DOCSLIB.ORG

Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy BLM Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy Final Report Prepared for: Bureau of Land Management May 2016 Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy Final Report prepared by Environmental Science Division Argonne National Laboratory for U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management May 2016 Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy This page intentionally left blank Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy CONTENTS CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................... XIV GENERAL ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................. XVI UNITS OF MEASURE ......................................................................................................................... XVIII 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background and Need for the Riverside East SEZ Long-term Monitoring Strategy ................... 1 1.2 Description of the Riverside East SEZ ......................................................................................... 3 1.3 Adaptive Management: Rationale for Monitoring ....................................................................... 5 1.4 Public Involvement ....................................................................................................................... 6 1.5 Funding ......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Planned Implementation ............................................................................................................... 8 1.7 Overview of this Document ........................................................................................................ 11 1.8 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 11 2 MONITORING APPROACH .............................................................................................................. 13 2.1 BLM Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring Program ............................................................ 13 2.2 Development of the Long-Term Monitoring Strategy ................................................................ 14 2.2.1 Conceptual Models ........................................................................................................ 14 2.2.2 Key Management Questions and Management Goals ................................................... 17 2.2.3 Monitoring Objectives ................................................................................................... 21 2.2.4 DOE/BLM Public Outreach and Public Response to Monitoring Objectives ............... 22 2.3 Monitoring Indicators, Methods, and Sampling Design ............................................................. 25 2.3.1 Monitoring Indicators .................................................................................................... 25 2.3.2 Sampling Methods, Sampling Design, and Data Analysis ............................................ 26 2.4 Monitoring Objectives Not Addressed in the LTMS ................................................................. 29 2.5 Summary and Prioritization of the Monitoring Indicators Proposed for the Riverside East SEZ LTMS ................................................................................................................................. 31 2.6 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 38 3 THE ROLE OF REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGIES .................................................................. 41 3.3 Application of Remote Sensing to the LTMS ............................................................................ 41 3.4 Limitations and the Evolving Nature of Remote Sensing .......................................................... 41 3.5 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 42 4 PHYSICAL RESOURCES INDICATORS ......................................................................................... 44 4.1 Groundwater Elevation ............................................................................................................... 44 4.1.1 Rationale for Monitoring the Indicators ........................................................................ 44 4.1.2 Related Management Questions, Management Goals, and Monitoring Objectives Addressed by the Indicator ............................................................................................ 45 4.1.3 Spatial and Temporal Considerations for Monitoring the Indicator .............................. 46 4.1.4 Existing Data Sources and New Indicator Data Collection Recommended for the Riverside East SEZ LTMS ............................................................................................ 46 4.1.5 Data Analysis and Summary of Monitoring Strategy ................................................... 51 iii Riverside East Solar Energy Zone Long Term Monitoring Strategy 4.1.6 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 53 4.2 Erosion and Surface Disturbance Indicators............................................................................... 54 4.2.1 Rationale for Monitoring the Indicators ........................................................................ 54 4.2.1.1 Soil Erosion ................................................................................................... 54 4.2.1.2 Disturbance to Desert Pavement ................................................................... 55 4.2.1.3 Dust ............................................................................................................... 56 4.2.1.4 Stream Erosion .............................................................................................. 58 4.2.1.5 Relevant Policy ............................................................................................. 59 4.2.2 Related Management Questions, Management Goals, and Monitoring Objectives Addressed by the Indicator ............................................................................................ 59 4.2.3 Soil Aggregate Stability, Texture, Infiltration, and Depth ............................................ 60 4.2.3.1 Key Soil Characteristics Sensitive to Environmental Changes ..................... 61 4.2.3.1.1 Soil Aggregate Stability ............................................................. 