DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment United States Department of Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Agriculture Forest Service September 2013 Mountaintop Ranger District, San Bernardino National Forest San Bernardino County, California For More Information Contact: David Kotlarski, District Recreation Officer [email protected] 909-382-2815 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250- 9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Environmental Assessment Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Table of Contents Document Structure .................................................................................................................................. ii Chapter 1 – Need for the Proposal ................................................................................................................ 1 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................................................... 4 Decision Framework ................................................................................................................................. 4 Public Involvement ................................................................................................................................... 4 Issues ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2 – Alternatives ............................................................................................................................... 5 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Alternative 1 (Upland East Alternative) ................................................................................................... 9 Alternative 2 (Upland West Alternative) .................................................................................................. 9 Alternative 3 (Full Restoration) ................................................................................................................ 9 Alternative 4 (No Action) ......................................................................................................................... 9 Avoidance/Minimization and Environmental Protection Measures ....................................................... 10 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ................................................................ 16 Comparison of Alternatives .................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences .................................................................................................. 20 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 20 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................................. 21 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 21 Environmental Consequences - Recreation and OHV Opportunities ................................................. 25 Environmental Consequences – Watershed (Soil and Water) ............................................................ 28 Environmental Consequences - Wildlife ............................................................................................ 32 Environmental Consequences - Botanical Resources ......................................................................... 52 Environmental Consequences - SBNF Management Indicator Species ............................................. 54 Environmental Consequences - Non-Native Species .......................................................................... 56 Environmental Consequences - Heritage Resources ........................................................................... 57 Chapter 4 – Agencies and Persons Consulted ............................................................................................. 58 Consultation and Coordination ............................................................................................................... 58 Federal, State and County Officials and Agencies .............................................................................. 58 Tribes .................................................................................................................................................. 58 Page i Environmental Assessment Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Others .................................................................................................................................................. 58 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 59 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 60 Document Structure The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This EA discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and alternatives. The document is organized into five parts: Chapter 1 – Need for the Proposal: The section includes information on the history of the project proposal, the purpose of and need for the project, and the agency’s proposal for achieving that purpose and need. This section also details how the Forest Service informed the public of the proposal and how the public responded. Chapter 2 – Alternatives: This section provides a more detailed description of the agency’s proposed action as well as alternative methods that were considered for achieving the stated purpose. This discussion also includes project design features to minimize the potential for adverse impacts. The alternatives are summarized in comparative form, defining the differences between each alternative and providing a clear basis for choice among options by the decision maker and the public. Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences: This section describes the environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and the effects of alternatives. This analysis is organized by resource areas that have the potential to be affected by implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. Within each resource area, the affected environment is described first, followed by the effects of the action. Chapter 4 – Agencies and Persons Consulted: This section provides a list of preparers and agencies consulted during the development of the EA. Page ii Environmental Assessment Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Chapter 1 – Need for the Proposal The section includes information on the history of the project proposal, the purpose of and need for the project, and the agency’s proposal for achieving that purpose and need. This section also details how the Forest Service informed the public of the proposal and how the public responded. Background The project area is located approximately two miles east of Silverwood Lake State Recreation Area, within the Mountaintop District of the San Bernardino National Forest (SBNF) (Figure 1). The current OHV trailering site is approximately 2 acres in size between National Forest System (NFS) road 2N37 and the East fork of the West fork of the Mojave River (hereafter referred to as Mojave River), in Section 10 of Township 2 North, Range 4 West. The Miller Canyon/Pilot Rock area is a popular Off -Highway Vehicle (OHV) riding area. Setting: Currently, there is an unofficial user-created OHV trailering site located just east of Silverwood Lake State Recreation Area in Miller Canyon on NFS road 2N37. The unofficial Miller Canyon OHV trailering site is connected to about 20 miles of OHV routes open to non- street legal vehicles, including the Pilot Rock, Rock Camp, and Pinnacles areas. Non-street legal vehicles are not permitted on Forest Service routes west or south of the unofficial Miller Canyon trailering site (towards Lake Silverwood and Highway 138). Overnight camping is permitted, however open fires (wood and charcoal) are never permitted.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2
    Simulation of Flows and Water Quality in the California Aqueduct Using DSM2 Siqing Liu, Bob Suits DWR, Bay Delta Office, Modeling Support Branch 2011 CWEMF Annual Meeting, February 28 –March 2 1 Topics • Project objectives • Aqueduct System modeled • Assumptions / issues with modeling • Model results –Flows / Storage, EC, Bromide 2 Objectives Simulate Aqueduct hydraulics and water quality • 1990 – 2010 period • DSM2 Aqueduct version calibrated by CH2Mhill Achieve 1st step in enabling forecasting Physical System Canals simulated • South Bay Aqueduct (42 miles) • California Aqueduct (444 miles) • East Branch to Silverwood Lake • West Branch to Pyramid Lake (40 miles) • Delta‐Mendota Canal (117 miles) 4 Physical System, cont Pumping Plants Banks Pumping Plant Buena Vista (Check 30) Jones Pumping Plant Teerink (Check 35) South Bay Chrisman (Check 36) O’Neill Pumping-Generating Edmonston (Check 40) Gianelli Pumping-Generating Alamo (Check 42) Dos Amigos (Check 13) Oso (West Branch) Las Perillas (Costal branch) Pearblossom (Check 58) 5 Physical System, cont Check structures and gates • Pools separated by check structures throughout the aqueduct system (SWP: 66, DMC: 21 ) • Gates at check structures regulate flow rates and water surface elevation 6 Physical System, cont Turnout and diversion structures • Water delivered to agricultural and municipal contractors through diversion structures • Over 270 diversion structures on SWP • Over 200 turnouts on DMC 7 Physical System, cont Reservoirs / Lakes Represented as complete mixing of water body •
    [Show full text]
  • CA-Waterways-Map.Pdf
    O R E G O N S rk m o it F h e dl R Mid . Goose Lake S o ut k h r o F C K l O O a m a N t h r Sa e c v r er i a Riv R m d e u A A aterways n o l t o o C c R W M E V A D i v e R i r r t v i e Some of the water you use every day has probably traveled T P r S S r i n i Trinity Lake ty M a d T T R iv er great distances and over high mountain ranges before reaching E UREKA R i v e r Shasta Lake Va n your faucet. This is because water is not always where we need R EDDING Du Clear zen Whiskeytown River Creek Lake Tunnel it. In California, most of the rain and snowfall is in the north. But Lake Antelope E Almanor Lake e l most of the people live in the south. The solution is to distribute S a R c i v r e a r m Corning R k Lake Frenchman e r n o Canal F Davis Lake the water to where it is needed through delivery systems such t o h t r o A R N rk Black i Fo v e e Butte r dl id as the State Water Project (SWP). Lake M Lake k N or F Oroville h t u So G Thermalito New Bullards The SWP delivers water from Lake Oroville in the north to the T Forebay and Bar Reservoir e h Lake Oroville Afterbay F e a a Visitors Center Indian m t h r a a e Valley e iv E R R r a San Francisco Bay area, the San Joaquin Valley, and Southern b u u Y Reservoir - s s i Clear Lake R a C i n o v e l u r S R sa i California.
