the project that included the Bowman Reservoir. The Bowman Reservoir was originally completed by 1939 with a 1000 acre-feet capacity which was increased to 4000 acre-feet in 1968. This project was strategic to preventing the farm fields in the area from flooding, a continuing problem with both the Muddy and Virgin Rivers (Kolvet and Ford 2006).

Telephone service in the area also expanded during the 20th century growth. Based on a 1938 GLO plat image, a telephone line labelled, ‘Transcontinental Telephone’ crosses the proposed project area. The Transcontinental Telephone line was developed and constructed by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) Bell Systems in 1914. Construction of this original line was completed from New York to California in 1915 (AT&T Corporation n.d.). In Nevada, previously held operations by the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company were transferred to Bell Telephone of Nevada, which was incorporated to hold telephone rights in Nevada while the transcontinental line was being constructed. The portion of the telephone line that passed through Nevada was completed on June 17, 1914. However, it was not until 1919 that Nevada Bell started construction on the state-wide telephone lines (Grant 1996, Funding Universe n.d.). The transcontinental telephone line crossed into Nevada from Wendover, Utah and continuing across northern Nevada towards San Francisco (Madrigal 2011, Grant 1996, AT&T Corporation n.d.). This route left southern Nevada without access to long-distance service until 1929 when Nevada Bell constructed a long-distance telephone line from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City. This gave southern Nevada, including Las Vegas, access to long-distance service (Grant 1996, Funding Universe n.d.). There is a good probability that the telephone line mapped on the 1938 GLO plat map is the Los Angeles to Salt Lake City telephone line which was the only long-distance telephone line present in southern Nevada during the time the GLO survey was completed.

xix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Old Spanish Trail Road/Mormon Wagon Road The Mormon Wagon Road/Old Spanish Trail corridor (both recorded segments and the Congressionally Designated Trail) is located within the vicinity of the proposed project. This transportation corridor was mostly used during the 19th century during the exploration and early settlement of southern Nevada. The corridor’s history has been documented through several researchers in the past (Lyman 2004, Lyman and Reese 2001, McBride and Rolf 2001, Myhrer, White and Rolf 1990, Hafen and Hafen 1954, E. v. Warren 1974).

The Old Spanish Trail was a consequence of Native American trails, but it is unlikely that no single Native American Trail followed the entire route of the Old Spanish Trail or the Mormon Wagon Road. Portions of this route became known as the Old Spanish Trail because of the Spanish missionaries explored this route in 1776. A substantial amount of the route through southern Utah was explored by the Escalante-Dominguez expedition, and other parts of the route through the Mojave Desert in California were explored by Francisco Garces (Myhrer, White and Rolf 1990). Fifty years later, Euro-Americans began to further explore the route. Jedediah Smith and other fur trappers made use of portions of the Old Spanish Trail between 1826 and 1831. The trappers were guided and shown numerous trails by Native American guides. The first person to travel the entire Old Spanish Trail route was Antonio Armijo, who traveled from Abiquiu, New Mexico to San Gabriel, California between November 1829 and February 1830. Armijo proved that you could travel from the Santa Fe area of New Mexico to southern California all the way trading blankets and other goods for mules and horses, which ultimately proved profitable. The route was used for horse and mule traders until 1848 (Lyman 2004).

John C. Fremont directed an expedition that explored the Rocky Mountains and other areas of the western United States between 1842 and 1844. Fremont started in southern California and continued through Nevada on the Old Spanish Trail. The name ‘The Old Spanish Trail’ is attributed to Fremont, before his historic trip the route was called ‘El Camino de California’ or ‘El Camino de Nuevo Mexico’. Fremont’s information and his informants clearly indicate that there is not a single ‘Old Spanish Trail’, but a collection of varying routes used between California and New Mexico (E. v. Warren 1974). Once Fremont returned to Washington, D.C., a report was prepared for Congress that was completed in 1845. Twenty-thousand copies of this report were printed under congressional order and the report became widely available to the public. Fremont’s work was also published in other books such as Joseph Ware’s Emigrant’s Guide to California.

The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican – American War, was signed in 1848, and turned over California, Nevada, New Mexico, and most of Arizona over to the United States. The Mormon Battalion traveled through Nevada via the Old Spanish Trail into southern Utah and to Salt Lake City after the treaty was signed. The route between southern California and Salt Lake City became known as the Mormon Road or the ‘Southern Route’ after this trek.

Discovery of gold in California in 1848 caused a widespread migration across the western United States as people headed to make their fortune. The availability of Fremont’s report and the consequences of the Donner Party in 1846/1847 caused many of these travelers to choose the Southern Route as they headed to California.

The last mule train and the first wagon traveled over the route from southern California to Utah in 1848 (Lyman 2004). With this mode of transportation change came the name change to the Mormon Wagon Road from The Old Spanish Trail.

xx GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

The establishment of the Mormon Fort at Las Vegas occurred due to the use of the Mormon Wagon Road. The fort did not last long and later the Muddy Mission, an offshoot of the Cotton Mission, was established and a number of settlements, including St. Thomas, Overton, and Logandale, along the Muddy and Virgin Rivers in Nevada were associated with the Mormon expansion (McClintock 1921). These settlements provided cotton and other warm weather crops to Salt Lake City as well as provided supplies to travelers along the Mormon Wagon Road.

North of the proposed project area, near Moapa, there was water for the travelers at the springs in the area. From there to Las Vegas the route was called jornada del muerte (days’ journey of death) because of the lack of water through this area. Generally speaking the distance between water along the route was under 30 miles, however this stretch was 57 miles according to Fremont’s account (McBride and Rolf 2001). The proposed project area is located along this stretch of the route.

The construction of the railroad (Atlantic & Pacific, later Santa Fe) through Barstow and Victorville, California stalled heavy use of the Mormon Wagon Road in southern California, however the route continued to be widely used through Nevada. The construction of the San Pedro, Los Angeles, and Salt Lake Railroad through Las Vegas was the end of the Mormon Wagon Road as a major route from Salt Lake City to Las Vegas. Parts of the Mormon Wagon Road continued to be used for local traffic. Since the railroad did not service the Lower Muddy and Virgin River settlements, wagon travel was used between St. George, Utah and the places not provided service by the railroad.

One of earlier academic studies of the Old Spanish Trail was undertaken by Hill in 1930 (Myhrer, White and Rolf 1990). In the 1950s, Hafen and Hafen completed a study of the Old Spanish Trail (Hafen and Hafen 1954), followed by Elizabeth Warren (1974) where she makes an argument that the Fremont route traveled was different than previous routes to 1844. She continues by stating that the entire length of Fremont’s route was not traveled until after publication of his report in 1845. Part of Nevada’s centennial, in 1964, was the Boy Scouts placing markers along a route that was thought to be Fremont’s route of the Old Spanish Trail. These previous studies and the Boy Scout markers have been a driving factor in archaeological research of the Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Wagon Road.

Continued archaeological research of the Mormon Wagon Road has shown many routes heading in the same general direction within the route vicinity. Routes could have differed based upon weather conditions, the type of load being carried, terrain, what map or directions you have and which landmarks to use, and who they may have known that directed them to go up the hill here, instead of there.

Arrowhead Trail/Highway/US91 and the Beginning of Motorized Vehicle Travel in Southern Nevada This route, over the course of history, has been called the Arrowhead Trail, Arrowhead Highway, and US Route 91. Several historians have studied the road through time (Jones and Cahlan 1975, Lyman 1999) along with several archaeologists having recorded segments of the road (see Site Sheets for 26CK4958, 26CK4959, 26CK4369, and 26CK8613).

The route is very similar to the Mormon Wagon Road and it was the automobile replacement for the route from Los Angeles, California to Salt Lake City, Utah. The exact date of this ‘transition’ is not expressed by most authors, it is recognized that the Mormon Wagon Road was used by wagons and the Arrowhead Trail/Highway was used by motor vehicles. This general acceptance, however, oversimplifies this transition. Transitioning from wagons/animal driven vehicles to motor vehicles was a neither a rapid transition nor a simple one. Horse drawn vehicles were utilized into the 1930s.

xxi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Wagon roads that became included in the Arrowhead Trail were in use before 1905 and were a loose collection of local roads more than a unified highway. The Arrowhead Trail traveled through the Valley of Fire, located east of the proposed project area. Automobiles in the area were still a novelty in 1910 and the term Arrowhead Trail arose in 1916 with the creation of the Arrowhead Trails Association. Since there was not a pressing need for automobiles yet, there was still the push to get an automobile road in southern Nevada because of the prediction of an increased demand for these motorized vehicles. This is when local, regional, and national organizations began to plan, push, lobby, and develop highways (Lyman 1999, Thurston 1994).

The Arrowhead Highway started out as an informal road, an outgrowth from the Mormon Wagon Road between Salt Lake City and Los Angeles. The Arrowhead Trail used existing local roads if possible, but from the Valley of Fire to Apex, there are no roads on any map we were able to examine from the 19th century that had a road through Valley of Fire. Kevin Rafferty has identified graffiti in the Valley of Fire dating to the 1800s suggesting that an early wagon road may have been present in the Valley of Fire during the 19th century (Rafferty, Personal Communication 2011).

It was not until 1910 that an automobile was seen in the Mesquite area and it caused quite the commotion among the locals. Motor vehicles, however, were still not very helpful in the area because most roads were still wagon roads and the motorized carriages had to be assisted across every obstacle in the wagon road. The Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce placed an ad in Sunset Magazine to lure travelers to Las Vegas to increase tourism so improving the roads became a priority so that they could accommodate the automobiles (Jones and Cahlan 1975, Thurston 1994).

By 1914, local roads began to come together into a unified highway that were basically maintained by people from each community keeping the road clear from community to community. These roads became part of the All the Year Route (Road) from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City. The Automobile Club of Southern California investigated this route with a road locator whose main job was to identify new routes, make maps, and provide signs for travelers. At the same time, Clark County also sent their own road locator and the consensus was that the best route would be through Goodsprings to Silver Lake and then to Barstow. During this time, most traffic went through Searchlight and the Searchlight route continued to be used despite it being a longer route. This inability to change the route was mostly because the people who owned the businesses and mines in the area had money and power (Jones and Cahlan 1975, Lyman 1999, Thurston 1994).

The federal government also was interested in this route, inquiring about the local roads since they believed that the route might shorten drives from Denver by several hundred miles (this belief was significantly overestimated). The letter from the federal government inquiring about the route encouraged people to continue to promote this route. Planning ahead, it was anticipated that a route needed to be available to motor vehicles from booming southern California that allowed access to the Midwest and east in general (Lyman 1999).

While routes were being determined, there was a fair amount of competition/debating about the best routes north out of Las Vegas and south from Las Vegas to California. In 1915, Clark County built a bridge across the Virgin River at St. Thomas making this route clearly the one of choice for the route north from Las Vegas at that time (Lyman 1999, Thurston 1994). Charles E. Bigelow, a famous race car driver along with a self-proclaimed automobile enthusiast, took an interest in the route from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City. He began to publicize his drives on the route to promote the use of the road, often bringing press people along for the ride. There was a race that included the military to prove that the route

xxii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information was a good road. Going from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City, the race revealed that the road definitely better than many (especially from the north) tried to claim. The race was a success and a new time record was set, even with a fair amount of bad weather along the way (Jones and Cahlan 1975, Lyman 1999, Motor West 1917a).

By 1916, Bigelow and Mont. B. Chubb, of the Automobile Club of Southern California, organized the Arrowhead Trails Association and solicited committees along the route to help promote it as the highway of choice. The association’s name appears to be the introduction of the Arrowhead Trail name for this route. Before this name the route was called either the Old Mormon Trail or the All the Year Route when it was mentioned (Jones and Cahlan 1975, Lyman 1999). In May 1917, an announcement was made regarding the Los Angeles Arrowhead Trails Office opening in Motor West (1917b) magazine. Articles began appearing about the Arrowhead Trail throughout automobile and travel magazines by 1917, and the Arrowhead Trail was their focus. One was entitled, “A Visit to Little Zion Canyon, Utah’s Scenic Wonder” in American Motorist (Waddell 1916), another was, “Easy Grades on Arrowhead Trail, Connects Lincoln and National Old Trails Routes” in Motor Age (Waddell 1917). Two more articles were in Motor West magazine; one about Arrowhead Trail being Utah’s great beautiful route (1917a), and the other about the great condition of the Arrowhead Trail which allowed people to travel from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City in three days (1917b).

The Federal Aid Road Act was passed in 1916 that required the federal government to put funds aside for long-term road building each year. Some of the stipulations for the funds were that they cannot be used in urban areas with a population over 5,000 and the roads cannot have any toll (Keane and Bruder 2003). Motor Age (1917a) reported that the federal road committee reported on roads to be considered for federal money through Utah, Nevada, and California and they inspected the Overland Trail, Midland Trail, and the Arrowhead Trail.

State Senator E. W. Griffith succeeded in passing two highway bills by the Nevada Legislature in 1919 that includes a road going from Mesquite to Jean (Arrowhead Trail). That same year that State Highway Map depicts the Arrowhead Trail, with the road passing through St. Thomas on its way to Bunkerville (Thurston 1994). Debates continued about the location of the Arrowhead Trail and whether this route should continue or if it should cross Mormon Mesa and follow the general corridor of the Mormon Wagon Road. Mainly the planning of the Boulder/Hoover Dam, the route preferred was the one through Glendale and over Mormon Mesa. The State Highway Maps from 1922 depict the new route across Mormon Mesa (Las Vegas Age 1921, Las Vegas Age 1922, Lyman 1999, NDOT 2011).

A second federal highway bill was passed in 1921 that required highway construction to follow a procedure to insure there was some kind of planning in the construction that ultimately facilitated travelers being able to travel from state to state. No more than seven percent of rural road could be part of this system that allotted funds. Each state selected roads for the funding, not the federal government (Keane and Bruder 2003).

In 1922, the contract for parts of the Arrowhead Trail through Apex towards the Virgin and Moapa Valleys was awarded to Wasatch Grading Co. of Provo, Utah. Construction began within weeks and the new route over Mormon Mesa was chosen. People living in area that the new road would not now go through were unhappy, but the residents were assured that county money would be made available to construct roads to their towns from the Arrowhead Highway (Las Vegas Age 1922).

xxiii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

By the end of 1924 an improved road was completed from just north of Las Vegas to the western edge of Mormon Mesa. The contract was awarded to Dodge Brothers & Dudley of Fallon, Nevada to complete the grading and culverts from the east side of Mormon Mesa to the Arizona State Line and Nevada Construction Company was to construct the road over Mormon Mesa. Work commenced on November 25, 1924 (Las Vegas Age 1922, Lyman 1999). Also, in 1924, the road began to be graveled and oiled, marking the beginning of the transition from the Arrowhead Trail to the Arrowhead Highway. By the middle of 1925 the stretch across Mormon Mesa was completed making the road completed from Las Vegas to the Arizona State line (Lyman 1999). In 1927 the Arrowhead Highway was improved and widened with complete gravel and oil (Jones and Cahlan 1975). A major realignment of the Arrowhead Highway occurred in 1932, mainly straightening out the road on some severe curves, flattening the road through ridges, and installing culverts in areas where the road originally went through larger drainages (Lyman 1999).

In 1927 the government began to organize the road system so that signage was consistent and understandable from state to state. Federal highways were assigned numbers and standardized signage was put into place. As soon as the road began to be numbered under the new federal system, the Arrowhead Highway was designated US91 (Keane and Bruder 2003, NDOT 2011). A new alignment began in the mid-1950s that bypassed many of the towns and streamlined the highway. This new alignment marks the end of what we have called the Arrowhead Highway and US91 becomes the prominent name for the road. In the 1960s, the construction of Interstate 15 incorporated US91, which is now the northbound lane in many places in the proposed project area location.

Old State Route 40 (Valley of Fire Road) Nevada State Route 40 appears on road maps as early as 1933 (NDOT 1933). It was used as an alternative route to Overton and provided access to Valley of Fire State Park, which was formally designated as a Nevada state park in 1934 (Nevada State Parks n.d.). The road was designated as a state route in 1935, coming from the old town site of Crystal and heading east to connect with State Route 12 to Overton (NDOT 1935). The portion of the road that passes through Valley of Fire was originally a part of the Arrowhead Trail which came into use in 1912 (Nevada State Parks n.d.). In the project area there is evidence of the original alignment of the state route which was changed to follow the northwestern alignment of the American Borax Road towards Crystal in 1940 (State Farm Insurance Companies Travel Bureau and Rand McNally & Company 1940, NDOT 1941).

American Borax Road After the discovery of borates in the Muddy Mountains in 1920, the American Borax Company needed a way to transport their product from the mines to the San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad station in Crystal, NV (Roske 1982). The American Borax Company constructed the road that ran southeast from Crystal towards the mine and calcining plant in White Basin (Roske 1982, Longwell, et al. 1965). The road appears on maps beginning in 1939 although the borate mines in the Muddy Mountains had been active from 1922 to 1924 (Rand McNally & Company and State Farm Insurance Companies Travel Bureau 1939, Bohannon, et al. 1982). The northern portion of the road’s alignment that connects with Interstate 15 became a part of State Route 40 (Valley of Fire Road) in 1940 (State Farm Insurance Companies Travel Bureau and Rand McNally & Company 1940).

Old Spanish Trail Road This road is not the Old Spanish Trail, but a road simply with the name of this historic route. This road follows a northeast to southwest alignment following the 1938 GLO plat image of the Transcontinental

xxiv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Telephone line. The road does not appear on the researched maps until 1968. A Nevada Department of Transportation (1968) map illustrated the road alignment as an unimproved road that continues southwest until it merges with one of the alignments of the Arrowhead Trail. This road was likely present for maintenance of the telephone line.

