DOCSLIB.ORG

L-057A-1 MND June 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
L-057A-1 MND June 2021 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY LINE 057A-1 MCDONALD ISLAND TO PALM TRACT PIPELINE DECOMMISSIONING PROJECT June 2021 Lead Agency: California State Lands Commission 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South Sacramento, California 95825 Applicant: Pacific Gas & Electric Company 5555 Florin Perkins Road, Room 128D Sacramento, CA 95826 MISSION STATEMENT The California State Lands Commission provides the people of California with effective stewardship of the lands, waterways, and resources entrusted to its care based on the principles of equity, sustainability, and resiliency, through preservation, restoration, enhancement, responsible economic development, and the promotion of public access. CEQA DOCUMENT WEBSITE www.slc.ca.gov/ceqa/ Geographic Location (Western Bank) Latitude: 37°58’6” N Longitude: 121°34’25” W WGS84 Datum Cover Photo: (Photo courtesy of Google Earth) Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................... vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ......................................................... vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ ES-1 1.0 PROJECT AND AGENCY INFORMATION ................................................... 1-1 1.1 PROJECT TITLE ............................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 LEAD AGENCY AND PROJECT SPONSOR ................................................. 1-1 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................... 1-1 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ............ 1-1 1.5 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES ............................................ 1-5 1.6 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ............................................................... 1-6 1.7 APPROVALS AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS .................................. 1-6 1.7.1 California State Lands Commission .............................................. 1-6 1.7.2 Other Agencies ............................................................................. 1-7 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................. 2-1 2.1 PIPELINE SEGMENTS PROPOSED FOR DECOMMISSIONING ................. 2-1 2.1.1 Segment 1 – Latham Slough Submarine Pipeline Crossing .......... 2-1 2.1.2 Segment 2 – Mildred Island Submerged (Originally Terrestrial) Pipeline Segment .......................................................................... 2-4 2.1.3 Segment 3 – Middle River Submarine Pipeline Crossing .............. 2-7 2.1.4 Segment 4 – Old River Submarine Pipeline Crossing ................. 2-10 2.2 Pipeline Decommissioning Methodology ...................................................... 2-13 2.2.1 Pre-Project Plans and Surveys ................................................... 2-13 2.2.2 Pipeline Pigging and Flushing ..................................................... 2-13 2.2.3 Cementing (Slurry and Abandonment In-Place as Applicable) ... 2-16 2.2.4 Pipeline Removal ........................................................................ 2-17 2.2.5 Site Restoration and Demobilization ........................................... 2-19 2.2.6 Post-Project Surveys and Reporting ........................................... 2-20 2.3 Equipment Requirements ............................................................................. 2-20 2.4 Schedule ................................................................................................... 2-22 2.5 PRE-PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND SURVEYS................... 2-22 2.5.1 Project APMs .............................................................................. 2-22 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ANALYSIS ....................................... 3-1 3.1 AESTHETICS ................................................................................................. 3-3 June 2021 i PG&E L-057A-1 McDonald Island to Palm Tract Pipeline Decommissioning Project MND Table of Contents 3.1.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................... 3-3 3.1.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................................... 3-3 3.1.3 Impact Analysis ............................................................................. 3-4 3.1.4 Mitigation Summary ...................................................................... 3-6 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ......................................... 3-7 3.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................... 3-7 3.2.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................................... 3-9 3.2.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-10 3.2.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-12 3.3 AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................... 3-13 3.3.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-13 3.3.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-19 3.3.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-20 3.3.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-22 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................ 3-23 3.4.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-23 3.4.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-43 3.4.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-45 3.4.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-53 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................... 3-54 3.5.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-54 3.5.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-63 3.5.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-64 3.5.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-67 3.