DOCSLIB.ORG

Document 01100 Attachment a Special Provisions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Document 01100 Attachment a Special Provisions DOCUMENT 01100 ATTACHMENT A SPECIAL PROVISIONS – REFERENCE DOCUMENTS • Notice of Intent for the Proposed Dredging of Docks 16 through 18. Port of Stockton – West Complex. Rough and Ready Island, Stockton, California. Environmental Risk Services Corporation. October 2013. • John F. Baldwin and Stockton Ship Channels 20 April – 06 May 2015 Condition Survey • Dillon and Murphy, Port of Stockton Robert’s Island I Topographic Survey August 1997 • Dillon and Murphy, Port of Stockton Robert’s Island I Topographic Survey August 2005 • Dillon and Murphy, Port of Stockton Robert’s Island I Topographic Survey February 2013 • Dillon and Murphy, Port of Stockton Robert’s Island I Proposed Levee Plan for Dredge Material Placement Site September 2014 Port of Stockton Dock 16 Through 18 Cover Sheet Maintenance Dredging NNOOTTIICCEE OOFF IINNTTEENNTT ffoorr tthhee PPRROOPPOOSSEEDD DDRREEDDGGIINNGG ooff DDOOCCKKSS 1166 tthhrroouugghh 1188 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX ROUGH AND READY ISLAND STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA October 2013 Environmental Risk Services Corporation NOTICE OF INTENT for the PROPOSED DREDGING of DOCKS 16 through 18 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX ROUGH AND READY ISLAND STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA October 2013 Submitted by: Port of Stockton Stockton, California Prepared by: Environmental Risk Services Corporation Walnut Creek, California __________________________________ ________________________________ Mark J. O’Brien Leslie Shields Project Manager Project Scientist __________________________________ Peter Weiler, Ph.D. Senior Hydrogeophysicist October 2013 Environmental Risk Services Corporation NOTICE OF INTENT FOR THE PROPOSED DREDGING OF DOCKS 16 THROUGH 18 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX, ROUGH AND READY ISLAND, CALIFORNIA Table of Contents SECTION PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Historical Dredged Depth................................................................................................1 1.2 Summary Description of Project.....................................................................................2 1.3 Purpose and Objectives of the Project............................................................................2 1.4 Economic Development ...................................................................................................3 1.5 Regulatory Setting.............................................................................................................3 1.5.1 General Order R5‐2009‐0085................................................................................................ 3 1.5.2 General Project Applicability .............................................................................................. 4 1.5.3 CEQA Compliance................................................................................................................ 5 1.6 Benefits of Dredging.........................................................................................................6 1.7 Structure of this NOI ........................................................................................................6 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................ 6 2.1 Dredge Sediment Removal..............................................................................................7 2.2 Dredge Sediment Placement ...........................................................................................7 2.3 Dredge and Placement Site Monitoring.........................................................................8 2.4 Reuse of Dredge Sediment ..............................................................................................9 3. CHARACTERIZATION OF SEDIMENT AND RIVER WATER .................. 10 3.1 Field Methods..................................................................................................................10 3.2 Whole Sediment Bioassays ............................................................................................11 3.2.1 Amphipod Survival and Growth (Hyallela Azteca) ...................................................... 12 3.2.2 Midge Survival and Growth (Chironimus dilutus) ....................................................... 12 3.3 Standard Elutriate Test (SET) Preparation ..................................................................12 3.3.1 Acute and Chronic SET Biotoxicity of Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) ... 