DOCSLIB.ORG

Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and Notice of Preparation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and Notice of Preparation Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and Notice of Preparation August 2017 This page left blank intentionally. Contents Contents Page CHAPTER 1 Project Description .......................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1.1 Background and Previous Studies ........................................................ 1-1 1.1.2 Santa Clara Valley Water District .......................................................... 1-2 1.1.3 CEQA Review ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 Project Setting .............................................................................................. 1-3 1.3 Project Description ....................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.1 Project Facilities .................................................................................... 1-5 1.4 Project Construction ................................................................................... 1-13 1.4.1 Preliminary Schedule .......................................................................... 1-13 1.4.2 Site Preparation ................................................................................... 1-13 1.4.3 Dam Construction ................................................................................ 1-14 1.4.4 Pump Station and Conveyance to Pacheco Conduit Construction Methods ........................................................................................................... 1-15 1.4.5 Access and Staging Areas .................................................................. 1-15 1.5 Project Operations ..................................................................................... 1-16 1.5.1 Central Valley Project/State Water Project Operations ....................... 1-17 1.5.2 Santa Clara Valley Water District Operations ...................................... 1-17 1.6 Project Benefits .......................................................................................... 1-17 1.7 Environmental Review ............................................................................... 1-18 1.7.1 Topics to be Analyzed in EIR .............................................................. 1-18 1.7.2 Environmental Procedures .................................................................. 1-19 1.8 Contact Information .................................................................................... 1-19 CHAPTER 2 Environmental Evaluation .............................................................. 2-1 2.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................. 2-1 2.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ........................................................... 2-1 2.4 CEQA Environmental Checklist .................................................................... 2-2 2.4.1 Aesthetics .............................................................................................. 2-2 2.4.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources ..................................................... 2-5 2.4.3 Air Quality .............................................................................................. 2-7 2.4.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................. 2-9 2.4.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. 2-19 2.4.6 Geology and Soils ............................................................................... 2-21 2.4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................ 2-26 2.4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................... 2-28 2.4.9 Hydrology ............................................................................................ 2-31 2.4.10 Land Use Planning ........................................................................... 2-37 2.4.11 Mineral Resources ........................................................................... 2-38 Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and NOP August 2017 – i Contents 2.4.12 Noise ................................................................................................ 2-40 2.4.13 Population and Housing ................................................................... 2-42 2.4.14 Public Services ................................................................................ 2-43 2.4.15 Recreation ........................................................................................ 2-44 2.4.16 Transportation and Traffic ................................................................ 2-45 2.4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................. 2-49 2.4.18 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................... 2-50 2.4.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................. 2-53 CHAPTER 3 List of Initial Study Preparers ......................................................... 3-1 3.1 Santa Clara Valley Water District ................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Stantec ......................................................................................................... 3-1 CHAPTER 4 References ....................................................................................... 4-1 ii – August 2017 Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and NOP Contents Tables Table 1-1. Physical Features of Major Project Components for the Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project ............................................................................. 