Appendix G Paleontological Resources Assessment

Home , Bear dog, Etchegoin Formation, Monterey Formation, Temblor Formation

Paleontological Resource Assessment for the California Flats Solar Project, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, California

Jessica L. DeBusk

Prepared By

Applied EarthWorks, Inc. 743 Pacific Street, Suite A San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Prepared For Element Power US, LLC 421 SW Sixth Avenue, Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97204

April 2013 draft

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

At the request of Element Power US, LLC, parent company of California Flats Solar, LLC (the Applicant), Applied EarthWorks Inc. (Æ) performed a paleontological resource assessment for the California Flats Solar Project (Project) located southeast of Parkfield in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, California. The study consisted of a museum records search, a comprehensive literature and geologic map review, and a field survey. This report summarizes the methods and results of the paleontological resource assessment and provides Project-specific management recommendations.

This assessment included a comprehensive review of published and unpublished literature and museum collections records maintained by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM) and the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP). The purpose of the literature review and museum records search was to identify the geologic units underlying the Project area and to determine whether or not previously recorded paleontological localities occur either within the Project boundaries or within the same geologic units elsewhere. The museum records search was followed by a field survey. The purpose of the field survey was to visually inspect the ground surface for exposed fossils and to evaluate geologic exposures for their potential to contain preserved fossil material at the subsurface. Using the results of museum records search and field survey, the paleontological resource potential of the Project area was determined in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines.

Published mapping indicates that the Project area is underlain by eight individually mapped geologic units, spanning the Tertiary to the Quaternary periods. Museum records identified no previously recorded paleontological localities directly within Project boundaries; however, UCMP records indicate that at least 18 previously documented fossil localities have been reported from within the same geologic units underlying the Project area elsewhere in San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties. The LACM reported 15 nearby fossil localities from within the same geologic units underlying the Project area. No fossil localities were discovered during the course of the field survey.

As a result of this study, the geologic units underlying the Project area are determined to have a paleontological resource potential (i.e., sensitivity) ranging from low to high. Units of high paleontological sensitivity include the Tertiary age Etchegoin, Monterey, and Temblor formations (and members thereof). Units of low paleontological sensitivity include Quaternary surficial alluvial deposits and landslide deposits. Quaternary age older surficial sediments may be sensitive for paleontological resources at depth or may overlie sensitive Tertiary age units. Therefore, this geologic unit is considered to have a paleontological sensitivity ranging from low to high (increasing with depth).

Much of the Project area is underlain either at the surface or at depth by geologic units with a proven potential to yield significant paleontological resources, and the likelihood of impacting vertebrate fossils during construction is high. Therefore, paleontological resource monitoring during Project construction is recommended. In addition, prior to the start of construction all

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project iii field personnel should receive a worker’s environmental training module on paleontological resources. By implementing these mitigation measures during Project development, adverse impacts to paleontological resources can be reduced to a less than significant level pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.

iv Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION...... 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION ...... 1 1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION ...... 1

2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ...... 5 2.1 FEDERAL...... 5 2.2 STATE ...... 5 2.2.1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ...... 5 2.2.2 Public Resources Code ...... 5 2.3 LOCAL ...... 5 2.3.1 Monterey County General Plan ...... 5 2.3.2 San Luis Obispo County General Plan ...... 6

3 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES ...... 7 3.1 DEFINITION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ...... 7 3.2 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY ...... 7

4 METHODS ...... 9 4.1 LITERATURE REVIEW AND RECORDS SEARCH ...... 9 4.2 FIELDWORK ...... 9 4.3 KEY PERSONNEL ...... 9

5 GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY ...... 11 5.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...... 11 5.2 GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY OF THE PROJECT AREA ...... 11 5.2.1 Quaternary alluvial deposits ...... 12 5.2.2 Etchegoin Formation ...... 12 5.2.3 Monterey Formation ...... 16 5.2.4 Temblor Formation ...... 16

6 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ...... 17 6.1 MUSEUM RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS ...... 17 6.2 FIELDWORK RESULTS ...... 19 6.3 DETERMINATION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL FOR GEOLOGIC UNITS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA ...... 23

7 CONCLUSIONS ...... 27

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project v 8 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 29 8.1 WORKER’S ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS TRAINING ...... 29 8.2 PALEONTOLOGICAL MONITORING ...... 29 8.3 FOSSIL PREPARATION, CURATION, AND REPORTING ...... 30

9 REFERENCES CITED ...... 31

FIGURES

1-1 Project vicinity in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, California ...... 2 1-2 Project location on the U.S. Geological Survey Paso Robles 30-minute quadrangle ...... 3 1-3 Aerial view of the Project area ...... 4

5-1 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 1 of 3) ...... 13 5-2 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 2 of 3) ...... 14 5-3 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 3 of 3) ...... 15

6-1 An outcrop of the Etchegoin Formation, looking north-northwest in the northwestern portion of the Project area north of Turkey Flat ...... 20 6-2 Looking northeast at an outcropping of the McClure Shale Member of the Monterey Formation in the central portion of the Project area east of Turkey Flat and northwest of Cottonwood Creek ...... 20 6-3 An outcropping of the McClure Shale Member of the Monterey Formation in the central portion of the Project area, looking west-northwest ...... 21 6-4 Soil development overlying Monterey Formation bedrock along Cottonwood Creek, looking northwest from the north-south access road ...... 21 6-5 Temblor Formation (marine member) east of Cottonwood Creek, looking east ...... 22 6-6 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 1 of 3) ...... 24 6-7 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 2 of 3) ...... 25 6-8 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 3 of 3) ...... 26

TABLES

3-1 Paleontological Sensitivity Categories ...... 8

6-1 Vertebrate Localities in the General Vicinity of the Project Area ...... 18 6-2 Geologic Units in the Project Area and Their Paleontological Resource Potential ...... 23

vi Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 1 INTRODUCTION

At the request of Element Power US, LLC, the parent company of California Flats Solar, LLC (the Applicant), Applied EarthWorks, Inc. (Æ) performed a paleontological resource assessment for the California Flats Solar Project (Project) located southeast of the community of Parkfield in southeastern Monterey County and northeastern San Luis Obispo County, California (Figure 1-1). The study consisted of a museum records search, a comprehensive literature and geologic map review, a field survey, and preparation of this technical report with Project-specific management recommendations.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

California Flats Solar, LLC is proposing to develop a 280 megawatt photovoltaic solar facility on grazing and agricultural land owned by the Hearst Corporation. The Project area is approximately 2,675 acres in size and is mapped within Sections 1–3, 7, 12–13, and 23–24 of Township 24 South, Range 15 East; Section 34 and 35 of Township 23 South, Range 15 East; Sections 7, 18–19, and 30 of Township 24 South, Range 16 East; and within unsectioned portions of the Cholame Land Grant as depicted on the U.S. Geological Survey The Dark Hole, Cholame Valley, and Cholame, CA 7.5-minute quadrangles. Access to the Project will be from State Route 41 via an existing ranch road, to be upgraded. The Project location is depicted in Figure 1-2 and an aerial view is shown in Figure 1-3.