    [Show full text]
  • Downstream of O'neill Forebay
    DSM2DSM2 CaliforniaCalifornia AqueductAqueduct ExtensionExtension Presented to California Water and Environmental Modeling Forum March 1, 2005 Introduction and Project Goals • CH2M HILL is constructing a DSM2 model of the California Aqueduct on behalf of DWR’s Municipal Water Quality Investigation (MWQI) program and the State Water Project Contractors • Goals: – Detailed evaluation of Aqueduct Hydrodynamics, Water Quality, and Operations – Forecasting short-term and long-term water quality – Potential for Real-time analysis of Water Quality throughout system Model Coverage and Geometry • The model includes – California Aqueduct, South Bay Aqueduct – East Branch to Silverwood Lake, West Branch to Pyramid Lake, – San Luis Reservoir and O’Neill Forebay, and – DMC from Tracy Pumping Plant to the Mendota Pool – 580 miles in total • EXCEL tool built to generate ASCII cross section files • Pipes and Tunnels treated as channels Model Area Model Schematic Boundary Conditions • Flow at Tracy and Banks • San Luis Reservoir Operations • DMC and O’Neill Forebay Operations • Diversions to South Bay Aqueduct and West Branch (pumping plant data) • Contractor Diversions Database • Mass Balance Closure Terms Application-specific issues • Treatment of Check Structures – gates and weirs to control elevation • Use of Object to Object programming – DSM2 tool that allows for instantaneous transfer of water from location to another • Flow into South Bay Aqueduct • O’Neill Pumping and Generating Flows • Gianelli Pumping and Generating Flows • Flow into South Bay
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS LIFEGUARD I (SEASONAL) Starting Pay $15.92 Per Hour
    Job Announcement CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS LIFEGUARD I (SEASONAL) Starting Pay $15.92 per hour BEGIN A REWARDING & CHALLENGING CAREER! Work as a lifeguard for the California State Parks PAID TRAINING IN: Public Safety First Aid, CPR, AED Open Water Lifesaving Techniques Aquatic Search and Rescue Procedures REQUIREMENTS: Possess a valid California Driver License with good driving record. Physical strength and endurance. Willingness to work weekends and holidays. Visual and hearing acuity necessary to detect and rescue a struggling victim in the water. TO QUALIFY: All applicants are required to complete the following: 1.) Pass a COMPETITIVE swimming test at a listed location consisting of the following: - 1,000 yard open water swim. Time limit of 20 minutes. - A continuous 200 yard run, 400 yard swim, 200 yard run. Time limit of 10 minutes. 2.) Qualification appraisal interview. 3.) Successful completion of the California State Park Lifeguard Training Program. 4.) Successful completion of Field Training Program. 2020 Reservoir & Lake Testing Dates & Locations: Lake Perris SRA Saturday, March 7, 10:00 AM Folsom Lake SRA Saturday, March 7, 10:00 AM Silverwood Lake SRA Saturday, March 7, 10:00 AM (@ Perris) San Luis Reservoir SRA Sunday, March 8, 10:00 AM Lake Oroville SRA Saturday, March 14, 12:00 PM Millerton Lake SRA Sunday, March 15, 10:00 AM Interviews to immediately follow for successful candidates www.parks.ca.gov/aquaticsafety [email protected] LIFEGUARD I (SEASONAL) Additional Testing Information Picture I.D. is REQUIRED on the day of the swim test. All minors shall have a parent or guardian PRESENT on the day of the swim test for swim test waiver signature.
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan's Water Treatment Plants
    Metropolitan’s Water Treatment Plants Safeguard Public Health The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is the largest wholesale provider of drinking water in the country. Metropolitan provides water for 26 member public agencies to deliver to nearly 19 million people living across six Southland counties. Metropolitan operates five water treatment plants, including some of the largest facilities in the nation. U DINO R LES CO LES E G ERNA AN B N LOS LOS LL SA 21010 SILVERWOOD LAKE JOSEPH (DWR) JENSEN Joseph5 Jensen, Granada Hills WATER MORRIS EAGLE ROCK TREATMENT 17070 RESERVOIR CONTROL CENTER 15 PLANT 210 LIVE OAK F.E. Weymouth,RESERVOIR La Verne 5 10101 605 110 ETIWANDA MWD RESERVOIR 40505 10 F.E. WEYMOUTH UNION STATION SAN BERNARDINO WATER TREATMENT 10 HEADQUARTERS 10 10 PLANT 57 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 60 60 GARVEY RIVERSIDE COUNTY SANTA RESERVOIR MONICA 71 7101 405 Henry J. Mills, Riverside 5 ORANGE COUNTY RESERVOIR HENRY J. MILLS 60 ROBERT B. DIEMER 155 WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT PLANT LAKE PERRIS 91 PLANT 91 91 605 LAKE MATHEWS 7100 405 555 21515 PALOS VERDES RESERVOIR LONG BEACH 1110 22 SANTIAGO RESERVOIR 405 DIAMOND 5 VALLEY LAKE 55 Robert B. Diemer, YorbaSAN JOAQUIN Linda EL TORO RESERVOIR RESERVOIR TY Y LAKE SKINNER COUNT ROBERT A. SKINNER WATER TREATMENT ORANGE COUN PACIFIC OCEAN RIVERSIDE PLANT Robert A. Skinner, Winchester RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAN CLEMENTE Metropolitan imports water from the Colorado drawn from the confluence of the Sacramento River and Northern California. Colorado River water and San Joaquin rivers and transported in the is brought via Metropolitan’s 242-mile Colorado State Water Project’s 444-mile California Aqueduct River Aqueduct extending from Lake Havasu on to serve urban and agricultural needs in the the California-Arizona border, to Lake Mathews San Francisco Bay area as well as Central and near Riverside.
