DOCSLIB.ORG

Montezuma II Wind Energy Project Final Environmental Impact Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Montezuma II Wind Energy Project Final Environmental Impact Report Montezuma II Wind Energy Project Final Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Solano County Department of Resource Management Prepared by Point Impact Analysis, LLC 2555 Park Boulevard, Suite 10 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Telephone: 650.856.2800 Fax: 650.856.2801 Email: [email protected] June 20, 2011 This page intentionally left blank Montezuma II Wind Energy Project Final Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Solano County Department of Resource Management Prepared by Point Impact Analysis, LLC 2555 Park Boulevard, Suite 10 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Telephone: 650.856.2800 Fax: 650.856.2801 Email: srussell@pointim pactanal ysis.com June 20, 2011 This page intentionally left blank TABLE OF CONTENTS This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents MONTEZUMA II WIND ENERGY PROJECT FINAL EIR TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I Chapter Page 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Changes Since the Draft EIR ...................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 Organization of the Final EIR..................................................................................................................... 1-3 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Additional Project Information ................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Turbine Micro-Siting and Renumbering ........................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 Temporary Laydown Area near Talbert Lane Entrance ................................................................ 2-3 2.1.3 Temporary and Permanent Project Disturbance ............................................................................ 2-3 2.1.4 Water Use for Construction Dependent on Season ....................................................................... 2-4 2.2 Changes to the Regulatory Setting .............................................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.1 Draft Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines .................................................................................... 2-5 2.2.2 Draft Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance ........................................................................................ 2-5 2.2.3 Renewable Portfolio Standard ............................................................................................................ 2-6 2.3 Supplemental Environmental Information ............................................................................................... 2-6 2.3.1 Recorded Swainson’s Hawk Fatalities ............................................................................................... 2-6 2.3.2 Additional Pond near Project Area ................................................................................................... 2-6 2.3.3 Memorandum Regarding Cultural Monitoring ................................................................................ 2-7 2.4 Supplemental Agency Information ............................................................................................................. 2-7 2.4.1 Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Resolution ..................................................................... 2-7 3 ERRATA AND REVISIONS...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Chapter 1, Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Chapter 2, Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Chapter 3, Project Description .................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.4 Chapter 6, Agricultural Resources .............................................................................................................. 3-5 3.5 Chapter 7, Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.6 Chapter 8, Biological Resources ............................................................................................................... 3-10 3.7 Chapter 9, Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3-14 3.8 Chapter 10, Geologic Resources .............................................................................................................. 3-16 3.9 Chapter 13, Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................. 3-17 3.10 Chapter 14, Land Use and Population .................................................................................................... 3-17 3.11 Chapter 15, Noise ....................................................................................................................................... 3-19 3.12 Chapter 16, Public Services and Utilities ................................................................................................ 3-24 3.13 Chapter 18, Safety ....................................................................................................................................... 3-26 3.14 Chapter 19, Transportation ....................................................................................................................... 3-27 3.15 Chapter 20, Alternatives ............................................................................................................................ 