DECISION MEMO Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communications Uses U.S. Forest Service, Los Padres National Forest Kern, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties, California

BACKGROUND The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service), Los Padres National Forest (LPF) proposed to issue new special use authorizations (“authorizations”) for existing communications uses on the LPF, for a new term to replace existing or expired authorizations. Communications uses are structures or facilities designed to house or support communications equipment, such as microwaves, antennas, and equipment cabinets. Facilities typically include equipment building(s), tower(s), and ancillary structures such as propane tanks, generators, solar panels and fences. These facilities support communication uses such as: microwave, AM/FM radio, television, cellular service, internet service, private and commercial radio services, and amateur radio. “Designated/Approved Communications Sites” are areas designated for telecommunications uses in a Land Management Plan, or separate NEPA decision document, identified by name, which may be limited to a single facility, but often encompass multiple facilities (e.g., towers, buildings). Each designated communications site has a Communications Site Management Plan which is attached to each special use authorization at the site. Single uses that involve minor development, such as personal receive-only antennas or resource monitoring equipment, do not always need to be designated as a communications site (FSH 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, Chapter 90 – Communications Site Management, 90.3, page 6). These authorizations have an attached operation and maintenance plan. There are currently thirty-two communication use locations on the Los Padres National Forest with facilities needing new authorizations for new terms. There are multiple facilities at many of the sites, totaling 129 existing authorizations for communications facilities. Of these use locations, twenty-two are Designated/Approved Communication Sites, and 10 are single or stand-alone uses.

PROJECT LOCATION The Project is located on National Forest System (NFS) lands within the Los Padres National Forest. Appendix A includes a project map, and Appendix B provides the names and general legal land descriptions of the communications use locations.

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION There is a need to provide communications services on the Los Padres National Forest for the purpose of public safety, emergency response, education, entertainment, information services and general communication, etc. These uses benefit all users both on NFS lands and on non-national forest lands encompassing the greater Central Coast area in parts of Kern, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties. The desired future condition would be the continued provision of communications services. Throughout the LPF there are approximately 88 authorizations that are expired or will expire within the next several years. New authorizations would allow for the continued use and occupancy of the existing communications uses located on the LPF. There is a need to comply with the Forest Service National Strategic Plan (2015) and the Los Padres National Forest Land Management Plan (Forest Plan or LMP) (2006), congressional statutes and executive orders. The Forest Service has been directed by Congress and the President to facilitate implementation of the Nation’s strategy for wireless communications. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 gives direction to Federal agencies to support the development of communication sites. In 1997 the General Services Administration released a bulletin regarding granting of siting requests, which stated:

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 1 of 16 “Requests for the use of property, right-of-way, and easements by duly authorized telecommunications service providers should be granted unless there are unavoidable conflicts with the department’s or agency’s mission, or current or planned use of the property or access to that property.” Executive Order 13616 of June 14, 2012 Accelerating Broadband Infrastructure Deployment states: “Broadband access is essential to the Nation’s global competitiveness in the 21st century, [it] also affords public safety agencies the opportunity for greater levels of effectiveness and interoperability. While broadband infrastructure has been deployed in a vast majority of communities across the country, today too many areas still lack adequate access to this crucial resource. … Federal property and rights of way can be essential to the deployment of both wired and wireless broadband infrastructure. The Federal Government controls nearly 30 percent of all land in the United States [and] owns thousands of buildings … creating significant opportunities for executive departments and agencies to help expand broadband infrastructure.” It further directs the development and implementation of “a strategy to facilitate the timely and efficient deployment of broadband facilities on Federal lands”, and that processes need to be developed that “facilitate nongovernment entities’ use of Federal property for the deployment of broadband facilities ... allow[ing] for access by multiple broadband service providers and public safety entities.”