    [Show full text]
  • Examination of Exhumed Faults in the Western San Bernardino Mountains, California: Implications for Fault Growth and Earthquake Rupture
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2005 Examination of Exhumed Faults in the Western San Bernardino Mountains, California: Implications for Fault Growth and Earthquake Rupture Joseph R. Jacobs Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Jacobs, Joseph R., "Examination of Exhumed Faults in the Western San Bernardino Mountains, California: Implications for Fault Growth and Earthquake Rupture" (2005). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 5246. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/5246 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXAMINATION OF EXHUMED FAULTS IN THE WESTERN SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS, CALIFORNIA: IMPLICATIONS FOR FAULT GROWTH AND EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE by Joseph R. Jacobs A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Geology Approved: James P. Evans Susanne U. Janecke Major Professor Committee Member Peter T. Kolesar Laurens H. Smith, Jr. Committee Member Interim Dean of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2005 ii ABSTRACT Examination of Exhumed Faults in the Western San Bernardino Mountains, California: Implications for Fault Growth and Earthquake Rupture by Joseph R. Jacobs, Master of Science Utah State University, 2005 Major Professor: Dr. James P. Evans Department: Geology The late Miocene Cedar Springs fault system is a high-angle transpressional system in the Silverwood Lake area, western San Bernardino Mountains, southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Drought Brochure 2021 Update
    Drought In California January 2021 California Department of Water Resources | Natural Resources Agency | State of California Major Water Facilities Tule Lake Clear LLaakke Reservoir Trinity Reservoir Shasta Lake Whiskeytown Redding State Water Project Lake Antelope Federal Water Project Corning Canal Lake Tehama-ColuColussa Local Water Project Canal Frenchmmaan BlackBlack ButteButte LaLakke Lake Lake Lake Oroville Davis Stony GoGorgege Reservvoioir New BullBullaards East PaParrk Reservoivoir Bar Reservoir Lake Mennddoocincino Englebrightight Reservoivoir Indian Vaalleylley Reservoivoir Glenn-Colusa Canal Lake Sonoma Folsom Lake Lake Sacramento Auburn FolFolsom Sooututhh CCananaal Berryessa Putah S. CanaCanal Camanche Reservvoioir North Bay Aqueduct Mokelkeluummnne New Hogan Reservoir AqAquedueducuct New Meloelonnees LaLakke Contra Costa CCananal Stockton Los Vaqueros Reservoir Hetch Hetchyetchy Reservoir Don Pedro Lake San Francisco Lake McClure Lake Crowley Lake Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct Del Vaalllle South Bay Aqueduceduct Delta-Meendotandota Pachechecoo Conduit Canal Madera CaCanal Tinemaha Santa Clara CondConduiuit Millerton Lake Reservoir Hollister Condduuiit Pine Flat Reservoir San Luis Reeservvoioir Fresno San Luis Los Banos Reservoir Canal Lake Friant-Kern Kaweah Coalinga Canal Canal Haiwee Reservoir Lake Calif Success San Antonio Reservvoioir or Nacimientnto ni Isabella Reservoiir a Lake Los Angeles Cross Valley Aqueduct Canal California Aqueduct Twitchelwitchell Coastal Branch Reservoir Quail Lake Aq ued Pyramid LaLakke u ct Colorado
    [Show full text]
  • Species Accounts -- Animals