Valley of Fire State Park Tucked behind the North Muddy Mountains is a valley comprised of red Aztec sandstone nestled in gray and tan limestone, a geologic feature of the Jurassic period (Nevada State Parks n.d.). These striking vistas make up the geologic backdrop of Valley of Fire State Park. The valley has a long history dating back to southern Nevada’s earliest residents and has maintained an allure that continues to attract people to the park today. Some of the early roads mentioned above went through the Valley of Fire because people wanted to see this beautiful scenery.

Prehistoric Research History While the geologic formations unique to the valley are one aspect of Valley of Fire’s identity, it is also home to some of southern Nevada’s most diverse rock art and archaeology. The earliest references to the valley’s archaeological resources are discussions on the petroglyph panels at Atlatl Rock (26CK207) (Rafferty 2006). Both the American anthropologist Julian Steward (1929, 72) and Ruth Henley (1929, 26) included discussions about the site or sketches of the motifs in their publications on the region.

Mark Harrington, an archaeologist in Nevada during the 1930s, also conducted research in Valley of Fire. Harrington (n.d.) wrote a three-page report about Valley of Fire focusing specifically on Atlatl Rock and the cultural resources in the general area. He had constructed a basic culture history for the area which would later be improved, expanded, and eventually superseded (Rafferty 2006).

Majority of the research conducted in Valley of Fire prior to the 1960s focused predominantly on the valley’s diverse examples of rock art. The first detailed recordings of archaeological sites within the valley were conducted in 1961 by Richard and Mary Shutler (Rafferty 2008). The Shutlers recorded a total of 32 sites as part of the park’s development, however, they placed most of their attention on sites that were easily accessed and already known to locals (Shutler and Shutler 1962, Rafferty 2008). Based on their research, they believed the valley was mainly occupied by the Virgin Anasazi (Puebloan period), however, future archaeologists would extend the occupation of Valley of Fire as far back as the Archaic period (Shutler and Shutler 1962).

In 1978, local archaeologist Claude Warren and his team excavated three rock shelters in the park, including Atlatl Rock Shelter. Warren’s research in the valley has helped establish older dates of occupation and is rich in data providing examples of how the valley’s early residents utilized the region. Through the excavation of Atlatl Rock Shelter, Turtle Bone Shelter, and South Shelter, Warren and his team were able to provide a more precise date range as early as the Pinto-Gypsum period (ca. 7500 - 1750 B.P.) to the Puebloan period (ca. 1750 - 650 B.P.) (Warren, et al. 1978, Rafferty 2006). Based on his findings and further research, Warren expanded his interpretations of the excavations to suggest a five- period chronology specific to Valley of Fire (C. N. Warren 1980, 63-74).

Research has continued to be conducted in the Valley of Fire with a large percentage of work being completed by Kevin Rafferty (Professor Emeritus of the College of Southern Nevada) and field school students from the College of Southern Nevada. Since 2003, Rafferty and students have surveyed over 4.25 square miles and recorded 54 prehistoric and historic sites (Pacl 2012, Rafferty 2010).

xxv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Historic and Modern History Valley of Fire received its name in the 1920s when an official from AAA traveled along the Arrowhead Trail through the area, noting that the red Aztec sandstone made the valley look like it was on fire (Nevada State Parks n.d.). The current access road, Valley of Fire Highway, was built by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) in 1933-1934. The CCC also constructed The Cabins which served as a rest stop for travelers along the Arrowhead Trail (Rafferty 2008).

In 1934 the park was formally opened, one year prior to it becoming an official state park. The Nevada State Legislature officially designated Valley of Fire as a state park in 1935 (Nevada State Parks n.d.). However, in the 1940s the Baker Act eliminated the valley from the parks system due to it being “inaccessible” (Nevada Division of State Parks 1969). By 1955 the act was repealed and Valley of Fire regained its state park status (Rafferty 2006).

The valley has also become the backdrop of many Hollywood productions spanning from 1923 to the present (Rafferty 2006). Most notable films include The Professionals (1966), The Hitcher (1986), Star Trek: Generations (1994), and Domino (2004).

Valley of Fire has maintained its role as an integral resource in Nevada and will likely continue to attract people to its fiery geological formations for years to come.

Field Methods Knight & Leavitt Associated (K&LA) archaeologists conducted an intensive Class III pedestrian survey, as defined by the BLM, of the proposed project area. A Class III survey is defined in the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management’s Nevada State Office Guidelines and Standards for Archaeological Inventory (2012). The Class III survey was conducted by a crew of up six with at least two to three being BLM permitted archaeologists walking transects no further than 30-meters apart following the specified guidelines. The Moapa Band of Paiutes provided monitors to assist in the survey and recording of sites. These monitors were present with at least one, typically two, professional BLM permitted archaeologist. This additional examination gave specific cultural information from the Moapa views which provided insights and memories when appropriate.

Mapping software (ArcMap) identified the project boundary and transects were downloaded into handheld GPS units (Garmin Rino 655t and two Garmin Rino 650 models) to assist in navigating to ensure all proposed project area land was inventoried/surveyed. These handheld GPS units were used in conjunction with the Dry Lake, Nevada and Piute Point, Nevada 7.5-minute USGS topographic maps.

Isolated occurrences were mapped with the handheld GPS units using real-time correction application, insuring accuracy within three to five meters. Archaeological site boundaries, features, and plotted artifacts within sites were mapped with a Trimble GeoXH, with post-processed differential correction. All maps and data are projected with NAD83 (Zone 11) datum, per the BLM guidelines and standards ( (United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management 2012).

Identified cultural resources were photo-documented in digital color images using digital cameras with at least 12-megapixel quality. The primary digital camera utilized were 14-megapixel Fujifilm Finepix XP100 cameras. Temporary field numbers are given to cultural resource sites and documented with mapping, artifact inventory, and digital photography. A description of the observed features and artifacts are field documented. Field data is used to prepare the suitable Nevada Intermountain Archaeological Computer System (IMACS) site form for all identified cultural resources. Completed forms are located in

xxvi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information the Appendix C. If suitable and appropriate, aerial maps are also used to aid in the interpretation of cultural resource sites (i.e. roads, etc.). Any aerial assistance is identified on all maps if it is applicable.

Terminology Often there is a need to define commonly used archaeological terms based upon a specific project and to bring uniformity to the terminology.

Lithic materials are an item that archaeologist use many differing terms to describe. Specifically, there are various cryptocrystalline siliceous rocks: e.g. chert, chalcedony, jasper, flint, etc. The definitions used by archaeologists often do not match the definition used by geologists and mineralogists and different archaeologists often assign slightly differing characteristics to these materials (Baker, Thompson and Ellis 2012, Baker 2008, Luedtke 1992). For this reason, we have used the acronym CCS (cryptocrystalline siliceous) for this lithic material.

When referring to different kinds/types of flakes, primary flakes are defined as flakes with cortex covering 100% of the dorsal survey, secondary flakes have some cortex on the dorsal survey, and tertiary flakes have no cortex present.

Tested or assayed cobbles are often referred to as cobble cores with one or two flake removals or have been broken open to ascertain what material is inside the cobble. It should be noted that these terms sometimes imply that these materials were not used. The authors of this report do not make that assumption and it is possible that the material was utilized at some level. Through this survey, and other is the general area, the authors have experienced many tested cobbles that have been broken open, presumably to determine if the lithic material can be used. It is likely a chunk of the material, if usable, would have been procured for future use. This type of activity has been associated with opportunistic lithic procurement. The people could work the lithic material where it was procured or taken a piece with them to work when they returned to their camp, home, or any other location.

Base marks on historic glass were generally researched using David Whitten’s (2015) webpage, with Toulouse (1971) providing additional data. Basic information about glass artifacts are based upon Bill Lindsey’s (2015) webpage. Any text that is embossed or painted on bottles or cans will be in quotes and a single “/” will separate lines (including cadastral markers). Logos, emblems, trademarks, etc. will be shown in parenthesis along with any comments about the text. Evaporated milk cans used Reno (2010) as an update to the standard Simonis’ (1997) chronology.

xxvii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

References Ahlstrom, Richard V. N. 2008. "Re-Imagining the History of Maize in the Las Vegas Valley." In Proceedings of the 2007 Three Corners Conference, edited by Mark C. Slaughter, Steven Daron, Eva Jensen, and Kathleen A. Sprowl, pp. 1-20.

Aikens, C.M., and Y.T. Witherspoon. 1986. "Great Basin and Numic Prehistory: Linguistics, Archaeology, and Environment. In Anthropology of the Desert West: Essays in Honor of Jesse D. Jennings." Edited by Carol J. Condie and Don D. Fowler. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 110: 7-21. Salt Lake City.

Altschul, Jeffrey H., and Helen C. Fairley. 1989. "Man, Models, and Management: An Overview of the Archaeology of the Arizona Strip and Its Cultural Resources." United States Department of Interior (USDI) Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C.

Amick, D. S. 1966. "Regional Patterns of Folsom Mobility and Land Use in the American Southwest." World Archaeology Vol. 27, No. 3, Hunter-Gatherer Land Use (Feb., 1996), 411-426.

Anderson, Gregory Sr. 2018. Moapa Band of Paiutes' Chairman (October 2).

Apple, Rebecca. 1989. "Cultural Resources Survey Report, City of North Las Vegas Lands Transfer." Dames and Moore, Las Vegas, Nevada.

AT&T Corporation. n.d. "First Transcontinental Line. History of AT&T." Accessed January 25, 2015. https://www.corp.att.com/history/nethistory/transcontinental.html.

Baker, Jeffrey L. 2008. "Lithic Analysis. In Data Recovery at Agua de la Mision (AZ BB:13:205 [ASM]), San Xavier Reservation, Pima County, Arizona." Edited by Jeffrey L. Baker and J. Simon Bruder. EcoPlan Data Recovery Report 00-469:90, EcoPlan Associates, Inc., Mesa, Arizona. 177-199.

Baker, Jeffrey L., Annette J. Thompson, and John A. Ellis. 2012. "A Class III Cultural Resource Survey of the Proposed Overton Power Nine-Year Plan. Prepared for the Overton Power District No. 5, BLM Las Vegas District, and Bureau of Reclamation. BLM Report No. 5-2676 and K&LA Report No. 09-0434."

Beck, Charlotte, and George T. Jones. 2010. "Clovis and Western Stemmed: Population Migration and the Meeting of Two Technologies in the Intermountain West." American Antiquity 75: 81-116.

Beck, Charlotte, and George T. Jones. 1997. "The Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Archaeology of the Great Basin." Journal of World Prehistory 11: 161-236.

Bedwell, Stephen F. 1973. "Fort Rock Basin Prehistory and Environment." University of Oregon Books, Eugene.

Bernor, R., ed. 1980. "Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation of CA-SBr-4417 at Ivanpah Dry Lake." Environmental Research Archaeologists, Los Angeles, California.

Blair, Lynda M. 1992. "A Cultural Resource Investigation for Bedroc Incorporated, Coyote Springs, Lincoln County, Nevada. Division of Environmental Assessment, Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. HRC Report 5-166-1. BLM Report 4- 1186."

xxviii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Bohannon, Robert G., Andrew M. Leszcykowski, Leon E. Esparza, and Clayton M. Rumsey. 1982. "Mineral Resource Potential of the Muddy Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Clark County, Nevada." USGS, Washington, D.C.

Campbell, Elizabeth W. , William H. Crozer, Antevs Ernst, Charles A. Amsden, Joseph A. Barbieri, and Francis D. Bode. 1937. "The Archaeology of Late Pleistocene Lake Mojave: A Symposium." Southwest Museum Papers 11, Los Angeles.

Carlson, Helen S. 1974. "Nevada Place Names: A Geographic Dictionary." University of Nevada Press, Reno, Nevada.

Church News. 1991. "Muddy Mission Settled a ‘Forbidding, Lonely’ Area." Church News, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, January 12. Accessed October 21, 2011. http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/21455/Muddy-mission-settled-a-forbidding-lonely- area.html.

Clark, Jeanne Wilson. 1984. "Prehistoric Settlement in the Moapa Valley." Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers Number 19.

Clemmer, R. O., and O. C. Stewart. 1986. "Treaties, Reservations, and Claims. In Great Basin. Handbook of North American Indians." Vol. 11. Edited by W. L. d’Azevedo. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 525-527.

Colton, Harold. 1945. "The Patayan Problem in the Colorado River Valley." Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1: 114-121.

Cordell, Linda. 1997. "Archaeology of the Southwest. 2nd Edition." Academic Press, New York.

Cosgrove, Sandra. 2011. "The Muddy Mission." On Line Nevada. Accessed October 25, 2011. http://onlinenevada.org/The_Muddy_Mission.

Dalley, Gardiner F., and Douglas McFadden. 1985. "The Archaeology of Red Cliffs Site. Cultural Resource Series No. 17." USDI Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Dennis, Jenkins L., Loren G. Davis, Thomas W. Stafford, Paula F. Campos, Bryan Hockett, George T. Jones, Linda Scott Cummings, et al. 2012. "Clovis Age Western Stemmed Projectile Points, and Human Coprolites at the Paisley Caves." Science, Vol. 337, No.6091, pp. 223-228.

Dillehay, Tom D. 1997. Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chili: The Archaeological Context and Interpretation. Washington, D.C.: Smithsoniam Institution Press.

Dixon, Raoul. 1987. "The Way of the Hunters: An Illustrated Commentary and Prehistoric Record." Carlton Press, Inc., New York.

Dziebel, German. 2012. "The Western Stemmed Tradition, Clovis and MTDNA 9-BP Deletion." Anthropogenesis. http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2012/07/the-western-stemmed- tradition-clovis-and-mtdna-9-bp-deletion/.

xxix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Ellsworth, S. George. 1995. "Heeding the Prophet’s Call. Ensign." October. Accessed October 21, 2011. http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD &locale=0&sourceId=5ba86e9ce9b1c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1.

Elston, Robert G., and David W. Zeanah. 2002. "Thinking Outside the Box: A New Perspective on Diet Breadth and Sexual Division of Labor in the Prearchaic Great Basin." World Archaeology 34: 103-130.

Euler, Robert C. 1966. "Southern Paiute Ethnohistory." Glen Canyon Series 28. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 78. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Evans, Georgene Cahoon. n.d. "The Cotton Mission." Utah History Encyclopedia. Accessed October 21, 2011. http://www.media/utah.edu/UHE/c/COTTONMISSION.html.

Ezzo, Joseph A. 1995. "A Class I Cultural Resources Survey for the Southern Nevada Water Authority Treatment and Transmission Facility, Clark County, Nevada." Statistical Research Technical Series No. 55. Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson.

Ezzo, Joseph A. 1996. "A Class I Cultural Resources Survey of the Moapa and Virgin Valleys, Clark County, Nevada." Statistical Research. Misc. 72.

Fenton, R. N. 1869. "Letter to E.S. Parker, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, dated 10/14/1869, St. Thomas." Report of the Secretary of Interior, 2nd Session, 41st Congress, 1869-1870.

Ferraro, David, and Robert Ellis. 1982. "The Survey and Mitigation of Thirteen Archaeological Sites Within the Las Vegas Wash Project." ARC Report 1-3-13. Archaeological Research Center, Museum of Natural History, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Fleming, L. A. 1967. "The Settlements on the Muddy, 1865-1871: A God Forsaken Place." Utah Historical Quarterly 35(2): 147-172.

Fowler, Catherine S., and Don D. Fowler. 1971. "Anthropology of the Numa: John Wesley Powell’s Manuscripts on the Numic Peoples of Western North American, 1868-1880." Smithsonian Contributions to archaeology 41.

Funding Universe. n.d. "Nevada Bell Telephone Company History." Accessed January 25, 2018. http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/nevada-bell-telephone-company-history/.

Gilbert, Thomas M., L. Dennis Jenkins, Aders Gotherstrom,, Nuria Naveran, Juan J. Sanchez,, Michael Hofreiter, Francis Phillip Thomsen, et al. 2008. "DNA from Pre-Clovis Human Coprolites in Oregon, North America." Vol. 320. Science.

Gilreath, Amy. 2009. "Gypsum Cave Revisited." Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Nevada Cultural Resources Report Number 5-2462-4A and B.

Goss, James A. 1977. "Linguistic Tools for the Great Basin Prehistorian. In Models and Great Basin Prehistory: A Symposium." Edited by D.D. Fowler. Publications in the Social Sciences No. 12. Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada.

xxx GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Grant, Tina. 1996. "International Directory of Company Histories." Vol. 14. St. James Press, Chicago, Illinois.

Hafen, LeRoy R., and Ann W. Hafen. 1954. "Journals of Forty-Niners: Salt Lake to Los Angeles: With Diaries and Contemporary Records of Sheldon Young, James S. Brown, Jocab Y. Stover, Charles C. Rich, Addison Pratt, Howard Egan, Henry W. Bigler, and Others." Edited by Arthur H. Clark. Glendale, California. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.32106000649969;view=1up;seq=12.

Harrington, Mark R. n.d. "The Valley of Fire, Clark County, Nevada." Ms. in Possession of the Braun Research Library, Southwest Museum, Los Angeles.

Harrington, Mark R. 1933. "Gypsum Cave, Nevada." Southwest Museum Papers 8. Los Angeles.

Hatzenbuehler, Lynn. 1992. "Examination of the Las Vegas Valley as Mojave/Patayan Territory." MS. On file, Community College of Southern Nevada. North Las Vegas.

Hayden, Irwin. 1930. "Mesa House." In Archaeological Explorations in Southern Nevada, pp. 26-92. Southwest Museum Papers No. 4. Los Angeles.

Haynes, Vance C. 2008. "Younger Dryas “black mats” and the Rancholabrean Termination in North America." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (18): 6520-6525.

Henley, Ruth W. 1929. "Catching Archaeology Alive." Southwest Museum Masterkey 2:23-27.

Hester, Thomas Roy. 1973. "Chronological Ordering of Great Basin Prehistory. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 17." University of California, Berkeley.

Hill, Matthew E., Jr. 2007. "A Moveable Feast: Variation in Faunal Resource Use Among Central and Western North American Paleoindian Sites." American Antiquity 72: 417-438.