61 4.2.3.1.2 Soil Texture ............................................................................... 61 4.2.3.1.3 Soil Infiltration........................................................................... 62 4.2.3.1.4 Soil Depth .................................................................................. 62 4.2.3.2 Spatial and Temporal Considerations for Monitoring the Indicator.............. 62 4.2.3.3 Existing Data Sources ................................................................................... 63 4.2.3.4 New Indicator Data Collection Recommended for the Riverside East SEZ LTMS .................................................................................................... 63 4.2.3.4.1 Criteria and Methods for Sample Stratification ......................... 63 4.2.3.4.2 Sampling Methods ..................................................................... 64 4.2.4 Stream Morphology ....................................................................................................... 65 4.2.4.1 Spatial and Temporal Considerations for Monitoring the Indicator.............. 65 4.2.4.2 Existing Data Sources ................................................................................... 65 4.2.4.3 New Indicator Data Collection Recommended for the Riverside East SEZ LTMS .................................................................................................... 66 4.2.4.3.1 Criteria and Methods for Sample Stratification ......................... 66 4.2.4.3.2 Image Collection Methods ......................................................... 66 4.2.4.4 Image Analysis .............................................................................................. 67 4.2.5 Particulate Matter Monitoring ....................................................................................... 67 4.2.5.1 Spatial and Temporal Considerations for Monitoring the Indicator.............. 67 4.2.5.2 Existing Data Sources ................................................................................... 67 4.2.5.3 New Indicator Data Collection Recommended for the Riverside East SEZ LTMS .................................................................................................... 69 4.2.5.3.1 Sampling Methods ..................................................................... 69 4.2.5.3.2 Meteorological Data Collection ................................................. 70 4.2.6
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Beolobical Survey
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BEOLOBICAL SURVEY Generalized geologic map of the Big Maria Mountains region, northeastern Riverside County, southeastern California by Warren Hamilton* Open-File Report 84-407 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature 1984 *Denver, Colorado MAP EXPLANATION SURFICIAL MATERIALS Quaternary Qa Alluvium, mostly silt and sand, of modern Hoiocene Colorado River floodplain. Pleistocene Qe Eolian sand. Tertiary Of Fanglomerate and alluvium, mostly of local PIi ocene origin and of diverse Quaternary ages. Includes algal travertine and brackish-water strata of Bouse Formation of Pliocene age along east and south sides of Big Maria and Riverside Mountains, Fanglomerate may locally be as old as Pliocene. MIOCENE INTRUSIVE ROCKS Tertiary In Riverside Mountains, dikes of 1 e u c o r h y o 1 i t e Miocene intruded along detachment fault. In northern Big Maria Mountains, plugs and dikes of hornbl ende-bi at i te and bioti te-hornbl ende rhyodacite and quartz latite. These predate steep normal faults, and may include rocks both older and younger than low-angle detachment faults. Two hornblende K-Ar determinations by' Donna L. Martin yield calculated ages of 10. 1 ±4.5 and' 21.7 + 2 m.y ROCKS ABOVE DETACHMENT FAULTS ROCKS DEPOSITED SYNCHRONOUSLY WITH EXTENSIONAL FAULTING L o w e r Tob Slide breccias, partly monolithologic, and Mi ocene Jos extremely coarse fanglomerate. or upper Tos Fluvial and lacustrine strata, mostly red. 01i gocene Tob T o v Calc-alkalic volcanic rocks: quartz latitic ignimbrite, and altered dacitic and andesitic flow rocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Goals and Objectives
    Appendix C Biological Goals and Objectives Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS APPENDIX C. BIOLOGICAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES C BIOLOGICAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES C.1 Process for Developing the Biological Goals and Objectives This section outlines the process for drafting the Biological Goals and Objectives (BGOs) and describes how they inform the conservation strategy for the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP or Plan). The conceptual model shown in Exhibit C-1 illustrates the structure of the BGOs used during the planning process. This conceptual model articulates how Plan-wide BGOs and other information (e.g., stressors) contribute to the development of Conservation and Management Actions (CMAs) associated with Covered Activities, which are monitored for effectiveness and adapted as necessary to meet the DRECP Step-Down Biological Objectives. Terms used in Exhibit C-1 are defined in Section C.1.1. Exhibit C-1 Conceptual Model for BGOs Development Appendix C C-1 August 2014 Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS APPENDIX C. BIOLOGICAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The BGOs follow the three-tiered approach based on the concepts of scale: landscape, natural community, and species. The following broad biological goals established in the DRECP Planning Agreement guided the development of the BGOs: Provide for the long-term conservation and management of Covered Species within the Plan Area. Preserve, restore, and enhance natural communities and ecosystems that support Covered Species within the Plan Area. The following provides the approach to developing the BGOs. Section C.2 provides the landscape, natural community, and Covered Species BGOs. Specific mapping information used to develop the BGOs is provided in Section C.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Mccoy Solar Energy Project Plan Amendment Supplement
