DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment RE Cinco Gen-Tie Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Appendix E Cultural Resources Technical Studies Supplemental Project Statistics Report 1. Project Name. RE Cinco Gen-Tie Line Project 2. BLM State Permit Number. CA-12-22 3. Field Authorization Number. Issued on May 14, 2014 4. Dates of Field Survey. May 19-25, 2014 5. Total acreage of lands surveyed at BLM Class II level. 0 Of Item 5 above: A) Acreage of BLM lands surveyed 0 B) Acreage of other lands surveyed (Private, 0 State, Other Federal) List separately 6. Total acreage of lands surveyed at BLM Class III level. 200 Of Item 6 above: A) Acreage of BLM lands surveyed 150 B) Acreage of other lands surveyed (Private, 50 State, Other Federal) List separately 7. Total number of cultural properties in project Area (of Potential 8 Effect). Of Item 7 above: A) Total number of cultural properties for which site records were completed (newly recorded 8 cultural properties). B) Number of new cultural properties on BLM 6 lands C) Number of new cultural properties on other 1 lands (Private, State, Other Federal) 8. Of the cultural properties located within the Area (of Potential Effect): [If properties are not located on BLM, place this number in parentheses ( ) after the number of BLM properties.] A) Number of cultural properties that you are recommending as eligible for the National 0 Register. B) Number of cultural properties you are a recommending as not eligible for the National 7, (1) Register. Of Item 8A above: a) Number of cultural properties that can/will be 0 avoided. b) Number of cultural properties that will be 0 affected. c) Number of cultural properties that you are recommending data recovery/mitigation. 0 d) Number of cultural properties that were data 0 recovered/mitigated. Of Item 8B above: a) Number of cultural properties that can be 7, (1) avoided. b) Number of cultural properties that will be TBD affected. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ v CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................ 1 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................. 4 Area of Potential Effects (APE)............................................................................................. 5 Project Personnel ................................................................................................................... 6 Report Organization ............................................................................................................. 13 CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT SETTING ........................................................................................... 15 Natural Context .................................................................................................................... 15 Physiography and Geology ......................................................................................... 15 Climate and Hydrology ............................................................................................... 16 Flora and Fauna........................................................................................................... 16 Geomorphology and Subsurface Deposits .................................................................. 17 Geomorphological Setting .......................................................................................... 17 Physical Setting.................................................................................................. 17 Holocene Climate Change ................................................................................. 18 Geological Units ......................................................................................................... 20 Quaternary Recent Alluvium (Qal) .................................................................... 20 Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Qc) ..................................................................... 20 Mesozoic Granitic Bedrock (gra) ...................................................................... 21 Project Geomorphology and the Potential for Buried Deposits.................................. 21 Cultural Context ................................................................................................................... 22 Prehistory .................................................................................................................... 22 Paleoindian Period (12,000 to 7000 B.P.) ......................................................... 22 Pinto Period (7000 to 4000 B.P.) ....................................................................... 23 Gypsum Period (4000 to 1500 B.P.) .................................................................. 23 Rose Spring Period (ca. 1500 to 1000 B.P.) ...................................................... 23 Protohistoric Period (1000 B.P. to European contact) ....................................... 24 Archaeological Patterns ..................................................................................... 24 Ethnographic Background .......................................................................................... 24 History......................................................................................................................... 25 Early Exploration ............................................................................................... 25 Mining ................................................................................................................ 27 Railroad .............................................................................................................. 28 Agriculture ......................................................................................................... 28 Los Angeles Aqueduct ....................................................................................... 28 The Military ....................................................................................................... 29 California City ................................................................................................... 30 RE Cinco Gen-Tie Line Project Class III Survey Report Page i CHAPTER 3 – ARCHIVAL RESEARCH AND CONTACT PROGRAM ................................ 31 Records Search .................................................................................................................... 31 Previous Studies .......................................................................................................... 31 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources.................................................................... 31 Other Archival Research ............................................................................................. 36 Historic Maps ..................................................................................................... 36 Contact Program .................................................................................................................. 41 Native American Contact Program ............................................................................. 41 Required Permits.................................................................................................................. 41 CHAPTER 4 – METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 43 Survey Methods ................................................................................................................... 43 Documentation ............................................................................................................ 43 Site Types ............................................................................................................................ 44 Prehistoric Site Types ................................................................................................. 44 Lithic Scatters .................................................................................................... 44 Habitation Sites .................................................................................................. 45 Ceramic Scatters ................................................................................................ 45 Human Remains ................................................................................................. 45 Historic Site Types ...................................................................................................... 45 Refuse Scatters and Dumps ............................................................................... 45 Early Farms and Ranches .................................................................................. 46 Transportation Routes ........................................................................................ 46 Historic Camps and Temporary Settlements ..................................................... 46 Historic Cairns ................................................................................................... 46 Utility and Water Conveyance Features ............................................................ 46 Isolated Finds .............................................................................................................. 46 Research Issues and Themes...............................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Kern County, California