3-29 3.16 Chapter 21, Cumulative ............................................................................................................................. 3-29 June 20, 2011 iii Montezuma II Wind Energy Project Final EIR Table of Contents 4 COMMENT LETTERS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ............................................. 4-1 1 Responses to Comments From the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Floodplain Management and Insurance Branch (March 24, 2011) ....................................................... 4-6 1.1 Current Effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) ................................................................. 4-6 1.2 Construction in a Riverine Floodplain, Regulated Floodway, or Special Flood Hazard Areas ......................................................................................................................................... 4-6 1.3 Local Floodplain Management Building Requirements ................................................................. 4-6 2 Response to Comment From Travis Air Force Base (April 1, 2011) ................................................... 4-8 2.1 Evaluation of Impacts to Radar ......................................................................................................... 4-8 3 Response to comments from the Solano County Airport Land Use (ALUC) Commission (April 15, 2011) .................................................................................................................... 4-10 3.1 Compliance with FAA Determinations of No Hazard ............................................................... 4-10 3.2 Compliance with FAA Condition Required for County Approval ........................................... 4-10 4 Response to Comments From the Native American Heritage Commission (April 21, 2011) ...... 4-13 4.1 Consultation with Native Americans Culturally Affiliated with the Area ................................ 4-13 4.2 Monitoring of Ground-Disturbing Activities ............................................................................... 4-13 4.3 Mitigation Plan Provisions for Curation of Recovered Non-Burial Cultural Items ............... 4-14 5 Response to Comments From the Delta Protection Commission (April 21, 2011) ....................... 4-16 5.1 Significant Impacts on Delta Air Quality and Avian Species Living in the Delta .................. 4-16 5.2 Goals and Policies in the Land Use and Resource Management Plan for the Primary Zone ..................................................................................................................................... 4-17 5.3 Minimize and Mitigate Construction and Operational Impacts that Could Occur Outside the Project Area...................................................................................................... 4-17 6 Response to Comments from the California Department of Fish and Game (April 21, 2011) .... 4-20 6.1 Take of Swainson’s Hawk ................................................................................................................ 4-20 6.2 Take of California Tiger Salamander .............................................................................................. 4-21 6.3 Trenching and HDD in Streams Subject to Lake and Streambed Alteration Program ......... 4-21 6.4 Post-Construction Monitoring Recommendations ...................................................................... 4-22 6.5 Consultation on Site Selection for Off-Site Mitigation ............................................................... 4-23 7 Response To Comments from Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Desilva Island
    SUISUN BAY 139 SUISUN BAY 140 SUISUN BAY SUISUN BAY Located immediately downstream of the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, Suisun Bay is the largest contiguous wetland area in the San Francisco Bay region. Suisun Bay is a dynamic, transitional zone between the freshwater input of the Central Valley rivers and the tidal influence of the upper San Francisco Estuary. This area supports a substantial number of nesting herons and egrets, including three of the largest colonies in the region. Although suburban development is rampant along the nearby Interstate 80 corridor to the north, most of the Suisun Bay area is protected from heavy development by the California Department of Fish and Game and a number of private duck clubs. Black- Active Great crowned or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret County active Page 501 Bohannon Solano Active 142 502 Campbell Ranch Solano Active 143 503 Cordelia Road Solano 1998 145 504 Gold Hill Solano Active 146 505 Green Valley Road Solano Active 148 506 Hidden Cove Solano Active 149 507 Joice Island Solano 1994 150 508 Joice Island Annex Solano Active 151 509 Sherman Lake Sacramento Active 152 510 Simmons Island Solano 1994 153 511 Spoonbill Solano Active 154 512 Tree Slough Solano Active 155 513 Volanti Solano Active 156 514 Wheeler Island Solano Active 157 SUISUN BAY 141 142 SUISUN BAY Bohannon Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets nest in a grove of eucalyptus trees on a levee in Cross Slough, about 1.8 km east of Beldons Landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Delta Dredged Material Placement Sites