PROPOSED ACTION 1. The Forest Service, Los Padres National Forest proposes to authorize issuance of new authorizations for existing communications uses at 32 locations (Appendix B) for the maximum allowable term under Forest Service Special Uses Handbook 2709.11, Chapter 10. Some authorizations are expired and some will expire in the next several years. New authorizations will be issued to individual holders after full compliance with the terms and conditions of the authorization has been verified. 2. There would be no physical changes to the facilities, other than minor maintenance and modifications that may be required in order for the facility to comply with the terms and conditions of the special use authorization. Examples of minor routine maintenance activities include: climbing towers, repair and replacement of tower hardware, equipment upgrades, roof repair, paint repair, maintenance of gas/propane tanks, installation and repair/maintenance of anti- perching devices. Other activities associated with the ongoing use and occupancy of the communication facilities include fuel hazard reduction, invasive plant treatment, graffiti removal, trash removal, pest control and routine road use and maintenance. 3. The authorizations would be subject to national standard clauses. These clauses would be subject to change in order to comply with any amendments as directed by the Forest Service at the time of authorization issuance. 4. Additionally, the authorizations will be subject to project specific resource protection requirements and design features (Appendix C). For single stand-alone authorizations the applicable measures will be attached to the authorization as an appendix. For designated/approved communications sites, the design features will be included in a communications site management plan that is consistent with the Forest Plan. The communications site management plans will provide site-specific direction and guidance to Forest Service personnel, the communications site users, and the public. These measures are put in place to protect the public, public lands, resources and the government of the United States, and shall be attached as an appendix to the authorizations.

DECISION I have decided to implement the project as proposed, authorizing the issuance of the appropriate authorization documents, (i.e., leases or permits) to existing communications use authorization holders for existing facilities, as described in the Proposed Action. This project will meet the purpose and need by providing for continued communication needs and it is in compliance with National and Forest Plan goals and directives.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 2 of 16 This decision will also cover the reissuance of existing authorized communication uses at these 32 locations that expire over the next few years, provided they are qualified to be reissued and in compliance with the terms and conditions of the authorization.

REASONS FOR CATEGORICALLY EXCLUDING THE DECISION This action is categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement (EIS) or an environmental assessment (EA). The applicable category of actions is identified in agency procedures as 36 CFR 220.6(e)(15): Issuance of a new special use authorization for a new term to replace an existing or expired special use authorization when the only changes are administrative, there are not changes to the authorized facilities or increases in the scope or intensity of authorized activities, and the applicant or holder is in full compliance with the terms and conditions of the special use authorization. I find that there are no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS. I took into account resource conditions identified in agency procedures that should be considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances might exist:

• Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species The Proposed Action includes resource protections measures to avoid or minimize effects to the California condor. With implementation of these measures the Proposed Action may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the California condor, and will have no effect on its designated critical habitat. It will not affect any federally-listed plants or the Primary Constituent Elements for designated plant Critical Habitat, as the project area does not contain suitable habitat for any U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service federally listed plants. Consultation was conducted with the USFWS and a letter of concurrence was received April 8, 2019. This project is in compliance with the Endangered Species Act. The project may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing of the Sensitive animal species on the current LPF list. Implementation of the proposed action as described may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability of the Forest Service Sensitive plant species on the current LPF list. Supporting documentation includes “Biological Assessment for the Renewal of Communication Use Authorizations on the Los Padres National Forest” by Forest Biologist Kevin Cooper, 11/27/2018, and “Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Species Communication Sites Special Use Permits Renewal” by Forest Botanist Lloyd Simpson, 12/18/2017. Additional supporting documentation includes: “Programmatic Wildlife Biological Evaluation for Management of Communication Sites on Los Padres National Forest, California” by Assistant Forest Biologist Patrick Lieske, 4/12/2019; “Migratory Birds Assessment Report” by Assistant Forest Biologist Patrick Lieske, 3/9/2019; “Programmatic Management Indicator Species for Los Padres National Forest, Communications Site SUP” by Assistant Forest Biologist Patrick Lieske, 5/30/2017; “Noxious Weed Risk Assessment” by Forest Botanist Lloyd Simpson, 8/21/2016.

• Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds No effects are expected as no significant ground disturbance would be authorized as part of this proposed action. All maintenance of the existing roads would comply with standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Forest engineering criteria. This project is in compliance with the Clean Water Act.

• Congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas The project locations are not within Congressionally-designated Wilderness areas.

• Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas Black Mountain Communications Site is erroneously included (mapping error) within the Black Mountain Inventoried Roadless Area. The IRA map shows exclusion of the communications site access road corridor and an area at the end of the road presumably meant to exclude the communications site. Analysis of the Black Mountain IRA with respect to the Black Mountain Communication Site was completed for the DGS/CHP Communication Use Lease Decision Memo

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 3 of 16 and is hereby incorporated by reference. Facilities at Black Mountain Communications Site were constructed beginning in 1959 (FAA) and include federal, state, county and commercial facilities. One stand-alone use, a UNAVCO seismic monitoring instrument, is located in the right of way of an administrative road serving as a boundary between the Dick Smith Wilderness and the Mono Recommended Wilderness/Mono IRA. The right of way is excluded from wilderness.