    SoCal Biodiversity - Animals Arboreal Salamander Amphibian SoCal Biodiversity - Animals Arboreal Salamander Amphibian Arroyo Toad Arboreal Salamander Arboreal Salamander (Aneides lugubris) Management Status Heritage Status Rank: G5N5S4 Federal: None State: None Other: Species identified as a local viability concern (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999) General Distribution Arboreal salamander occurs in yellow pine and black oak forests in the Sierra Nevada, and in coastal live oak woodlands from northern California to Baja California. The species also occurs in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada from El Dorado County to Madera County and on South Farallon, Santa Catalina, Los Coronados, and Ano Nuevo islands off the coast of California (Petranka 1998, Stebbins 1951, Stebbins 1985). Arboreal salamander occurs from sea level to an elevation of about 5,000 feet (1,520 meters) (Stebbins 1985). Distribution in the Planning Area Arboreal salamander reportedly occurs in the foothills and lower elevations of every mountain range on National Forest System lands, although it is seldom seen (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). There are records of occurrence for this species on the Los Padres National Forest near upper San Juan Creek and on the Cleveland National Forest near Soldier Creek (USDA Forest Service file information), San Gabriel foothills east to Day Canyon, and in the San Jacinto Mountains (Goodward pers. comm.). Systematics There are four species in the genus Aneides in the western United States, three of which occur in California (Stebbins 1985). Of these three, only arboreal salamander ranges into southern California. Most of the Aneides salamanders climb (Stebbins 1985). Arboreal salamander consists of two chromosomally differentiated groups that intergrade in south and east-central Mendocino County, about 56 miles (90 kilometers) north of the San Francisco Bay region (Sessions and Kezer 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • Travel Analysis Report
    Travel Analysis Report United States Department of Cajon Place Off-Highway Vehicle Use Agriculture Forest Service January 2013 Mountaintop and Front Country Ranger Districts, San Bernardino National Forest San Bernardino County, California For More Information Contact: Tom Hall, Environmental Coordinator San Bernardino National Forest [email protected] 909-382-2921 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual‘s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795- 3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 0 San Bernardino National Forest Cajon Place Off-Highway Vehicle Travel Analysis Process TABLE OF CONTENTS Setting up the Analysis .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central
    Chapter 10: Terrestrial Biological Resources Chapter 10 1 Terrestrial Biological Resources 2 10.1 Introduction 3 This chapter describes terrestrial biological resources in the Study Area; and 4 potential changes that could occur as a result of implementing the alternatives 5 evaluated in this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Implementation of the 6 alternatives could affect terrestrial biological resources through potential changes 7 in operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) 8 and ecosystem restoration. 9 10.2 Regulatory Environment and Compliance 10 Requirements 11 Potential actions that could be implemented under the alternatives evaluated in 12 this EIS could affect terrestrial biological resources in areas: along the shorelines 13 and in the waters of reservoirs that store CVP and SWP water supplies, along 14 rivers and waterways (including bypasses) impacted by changes in the operations 15 of CVP or SWP reservoirs, within agricultural areas served by CVP and SWP 16 water supplies, and modified to provide wetland habitat. Actions located on 17 public agency lands; or implemented, funded, or approved by Federal and state 18 agencies would need to be compliant with appropriate Federal and state agency 19 policies and regulations, as summarized in Chapter 4, Approach to 20 Environmental Analyses. 21 10.3 Affected Environment 22 This section describes terrestrial biological resources that could potentially be 23 affected by implementing the alternatives considered in this EIS. Changes in 24 terrestrial biological resources due to changes in CVP and SWP operations may 25 occur in the Trinity River, Central Valley, San Francisco Bay Area, Central Coast, 26 and Southern California regions.