    Director’s Protest Resolution Report McCoy Solar Energy Project Plan Amendment California Desert Conservation Area Supplement May 29, 2013 1 Contents Reason for Supplement ................................................................................................................... 3 Reader’s Guide................................................................................................................................ 4 List of Commonly Used Acronyms ................................................................................................ 5 Protesting Party Index ..................................................................................................................... 6 Issue Topics and Responses ............................................................................................................ 7 California Desert Conservation Area .............................................................................................. 7 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................... 8 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................ 11 Water Resources ........................................................................................................................... 14 Biological Resources .................................................................................................................... 17 Wildlife
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Local Permitting on the Cost of Solar Power
    The Impact of Local Permitting on the Cost of Solar Power How a federal effort to simplify processes can make solar affordable for 50% of American homes January 2011 Endorsed by: Alteris Renewables Namaste Solar Sullivan Solar Power American Solar Electric PetersenDean Sun Chariot Solar Acro Energy Real Goods Solar Sunetric Corbin Solar REC Solar Sunlight Solar Energy Greenspring Energy RevoluSun SunTrek Solar groSolar Sierra Club Trinity Solar HelioPower SolarTech Verengo Solar Plus Mainstream Energy SolSource The Vote Solar Initiative Mercury Solar Systems The full report is available as a free download at www.sunrunhome.com/permitting. Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................ 1 Note from SunRun ......................................................................................... 2 The impact of local permitting on the cost of solar power ............................. 3 Local permitting costs $2,516 per installation ............................................ 6 Streamlined permitting will benefit jurisdictions ......................................... 7 Launching the Residential Solar Permitting Initiative ................................... 9 The prize: grid parity for more than half of American homes .................... 11 Appendix ..................................................................................................... 12 Appendix A: Methodology ......................................................................... 13 Appendix B: Data .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Master List of Companies
    Companies A1A Solar Contracting Inc. AA Solar Services LLC 0Titan Solar & Remodeling AAA 1 Solar Solutions AAA Solar 1 Stop Shop AABCO 1800 Remodel AAE Solar 1800 Solar USA Aapco 1Solar Abakus Solar USA Inc. 1st Choice Solar Abbott Electric Inc. 1st US Energy LLC ABC Leads 21st Century Doors & Windows ABC Seamless Corporate 21st Century Power Solutions ABCO Solar 2Four6 Solar ABest Energy Power 2K Solar Ablaze Energy 310 Solar LLC Able Energy 31Solar LLC Able Energy Co. 360 Solar Energy Able Heating & Cooling 360 Solar Group Able Roof Mr Roof 4 Lakes Home Restoration ABM Services & Renovations 7 Summits Roofing Absolute Solar 76 Solar Absolutely Solar 84 Lumber Abundant Air Inc 84 Lumber Company Abundant Energy 84 Lumber Company Abundant Solar A & R Solar AC Solar Inc. A Division of Mechanical Energy Systems Accelerate Solar A National Electric Service Inc. Accent Window Systems, Inc. A Plus Roofing Acceptance A Real Advantage Construction Access Geothermal A Two Z Windows & Doors Installing Access Insurance Quality A Wholesale Acclaimed Roofing of Colorado Window Company Accord Construction / Window Wise Austin A&E Mechanical Accuquote A&M Energy Solutions Accurate Architecture LLC A&R Solar ACDC Solar A.D.D. Solar Connect Acker Roofing A.I. Solar ACME Environmental A.M. Solar ACME International Services Inc. A-1 Electric Acordia A1 Energy LLC Acquisition Technologies A1 Plumbing Acro Energy A1 Solar LLC Active Energies A1 Solar Power Active Energies Inc. A-1 Windows & Doors, Inc. Active Energies Solar A-1 Windows & Doors, Inc. A-1 Windows & Active Solar Doors, Inc. Folkers Window Company PGT Addin Solar Industries Addison Homes LLC A1A Solar Addy Electric Adobe Reo Affordable Windows and Doors of Tampa Adobe Solar Bay ADT LLC AffordaSolar, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Rooftop Solar PV Permitting Guide Connecticut Rooftop Solar PV Permitting Guide
    Connecticut Rooftop Solar PV Permitting Guide Connecticut Rooftop Solar PV Permitting Guide Published May 1, 2014 Connecticut Rooftop Solar PV Permitting Guide 2 U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative Rooftop Solar Challenge Round II ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISCLAIMERS This material is based upon work supported The views and opinions of authors expressed by the U.S. Department of Energy SunShot herein do not necessarily state or reflect those Initiative Rooftop Solar Challenge under of the United States Government or any award number DE-EE0005688 issued to the agency thereof. Sun Rise New England - Open for Business team, led by Connecticut’s Clean Energy The material provided in this Guide is not Finance and Investment Authority (CEFIA) intended to replace or supplant existing state and work supported by the U.S. Department or federal codes or regulations. There are of Energy SunShot Initiative Rooftop no warranties associated with the use of this Solar Challenge II under award number information. Some of this material, which DE-FOA-0000788 issued to the New is/was believed to be accurate at the time England Cost Reduction Partnership led of publication, may no longer be accurate, by the Clean Energy States Alliance. current, or comply with existing codes and regulations. Neither the authors nor any This Guide was prepared as an account of other organizations or individuals who have work sponsored by an agency of the United contributed to this Guide are accountable States Government. Neither the United States for the use or misuse of information obtained Government nor any agency thereof, nor any herein.