• Research natural areas There are no research natural areas present in the project area.

• American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites Several peaks with existing communications facilities are sometimes identified by Native American tribes or individuals as sacred sites or ceremonial sites. Pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 requirements, the following federally recognized tribes were contacted: Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians and Tejon Indian Tribe. Additionally, eleven letters were mailed to groups and individuals that are not from federally recognized tribes. The Forest received four responses from Native Americans. Two responders had no concerns, one was interested in road maintenance activities (that occur within authorized road right-of-way), and one requested notification of any soil disturbance in the project area. None expressed any concerns with continuing use of locations as communications sites as long as current best management practices protecting cultural sites are followed. Proposals for new or replacement facilities are not included in this decision and such proposals would trigger additional tribal consultation. Heritage Staff have determined that this project has little potential to adversely affect Native American religious or cultural sites and is in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). State Historic Preservation Office concurrence is not required per the Programmatic Agreement among the Forest Service, (Region 5), the California SHPO, and the ACHP Regarding Processes for Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA for Management of Historic Properties and the project qualifies as a Screened Undertaking under Stipulation 7.2 Exemption Category ((Appendix D 2.3 (f)). (Forest Tribal Liaison Pete Zavalla, 4/24/2019 and Forest Heritage Program Manager Wendy Weaver, 4/23/2019)

• Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas

Heritage resources consisting of both recorded and unrecorded archaeological sites and historic structures are present in the vicinity of many of the communications site locations. The renewal of authorizations for existing facilities has little to no potential to adversely affect these sites and structures. Proposals for new or replacement facilities are not included in this decision and such proposals would trigger additional heritage resource analyses, including consideration of historic properties. Heritage Staff have determined that this project has little potential to adversely affect recorded and unrecorded archaeological sites and historic structures and is in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). State Historic Preservation Office concurrence is not required per the Programmatic Agreement among the Forest Service, (Region 5), the California SHPO, and the ACHP Regarding Processes for Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA for Management of Historic Properties and the project qualifies as a Screened Undertaking under Stipulation 7.2 Exemption Category ((Appendix D 2.3 (f)). (Forest Heritage Program Manager Wendy Weaver, 4/23/2019) The holder shall immediately notify the authorized officer of any antiquities or other objects of historic or scientific interest, including but not limited to historic or prehistoric ruins, fossils, or artifacts discovered as the result of operations under this permit. Section 6(a) of Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and the implementing regulation 36 CFR § 296.4 states that no person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface, or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological resource located on public lands or Indian lands. In the event of an inadvertent discovery of any antiquities or other objects of historic or scientific interest, including but not limited to historic or prehistoric ruins, human skeletal remains, fossils, or artifacts during the duration of this permit, the holder shall leave such discoveries intact and contact the authorized officer as soon as possible.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 4 of 16 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT This action was originally listed as a proposal on the Los Padres National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions on January 4, 2017, and updated periodically during the analysis. In addition to providing information about this project on the Los Padres National Forest website, scoping letters were mailed to 53 interested or affected individuals, organizations and agencies on June 7, 2018, requesting responses by July 6, 2018. The Forest received seven written comments by mail and email, with the last scoping response received and accepted on August 27, 2018. Two commenters had no concerns, one requested ongoing information regarding any soil disturbing activities associated with communication facilities, one inquired about general access road maintenance, two were concerned about maintenance and use of the access road to a communication site that also traverses private lands and has a limited easement, and one mentioned considerations for protection of birds and ongoing compliance requirements of communications authorization holders. All of these concerns are addressed in standard clauses in communications use permits and leases, in the Communications Site Management Plans attached to each authorization at designated communications sites, and in Operating Plans attached to each authorization for single/stand-alone uses. New authorizations will be issued to individual holders after full compliance with the terms and conditions of the authorization has been verified. Proposals for new or replacement facilities are not included in this decision; such proposals would trigger additional resource analysis, scoping and a separate NEPA decision. No public comments raised concerns or issues related to the seven resource conditions that should be considered when determining whether an extraordinary circumstance exists. Scoping letters and scoping comments received are located in the project file.