Hohmann, John W. 1996. "The Old Las Vegas Mormon Fort: The Founding of a Desert Community in Clark County, Nevada." Studies in Western Archaeology, No. 4. Louis Berger & Associates, Las Vegas.

Holland, Jeffrey R. 2011. "Faith to Answer the Call, from a Regional Stake Conference Broadcast Address Delivered on September 12, 2010, at Brigham Young University." July.

Historical Research Associates (HRA), Inc., Conservation Archaeology, and Gnomon, Inc. 2012. "A Prehistoric Context for Southern Nevada, Archaeological Report No. 011-05." Edited by Heidi Roberts and Richard V. N. Ahlstrom.

Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada. 1976. "Nuwuvi: A Southern Paiute History." University of Utah Printing Service, Salt Lake City.

Jenkins, Dennis L. 2012. "Paisley Caves Yield 13,000-Year Old Western Stemmed Points, More Human Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)." Media Relations, University of Oregon Media Relations. http://uonews.uoregon.edu/archive/news-release/2012/7/paisley-caves-yield-13000-year-old- western-stemmed-points-more-human-dna.

xxxi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Jones, Florence Lee, and John F. Cahlan. 1975. "Water: A History of Las Vegas." Vol. I. Las Vegas Water District, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Keane, Melissa, and J. Simon Bruder. 2003. "Good Roads Everywhere: A History of Road Building in Arizona." Edited by A. E. Rogge. URS Cultural Resource Report 2003-28(AZ).

Kelly, Isabel T. 1934. "Southern Paiute Bands. American Anthropologist, New Series, Volume 36 (4): 548-560." Washington, D.C.

Kelly, Isabel T., and Catherine S. Fowler. 1986. "Southern Paiute. In Great Basin. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 11,." Edited by W. L. D’Azevedo and W. C. Sturtevant. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kelly, Michael S., James H. Cleland, Kathleen L. Hull, Alison J. MacDougall, and Paul Friedman. 1990. "Kern River Pipeline Cultural Resource Data Recovery Report: Nevada." Dames & Moore, San Diego. BLM Report 5-1985 A, B, C.

Kelly, Robert L. 1997. "Late Holocene Great Basin Prehistory." Journal of World Prehistory 11: 1-49.

Kleinsorge, Paul L. 1941. "The Boulder Canyon Project: Historical and Economic Aspects." Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Knack, Martha C. 2001. "Boundaries Between: The Southern Paiutes, 1775-1995." University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Kolvet, Corona Renee, and Victoria Ford. 2006. "The Civilian Conservation Corps in Nevada." University of Nevada Press, Reno, Nevada.

Kroeber, Alfred. 1925. "The Mohave. In Handbook of the Indians of California." Bureau of Ethnology Bulletin 78. Washington, D. C.

Kroeber, Alfred. 1953. "Handbook of the Indians of California." California Book Company, Ltd., Berkeley, California. Originally published in 1925 as Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 78. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Larson, Daniel O., and J. Michaelson. 1990. "Impacts of Climatic Variability and Population Growth on Virgin Branch Anasazi Cultural Developments." American Antiquity 55:227-249.

Las Vegas Age. n.d. "1905-1924 Las Vegas, Nevada." Microfilm and electronic archives on file at Lied Library, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Las Vegas Age. 1921. "New Highway Route to be Examined." Accessed January 29, 2011. http://digital.lvccld.org/lvage.html.

Las Vegas Age. 1922. "Wasatch Grading Co. Begins Work: Grading Outfit on the Ground – Camp Now Being Prepared for Building Force." Accessed April 22, 1922. http://digital.lvccld.org/lvage.html.

Leavitt, Robert M. 2001. "A Cultural Resources Survey in Coyote Springs Valley. K&LA Report 01- 0254." Knight & Leavitt.

xxxii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Leavitt, Robert M. 2005. "A Cultural Resource Survey of a 3700 Acre Parcel in Coyote Springs Valley during 2005 for Coyote Springs Investments and Nevada State Historic Preservation Office."

Leavitt, Robert M. 2007. "A Cultural Resource Survey of 22,370 Acres in Coyote Springs Valley During 2006. Knight & Leavitt Associates, Inc." Las Vegas, NV.

Lincoln, Francis Church. 1923. "Mining Districts and Mineral Resources of Nevada." Published by Stanley Paher, Nevada Publications, 1982.

Lindsey, Bill. 2015. Historic Glass identification and Information Website. Bureau of Land Management and Society for Historical Archaeology. http://bottleinfo.historicbottles.com/index.htm.

Longwell, C.R., E.H. Pampeyan, Ben Bowyer, and R.J. Roberts. 1965. "Geology and Mineral Deposits of Clark County, Nevada." Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Bulletin 62. Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno.

Luedtke, Barbara. 1992. "An Archaeologist’s Guide to Chert and Flint." Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Lyman, Edward Leo. 1991. "From the City of Angels to the City of Saints: The Struggle to Build a Railroad from Los Angeles to Salt Lake City. In California History." Vol. LXX (1): Spring 1991.

Lyman, Edward Leo. 1999. "The Arrowhead Trails Highway: Southern Nevada’s First Automobile Link to the Outside World. Nevada Historical Society Quarterly." Vols. 42, Number 4. 256-278.

Lyman, Edward Leo. 2004. "The Overland Journey from Utah to California: Wagon Travel from the City of Saints to the City of Angels." University of Nevada Press, Reno, Nevada.

Lyman, Edward Leo, and Larry Reese. 2001. "The Arduous Road: Salt Lake to Los Angeles, The Most Difficult Wagon Road in American History." Lyman Historical Research and Publishing Company, Victorville, California.

Lyman-Whitney, Susan. 1992. "The Muddy Mission." Desert News, January 30. Accessed October 21, 2011. http://deseretnews.com/articale/207275/THE-MUDDY-MISSION.html.

Lyneis, Margaret M. 1982. "An Archaeological Element for the Nevada State Historic Preservation Plan." Nevada Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology, Carson City.

Lyneis, Margaret M. 1990. "PII/PIII Change in Southwestern Utah, The Arizona Strip, and Southern Nevada." Manuscript of file, Crow Canyon Center, Cortez, Colorado.

Lyneis, Margaret M. 1992a. "The Main Ridge Community at Lost City: Virgin Anasazi Architecture, Ceramics, and Burials." University of Utah Anthropological Papers Number 117.

Lyneis, Margaret M. 1992b. "Social Complexity among the Virgin Anasazi." Kiva 57:197-212.

Lyneis, Margaret M.. 1995. "The Virgin Anasazi, Far Western Puebloans." Journal of World Prehistory 9:199-241.

xxxiii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Madrigal, Alexis C. 2011. "The First Transcontinental Call Was Made Today in 1915." The Atlantic. Accessed January 25, 2018. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/01/the-first- transcontinental-call-was-made-today-in-1915/70140/.

McBride, Terry, and Stanton D. Rolf. 2001. "Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Road Historic District." National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form.

McClintock, James H. 1921. "Mormon Settlement in Arizona: A Record of Peaceful Conquest of the Desert." Vol. Chapter 11: In the Virgin and Muddy Valleys. State of Arizona, Phoenix. 116-129. Accessed October 21, 2011. http://www.nevadaobserver.com/Reading%20Room%20Documents/early_mormon_settlements_i n_sout.htm.

McClintock, James H. 1985. "Mormon Settlement in Arizona." University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

McGuire, Thomas. 1983. "Walapai. In Handbook of North American Indians, Southwest, Volume 10." Edited by Alfonso Ortiz. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Moapa Band of Paiutes. n.d. "Moapa Band of Paiute Indians." Publication compiles by the Tribal Council. Accessed January 19, 2015. http://moapapaiutes.com/tribal_history.htm.

Moapa Band of Paiutes. 2014. Tribal History. Accessed January 19, 2015. http://moapapaiutes.com/tribal_history.htm.

Motor Age. 1917a. "L.A. – Salt Lake Records Broken, in Motor Age." May 15. 11. https://books.google.com/.

Motor West. 1917a. "The Arrowhead Trail – Utah’s Wonderful Route, in Motor West." September 1. https://books.google.com/.

Motor West. 1917b. "Arrowhead Trail from Los Angeles to Salt Lake, in Motor West." September 15. https://books.google.com/.

Myhrer, Keith. 1986. "Evidence for an Increasing Dependence on Agriculture during Virgin Anasazi Occupation in the Moapa Valley." Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada-Las Vegas.

Myhrer, Keith. 1989. "Basketmaker and Puebloan Occupation at the Steve Perkins Site, Moapa Valley, Southern Nevada." Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies Library Reference # A852. University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Myhrer, Keith, William G. White, and Stanton D. Rolf. 1990. "The Archaeology of the Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Wagon Road from Las Vegas, Nevada to the California Border." U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Nevada. Contributions to the Study of Cultural Resources, Technical Report 17.

Myrick, David. 1992. "Railroads of Nevada and Eastern California, Volume II-The Southern Roads." University of Nevada Press, Reno.

xxxiv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). 1933. "Official road map of Nevada." Accessed January 24, 2018. http://contentdm.library.unr.edu/cdm/ref/collection/hmaps/id/461.

NDOT. 1935. "Official road map of the state of Nevada (1935)." Accessed January 24, 2018. http://contentdm.library.unr.edu/cdm/ref/collection/hmaps/id/465.

NDOT. 1941. "Official road map of the state of Nevada (1941)." Accessed January 24, 2018. http://contentdm.library.unr.edu/cdm/ref/collection/hmaps/id/475.

NDOT. 1968. "Clark County Zone 2." Accessed December 14, 2017. https://www.nevadadot.com/home/showdocument?id=690.

NDOT. 2011. "Historic Maps." Accessed December 1, 2011. http://www.nevadadot.com/Traveler_Info/Maps/Historical_Maps.aspx.

Nevada Division of State Parks. 1969. "Valley of Fire State Park." Nevada Division of State Parks, Carson City.

Nevada State Parks. n.d. "History of Valley of Fire State Park." Accessed January 24, 2018. http://parks.nv.gov/learn/park-histories/valley-of-fire-history.

Olsen, Pat. 1986. "Historical Archaeology in a Rural Southern Nevada Community." Lost City Museum, Overton, NV.

Pacl, Eric John. 2012. "Valley of Fire Petroglyphs: A New Perspective on an Old Idea." UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. Accessed May 8, 2018. https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations/1604.

Paher, Stanley W. 1971. "Las Vegas: As it began – as it grew." Nevada Publications, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Perkins, R. F. 1967. "Clovis-Like Points in Southern Nevada." Nevada Archaeological Survey Reporter 1(9): 9-11.

Peterson, Richard H. 1971. "The Bonanza Kings: The Social Origins and Business Behavior of Western Mining Entrepreneurs, 1870-1900." University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Plog, Fred. 1979. "Prehistory: Western Anasazi. In Southwest. Handbook of North American Indians Volume 9: 108-130." Edited by Alfonso Ortiz. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Rafferty, Kevin. 1984. "On Common Ground: Las Vegas as a Cultural Frontier in Prehistory." Division of Anthropological Studies Report No. 2.5.10. Environmental Research Center, University of Nevada-Las Vegas. Submitted to Nevada Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology, Carson City.

Rafferty, Kevin. 1990. "Las Vegas Wash Revisited: A Cultural Resource Survey and Inventory of Property Owned by the Lake at Las Vegas Joint Venture, Henderson, Clark County, Nevada." Archaeological Paper No. 1. Clark County Community College, North Las Vegas.

Rafferty, Kevin. 2006. "Continuing Research in the Valley of Fire State Park, Clark County, Nevada by the Survey Field School of the Community College of Southern Nevada." Community College of

xxxv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Southern Nevada Archaeological Papers No. 5. Community College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas.

Rafferty, Kevin. 2008. "Through the Wash and Over the Rocks: Prehistoric and Historic Research by the Survey Field School of the College of Southern Nevada in Valley of Fire State Park, Clark County, Nevada." College of Southern Nevada Archaeological Papers No. 6. College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas.

Rafferty, Kevin. 2010. "A Small Rockshelter in the Valley of Fire State Park, Clark County." In-Situ 14(2):6-9.

Rafferty, Kevin. 2011. Personal Communication

Rafferty, Kevin, and Lynda Blair. 1988. "A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Proposed Utah Tie Line System in Clark and Lincoln Counties, Nevada. BLM Report No. 5-1571. HRC (DAS) Report 5- 4-11C."

Rand McNally & Company and State Farm Insurance Companies Travel Bureau. 1939. "Rand McNally Road Map: Nevada-Utah. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection." Accessed January 19, 2018. https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~258645~5522111.

Reno, Ron. 2010. "Milk Can Field Dating Guide." Unpublished document on file at Knight & Leavitt Associates, Inc.

Roberts, Heidi, and Richard V.N. Ahlstrom. 2000. "Fragile Past: Archaeological Investigations in Clark County Wetlands Park, Nevada. HRA, Inc. Archaeological Report No. 00-03, Las Vegas. Submitted to the Southern Nevada Water Authority, Las Vegas, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Boulder City, Nevada."

Roberts, Heidi, amd Richard V.N. Ahlstrom. "Coyote Named This Place Pakonapanti: Corn Creek National Register Archaeological District, Desert National Wildlife Refuge, Clark County, Nevada." Edited by Heidi Roberts, Elizabeth von Till Warren and Suzanne Eskenazi. HRA Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada.

Rogers, Malcolm J. 1929. "Report of an Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Mojave Sink. San Diego Museum Papers No. 1." San Diego Museum.

Rogers, Malcolm J. 1945. "An Outline of Yuman Prehistory." Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1: 167-198.

Roske, Ralph. 1982. "The Old Spanish Trail. Manuscript on file, History Department, University of Nevada, Las Vegas."

Royce, Charles C. 1899. "Indian Land Cessions in the United States. In 18th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1896-1897." Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D.C. 521-964.

Rucso, Mary, and Carmen Kuffner. 1981a. "Archaeological Investigations in Coyote Springs Valley, Lincoln and Clark Counties, Nevada." Nevada State Museum, Carson City.

xxxvi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Rucso, Mary, and Carmen Kuffner. 1981b. "Archaeological Investigations in Coyote Springs Valley, Lincoln and Clark Counties, Nevada: Survey of Alternate Operations Base." Nevada State Museum, Carson City.

Seymour, Gregory R. 1997. "A Reevaluation of Lower Colorado Buff Ware Ceramics: Redefining the Patayan in Southern Nevada." Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada-Las Vegas.

Shutler, Richard, Jr. 1961. "Lost City: Pueblo Grande de Nevada." The Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 5.

Shutler, Richard, Jr., Mary E. Shutler, and James S. Griffith. 1960. "Stuart Rockshelter: A Stratified Site in Southern Nevada." Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 3. Carson City.

Shutler, Richard, and Mary Elizabeth Shutler. 1962. "Archaeological Survey in Southern Nevada." Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 7. Carson City.

Signor, John R. 1998. The Los Angeles and Salt Lake Railroad Company: Union Pacific’s Historic Salt Lake Route. Golden West Books, San Marino, California.

Simonis, Don. 1997. "Condensed/Evaporated Milk Cans: Chronology for Dating Historical Sites." Bureau of Land Management, Kingman, Arizona.

Southwest Back Country. 2009. "Huntsman Cabin Ruins, NV." Accessed November 2011. http://southwestbackcountry.wordpress.com/2009/07/06/huntsman-cabin-ruins-nv/.

State Farm Insurance Companies Travel Bureau and Rand McNally & Company. 1940. "Rand McNally Road Map, Nevada-Utah. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection." Accessed January 19, 2018. https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~281144~5515464.

Steward, Julian H. 1929. "Petroglyphs of California and Adjoining States." University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 30(2). University of California, Berkley and Los Angeles.

Steward, Julian H. 1938. "Basin – Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups." Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 120. Washington, D. C.

Stewart, Kenneth. 1983. "Mohave. In Handbook of North American Indians, Southwest, Volume 10." Edited by Alfonso Ortiz. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Susia, Margaret L. 1964. "Tule Springs Archaeological Surface Survey." Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 12. Carson City, Nevada.

Swanson, Mark T. 1995. "Historical Period. In A Class I Cultural Resources for the Southern Nevada Water Authority Treatment and Transmission Facility, Clark County, Nevada." Edited by Joseph A. Ezzo. Technical Series No. 55. Statistical Research, Tucson, AZ. 75-127.

Thomas, David Hurst. 1981. "How to Classify the Projectile Points from Monitor Valley, Nevada." Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 7-43.

xxxvii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Thurston, Dorothy Dawn Frehner. 1994. "A River and a Road." Privately published in honor of Mesquite, Nevada’s Centennial.

Toulouse, Julian Harrison. 1971. "Bottle Makers and Their Marks." The Blackburn Press, Caldwell, New Jersey.

United States Department of the Interior (USDOI), Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2012. "Guidelines and Standards for Archaeological Inventory. Fifth Edition." BLM, Nevada State Office, January.

University of Oregon. 2012. "As Old as Clovis Sites, But Not Clovis: Paisley Caves, Oregon Yields Western Stemmed Points, More Human DNA." ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120712141916.htm.

Waddell, Albert Gill. 1916. "A Visit to Little Zion Canyon, Utah’s Scenic Wonder, in American Motorist." August. 7-11. https://books.google.com/.

Waddell, Albert Gill. 1917. "Easy Grades on Arrowhead Trail, Connects Lincoln and National Old Trails Routes, in Motor Age." January 25. 102-105. https://books.google.com/.

Wagner , Daniel P., and Joseph M. McAvoy. 2004. "Pedoarchaeology of Cactus Hill, a Sandy Paleoindian Site in Southeastern Virginia, U.S.A." Vol. 19. Geoarchaeology 19(4):297-322.

Walker, Henry P., and Don Bufkin. 1979. "Historical Atlas of Arizona." University of Oklahoma Press. Norman, Oklahoma.

Warner, Ted J., ed. 1976. "The Dominguez-Escalante Journal." Translated by Angelico Chavez. Brigham Young University Press, Provo, UT.

