HomeMy WebLinkAboutR13+-+Padre+&+Associates+-+Chevron+Tank+Farm+FEIR+Appendix
Reference
13
An Analysis of the Geographic Extent of Waters
of the U.S., Including Wetlands at the Chevron
Tank Farm Facility, San Luis Obispo, California
August 5, 2008
Prepared for:
Chevron EMC
San Luis Obispo, California
Prepared by:
Padre Associates, Inc.
811 El Capitan Way, Ste. 130
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
and
WSP Environment & Energy
Ecosystem Science & Natural Resources
Management Services
2324 Eastlake Ave E, Suite 505
Seattle, WA 98102
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-1 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
i
DISCLAIMER
Padre Associates and WSP Environment & Energy (hereafter, “WSP/Padre”) have prepared this
waters/wetlands delineation report for use by Chevron EMC. The results and conclusions of this
report are conditional upon final approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the California
Department of Fish and Game, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Central Coast
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Results and conclusions presented in this report are
based upon information available in the public domain (e.g. U.S. Geological Survey 7.5’
topographic quadrangle maps, the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Surveys, and air
photographs from various sources), and on the WSP/Padre technical team’s on-site
reconnaissance, data collection, and analyses by standard methods. Results and conclusions
presented herein represent the best professional judgment of Padre Associates and WSP
Environment & Energy technical staff. In this context, surveying/boundary locations developed
by Padre Associates are assumed to be true and correct.
Eric Snelling
Senior Project Manager
Padre Associates, Inc.
Date
Lyndon C. Lee, Ph.D., PWS
Principal Ecologist & Vice President
Ecosystem Science & Natural Resources
Management Services
WSP Environment & Energy
Date
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-2 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
ii
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................1
I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND ..............................................................................3
II. OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................ 4
III. OVERVIEW OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS..................................................................5
A. Current and Historic Land Uses...........................................................................................5
B. Geomorphology and Landscape Context.............................................................................5
C. Climate and Growing Season...............................................................................................6
1. Climate ........................................................................................................................... 6
2. Growing Season ............................................................................................................. 6
IV. METHODS............................................................................................................................. 7
A. Rationale for the determination of the geographic extent of waters of the U.S., including
wetlands...................................................................................................................................... 7
B. Consistency with SWANCC & “Rapanos” Guidance .........................................................7
C. Office Methods & Review of Background Materials .......................................................... 8
D. Field Delineation Methods................................................................................................... 8
1. Delineation Team Members...........................................................................................8
2. Field Review and Verification of Other Delineations, Sample Plot Locations, and
Data Documenting Site Conditions ....................................................................................8
3. Hydrology....................................................................................................................... 9
4. Soils................................................................................................................................ 9
5. Vegetation .................................................................................................................... 10
V. RESULTS............................................................................................................................. 11
A. Geographic Extent of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands..........................................11
1. Summaries of Previous Consultants’ Reports..............................................................11
2. The WSP/Padre Delineation.........................................................................................13
B. Hydrology........................................................................................................................... 14
1. Landscape-Scale Mapping ........................................................................................... 14
2. Site Specific Mapping and Hydrologic Processes........................................................14
C. Soils.................................................................................................................................... 17
1. Natural Resources Conservation Service Mapping & Other Studies...........................17
2. WSP/Padre Observations ............................................................................................. 17
D. Vegetation .......................................................................................................................... 18
1. General Description of SLO Tank Farm Vegetation....................................................18
2. Wetland Classes ........................................................................................................... 20
VI. REGULATORY CONTEXTS ...........................................................................................22
A. Federal Jurisdiction ............................................................................................................ 22
1. Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404..............................................................................22