    Summary of Delta Dredged Material Placement Sites Capacity Overall Map Dredge Material Placement Active Types of Material Years in Remaining Capacity ID Site (Yes/No) Owner/Operator Accepted Service (CY) (CY) Notes 1 S1 2 S4 3 S7 4 S9 5 S11 Port of Sacramento S12 (Department of 6 1,710,000 3, 5 South Island Prospect Island Interior Bureau of Land Management?) 7 S13 S14 8 USACE N/A 3 Grand Island Placement Site S16 9 USACE 3,000,000 3 Rio Vista Placement Site DWR, Mega S19 10 Sands, Port of 20,000,000 3 Decker Island Placement Site Sacramento S20 Port of Sacramento 11 1,000,000 3, 5 Augusta Pit Placement Site (DWR?) S31 12 Port of Sacramento Placement Port of Sacramento Site Reclamation S32 13 Districts 999 and (six segments) 900 S35 DOW Chemical 14 Montezuma Hills Placement 890,000 3 Company Site 15 SX Sacramento Muni 1 Capacity Overall Map Dredge Material Placement Active Types of Material Years in Remaining Capacity ID Site (Yes/No) Owner/Operator Accepted Service (CY) (CY) Notes Utility District Sherman Lake (Sherman 16 USACE 3,000,000 3 Island?) 17 Montezuma Wetlands Project Montezuma LLC Montezuma Wetlands 18 Montezuma LLC Rehandling Site Expanded Scour Pond Dredge material 19 Placement Site (also called Yes DWR according to WDR #R5- 250,000 1, 2, 3,4 Sherman Island?) 2004-0061 Port of Stockton McCormack Pit Placement maintenance material 20 Site (also called Sherman Yes DWR only 250,000 3,4 Island?) WDR R5-2003-0145 Proposed Iron House Levy repair and 21 Jersey Island Placement Site Restoration 3 Sanitation District maintenance
    [Show full text]
  • Salinity Effects on Native and Introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2
    ! Section 1: Summary Information 1. Project title: Salinity effects on native and introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2. Applicant name: San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies 3. Contact person: Katharyn E. Boyer 4. Address: 3152 Paradise Drive 5. City, State, Zip: Tiburon, CA, 94920 6. Telephone #: 510-504-2424 7. Fax #: 510-558-0167 8. Email address: [email protected] 9. Agency Type: University (CSU) 10. Certified nonprofit organization: No 11. New grantee: Yes 12. Amount requested: $412,410 13. Total project cost: $412,410 (University rules do not allow formal attribution of closely related projects as match; however, two projects funded in recent weeks by the Delta Science Program [$160K] and NOAA Fisheries [$10K] represent substantial leveraging of requested funds) 14. Topic Area(s): Primary: Shallow water and marsh habitat; Secondary: X2 (freshwater- seawater interface), Non-native invasive species 15. ERP Project type: Primary: Research; Secondary: Monitoring, Pilot/Demonstration 16. Ecosystem Element: Primary: Tidal perennial aquatic habitat; Secondary: Invasive aquatic plants, Essential fish habitat, Mid-channel islands and shoals 17. Water Quality Constituent: Primary: Salinity; Secondary: Turbidity, Nutrients 18. At-Risk species benefited: Delta Smelt, Central Valley Fall-/Late-Fall-Run Chinook Salmon ESU, and Green Sturgeon ! "! ! 19. Project objectives: Characterize salinity and other abiotic factors in and outside native Stuckenia pectinata beds with comparisons to four invasive Egeria densa beds, and use mescosom experiments to evaluate and predict the effects of increased salinity on Stuckenia and Egeria, and their invertebrate assemblages. 20. Time frame: 3 years, beginning fall 2011 (depending on award/contracting schedule) Section 2: Location Information 1.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected]
    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Master's Projects and Capstones Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects Spring 5-20-2016 Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resource Economics Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, and the Other Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Bowis, Meagan, "Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident" (2016). Master's Projects and Capstones. 340. https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone/340 This Project/Capstone is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Projects and Capstones by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This Master’s Project Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident By Meagan Kane Bowis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Solano 4 Wind Project EIR 8 References Executive
    Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 8 References Executive Summary No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 1, “Introduction” No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 2, “Project Description” California Energy Commission. 2018 (August). Operational Wind Projects, Solano Wind Resource Area, 2018. Map scale 1:24,000. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/wind/WindResourceArea_Solano.pdf. Accessed March 27, 2019. CEC. See California Energy Commission. Solano County. 1987 (May). Solano County Wind Turbine Siting Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Department of Environmental Management, Fairfield, CA. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019 (January). U.S. Wind Turbine Database. Available: https://eerscmap.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/#14.02/38.16164/-121.79729. Accessed February 9, 2019. USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey. Chapter 3, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures” Section 3.1, “Aesthetics” Black & Veatch. 