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES – TRIBAL .......................................................... 3-68 3.6.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-68 3.6.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-72 3.6.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-72 3.6.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-73 3.7 ENERGY ................................................................................................... 3-74 3.7.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-74 3.7.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-74 3.7.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-74 3.7.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-75 3.8 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................. 3-76 3.8.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-76 3.8.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-78 3.8.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-79 PG&E L-057A-1 McDonald Island to Palm Tract ii June 2021 Pipeline Decommissioning Project MND Table of Contents 3.8.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-82 3.9 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................... 3-83 3.9.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-83 3.9.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-84 3.9.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-86 3.9.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-87 3.10 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................... 3-88 3.10.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-88 3.10.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................... 3-89 3.10.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 3-90 3.10.4 Mitigation Summary .................................................................... 3-94 3.11 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ........................................................ 3-95 3.11.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 3-95 3.11.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Μ and Statewide Resources Office
    Woodland RD Name RD Number Atlas Tract 2126 5 !"#$ Bacon Island 2028 !"#$80 Bethel Island BIMID Bishop Tract 2042 16 ·|}þ Bixler Tract 2121 Lovdal Boggs Tract 0404 ·|}þ113 District Sacramento River at I Street Bridge Bouldin Island 0756 80 Gaging Station )*+,- Brack Tract 2033 Bradford Island 2059 ·|}þ160 Brannan-Andrus BALMD Lovdal 50 Byron Tract 0800 Sacramento Weir District ¤£ r Cache Haas Area 2098 Y o l o ive Canal Ranch 2086 R Mather Can-Can/Greenhead 2139 Sacramento ican mer Air Force Chadbourne 2034 A Base Coney Island 2117 Port of Dead Horse Island 2111 Sacramento ¤£50 Davis !"#$80 Denverton Slough 2134 West Sacramento Drexler Tract Drexler Dutch Slough 2137 West Egbert Tract 0536 Winters Sacramento Ehrheardt Club 0813 Putah Creek ·|}þ160 ·|}þ16 Empire Tract 2029 ·|}þ84 Fabian Tract 0773 Sacramento Fay Island 2113 ·|}þ128 South Fork Putah Creek Executive Airport Frost Lake 2129 haven s Lake Green d n Glanville 1002 a l r Florin e h Glide District 0765 t S a c r a m e n t o e N Glide EBMUD Grand Island 0003 District Pocket Freeport Grizzly West 2136 Lake Intake Hastings Tract 2060 l Holland Tract 2025 Berryessa e n Holt Station 2116 n Freeport 505 h Honker Bay 2130 %&'( a g strict Elk Grove u Lisbon Di Hotchkiss Tract 0799 h lo S C Jersey Island 0830 Babe l Dixon p s i Kasson District 2085 s h a King Island 2044 S p Libby Mcneil 0369 y r !"#$5 ·|}þ99 B e !"#$80 t Liberty Island 2093 o l a Lisbon District 0307 o Clarksburg Y W l a Little Egbert Tract 2084 S o l a n o n p a r C Little Holland Tract 2120 e in e a e M Little Mandeville
    [Show full text]
  • Marsh Creek State Park
    John Marsh Historic Trust presents STONE HOUSE HERITAGE DAY Marsh Creek State Park 21789 Marsh Creek Road @ Vintage Parkway th Saturday, October 17 10 am – 4 pm Get an up-close look, inside and out, at Marsh’s 159-year-old mansion The John Marsh Story Scheduled Presentations Hear the story of the remarkable life of John Marsh, pioneer who blazed a trail across 10:00 Opening Welcome America and was the first American to settle in 11:00 Presenting Dr. John Marsh Contra Costa County. 11:00 Guided hike begins GUIDED HIKE ($5 donation suggested) Enjoy an easy, guided hike through 3 miles of 11:30 Stone House history Marsh Creek State Park. 12:00 Ancient archaeology of MCSP Archaeological Discoveries 12:00-1:30 Brentwood Concert Band View important archeological finds dating 12:30 Marsh Creek State Park plans 7,000 to 3,000 years old, including items associated with an ancient village. 1:30 Professional ropers/Vaqueros Native American Life 2:30 Presenting Dr. John Marsh See members of the Ohlone tribe making brushes, rope, jewelry and acorn meal. Enjoy Kids’ Activities All Day Rancho Los Meganos Experience the work of the Vaquero, who Rope a worked John Marsh’s rancho. ‘steer’ Period Music Hear music presented by the Brentwood Concert Band. Take a ‘Pioneer family’ Westward Movement picture how Marsh triggered the pre-Gold Rush Learn migration to California, which established the historic California Trail. Co-hosted by Support preservation of the John Marsh House with your tax deductible contribution today at www.johnmarshhouse.com at www.razoo.com/john -marsh-historic-trust, or by check to Sponsored by John Marsh Historic Trust, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a Public Involvement Program