2. Clean Water Act, Section 401...........................................................................................22
3. Clean Water Act, Section 402...........................................................................................22
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-3 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
iii
4. Endangered Species Act, Section 7 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)..............................23
5. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Section 106................................................23
B. California State................................................................................................................... 23
1. Clean Water Act (Water Quality Certification), Section 401...........................................24
2. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act...................................................................................24
3. Clean Water Act, Section 402...........................................................................................24
4. Stream Bed Alteration – Section 1600 Series Permit ....................................................... 24
5. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)...............................................................25
6. National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 ..............................................................25
7. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (CWA 401)......................................25
8. California Coastal Commission (CCC) ............................................................................25
C. Local Jurisdiction - San Luis Obispo County ....................................................................25
VII. LITERATURE CITED ..............................................................................................26
List of Tables
Table 1. Delineations of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands Conducted at the
Chevron Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo, California
Table 2. Waters/Wetland Areas Removed, Adjusted, or Added Based on 2007-2008 Field
Observations by WSP/Padre Technical Team, Chevron Tank Farm, San Luis
Obispo, California
Table 3. Criteria for Hydric Soils of the United States
Table 4. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Plant Indicator Status (Reed 1988)
Table 5. Summary of the Distribution of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands and
Other Wetlands Features
List of Figures
Figure 1. Chevron SLO Tank Farm Project Site Location, San Luis Obispo, California
Figure 2. Aerial Image of Chevron SLO Tank Farm Project Site
Figure 3. Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands, Mapped by Winfield (2001)
Figure 4. Distribution of Protected Plant and Animal Species within Waters of the US,
Including Wetlands
Figure 5. Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands
Figure 6. HGM Wetland Classes
Figure 7. The Central Coast Hydrologic Region and San Luis Obispo Hydrologic Subunit
Figure 8. Storm Water Catchment Areas (Source: Avocet Environmental, Inc. 2008)
Figure 9. Water Flow Directions among Waters/Wetlands
Figure 10. Mapped Soils for the SLO Tank Farm Project Site
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-4 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
iv
List of Photographs
Photograph 1. SLO Tank Farm project site is primarily open space. This photo looks southwest
across wetland feature #83 (Reservoir 3) toward a line of trees along the East Fork of San Luis
Obispo Creek.
Photograph 2. SLO Tank Farm project site looking eastward along the northern edge of the
North Marsh. Cattle graze throughout the majority of the property.
Photograph 3. Much of the SLO Tank Farm project site is dominated by non-native forbs and
grasses.
Photograph 4. Oxbow located in the south eastern portion of the site is dominated by
scrub/shrub and forested plant communities.
Photograph 5. The East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek is dominated by scrub-shrub or forest
communities along part of the reach within the Chevron SLO Tank Farm project site.
Photograph 6. Depressional wetland (#37) in old tank footprint. Non-native dominants
including cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) are in the foreground.
Photograph 7. North Marsh/ Tank Farm Creek slope/ riverine wetland complex at the SLO
Tank Farm project site.
Photograph 8. Depressional wetland features such as those in foreground persist as a result of
the SLO Tank Farm project site’s long history of ranching and industrial development.
Photograph 9. The highest elevations on the SLO Tank Farm project site are in the northeastern
portion. The slope grades generally southward and onto valley alluvium.
Photograph 10. Tank Farm Road bisects the SLO Tank Farm project site. Two sets of culverts
convey water southward.
Photograph 11. The old crude oil reservoirs were lined with various materials, and berms were
installed around their perimeters to contain oil if necessary.
Photograph 12. Berms that show the legacy of soil and hydrologic disturbance are present
throughout the SLO Tank Farm project site. Many of these berms are remnants of historic
reservoirs.
Photograph 13. Cattle graze across the majority of the SLO Tank Farm project site. Note
ponding in foreground.
Photograph 14. East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek at the SLO Tank Farm. Native California
walnuts (Juglans californica var. californica) are not infrequent along the adjacent riparian
corridor.
Photograph 15. East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek at the SLO Tank Farm. View looking
north.
Photograph 16. Old water control structure in Tank Farm Creek, upgradient of the North Marsh.
Photograph 17. Tank Farm Creek in winter 2007 at the SLO Tank Farm project site.
Photograph 18. North Marsh at SLO Tank Farm project site (April 2008). Note dominance by
native rushes (Juncus spp.) and bulrush (Schoenoplectus spp.).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-5 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
v
Photograph 19. Twin concrete culverts under Tank Farm Road.
Photograph 20. Headworks at south end of wetland #98 infrequently connect the southern
extent of the SLO Tank Farm site with the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek.
Photograph 21. Ponding was observed in Reservoir 6 (Wetland #45) in January 2008.