1.2 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

The purpose of this paleontological resource assessment is to: (1) identify the geologic units within the Project area, (2) assess their paleontological resource potential (i.e., “sensitivity”), (3) evaluate whether or not the Project has the potential to adversely impact scientifically significant paleontological resources, and (4) provide Project-specific mitigation measures to be implemented during development (as necessary). This assessment was performed to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and was conducted in accordance with professional standards and guidelines set forth by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP 2010).

1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION

This report documents the results of Æ’s paleontological resource assessment of the Project area. Chapter 1 introduces the Project and defines the purpose of the investigation. Chapter 2 outlines the regulatory framework governing the Project. Chapter 3 presents the paleontological resources guidelines and professional standards used for this assessment, and Chapter 4 presents the study methods. The geology and paleontology of the Project area is described in Chapter 5, while Chapter 6 presents the analysis and results of the assessment. Chapter 7 provides conclusions, followed by management recommendations in Chapter 8. References cited in the text are listed in Chapter 9.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 1 ! !Hollister Madera Clovis ! Fresno Salinas ! Pacific Grove! S a n ! S a n B e n i t o Selma San Benito ! ! Kingsburg Soledad F r e s n o ! !

Big Sur ! Lemoore Visalia ! ! Tulare M o n t e r e y Coalinga ! M o n t e r e y ! T u l a r e K i n g s Corcoran ! Porterville Kettleman City ! ! PROJECT AREA

Delano ! Paso Robles ! Lost Hills ! Wasco San Luis Obispo ! Shafter ! Morro Bay ¨¦§5 ! Bakersfield San Luis Obispo ! ! K e r n ¨¦§101 Ford City !

Santa Maria !

Santa Barbara

Lompoc ! V e n t u r a

Santa Barbara ! Carpinteria ! Ventura Moorpark ! ! Oxnard ! ! Thousand Oaks Point Dume !

25 0 25 50 75 100 PROJECT Miles AREA 25 0 25 50 75 100 125 Kilometers j 1:2,000,000 N

Figure 1-1 Project vicinity in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, California.

2 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project PROJECT AREA

Paso Robles, CA 30' x 60' USGS Quadrangle

0 2 4 Miles j 1:100,000 N

Figure 1-2 Project location on the U.S. Geological Survey Paso Robles 30-minute quadrangle.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 3 PROJECT AREA

Basemap Bing Aerial Imagery Web Mapping Service ©Microsoft Corporation and its Data Partners

0 2.5 5 Miles j 1:100,000 N

Figure 1-3 Aerial view of the Project area.

4 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) are considered nonrenewable scientific resources because they cannot be replaced once destroyed. As such, paleontological resources are afforded protection under the various federal, state, and local laws and regulations discussed below.

2.1 FEDERAL

Paleontological resources are afforded protection under numerous federal laws and regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA). The PRPA was recently enacted as a result of the passage of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 and requires federal land management agencies to manage and protect paleontological resources, affirming the authority of existing policies already in place. Federal laws and regulations would only apply to the Project if it is located on federal lands or if the Project receives federal funding.

2.2 STATE

2.2.1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

Paleontological resources are considered nonrenewable scientific resources and are protected under the CEQA. Specifically, in Section V(c) of Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the “Environmental Checklist Form,” the question is posed: “Will the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?” In order to determine the uniqueness of a given paleontological resource, it must first be identified or recovered (i.e., salvaged). Therefore, mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources is mandated by CEQA.

2.2.2 Public Resources Code

Public Resources Code 5097.5 affirms that no person shall willingly or knowingly excavate, remove, or otherwise destroy a vertebrate paleontological site or paleontological feature without the express permission of the overseeing public land agency. It further states under Code 30244 that any development that would adversely impact paleontological resources shall require reasonable mitigation. These regulations would only apply to the Project if it is located on land owned by or under the jurisdiction of the state or a city, county, district, or other public agency.

2.3 LOCAL

2.3.1 Monterey County General Plan

The 2007 Draft Monterey County General Plan addresses paleontological resources in its Conservation and Open Space Element. Under Goal OS-7, the following policies have been put into place in order to preserve and protect paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA:

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 5 OS-7.1 Important representative and unique paleontological sites and features shall be identified and protected. Developers shall be required to complete Phase I (reconnaissance level) paleontological reviews in any formation known to yield important elements of the fossil record. If significant fossil deposits are found during grading activities, data recovery shall be required to obtain a sample of materials from such deposits prior to their systematic destruction. OS-7.2 Information on the location and significance of the County’s paleontological resources shall be compiled and used in the environment and development review process. This compilation process shall involve consulting with knowledgeable academic professionals. OS-7.3 Development proposed within high and moderate sensitivity zones and known fossil bearing formations shall require a paleontological field inspection prior to approval. Routine and Ongoing Agricultural Activities are exempted from this policy in so far as allowed by state or federal law. OS-7.4 Development proposed in low sensitivity zones are not required to have a paleontological survey unless there is specific additional information that suggests paleontological resources are present. OS-7.5 Policies and procedures shall be established that encourage development to avoid impacts to sensitive paleontological sites including: a. designing or clustering development to avoid paleontological deposits; b. dedicating permanent conservation easements shall be required where subdivisions and other developments can be planned to provide for such protective easements [Monterey County 2010:C/OS-16].