13 3.3.2 SET Analytical Chemistry.................................................................................................. 13 3.4 Pre‐Dredge Sediment Total Chemistry Results..........................................................13 3.4.1 Evaluation of Total Dredge Sediment Chemistry........................................................... 14 3.5 Pre‐Dredge Sediment Leachate Results (DIWET)......................................................14 3.5.1 Evaluation of Potential Threat to Ground Water ........................................................... 15 3.6 Modified Elutriate Test ..................................................................................................16 3.7 River Water Chemistry...................................................................................................16 October 2013 i Environmental Risk Services Corporation NOTICE OF INTENT FOR THE PROPOSED DREDGING OF DOCKS 16 THROUGH 18 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX, ROUGH AND READY ISLAND, CALIFORNIA 4. MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS FROM UPLAND PLACEMENT OF SEDIMENTS................................................................................................. 16 4.1 Mitigation of Potential Impacts to Ground Water Quality.......................................17 4.2 Mitigation Of Potential Impacts to Surface Water Quality.......................................17 4.3 Mitigation of Potential Capacity and Infiltration Limitations At RN1 ...................17 5. MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS FROM DREDGING................. 18 5.1 Removal of sediment from the riverbed......................................................................18 5.2 Turbidity...........................................................................................................................19 5.2.1 Mitigation of Potential Turbidity from Sediment Suspended During Dredging ...... 19 5.2.2 Mitigation of Potential Turbidity in Water Returned to DWSC from RN1 ................ 19 5.3 Toxicity .............................................................................................................................20 5.3.1 Mitigation of Potential Toxicity from Sediment Suspended During Dredging ......... 20 5.3.2 Sediment Suspended in Returned Water......................................................................... 20 5.4 Dissolved Oxygen ‐ Hydraulic Dredging and Returned Water ..............................20 5.4.1 Short‐Term Near‐Field Effects........................................................................................... 21 5.4.2 Long‐Term Far‐Field Effects.............................................................................................. 22 6. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... 22 6.1 Summary of Dock 16 Through 18 Data .......................................................................22 6.2 Summary of Dredging and Placement Mitigation Measures...................................23 REFERENCES................................................................................................................. 25 REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST ................................................................................ 29 October 2013 ii Environmental Risk Services Corporation NOTICE OF INTENT FOR THE PROPOSED DREDGING OF DOCKS 16 THROUGH 18 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX, ROUGH AND READY ISLAND, CALIFORNIA LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Total Sediment Chemistry Results Table 2. DIWET Sediment Chemistry Results Table 3. Standard Elutriate Test (SET) Chemistry Results Table 4. Total Dioxin and Furan Sediment Chemistry Results Table 5. Calculation of Attenuation Capacity in Native Soil at Roberts Island Table 6. San Joaquin River Chemistry Results LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Port of Stockton Rough and Ready Island Location Map Figure 2. Port of Stockton West Complex Sediment Sampling Locations Figure 3. Roberts No. 1 Dredge Sediment Placement Facility Figure 4. Dredge Sediment Sampling Schematic LIST OF CHARTS Chart 1 Total Sediment Metal Concentrations, Dock 16 through 18, RN1, and USACE Stockton DWSC LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Bathymetric Data for West Complex Docks 16 through 20 (Sea Surveyor, 2013) Appendix B. RN1 dredge placement area capacity survey (Dillon and Murphy, 2013) Appendix C. Operations Plan for the Dredging and Placement of Dock 16 through 18 Sediment at the RN1 Placement Facility Appendix D. Pacific Ecorisk Data Report: Biological Testing of the Sediment Samples Collected from the West Complex Appendix E. Evaluation of Near and Far Field Turbidity Appendix F. Analytical Chemistry Laboratory Analytical Reports October 2013 iii Environmental Risk Services Corporation NOTICE OF INTENT FOR THE PROPOSED DREDGING OF DOCKS 16 THROUGH 18 PORT OF STOCKTON - WEST COMPLEX, ROUGH AND READY ISLAND, CALIFORNIA 1. INTRODUCTION Environmental Risk Services Corporation (ERS) has prepared this Notice of Intent (NOI) on behalf of the Port of Stockton (Port) for the proposed maintenance