FINDINGS REQUIRED BY OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS This decision is consistent with the Forest Plan:

• Forest Plan Program Emphasis and Objectives (LMP, Part 2, page 30): Communications sites are one of the special uses recognized in the Forest Plan, under Commodity and Commercial Uses. Given the Los Padres National Forest's proximity to multiple large population centers in Southern California, National Forest System land is in demand for locating infrastructure to support communities; program emphasis is on managing these uses while preserving recreation opportunities and resolving natural resource conflicts. • Program Strategies and Tactics, Lands 2 - Non-Recreation Special Use Authorizations (LMP Part 2, Appendix B, page 138): Administer special-use authorizations (SUAs) to standard: . Upon termination of SUA restore areas to a specified condition. . Administer existing SUAs in threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species habitats to ensure they avoid or minimize impacts to threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and their habitats. . Work with special-use authorization holders to better administer National Forest System land and reduce administrative cost. . Maximize opportunities to co-locate facilities and minimize encumbrance of National Forest System land. . For special-use authorization holders operating within threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species key and occupied habitats, develop and provide information and education (e.g., workshops, annual meetings) on ways to avoid and minimize effects of their activities on occupied threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species habitat. . Use signing, barriers, or other suitable measures to protect threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species, and key and occupied habitats within special-use authorization areas. . Utilize existing designated communication sites (Table 476, p. 14) as noted in Appendix G (LMP).

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 5 of 16 • Design Criteria for the Southern California National Forests (LMP Part 3, page 9, S-42): The Forest Plan calls for including provisions for raptor safety when issuing authorizations for new communication sites (see also Appendix G - Guidelines for Protection and Conservation of Bird Species at Mountain Top Communications Sites, pp.69-70). It also directs that these guidelines should be implemented for existing authorizations in high-use flyways of the California condor, and other high-use raptor flyways.

• Land use zones (LMP Part 2, pages 2-5): Identify appropriate management types of ‘uses’ that are consistent with the achievement of the desired conditions described in the Forest Plan. Specific uses are allowed on national forests except when identified as not suitable, because of law, national or regional policy, or the revised forest plan. What this means is that the forest plans are permissive. That is, activities may occur unless the forest plan says that they cannot. Most ground disturbing activities require further project or site-specific analysis before a decision is made. The uses that are identified as suitable in each of the land use zones are subject to design criteria, as well as the other guidance described in the LMP, Forest Handbooks and other documents with guidance that is identified for use based on site- specific project analysis. The following information from the LMP (Table 2.3.3., Part 2, page 4) shows each land use type that an existing communications use is within and indicates the general suitability of the use. By exception indicates that generally conditions are not compatible with those use types but under certain conditions they might be appropriate. All of the communication uses are existing; the Forest Plan states: The suitable uses identified in the LMP are intended as guidance for consideration of future activities and do not affect existing authorized occupancy and uses or the administrative procedures used to manage them. (LMP Part 2, page 5).

Back Country Wilderness Developed Motorized Use Back Country Critical (recommended Activity or Use Areas Interface Back Country Restricted Non-Motorized Biological is included) (Non-Rec) Special Uses: Low Intensity Suitable Suitable Suitable By Exception* By Exception* By Exception* Land Use Communication Designated Designated Designated By Exception* By Exception* Not Suitable Sites Areas Areas Areas *By Exception = Conditions which are not generally compatible with the land use zone but may be appropriate under certain circumstances. In this table “Communications Sites” refers to “Designated/Approved Sites” which are areas designated for telecommunications uses in an LMP, or separate NEPA decision document. They are identified by name and may be limited to a single facility, but often encompass multiple facilities. Single stand-alone uses that involve minor development, such as personal receive-only antennas or resource monitoring equipment do not always need to be designated as a communications site, and would be considered a Low Intensity Land Use (FSH 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, Chapter 90 – Communications Site Management, 90.3, page 6). The 32 existing communications use locations fall within a variety of Land Use Zones as shown in the table below:

Developed Back Country Recommended LAND USE ZONES Areas Back Motorized Use Back Country Critical Wilderness/IRA Interface Country Restricted Non-Motorized Biological Number of Designated/Approved 4 8 9 0 1 0 Communications Sites # of Stand-Alone Use 4 3 3 0 0 0 Locations Total 8 11 12 0 1 0

The Mt. Pinos Communications Site is within critical habitat for the California condor; USFWS designated this habitat after the site was established. Biologists determined that maintenance and use of the existing structures does not alter the primary constituent elements of the critical habitat. The authorization and the Communications Site Management Plan include requirements protecting condors that may visit the site. The designated Black Mountain