Warren, Claude N. 1980. "The Archaeology and Archaeological Resources of the Amargosa Mohave Basin Planning Units. In A Cultural Resources Overview of the Amargosa Mohave Basin Planning Units." Cultural Resource Publications in Anthropology and History, Bureau of Land Management, California. 1-34.

Warren, Claude N., and Robert H. Crabtree. 1986. "Prehistory of the Southwest Region." Handbook of North American Indians: Great Basin. Vol. 11. Edited by W.C. Sturtevant. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Warren, Claude N., Martha Knack, and Elizabeth van Till Warren. 1980. "The Archaeology and Archaeological Resources of the Amargosa Mohave Basin Planning Units. In A Cultural Resources Overview of the Amargosa Mohave Basin Planning Units." Cultural Resource Publications in Anthropology and History, Bureau of Land Management, California.

Warren, Claude, Kathleen Bergin, David Ferraro, and Kathryne Olson. 1978. "Archaeological Investigation at the Valley of Fire." Archaeological Research Center, Museum of Natural History, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Warren, Elizabeth von Till. 1974. "Armijo’s Trace Revisited: A New Interpretation of the Impact of the Antonio Armijo Route of 1829-1830 on the Development of the Old Spanish Trail." Unpublished Mater’s Thesis, Department of History, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

xxxviii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Cultural Resources Support Information

Waters, Michael R. 1982. "The Lowland Patayan Ceramic Tradition. In Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwestern Arizona." Edited by Randall H. McGuire and Michael B. Schiffer. Academic Press, New York.

Waters, Michael R., and Thomas W. Stafford, Jr. 2007. "Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas." Vol. 315. Science.

White, William. 1990. "A Window to the Past: Analysis of Flat Glass Recovered from West Point, Nevada." Master’s Thesis in Anthropology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Whitten, David. 2015. Glass Factory Marks on Bottles. http://www.glassbottlemarks.com/bottlemarks/

Wikipedia. 2011. "St. Thomas, Nevada." Accessed October 21, 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Thomas,_Nevada.

Williams, Pete A., and Robert I. Orlins. 1963. "The Corn Creek Dunes Site: A Dated Surface Site in Southern Nevada." Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 10. Carson City.

Willig, J. A., and C.M. Aikens. 1988. "The Clovis-Archaic Interface in Western North America. In Early Human Occupations in Far Western North America: The Clovis-Archaic Interface." Edited by C. M. Aikens and J. L. Fagan, pp 1-40 J. A. Willig. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 21. Nevada State Museum, Carson City.

Winslow, Diane L. 2004. "Logandale Trails Phase I Mitigation, Sites 26CK192 and 26CK194/1893, Clark County, Nevada." BLM Report No. 5-2491. HRC Report No. 1-1-42(3) A.

Winslow, Diane L. 2009. "MITIGATION Black Dog Mesa Archaeological Complex (26CK5686/BLM 53-7216) Volume III – Pithouse Excavations, Locus 4 and Volume IV – Conclusions and Research Questions Addressed." Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies Report No. 5-4- 26(3) and BLM Report No. 5-2430(3).

Winslow, Diane L., and Jeffrey L. Wedding. 2006. "A Class III Cultural Resource Investigation for Logandale Trails Phase 2, Clark County, Nevada." Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies Report Number 1-1-49, Bureau of Land Management Report Number 5-2522, Bureau of Reclamation Report Number LC-NV-05-04 P.

Winslow, Diane L., and Lynda M. Blair. 2003a. "MITIGATION Black Dog Mesa Archaeological Complex (26CK5686/BLM 53-7216) Volume I – History and Project Overview." Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies Report No. 5-4-26(1) and BLM Report No. 5-2430(1).

Winslow, Diane L., and Lynda M. Blair. 2003b. "MITIGATION Black Dog Mesa Archaeological Complex (26CK5686/BLM 53-7216) Volume II – Black Dog Cave." Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies Report No. 5-4-26(2) and BLM Report No. 5-2430(2).

Wright, Frank. 1981. "Clark County: The Changing Face of Southern Nevada." Nevada Historical Society.

xxxix APPENDIX G Best Management Practices

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Construction Best Management Practices

Table 1. General Construction BMPs

General Construction BMPs Minimize vegetation removal by limiting it only to areas of active construction

Recontour and revegetate Project roads that are no longer needed in order to increase infiltration and reduce soil compaction

Utilize originally excavated materials for backfill

Control Project vehicle and equipment speeds to reduce dust erosion

Control water runoff and directing it to settling or rapid infiltration basins

Retain sediment-laden waters from disturbed, active areas within the Project site through the use of barriers and sedimentation devices (e.g., berms, straw bales, sandbags, jute netting, or silt fences). Conduct periodic surveys of these areas and remove sediment from barriers and sedimentation devices to restore sediment-control capacity.

Place barriers and sedimentation devices around drainages and wetlands

Replant Project areas with native vegetation at spaced intervals to break up areas of exposed soil to reduce soil loss through wind erosion, where possible

Minimize land disturbance (including crossings) in natural drainage systems and groundwater recharge zones (i.e., ephemeral washes)

Locate and construct drainage crossing structures so as not to decrease channel stability or increase water volume or velocity

Avoid clearing and disturbing areas outside the construction zone

Conduct construction grading in compliance with industry practice (e.g., the American Society for Testing and Materials [ASTM] international standard methods) and other requirements (e.g., BLM and/or local grading and construction permits)

Use temporary stabilization devices (i.e., erosion matting blankets, or soil stabilizing agents) for areas that are not actively under construction

Minimize topsoil removal and disturbance to minimize weed invasions and to keep the soil seed bank in place. Where soils would otherwise be disturbed, salvage topsoil and store for restoration

Restore native plant communities as quickly as possible in areas temporarily disturbed during construction, through natural revegetation or by seeding and transplanting (using weed-free native grasses, forbs, and shrubs), based on BLM recommendations

Conduct inventory for non-native and noxious weeds prior to construction and throughout construction, treating weeds when they are found, and follow Integrated Weed Management Plan to minimize the spread of weeds during construction

Minimize soil-disturbing activities on wet soils

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Construction Best Management Practices

Table 2 Hazardous Material BMPs

Storage Practices and Special Handling Hazardous Material Precautions Gas and Diesel Fuel (for equipment) Would be managed in accordance with the Spill Response and Emergency Response Plan.

Lubricants Would be managed in accordance with the Spill Response and Emergency Response Plan.

Mineral Insulating Oil Used only in transformers; secondary containment for each transformer would be managed in accordance with the Spill Response and Emergency Response Plan.

Batteries, lead acid based and/or lithium ion Sufficient cooling capacity to maintain ambient temperatures appropriate for the selected battery would be provided.

Propane Would be managed in accordance with the Spill Response and Emergency Response Plan.

Herbicide; Pesticide No mixing would occur on site and no herbicides would be stored on-site.

Table 3 BMPs for Wastes Potentially Generated by the Project

BMP Disposal Waste Origin Composition Classification Method Scrap wood, steel, Construction Normal refuse Nonhazardous Recycle and/or glass, plastic, activities dispose of in paper industrial or municipal landfill

Scrap metals Construction Parts, containers Nonhazardous Recycle and/or activities dispose of in industrial or municipal landfill; wood pallets may be returned to vendor for re-use

Empty hazardous Operation and Drums, Hazardous and Containers <5 gal material maintenance of containers, totes nonhazardous would be containers facility solids disposed as normal refuse.

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Construction Best Management Practices

BMP Disposal Waste Origin Composition Classification Method Containers >5 gal would be returned to vendors for recycling or reconditioning.

Waste oil filters Construction Solids Used oil Recycle at a equipment and permitted vehicles Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility (TSDF)

Oily rags, oil Cleanup of small Hydrocarbons Used oil Recycle or sorbent spills dispose at a (excluding lube permitted TSDF oil flushes)

Spent lead acid Construction Heavy metals Hazardous Store no more batteries machinery than 10 batteries (up to 1 year); recycle off-site

Spent batteries Solar facility Lithium-ion Universal waste Recycle or equipment solids dispose off-site in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications at the time of disposal

Waste oil Equipment, Hydrocarbons Used oil Dispose at a vehicles permitted TSDF

Sanitary waste Portable toilet Solids and liquids Nonhazardous Remove by holding tanks liquid contracted sanitary service

iii APPENDIX H Mitigation, Monitoring, Reporting Measures

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM LU-1: Coordination with Transmission Line ROW Holders/Applicants The Applicant shall coordinate with transmission line right-of-way (ROW) holders/applicants Cooperative (e.g., TransWest Express, LLC, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, NV Energy) to Engineering identify potential conflicts between applicable transmission line and Project generation tie (gen- Coordinate with Agreement Prior to Verified by: tie) lines. The Applicant shall incorporate gen-tie facility adjustments into final design and Section 3.1 Gen-tie routes transmission line Applicant construction engineering plans to avoid any conflicts, such as adjusting the locations or heights of conductor owners/applicants Final Date: and support structures including towers, and shall schedule construction activities with the Engineering appropriate ROW holder/applicant (e.g., TransWest Express, LLC, NV Energy, and LS Power) Design in overlapping ROW areas to minimize disruption of construction activities.

MM LU-2: Coordination with CenturyLink The northern gen-tie route Prior to construction within the ROW, the Applicant shall coordinate with CenturyLink to Coordinate with Prior to Verified by: Section 3.1 parallel to Applicant None identify the location of any underground cables to ensure the cables are not inadvertently CenturyLink construction damaged during construction of the gen-tie lines. Interstate 15 (I- Date: 15)

MM REC-1: Old Spanish Trail Road and Route 167 Reroute Old Spanish Trail Old Spanish Trail Road shall be rerouted south of development area D, utilizing the California Road at Wash, Arrowhead Trail, or Route 167 up to where those routes meet Valley of Fire Road. The Sections 3.2 and intersections with Prior to Verified by: Applicant shall provide Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-approved signage at Old Spanish Post signage Applicant None 3.14 California Wash, construction Date: Trail Road and Route 167 indicating the detour for recreational access (non-off-highway vehicle Arrowhead Trail, [OHV]), which is primarily to California Wash or the Arrowhead Trail. and Route 167

MM GS-1: Operation and Maintenance Erosion Control The following methods shall be implemented to minimize effects on Project infrastructure from on-site erosion prior to and during Project operation:

• During final Project design, the Applicant’s engineer shall assess the need for erosion Final control and bank stabilization devices to be installed in and around on-site and off-site Install erosion Engineering Sections 3.3, washes and include recommended stabilization in the final design to be submitted to the control devices Design Prior to and Verified by: BLM, prior to issuance of the Notice to Proceed (NTP). Devices could include riprap 3.5, 3.6, and All Project areas Contractor Inspect Project site Routine during operation Date: lining of wash banks to direct flows and protect banks. The Applicant shall obtain 3.12 for erosion Inspection appropriate permits, as needed. Reports • The facility operator shall perform routine site inspections to identify and repair areas of erosion, such as deep rills and gullies in the panel arrays and along the gen-tie access routes, and shall maintain, change, or add additional erosion control features if needed (in accordance with required permits).

i

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM PR-1: Preparation and Implementation of a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan Prior to construction, a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP) shall be prepared by a qualified professional paleontologist and approved by the BLM. It shall be implemented during construction and operation and maintenance (O&M) of the Project. It shall include the following details:

• A description of a worker training program. The worker environmental awareness plan (WEAP) training program shall be prepared and provided by a BLM-approved professional paleontologist. The WEAP training shall focus on the recognition of the types of paleontological resources that could be encountered within the Project site, and the procedures to be followed if scientifically significant fossils are discovered. The WEAP training shall be reviewed and approved by the BLM prior to the issuance of a Notice to Proceed. • Detailed procedures for monitoring during construction. Based on the results of the field survey and in accordance with the BLM’s paleontological resource management policies, monitoring by a BLM-approved professional paleontologist shall occur in all areas were excavations have a moderate potential to disturb paleontological resources Prepare PRMMP (i.e., are with a Potential Fossil Yield Classification [PFYC] 3). Areas of unknown PRMMP and obtain Prepare and Qualified paleontological potential (PFYC U) shall be initially monitored to determine their curation implement a professional Curation thicknesses and to better refine their paleontological classification. If these geologic units agreement prior Verified by: PRMMP paleontologist agreements are determined to have a low paleontological potential (PFYC 2), then the level of Section 3.4 All Project areas to construction paleontological mitigation and monitoring can be reduced at the discretion of the Date: Obtain curation BLM qualified professional paleontologist in cooperation with the BLM. Areas mapped as Monitoring Implement agreements Contractor Holocene-age young alluvium (Qa) and artificial fill (af), which have low paleontological reports PRMMP during potential (PFYC 2), shall be spot-checked during excavations that exceed depths of 3 feet construction (0.9 meter) to check for underlying, paleontologically sensitive geologic deposits. If older, native deposits are observed, full-time monitoring shall be implemented in those areas. If it is determined that only PFYC 2 areas (i.e., Holocene-age alluvium or artificial fill) would be affected, the monitoring program at these areas shall be reduced or suspended. • Fossil discovery. Upon discovery of fossils, work shall be halted at the fossil site until the qualified paleontologist can determine the significance of the find and, if significant, make site-specific recommendations for collection or other resource protection. The area of the discovery shall be protected to ensure that the fossils are not removed, handled, altered, or damaged until the site is properly evaluated and further action determined. • Fossil recovery, laboratory analysis, and museum curation. All scientifically significant fossils salvaged during construction monitoring shall be prepared to the point of curation, identified to the element and the lowest taxonomic level, and transferred to the Las Vegas Natural History Museum or other accredited repository for which a curation agreement was obtained, for permanent storage. A curation agreement with Las Vegas National History Museum or another accredited repository approved by BLM Southern Nevada District Office shall be obtained prior to the start of construction.

ii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM PR-2: Known Fossil Collection Location of Collect potentially potentially Qualified Report on Prior to construction, the potentially significant vertebrate ear bone fragment from an area significant vertebrate Prior to Verified by: Section 3.4 significant professional collection and mapped as intermediate-age sidestream alluvium shall be collected. Collection shall follow the ear bone fragment construction vertebrate ear paleontologist curation Date: procedures outlined in the PRMMP. and curate bone fragment

MM WR-1: Elevation of Solar Facilities in Floodplain Areas, Avoidance of Jurisdictional Drainages During final engineering design, the site hydrology shall be remodeled, considering the final configuration of solar development areas, solar features, and areas constructed via mowing versus traditional methods of development (under the Hybrid Alternative or All Mowing Alternative). Based on the outcome of the remodeling, solar panels and electrical equipment shall be elevated above the 100-year flood depth in the affected areas of development areas B and C, and foundations shall be designed to withstand scour.

The placement of fill material in jurisdictional drainages shall be allowed as necessary, with appropriate permits from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), in drainage crossings for access road and utility trench construction, for solar facility posts, and for the Hydrology installation of drainage facilities and bank stabilization measures. All other fill of jurisdictional Remodel Report drainages shall be avoided unless a justifiable reason is provided in the final engineering Verified by: drawings submitted to the BLM for approval and issuance of an NTP. If drainages need to be Sections 3.5 and Remodel site Qualified Prior to All Project areas Final filled and rerouted, such as for traditional methods of construction in the lower part of 3.6 hydrology hydrologist construction Date: Engineering development area D where jurisdictional drainages are extensive, justification for the fill and Design rerouting must be provided in the final engineering drawings subject to BLM (and USACE) approval. Drainages shall not be filled and rerouted in the traditional development areas of the Hybrid Alternative. Under the Hybrid and All Mowing Alternatives, fill of jurisdictional drainages shall only be allowed where needed for access road and utility trench construction, for solar facility posts, and for drainage facilities and bank stabilization, and other rare and justifiable circumstances. Gen-tie access roads shall be constructed to avoid the placement of fill in jurisdictional washes, unless unavoidable.

During site preparation, jurisdictional drainages to be avoided in areas of traditional development shall be flagged or fenced at their top-off bank to ensure that when vegetation is removed during disking and rolling, no material is filled into these drainages. Flagging shall be removed after site preparation.

MM WR-2: Stormwater Quality Monitoring Program A Stormwater Quality Monitoring Program shall be prepared and submitted to the BLM for Stormwater approval. The program shall specify the testing procedures for stormwater quality, frequency, Quality Use BLM-approved constituents tested, and reporting requirements, including the agencies to which the results must Qualified Monitoring dust palliatives During Verified by: be reported. The program shall also include requirements for modifications in construction or hydrologist Program operation methods if water quality impacts are detected. On-site ponds used for construction Section 3.5 All Project areas construction and Test stormwater Date: water shall be designed with appropriate freeboard and/or spillways and flow dissipation to BLM operation quality periodically Monitoring ensure that water is held or properly discharged during a storm event, without causing excessive reports sedimentation.

Only BLM-approved dust palliatives shall be used during Project construction and operation.

iii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance The Stormwater Quality Monitoring Program shall also require periodic testing of stormwater quality to verify that water quality impacts are not occurring from use of the dust palliative. If water quality impacts are found during monitoring, the monitoring program shall require modification to the palliative use in consultation with the BLM, which could include installation of fencing, changes to the application rate of the palliative, or other means to minimize effects.

MM WR-3: Groundwater Pumping Meter and Development of a Groundwater Monitoring and Reporting Plan A water flow meter shall be installed at the on-site well, if water is supplied via this source option, to monitor the quantity of groundwater pumped. The total quantity of groundwater pumped throughout the duration of construction shall not exceed 2,000 acre-feet (247 hectare- Install water flow meters). Annual water usage during operation shall not exceed 20 acre-feet (2.5 hectare-meters). Contractor GRMP Prior to and On-site well in meter at the on-site Annual reports logging the quantity of water pumped shall be retained at the O&M building and during Verified by: Section 3.5 development area well available upon agency request. Qualified Monitoring construction and B Date: hydrologist reports operation A Groundwater Monitoring and Reporting Plan (GMRP) shall also be prepared for the Project. Develop GMRP The GMRP shall provide the methods and requirements for documenting pre-construction baseline groundwater conditions, guiding groundwater monitoring and reporting, and documenting groundwater use. The GMRP shall include performance criteria for groundwater impacts and shall include provisions to reduce pumping, if needed.