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Μ and Statewide Resources Office
    Woodland RD Name RD Number Atlas Tract 2126 5 !"#$ Bacon Island 2028 !"#$80 Bethel Island BIMID Bishop Tract 2042 16 ·|}þ Bixler Tract 2121 Lovdal Boggs Tract 0404 ·|}þ113 District Sacramento River at I Street Bridge Bouldin Island 0756 80 Gaging Station )*+,- Brack Tract 2033 Bradford Island 2059 ·|}þ160 Brannan-Andrus BALMD Lovdal 50 Byron Tract 0800 Sacramento Weir District ¤£ r Cache Haas Area 2098 Y o l o ive Canal Ranch 2086 R Mather Can-Can/Greenhead 2139 Sacramento ican mer Air Force Chadbourne 2034 A Base Coney Island 2117 Port of Dead Horse Island 2111 Sacramento ¤£50 Davis !"#$80 Denverton Slough 2134 West Sacramento Drexler Tract Drexler Dutch Slough 2137 West Egbert Tract 0536 Winters Sacramento Ehrheardt Club 0813 Putah Creek ·|}þ160 ·|}þ16 Empire Tract 2029 ·|}þ84 Fabian Tract 0773 Sacramento Fay Island 2113 ·|}þ128 South Fork Putah Creek Executive Airport Frost Lake 2129 haven s Lake Green d n Glanville 1002 a l r Florin e h Glide District 0765 t S a c r a m e n t o e N Glide EBMUD Grand Island 0003 District Pocket Freeport Grizzly West 2136 Lake Intake Hastings Tract 2060 l Holland Tract 2025 Berryessa e n Holt Station 2116 n Freeport 505 h Honker Bay 2130 %&'( a g strict Elk Grove u Lisbon Di Hotchkiss Tract 0799 h lo S C Jersey Island 0830 Babe l Dixon p s i Kasson District 2085 s h a King Island 2044 S p Libby Mcneil 0369 y r !"#$5 ·|}þ99 B e !"#$80 t Liberty Island 2093 o l a Lisbon District 0307 o Clarksburg Y W l a Little Egbert Tract 2084 S o l a n o n p a r C Little Holland Tract 2120 e in e a e M Little Mandeville
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    comparing futures for the sacramento–san joaquin delta jay lund | ellen hanak | william fleenor william bennett | richard howitt jeffrey mount | peter moyle 2008 Public Policy Institute of California Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation ISBN: 978-1-58213-130-6 Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Summary “Once a landscape has been established, its origins are repressed from memory. It takes on the appearance of an ‘object’ which has been there, outside us, from the start.” Karatani Kojin (1993), Origins of Japanese Literature The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is the hub of California’s water supply system and the home of numerous native fish species, five of which already are listed as threatened or endangered. The recent rapid decline of populations of many of these fish species has been followed by court rulings restricting water exports from the Delta, focusing public and political attention on one of California’s most important and iconic water controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • San Joaquin County Regional Blueprint a Year 2050
    San Joaquin County Regional Blueprint A Year 2050 Transportation Land Use Environmental Vision San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 E Weber Ave. January 28, 2010 Stockton, CA 95202 (209) 235-0600 This Page Left Blank Intentionally THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chair Larry Hansen City of Lodi Vice Chair Ann Johnston City of Stockton Boardmember Gary L. Haskin City of Escalon Boardmember Steve J. Bestolarides San Joaquin County Boardmember Ken Vogel San Joaquin County Boardmember Leroy Ornellas San Joaquin County Boardmember Kristy Sayles City of Lathrop Boardmember Katherine M. Miller City of Stockton Boardmember Dale Fritchen City of Stockton Boardmember Chuck Winn City of Ripon Boardmember Steve DeBrum City of Manteca Boardmember Brent H. Ives City of Tracy EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBERS Steven A. Herum Port of Stockton Ken Baxter Caltrans, District 10 Gary Giovanetti San Joaquin Regional Transit District SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PROFESSIONAL STAFF Andrew T. Chesley Executive Director Steve Dial Deputy Executive Director/Chief Financial Officer Dana Cowell Deputy Director, Planning, Programming & Project Delivery Rebecca Montes Manager of Administrative Services Kevin Sheridan Project Manager Dianne Barth Public Communications Manager Donna Aflague Senior Regional Planner Michael A. Swearingen Senior Regional Planner Kim Kloeb Senior Regional Planner Steve Mayo Senior Habitat Planner Wil Ridder Senior Regional Planner Tanisha Taylor Senior Regional Planner Nicole Gorham Public Communications Specialist