1-6 Table 1-2. Average Monthly Release Targets to Pacheco Creek from Expanded Pacheco Reservoir .......................................................................................... 1-16 Table 2-1. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................. 2-1 Table 2-2. Aesthetics Checklist .................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-3. Agricultural and Forestry Resources Checklist ............................................ 2-5 Table 2-4. Air Quality Checklist .................................................................................... 2-7 Table 2-5. Biological Resources Checklist ................................................................... 2-9 Table 2-6. Cultural Resources Checklist .................................................................... 2-19 Table 2-7. Geology and Soils Checklist...................................................................... 2-21 Table 2-8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Checklist ...................................................... 2-26 Table 2-9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Checklist ............................................. 2-28 Table 2-10. Hydrology Checklist ................................................................................ 2-31 Table 2-11. Land Use Planning Checklist .................................................................. 2-37 Table 2-12. Mineral Resources Checklist ................................................................... 2-38 Table 2-13. Noise Checklist ....................................................................................... 2-40 Table 2-14. Population and Housing Checklist ........................................................... 2-42 Table 2-15. Public Services Checklist ........................................................................ 2-43 Table 2-16. Recreation Checklist ............................................................................... 2-44 Table 2-17. Transportation and Traffic Checklist ........................................................ 2-45 Table 2-18. Tribal Cultural Resources Checklist ........................................................ 2-49 Table 2-19. Utilities and Service Systems Checklist .................................................. 2-50 Table 2-20. Mandatory Findings of Significance Checklist ......................................... 2-53 Figures Figure 1-1. Project Location ......................................................................................... 1-4 Figure 1-2. Major Project Facilities and New Dam Footprint ........................................ 1-7 Figure 1-3. Area/Capacity Curve of Proposed Project.................................................. 1-8 Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and NOP August 2017 – iii Contents Exhibits Exhibit 1. Project Geopgraphic Overview Exhibit 2. Project Site Features Exhibit 3. Reservoir Plan View Exhibit 4. Cross Section of Dam Embankment Exhibit 5. Spillway Profile Exhibit 6. Outlet Tunnel Profile Exhibit 7. Pump/Gravity Flow Diagram Exhibit 8. Pump/Gravity Hydraulic Profile Exhibit 9. Pump Station Layout Exhibit 10. Regulating Tank at Pacheco Pumping Plant Exhibit 11. Borrow Areas Exhibit 12. Construction Access and Staging Areas Exhibit 13. Native American Heritage Commission Tribal Consultation List iv – August 2017 Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Initial Study and NOP Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms AB 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act ARB California Air Resources Board BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chairwoman Kaptur Letter WIIN Storage
    Bureau of Reclamation FY 2017, FY 2018 & FY 2019 Funding for WIIN Act Section 4007 Storage Projects FY 17/18/19 WIIN State Category Project (Study) Title Project Description Recommended Funding to be Spent in FY 21 This project will enlarge Shasta Dam and Reservoir, creating an additional 634,000 acre-feet of storage to benefit anadromous fish cold water supply (191,000 acre-feet) and water supply reliability, improve Upper Sacramento River habitat, increase power generation, and increase/improve recreation opportunities. Funds will Shasta Dam and Pre-Construction / be used for preconstruction activities related to Shasta Dam raise, recreation facilities planning/coordination, CA Reservoir Enlargement $ 15,000,000 Construction and reservoir infrastructure modifications. Pre-construction and design activities include: field explorations; Project contracts for cultural resource activities to support the required Historic Properties Treatment Plan development, survey data collection, seismic and hydrologic studies, and consultant contracts; and project management. Funds will also be used to begin construction once WIIN requirements are met. Address the issue of Friant-Kern Canal (FKC) subsidence; 3,000 acre-feet/day conveyance restored, which Friant-Kern Canal would allow significant increase in storage capacity in Millerton Reservoir during key times. Restoring FKC capacity would increase annual average surface water deliveries by 8,000 acre-feet. FY 2021 funding will be Pre-Construction / Capacity Correction CA used to complete NEPA EIS, develop a Biological Assessment, and establish agreement to preserve historic sites $ 71,000,000 Construction Resulting from ($1.9M); preconstruction activities to include land acquisition document development, land surveys, geologic Subsidence oversight, engineering oversight, and project management ($2.3M); and initial award funding for construction of $66.8M.