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Correspondence between EDAW and NRCS (1999)
Appendix B – Arid West Manual datasheets
Appendix C – Resumes of Principal Scientists
Appendix D – Location and Areal Extent of Waters/Wetlands Under Federal Jurisdiction
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-6 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In July of 2007, WSP Environment & Energy (WSP) was requested by Chevron Environmental
Management Company (CEMC) to assist Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre) with identification and
delineation of the current geographic extent of waters of the U.S., including wetlands under
Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (hereafter “waters/wetlands”) on the San Luis Obispo Tank
Farm (hereafter “SLO Tank Farm”) project site. Union Oil Company owns the 340-acre tank
farm property. It is located immediately south of the city of San Luis Obispo, in San Luis Obispo
County, California. SLO Tank Farm abuts East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek, which is a
tributary to the Pacific Ocean; it lies outside the designated “Coastal Zone” in San Luis Obispo
County.
This report has been developed by the WSP/Padre team using (1) current U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (hereafter “US ACOE”) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (hereafter “EPA”)
guidance concerning jurisdictional delineations, and a (2) combination of 2007-2008 field-based
observations of site conditions at the SLO Tank Farm and consideration of several previous
waters/wetlands identification and delineation studies at the SLO Tank Farm site. These earlier
studies were completed by other consultants to either Unocal or Chevron EMC during the
interval 1999 to 2003. Information offered in this report is arranged to (1) describe the
delineation objectives, (2) introduce and describe briefly the contexts and results of prior
delineations on the SLO Tank Farm property, (3) explain the approach and methodology used by
the WSP/Padre team in this delineation, (4) provide technical results, and (5) discuss pertinent
regulatory contexts and issues at the federal, state, and local levels of jurisdiction.
The three main objectives for this effort are as follows:
1. Delineate the geographic extent of waters/wetlands within the San Luis Obispo
Chevron Tank Farm project area consistent with definitions provided in CFR 33 328.3
(a)(1-8), 328.3 (b, c, and e) (Federal Register 1986), and procedures detailed in the 1987
Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and in the Arid West Regional Supplement
(US ACOE 2006) as implemented with pertinent regulatory guidance letters,
memoranda, and public notices.
2. Summarize the regulatory context of waters/wetlands within the project area, paying
particular attention to current federal, state of California, and San Luis Obispo County
regulations and policies.
3. Work with the US ACOE and California State and San Luis Obispo County
regulatory agencies to review and certify the delineation.
The WSP/Padre field team delineated one hundred three (103) polygons on the SLO Tank Farm
project site. WSP/Padre determined the classification of waters/wetlands on the project site
consistent with the hydrogeomorphic types described by Brinson (1993) and Brinson et al.
(1995).
Delineation results were reviewed and given preliminary approval in the field on June 9, 2008 by
Mr. Bruce Henderson, Los Angeles District, US ACOE. As always, the results and
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-7 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
2
recommendations offered in this report are subject to final review and approval by the US
ACOE. At the June 2008 field review, Mr. Henderson determined that of the 103
waters/wetlands polygons mapped by the WSP/Padre team, 38 are wetlands per se and under
federal CWA jurisdiction. Their combined area is 49.0 acres. Another six polygons are otherwise
called “’other waters’ of the U.S.” Their combined total area is 3.9 acres. Therefore, total area of
waters/wetlands under federal CWA jurisdiction at the SLO Tank Farm project site is 52.9 acres.
Forty-four (44) polygons mapped on the SLO Tank Farm project site are not under federal CWA
jurisdiction because they are isolated depressional features that either have (1) no connection
with, or adjacency to, traditionally navigable waters, and/or (2) no significant nexus with
interstate commerce or maintenance of the physical, biological, or chemical integrity of
downstream waters. However, these wetland features support special status species that are
protected at federal and/or state levels of jurisdiction. Total area of waters/wetlands not under
federal CWA jurisdiction, but which do support special status species is 15.8 acres. Finally,
fifteen (15) wet depressional features mapped on the SLO Tank Farm site do not support any
special status species. Their combined total area is 3.4 acres.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-8 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
3
I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
In July of 2007, WSP Environment & Energy (WSP) was asked by Chevron Environmental
Management Company (CEMC) to assist Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre) with identification and
delineation of the current geographic extent of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, under
Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (hereafter “waters/wetlands”) on the San Luis Obispo Tank
Farm (hereafter “SLO Tank Farm”) project site. Union Oil Company owns the 340-acre tank
farm property. It is located immediately south of the city of San Luis Obispo, in San Luis Obispo
County, California (Figures 1 and 2). The SLO Tank Farm abuts East Fork of San Luis Obispo
Creek, which is an infrequently intermittent to perennial tributary to the “traditionally navigable
waters” of the Pacific Ocean. SLO Tank Farm is not within the designated “Coastal Zone” in San
Luis Obispo County as designated by the California Public Resources Code Division 20,
§§30000 – 30012.