2019 (January 3). Solano Wind Energy Project, Wind Project Shadow Flicker Assessment. California Department of Transportation 2019. Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. Accessed March 18, 2019. Federal Aviation Administration. 2018 (August 17). Obstruction Marking and Lighting, including Changes 1 and 2. Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L. Chapter 13, “Marking and Lighting Wind Turbines.” Federal Highway Administration. 2015 (January). Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. FHWA-HEP-15-029. Washington, DC. Page 8-1 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 National Research Council. 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NRC. See National Research Council. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2007 (September). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the SMUD Solano Wind Project Phase 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh Iii Wind Plant Project Habitat Conservation Plan
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE SHILOH III WIND PLANT PROJECT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN P REPARED BY: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2800 Cottage Way, W-2650 Sacramento, CA 95825 Contact: Mike Thomas, Chief Habitat Conservation Planning Branch W ITH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Brad Schafer 916.737.3000 February 2011 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh III Wind Plant Project Habitat Conservation Plan. February. (ICF 00263.09). Sacramento, CA. With technical assistance from ICF International, Sacramento, CA. Contents Chapter 1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.2 Species Covered by the HCP ...................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3 Proposed Action Addressed in this EA ....................................................................................... 1‐2 1.4 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action .......................................................................... 1‐2 Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives .................................................................................. 2‐1 2.1 Alternative 1: Proposed Action .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • F-1'7-03 Meeting
    MINUTE ITEM This Calendar Item No. <!I/ was approved as Minute Item No . .J.L. by the California State Lands Commission by a vote of _g__ to,L'at Its f-1'7-03 meeting. CALENDAR ITEM C11 A) 11 08/19/03 PRC 5438 WP 5438.1 S) 2 L. Burks AMENDMENT OF MASTER LEASE NO. PRC 5438.1 (ADDENDUM NO. 14) APPLICANT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company AREA, LAND TYPE, AND LOCATION: Master Lease: Over 100 waterway crossings throughout the State. Amendment: Delete from the Lease 6.07 acres, more or less, of tide and submerged lands in Honker and Suisun Bays, near Bay Point, Contra Costa and Solano counties. AUTHORIZED USE: Master Lease: Continued use and maintenance of distribution pipelines to transport natural and synthetic gas. Amendment: Removal of an existing 10-inch and 12-inch diameter pipeline known as PG&E Line 182. LEASE TERM: Existing Master Lease: 20 years, beginning January 1, 1978. A new lease is currently being negotiated. The existing lease is in holdover. CONSIDERATION: Existing Master Lease: $30,400 per year; with the State reserving the right to fix a different rent periodically during the lease term, as provided in the lease. SPECIFIC LEASE PROVISIONS: Liability insurance: $10,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $10,000,000 for property damage. n1 r 01. I lJs l 1U·"t REVISED 08/18/03 0 -1- CALEMDAR PAGE Mir<UT E PA GE CALENDAR ITEM NO. C11 (CONT'D) PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Master Lease provides that the lease may periodically be amended by a series of addenda for the purpose of adding to and deleting from the lease the parcels of land necessary for the distribution of natural gas pipelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources Inventory Report and Addendum
    APPENDIX E1 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT This page intentionally left blank CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED MONTEZUMA II WIND PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P REPARED FOR: NextEra Energy Montezuma II Wind, LLC 700 Universe Boulevard, MS FEW/JB Juno Beach, FL 33408 Contact: Cliff Graham 561.304.5372 P REPARED BY: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Andrea Nardin 916.737.3000 August 2010 ICF International. 2010. Cultural Resources Inventory Report for the Proposed Montezuma II Wind Project, Solano County, California. August. (ICF 00336.10). Sacramento, CA. Prepared for NextEra Energy Montezuma II Wind, LLC, Juno Beach, FL. Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 1 Area of Impact ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Regulatory Setting .................................................................................................................................. 3 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................ 4 Cultural Setting ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Suisun City General Plan