    [Show full text]
  • Monterey Bay Chapter Archive of Field Trips 2016
    22-Oct-19 California Native Plant Society – Monterey Bay Chapter Archive of Field Trips 2016- Table of Contents 2019 ............................................................................................................................................................ 11 Sunday, December 29 ......................................................................................................................... 11 Williams Canyon Hike to Mitteldorf Preserve................................................................................. 11 Saturday, December 21....................................................................................................................... 11 Fly Agaric Mushroom Search .......................................................................................................... 11 Saturday, December 7......................................................................................................................... 11 Buzzards Roost Hike, Pfeiffer State Park ......................................................................................... 11 Saturday, November 23 ...................................................................................................................... 11 Autumn in Garzas Creek, Garland Ranch ........................................................................................ 11 Wednesday, November 13 ................................................................................................................. 11 Birds and Plants of Mudhen Lake, Fort
    [Show full text]
  • South County Stormwater Resource Plan
    2020 South Santa Clara County Stormwater Resource Plan Prepared By: Watershed Stewardship and Planning Division Environmental Planning Unit South Santa Clara County Stormwater Resource Plan January 2020 Prepared by: Valley Water Environmental Planning Unit 247 Elisabeth Wilkinson Contributors: Kirsten Struve James Downing Kylie Kammerer George Cook Neeta Bijoor Brian Mendenhall Tanya Carothers (City of Morgan Hill/City of Gilroy) Sarah Mansergh (City of Gilroy) Vanessa Marcadejas (County of Santa Clara) Julianna Martin (County of Santa Clara) Funding provided by the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................2 1.1 Background and Purpose .................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Previous and Current Planning Efforts ................................................................................................ 3 Chapter 2: South Santa Clara County Watershed Identification ...........................................................5 2.1 Watersheds and Subwatersheds ........................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Internal Boundaries ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • C1: Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit*
    C1: Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit* About This Project Anderson Reservoir is currently limited to about 52% of its capacity due to seismic concerns, costing Santa Clara County valuable drinking water resources. This project covers earthquake retrofitting of Anderson Dam to improve reliability and safety, and returns the reservoir to its original storage capacity. Anderson Dam creates the county’s largest surface water reservoir—Anderson Reservoir— which stores local rainfall runoff and imported water from the Central Valley Project. The reservoir is an important water source for treatment plants and the recharge of the groundwater basin. Besides restoring drinking water supplies, the upgrade also supports compliance with environmental regulations. The District’s regular reservoir releases ensure that downstream habitat has healthy flows and temperatures to sustain wildlife. A breach of Anderson Dam at full capacity could have catastrophic consequences, including inundation of surrounding land more than 30 miles northwest to San Francisco Bay, and more than 40 miles southeast to Monterey Bay. In December 2016, the board was informed by the district that findings from the geotechnical and geologic investigations performed during the project’s design phase led to the conclusion that a more extensive dam retrofit than had originally been envisioned would have to be performed. Further, the Board was informed that the more extensive retrofit work would double the previous project’s estimated cost. The district presented the Board with a water supply cost-benefit analysis that showed the benefits of the more extensive retrofit project significantly outweighed the cost of not proceeding with the retrofit, which would require the district to purchase additional imported water every year to make up for the loss of long-term storage at Anderson Reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Technical Review
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- THE CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., Governor CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 901 P STREET, P.O. BOX 942836 SACRAMENTO, CA 94236-0001 (916) 651-7501 Armando Quintero May 25, 2018 Chair Carol Baker Melih Ozbilgin, Senior Water Resources Specialist Vice-Chair Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project Andrew Ball Member [email protected] Joseph Byrne Member Dear Mr. Ozbilgin: Daniel Curtin Member Attached please find the Water Storage Investment Program technical review for the Joe Del Bosque Member Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project. The technical review contains the preliminary application scores and related reviewer comment. Additional documents including Maria Herrera Member California Department of Fish and Wildlife and State Water Board Relative Environmental