In this report, the WSP/Padre technical team provides results of their delineation effort. These
results were reviewed and given preliminary approval in the field on June 9, 2008 by Mr. Bruce
Henderson of the Los Angeles District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (hereafter “US
ACOE”). As always, the results and recommendations offered in this report are subject to final
review and approval by the US ACOE.
This report has been developed by the WSP/Padre team using (a) current US ACOE and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (hereafter “EPA”) guidance concerning jurisdictional
delineations, and (b) a combination of 2007-2008 field-based observations of site conditions at
the SLO Tank Farm and consideration of several previous waters/wetlands identification and
delineation studies at the SLO Tank Farm site. These studies were completed by other
consultants to either Union Oil or CEMC during the interval 1999 to 2003. The information
offered in this report is arranged to: (1) describe the delineation objectives, (2) introduce and
briefly describe the contexts and results of prior delineations on the Chevron Property, (3)
explain the approach and methodology used by the WSP/Padre team in this delineation, (4)
provide technical results, and (5) discuss the pertinent regulatory contexts and issues at the
federal, state, and local levels of jurisdiction.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-9 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
4
II. OBJECTIVES
The three main objectives for this effort are as follows:
1. Delineate the geographic extent of waters/wetlands within the SLO Tank Farm
project area consistent with definitions provided in CFR 33 328.3 (a)(1-8), 328.3 (b,
c, and e), and procedures detailed in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory
1987) and in the Arid West Regional Supplement (US ACOE 2006) as implemented
with pertinent regulatory guidance letters, memoranda, and public notices.
2. Summarize the regulatory context of waters/wetlands within the project area, paying
particular attention to current federal, state of California, and San Luis Obispo
County regulations and policies.
3. Work with the US ACOE and California State and San Luis Obispo County
regulatory agencies to review and certify the delineation.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-10 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
5
III. OVERVIEW OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Current and Historic Land Uses
The SLO Tank Farm is owned by the Union Oil Company. Storage facilities and supporting
infrastructure were constructed in 1910 to serve as the tidewater accumulation point for the
petroleum pipeline from the San Joaquin Valley. The tank farm facility was withdrawn slowly
from Union Oil operations during the later decades of the twentieth century, and by the late
1990s, it was formally decommissioned (Avocet Environmental 2007).
With the exception of a small area of office buildings that serves as the local headquarters for
CEMC west coast, the SLO Tank Farm site primarily is open space (Figure 2, Photographs 1 and
2). For the past several decades, tank farm lands have been leased for cattle grazing for the
purposes of fire and weed control. Adjacent land uses include the San Luis Obispo County
Airport to the south, and light commercial and industrial developments, agricultural and pastoral
land with scattered residences, and a trailer park to the east.
At the SLO Tank Farm, topography, soils, and vegetation have been altered considerably through
plowing and disking, catastrophic fire, grazing of domestic livestock, construction and removal
of oil storage tanks and their surrounding berms, stream channelization, construction of water
and oil management and containment systems, and several other anthropogenic alterations.
Currently, most of the SLO Tank Farm is dominated by non-native species of forbs and grasses
(Photograph 3). However, some scrub/shrub and forested plant communities occur in wet
depressions or within riparian corridors associated with East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek and
its tributaries (Photographs 4 and 5). Waters of the U.S., including wetlands, in the forms of
riverine, depressional, and small slope ecosystems are prominent throughout the SLO Tank Farm
(Photographs 5, 6, 7 and 8). Many of the waters/wetlands on the property are associated with
natural features such as swales, small riverine channel systems, or depressions. However, some
of the depressional and slope wetlands are associated with human-made depressions that remain
after decommissioning of oil storage facilities (Photographs 1 and 6) or after various mining or
domestic livestock management operations (Photograph 8).
B. Geomorphology and Landscape Context
The SLO Tank Farm is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. The
underlying geologic structure has been formed during millions of years of folding and faulting as
the Pacific plate moves north along the North American plate. Geologic structure in this
landscape is oriented primarily in a northwesterly direction with the coast range.