    [Show full text]
  • 2. the Legacies of Delta History
    2. TheLegaciesofDeltaHistory “You could not step twice into the same river; for other waters are ever flowing on to you.” Heraclitus (540 BC–480 BC) The modern history of the Delta reveals profound geologic and social changes that began with European settlement in the mid-19th century. After 1800, the Delta evolved from a fishing, hunting, and foraging site for Native Americans (primarily Miwok and Wintun tribes), to a transportation network for explorers and settlers, to a major agrarian resource for California, and finally to the hub of the water supply system for San Joaquin Valley agriculture and Southern California cities. Central to these transformations was the conversion of vast areas of tidal wetlands into islands of farmland surrounded by levees. Much like the history of the Florida Everglades (Grunwald, 2006), each transformation was made without the benefit of knowing future needs and uses; collectively these changes have brought the Delta to its current state. Pre-European Delta: Fluctuating Salinity and Lands As originally found by European explorers, nearly 60 percent of the Delta was submerged by daily tides, and spring tides could submerge it entirely.1 Large areas were also subject to seasonal river flooding. Although most of the Delta was a tidal wetland, the water within the interior remained primarily fresh. However, early explorers reported evidence of saltwater intrusion during the summer months in some years (Jackson and Paterson, 1977). Dominant vegetation included tules—marsh plants that live in fresh and brackish water. On higher ground, including the numerous natural levees formed by silt deposits, plant life consisted of coarse grasses; willows; blackberry and wild rose thickets; and galleries of oak, sycamore, alder, walnut, and cottonwood.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Atlas
    State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ATLAS August 1987 FOREWORD The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta was originally a tidal marsh formed at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and Suisun Bay. More than 80 percent of this former marsh was leveed and developed for agriculture from the mid-1800s to the early 1900s. Today the Delta islands and levees are of statewide importance for agriculture, water quality, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife, water supply, commercial shipping, transportation, and other benefits. This Atlas is the result of information gathered during Department of Water Resources studies on Delta programs and, in particular, the recent studies for Delta levee improvements. The Atlas provides background information that should be helpful for people trying to understand and address complex problems of this estuary. The information is presented in a series of figures, photographs, and tables for easy reference. David N. Kennedy, Director Department of Water Resources The Resources Agency State of California iii CONTENTS FOREWORD iii INTRODUCTION 1 Tables 1 Improvements on Delta Islands 2 2 Emergency Work Expenditures on Nonproject Levees, 1980-1986, Ranked by Total Cost Expended 44 3 Emergency Work Expenditures on Nonproject Levees, 1980-1986, Ranked by Cost per Acre 45 4 Annual Levee Maintenance, 1981-1986, Ranked by Total Cost per Mile 46 5 Delta Statistics 60 Figures 1 Fresh Water Tidelands, 1872 4 2 Delta Waterways, 1987 5 3 Waterways
    [Show full text]
  • Northern California, Oregon, and the Sandwich Islands by Charles Nordhoff</H1>
    Northern California, Oregon, and the Sandwich Islands by Charles Nordhoff Northern California, Oregon, and the Sandwich Islands by Charles Nordhoff Produced by Ronald Holder and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team. [Transcriber's Notes: The following words are noted as having changed between the publication of this book and the year 2004: 'Nuuanu Valley', versus 'Nuanu'; 'lei', vs. 'le' for a flower garland; 'holoku' vs. 'holaku' for a Hawaiian black dress; 'Wailua', vs. 'Waialua'; 'Kealakekua Bay' vs. 'Kealakeakua'; 'Kahului' vs. 'Kaului'; 'kuleana' vs. 'kuliana' for a small land-holding; 'kulolo' vs. 'kuulaau' for a taro pudding; 'piele' vs. 'paalolo' for a sweet-potato and coconut pudding; 'Koa' trees vs. 'Ko'; 'Sausalito' vs. 'Soucelito'; 'Klickitat', vs. 'Klikatat'; and 'Mount Rainier' vs. 