Value reviews and public benefit findings of the Department of Fish Catherine Keig Member and Wildlife, Department of Water Resources, and State Water Resources Control Board, as appropriate, can be found at the following link: https://cwc.ca.gov/Pages/WSIP/PachecoTech.aspx Additionally, staff is finalizing summaries of information related to Commission determinations. We will transmit and post this information no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 4. Staff from the Commission, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Water Resources, and State Water Resources Control Board look forward to engaging with applicants and stakeholders at the scheduled meetings on June 6 and 7. These meetings are intended to focus on the preliminary scores and determination information. Any issues of clarification identified at the June 6 and 7 meetings will be reported by staff to the Commission at the June 27-29 meeting for its consideration in making final application scores and project determinations.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    The ecology of the American badger Taxidea taxus in California: assessing conservation needs on multiple scales. By JESSICA HELENE QUINN B.S. (University of California, Santa Barbara) 1998 M.S. (University of California, Davis) 2004 DISSERTATION Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Ecology in the OFFICE OF GRADUATE STUDIES of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS Approved: Committee in Charge 2008 i UMI Number: 3317963 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform 3317963 Copyright 2008 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway PO Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements iii List of Tables vii List of Figures ix Abstract 1 Introduction 3 Chapter 1: Activity-specific habitat preferences of badgers {Taxidea taxus) in coastal California 30 Chapter 2: Factors affecting the movement behavior of American badgers {Taxidea taxus) 72 Chapter 3: Investigating
    [Show full text]
  • 9 – Recreation and Cultural Resources
    9 – Recreation and Cultural Resources 9.1 Introduction This chapter describes how the recreational, archeological, and historical resources within Merced County contribute to both the quality of life and economic well being of its residents. Current conditions regarding active and passive recreation, as well as archeological and historical resources, are addressed. This chapter is divided into the following sections: . Introduction (Section 9.1) . Recreation and Open Space (Section 9.2) . Archeological and Historical Resources (Section 9.3) . Major Findings (Section 9.4) 9.2 Recreation and Open Space Introduction Merced County contains several County, State, and Federal parks and recreation areas. Aside from parks in the county, there are many public open space areas as well. This section highlights these various parks and open space areas and identifies recreational opportunities within them. The information contained in this section was compiled from a variety of sources including the California State Department of Parks and Recreation website, and consultation with the Merced County Department of Public Works and Division of Parks and Recreation. Key Terms Open Space Land. Open space land is any parcel, area, or waterway that is essentially unimproved and devoted to an open space use. Under Section 65560 of the California State Government Code, open space land is broadly defined as land designated for the preservation of natural resources (i.e., lakeshore and watershed lands); managed production of resources (i.e., lands for agriculture, forestry, recharge of groundwater); outdoor recreation (i.e., parks, scenic highway corridors, and areas with outstanding scenic, historic and cultural values); and public health and safety (i.e., flood plains, unstable soil areas).
    [Show full text]
  • ELK CONSERVATION and MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2018 CONTENTS
    ELK CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2018 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. INTRODUCTION 10 A. Goals and Objectives 13 B. Taxonomy and Historical Distribution 15 C. Life History and Habitat 18 D. Distribution and Population Status Since 1970 22 E. Historical and Ongoing Management Efforts by the Department and California Tribes 30 II. CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT 32 A. Adaptive Management 32 B. Population Monitoring 33 C. Population Viability and Genetic Diversity 36 D. Disease Surveillance 38 E. Co-Management with California Federally Recognized Tribes & Tribal Traditional Uses and Knowledge 40 F. Hunting 41 G. Depredation Response and Alleviation 43 H. Human Dimensions 44 2 III. UNRESOLVED MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND INFORMATION NEEDS 45 A. Key Uncertainties 45 B. Research Needs to Inform Management 49 IV. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 53 A. Strategy for Implementation and Evaluation 53 B. Priority Actions 53 V. PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION 54 VI. LITERATURE CITED 55 VII. GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS 66 VIII. LIST OF FIGURES and TABLES 67 IX. APPENDICES 68 3 FROM OUR DIRECTOR It is remarkable that in a state with nearly 40 million people, one of the largest, most iconic land mammals in North America is one of our most successful conservation stories. Elk, or Wapiti, meaning “ghost kings” as named by the Shawnee Indians due to the animals’ elusive behavior are coming back from a precipitous population decline. The Department of Fish and Wildlife is proud to present this adaptive, scientifically based management plan that considers the many challenges facing elk in the most populous state in the nation. We’ve come a long way.