    APPENDIX A PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM Stakeholder Issues Summary CEQA Notice of Preparation Public Newsletter #1 Questionnaire Land Tours Announcement Public Newsletter #2 Stakeholder Issues Summary – Cowell Ranch / John Marsh General Plan PERSON & AFFILIATION COMMENT TYPE COMMENTS, ISSUES, & SUGGESTIONS Jack & Jeanne Adams Survey • Improve safety and develop area for school children to visit. Lions & S.I.R.S., Brentwood Seth Adams Email / letter Resource Element Save Mount Diablo Organization • Because important plant and wildlife species (including 4 special status plant communities and 12 special status wildlife species) as well as man-made stock ponds and seasonal ponds that have been observed within the historic boundaries of Cowell Ranch, it is concluded that the ponds and water bodies on the State park are of extreme importance and should be maintained. • We support extensive land additions to Cowell Ranch State Park to protect sensitive species and to further protect wildlife corridors stretching from Los Vaqueros to Black Diamond Mines. • Attention should be given to avoiding impacts on these corridors as well as to resolving existing conflicts, including restoration and enhancement, and additional land acquisition. • We support reintroduction of Tule elk, pronghorn and the Mt. Diablo buckwheat. • We believe multi-use passive recreation should be supported through the creation of trails and staging areas, including the extension of the 30-mile Diablo Trail to create the 60-mile Diablo Grand Loop. • Although we have no position on the renaming of Cowell Ranch, we are intrigued by the historic name of Rancho Los Meganos. • Habitat enhancement for endangered species should be undertaken. • The Park is a potential reintroduction site for the Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Pipeline Installation by the Hole Intersect Method to Protect Facilities Crossing Under Navigable Waterways
    PipelinePipeline InstallationInstallation byby thethe HoleHole IntersectIntersect MethodMethod toto ProtectProtect FacilitiesFacilities CrossingCrossing UnderUnder NavigableNavigable WaterwaysWaterways • L-57A (18”) installed 1949 by Standard Oil. Floated during flooding of Mildred Island, and is partially decommissioned. • L-57B (22”) installed 1974 through the levy cross sections. • 25% of PG&E’s daily peak winter demand is supplied by Mc Donald Island. The loss of supply from Mc Donald Island would cost between $200 million to $1 billion. McDonald Island levy breech Levee Breech = Scour Scour is bad for buried structures! Levee Break Dimensions Probable Max. Scour Island Date of Flood Cause of Levee Failure Width Scour Depth Length Lower Jones Tract 1980 Levee Failure - Rodents? Webb Tract 1980 High Water Failure 800 ft. 3800 ft. Holland Tract 1980 High Water Failure 300 ft. 2600 ft. McDonald Island August 23, 1982 Levee Failure - Rodents? 650 ft. -70 ft. 1200 ft. Venice Island November 1982 High Water Failure 510 ft. -35 ft. 2200 ft. Mildred Island November 1982 High Water Failure 450 ft. -90 ft. 550 ft. Bradford Island 1983 High Water Failure New Hope Tract February 1986 High Water Failure McCormick-Williams Tract February 1986 Overtopping Deadhorse Island February 1986 Overtopping 190 ft. None None Glanville Tract February 1986 Overtopping None None Little Mandeville Island February 1986 High Water Failure 190 ft. -25 ft. 200 ft. Tyler Island February 21, 1986 Overtopping 375 ft. -45 ft. 1900 ft. Upper Jones Tract June 3, 2004 Levee Failure - Rodents? 260 ft. -50 ft. But How Deep? • Pipe Spec: 24” DSAW, 0.750 WT, Gr. X-70, w/ 16 mils FBE (Mfg: Nippon Steel) • Open Cut Coating: 1” concrete added over FBE for buoyancy control • HDD Coating: 40 mils Powercrete over FBE HDD Design • Pipeline outside of modeled scour zone.
    [Show full text]
  • GRA 9 – South Delta
    2-900 .! 2-905 .! 2-950 .! 2-952 2-908 .! .! 2-910 .! 2-960 .! 2-915 .! 2-963 .! 2-964 2-965 .! .! 2-917 .! 2-970 2-920 ! .! . 2-922 .! 2-924 .! 2-974 .! San Joaquin County 2-980 2-929 .! .! 2-927 .! .! 2-925 2-932 2-940 Contra Costa .! .! County .! 2-930 2-935 .! Alameda 2-934 County ! . Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, 2013 Calif. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Area Map Office of Spill Prevention and Response I Data Source: O SPR NAD_1983_C alifornia_Teale_Albers ACP2 - GRA9 Requestor: ACP Coordinator Author: J. Muskat Date Created: 5/2 Environmental Sensitive Sites Section 9849 – GRA 9 South Delta Table of Contents GRA 9 Map ............................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 2 Site Index/Response Action ...................................................................................................... 3 Summary of Response Resources for GRA 9......................................................................... 4 9849.1 Environmentally Sensitive Sites 2-900-A Old River Mouth at San Joaquin River....................................................... 1 2-905-A Franks Tract Complex................................................................................... 4 2-908-A Sand Mound Slough ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop Report—Earthquakes and High Water As Levee Hazards in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    Workshop report—Earthquakes and High Water as Levee Hazards in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Delta Independent Science Board September 30, 2016 Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Workshop ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Structure ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Participants and affiliations ........................................................................................................ 2 Highlights .................................................................................................................................... 3 Earthquakes ............................................................................................................................. 3 High water ............................................................................................................................... 4 Perspectives....