    Kern County, California

    2503 Eastbluff Dr., Suite 206 Newport Beach, California 92660 Fax: (949) 717-0069 Matt Hagemann · Tel: (949) 887-9013 Email: [email protected] August 22, 2012 Gideon Kracov Attorney at Law 801 S. Grand Ave, llu' Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90017 Subject: Comments on the Beacon Photovoltaic Project Dear Mr. Kracov: We have reviewed the July 2012 Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR"i for the Beacon Photovoltaic Project ("Project"). The Project proposes to build a 250-megawatt solar generation facility on approximately 3.6 square miles of land four miles north of California City in Kern County, California. Project components include: • A photovoltaic (PV) solar power generation facllity containing approximately 972,000 panels; • 230 ki lovolt overhead transmission line; • Operations and maintenance building, parking lot, office, and sewer system; and • Access roads (DEIR, p. 3-9). We have reviewed the DEIR for issues associated with air quality, hydrology and water quality, and ha za rds and hazardous materials. The DEIR fails to adequately disclose potentially significa nt impacts from Project constru.ction on workers and offsite r eceptors. A revised DEIR needs to be prepared to adequately disclose and analyze these impacts and provide mitigation, if necessary.· Air Quality The Project is located in t he Eastern Kern Air Pollution Cont rol District ("EKAPCD") and the M ojave Desert Air Basin ("MOAB"). Both the EKAPCD and t he M DAB are designated non-attainment for PMlO (DEIR, pp. 4.2-3, 22). Significant emlssion.s of P:MlO and its contributing sources, such as NOx, will lead 1 to a worsening of regional air quality.
  • People of Snowy Mountain, People of the River: a Multi-Agency Ethnographic Overview and Compendium Relating to Tribes Associated with Clark County, Nevada

    People of Snowy Mountain, People of the River: a Multi-Agency Ethnographic Overview and Compendium Relating to Tribes Associated with Clark County, Nevada

    Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 2012 People of Snowy Mountain, People of the River: A Multi-Agency Ethnographic Overview and Compendium Relating to Tribes Associated with Clark County, Nevada Douglas Deur Portland State University, [email protected] Deborah Confer University of Washington Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons, and the Sustainability Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Deur, Douglas and Confer, Deborah, "People of Snowy Mountain, People of the River: A Multi-Agency Ethnographic Overview and Compendium Relating to Tribes Associated with Clark County, Nevada" (2012). Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations. 98. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac/98 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Pacific West Region: Social Science Series National Park Service Publication Number 2012-01 U.S. Department of the Interior PEOPLE OF SNOWY MOUNTAIN, PEOPLE OF THE RIVER: A MULTI-AGENCY ETHNOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW AND COMPENDIUM RELATING TO TRIBES ASSOCIATED WITH CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA 2012 Douglas Deur, Ph.D. and Deborah Confer LAKE MEAD AND BLACK CANYON Doc Searls Photo, Courtesy Wikimedia Commons
  • Energy Storage Development Plan

    Energy Storage Development Plan

    Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Energy Storage Development Plan Grid Planning and Development System Studies and Research Group September 2, 2014 This space is intentionally left blank Table of Contents: Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1 A. Background ............................................................................................................. 1 B. Scope and Objectives .............................................................................................. 1 C. Energy Storage Targets ........................................................................................... 1 1. Overview and Policy ....................................................................................................... 3 A. Purpose .................................................................................................................... 3 B. Background ............................................................................................................. 3 C. ES Regulation, Policy, and Legislative Impacts ..................................................... 5 2. Scope & Objectives ......................................................................................................... 5 A. Energy Storage System Development Strategy ...................................................... 6 B. Energy Storage System Target Development Schedule ......................................... 6 3. Description of Existing
  • The Bearhead Rhyolite, Jemez Volcanic Field, NM