MM VG-1: Requirements of the Site Restoration Plan and Integrated Weed Management Plan The Site Restoration Plan and Integrated Weed Management Plan shall include the following requirements, at a minimum:

• Vegetation – For the Hybrid and All Mowing Alternative, four long-term vegetation monitoring plots shall be set up within the Project area (three in developed areas and a fourth in a mowed, undeveloped area ) to measure change and recovery in vegetation within Site Restoration the Project site. These test plots shall provide information about habitat recovery for Plan the Mojave desert tortoise. Development of this monitoring shall be in coordination Prepare and BLM-approved Integrated Weed Prior to, during, with the BLM, which shall be involved in setting up monitoring design and criteria implement the Site Sections 3.6, qualified Management and after Verified by: for these plots. All Project areas Restoration Plan and 3.7, 3.8 and 3.10 biologist/ Plan construction and Integrated Weed Date: – Monitoring for vegetation change in the mowed areas shall be bonded to ensure botanist decommissioning Management Plan adherence to this monitoring stipulation. Monitoring – Reporting for vegetation monitoring shall be submitted by July 1 of each year. reports • Weeds – A PUP shall be completed and signed prior to the Notice to Proceed being issued. – The Applicant is responsible for treatment and control of all non-native and noxious weeds for the lifetime of their ROW and until all restoration/decommissioning standards have been met. Specific control measures shall be identified in an Integrated Weed Management Plan. – The contractor used for weed treatments shall be familiar with Mojave Desert vegetation to the extent that they are able to identify habitat for, and identify plant

iv

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance material belonging to, the sensitive plant species within the Project area. The person(s) knowledgeable about Mojave Desert vegetation shall be present at all times while the weed contractors are on site. This weed contractor shall be approved in advance by the BLM. As an alternative, weed crews shall be accompanied during all surveys and treatments by a BLM-approved botanist. – Vector areas, including along roadways, shall be cleared (through biological and/or chemical control) of any weed species that have or shall have seeds present, prior to ground disturbance. – Sensitive habitats, including high-density desert tortoise habitat and threecorner milkvetch habitat, shall be cleared (through biological and/or chemical control) of any non-native and noxious weed species that has or shall have seeds present, prior to ground disturbance. – Flagging or another indicator shall be used to distinguish threecorner milkvetch habitat from adjacent tortoise habitat to assist in identifying the herbicides used in which areas. The color scheme or other indicator shall be taught to all personnel on site during WEAP training. – A BLM-approved botanist shall conduct regular surveys for weed species throughout construction and O&M. Surveys shall be conducted when weed species are detectable but before they are anticipated to have gone to seed. – Any new weed species discovered on site shall be reported immediately (within 2 days) to BLM. A specimen shall be taken and submitted to the University of Nevada, Las Vegas herbarium (and if two specimens are available, to the University of Nevada, Reno herbarium). If there is more than one plant, all other plants and plant parts shall be treated or removed from the site and disposed of appropriately. – The Applicant is responsible for the complete treatment and eradication of any new weeds that are introduced, or existing weeds that spread to new areas as a result (as far as can be reasonably determined) of Project activities during construction, restoration of temporary disturbance, and O&M. The Applicant is also responsible for treating and eradicating weeds in this category that spread onto adjacent BLM lands. – All weeds shall be treated before they go to seed. If any weeds are discovered that are beginning to go to seed before they have been treated, they shall be hand-pulled, bagged in a puncture-proof bag or container, and disposed of in an enclosed, off-site trash receptacle. – Monitoring shall be conducted during appropriate seasons throughout the year (this shall require multiple site visits per month in different seasons when weeds are emerging). – Reporting shall be conducted biannually during construction, restoration of temporary disturbance areas, and during the first 3 years of O&M. This monitoring shall be compiled into an annual report that details all dates when monitoring occurred; the dates of all weed treatments; the number and types of weeds found; if any new weeds were located; and the amount, types, and locations of herbicides used (in accordance with the PUP). Reporting shall be submitted to the BLM on or before December 31 of each year. During years when biannual reporting is required,

v

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance reports shall also be submitted on or before July 1 (to document that spring surveys and treatments for weeds took place). – Weed vectors (roads, transmission lines, etc.) associated with the Project shall also be monitored and treated according to the Integrated Weed Management Plan. – The Applicant shall be required to bond for the estimated cost of weed treatment per acre for the 30-year ROW period. If any part of the Integrated Weed Management Plan is not being followed or adhered to during any year, the bonded portion of weed treatment for that year shall not be returned and shall be used to treat weeds adjacent to the Project area. – Only certified weed-free materials shall be used during construction, restoration, and O&M. This includes gravel, seed mixes, and any waddles or other erosion control devices. – Prevention measures shall be implemented, including WEAP training and vehicle and equipment cleaning protocols (as described in the Integrated Weed Management Plan) as well as construction reporting. • Cacti and Yucca – If the Proposed Action is selected, a specific plan for use of cacti and yucca would be developed by the BLM to attempt to salvage the maximum number of cacti and yucca possible. All other measures herein are based on the All Mowing Alternative or Hybrid Alternative. – All cacti and yucca within permanent disturbance areas (i.e., such as roads, battery storage areas, and transmission line towers) shall be salvaged and transplanted in a natural pattern within the mowed areas. More details shall be included in the Site Restoration Plan. – Within sensitive plant habitat, where drive and crush methods would be used with the Hybrid Alternative, cacti and yucca shall be avoided when possible. If they are unavoidable, they may be cut down (cacti) or ground down (yucca) to a height of no less than 6 inches (15 centimeters) (excepting small cacti or barrel cacti – these shall be left in place). Cut or ground materials from cacti and yucca shall be left on site where they fall. Regeneration of cacti and yucca in these areas shall be allowed to occur. – Within mowed areas, cacti and yucca shall be cut down (cacti) or ground down (yucca) to a height of no less than 16 inches (41 centimeters). Cut or ground materials from cacti and yucca shall be left on site where they fall. Smaller cacti or yucca (already under 16 inches [41 centimeters]) shall not be cut. Cacti and yucca shall be flagged and avoided during construction as much as possible. Flagging shall be removed after construction. More details shall be provided in the Site Restoration Plan. The designated botanist is responsible for flagging and monitoring cacti and yucca during construction. – Barrel cacti shall not be reduced in height even if they are over 16 inches (41 centimeters). Barrel cacti shall be avoided during construction. – Some cacti and yucca may be salvaged and held in an onsite nursery to be transplanted back into the site after construction. This shall be identified in the Site Restoration Plan in order to provide additional habitat structure for the Mojave Desert tortoise under the All Mowing Alternative or Hybrid Alternative.

vi

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance – The designated botanist shall submit a report to the BLM after construction with the numbers of cacti and yucca damaged by construction activities. • Desert Pavement and Biological Soil Crust – If the Proposed Action is selected, measures to protect or store biocrust shall be identified in the Site Restoration Plan.

• General Restoration – The Applicant shall develop and bond for a Site Restoration Plan based on BLM’s restoration template. – The Applicant shall develop and bond for an Integrated Weed Management Plan. – The Applicant shall develop and bond for a site Decommissioning Plan, which shall incorporate BLM’s restoration template and include future BMPs.

MM VG-2: Threecorner Milkvetch and Other Special Status Plants • The Applicant is required to submit a permit application for take of plants or disturbance of a management area from the Nevada Division of Forestry. There shall be no disturbance (i.e., any sort of construction) in modeled habitat for threecorner milkvetch unless a final permit from the Nevada Division of Forestry is obtained. • Seed collection of threecorner milkvetch seeds shall take place in development areas C, D, and E prior to ground disturbance of that habitat. Seed shall be collected from any species that emerge in the spring prior to planned disturbance. Disturbance of sensitive plant habitat cannot commence before seed collection from plants has occurred. Seed collection shall be contracted by the Applicant to a BLM-approved botanic garden with staff experience with conservation seed collections of sensitive species. The botanic garden shall be contracted by the Applicant to store the seed for the 30-year period of the ROW. If the ROW is renewed, the contract shall be extended as long as the Project is Implement ongoing to preserve the seed. The seed shall be used on habitat within the Project site Prior to, during, Modeled habitat threecorner BLM-approved after decommissioning takes place. Monitoring and after Verified by: Section 3.6 for threecorner milkvetch seed botanist • The Applicant shall bond for the cost of seed collection and seed storage by an approved reports construction and milkvetch collection and weed Date: botanic garden. The bond shall be returned when these stipulations have been Applicant decommissioning successfully completed. control measures • There shall be no disk and roll in development areas C, D, and E under the Hybrid Alternative. These areas shall be developed using drive and crush methods to preserve the sandy soils where habitat for threecorner milkvetch occurs. This approach shall help to mitigate for spread of noxious and non-native weeds and has the best chance of preserving some semblance of habitat for this species. Where the drive and crush method is used, vegetation shall be allowed to regrow to a minimum height of 12 inches (31 centimeters) after construction. • A designated, BLM-approved botanist shall be on site during construction and restoration of temporary disturbance areas to monitor sensitive plant habitats and to ensure compliance with these stipulations. • All Sahara mustard shall be removed from modeled threecorner milkvetch habitat prior to construction.

vii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance • Sahara mustard shall be removed annually, before it has gone to seed, from all modeled habitat for threecorner milkvetch. Multiple treatments shall likely be necessary to remove different cohorts of Sahara mustard. All other pre-existing weed species shall be kept below densities found on the Project site pre-disturbance. • Herbicide treatment would be completed in threecorner milkvetch habitat and in Nye milkvetch habitat prior to March 15 to avoid non-target impacts to sensitive plant species. After March 15, only hand-pulling of weeds in any sensitive milkvetch habitat is permitted. • There shall be no use of aminopyralid within modeled habitat for threecorner milkvetch or within 656 feet (200 meters) of any modeled habitat. There shall be no use of aminopyralid within habitat for Nye milkvetch (as determined by pre-project surveys). • Annual monitoring for threecorner milkvetch (using BLM-approved protocol) within the impacted population group by a BLM-approved botanist is required. Monitoring shall determine the number of threecorner milkvetch plants that emerge each year, including the reproductive success of those plants. Monitoring shall determine if weeds are spreading as a result of Project-related activities, and if and how weed spread is impacting sensitive plant populations. This monitoring shall be summarized in an annual report to BLM, due by July 1 of each year. • The Applicant shall bond for the cost of monitoring threecorner milkvetch in the impacted population group for the 30-year ROW. If each successive year monitoring is performed and the report is submitted by the deadline, that year’s bond amount shall be returned. If monitoring and reporting are not completed, that bond amount shall be used by BLM to fund monitoring of threecorner milkvetch. • WEAP training shall include information on habitat for all sensitive species, including how that habitat is marked on the ground (flagging, flagging color, etc.) in order for contractors to follow appropriate avoidance and weed treatment stipulations.

MM VG-3: Drainage Protection • The Applicant shall comply with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act permit requirements from the USACE, based on actual Project impacts on ephemeral dry wash jurisdictional features (depending upon the selected alternative and direct Project impacts). • Road building, construction activities and vegetation clearing within ephemeral drainages Section 404 of shall be minimized to the extent feasible. Compliance with the Clean Water Section 404 of the Act (individual • The Applicant shall not allow water containing mud, silt, or other pollutants from Applicant During Verified by: Section 3.6 All Project areas Clean Water Act permit) grading, aggregate washing, or other activities or any other substances that would be construction hazardous to vegetation or wildlife resources to enter ephemeral drainages or be placed in permit requirements Contractor Date: locations that may be subjected to high storm flows. from USACE Monitoring • Spoil sites shall not be located within 30 feet (9 meters) of the boundaries and drainages reports or in locations that may be subjected to high storm flows, where spoils might be washed back into drainages. • No equipment maintenance shall occur within 150 feet (46 meters) of any ephemeral drainage where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow.

viii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM WILD-1: Reduced Project Footprint The Applicant shall provide a revised Project footprint based on additional engineering design Revise to minimize that shall be reviewed and approved by the BLM prior to issuance of a Notice to Proceed for Final Sections 3.6, 3.7 Project footprint Applicant Prior to Verified by: construction. All disturbance areas shall be refined and designed to the minimum size needed to All Project areas engineering and 3.8 during final construction safely and legally operate the facility, including access roads. Justifications for disturbances, BLM design Date: such as access road widths, substrates, locations, and frequency, shall be provided upon BLM engineering request during review of the revised footprint.

MM WILD-2: Qualified Biologist The Applicant shall designate a USFWS-qualified biologist to be responsible for overseeing Applicant compliance with mitigation measures related to the protection of ecological resources Designate qualified Prior to and Verified by: throughout all Project phases, particularly in areas requiring avoidance or containing sensitive Section 3.7 and biologist Qualified Monitoring during biological resources, such as special status species and important habitats. Additional qualified All Project areas 3.8 biologist reports construction and Date: biological monitors may be required on site during all project phases, as determined by the On-site monitoring O&M authorizing federal agency, the USFWS, and appropriate state agencies. Qualified and USFWS Authorized Biologists shall be approved by USFWS.

MM WILD-3: Worker Environmental Awareness Program WEAP Training WEAP training shall include identification and protection of ecological resources (especially for Program Prior to and desert tortoise), including knowledge of mitigation measures required by federal, state, and local Section 3.7 and Develop and provide ongoing Verified by: agencies. Workers must be aware that only qualified biologists are permitted to handle listed N/A Contractor Sign-in sheets 3.8 WEAP training throughout Date: species according to specialized protocols approved by the USFWS. Workers shall not approach and record of construction wildlife for photographs or feed wildlife. training

MM WILD-4: Elimination of Wildlife Hiding Locations The number of areas where wildlife could hide or be trapped (e.g., open sheds, pits, uncovered basins, and laydown areas) shall be minimized. For example, an uncovered pipe that has been Contractor/ Section 3.7 and Minimize wildlife During Verified by: placed in a trench shall be capped at the end of each workday to prevent animals from entering All Project areas construction None 3.8 hiding locations construction the pipe. If a special status species is discovered inside a component, that component must not be personnel Date: moved or, if necessary, moved only to remove the animal from the path of activity, until the animal has escaped.

MM WILD-5: Elimination of Conflicts with Wildlife Access roads shall be appropriately constructed, improved, maintained, and provided with signs to minimize potential wildlife/vehicle collisions and facilitate wildlife movement through the Project area. Project vehicle speeds shall be limited in areas occupied by special status animal species. Appropriate speed limits shall be determined through coordination with federal and state Minimize conflicts Contractor/all Section 3.7 and During Verified by: resource management agencies. Traffic shall be required to stop to allow wildlife to cross roads. All Project areas with wildlife and construction None 3.8 construction Unless authorized, personnel shall not attempt to move live, injured, or dead wildlife off roads, construction vehicles personnel Date: ROWs, or the project site. Honking horns, revving engines, yelling, and excessive speed are inappropriate and considered a form of harassment. If traffic is being unreasonably delayed by wildlife in roads, personnel shall contact the project biologist and security, who shall take any necessary action.

ix

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM WILD-6: Fitting of Water Supply Ponds with Wildlife Protection Devices If any chemicals, as allowed in an approved PUP, are used in the construction water storage Construction ponds that are not bird or wildlife compatible or if injuries to birds occur due to increased Install exclusion During Verified by: flocking at the ponds, the ponds shall be fitted with exclusion devises such as floating balls or Section 3.7 water storage Contractor None devises, if needed construction Date: fencing. Textured material shall be placed on the bottom of the ponds to minimize the likelihood ponds of wildlife drowning.

MM WILD-7: Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy Requirements The Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy shall include a robust systematic monitoring and Preparation and Bird and Bat adaptive management plan to assist in avoiding and minimizing Project impacts on migratory implementation of Conservation Prior to and Qualified Verified by: birds. The monitoring shall include overall annual mortality, species composition, and spatial Section 3.7 All Project areas the Bird and Bat Strategy during differentiation based on established searcher efficiency and carcass persistence trials, being biologist Date: Conservation Monitoring construction established through other studies at solar facilities, at the site and shall be designed to account Strategy reports for seasonal differences and fatality events of rare species.

MM WILD-8: Nesting Bird Avoidance and Minimization Habitat-altering activities shall be avoided during bird breeding season to the extent possible, which generally occurs from February 15 through August 31. If a Project-related activity must Bird breeding occur during the breeding season, a qualified biologist shall survey the area for nests Avoidance of Verified by: Contractor/ season (typically immediately prior to commencing construction activities. The surveys shall include burrowing habitat-altering Section 3.7 All Project areas Qualified None February 15 and ground-nesting species in addition to those nesting in vegetation. If any active nests are activities during bird Date: biologist through August found, an appropriately-sized buffer area shall be established in coordination with the BLM and breeding season maintained until the young birds fledge. This buffer shall be required to connect to another 1) suitable undisturbed habitat. The above dates are a general guideline, and any active nests observed outside of this range shall also be avoided.

MM T&E-1: Dust Palliative Study Funding In accordance with MM AQ-1, the Applicant shall contribute funds to a BLM study to Contribute funds to During Verified by: understand the effects of dust palliatives mobilized in stormwater runoff on the health of desert Section 3.8 N/A Applicant None the BLM construction Date: tortoises.