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 6 of 16

Appendix A - Map of the Geographic Area

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 8 of 16 Appendix B - Communications Facilities on Los Padres National Forest No. of Facility District and Site Name General Legal Description County Authorizations Monterey Ranger District Anderson Peak Communications Site Sec. 21, T20S, R3E, MDM Monterey 10 Vaqueros Peak Communications Site Sec. 3, T20S, R6E, MDM Monterey 1 *Manuel Pk passive reflector Sec. 20, T19S, R2E, MDM Monterey 1 *Chews Ridge wx data/seismic Sec. 6, T19S, R4E, MDM Monterey 2 Santa Lucia Ranger District Black Mountain Communications Site Sec. 15, T29S, R15E, MDM San Luis Obispo 7 Branch Mountain Communications Site Sec. 31, T31S, R18E, MDM San Luis Obispo 2 Cuesta Peak Communications Site Sec. 35, T29S, R12E, MDM San Luis Obispo 15 La Panza Communications Site Sec. 15, T31S, R17E, MDM San Luis Obispo 2 Mt. Lowe Communications Site Sec.8/17, T30S,R13E,MDM San Luis Obispo 6 Plowshare Peak Communications Site Sec. 4, T11N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 5 Tassajera Peak Communications Site Sec. 20, T29S, R12E, MDM San Luis Obispo 10 Tepusquet Peak Communications Site Sec. 30, T10N, R31W, SBM Santa Barbara 3 *Figueroa Lookout repeater/wx data Sec. 25, T8N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 2 *Figueroa Station amateur/GPS seismic Sec. 35, T8N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 2 *Treplett Mtn GPS seismic Sec. 19, T11N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 Santa Barbara Ranger District Broadcast Peak Communications Site Sec. 7, T5N, R29W, SBM Santa Barbara 6 Camino Cielo Communications Site Sec. 13, T5N, R28W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 La Cumbre Peak Communications Site Sec. 21, T5N, R27W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 West La Cumbre Communications Site Sec. 20/21, T5N,R27W,SBM Santa Barbara 7 Rattlesnake Pass Communications Site Sec. 35, T5N, R27W, SBM Santa Barbara 2 W Santa Ynez Peak Communications Site Sec. 11, T5N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 Santa Ynez Peak Communications Site Sec. 12, T5N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 19 E Santa Ynez Peak Communications Site Sec. 12, T5N, R30W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 *Loma Pelona GPS seismic Sec. 33, T7N, R26W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 *Noon Peak GPS seismic Sec. 33, T5N, R26W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 *Paradise Road air quality station Sec. 2, T5N, R28W, SBM Santa Barbara 1 Ojai Ranger District Sisar Peak Sec. 24, T5N, R22W, SBM Ventura 3 *Rose Valley GPS seismic Sec. 4, T5N, R22W, SBM Ventura 1 Mount Pinos Ranger District Frazier Mountain Sec. 14/23, T8N,R20W,SBM Ventura 7 McPherson Peak Sec. 6, T9N, R27W, SBM Santa Barbara 6 Mt. Pinos Sec. 6, T8N, R21W, SBM Ventura 2 *Ozena Station wx data/GPS seismic Sec. 19, T7N, R23W, SBM Ventura 2 *Communications facility not located at a designated communications site TOTAL 129

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 9 of 16

Appendix C - Resource Protection Requirements (Included in Communications Site Management Plans)

Resource Design Features Area 1. All appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be implemented to minimize damage to Soil and surface soil structure and to reduce potential for erosion and sediment transport to drainages due to Water project activities. All ground disturbing activities with the potential for erosion must be consistent with Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 2509.22 – Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook and Best Management Practices. 2. Work and parking/staging areas along with ground and vegetation disturbance are limited to the minimum necessary. 3. All equipment and work areas must contain appropriate spill containment kits to respond to leaks and spills. Personnel must have training on proper response to any type of hazmat situation. All hazmat situations must be reported to the Forest Hazmat Coordinator according to the Forest guidelines.