    The Bearhead Rhyolite, Jemez Volcanic Field, NM

    Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 107 32001) 241±264 www.elsevier.com/locate/jvolgeores Effusive eruptions from a large silicic magma chamber: the Bearhead Rhyolite, Jemez volcanic ®eld, NM Leigh Justet*, Terry L. Spell Department of Geosciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, 89154-4010, USA Received 23 February 2000; accepted 6 November 2000 Abstract Large continental silicic magma systems commonly produce voluminous ignimbrites and associated caldera collapse events. Less conspicuous and relatively poorly documented are cases in which silicic magma chambers of similar size to those associated with caldera-forming events produce dominantly effusive eruptions of small-volume rhyolite domes and ¯ows. The Bearhead Rhyolite and associated Peralta Tuff Member in the Jemez volcanic ®eld, New Mexico, represent small-volume eruptions from a large silicic magma system in which no caldera-forming event occurred, and thus may have implications for the genesis and eruption of large volumes of silicic magma and the long-term evolution of continental silicic magma systems. 40Ar/39Ar dating reveals that most units mapped as Bearhead Rhyolite and Peralta Tuff 3the Main Group) were erupted during an ,540 ka interval between 7.06 and 6.52 Ma. These rocks de®ne a chemically coherent group of high-silica rhyolites that can be related by simple fractional crystallization models. Preceding the Main Group, minor amounts of unrelated trachydacite and low silica rhyolite were erupted at ,11±9 and ,8 Ma, respectively, whereas subsequent to the Main Group minor amounts of unrelated rhyolites were erupted at ,6.1 and ,1.5 Ma. The chemical coherency, apparent fractional crystallization-derived geochemical trends, large areal distribution of rhyolite domes 3,200 km2), and presence of a major hydrothermal system support the hypothesis that Main Group magmas were derived from a single, large, shallow magma chamber.
  • Fish Traps on Ancient Shores

    Fish Traps on Ancient Shores

    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-2007 Fish traps on ancient shores Eric Stephen White University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation White, Eric Stephen, "Fish traps on ancient shores" (2007). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 2197. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/7v2b-4kwu This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FISH TRAPS ON ANCIENT SHORES By Eric Stephen White Master of Arts University of Nevada Las Vegas 2007 A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree in Anthropology Department of Anthropology and Ethnic Studies College of Liberal Arts Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas August 2007 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1448429 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
  • "A Review of Pertinent Literature on Volcanic-Magmatic and Tectonic

    "A Review of Pertinent Literature on Volcanic-Magmatic and Tectonic

    CNWRA 92 025 ~~~_- _ -N A A0on 0 ~~~~~~~~- 0 -~~~ A I M Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract NRC-02-88-005 Prepared by Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses San Antonio, Texas September 1992 462.2 --- T1993032400 0 1 A Review of Pertinent Lite-rture on Volcanic-Magmatic and Tectonic History of the Basin CNWRA 92-025 Property of CNWRA Library A REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERATURE ON VOLCANIC- MAGMATIC AND TECTONIC HISTORY OF THE BASIN AND RANGE Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract NRC-02-88-005 Prepared by Gerry L. Stirewalt Stephen R. Young Kenneth D. Mahrer Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses San Antonio, Texas September 1992 ABSTRACT The long-range goal of the Volcanism Research Project is to assess likelihood of volcanic and magmatic activity in the Yucca Mountain area and the potential for disruption of a repository at Yucca Mountain by that activity. To this end, this report discusses extent of available volcanic and tectonic data for the Basin and Range Physiographic Province, assesses usefulness of these data for constraining conceptual models of tectonism and associated volcanism in the Basin and Range, and addresses use of nonlinear dynamics for analyzing patterns of volcanism. Based on data from review of existing literature, the following conclusions and recommendations are drawn to provide guidance for future work in the remaining tasks of this project: (i) middle to late Cenozoic (i.e., less than 55 million years ago) volcanism in the Basin and Range Province can be broadly correlated
  • Ai Margini Del Dialetto