2.3.2 San Luis Obispo County General Plan

Paleontological resources are addressed under the Conservation and Open Space Element of the County of San Luis Obispo General Plan 2010. Goal CR 4 states, “The County’s known and potential Native American, archaeological, and paleontological resources will be preserved and protected.” Policy CR 4.5 states, “Protect paleontological resources from the effects of development by avoiding disturbance where feasible.” In order to fulfill this goal, the County has set forth the following implementation strategies:

Implementation Strategy CR 4.5.1 Paleontological Studies Require a paleontological resource assessment and mitigation plan to 1) identify the extent and potential significance of the resources that may exist within the proposed development and 2) provide mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts when existing information indicates that a site proposed for development may contain biological, paleontological, or other scientific resources. Implementation Strategy CR 4.5.2 Paleontological Monitoring Require a paleontologist and/or registered geologist to monitor site-grading activities when paleontological resources are known or likely to occur. The monitor will have the authority to halt grading to determine the appropriate protection or mitigation measures. Measures may include collection of paleontological resources, curation of any resources collected with an appropriate repository, and documentation with the County [San Luis Obispo County 2010:4.15].

6 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 3 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES

3.1 DEFINITION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA

Paleontological resources are the evidence of once-living organisms as preserved in the rock record. They include both the fossilized remains of ancient plants and animals and the traces thereof (trackways, imprints, burrows, etc.). In general, fossils are considered to be older than recorded human history or greater than 5,000 years old and are typically preserved in sedimentary rocks. Although rare, fossils can also be preserved in volcanic rocks and low-grade metamorphic rocks formed under certain conditions (SVP 2010).

Significant paleontological resources are defined as “identifiable” vertebrate fossils, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils that provide taphonomic, taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, stratigraphic, or biochronological data (SVP 2010). These data are important because they are used to examine evolutionary relationships, provide insight on the development of and interaction between biological communities, establish time scales for geologic studies, and for many other scientific purposes (Scott and Springer 2003; SVP 2010).

3.2 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY

Absent specific agency guidelines, most professional paleontologists in California adhere to guidelines set forth by SVP in “Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources” (SVP 2010). These guidelines establish detailed protocols for assessing the paleontological resource potential (i.e., “sensitivity”) of a project area and outline measures to follow to mitigate adverse impacts to known or unknown fossil resources during project development. To prevent project delays, SVP highly recommends that the owner or developer retain a qualified professional paleontologist in the advance planning phases of a project to conduct an assessment and implement paleontological mitigation during construction, as necessary.

Using baseline information gathered during a paleontological resource assessment, the paleontological resource potential of the geologic unit(s) (or members thereof) underlying a Project area can be assigned to one of four categories defined by SVP (2010). These categories include high, undetermined, low, and no potential. The criteria for each sensitivity classification, and the corresponding mitigation recommendations, are summarized in Table 3-1.

If a project area is determined to have high or undetermined potential for paleontological resources following the initial assessment, then SVP recommends that a paleontological resources mitigation plan be developed and implemented during the construction phase of a project. The mitigation plan describes, in detail, when and where paleontological monitoring will take place and establishes communication protocols to be followed in the event that an

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 7 Table 3-1 Paleontological Sensitivity Categories Resource Potential Criteria Mitigation Recommendations No Potential Rock units that are formed under or exposed to No mitigation required. immense heat and pressure, such as high-grade metamorphic rocks and plutonic igneous rocks. Low Potential Rocks units that have yielded few fossils in the past, Mitigation is not typically required. based upon review of available literature and museum collections records. Geologic units of low potential also include those that yield fossils only on rare occasion and under unusual circumstances. Undetermined In some cases, available literature on a particular A field survey is required to further assess Potential geologic unit will be scarce and a determination of the unit’s paleontological potential. whether or not it is fossiliferous or potentially fossiliferous will be difficult to make. Under these circumstances, further study is needed to determine the unit’s paleontological resource potential (i.e., field survey). High Potential Geologic units with high potential for paleontological Typically, a field survey as well as onsite resources are those that have proven to yield construction monitoring will be required. vertebrate or significant invertebrate, plant or trace Any significant specimens discovered will fossils in the past or are likely to contain new need to be prepared, identified, and curated vertebrate materials, traces, or trackways. Rock units into a museum. A final report documenting with high potential also may include those that the significance of the finds will also be contain datable organic remains older than late required. Holocene (e.g., animal nests or middens). Adapted from SVP (2010).

unanticipated fossil discovery is made during project development. If significant fossil resources are known to occur within the boundaries of the project and have not been collected, then the plan will outline the procedures to be followed prior to the commencement of construction (i.e., preconstruction salvage efforts or avoidance measures including fencing off a locality). Should microfossils be known to occur in the geologic unit(s) underlying the Project area or suspected to occur, then the plan will describe the methodology for matrix sampling and screening.

The paleontological mitigation plan should be prepared by a qualified professional paleontologist and developed using the results of the initial paleontological assessment and survey. Elements of the plan can be adjusted throughout the course of a project as new information is gathered and conditions change, so long as the lead agency is consulted and all parties are in agreement. For example, if after 50 percent of earth disturbing activities have occurred in a particular unit or area, and no fossils whatsoever have been discovered, then the project paleontologist can reduce or eliminate monitoring efforts in that unit or area.

8 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 4 METHODS

4.1 LITERATURE REVIEW AND RECORDS SEARCH

Unlike archaeological sites, paleontological resources are not found in “soil” but are contained within the geologic deposits or bedrock that underlies the soil layer. Therefore, in order to ascertain whether or not a particular project area has the potential to contain significant fossil resources, it is necessary to review relevant scientific literature and geologic mapping to determine the underlying geology and stratigraphy of the area. Further, to delineate the boundaries of an area of paleontological sensitivity it is necessary to determine the extent of the entire geologic unit, because paleontological sensitivity is not limited to surface exposures of fossil material.

To determine whether or not fossil localities have been previously discovered within a project area or a particular rock unit, a search of paleontological locality records on file at pertinent local and regional museums within and near the project area should be performed. For the California Flats Solar Project, a museum records search was conducted at the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM). The museum records search was supplemented by a review of the UCMP’s online database, which contains additional paleontological records for Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties.