4. Vehicles are encouraged to idle for two minutes or less to reduce emissions. Wildlife 5. Pets are allowed on-site only if they are leashed or properly restrained at all times. 6. Wildlife encountered during the course of work activities should be avoided or given the opportunity to evacuate the site. This includes venomous species such as rattlesnakes. If needed, reptile species, including rattlesnakes, can be moved from the project site using non-lethal means such as sticks, shovel handles, buckets or similar containers. Personnel will be reminded that harassing, harming, or feeding wildlife is not permitted (with the exception of Forest Service approved pest control). 7. Use of pesticides (including rodenticides) will be in strict conformance with prescribed regulations, label directions and Forest Service Manual (FSM) -Environmental Management direction. Pesticides that could adversely affect secondary consumers would not be permitted. Placement of bait and traps outside buildings is not permitted. 8. Holder(s) shall follow the Guidelines for Protection and Conservation of Bird Species at Mountain Top Communications Sites, USDA Forest Service, as described in Exhibit 1. 9. Horizontal surfaces shall be treated to prevent perching on a case by case basis with Forest Service input. Anti-perching measures must not present a hazard to condors or raptors. Authorization holder(s) can utilize treatments consistent with the range of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recommendations described in Exhibit 2. As new information and technologies becomes available, a list of acceptable treatments would be updated. Treatments not described in Exhibit 2 must be submitted to the Los Padres National Forest (LPF) for approval prior to installation. The authorization holder(s) is responsible for providing the LPF with documentation of the anti-perching treatments applied to their facilities. Use of materials that will degrade and fragment due to weathering are not recommended. For example, use of plastic anti-perching strips is discouraged because exposure to the elements causes them to disintegrate quickly and become microtrash when the fragments fall to the ground. 10. Sites shall be kept clear of garbage and debris including microtrash. Areas included in fuel hazard reductions must also be kept clear of microtrash and debris since the removal of vegetation can expose items that can then be ingested by wildlife. 11. Items that could pose a risk of entanglement such as ropes, cables, lines, etc. will be kept secure.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 10 of 16 12. All project materials shall be properly stored and secured. Tools, hardware, equipment and all loose items must be stored in a manner that would prevent their removal or ingestion by wildlife. 13. Materials that are in any type of liquid, granular or powder form must be stored in sealed leak- proof containers. These containers would be stored in a manner that prevents access by wildlife. 14. All parked vehicles/equipment would be kept free of leaks, particularly anti-freeze, since this could be fatal if consumed by wildlife. 15. Informational signs specific to condors shall be posted inside at applicable sites and would focus on three basic areas: identification, response and hazards. The posted information will include a basic condor identification guide (Exhibit 4), an outline of actions to take in response to a condor entering the permitted area and a description of site associated risks to condors and the required corrective measures. These signs must have both LPF and USFWS approval. 16. If condors enter the permitted area while personnel are present, all personnel should be instructed to assess current work activities to ensure that none of them present a hazard to condors (moving vehicles, equipment loading, etc.). Any activities identified as presenting a potential hazard should be stopped or blocked to prevent condor access to the specific activity. 17. USFWS approved methods for hazing condors away from the site can be utilized. The LPF uses field guidelines developed by Angeles National Forest for hazing based on USFWS direction (Exhibit 3). Hazing would only occur once the personnel on site have confirmed that there are no conditions present that may create a risk for collision by hazed condors taking flight to exit the area. Acceptable hazing includes clapping, yelling and stomping but does not include any physical contact with the birds or any action that would pose a risk to the bird’s safety. 18. Any condors hazed from the work area would be observed until they have safely left the immediate vicinity. This is to ensure that hazing has not resulted in creating conditions hazardous for the condors. 19. Any observations of condors within the project area would be reported within 48 hours to the authorized officer with information including the date, time, location and wing/tag numbers if readable. If possible, any photos would be sent with the report. 20. Access to any sources of electrocution will be prevented.

21. To limit the introduction and spread of new invasive plant species, tool, vehicle and equipment Invasive washing requirements would be implemented. All ground disturbing and vegetation removal tools Plant and equipment (including handheld) must be cleaned prior to entering National Forest System Mgmt lands. Washing of tools, equipment and vehicles would be done in a manner that will effectively remove seeds and propagules and would not further enhance the spread of invasive plants through improper disposal of rinse water. Washing of equipment and vehicles must include tires/tracks, wheel wells, bumpers, fuel/skid pans and undercarriages. Personnel transport vehicles are exempt from this requirement as long as they have not engaged in off-road travel. 22. All plant material (e.g., straw, mulch, seeds, etc.) used for erosion control and/or road maintenance must be certified weed-free. Only weed-free rice straw or rice mulch is allowed. 23. All erosion control material must be biodegradable. Wattles wrapped in “photodegradable” plastic are not acceptable as they increase trash and can cause entrapment of small wildlife. 24. All fill material (soil, sand, gravel, rock) must be from an LPF approved material site. 25. Authorization holder(s) is responsible for the monitoring and removal of noxious weeds within their permitted area and the area included in their fuel hazard reduction treatments. If noxious weed removal/treatments are necessary, they shall be completed within that growing season and follow the requirements listed in the Forestwide Invasive Plants Program, Los Padres National Forest Environmental Assessment (pending 2019).