    Ai Margini Del Dialetto

    Bruno Moretti Ai margini del dialetto. Varietà in sviluppo e varietà in via di riduzione in una situazione di 'inizio di decadimento' Osservatorio Linguistico della Svizzera Italiana Bellinzona 1999 2 Il presente testo è stato accettato nel semestre invernale 1997-1998 dalla Facoltà di Lettere dell'Università di Berna come lavoro di abilitazione 3 Indice Introduzione............................................................................................................ 1 1. Il calo della dialettofonia e le varietà marginali ................................................... 10 1.1. Il dialetto come varietà ‘in via di decadimento’ ...................................... 10 1.2. Le varietà dei parlanti evanescenti........................................................ 24 1.2.1. Parlare dialetto: tra competenza e identità .............................. 25 1.2.2. Il ruolo dell'italiano ................................................................... 26 1.2.3. Fenomeni di asimmetria .......................................................... 29 1.2.4. La 'morfologia interlinguistica' e la costruzione lessicale nel dialetto lingua seconda ................................................................ 36 1.2.5. Il ruolo del francese come lingua d'appoggio........................... 48 1.3. Il riassestamento della diglossia............................................................ 51 2. Aspetti quantitativi della situazione ticinese da ieri a oggi .................................. 56 3. Varietà di non nativi..........................................................................................
  • Federal Interagency Geothermal Activities 2011

    Federal Interagency Geothermal Activities 2011

    FEDERAL INTERAGENCY GEOTHERMAL ACTIVITIES Updated JUNE 2011 WORKING DRAFT Geothermal Technologies Program Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy FEDERAL INTERAGENCY GEOTHERMAL ACTIVITIES The principal organizers of this updated document were Arlene Anderson of the Geothermal Technologies Program, U.S. Department of Energy, and Loretta Prencipe, Richard M. Todaro (technical editor), New West Technologies, LLC, and David Cuyler, Distinguished Technical Fellow, Sandia National Laboratory, Contractor to DOE, in cooperation with the Federal Interagency Geothermal Working Group facilitated by Elizabeth Eide of the National Research Council’s Committee on Earth Resources. Arlene Anderson U.S. Department of Energy, Geothermal Technologies Program Seth Broadfoot U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Chris Cassidy U.S. Department of Agriculture Kara Chadwick U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service Paul Crigler U.S. Department of Defense, Army National Guard James Critchfield U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Jennifer Derstine U.S. Department of Commerce Ronald Diehl U.S. Department of Defense, Department of the Army Robert Fujimoto U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service Al McKee U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management Jason McKenna U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Elena Melchert U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy David Meyer U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Brenda Pierce Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey Andrew Sabin U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Naval Air Weapons Station, Geothermal Program Office Christopher Swihart U.S.
  • 150 Geologic Facts About California

    150 Geologic Facts About California

    California Geological Survey - 150th Anniversary 150 Geologic Facts about California California’s geology is varied and complex. The high mountains and broad valleys we see today were created over long periods of time by geologic processes such as fault movement, volcanism, sea level change, erosion and sedimentation. Below are 150 facts about the geology of California and the California Geological Survey (CGS). General Geology and Landforms 1 California has more than 800 different geologic units that provide a variety of rock types, mineral resources, geologic structures and spectacular scenery. 2 Both the highest and lowest elevations in the 48 contiguous states are in California, only 80 miles apart. The tallest mountain peak is Mt. Whitney at 14,496 feet; the lowest elevation in California and North America is in Death Valley at 282 feet below sea level. 3 California’s state mineral is gold. The Gold Rush of 1849 caused an influx of settlers and led to California becoming the 31st state in 1850. 4 California’s state rock is serpentine. It is apple-green to black in color and is often mottled with light and dark colors, similar to a snake. It is a metamorphic rock typically derived from iron- and magnesium-rich igneous rocks from the Earth’s mantle (the layer below the Earth’s crust). It is sometimes associated with fault zones and often has a greasy or silky luster and a soapy feel. 5 California’s state fossil is the saber-toothed cat. In California, the most abundant fossils of the saber-toothed cat are found at the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles.
  • Transforming Tomorrow