4.2 FIELDWORK

Æ Senior Paleontologist Jessica DeBusk conducted a preliminary field reconnaissance of the Project area on June 28, 2012. The purpose of the field visit was to perform a cursory evaluation of geologic exposures in the Project area and verify locations within the Project area that required a more comprehensive field survey for paleontological resources. The paleontological field survey of areas determined to be sensitive for paleontological resources was performed on July 12 and 13, 2012. The purpose of the field survey was to inspect the ground surface for exposed fossils and to evaluate geologic exposures for their potential to contain preserved fossil material at the subsurface.

4.3 KEY PERSONNEL

Æ Senior Paleontologist Jessica DeBusk requested the museum records search, conducted the literature and geologic map review, conducted all fieldwork, and authored this technical report. DeBusk has nearly 10 years of professional experience as a consulting paleontologist and meets the SVP’s definition of a qualified professional paleontologist. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Specialist Gregory Greenberg produced all graphics.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 9

10 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 5 GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY

5.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The Project area is located in the Coast Ranges geomorphic province. A geomorphic province is a region of unique topography and geology that is distinguished from other regions based on its landforms and diastrophic history. The Coast Ranges are dominated by elongate ranges and narrow valleys that parallel the coast line. They have two basement rock complexes, the Franciscan basement and the Salinian block. The Franciscan basement is more than 50,000 feet thick and spans over 75,000 square miles on land and on the sea floor. It is composed of about 90 percent grayish green graywackes formed during the Mesozoic by the rapid erosion of volcanic highlands into deep marine basins. The assemblage also contains interbedded shale and limestone and is intruded by serpentenite (Norris and Webb 1990).

The second basement rock complex of the Coast Ranges is the Salinian block, located between the Rinconada-Nacimiento and San Andreas fault zones in the southern ranges, and west of the San Andreas in the northern ranges (Lagoe 1985; Norris and Webb 1990). The complex is composed of metamorphic rocks including gneiss, schist, quartzite, and marble of Mesozoic and Paleozoic age. The Salinian block includes Late Cretaceous age (99.6 million years ago [Ma] to 65.5 Ma) granitic plutons that intrude the metamorphic rocks. These plutons, made up of granodiorite, quartz monzonite, and quartz diorite, are of similar composition to the plutonic rocks that make up the Sierra Nevada and Peninsular Ranges.

The Great Valley sequence is also a major Mesozoic rock unit characterizing the Coast Ranges. This sequence is composed of shale, sandstone, and conglomerates that are Late Jurassic (161.0– 145.5 Ma) to Late Cretaceous in age. The Knoxville Formation, comprising the lower part of the sequence, is exposed for a length of 110 miles along the western Sacramento Valley and is 16,000 feet in thickness. It is dominated by dark shale within sandstone interbeds.

Cenozoic age geologic deposits of the Coast Ranges represent all epochs, although no complete section is found. Early Tertiary deposits overlie both the Salinian and Franciscan blocks, and represent marine deposition occurring during a time of restricted and shallow seaways. Quaternary deposits reflect an increase in tectonism culminating in the middle Pleistocene (1.8 Ma), as evidenced by young faults and elevated marine terraces (Norris and Webb 1990).

5.2 GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY OF THE PROJECT AREA

The northern portion of the Project area is located southwest of Table Mountain within the Turkey Flat area. The Project area extends southeast across Cottonwood Creek and into Cholame Valley. Cholame Valley is a depressed rift trench about 10 miles in length and more than a mile in width. Its flat alluvial valley floor is situated between the Cholame Hills to the west and a series of discontinuous hills to the east. The trench is bounded on either side by en echelon segments of the San Andreas fault (Dickinson 1966).

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 11 The geology of the Project area is mapped at a scale of 1:250,000 by Jennings (1958) and 1:24,000 by Dibblee (2005a, 2005b, 2005c). According to these published maps, there are eight individually mapped geologic units underlying the Project area, spanning from the Tertiary to the Quaternary periods. These geologic units, and their paleontological resource potential, are described in the following sections and depicted in Figures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3.

5.2.1 Quaternary alluvial deposits

Quaternary alluvial deposits in the Project area include Holocene age (10,000 years before present [B.P.] to recent) surficial deposits, older surficial deposits of Pleistocene age (2.6 Ma– 10,000 B.P.) and landslide rubble of Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene age. Holocene age surficial deposits, mapped as “Qa,” cover the Cholame Valley floor and the Cottonwood Creek drainage. These deposits are composed of fine-grained alluvial gravel, sand, and clay and include shale and serpentenite detritus. Older surficial deposits, mapped as “Qoa,” underlie a large portion of the Turkey Flat area and in the vicinity of Cottonwood Creek. These deposits, composed of slightly consolidated alluvial gravel, sand, and clay may in part be equivalent to the Pliocene age (5.3–2.6 Ma) Paso Robles Formation. Finally, Quaternary landslide rubble, mapped as “Qsp,” is mapped northeast of Turkey Flat and is composed of serpentenite detritus overlying the Etchegoin Formation at an unknown depth (Dibble 2005b).

Quaternary alluvial deposits of Pleistocene age have proven to yield significant vertebrate fossils throughout California (UCMP collections data). In addition, the Paso Robles Formation has yielded at least two vertebrate localities in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties and is considered highly sensitive for fossil resources (UCMP collections data; Kellogg 1921). Holocene age units, particularly those younger than 5,000 years old, are generally too young to contain fossilized material. However, they may overlie sensitive older units at an unknown depth. Finally, landslide deposits do not typically contain intact paleontological resources, especially deposits that are composed of serpentenite.

5.2.2 Etchegoin Formation

The Etchegoin Formation, mapped as “Te,” outcrops intermittently along the northern portion of the Project on either side of the Turkey Flat area. This formation is Pliocene in age and is composed of weakly lithified light gray bedded sandstone with gray silty clay shale (Dibblee 2005b). The type area for the Etchegoin Formation is nearby Coalinga, and the unit outcrops in numerous locations along the western margin of the San Joaquin Valley (Durham 1950; Hanna and Grant 1929). The Etchegoin Formation overlies the Santa Margarita or Monterey Formations and is in turn overlain by the Tulare Formation (Hanna and Grant 1929).