    [Show full text]
  • "150 Years Commemorative" Vehicle Day Use Annual Pass
    State of California – Natural Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION California State Parks "150 Years Commemorative" Vehicle Day Use Annual Pass ~ Terms and Conditions ~ Valid for entry of one passenger vehicle with capacity of nine people or less or one motorcycle at many state parks where a vehicle day use fee is collected. Valid for 12 months from date of purchase. This pass must be displayed on the rearview mirror or vehicle dashboard when visiting state parks that honor this pass. To avoid theft, motorcycle passholders should present the hangtag at the entrance station in exchange for a day use ticket, utilizing self-pay envelopes where no attendant is available. Passholders should be prepared to present the annual pass upon request. For additional details and/or to purchase a 150 Years Commemorative Vehicle Day Use Annual Pass, please visit our website, www.parks.ca.gov. 150 Years Commemorative Vehicle Day Use Annual Passes are also available for purchase at many park units, and at sector or district offices. Please contact individual locations in advance to confirm availability. Parks Accepting the 150 Years Commemorative Vehicle Day Use Annual Pass * Anderson Marsh SHP Emma Wood SB Palomar Mountain SP Andrew Molera SP Folsom Lake SRA Patrick's Point SP Angel Island SP (day use boat dock at finger piers) Folsom Powerhouse SHP Pescadero SB Annadel SP Fort Ross SHP Pfeiffer Big Sur SP Año Nuevo SNR Fremont Peak SP Picacho SRA Antelope Valley CA Poppy Reserve (SNR) Gaviota SP Pismo SB Anza-Borrego Desert SP George J. Hatfield SRA Point Lobos SNR Armstrong Redwoods SNR Grizzly Creek Redwoods SP Pomponio SB Auburn SRA Grover Hot Springs SP Portola Redwoods SP Austin Creek SRA Half Moon Bay SB Prairie Creek Redwoods SP Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook Hendy Woods SP Red Rock Canyon SP Benbow Lake SRA Henry Cowell Redwoods SP Refugio SB Benicia SRA Henry W.
    [Show full text]
  • PB 297571 the John A
    PB 297571 The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Department of Civil Engineering Stanford University SEISMIC RISK ANALYSIS FOR CALIFORNIA STATE WATER PROJECT Reach C by Haresh C. Shah Manoutchehr Movassate Theodore C. Zsutty This research was partially supported by the Department of Water Resources, State of California Grant DWR 8-51478 and by the National Science Foundation Grant GI-39122 Report No. 22 March 1976 50272 -101 REPORT DOCUMENTATION T1:-REPORT NO. I- PAGE I NSF!:_RA-=76~~~2_~_ 4. Title and Subtitle Seismic Risk Analysis for California State Water Project, Reach C 6. ------------- .. - -------------------------1 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Rept. No. H.C. Shah, M. Movassate, T.C. Zsutty 22 ----- - -----------------~ 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. --. --. -------------- Center II. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No. (C) (G) GI39122 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and A-dd-r·e-s-s------------------ ---------- ---------------------1 13. Type of Report & Period Covered Engineering and Applied Science (EAS) National Science Foundation ------------------_ .. ------- 1800 G Street, N.W. 14. Washington, DoC. 20550 r-1~5-.-=-su-p-p'-em"""e'-Cnt-'-ary-'-'--'-N-ot=--es-=--=-':""""'--=:"::"'::"'=""--- .-------.--------------~ --------------------1 Partially supported by the Department of Water Resources, State of California, Grant DWR B-51478 1-------------------- ---------------- 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) A seismic hazard map for the region described as "Reach C" for the California Water Project is developed in this report. "Reach C" for this work is defined as that por­ tion of the California Water Project from Tehachapi Afterbay up to and including the Perris Dam and Lake. The key facilities within this reach include: (1) Tehachapi Afterbay, (2) Cottonwood Power Plant Site, (3) Pearblossom Pumping Plant, (4) Mojave Siphon, (5) Silverwood Dam and Lake, (6) San Bernardino Tunnel, (7) Devil Canyon Power Plant, (8) Santa Ana Valley Pipeline, (9) Perris Dam and Lake, and (10) Perris 0 &M Subcenter.
    [Show full text]