MM AQ-1: Emissions Controls The Dust Control and Air Quality Plan shall include, at a minimum, the following fugitive dust and equipment controls to minimize emissions:

• Use equipment that meets emissions standards specified in the state code of regulations Dust Control and Air Quality and meets the applicable United States Environmental Protection Agency Tier 3 and Tier Sections 3.3, Implement the Dust Contractor/all During Verified by: 4 emissions requirements. 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, All Project areas Control and Air construction Plan construction and Date: • Incorporate multiple methods for dust suppression (i.e., water, gravel, and/or regulation- 3.10, and 3.17 Quality Plan personnel Monitoring decommissioning compliant palliatives) on unpaved, disturbed areas where no natural vegetation occurs. reports • Install a gravel apron to reduce mud/dirt trackout from unpaved truck exit routes. • Install pipe-grid trackout-control device to reduce mud/dirt trackout from unpaved truck exit routes.

x

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance • Construct three-sided enclosures for storage piles. • Water the storage piles or otherwise applying a cover when wind events are declared. • Consider surfacing access roads with aggregate that is hard enough that vehicles cannot crush it, where necessary to reduce substantial wind erosion. • Manage unpaved roads, disturbed areas (e.g., areas of scraping, excavation, backfilling, grading, and compacting), and loose materials generated during Project activities as frequently as necessary to effectively minimize fugitive dust generation. • Use machinery that has air-emission-control devices as required by federal, state, and local regulations or ordinances. • Limit travel to stabilized roads. • Consider paving the main access road to the main power block and the main maintenance building. • Enforce posted speed limits (e.g., 10 miles per hour [16 kilometers per hour]) within the construction site to minimize airborne fugitive dust. • Cover vehicles that transport loose materials as they travel on public roads, using dust suppressants on truck loads, and keeping loads below the freeboard of the truck bed. • Install wind fences around disturbed areas that could affect the area beyond the site boundaries (e.g., nearby residences). • Suspend soil disturbance activities and travel on unpaved roads during periods of high winds. Site-specific wind speed thresholds shall be determined on the basis of soil properties determined during site characterization. • To the extent practicable, avoid chemical dust suppressants that emit volatile organic compounds within or near ozone nonattainment areas. • Consider use of ultra-low-sulfur diesel with a sulfur content of 15 parts per million or less for project vehicles. • Limit the idling time of equipment to no more than 5 minutes, unless idling must be maintained for proper operation (e.g., drilling, hoisting, and trenching). • Access transmission lines from designated routes to minimize fugitive dust emissions. • Minimize on-site vehicle use and require routine preventive maintenance, including tuneups to meet the manufacturer’s specifications, to ensure efficient combustion and minimal emissions. • Encourage the use of newer and cleaner equipment that meets more stringent emission controls. • Limit access to the construction site and staging areas to authorized vehicles only through the designated treated roads if too much dust is generated. • Stage construction to limit the areas exposed at any time. • Consider inspecting and cleaning tires of all construction-related vehicles to ensure they are free of dirt before they enter paved public roadways. • Cleanup visible trackout or runoff dirt on public roadways resulting from the construction site (e.g., street vacuum/sweeping). • Salvage topsoil from all excavations and construction activities during reclamation or

xi

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance interim reclamation and reapply to construction areas not needed for facility operation as soon as activities in that area have ceased. • Consider atmospheric conditions, such as wind level, when planning construction activities to minimize dust. • Incorporate environmental inspection and monitoring measures and other relevant plans to monitor and respond to air quality during construction, operations, and decommissioning, including adaptive management protocols.

MM VR-1: Visual Design Elements The Project shall incorporate the following design elements into the final engineering and receive approval from BLM prior to issuance of an NTP, to minimize moderate to strong visual contrast: • Vary the grid layout where appropriate to reduce contrast caused by long straight roads and array blocks. Employ an offset in the grid layout to reduce visual contrast caused by long straight roads and, to the greatest extent possible, arrays. The result shall be that no Implement visual Sections 3.1, Final road extends from one side of the solar field to the other in a straight line. design elements Prior to Verified by: 3.2, 3.10, and All Project areas Applicant engineering • Minimize perimeter clearing (maximum 20 feet [6 meters]) for patrol road (typically 20 during final construction 3.14 design Date: feet [6 meters]) inside and outside of the Project fence line with consideration of the local engineering fire regime. • Realign the gen-tie line that runs parallel to I-15 so it follows the northern project boundary in development area A and crosses I-15 at a perpendicular angle near the other gen-tie lines. • Reposition the O&M building so it is integrated into the solar facility and screened from view from Valley of Fire Road.

MM VR-2: Color and Surface Treatment The following color or surface treatments shall be applied to minimize moderate and strong visual contrast: • Apply colors from BLM’s Standard Environmental Colors chart, such as Shadow Gray and Covert Green, to Project structures and facilities including O&M facilities, rear surfaces of the collectors, frames, tracker structures, Power Conversion Station, and water tank facilities where most visible from public vantages (i.e., I-15 and Valley of Fire Road). The Project perimeter fencing shall be color treated along Valley of Fire Road Determine Applicant between development areas B and C (approximately 1.6 miles [2.6 kilometers]) to blend Sections 3.1, appropriate colors Final Prior to and Verified by: with the natural environment, such as through using a patina. Grouped structures shall be 3.2, 3.10, and All Project areas and color treat BLM engineering during treated with the same color and surfaces maintained when necessary. 3.14 Project’s structural design construction Date: Contractor • Apply rock stains or other color treatments appropriate with the surrounding landscape surfaces where necessary along off-site and internal access roads, graveled surfaces, areas permanently cleared of vegetation, off-site corridors for the collector system and gen-tie, and rock-lined berms or drainage facilities. • Select materials, coatings, and paints for the Project that have little to no specular or reflective qualities whenever possible. • Apply surface treatments or dulling agents to minimize substantial sources of reflected light from Project facilities. Substation equipment shall be treated with a low-reflectivity

xii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance neutral finish. Insulators at substations and on takeoff equipment shall be non-reflective and non-refractive. The surfaces of substation structures shall be given low-reflectivity finishes with neutral colors that contrast minimally with the surrounding landscape. Chain-link fences shall have a dulled, darkened finish to reduce contrast. • Maintain and repaint all color-treated surfaces intended to reduce contrast when color fades or flakes. Specific color and surface treatment shall be determined in conjunction with the BLM prior to issuance of the Record of Decision.

MM VR-3: Lighting Plan A Lighting Plan shall be prepared that details the proposed lighting design and demonstrates how impacts from artificial light at night shall be minimized during facility construction and operation. Lighting for facilities shall not exceed the minimum number of lights and brightness required for safety and security and shall not cause excessive reflected glare. Low-pressure sodium light sources shall be used to reduce light pollution. Full cutoff luminaires shall be used Applicant Prepare and to minimize uplighting. Lights shall be directed downward or toward the area to be illuminated. All Project areas Prior to Verified by: Section 3.10 implement Lighting Lighting Plan Light fixtures shall not spill light beyond the Project boundary. Lights in highly illuminated with lighting BLM construction Plan Date: areas that are not occupied on a continuous basis shall be equipped with switches, timer Contractor switches, or motion detectors so that the lights operate only when the area is occupied. Where feasible, vehicle-mounted lights shall be used for night maintenance activities. Where feasible and consistent with safety and security, lighting shall be kept off when not in use. The Lighting Plan shall include a process for promptly addressing and mitigating complaints about potential lighting impacts. Sections 3.1, Final All solar array Utilize anti-reflective Applicant During Verified by: MM VR-4: Anti-reflective Coating 3.2, 3.10, and engineering areas solar panels construction The solar panels installed for the Project shall be treated with anti-reflection coatings. 3.14 Contractor design Date:

MM VR-5: Visual Construction Elements Construction of the Project shall adhere to the following procedures to reduce adverse visual effects. These measures shall be incorporated into the final engineering design that must be approved by BLM prior to issuance of an NTP: • Delineate construction boundaries. • Minimize surface and vegetation disturbances. Existing rocks, vegetation, and drainage patterns shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible. Existing, native vegetation shall Include measures in Final Prior to and Sections 3.10 Applicant Verified by: be preserved to the greatest extent feasible. Where appropriate, the boundary of vegetated All Project areas the final engineering engineering during and 3.14 areas that are cleared shall be feathered to blend into the surrounding environment. design BLM design construction Date: • Contour graded areas to blend with the surrounding topography. • Control erosion and fugitive dust. • Contain and store construction wastes and debris away from well-traveled roadways. Following construction activities, all stakes and flagging shall be removed and disposed of. All waste and debris shall be disposed of in an appropriate off-site facility. • Discuss visual impact mitigation objectives and activities with equipment operators before beginning construction activities.

xiii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance

MM VR-6: Visual Decommissioning Elements Decommissioning of the Project shall adhere to the following procedures to reduce adverse visual effects:

• Incorporate visual objectives into Decommissioning Plan and Site Reclamation Plan. A Decommissioning Plan and Site Reclamation Plan shall be developed, approved by the BLM, and implemented. The plans shall require the removal of all aboveground and near- ground structures. Some structures can be removed only to a level below the ground surface that would allow reclamation/restoration. Topsoil from all decommissioning activities shall be salvaged and reapplied during final reclamation. The plans shall include provisions for monitoring and determining compliance with the Project’s visual mitigation and reclamation objectives. • Recontour and restore surfaces. Soil borrow areas, cut-and-fill slopes, berms, water bars, and other disturbed areas shall be contoured to approximate naturally occurring Include measures in Final slopes, thereby avoiding form and line contrasts with the existing landscapes. The the final Applicant Decommissionin Verified by: Section 3.10 All project areas Decommissioni surfaces shall be contoured to a rough texture (i.e., use large rocks/boulders, grade Decommissioning g BLM ng Plan Date: uneven surfaces, and/or use vegetation mulches/debris) in order to trap seed and to Plan discourage off-road travel, thereby reducing associated visual impacts. Rocks, brush, and vegetal debris shall be restored whenever possible to approximate preexisting visual conditions. • Topsoil. Stockpiled topsoil shall be reapplied to disturbed areas, and the areas shall be revegetated by using a mix of native species selected for visual compatibility with existing vegetation, where applicable, or by using a mix of native and non-native species, if necessary, to ensure successful revegetation. Gravel and other surface treatments shall be removed or buried. • Revegetation. The Project site shall be revegetated using a combination of seeding, planting nursery stock, and transplanting local vegetation within the proposed disturbance areas. Decommissioning activities shall be staged to enable direct transplanting. Where feasible, native vegetation shall be used for revegetation to establish a composition consistent with the form, line, color, and texture of the surrounding undisturbed landscape.

MM CR-1: Establishment of Environmental Exclusion Areas An Environmental Exclusion Area (EEA) shall be established around the known tribal cultural property (TCP) and recommended National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-eligible site in development area A and shall be marked for avoidance during Project construction. A minimum Applicant 100-foot (30-meter) exclusion area shall be established around the sites, which shall be clearly Known TCP and Delineate EEAs with During Final identified and maintained throughout construction to ensure that avoided sites are not Sections 3.12 recommended 100-foot buffer engineering Verified by: BLM engineering inadvertently affected. The EEA shall be clearly delineated in the field with temporary and 3.13 NRHP-eligible design and prior construction fencing and signs prohibiting movement of the fencing under the consequence of Remove EEAs from design Date: site the Project footprint Qualified to construction work stoppages or compensatory mitigation. The limits of the exclusion area may be extended, archaeologist or monitoring may be required, if requested by the Moapa Band of Paiutes during ongoing consultation. The EEA shall also be removed from the Project footprint during the engineering design of the Project, prior to construction, such that the area is outside the borders of the solar development facility. Approximately 29 acres (12 hectares) shall be removed from the Project in

xiv

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance development area A to fully avoid the site.

An EEA shall also be established encompassing any other known NRHP-eligible archaeological sites within 500 feet (152 meters) of the outer Project boundary and shall include a 100-foot (30- meter) buffer around any sites, as identified in the Class III archaeological surveys conducted between February 22 and July 23, 2018 (Knight & Leavitt Associates 2019). The EEA shall be clearly marked for avoidance in the field during Project construction (using the previously described methods for the EEA around the site in development area A).

MM CR-2: Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan Prior to construction, a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (CRMMP) shall be developed and implemented by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards and is approved by the BLM. It shall include the following details:

• Cultural Resource Training. Prior to ground-disturbing activities, the Applicant shall retain a BLM-qualified archaeologist, defined as one meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s qualification standards for archaeology and subject to approval by the BLM, to conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction personnel shall be informed of the avoidance areas for eligible archaeological sites, the importance of remaining only within the designated Project site development areas, of the types of cultural resources that may be encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources, including consequences for vandalism or theft. The Applicant shall ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and shall retain documentation demonstrating attendance. Designate qualified Applicant • Data Recovery and Preservation. The CRRMP shall also include procedures for All Project areas archaeologist Prior to and Sections 3.12, Verified by: preservation and/or data recovery of the NRHP-eligible sites in development areas C and and at any site BLM CRMMP during 3.13, and 3.14 Develop and B2 (if these areas are developed under an alternative), and preservation of the 5,843-foot discovery construction Date: (1,781-meter) length of the “California Crossing” of the Old Spanish Trail in implement a Qualified development area B. The BLM shall consult with appropriate Native American CRMMP archaeologist representatives in determining appropriate treatment for the prehistoric cultural resource sites. Archaeological materials recovered shall be curated at an accredited curational facility. The CRMMP shall include provisions for the reporting of monitoring activities and any treatment of resources in a timely manner. • Cultural Resource Discovery. The CRMMP shall detail procedures for halting construction, making appropriate notifications to agencies, officials, and tribes, and assessing NRHP-eligibility in the event that previously unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction. The CRMMP shall require that the contractor immediately cease all work activities in the area (within 100 feet [30 meters]) of the discovery until it can be evaluated by a BLM-qualified archaeologist. After cessation of excavation, the contractor shall immediately contact the BLM archaeologist. The contractor shall not resume work until authorization from the BLM is received. If the qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the BLM, determines that the discovery constitutes a historic property per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, preservation in place shall be the preferred manner of mitigation. In the event

xv

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible, the data recovery and preservation procedures outlined in the CRMMP shall be followed.

MM CR-3: Discovery of Human Remains If human remains or associated cultural items as defined by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act are discovered during construction, all work shall be halted in Contractor/all Halt work in the area construction the area of the discovery and the BLM-authorized officer shall be informed immediately. The of any human As required by personnel Verified by: BLM shall ensure that any Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, remains discovery BLM to During and/or objects of cultural patrimony discovered on BLM-administered lands during Section 3.12 All Project areas BLM document the construction Date: implementation of the Project shall be treated as unanticipated discoveries in accordance with Inform BLM- discovery the requirements of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Pub. L. 101- authorized officer Qualified 601) and 43 CFR Part 10. The preferred protection strategy shall be Project redesign to avoid archaeologist and protect inadvertent discoveries that contain human remains.

MM NHT-1: Contribution to the Old Spanish Trail Association Applicant-volunteered mitigation of a contribution in the amount of $25,000 shall be provided to the OSTA upon issuance of the Record of Decision. This contribution shall be used to substantially and materially support the goals of the OSTA to preserve the history of the Old Spanish Trail in the region and to promote the general education of that history. The contribution shall support the following OSTA initiatives: • Projects performed by Eagle Scouts and others to install markers, and in some cases replace markers, along the Old Spanish Trail. Markers shall consist of reinforced concrete monoliths with engraved lettering indicating "Old Spanish Trail" • Printing of copies of Harold Steiner's "The Old Spanish Trail Across the Mojave Desert" for distribution to the public, to raising awareness of the history of the trail Upon issuance of the Record of Verified by: • Preparation and publishing of a book describing the history of the Old Spanish Trail Contribute $25,000 to Applicant through Nevada, in cooperation with the Eagle Scouts, with the goal of placing the Section 3.14 N/A None Decision and the OSTA Date: book in all public school libraries in Clark County prior to construction • Procuring and placing Old Spanish Trail signage in urban areas in Clark County in cooperation with Clark County, NPS, and BLM • Identifying Native American rock art sites in Southern Nevada that include Old Spanish Trail-associated elements • Preparing a map of the Old Spanish Trail through Nevada for distribution at key locations, including state park and NPS visitor centers, state and local agency offices, and libraries • Preparing a brochure highlighting key OSTA activities and recognizing participants to help foster continued participation in OSTA preservation activities • Creating a diverse social media platform for the Nevada chapter of the OSTA

MM TRA-1: Traffic and Transportation Plan Measures Applicant Prepare and Traffic and Prior to and A Traffic and Transportation Plan shall be prepared for implementation during construction and Sections 3.1 and implement Traffic Verified by: All Project areas Contractor/all Transportation during operation of the Project. The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following information and 3.16 and Transportation construction Plan construction Date: measures: Plan personnel

xvi

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance • Identify traffic control measures needed, consistent with the requirements in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and specify the circumstances under which each is required. Traffic control measures may include escort vehicles for wide loads, signage, and flaggers. • Use static and variable message signs, as necessary, to inform drivers that there may be delays or trucks entering traffic due to construction. • Provide a breakdown of the number, type, capacity, and dimensions of the construction vehicles that would service the site. • Provide an estimate of the average daily or weekly number of vehicles per vehicle type during each major phase of the work. • Identify effective and safe routes for use by passenger/worker vehicles, delivery vehicles, and excavation and construction vehicles. • Enforce the chosen construction travel routes through contractor stipulations and conditions and periodic verification. • Identify a contact for complaints and indicate how complaints should be addressed. • Organize a carpool program that identifies the best location and time to coordinate carpools to the site for construction employees, and/or organize a shuttle to take workers from a centralized point in North Las Vegas to the Project site. • Inform the public via the radio, internet, or newspaper about key construction dates, especially those that could affect regional roadways.

MM TRA-2: Road Condition Assessment The Applicant shall conduct a pre-construction road condition assessment along the low-volume construction traffic routes (i.e., excluding highways) prior to construction. The pre-construction Conduct pre- and No less than 30 road condition assessment shall include photographs or a video recording. The Applicant shall post-construction Applicant Pre- and post- days prior to submit the pre-construction road condition assessment to Clark County Public Works no less Low-volume road condition construction Verified by: Contractor construction than 30 days prior to construction. Following construction, the Applicant shall conduct a post- Section 3.16 construction assessment road condition construction road condition assessment along Valley of Fire Road or other low-volume Date: traffic routes assessment Within 60 days roadways. If damage to roads occurs as a result of construction traffic, the Applicant shall Restore damaged Clark County report post-construction restore damaged roadways within 60 days after the completion of construction to a pre- roadways Public Works construction condition, based on the pre-construction road condition assessment, or to a condition agreed upon by the Applicant and the roadway owner.