The Etchegoin Formation is well known for its fossil mollusks, including pelecypods and gastropods, and its echinoderms (Durham 1950; Hanna and Grant 1929). It also has yielded numerous vertebrate specimens of marine and terrestrial origin, including the holotype of the fossil horse Merychuppus brevidontus (McLeod 2012).

12 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological Figure 5-1 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 1 of 3).

PROJECT AREA

Legend Geologic Units Qa: Quaternary Surficial Deposits Qoa: Quaternary Older Surficial Sediments Qsp: Quaternary Landslide Rubble (Serpentine) Te: Tertiary Etchegoin Formation Tm: Tertiary Monterey Shale (McClure Member) Tmd: Tertiary Monterey Shale (Devilwater Member) Ttr: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Terrestrial) Tts: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Marine)

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers 13 The Dark Hole and Cholame Valley, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangles 14 Figure 5-2 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 2 of 3).

PROJECT AREA

Legend Qa: Quaternary Surficial Deposits

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological Qoa: Quaternary Older Surficial Sediments Qsp: Quaternary Landslide Rubble (Serpentine) Te: Tertiary Etchegoin Formation Tm: Tertiary Monterey Shale (McClure Member) Tmd: Tertiary Monterey Shale (Devilwater Member) Ttr: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Terrestrial) Tts: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Marine)

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers

Cholame Valley, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangle

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological Figure 5-3 Geologic units in the Project area (Map 3 of 3).

PROJECT AREA

Legend Qa: Quaternary Surficial Deposits Qoa: Quaternary Older Surficial Sediments Qsp: Quaternary Landslide Rubble (Serpentine) Te: Tertiary Etchegoin Formation Tm: Tertiary Monterey Shale (McClure Member) Tmd: Tertiary Monterey Shale (Devilwater Member) Ttr: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Terrestrial) Tts: Tertiary Temblor Formation (Marine)

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers 15 Cholame Valley and Cholame, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangles

5.2.3 Monterey Formation

Members of the Monterey Formation, Miocene in age (23.0–5.3 Ma), outcrop along the margins of much of the Project area. The McLure Shale Member, mapped as “Tm,” is late Miocene in age (16.0–11.6 Ma) and is composed of white-weathered thinly bedded and fractured siliceous shale. The Devilwater Shale Member, mapped as “Tmd,” is middle Miocene in age (11.6– 5.3 Ma) and is composed of gray crumbly clay shale that contains yellow-gray dolomitic concretions and thin interbeds of sandstone (Dibblee 2005b).

The Monterey Formation outcrops in numerous locations along coastal California from San Francisco south to Los Angeles. It is named after extensive exposures in the vicinity of Monterey and is easily recognized by its pale buff to white color (Berndmeyer et al. 2012; Norris and Webb 1990). The Monterey Formation is as much as 1 mile thick and is dominated by finely laminated diatomaceous sediments with scarce terrigenous material. It weathers out to a dark clay-rich soil that typically supports grass instead of trees (Norris and Webb 1990). The Monterey Formation overlies the Rincon Formation, a clayey mudstone of Miocene age, and is in turn overlain by the Sisquoc Formation, a clayey siliceous mudstone of Miocene to possibly Pliocene age (Berndmeyer et al. 2012; Norris and Webb 1990).

The Monterey Formation is well known for producing marine vertebrates, plants, and invertebrates from hundreds of localities in California. Dozens of vertebrate localities have been recorded from this unit and have yielded large sea turtles, whales, pinnipeds, sharks, sea cows, fish, birds, and many other fauna (UCMP collections data).

5.2.4 Temblor Formation

The Temblor Formation is early Miocene (23–16 Ma) to Oligocene in age (33.9–23.0 Ma) and is comprised of six unnamed members (Graham et al. 1989). Two of its members outcrop in the southern portion of the Project area. A light gray to tan arkosic sandstone member, mapped as “Tts,” is marine in origin, thick-bedded, and locally pebbly. A gray to red pebbly sandstone member, mapped as “Ttr,” is terrestrial in origin and includes a red claystone. Both of these unnamed members are early Miocene in age (Dibblee 2005b).

The Temblor Formation was named for exposures northwest of McKittrick along the west side of the Great Valley and later extended to include exposures west of the San Andreas fault (Dickinson 1966; Graham et al. 1989). Its original description included what was considered by others to be the Vaqueros Formation. The two formations have since been referred to jointly as the Vaqueros-Temblor or referenced interchangeably despite known age differences (Dickinson 1966). In its type area, the Temblor Formation consists of six interbedded sandstone and shale members (Graham et al. 1989). Its total thickness reaches almost 500 feet and was likely deposited in various shoreline and nearshore environments (Bridges and Castle 2003).

The Temblor Formation has yielded a wealth of fossil resources, including more than 700 localities in central California. Of those localities, 38 yielded hundreds of vertebrate specimens, including sea cows, gomphothere, mastodon, extinct horse, pinnipeds, fish, and sharks, among other taxa (UCMP collections data).

16 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 6 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

6.1 MUSEUM RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS

Museum records searches for the Project area were conducted by the UCMP on June 18, 2012 and the LACM on June 22, 2012. The museum records searches were supplemented by a review of the UCMP’s online database, which contains paleontological records for San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties. The UCMP reported that there are no previously recorded paleontological localities directly within the Project area (Holroyd, personal communication 2012); however, 18 previously documented vertebrate fossil localities have been reported from within the same geologic units underlying the Project area in other parts of Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties. The LACM also reported that there are no previously recorded paleontological localities within the Project area but reported 15 nearby fossil localities from within the same geologic units underlying the Project area (McLeod 2012).

According to museum records, fossil localities within Quaternary age alluvial deposits have yielded the remains of large mammals such as ground sloth, horse, camel, deer, and bison, and small mammals such as mice, cottontail rabbit, jackrabbit, squirrel, pocket gopher, and kangaroo rat. Specimens of bird, snake, and iguana also have been recovered from these deposits near the Project area. In addition to these Quaternary age discoveries, at least three vertebrate fossil localities have been reported from within the Etchegoin Formation near the Project area. These localities yielded terrestrial as well as marine fauna, including specimens of bird, horse, shark, and sea lion (McLeod 2012).