    [Show full text]
  • Um 1776, Petition to Intervene, 6/27/2016
    22 June 2016 Via Electronic Filing Public Utilities Commission of Oregon Attn: Filing Center [email protected] Re: In the Matter of PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON Investigation of Competitive Bidding Guidelines Related to Senate Bill 1547 Docket No. UM 1776 Dear Filing Center: Enclosed for filing in the above­referenced docket is the Oregon Solar Energy Industries (OSEIA)’s Petition to Intervene. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Jeff Bissonnette Executive Director [email protected] 503­516­1636 UM 1776 ­ PETITION TO INTERVENE ­ OREGON SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1776 In the Matter of | PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF | OREGON | | PETITION TO INTERVENE Investigation of Competitive Bidding Guidelines | Related to Senate Bill 1547 | | __________________________________________| The Oregon Solar Energy Industries Association (OSEIA) petitions to intervene in this proceeding. In support of this petition, the following is provided: 1. The contact information (name, address, email address) of the petitioner is: Name: Jeff Bissonnette Company: Oregon Solar Energy Industries Association (OSEIA) Street Address: PO Box 14927 City, State, Zip: Portland, OR 97293 Email Address: [email protected] Telephone: 503­516­1636 Please include this contact on the service list. 2a. The petitioner will not be represented by counsel in this proceeding. 2b. Additional contacts to be included on the service list (a petitioner is limited to three contacts on the service list): Name: Erica Nist­Lund Company: Oregon Solar Energy Industries Association (OSEIA) Street Address: PO Box 14927 City, State, Zip: Portland, OR 97293 Email Address: [email protected] Telephone: 503­516­1636 UM 1776 ­ PETITION TO INTERVENE ­ OREGON SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Mesozoic Tectonics of the Maria Fold and Thrust Belt and Mccoy Basin : an Examination of Polyphase Deformation and Synorogenic Response Anthony C
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Earth and Planetary Sciences ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 8-27-2009 Mesozoic tectonics of the Maria fold and thrust belt and McCoy basin : an examination of polyphase deformation and synorogenic response Anthony C. Salem Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/eps_etds Recommended Citation Salem, Anthony C.. "Mesozoic tectonics of the Maria fold and thrust belt and McCoy basin : an examination of polyphase deformation and synorogenic response." (2009). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/eps_etds/75 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Earth and Planetary Sciences ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MESOZOIC TECTONICS OF THE MARIA FOLD AND THRUST BELT AND MCCOY BASIN, SOUTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA: AN EXAMINATION OF POLYPHASE DEFORMATION AND SYNOROGENIC RESPONSE BY ANTHONY CHRISTOPHER SALEM B.S., Arizona State University, 1999 M.S.., Geological Sciences, Arizona State University, 2005 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Earth & Planetary Sciences The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico August, 2009 ©2009, Anthony C. Salem iii DEDICATION For Audrey, my best friend, chief advisor, drill sergeant, sounding board, editor extraordinaire, GIS wizard, partner in crime and great love. Without her love and support, life and this work would have been a lonely endeavor. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS All the work that goes into conducting research and writing a dissertation may be indeed done by one person, but is actually the result of the efforts and support of many people who should be acknowledged.