    Transforming Tomorrow

    TRANSFORMING TOMORROW calstate.edu/impact-of-the-csu/research CSU research, scholarship and creative activity positively impact student success and faculty excellence with opportunities to explore, investigate and solve the issues facing California’s diverse communities, the nation and the world. The hallmark of a CSU education includes experiential learning to engage, retain and propel students to successful careers. Within the following pages are delightful exemplars from our 23 campuses and 10 affinity groups that showcase innovative applications of discoveries and the creation of new knowledge. TABLE OF CONTENTS AFFINITY CSU GROUPS CAMPUSES 7 Agriculture 41 Bakersfield Research 45 Channel Islands Institute 49 Chico 11 California Desert Studies 53 Dominguez Hills Consortium 57 East Bay 15 Council on Ocean 61 Fresno Affairs, Science and Technology 65 Fullerton 19 CSU Program 69 Humboldt for Education 73 Long Beach and Research in 77 Los Angeles Biotechnology 81 Maritime Academy 23 Moss Landing Marine 85 Monterey Bay Laboratories 89 Northridge 27 Ocean Studies 93 Pomona Institute 97 Sacramento 29 CSU Shiley Institute for 101 San Bernardino Palliative Care 105 San Diego 33 Social Science 109 San Francisco Research and 113 San José Instructional Council 117 San Luis Obispo 35 STEM-NET 121 San Marcos 39 Water Resources 125 Sonoma and Policy 129 Stanislaus Initiatives 3 On behalf of the entire California State University, I congratulate the students and faculty who distinguish themselves through exemplary research, scholarship and creative activity. Working together, they advance knowledge, understanding and creative expression at the forefront of their disciplines to benefit California’s diverse communities, the nation and the world.
  • Dry Lake Valley North SEZ Analysis

    Dry Lake Valley North SEZ Analysis

    1 11.4 DRY LAKE VALLEY NORTH 2 3 4 11.4.1 Background and Summary of Impacts 5 6 7 11.4.1.1 General Information 8 9 The proposed Dry Lake Valley North SEZ is located in Lincoln County in southeastern 10 Nevada (Figure 11.4.1.1-1). The SEZ has a total area of 76,874 acres (311 km2). In 2008, the 11 county population was 4,643, while adjacent Clark County to the south had a population 12 of 1,879,093. The closest population centers to the SEZ are Pioche, located about 15 mi (24 km) 13 to the east, and Caliente, located about 15 mi (24 km) to the southeast; both communities have 14 populations of about 1,000. The smaller communities of Caselton and Prince are located about 15 13 mi (21 km) to the east of the SEZ. Las Vegas is located about 110 mi (180 km) to the south. 16 17 The nearest major road to the Dry Lake Valley North SEZ is State Route 318, which is 18 about 7 mi (11 km) to the west of the SEZ, while U.S. 93 is about 8 mi (13 km) to the south. 19 Access to the interior of the SEZ is by dirt roads. The nearest railroad access is approximately 20 25 mi (40 km) away, while nearby airports include Lincoln County Airport in Panaca and Alamo 21 Landing Field in Alamo, which are located about 13 mi (21 km) south–southeast of and 35 mi 22 (56 km) southwest of the SEZ, respectively.
  • Appendix E: Cultural Resources Technical Report

    Appendix E: Cultural Resources Technical Report

    SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN DRAFT PEIR COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Appendices Appendix E: Cultural Resources Technical Report June 2019 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN DRAFT PEIR COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Appendices This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 2019 PREPARED FOR PlaceWorks PREPARED BY SWCA Environmental Consultants E-1 E-2 CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for PlaceWorks 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707 Attn: Colin Drukker Prepared by Alex Wesson, B.A., Chris Millington, M.A., RPA and Nicole Kromarek, B.A. SWCA Environmental Consultants 51 W. Dayton Street Pasadena, California 91105 (626) 240-0587 www.swca.com Contact: Chris Millington, Project Manager SWCA Project No. 31474 SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 18-270 February 2019 E-3 This page intentionally left blank. E-4 Cultural Resource Technical Report for the San Bernardino Countywide Plan, San Bernardino County, California EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose and Scope: In support of the forthcoming San Bernardino Countywide Plan, PlaceWorks retained SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) to summarize the existing conditions of cultural resources within the study area, evaluate potential impacts that could occur to these resources because of the Countywide Plan, and to provide mitigation measures for potential impacts. The study area is composed of all unincorporated lands that are subject to the County of San Bernardino’s land use jurisdiction; also referred to as the “County Control Area,” the study area is approximately 1,623,988 acres (2,537 square miles) in area, or 12.627 percent of the approximately 12,861,026-acre (20,105- square mile) county.