The UCMP database contains more than 80 fossil locality records from the Temblor Formation in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, of which three yielded unspecified vertebrate remains. The LACM reports nine vertebrate localities from within the Temblor Formation, all north of the Project area in the Big Blue Hills and Ciervo Hills. These localities have yielded a diverse list of taxa, including both terrestrial and marine fauna. The terrestrial fauna include fossil horse, beaver, elephant, bear-dog, rhinoceros, camel, peccaries, dog, tapir, musk deer, and bear. The marine fauna include shark, desmostylian, sea lion, toothed cetacean, and dugong (McLeod 2012).

Finally, more than 1,000 previously recorded paleontological localities from within the Monterey Formation are listed in the UCMP database, including nine vertebrate localities within Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties. These localities yielded specimens of desmostylian, toothed whale, and unspecified mammal remains. The LACM reports at least one nearby locality from within the Monterey Formation, west of the Project area around San Antonio Reservoir. This locality yielded fossilized remains of bonito shark, desmostylian, primitive baleen whale, and right whale (McLeod 2012). The results of the museum records search are presented in Table 6-1.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 17 Table 6-1 Vertebrate Localities in the General Vicinity of the Project Area Geologic Locality Unit Age Number Location Taxa Quaternary Pleistocene UCMP V4002 Monterey Co. Glossotherium (ground sloth), Equus alluvial johnstoni (horse), Equus (horse) deposits UCMP V4856 Monterey Co. Mammalia (mammal) UCMP V4918 Monterey Co. Camelops (camel) UCMP V5576 Monterey Co. Bison latifrons (giant bison) UCMP 1648 San Luis Obispo Co. Mammalia (mammal) LACM 7844, Southeast of the Project Colubridae (snake), Iguanidae (iguanas), 7845 area between Antelope Aves (birds), Lepus (jackrabbit), Sylvilagus Valley and Polonio Pass (cottontail), Sciuridae (squirrels), Thomomys (pocket gopher), Perognathus (pocket mouse), Dipodomys (kangaroo rat), Odocoileus (deer) Etchegoin Pliocene UCMP 130379 Monterey Co. Aves (bird) Formation LACM (CIT) West of north of the Pliohippus (horse) 319 northwestern part of the Project area along Jacalitos Creek LACM 3814 Northeast of the Project Notorhynchus primigenius (sevengill shark), area in Kettleman Hills Pliopedia pacifica (sea lion) Monterey Miocene UCMP 1299 Monterey Co. None listed in database Formation UCMP 6279 Monterey Co. Pinnipedia (pinniped) UCMP V79042 Monterey Co. None listed in database UCMP V2805 San Luis Obispo Co. Mammalia (mammal) UCMP V3214 San Luis Obispo Co. Odontoceti (toothed whale) UCMP V3950 San Luis Obispo Co. Demostylus hesperus (desmostylian) UCMP V72233 San Luis Obispo Co. None listed in database UCMP V79069 San Luis Obispo Co. None listed in database UCMP V81251 San Luis Obispo Co. None listed in database LACM 6169, West of the Project area Isurus hastalis (bonito shark), Isurus planus 6382 around the San Antonio (bonito shark), Desmostylus (desmostylian), Reservoir Cetotheriidae (primitive baleen whales), Balaenidae (right whale) Temblor Early UCMP A1517 Monterey Co. None listed in database Formation Miocene to UCMP V3510 Monterey Co. None listed in database Oligocene UCMP A493 San Luis Obispo Co. None listed in database LACM (CIT) North of the Project Merychippus brevidontus (horse), 108 and 129 area around Domengine Monosaulax pansus (beaver), Proboscidea Creek in the Big Blue (elephant), Amphicyon (bear-dog), Aelurodon Hills (dog), Hemicyon (bear), Aphelops (rhinoceros), Archaeohippus mourninhi (horse), Hypohippus (horse), Merychippus californicus (horse), Merychipuus isoneus (horse), Parahippus brevidens (horse), Cynorca occidentalis (peccary), Prosthennops (peccary), Alticamelus (camel), Miolabis (camel), Procamelus (camel)

18 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Table 6-1 (continued) Vertebrate Localities in the General Vicinity of the Project Area Geologic Locality Unit Age Number Location Taxa Temblor LACM 1020, North of the Project Miotapirus (tapir), Blastomeryx (musk deer), Formation 4253, 5890, area on Monocline Hexanchus (sixgill shark), Carcharocles (continued) 5911-5913, Ridge in the Ciervo megalodon (giant white shark), Otariidae 6066 Hills (sea lion), Odontoceti (toothed cetacean), Dugongidae (dugong), Paleoparadoxia tabatai (desmostylian), Demostylus hesperus (desmostylian) Source: UCMP collections database: http://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/loc.html, accessed June 2012; McLeod (2012).

6.2 FIELDWORK RESULTS

Æ Senior Paleontologist Jessica DeBusk conducted a preliminary field reconnaissance of the Project area on June 28, 2012. During the course of the initial reconnaissance, a windshield survey of the entire Project area was accomplished and all rock outcrops were examined for surface fossils. Areas underlain by Quaternary age units were found to be obscured by vegetation and heavily disturbed by cattle grazing activities, or otherwise too coarse-grained to preserve intact fossil remains. However, other areas, including outcrops of fine-grained shales and sandstone units in the north and central portions of the Project area, were determined to have the potential to contain fossil resources and were subject to an intensive field survey.

An intensive pedestrian walkover of all mapped Tertiary age geologic units in the Project area was conducted by DeBusk on July 12 and 13, 2012. Approximately 150 acres were intensively surveyed for paleontological resources utilizing tightly spaced zig-zag transects covering all portions of the Project area underlain by the Temblor, Monterey, and Etchegoin formations. In the field, DeBusk utilized a Trimble GeoXT Global Positioning System (GPS) unit, topographic maps, and aerial photographs to locate geologic formation boundaries. When a rock outcrop was encountered, the entire surface of the exposure was visually scanned for paleontological resources. Notes were taken on the geology and lithology of each geologic unit and photographs were taken to document the survey.