MM PS-1: Health and Safety Plan Prepare and The Health and Safety Plan shall comply with all Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) implement Health Health and and Nevada-OSHA guidelines for the types of activities being performed. All personnel on site and Safety Plan, Safety Plan, Prior to during construction, operation, and decommissioning shall be trained and given access to including a Site Applicant including a Site construction appropriate OSHA and Nevada-OSHA guidelines, and a safety and compliance coordinator shall Evacuation Plan and Evacuation Plan Verified by: be assigned to the Project. The plan shall document worker safety practices and address health Section 3.17 All Project areas a Waste and Contractor/all and a Waste and During and safety issues associated with normal and unusual (emergency) conditions related to the high- Hazardous Materials construction Hazardous construction, Date: voltage systems, mechanical systems, and other solar plant operations. Personnel shall be Management Plan personnel Materials operation, and properly trained in the handling of relevant chemicals and wastes and instructed in the Management decommissioning procedures to follow in case of a chemical spill or accidental release. The plan shall include Conduct WEAP Plan procedures for grounding any conducting objects such as buildings, fences, and other metal training

xvii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance structures on the site. Grounding shall eliminate effects related to induced current and voltages on conductive objects sharing the ROW.

The plan shall also address the selection, transport, storage, and use of all hazardous materials needed for construction, operation, and decommissioning of the facility for local emergency response and public safety authorities, and shall address the characterization, on-site storage, recycling, and disposal or recycling of all resulting wastes, including batteries. The plan shall also include a Site Evacuation Plan that details the evacuation routes and plan for construction workers and Project personnel on site during an emergency. A Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Plan for operation shall also be prepared that identifies the anticipated waste streams; handling instructions for waste streams, including damaged or old batteries and panel waste; and how the wastes shall be managed in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and BLM policy.

MM PS-2: Oil and Gas Well Avoidance The Applicant shall verify the locations of the five oil and gas wells identified in the Project area Around the Identify and during the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. The oil and gas wells shall be demarcated for former oil and demarcate oil and gas Applicant Final Prior to and Verified by: avoidance during construction of the Project, unless the wells are adequately remediated and Section 3.17 gas wells in wells and show in engineering during Contractor Date: closed prior to construction. The avoidance area shall be a minimum of 100 feet (30.5 meters) development area final engineering design construction and shall be clearly delineated in the field with temporary construction fencing and signs. B design

MM PS-3: Fire Prevention and Safety Plan The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Fire Prevention and Safety Plan to ensure the safety of workers and the public during Project construction, O&M, and decommissioning Applicant activities. The Fire Prevention and Safety Plan shall be provided to the BLM for approval before Prepare and Prior to and the Applicant receives an NTP. The plan shall incorporate the use of appropriate fire protection implement Fire BLM Fire Prevention during Verified by: equipment, worker training, and consultation with local fire departments to identify appropriate Section 3.17 All Project areas Prevention and and Safety Plan construction and Date: protocols and procedures for fire prevention and early response to minor fires. The plan shall Safety Plan All construction O&M also address the following recommendations, with particular focus on suppressants for fires from personnel lithium-ion cells, including inert gas, carbon dioxide, and Halon and measures to protect batteries against thermal abuse:

xviii

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures

Application Implementation Responsible Deliverable/ Compliance Verification of Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Measures EIS Section Locations Procedure or Action Organization Report Schedule Compliance • Have a portable trailer-mounted water tank on site and available to workers at all times for use in extinguishing small human-caused fires. • Implement fire watches during hot work on site (e.g., welding, soldering, cutting, drilling, or grinding). • Prepare the implement a Fire Prevention and Safety Plan that incorporates the use of appropriate fire protection equipment, worker training, and consultation with local fire departments to identify appropriate protocols and procedures for fire prevention and early response to minor fires. The plan shall limit where smoking can occur to minimize chances of igniting a fire, and shall identify proper vehicle maintenance and use to minimize fire risks. • Store battery packs at reduced state-of-charge prior to and during construction to reduce the likelihood that crush, puncture, or external heating would lead to cell thermal runaway and a fire ignited by heated cell cases. • Ensure protocols are in place to quickly extinguish any transmission line breakages that could ignite a fire during construction. • Comply with fire restrictions when they are in effect (43 CFR 9212). Fire restrictions are generally enacted from May through October. Fire restriction orders are available for review at the BLM district offices and on the BLM website. • Practice standard fire prevention measures at all times. • Immediately report fires to 911 or (702) 631-2350 and make all accommodations to allow immediate safe entry for firefighting apparatus and personnel. • Conduct an Origin and Cause Investigation on any human-caused fire by BLM law enforcement or their designated representative. To minimize disturbance of potential evidence located at the fire scene, the Applicant shall properly handle and preserve evidence in coordination with the BLM. The BLM shall pursue cost recovery for all costs and damages incurred from human-caused fires on BLM lands when the responsible party(s) has been identified and evidence of legal liability or intent exists. Legal liability includes, but is not limited to, negligence and strict liability (including statutory and contractual liability) and products liability.

MM PS-4: Spill Prevention and Control Measures The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan to identify specific best management practices (BMPs) for managing hazardous materials and waste, including spill prevention, containment, and cleanup, proper handling of wastes, proper procedures for refueling and repairing vehicles, and waste management, among others. Prepare and Applicant Spill Prevention, Prior to and As a part of this plan, the Applicant shall: implement Spill BLM Control, and during Verified by: Section 3.17 All Project areas Prevention, Control, Countermeasure construction and • Supply the construction site with adequate spill containment kits and personal protective and Countermeasure Date: equipment in case of a release. All construction Plan O&M Plan personnel • Maintain construction equipment and maintenance trucks at all times to minimize leaks of motor oils, hydraulic fluids, and fuels. • Retain on-site safety data sheets for the hazardous materials that are expected to be used and/or stored on site.

xix

APPENDIX I References

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

References 174 Power Global. 2019. Our Projects - Techren Solar. Retrieved from https://174powerglobal.com/our- projects/

8minutenergy Renewables. 2018. 8minutenergy and Nevada (NV) Energy Announce Largest Solar Project Ever on Tribal Land. May 31. Accessed August 14, 2018. https://www.8minutenergy.com/2018/05/8minutenergy-nv-energy-announce-largest-solar- project-ever-tribal-land/.

99 Air Base Wing (ABW) Public Affairs. 2018. "Personal communication, Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, and 99 ABW Public Affairs." August 29.

Abella, Scott R., and Alice C. Newton. 2009. "A systematic review of species performance and treatment effectiveness for revegetation in the Mojave Desert, USA." In Arid Environments and Wind Erosion, by A. Fernandez-Bernal and M. A. De La Rosa, 45-74.

Anderson, D. C., and W. K. Ostler. 2002. "Revegetation of Degraded Lands at United States Department of Energy and United States Department of Defense Installations: Strategies and Successes." Arid Land Research and Management 197-212.

AECOM. 2012. National Historic Trails Inventory Project. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 Project, Department of the Interior.

Applied Analysis. 2019. "Gemini Solar Project Economic and Fiscal Impact Assessment." March.

Armantrout, Brok. 2017. "Location Map Copper Mountain Solar 5 Site ." October 4.

Barlow, Paul M, and Allen F Moench. 1999. "WTAQ-A Computer Program for Calculating Drawdowns and Estimating Hydraulic Properties for Confined and Water-Table Aquifers: United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4225."

Barneby, R.C. 1964. Altas of North American Astragalus. New York: New York Botanical Garden.

Beard, et. al. 2007. "Preliminary Geologic Map of the Lake Mead 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Clark County, Nevada, and Mohave County, Arizona: United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007- 1010." 109.

Beard, L. W., R. E. Anderson, D. L. Block, R. G. Bohannon, R. J. Brady, S. B. Castor, E. M. Duebendorfer. 2010. "Preliminary Geologic Map of the Lake Mead 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Clark County, Nevada, and Mohave County, Arizona." United States Geological Service (USGS).

Blazi, Jeffrey. 2018. "Personal communication via phone between Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, and Jeffrey Blazi, 99th Civil Engineer Squadron Neills Air Force Base." August 31.

Brean, Henry. 2018a. Coyote Springs Developer Envisioned Project Twice Summerlin's Size. June 23. Accessed August 14, 2018. https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/coyote-springs- developer-envisioned-project-twice-summerlins-size/.

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Brean, Henry. 2018b. Suit Filed After Water Official Blocks Coyote Springs Construction. June 23. Accessed August 14, 2018. https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/suit-filed-after- water-official-blocks-coyote-springs-construction/.

BrightSource Energy Inc. 2008. "SF-299 Application with Attachments." Oakland, CA, January 28.

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). 2013. "Moapa Solar Energy Center Environmental Impact Statement." August.

BIA. 2015. "Aiya Solar Project Environmental Impact Statement." May.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1986a. "Manual 8431 - Visual Resource Contrast Rating." January 17.

BLM. 1986b. "Manual H-8410-1 – Visual Resource Inventory." January 17

BLM. 1990. "Contributions to the Study of Cultural Resources, Technical Report 17." Archaeology of the Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Road from Las Vegas, Nevada to the California Border.

BLM. 1998. "Record of Decision for the Approved Las Vegas Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement." October.

BLM. 2000. "Instruction Memorandum No. 2001-030." November 8.

BLM. 2007. Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Land in 17 Western States. Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Washington: United States Department of the Interior.

BLM. 2008a. "Assessment and Mitigation of Potential Impacts to Paleontological Resources." Instruction Memorandum No. 2009-011.

BLM. 2008b. "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the UNEV Pipeline." November.

BLM. 2009. "Final Scoping Package: Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties." March 8. http://water.nv.gov/hearings/past/Spring%20Valley%202006/exhibits/SNWA/0__Overview/final _scoping_package.pdf.

BLM. 2010a. "Environmental Assessment for Apex Solar Power - 69kV Generation Tie Transmission Line Project." July.

BLM. 2010b. "Final Environmental Impact Statement for the ON Line Project." December.

BLM. 2010c. "National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Project Summary: DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2009- 1007-EA." March 18. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front- office/eplanning/projectSummary.do?methodName=renderDefaultProjectSummary&projectId=4 003.

BLM. 2010d. "NEPA Project Summary: DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2010-0184-EA (Silverstate Solar LLC)." August 08. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front- office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do?methodName=renderDefaultPlanOrProjectSite&projectI d=6504&dctmId=0b0003e88011ede8.

ii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

BLM. 2012a. "Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments/Record of Decision for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States." October.

BLM. 2012b. "Final Environmental Impact Statement for Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project." August.

BLM. 2013. "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for TransWest Express Transmission Project." June.

BLM. 2014a. "Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone (SEZ) Competitive Leasing." http://blmsolar.anl.gov/sez/nv/dry-lake/competitive-leasing/.

BLM. 2014b. "Environmental Assessment for Dry Lake Solar Energy Center Project." December.

BLM. 2014c. "Environmental Assessment for Harry Allen Solar Energy Center Project." December.

BLM. 2014d. "Environmental Assessment for Playa Solar Project." December.

BLM. 2014e. "Final Environmental Assessment for Southern Nevada Intertie Project." November.

BLM. 2014f. Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone, Technical Note 444. March.

BLM. 2015a. "Environmental Assessment for Dry Lake Solar Energy Center at Harry Allen Project." March.

BLM. 2016a. "Final Environmental Assessment for Eastern Nevada Transmission Project." May.

BLM. 2016b. "Potential Fossil Yield Classification System: BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2016- 124."

BLM. 2016c. Vegetation Treatments Using Aminopyralid, Fluroxypyr, and Rimsulfuron on Bureau of Land Management's Land in 17 Western States. Final EIS, Washington: United States Department of the Interior (DOI).

BLM. 2017. "BLM NV Designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Polygons GIS dataset." November 1.

BLM. 2018a. Environmental Impact Report Public Scoping Flyer for Yellow Pine Solar Project. June 26. Accessed August 14, 2018. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front- office/projects/nepa/81665/149519/183553/YPSP_Flyer_6.26.18_FINAL_red_(1).pdf.

BLM. 2018b. "NEPA Project Summary: DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2018-0013-DNA (Coyote Springs Mineral Material Sales Contract)." March 27. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front- office/eplanning/projectSummary.do?methodName=renderDefaultProjectSummary&projectId=9 4346.

BLM. 2018c. "Project Variance Request." Harry Allen to Eldorado 500 kV Transmission Line Desertlink, LLC. September.

BLM. 2018d. "Wild and Scenic Rivers Summary Table." January. Accessed March 1, 2018. https://www.blm.gov/node/9974/.

iii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

BLM. 2019. BLM Southern Nevada District, Fire Management Plan. March.

BLM, National Parks Service (NPS), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), BIA, United States Forest Service (USFS). 2018. "Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations." January.

Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). 2016. "Eastern Nevada Transmission Project Finding of No Significant Impact." October.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. "Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol." September.

Caltrans. 2014. "Traffic Noise Basic Fact Sheet." South 805 Express Lanes. December.

Carlson, Helen S. 1974. Nevada Place Names: A Geographical Dictionary. University of Nevada Press.

Chandler, D.G, Day, N., Madsen, M.D., Belnap, J. 2019. "Amendments fail to hasten biocrust recovery or soil stability at a disturbed dryland sandy site." Restoration Ecology 27(2) 289-297.

Choquette, Kara. 2018. "Personal communication between Caitlin Gilleran, Panorama Environmental, and Kara Choquette, Power Company of Wyoming LLC." August 14.

Clark County. 2017. "Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan Conservation Element." September 6.

Clark County. 2018. Clark County Public Lands Proposal Supporting Documents. June 6. Accessed August 14, 2018. http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/airquality/announcements/Pages/Clark-County- Lands-Proposal.aspx.

Clark County. n.d. Major Projects: Coyote Springs. Accessed April 16, 2019. http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/comprehensive-planning/major- projects/Pages/MajorProjectCoyoteSprings.aspx.

Cooper, Christi. 2017. California Wash Hydrographic Basin 13-218: Groundwater Pumpage Inventory. State of Nevada, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Water Resources.

Cooper, Christi. 2018. Designated Groundwater Basins of Nevada. State of Nevada, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Water Resources.

Crescent Peak Renewables, LLC. 2017. "Crescent Peak Wind Project Plan of Development Second Draft." November 27.

Dellen, C. Van. 2017. "Occupied seasonal habitat distributions and movement corridors of Nevada Bighorn Sheep." NDOW Big Game Distributions. Nevada Department of Wildlife, February 13.

Department of Energy (DOE) and BLM. 2012. "Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States." FES 12-24; DOE/EIS-0403. July.

Department of Interior (DOI). 2017. “BLM Fire Occurrence from 1980 to 2016”.

iv GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Dugan Biological Services, LLC and Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2019. "Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Survey Report for the Gemini Solar Project." Biological Report.

Eldred, Kenneth MK. 1981. "Standards and Criteria for Noise Control - An Overview." In Noise Control Engineering, 16-23.

Environment Planning Development (EPD) Solutions, Inc. 2019. "Transportation and Traffic Technical Report for the Gemini Solar Project." March.

EnviroMINE. 2018. "Arevia Due Diligence Report Updated to Include Information on Oil & Gas Leases, historical mining and gypsum market, and updated mining claim research." October 23.

Esque, Todd. 2019. "Desert Tortoise Ecology, Health, Habitat, and Conservation Biology." USGS. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/werc/science/desert-tortoise-ecology-health-habitat-and- conservation-biology?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2016. "Advisory Circular 0/7460-1L." Obstruction Marking and Lighting. October 8.

FAA. 2018. "Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on Airports." April.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2008. "Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM)." December 8.

FHWA. 2010. "23 CFR 772." FHWA Noise Standard. July.

FHWA. 2017. "Las Vegas, Nevada." Highway Evacuations in Selected Metropolitan Areas: Assessment of Impediments. February 1. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/eto_tim_pse/reports/2010_cong_evac_study/las_vegas_nv.htm.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2006. "Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment." May.

Fidelity National Title Group. 2018. "Preliminary [Title] Report - 3rd Amendment." December 24.

First Solar. 2018. Moapa Southern Paiute Solar Project. Accessed August 14, 2018. http://www.firstsolar.com/Resources/Projects/Moapa-Southern-Paiute-Solar-Park.

Fowler, C.S. 1991. "Native Americans and Yucca Mountain: A Revised and Updated Summary." Reno, Nevada: Cultural Resource Consultants, Ltd.

Freeman, Sigmund A., Ayhan Irfanoglu, and Terrence F. Paret. 2004. "Earthquake Engineering Intensity Scale: A Template with Many Uses." 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

Geo Energy. 2016. "2016 Annual United States and Global Geothermal Power Production Report." March.

Gilroy, John. 2018. "In Southern Nevada, Community Supports New Public Land Protections." The Pew Charitable Trusts, July 17. In Southern Nevada, Community Supports New Public Land Protections.Hamilton, M.E., and S.R. Kokos. 2011. Clark County Rare Plant Habitat Modeling. model, Las Vegas: Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office.

v GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Harmon, Lisa, interview by Caitlin Gilleran. 2018. Operations Manager at NVEnergy. August 20.

HERServices. 2018. "Gemini Solar Phase I Located in Clark County Nevada." Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Report. March.

Holzman, David C. 2011. "Vehicle Motion Alarms: Necessity, Noise Pollution, or Both?" Environmental Health Perspectives 31-33.

Horn, Katie. 2018. "Personal communication between Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, and Katie Horn, Southern Nevada Water Authority." August 23.

IAC Acoustics. 2019. Comparative Examples of Noise Levels. http://www.industrialnoisecontrol.com/comparative-noise-examples.htm.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. "Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis." Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of IPCC.