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 11 of 16 Exhibit 1: Guidelines for Protection and Conservation of Bird Species at Mountain Top Communications Sites, USDA Forest Service The four southern California national forests are comprised of the Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino National Forests. A major program administered by these national forests is the issuance and administration of special-use authorizations for communications facilities at designated communications sites. The following guidelines have been developed and adopted by the four southern California national forests as a supplement to communications site management plan, for the protection and conservation of bird species covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and/or Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. I: Guidelines for Communication Tower Siting, Construction, Operation, Maintenance and Decommissioning New towers shall be the same or lesser tower heights as existing towers at the site and no more than 199 feet above ground level (AGL), and shall not require guy wires. Towers shall be unlighted if Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations permit. If towers requiring lights for aviation safety must be constructed, the minimum amount of pilot warning and obstruction avoidance lighting required by the FAA should be used. Unless otherwise required by the FAA, only white (preferable) or red strobe lights should be used at night, and these should be the minimum number, minimum intensity, and minimum number of flashes per minute (longest duration between flashes) allowable by the FAA. The use of solid red or pulsating red warning lights at night should be avoided. Any existing tower using guy wires shall have daytime visual markers on the wires to prevent collisions by diurnally moving species. Spacing of markers should be at 10-foot intervals for smaller ‘tags’ and at 20-foot intervals for larger more linear ‘flight diverter’ structures. In order to reduce the number of towers needed in the future, providers shall design new towers structurally and electrically to accommodate the applicant/licensee’s antennas and comparable antennas for multiple users. Security lighting for on-ground facilities and equipment should be down-shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the site. Towers, facilities and structures no longer in use or determined to be obsolete should be removed. Road access to mountain top communications sites must be adequate to support construction, maintenance and demolition of facilities. Communication service providers responsible for construction activities must notify the Forest Service prior to removal of equipment and structures to assess access needs. II: Additional Guidelines for Other Structures Associated with Communication Towers and Sites Place anti-perching materials along the top of open horizontal surfaces at tower tops or protruding arms of other tall vertical structures. Place anti-perching materials or devices along the top edge of flat rooftops or roof ridges of equipment buildings or other similar structures located within the communication site. Cover all microwave dishes with radome covers and place anti-perching materials or devices along the top quarter-arch of the front edge of dishes capable of supporting a perching condor (approximately 20 pounds per bird). Place anti-perching materials or devices along the top surface of horizontal coverings or tracks holding wave-guides capable of supporting a condor. Keep all trash, garbage or excess scrap materials removed from the communications site, or placed in enclosed structures not accessible to condors or other large bird species. Secure all loose wires or netting to prevent accidental entrapment of large birds. Placement of wires in conduit is also recommended where feasible. Cover or otherwise protect external fiberglass type insulation or other soft materials, which could be ripped apart or ingested by condors or other large birds.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 12 of 16 Cover all spill retention or catchment basins or other open structures that may collect and hold water or other liquids, which condors or other birds may attempt to drink. Cover or screen all large drains, conduits or other similar openings, which are large enough for a condor to walk into to prevent potential entrapment. All doors and windows on buildings or other structures shall be designed to ensure they remain closed when not occupied by personnel to prevent accidental entry and entrapment of condors or other species. Cyclone type fencing or other similar security fencing or walls surrounding equipment or other structures should be designed and located to avoid the potential for accidental entrapment of condors or eagles. Place raptor guards or other anti-perching materials or devices along the upper surface of the horizontal cross arms of electrical power poles at communications facilities, which could serve as perches for larger birds. Fuel storage tanks associated with generators and other facilities shall meet current fire department, federal, state, and local safety and hazardous materials requirements. Fuel storage shall be consolidated into one tank large enough to accommodate all tenants in a facility. For guidance on markers and other anti-perching devices, see Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 2006. Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006. Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) Final Project Report CEC-500-2006-022. Edison Electric Institute, APLIC, and the California Energy Commission. Washington D.C. and Sacramento, California. Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 2012. Reducing Avian Collisions with Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2012. Edison Electric Institute and APLIC, Washington D.C. APLIC's website is http://www.aplic.org/. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Communication Tower Guidance: http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/guidance- documents/communication-towers.php (Forest Land Management Plan, Design Criteria for the Southern California National Forests, Part 3, Appendix G, page 69)