In the northern portion of the Project area, the Etchegoin Formation was largely obscured by vegetation, but some exposures were found along drainages and intermittently along the surface (Figure 6-1). This geologic deposit was characterized as a light brownish gray moderately indurated, moderately to well-sorted, medium- to fine-grained bedded sandstone with some clay clasts.

The McClure Shale Member of the Monterey Formation was observed in the central portion of the Project area northwest of Cottonwood Creek in a prominent outcrop that is visible to the north from Turkey Flat Road (Figure 6-2). This member was also observed in outcrops west of the main access road that runs north-south through the Project area (Figure 6-3). It was characterized by a grayish brown (weathers white), iron-stained, thinly bedded, highly fractured, well-indurated shale. The McClure Shale Member is also mapped in other parts of the Project area but surface exposures were obscured by vegetation and covered in a thin veneer of alluvium (Figure 6-4).

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 19

Figure 6-1 An outcrop of the Etchegoin Formation, looking north-northwest in the northwestern portion of the Project area north of Turkey Flat.

Figure 6-2 Looking northeast at an outcropping of the McClure Shale Member of the Monterey Formation in the central portion of the Project area east of Turkey Flat and northwest of Cottonwood Creek.

20 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project

Figure 6-3 An outcropping of the McClure Shale Member of the Monterey Formation in the central portion of the Project area, looking west-northwest.

Figure 6-4 Soil development overlying Monterey Formation bedrock along Cottonwood Creek, looking northwest from the north-south access road.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 21 The Devilwater Shale Member of the Monterey Formation is mapped south and east of the Cottonwood Creek drainage. However, no surface exposures were observable within the Project area due to vegetation coverage. Finally, neither the terrestrial or marine members of the Temblor Formation were observed within the Project area during the course of the field survey due to vegetation coverage or soil development. However, the marine member of the Temblor Formation was observable from the north-south access road east of the Cottonwood Creek drainage just slightly outside the Project area (Figure 6-5). It was characterized as a medium grayish brown iron-stained, massively bedded, well-sorted, moderately indurated fine-grained sandstone.

Figure 6-5 Temblor Formation (marine member) east of Cottonwood Creek, looking east.

No fossil resources were discovered during fieldwork; however, more than half of the survey area was obscured by vegetation or soil development, which limited surface visibility. All of the Tertiary age units (Temblor, Monterey, and Etchegoin formations) are characterized by mostly fine-grained sediments that have proven to be conducive to the preservation of vertebrate remains. Therefore, these rock units may contain an unknown number of subsurface fossil resources.

22 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 6.3 DETERMINATION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL FOR GEOLOGIC UNITS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA

Based on the literature review, museum records search results, and field survey, the geologic units underlying the Project area are determined to have a paleontological sensitivity ranging from low to high in accordance to criteria set forth by SVP (2010). Landslide deposits and surface alluvial deposits of Holocene age have low paleontological sensitivity because they are either too young or unlikely to preserve fossilized remains. The Quaternary older surficial sediments also have low potential to contain intact paleontological resources, at least at the surface, because these deposits are heavily disturbed and too coarse grained to preserve fossils. However, these surficial deposits may overlie older intact fine-grained sediments or sensitive Tertiary units at depth. Therefore, areas mapped as Quaternary older surficial sediments are considered to have a low to high paleontological sensitivity, increasing at an unknown depth. The Tertiary age units, including the Etchegoin, Monterey, and Temblor formations, have high paleontological sensitivity because they have yielded significant vertebrate fossils in other locations. The geologic units underlying the Project area and their determined sensitivity ratings are shown in Table 6-2 below and depicted in Figures 6-6, 6-7, and 6-8.

Table 6-2 Geologic Units in the Project Area and Their Paleontological Resource Potential Map Paleontological Geologic Unit Abbreviation Age Known Fossil Types Sensitivity Quaternary surficial Qa Holocene None Low deposits Quaternary landslide Qsp Pleistocene None Low deposits Quaternary older Qoa Pleistocene Terrestrial vertebrates, Low to High surficial sediments invertebrates (increasing with depth) Etchegoin Formation Te Pliocene Invertebrates, terrestrial High vertebrates, marine vertebrates Monterey Formation Tmd, Tm Miocene Invertebrates, microfossils, High plants, marine vertebrates Temblor Formation Ttr, Tts Miocene to Invertebrates, microfossils, High Oligocene marine vertebrates, terrestrial vertebrates Source: Dibblee (2005a, 2005b, 2005c).

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 23 24 Figure 6-6 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 1 of 3).

PROJECT AREA Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological

Legend High Sensitivity Low-High Sensitivity (Increasing with Depth) Low Sensitivity

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers

The Dark Hole and Cholame Valley, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangles Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological Figure 6-7 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 2 of 3).

PROJECT AREA

Legend High Sensitivity Low-High Sensitivity (Increasing with Depth) Low Sensitivity

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers 25 Cholame Valley, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangle 26 Figure 6-8 Paleonotological sensitivity in the Project area (Map 3 of 3).

PROJECT AREA Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project Assessment: California Resource Paleontological

Legend High Sensitivity Low-High Sensitivity (Increasing with Depth) Low Sensitivity

SCALE 1:24,000 1 0.5 0 1 Miles

1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Feet

1 0.5 0 1 ° Kilometers

Cholame Valley and Cholame, CA 7.5' USGS Quadrangles

7 CONCLUSIONS

This assessment is based on the results of a museum records search, review of available geologic and paleontologic literature, and a pedestrian survey of bedrock exposures within the Project area. Therefore, only fossils that have already been inventoried or collected are available for this analysis. In addition to unrecorded surface fossils, there is the potential for paleontological resources to exist within geologic units underlying the Project area. These nonrenewable scientific resources may be at risk of adverse impact by earth-disturbing activities during the development of the Project.