'Mount Regnier'. Also, in chapter 1, the author mis-stated information on taro fields; it should say that a square forty feet on each side will support a person for a year; this is equivalent to a square mile feeding 15,000. An explanation of footnotes in the Appendix: The book has both footnotes at the bottom of each page, to which I assigned letters, and four pages page 1 / 393 of notes at the end of the Appendix. The latter includes comments by the translator in brackets, therefore these notes, which use numbers, will not be enclosed in the normal [Footnote: ] brackets to avoid any confusion. The lettered footnotes follow the numbered notes at the end.] [Illustration: THE HAWAIIAN ARCHIPELAGO.] NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, OREGON, AND THE SANDWICH ISLANDS. BY CHARLES NORDHOFF, AUTHOR OF "CALIFORNIA: FOR HEALTH, PLEASURE, AND RESIDENCE," &c., &c.
    [Show full text]
  • Jones Tract Flood Water Quality Investigations Iii
    Division of Environmental Services California Department of Water Resources July 2009 Arnold Schwarzenegger Mike Chrisman Lester A. Snow Governor Secretary for Resources Director State of California Natural Resources Agency Department of Water Resources Jones Tract Flood Water Quality Investigations iii Executive Summary Purpose The report documents all the water quality data collected by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) at Upper Jones Tract and Lower Jones Tract and the Middle River after the levee breached at Upper Jones Tract. Sampling was conducted while Middle River was filling the Upper Jones Tract and Lower Jones Tract and continued through the levee repair and the dewatering. Analyses were done with the monitoring data required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) and the independent data collected by DWR staff. Because the delta provides drinking water to many Californians, a comprehensive monitoring program was implemented to collect and analyze the water quality constituents. The methods used by the field staff as well as the Bryte Laboratory have been summarized in the report, and the analyses done by laboratories under contract to DWR also are described. The results and the discussion of the data analysis are in Chapter 3. Within the overall DWR goal of recovering Jones Tract from the levee breech and flood, the Municipal Water Quality Investigations Branch of the Division of Environmental Services of DWR undertook the water quality monitoring with 3 project purposes: 1 Evaluate the water quality of pump discharge as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board to meet water quality objectives; 2 Evaluate water quality at the pump-out site to determine possible water quality effects to delta waters used for municipal purposes; and 3 Gather and analyze data that might help assess potential water quality effects of future island water storage projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Homeland Security
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Applied Agriculture and Environmental Research $2,500,000 requested from the Department of Agriculture Funding will be used for the agriculture research initiative, a state-wide initiative for agriculture research, development, and technology improvement. This project will help support California’s agricultural economy, particularly in the San Joaquin Valley. The recipient of this funding is California State University, Fresno Foundation, located at 4910 North Chestnut Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726. Lodi Lake Park Nature Area Protection Project $1,861,970 requested from the Department of Agriculture Funding will be used to reinforce a 500-foot stretch of riverbank and protect a riparian habitat and park from flooding. This project will provide enhanced recreational opportunities and species preservation in Lodi. The recipient of this funding is the City of Lodi, located at 25 East Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240. San Joaquin County Agricultural Center Solar Energy Project $1,000,000 requested from the Department of Agriculture Funding will be used to complete the Solar Energy Project at San Joaquin County’s Agricultural Center. These funds will be utilized to acquire and install solar energy panels which will result in generating approximately 100 percent of the expected annual electric usage at the Center. The recipient of this funding is the San Joaquin County Agriculture Center, located at 44 North San Joaquin Street, Stockton, CA 95202. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Ripon High School Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps $200,000 requested from the Department of Defense Funding will be used to support the Ripon High School Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) program and protect this program from potential future funding cuts.