Kelly, Isabel T. and Catherine S. Fowler. 1986. "Southern Paiute." Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 11. Edited by W. C. Sturtevant. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Knight & Leavitt Associates. 2019. Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of Approximately 11,050 Acres for the Gemini Solar Project, Near Crystal, Clark County, Nevada. March.

Las Vegas Valley Water District. 2001. "Water Resources and Ground-Water Modeling in the White River and Meadow Flow Systems, Clark Lincoln, Nye and White Pine Counties, Nevada."

Laura, Miner. 2018. "Personal communication between Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, and Miner Laura, Invenergy LLC." August 15.

Ldn Consulting. 2011. "Noise Assessment." Centinela Solar Energy Project County of Imperial. September 6.

Lee, Jack M. 1996. "Electrical and Biological Effects of Transmission Lines: A Review." Bonneville Power Administration, December.

Leslie, Steve. 2018. "Email correspondence between Steve Leslie, BLM, and Tania Treis, Panorama Environmental, Inc." July 13.

Leslie, Steve. 2019. "Email correspondence and interview between Steve Leslie, BLM, and Tania Treis, Panorama Environmental, Inc." April 15.

Louis Berger. 2019. "Conceptual Drainage Report Gemini Solar Project." Las Vegas, March.

Maghami, M.R., H. Hashim, C. Gomes, M.A. Radzi, M.I. Rezadad, and S. Hajighorbani. 2016. "Power loss due to soiling on solar panel: A review." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Review 1307- 1316.

McBride, T. and Stanton, D. Rolf. 2001. "Old Spanish Trail/Mormon Road Historic District, National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form."

vi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Moapa Valley (MV) Progress. 2018. Dismantling Moapa’s Reid Gardner. July 4. Accessed August 14, 2018. http://mvprogress.com/2018/07/04/dismantling-moapas-reid-gardner/.

Montgomery, James. 2013. Renewable Energy World: Calculating Solar Energy's Land-Use Footprint. August 8. Accessed March 17, 2019. https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2013/08/calculating-solar-energys-land-use- footprint.html.

National Agriculture Imagery Project (NAIP). 2017. "Dry Lake East Designated Leasing Area - Proposed Action Area Map."

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 2017. "District Directory Information (2016-2017 school year)." https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/.

National Electric Manufacturers Association (NEMA). 2013. "Transformers, Step Voltage Regulators and Reactors." NEMA TR 1-2013.

National Parks Service (NPS). 2001. Old Spanish Trail National and Historic Trail Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment.

NPS. 2010. "Inventory, Research and Monitoring for Covered Plant Species Project Report 2008-2010." (National Park Service, Lake Mead Recreation Area).

NPS and BLM. 2017. Old Spanish National Historic Trail Final Comprehensive Administrative Strategy.

National Safety Council. 2017. "Injury Facts." http://injuryfacts.nsc.org/.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2017. "Soil Survey Areas for Clark County Area, Nevada and Virgin River Area, Nevada and Arizona Geographic Information System (GIS) dataset2017." United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology. 2018. "Geothermal Energy Resource Potential." University of Nevada, Reno.

Nevada Department of Public Safety. 2016. "2016 Crime in Nevada." Uniform Crime Reporting 2016 Report.

Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). n.d. I-15/U.S. 93 Garnet Interchange & U.S. 93 Capacity Improvements. Accessed August 14, 2018. https://www.nevadadot.com/projects-programs/road- projects/i-15-u-s-93-garnet-interchange-u-s-93-capacity-improvements.

NDOT. 2017. Traffic Records Information Access. http://ndot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=faed065cb86742af97a2c7e4293b af42.

NDOT. 2018. "Quarterly Report for Major Projects for Quarter Ending March 31, 2018." March 31.

Nevada Department of Wildlife. 2013. "Nevada Wildlife Action Plan, 2012 Species of Conservation Priority Lists (P73 et Seq) Approved Mar 1 2013." http://www.ndow.org/uploadedFiles/ndoworg/Content/Nevada_Wildlife/Conservation/2013-NV- WAP-ID-SOCP-Wildlife-Landscape.pdf.

vii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). 2014. "2012 Water Quality Integrated Report with EPA Overlisting. Assessment Period October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2011."

NDEP. 2016. "Nevada Statewide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Projections, 1990 - 2030."

NDEP. 2017. State of Nevada Solid Waste Management Plan.

Nevada Division of Forestry. n.d. "Nevada Natural Resources and Fire Information Portal." https://nevadaresourcesandwildfireinfo.com/.

Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR). 2018. Hydrographic Area Summary. December 28. Accessed December 28, 2018. http://water.nv.gov/DisplayHydrographicGeneralReport.aspx.

NDWR. 2010. "Nevada Revised Statues Chapters 532-538."

Nevada Energy. 2018. "NV Energy Reid Gardner Station Administrative Order on Consent Fact Sheet." May.

Nevada Natural Heritage Program. 2001. Rare plant fact sheets and distribution maps for Astragalus geyeri var. triquentrus, Astragalus nyensis, and Penstemon biocolor ssp. roseus. http://heritage.nv.gov/species/.

NextEra Energy, Inc. 2016. "Silver State South Solar Energy Center." Fact Sheet.

Ninyo and Moore. 2018. "Gemini Solar Project Interstate 15 and Valley of Fire Highway Clark County, Nevada." Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation. August 20.

Ninyo and Moore. 2019. "Preliminary Geologic and Groundwater Occurrence Evaluation Proposed 690- MW Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Field Clark County, NV." Las Vegas, March.

Nussear, Ken. 2018. Covered Species Analysis Support; Report for 2011-SWECO-901B - submitted to the Clark County Conservation Program. Final Report, Southwest Ecology.

Olivier, J. G. J., K. M. Schure, and J. A. H. W. Peters. 2017. "Trends in Global Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2017 Report." PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, December.

Olsen, Wayne O. 1998. "Average Speech Levels and Spectra in Various Speaking/Listening Conditions: A Summary of the Pearson, Bennett, and Fidell (1977) Report." American Journal of Audiology 1059-0889.

Otak, Inc. 2011. "Visual Resource Inventory." BLM Southern Nevada District Office. March.

Paleo Solutions, Inc. 2018. "Paleontological Technical Study for the Gemini Solar Project." May 7.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2018. "Scoping Report." Gemini Solar Project (N-84631). September 21.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019a. "Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report for the Gemini Solar Project." March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019b. "Gemini Solar Project Alternatives Report." April.

viii GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019c. "Glint and Glare Study for the Gemini Solar Project." March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019d. "Informational Summary of Water Rights, Supply, and Use for the Gemini Solar Project." San Francisco, March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019e. "Land Use and Corridor Report for the Gemini Solar Project." San Francisco, March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019f. "Manual 6280 Inventory and Impacts Analysis for the Old Spanish National Historic Trail." April.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019g. "Public Health and Safety Technical Report Gemini Solar Project." March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019h. "Socio-Economics and Environmental Justice Report Gemini Solar Project." March.

Panorama Environmental, Inc. 2019i. "Visual Resources Technical Report for the Gemini Solar Project." April.

Patterson, Sherryl. 2018a. "Personal communication via phone between Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, and Sherryl Patterson, Moapa Band of Paiutes." August 15.

Patterson, Sherryl. 2018b. "Personal communication via phone between Yingying Cai, Panorama Environmental, Sherryl Patterson, Moapa Band of Paiutes." August 23.

Peterson, E. 2008. International Vegetation Classification Alliances and Associated Occurring in Nevada with Proposed Additions. Carson City: Nevada Natural Heritage Program.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018a. Botanical Resources Report for the Gemini Solar Project. July.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018b. "Desert Tortoise Survey Report (Areas A-E) for the Gemini Solar Project." Biological Report.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018c. "Desert Tortoise Survey Report Areas B1, B2, F & G for the Gemini Solar Project." Biological Report.

Phoenix Biological Consulting. 2018d. Jurisdictional Delineation Report for the Gemini Solar Project. November.

Power Technology. 2019. "Silver State North Solar Project, Nevada." https://www.power- technology.com/projects/silver-state-north-solar-project-nevada/.

RCH Group. 2018. "Gemini Solar Project Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report." November.

Royster, J. 2008. "Indian Land Claims." Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 2, Indians in Contemporary Society. Edited by G.A. Bailey. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. 28-37.

Satcon. n.d. "Utility Ready Solar PV Inverters."

ix GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Sawyer, J., T. Keeler-Woolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. Sacramento: California Native Plant Society Press.

Sengpielaudio. 2018. Damping of sound level (decibel dB) vs. distance. Accessed April 26, 2018. http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-distance.htm.

Severts, Mark. 2018a. "Personal communication between Caitlin Gilleran, Panorama Environmental, and Mark Severts, NV Energy." August 13.

Severts, Mark. 2018b. "Personal communication between Caitlin Gilleran, Panorama Environmental, and Mark Severts, NV Energy." August 15.

Smith, David F., and Rafik Albert. 2018. "Email correspondence regarding Right-of-Ways for the TransWest Express Project." August 22.

Solar Energy Industry Association. 2019. Responsible Land Use. Accessed April 13, 2019. https://www.seia.org/initiatives/responsible-land-use.

Solar Energy Zones. n.d. "Silver State North Solar Facility." Accessed April 17, 2019. https://solarenergyzones.com/claims/nvn----085077.

Solar Partners, XI, LLC. 2019. Plan of Development for the Gemini Solar Project N-84631. Las Vegas: Bureau of Land Management.

Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD). 2017. "Chronic Disease and Associated Risk Factor Disparities Among Populations in Clark County, Nevada." http://www.southernnevadahealthdistrict.org/download/stats-reports/Public-Health- Reports/chronic-disease-and-associated-risk-factor-disparities-051717.pdf.

SNHD. 2018. "Clark County Disease Statistics, December 2017." http://www.southernnevadahealthdistrict.org/download/epi/disease-stats/20180130-SNHD-sp- Dec.pdf.

Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition. 2014. "Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2014." Clark County Regional Emissions Inventory.

Southwest Ecology LLC. 2018. "Milk Vetch Habitat Suitability Dataset." Covered Species Analysis Support - Final Report.

State Engineer. 2019. "Interim Order #1303." The Office of the State Engineer of the State of Nevada.

State Environmental Comission Nevada (SEC). 2011. "Reid Gardner Appeal — Water Pollution Control Groundwater Permit NEV91022." December 1. http://sec.nv.gov/main/reid_gardner.htm.

Steiner, Harold. 1999. The Old Spanish Trail Across the Mojave Desert. Las Vegas: The Haldor Company.

Steven W. Carothers and Associates Environmental (SWCA) Consultants. 2011. Ethnohistoric and Class I Records Searches for Proposed Solar Energy Zones in California, Nevada, and Utah for the Bureau of Land Management's Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Report, Denver: Bureau of Land Management.

x GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

Stoffle, R., et al. 1999. "Puchuxwavaats Uapi (To know about plants): Traditional Knowledge and the Cultural Significance of Southern Paiute Plants." Human Organization. Society for Applies Anthropology.

Stoffle, R.W. and H.F., Dobyns. 1983. "Nuvagantu: Nevada Indians Comment on the Intermountain Power Project." Cultural Resources Series No. 7. Reno, Nevada: Nevada State office of the Bureau of Land Management. https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/270834/azu_stoffle_ipp_nuvagantu_w.pdf? sequence=1.

Stoffle, R.W., M.N. Zedeno, and D.B. Halmo, 2001. American Indians and the Nevada Test Site: A Model. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 139-152.

Streater, Scott. 2018. "Proposed Nev. leasing zone could spark solar development." April 13. https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060079043.

SunPower. 2019. "Nellis Air Force Base Builds Largest Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in North America with SunPower." https://us.sunpower.com/sites/default/files/media-library/case-studies/cs-nellis- air-force-base-builds-largest-solar-photovoltaic-power-plant-north-america-sunpower.pdf.

The Mint 400. 2018. "2018 Mint 400 Spectator Area 1-4 Map." Accessed September 17, 2018. https://themint400.com/spectator-parking-passes/.

Transportation Research Board (TRB). 2011. "Airport Cooperative Research Program." Investigating Safety Impacts of Energy Technologies on Airports and Aviation.

TRB. 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition.

United States Air Force (USAF). 2006. "Environmental Assessment for Leasing Nellis Air Force Base Land for Construction and Operation of a Solar Photovoltaic System." August.

USAF. 2011. "Environmental Assessment for Outgrant for Construction and Operation of a Solar Photovoltaic System in Area I, Nellis Air Force Base." March.

United States Census Bureau (USCB). 2016. How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty. May 12. https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/about.html.

USCB. 2017. Las Vegas, Nevada, and Clark County Data. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml#.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1980. "Parts of Clark and Lincoln Counties, Nevada and Part of Mohave County, Arizona." Soil Survey of Virgin River Area, Nevada - Arizona.

United States Department of Justice. 2016. Crime in the United States. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the- u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/resource-pages/tables-by-title.

United States Department of Transportation and FHWA. 2011. "Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance." December.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. "Volume-to-Weight Conversion Factors." April.

xi GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS References

USEPA. 2018a. Current Nonattainment Counties for All Criteria Pollutants. January 31. https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ancl.html.

USEPA. 2018b. "Draft Inventory of United States Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 - 2016." February 6.

USEPA. 2018c. Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. October 15. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator.

USEPA. 2019. Frequent Questions about General Conformity. Accessed January 8, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/frequent-questions-about-general-conformity.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1993. "50 CFR Part 17: Endangered and Threatened Widllife and Plants: Review of Plant Taxa for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species." 58 Federal Register 51144-51190. Washington DC, September 30.

USFWS. 2009. "Desert National Wildlife Refuge Complex: Ash Meadows, Desert, Moapa Valley, and Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuges." Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. August.

USFWS. 2014. "Status of the Desert Tortoise and Its Critical Habitat."

USFWS. 2015a. Final Biological Opinion for the Aiya Solar Energy Project. Las Vegas: USFWS.

USFWS. 2015b. "Final Project-Level Formal Consultations for Four Solar Energy Projects in the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone." Clark County, Nevada.

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1999. "Land Subsidence in the United States." United States Geological Survey Circular 1182.

USGS. 2000. Floods of July and September 1998 in Clark County, Nevada. USGS Fact Sheet 079-00, USGS.

USGS. 2003. "Ground-Water Quality in the Carbonate-Rock Aquifer of the Great Basin, Nevada and Utah, 2003: Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5232."

USGS. 2018. National Water Information System: Mapper. https://maps.waterdata.usgs.gov/mapper/index.html.

Vrobison. 2018. NV Energy announcement includes Moapa Paiute solar plant. June 6. http://mvprogress.com/2018/06/06/nv-energy-announcement-includes-moapa-paiute-solar-plant/.

West Yost Associates. 2019. "Groundwater Modeling to Assess Water Resource Impacts for the Gemini Solar Project." Groundwater Technical Report, Sacramento.

Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2016a. Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries - North Las Vegas, Nevada (265705). June 9. https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?nv5705.

WRCC. 2016b. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. June 9. https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?nv5705.

xii APPENDIX J List of Preparers

GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Preparers

List of Preparers This EIS was prepared by an interdisciplinary team of staff from the Southern Nevada District Office of the BLM, with assistance from Panorama Environmental, Inc. A list of the names and roles/responsibilities of the preparers is provided in Table 1 (BLM) and Table 2 (Consultants).

Table 1 BLM Staff Contributing to the Preparation of this EIS Contributor Role/Responsibility Augrelio Herman Pinales Project Manager Tim Smith District Manager Shonna Dooman Acting Field Office Manager Kimberly Sullivan NEPA Coordinator Gregory Helseath (State Office) Renewable Energy Manager Eric Benavides Lands and Realty Kerri-Anne Thorpe Lands and Realty Michelle Lieber Right of Ways Justin DeMaio Cultural Resources Steve Leslie Visual, Recreation, and Special Management Areas Kenneth Kendrick Recreation Mark Slaughter Wildlife Resources; Threatened and Endangered Species Gregory Brooks Wildlife Resources Lara Kobalt Range, Vegetation Corey Lange Wildlife Resources; Threatened and Endangered Species Sean McEldery Local Weeds Boris Poff Soils, Hydrology, and Water Quality Lisa Christianson Air Quality Mary Klinger Paleontology Shonna Dooman Minerals, Geology, and Soils Kimberly Sullivan Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice

Table 2 Panorama Environmental Team Contributing to the Preparation of this EIS Contributor Position Responsibilities EIS Preparation Proposed Action and Alternatives; Old Spanish National Historic Trail; Water Tania Treis Project Manager Resources; Threatened and Endangered Species Aaron Lui Deputy Project Manager Land Use; Recreation; Visual Resources

i GEMINI SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT EIS List of Preparers

Contributor Position Responsibilities Geology, Soils, and Mineral; Air Quality and Climate Change; Acoustics; Socioeconomics Caitlin Gilleran Environmental Planner and Environmental Justice; Transportation; Cumulative Wildlife, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Whitney Broeking Environmental Planner Species; Cultural Resources; Native American Concerns; Public Health and Safety Kathleen Cuschieri Analyst Technical Editing Yingying Cai Analyst Document Production GIS Corey Fong Graphics Specialist/Cartographer Christina Kossa Visual Specialist Visual Simulations and Analysis Peter Langenfeld Visual Specialist Visual Resources Technical Specialists Ryan Young Biologist, Phoenix Biology Biological Resources Technical Reports Mike Ratte Air Quality Specialist, Air Quality and Climate Change RCH Group AJ Thompson and Cultural Resources Cultural and Historic Brian Cole Specialist, Knight and Leavitt Geraldine Aron Paleontologist, Paleo Paleontology Solutions Jeff Douglas and Syndi Engineers, Louis Berger Hydrology/Drainage Dudley Naik Banavanthu Engineer, Ninyo and Geotechnical and Groundwater Moore Ken Loy Hydrologist, West Yost Groundwater Rafik Albert Planner, EPD Solutions, Lands and Realty Inc Meghan Macias Transportation Planner, Traffic EPD Solutions, Inc.

ii