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Focus Reprint Pgs 63 Modified
    How is financing influencing PV 2015 TOP SOLAR CONTR ACTOR S 5 adoption? Third-party financing for PV has opened the market to opportunities that otherwise wouldn’t have been there through North Brunswick Target traditional purchasing programs. North Brunswick, New Jersey This provides the developer 658.8 kW an opportunity to work with (Photo credit: Greenskies Renewable Energy) site hosts and help create the best suited financial program that works best for all parties. These financing options, along with federal, state and utility incentives, help to make PV adoption a much easier process. - Michael Silvestrini, President, Greenskies Renewable Energy (No. 48 Overall) TOP 50 SOLAR DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS TOTAL MW RANK COMPANY OVERALL CITY STATE FOUNDED EMPLOYEES INSTALLED INSTALLED RANK MW 2014 1 First Solar 1 Tempe CA 1999 6,060 3,881.333 1,023.130 2 Vivint Solar (now SunEdison) 16 Lehi UT 2011 3,289 228.000 155.000 3 NRG Energy (including NRG Renew & NRG Home Solar ) 18 Princeton NJ 1989 10,000 1,341.000 112.000 4 FLS Energy 24 Asheville NC 2006 60 175.000 63.000 5 Hanwha Q CELLS USA 26 Irvine CA 1999 49 170.640 58.337 6 NARENCO 39 Charlotte NC 2009 22 47.000 31.000 7 REC Solar 41 San Luis Obispo CA 1997 156 139.820 28.842 8 Sunnova 42 Houston TX 2013 175 45.486 26.092 9 Greenskies Renewable Energy 48 Middletown CT 2008 50 41.794 22.611 10 Nexamp 49 Boston MA 2007 42 46.953 22.086 11 Clean Focus 50 Sunnyvale CA 2008 20 40.000 22.000 12 RGS Energy (Real Goods Solar) 54 Louisville CO 1978 200 22.500 17.044 13 PsomasFMG 57 Huntington Beach CA 2009 25 42.230 16.160 14 AES Distributed Energy 59 Boulder CO 2009 32 249.058 15.500 15 Amergy Solar 67 Piscataway NJ 2010 70 30.000 12.000 16 EnterSolar 74 New York City NY 2006 17 17.300 10.500 17 Carolina Solar Energy 75 Durham NC 2007 4 76.000 10.400 18 Shorebreak Energy Developers 77 Irvine CA 2010 65 35.000 10.000 19 Natural Power and Energy 79 Scottsdale AZ 2008 7 37.439 9.984 20 Sustainable Energy Developments 91 Rochester NY 2002 25 17.000 7.760 Reprinted from Solar Power World for Clean Focus © 2015 WTWH Media, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • SIR 2021-5017: Landscape Evolution in Eastern Chuckwalla Valley
    Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management Landscape Evolution in Eastern Chuckwalla Valley, Riverside County, California Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5017 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. U.S. Geological Survey photograph of wind-rippled sand and sand verbena in eastern Chuckwalla Valley, Riverside County, California. Landscape Evolution in Eastern Chuckwalla Valley, Riverside County, California By Amy E. East, Harrison J. Gray, Margaret Hiza Redsteer, and Matthew Ballmer Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5017 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2021 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS (1–888–275–8747. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: East, A.E., Gray, H.J., Redsteer, M.H., and Ballmer, M., 2021, Landscape evolution in eastern Chuckwalla Valley, Riverside County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5017, 46 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20215017.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Supply Assessment
    DESERT QUARTZITE SOLAR PROJECT DRAFT PLAN AMENDMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX Y WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE DESERT QUARTZITE SOLAR PROJECT RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PURCHASE ORDER 4800019091 Prepared for: Desert Quartzite, LLC 135 Main Street, 6th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Prepared by: URS(an AECOM company) 130 Robin Hill Road, Suite 100 Santa Barbara, California 93117 (805) 692-0600 Fax: (805) 964-0259 Job No. 60486157 June 2016 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT DESERT QUARTZITE SOLAR PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 WATER REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................... 2-1 3.0 PROJECT WATER SUPPLY SOURCES ............................................................... 3-1 3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 GROUNDWATER RESOURCES ...................................................................... 3-1 3.2.1 Description of the Palo Verde Mesa Groundwater Basin ........................ 3-1 3.2.2 Regional Hydrogeologic Setting .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Paleontological Resources
    Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS CHAPTER III.10. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES III.10 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES A paleontological resource is defined in the federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA) as the “fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of organisms, preserved in or on the earth’s crust, that are of paleontological interest and that provide information about the history of life on earth” (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] 470aaa[1][c]). For the purpose of this analysis, a significant paleontological resource is “considered to be of scientific interest, including most vertebrate fossil remains and traces, and certain rare or unusual inverte- brate and plant fossils. A significant paleontological resource is considered to be scientifically important for one or more of the following reasons: It is a rare or previously unknown species It is of high quality and well preserved It preserves a previously unknown anatomical or other characteristic It provides new information about the history of life on earth It has identified educational or recreational value. Paleontological resources that may be considered not to have paleontological significance include those that lack provenance or context, lack physical integrity because of decay or natural erosion, or are overly redundant or otherwise not useful for academic research” (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] Instruction Memorandum [IM] 2009-011; included in Appendix R2). The intrinsic value of paleontological resources largely stems from the fact that fossils serve as the only direct evidence of prehistoric life. They are thus used to understand the history of life on Earth, the nature of past environments and climates, the biological mem- bership and structure of ancient ecosystems, and the pattern and process of organic evolution and extinction.
    [Show full text]