    [Show full text]
  • Delta Narratives-Saving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of The
    Delta Narratives: Saving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Delta Narratives: Saving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta A Report to the Delta Protection Commission Prepared by the Center for California Studies California State University, Sacramento August 1, 2015 Project Team Steve Boilard, CSU Sacramento, Project Director Robert Benedetti, CSU Sacramento, Co-Director Margit Aramburu, University of the Pacific, Co-Director Gregg Camfield, UC Merced Philip Garone, CSU Stanislaus Jennifer Helzer, CSU Stanislaus Reuben Smith, University of the Pacific William Swagerty, University of the Pacific Marcia Eymann, Center for Sacramento History Tod Ruhstaller, The Haggin Museum David Stuart, San Joaquin County Historical Museum Leigh Johnsen, San Joaquin County Historical Museum Dylan McDonald, Center for Sacramento History Michael Wurtz, University of the Pacific Blake Roberts, Delta Protection Commission Margo Lentz-Meyer, Capitol Campus Public History Program, CSU Sacramento Those wishing to cite this report should use the following format: Delta Protection Commission, Delta Narratives: Saving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, prepared by the Center for California Studies, California State University, Sacramento (West Sacramento: Delta Protection Commission, 2015). Those wishing to cite the scholarly essays in the appendix should adopt the following format: Author, "Title of Essay", in Delta Protection Commission, Delta Narratives: Saving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, prepared by the Center for California Studies, California State University, Sacramento (West Sacramento: Delta Protection Commission, 2015), appropriate page or pages. Cover Photo: Sign installed by Discover the Delta; art by Marty Stanley; Photo taken by Philip Garone.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 to the 2017 Federal Transportation Member Agencies Improvement Program CITIES of ESCALON, LATHROP, LODI, Dear Mr
    SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 555 E. Weber Avenue Stockton, California 95202 P 209.235.0600 F 209.235.0438 www.sjcog.org June 27, 2017 Mr. Muhaned Aljabiry California Department of Transportation Steve DeBrum Division of Transportation Programming, MS82 CHAIR P.O. Box 942874 Katherine Miller Sacramento, CA 64274-0001 VICE CHAIR Attention: Lima Huy Andrew T. Chesley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Subject: Administrative Modification #10 to the 2017 Federal Transportation Member Agencies Improvement Program CITIES OF ESCALON, LATHROP, LODI, Dear Mr. Aljabiry, MANTECA, RIPON, STOCKTON, Please be advised that the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) made changes to the TRACY, 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The SJCOG Executive Director has AND THE COUNTY OF the authority to approve all administrative modifications. The proposed modifications are SAN JOAQUIN consistent with the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan (as amended) and Public Participation Plan (as amended) adopted by the SJCOG Board of Directors. SJCOG FTIP Administrative Modification #10 amends the costs to the following projects in the 2017 FTIP: CTIPS ID 112-0000-0323: Stockton Avenue Widening - Revises project description, shifts schedule back one year, and revenue neutral change of project funding sources. Includes shifting $465,000 of Local Transportation Funds for PE from FY 16/17 to FY 17/18, shifts $1,077,000 of RSTP funds for CON from FY 17/18 to FY 18/19, decreases Local Transportation Funds for CON by $1,758,000 in FY 17/18, and adds $210,000 of Local Transportation Funds and $1,548,000 of Measure K funds for CON in FY 18/19.
    [Show full text]