In general, the potential for a given project to result in adverse impacts to paleontological resources is directly proportional to the amount of ground disturbance associated with the project. Much of the Project area is underlain by geologic units with a proven potential to yield significant paleontological resources. Although the Project should not require substantial grading, the likelihood of encountering significant fossils during construction-related ground- disturbing activities is high and mitigation is recommended. By implementing the management recommendations outlined in the following chapter, including worker’s environmental awareness training and on-site construction monitoring, adverse impacts to paleontological resources can be reduced to a less than significant level pursuant to the requirements of CEQA.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 27

28 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 8 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations have been developed in accordance with SVP guidelines for mitigation of impacts to paleontological resources. If implemented, these will satisfy the requirements of CEQA. These measures have been used by professional paleontologists for many years and have proven to be effective in reducing or eliminating adverse impacts to paleontological resources as a result of private and public development projects throughout California and elsewhere.

8.1 WORKER’S ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS TRAINING

Prior to the start of construction, all field personnel should receive a worker’s environmental awareness training module on paleontological resources. The training will provide a description of the fossil resources that may be encountered in the Project area, outline steps to follow in the event that a fossil discovery is made, and provide contact information for the Project Paleontologist and on-site monitor(s). The training will be developed by the Project Paleontologist and may be conducted concurrent with other environmental training (e.g., cultural and natural resources awareness training, safety training, etc.). The training also may be videotaped or presented in an informational brochure for future use by field personnel not present at the start of the Project.

8.2 PALEONTOLOGICAL MONITORING

Prior to the start of construction, the Applicant should retain a qualified professional paleontologist to prepare a Paleontological Resource Mitigation Plan (PRMP) for the Project. The PRMP should include maps showing where monitoring is required, provide protocols for construction monitoring and recovery of significant fossils, identify the Project Paleontologist and qualified on-site monitors, and make provisions for fossil preparation, curation, and reporting. Monitoring will entail the visual inspection of excavated or graded areas and trench sidewalls. In the event that a paleontological resource is discovered, the monitor should have the authority to temporarily divert the construction equipment around the find until it is assessed for scientific significance and collected, if appropriate.

Initially, full-time monitoring should be required during ground disturbing activities in areas determined to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., the Monterey, Temblor, and Etchegoin formations). In areas of high sensitivity, monitoring efforts can be reduced or eliminated at the discretion of the Project Paleontologist if, after 50 percent of the excavations are completed, no fossil resources are encountered. Part-time monitoring or spot checking should occur during the construction of the Project in areas underlain by Quaternary surficial alluvial sediments to determine if underlying sensitive geologic units are being impacted by construction, and at what depth.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 29 8.3 FOSSIL PREPARATION, CURATION, AND REPORTING

Upon completion of fieldwork, all significant fossils collected should be prepared in a properly equipped paleontology laboratory to a point ready for curation. Preparation will include the careful removal of excess matrix from fossil materials and stabilizing and repairing specimens, as necessary. Following laboratory work, all fossil specimens will be identified to the lowest taxonomic level, cataloged, analyzed, and delivered to an accredited museum repository for permanent curation and storage. The cost of curation is assessed by the repository and is the responsibility of the Applicant.

At the conclusion of laboratory work and museum curation, a final report will be prepared describing the results of the paleontological mitigation monitoring efforts associated with the Project. The report will include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the Project area geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report will also be submitted to the designated museum repository.

30 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 9 REFERENCES CITED

Berndmeyer, C., D. Birgel, B. Brunner, L. M. Wehrmann, N. Jons, W. Bach, E. T. Arning, K. B. Follmi, and J. Peckmann 2012 The Influence of Bacterial Activity on Phosphorite Formation in the Miocene Monterey Formation, California. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 317–318:171–181.

Bridges, R. A., and J. W. Castle 2003 Local and Regional Tectonic Control on Sedimentology and Stratigraphy in a Strike- Slip Basin: Miocene Temblor Formation of the Coalinga Area, California, USA. Sedimentary Geology 158:271–297.

Dibblee, T. W. 2005a Geologic Map of the Cholame Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties, California. Dibblee Geology Center Map #DF-144. Scale 1:24,000.

2005b Geologic Map of the Cholame Valley Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties, California, Dibblee Geology Center Map #DF-142. Scale 1:24,000.

2005c Geologic Map of the Dark Hole Quadrangle, Monterey, Fresno, and Kings Counties, California, Dibblee Geology Center Map #DF-140. Scale 1:24,000.

Dickinson, W. R. 1966 Structural Relationships of San Andreas Fault System, Cholame Valley and Castle Mountain Range, California. Geological Society of America Bulletin 77(7):707–726.

Durham, J. W. 1950 Cenozoic Marine Climates of the Pacific Coast. Geological Society of America Bulletin 61(11):1243–1264.

Graham, S. A., R. G. Stanley, J. V. Bent, and J. B. Carter 1989 Oligocene and Miocene Paleogeography of Central California and Displacement along the San Andreas Fault. Geological Society of American Bulletin 101(5):711– 730.

Hanna, G. D., and W. M. Grant 1929 Brackish-Water Pliocene Diatoms from the Etchegoin Formation of Central California. Journal of Paleontology 3(1):87–101.

Jennings, C. W. 1958 Geologic Map of California: San Luis Obispo Sheet. California Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento.

Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project 31 Kellogg, R. 1921 A New Pinniped from the Upper Pliocene of California. Journal of Mammalogy 2(4):212–226.

Lagoe, M. B. 1985 Depositional Environments in the Monterey Formation, Cuyama Basin, California. Geological Society of American Bulletin 86(10):1296–1312.

McLeod, S. A. 2012 Unpublished museum collections records, 4 pp.

Monterey County 2007 Conservation/Open Space Element, http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/planning/gpu/ GPU_2007/2010_Mo_Co_General_Plan_Adopted_102610/Elements_Area-_Master_ Plans/03-Conservation-Open%20Space%20Element_Board%20action.pdf, accessed 4 April 2013. Monterey County General Plan, adopted October 26, 2010. County of Monterey Resource Management Agency and Planning Department.

Norris, Robert M., and Robert W. Webb 1990 Geology of California. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

San Luis Obispo County 2010 Chapter 4, Cultural Resources. In Conservation and Open Space Element, http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PL/Elements/COSE.pdf, accessed 4 April 2013. San Luis Obispo General Plan, May 2010. San Luis Obispo County Planning and Building.

Scott, Eric, and Kathleen Springer 2003 CEQA and Fossil Preservation in California. The Environmental Monitor Fall 2003. Association of Environmental Professionals, Sacramento, California.

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) 2010 Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee.

32 Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project