    B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES B ACKGROUND R EPORT Biological Resources In This Background Report Page Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................... 3 Habitat Types ......................................................................................................................... 3 Sensitive Biological Resources ................................................................................................ 9 Sensitive Habitats ................................................................................................................. 10 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................... 40 Federal Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Laws ...................................................................... 41 State Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Laws ......................................................................... 43 Regional and Local Plans, Policies, Regulations, and Ordinances .......................................... 44 General Plan Issues and Opportunities ..................................................................................... 46 References ............................................................................................................................... 47 P AGE BIO‐ 1 C ITY OF
    [Show full text]
  • Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report Montezuma Wind Plant Project (U-06-06) January 2010
    Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report Montezuma Wind Plant Project (U-06-06) January 2010 Department of Resource Management 675 Texas Street, Suite 5500 Fairfield, CA 94533 Planning Services Division Michael Yankovich Phone: (707) 784-6765 / Fax: (707) 784-4805 Planning Program Manager January 14, 2010 Dear Interested Agency: Subject: Notice of Montezuma Wind Project Final Environmental Impact Report Amendment The County of Solano Department of Resource Management published the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Montezuma Wind Project in February of 2007. An amendment to the FEIR has been prepared, dated January 2010, and is attached. The amendment describes and analyzes the potential impacts resulting from minor changes to the project description, environment and setting, and/or new information being received, generally described as follows: Modifications to wind turbine layout option #1 (Siemens). Elimination of PG&E reconductoring project from EIR (project near completion). Slight increased size (0.07 acre) of one of two substation options, and increased main transformer size from 40 MVA to 60 MVA. Increased project area from 1,458 to 1,466 acres. New and/or updated reports: blade throw, shadow flicker, low frequency/infrasound noise, and avian mortality. Update and resolution of Travis AFB radar issue related to the Project. Update to Air Quality section of EIR regarding greenhouse gases and global warming. Update to Biological Resources section of EIR regarding California Tiger Salamander and regulations for Bald and Golden Eagles. Other updates regarding County adoption of 2008 General Plan, plans underway for County adoption of updated development standards for wind turbine generators, and recently completed and planned wind energy projects in the vicinity of Montezuma Wind.
    [Show full text]
  • Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1
    SAN FRANCISCO BAY RESTORATION AUTHORITY Staff Recommendation April 11, 2018 MONTEZUMA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT, PHASE 1 Project No. RA-001 Project Manager: Laura Cholodenko RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorization to disburse up to $1,610,000 to Montezuma Wetlands LLC to complete the Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1, which includes tidal and seasonal wetland restoration on 630 acres of diked baylands and enhancement of adjacent uplands in Suisun Marsh, Solano County. LOCATION: Montezuma Slough, Solano County; Measure AA Region: North Bay MEASURE AA PROGRAM CATEGORY: Safe, Clean Water and Pollution Prevention Program; Vital Fish, Bird and Wildlife Habitat Program. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Project Location Exhibit 2: Project Design Exhibit 3: CEQA Documentation Exhibit 4: Project Letters RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends that the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority adopt the following resolution pursuant to The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Act, Gov. Code § 66700- 66706: “The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority hereby authorizes the disbursement of an amount not to exceed one million six hundred ten thousand dollars ($1,610,000) to Montezuma Wetlands LLC for implementation of the Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project, Phase 1, which includes tidal and seasonal wetland restoration on 630 acres of diked baylands and enhancement of adjacent uplands in Suisun Marsh, Solano County. Prior to commencement of the project, the grantee shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Officer of the Authority the following: a. A detailed work program, schedule, and budget. Page 1 of 10 MONTEZUMA WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT, PHASE 1 b. Names and qualifications of any contractors to be employed in carrying out the project.
    [Show full text]