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 13 of 16 Exhibit 2: USFWS Recommended Deterrents and Anti-Perching Devices *

EFFECTIVE CONDOR DETERRENTS AND ACTIONS: • Scarecrow motion-activated animal deterrent (most effective method available) http://motionsensorsprinkler.com/motion-sensor-sprinklers/contech-cro101-scarecrow-motion-activated-sprinkler/ • Removing attractants (e.g. open trash and recyclable containers, wires, seat cushions, drinkable water sources) • Constructing barriers to vulnerable property that is not able to be moved (e.g. barriers to AC unit wires, metal conduit around exposed wires, protective caps around insulation on outside water spouts) • Immediate response in scaring visiting condors away (e.g. spraying water, yelling/clapping/loud noises)

DETERRENTS THAT MAY BE EFFECTIVE:

• Electric track/electric strip tape (htt p://www.birdbgone.com/products/electric-track.html ; http://www.birdbarrier.com/products/bird-shock-flex-track/ ; http://www.nixalite.com/shocktape.aspx) • Avian Control Bird Repellent Spray (http://solveyourbirdproblems.com/) • Rollers for deck railings and ledges (http://coyoteroller.com/) • Avian anti-perching spikes (http://www.nixalite.com/Nixalitemodels.aspx#Premium_Model_S) • Artificial effigies (http://www.hankenimports.com/artificial-animals/93-15-inch-artificial-heads-up-vulture.html) • Gull sweep/daddi long legs (http://www.gullsweep.com/index.html ; http://www.birdbusters.com/pigeon_control_repellent.html)

* The list of product options does not imply endorsement of any of these products by the USFWS.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 14 of 16 Exhibit 3: Field Guidelines for Hazing California Condors

What is condor hazing? Hazing is the use of immediate and direct negative reinforcement to discourage interactions between condors and humans and/or human structures. What techniques are used to haze condors? The hazing of California condors typically involves actions such as hand clapping, yelling and foot stomping to startle the birds and get them to move away from potentially harmful situations. When is hazing condors appropriate? The use of hazing is appropriate if a condor enters the permitted area or is seen loitering on an access road. Hazing should be implemented only after it has been determined that a condor hazed from the site can safely leave without encountering any collision hazards. Why is hazing condors recommended? Condors that land on or near buildings, oil rigs, communication towers and other human structures are at risk of injury or mortality. In these situations, condors may become entangled in, or ingest materials including but not limited to wire, ropes, tarps, small bits of trash (micro-trash), industrial and household chemicals. Condors may also associate humans and human structures with food if they find discarded food trash or are given food directly.

Field Guidelines for Hazing California Condors

Follow these steps if a condor enters the permitted area: 1. Confirm identification of bird(s) in project area as California condor. 2. Alert other personnel to the presence of condors in the area. 3. Assess site and activities to ensure that there are no immediate hazards to birds that enter the work area (moving vehicles, equipment/material loading, etc.). Stop or block any activities deemed potentially hazardous. 4. Assess the site to ensure that birds can take flight and leave the area without encountering any potential collision hazards (powerlines, fences, hoists, etc.). 5. Hazing is to occur as soon as possible to reduce the amount of time condors spend in the work area. 6. If the flight path is clear, utilize non-invasive methods to startle the birds into taking flight. 7. Acceptable methods include hand clapping, stomping and yelling. 8. Under no circumstances will the crew touch individuals or throw objects for the purpose of hazing. 9. Any condors hazed from the work area would be observed until they have safely left the area included in the permit. Condor observations will be reported to the FS within 48 hours. 10. For any hazing effort, the following information is to be collected and submitted to the Forest Service as soon as possible and within 48 hours: date/time, location, number of condors involved, wing tag numbers, hazing technique used, outcome of hazing effort. 11. Immediate Forest Service notification is required if injury or mortality of a condor is observed.

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 15 of 16 Exhibit 4: Condor Identification

— LPF - Special Use Authorization Issuance for Existing Communication Uses - Decision Memo — Page 16 of 16