    [Show full text]
  • San Luis Reservoir
    MISSION STATEMENTS DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The Mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation's natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION To provide for the health, inspiration and education of the people of California by helping to preserve the state's extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources, and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation. San Luis Reservoir State Recreation Area Draft Resource Management Plan / General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement / Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report This document contains a joint Draft Resource Management Plan (RMP)/General Plan (GP) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) for the San Luis Reservoir State Recreation Area (SRA) and adjacent lands owned by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and managed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation (also known as California State Parks, or CSP), California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and California Department of Fish and Game (DFG). This document also contains policies, in the form of goals and guidelines, that relate to the project area and a description of the desired future condition of project area lands and waters for recreation and resource use and management. The purpose of the Draft EIS/EIR is to help Reclamation and CSP select a preferred alternative for implementing the RMP/GP.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Central California Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma Californiense)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Central California Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) California tiger salamander at Jepson Prairie, Solano County. Photograph by Adam Clause. Used with permission. Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate such reasonable actions as may be necessary, based upon the best scientific and commercial data available, for the conservation and survival of listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the view, official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the Service. They represent the official position of the Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director. Recovery plans are guidance and planning documents only; identification of an action to be implemented by any public or private party does not create a legal obligation beyond existing legal requirements. Nothing in this plan should be construed as a commitment or requirement that any Federal agency obligate or pay funds in any one fiscal year in excess of appropriations made by Congress for that fiscal year in contravention of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1341, or any other law or regulation. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new finding, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. Literature Citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Recovery Plan for the Central California Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense).
    [Show full text]
  • American Badgers (Taxidea Taxus) As a Outline Focal Species for Conservation Planning in • Badger Ecology California • Badger As a Focal Jessie Quinn Species Ph.D
    American badgers (Taxidea taxus) as a Outline focal species for conservation planning in • Badger ecology California • Badger as a focal Jessie Quinn species Ph.D. Candidate UC Davis Ecology Graduate Group • Future plans CDFG/UCD WHC Resource Assessment Program Competitive Grant Project, 2004-2007 About badgers About American badgers • Taxidea taxus (4 subspecies) • Mustelids • Range across the • 6 species worldwide western U.S., southern Canada, • Carnivorous-omnivourous and northern • Semi-fossorial Mexico • Associated with grasslands, open habitats • Semi-fossorial 1 About American badgers Resource Assessment Project Resource Assessment2004-2007 Project 2004-2007 • Females ~ 7 kg, • Determine conservation status of males ~ 15 kg. badgers • 1-4 kits per year • Population distribution (avg. 2). • Population distribution • Polygamous • Behavioral ecology • Delayed implanters • Solitary • Mainly carnivorous Æ Reassess listing status • Eat burrowing rodents, lizards, Æ Badger as a focal species birds and bird eggs Badgers as a focal species Has their range extent changed, •Sensitive to human and why? impact and development •Joseph Grinnell: 1919-1924 •CDFG: ~1965-1985 •Land conversion may be association with decline in badger sightings •Currently a SSC 2 Sensitive to fragmentation in Do they occur in fragmented habitat southern California? elsewhere? • Grassland habitats • Sierras and central coast • 10 fragments, 7 contiguous • 1 to 5 plots 0.5 km2 each • Recorded number Body mass (kg) and age of badger *Crooks 2002 burrows Higher indices
    [Show full text]
  • PIGS & Natural Area Survey Report.Pdf
    NATURAL AREAS ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE AND ECONOMIC COSTS SURVEY REPORT SUBMITTED TO: All Interested Survey Respondents PREPARED BY: Rick A. Sweitzer and Blake E. McCann Department of Biology, University of North Dakota Grand Forks, ND 58202 e-mail: [email protected] July 2007 Sweitzer & McCann • Wild Pig Natural Areas Survey Report TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................1 METHODS .............................................................................................................................5 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................7 Wild Pig Presence and Issues .......................................................................................7 Resource Damages and Visitor Interactions.................................................................10 Habitat Protection and Management to Control Wild Pig Populations ........................12 Economic Costs of Managing Natural Areas with Wild Pigs.......................................16 DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................18 Presence and Trends for Wild Pigs in Natural Areas ...................................................18 Resource Damage and Visitor Interactions with Wild Pigs..........................................19 Economic Costs Incurred from Wild Pig Damage and Removal Efforts .....................20
    [Show full text]