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    comparing futures for the sacramento–san joaquin delta jay lund | ellen hanak | william fleenor william bennett | richard howitt jeffrey mount | peter moyle 2008 Public Policy Institute of California Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation ISBN: 978-1-58213-130-6 Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Summary “Once a landscape has been established, its origins are repressed from memory. It takes on the appearance of an ‘object’ which has been there, outside us, from the start.” Karatani Kojin (1993), Origins of Japanese Literature The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is the hub of California’s water supply system and the home of numerous native fish species, five of which already are listed as threatened or endangered. The recent rapid decline of populations of many of these fish species has been followed by court rulings restricting water exports from the Delta, focusing public and political attention on one of California’s most important and iconic water controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • (Estimated Time 5 Minutes) IAN ROBERTSON
    Tuesday, June 6, 2017, 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 1.A. BOARD ROLL CALL 1.B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. STAFF RECOGNITION (Estimated Time 5 Minutes) 2.A. IAN ROBERTSON - WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATOR 2.B. DAVID GARCIA - WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATOR 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MAY 23, 2017 PLANNING AND PROGRAMS - FINANCE/CIP MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE IRONHOUSE SANITARY DISTRICT Documents: PLANNING AND PROGRAMS MINUTES 5.23.2017.PDF 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time, the public may address the Board on subjects not on the agenda. Comments may not exceed three (3) minutes in length. While State Law prohibits Board action or discussion on any item not on the agenda, members of the Board may briefly respond to statements or questions from members of the public, provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Board at a subsequent meeting, or take action to direct staff to place a matter on a future agenda. Members of the public are asked to submit a speaker card for public comment in advance of the Chair calling for public comments. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be adopted in one single motion with no separate discussion of the items. Directors or members of the public can request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar. When item(s) are removed, the Board will adopt the remaining Consent Calendar items in one single motion. After approval of the Consent Calendar, the Board will take action on pulled items as Business Before the Board.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Implications for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Economics of a Changing Agricultural Mosaic in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/99z2z7hb Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 15(3) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Deverel, Steven Jacobs, Paul Lucero, Christina et al. Publication Date 2017 DOI 10.15447/sfews.2017v15iss3art2 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California SEPTEMBER 2017 RESEARCH Implications for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Economics of a Changing Agricultural Mosaic in the Sacramento – San Joaquin Delta Steven Deverel1, Paul Jacobs2, Christina Lucero1, Sabina Dore1, and T. Rodd Kelsey3 profit changes relative to the status quo. We spatially Volume 15, Issue 3 | Article 2 https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2017v15iss3art2 assigned areas for rice and wetlands, and then allowed the Delta Agricultural Production (DAP) * Corresponding author: [email protected] model to optimize the allocation of other crops to 1 HydroFocus, Inc. maximize profit. The scenario that included wetlands 2827 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 USA decreased profits 79% relative to the status quo but 2 University of California, Davis -1 One Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 USA reduced GHG emissions by 43,000 t CO2-e yr (57% 3 The Nature Conservancy reduction). When mixtures of rice and wetlands were 555 Capitol Mall Suite 1290, Sacramento, CA 95814 USA introduced, farm profits decreased 16%, and the GHG -1 emission reduction was 33,000 t CO2-e yr (44% reduction).
    [Show full text]
  • Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7xd4x0xw Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 8(2) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Deverel, Steven J Leighton, David A Publication Date 2010 DOI https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2010v8iss2art1 Supplemental Material https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7xd4x0xw#supplemental License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California august 2010 Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA Steven J. Deverel1 and David A. Leighton Hydrofocus, Inc., 2827 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 AbStRACt will range from a few cm to over 1.3 m (4.3 ft). The largest elevation declines will occur in the central To estimate and understand recent subsidence, we col- Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. From 2007 to 2050, lected elevation and soils data on Bacon and Sherman the most probable estimated increase in volume below islands in 2006 at locations of previous elevation sea level is 346,956,000 million m3 (281,300 ac-ft). measurements. Measured subsidence rates on Sherman Consequences of this continuing subsidence include Island from 1988 to 2006 averaged 1.23 cm year-1 increased drainage loads of water quality constitu- (0.5 in yr-1) and ranged from 0.7 to 1.7 cm year-1 (0.3 ents of concern, seepage onto islands, and decreased to 0.7 in yr-1). Subsidence rates on Bacon Island from arability.
    [Show full text]