From the perspective of surficial processes and landforms, the SLO Tank Farm is located in a
coastal basin that is partially filled with late Pleistocene and early Holocene alluvium (Figures 1
and 2). The northern portion of the site is characterized by a slope/riverine wetland complex that
serves as the headwaters of a small, unnamed tributary (locally known as “Tank Farm Creek”) of
East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek. This tributary has been mostly disconnected from East Fork
of San Luis Obispo Creek due to historic road construction, water and oil management
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-11 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
6
operations, and other anthropogenic activities. Underlying geology of the north half of the SLO
Tank Farm site includes a colluvial toe slope near the northern property boundary that grades
generally south and onto valley alluvium (Photograph 9). Alluvial soils dominate the central and
southern portions of the site. The valley alluvial surfaces are approximately 8,000 -10,000 years
old while the colluvial toe slope on the northern property boundary is a somewhat older surface.
The extreme southern potion of the SLO tank Farm site, generally on the southern property
boundary, has been shaped by the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek channel system as it has
alternatively incised and migrated back and forth across the basin floor (Figure 2).
C. Climate and Growing Season
1. Climate
The San Luis Obispo area has a mild, Mediterranean climate with warm, dry summers and
wetter, cooler winters. The average maximum temperature (by month) ranges from 63 °F in
January to 79.5 °F in September. Average minimum temperatures range between 41.6 °F in Jan
and 53 °F in August (Station No. 047851-4) (WRCC 2007). In this coastal area, the majority of
precipitation comes as rainfall during the winter months (Nov–April). Average annual
precipitation is 23.45 inches (WRCC 2007).
2. Growing Season
For the purposes of delineations of waters/wetlands, the US ACOE, EPA and Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) currently define “growing season” as that part of the year when
soil temperatures at 19.7 inches below the soil surface are higher than “biological zero” (41 °F or
5 °C) (USDA Soil Conservation Service [NRCS] 2006). When soil temperature data are not
available, current national guidance for the delineation of waters/wetlands is to use the closest
and best available weather station data to estimate the length of the growing season (US ACOE
1992). For example, current national guidance allows for use of the 28 °F standard from either
WETS (Climate Analysis for Wetlands) data (NRCS 2002) or data from pertinent NRCS Soil
Surveys to approximate the duration of frost-free intervals for a particular location (US ACOE
1992). In this report, recent data recorded at WETS station CA7851, in the city of San Luis
Obispo (NRCS 2002), were used to determine the growing season. Using the NRCS guidance,
this data indicates that the growing season technically extends throughout the winter wet season
(365 days) in the San Luis Obispo region. For the purpose of determining the hydrology
parameter for delineation (COE 1992), five percent (5%) of the growing season (365 days)
results in a requirement for saturation to the surface for at least 18.3 days.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-12 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
7
IV. METHODS
A. Rationale for the determination of the geographic extent of
waters of the U.S., including wetlands
Based upon guidance provided in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Arid
West Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2006), and in Regulatory Guidance Letters 82-2,
86-9, and 90-7, wetlands disturbed through natural and/or anthropogenic alterations of
hydrology, soils, and/or vegetation do not necessarily exist under “normal circumstances.” As
introduced in the preceding text, hydrologic, soil, and plant community conditions at the SLO
Tank Farm have and continue to be disturbed by a suite of historic and/or current crude oil
storage, agricultural, and development-related activities. Disturbances to hydrology include
ditching, grading, cultivation, redirection and/or consolidation of storm water to and through the
site, oil spill containment features, and installation of numerous drainage and pipe systems
(Photographs 1, 6, and 10). Disturbances to soils include deposition of imported fill materials,
berm construction, ripping, plowing, discing, road construction, and compaction by domestic
livestock (Photographs 10 through 13). Disturbances to native vegetation include domestic
livestock grazing, conversion of native and non-native plant communities to pasture, clearing,
discing, burning, etc. (Photographs 2 and 13). Due to the combination of site disturbances and
their effects on current hydrologic, soil, and vegetation conditions on the SLO Tank Farm, the
WSP/Padre technical team chose to delineate waters/wetlands using a combination of “Routine”
and “Atypical” approaches as articulated in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
B. Consistency with SWANCC & “Rapanos” Guidance
Recent decisions in the U.S. Supreme Court (i.e., Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County
[SWANCC] v. US ACOE (531 U.S. 159, 2001) January 9, 2001; Rapanos et ux., et al. v. United
States, June 19, 2006) have led to the development of federal guidance that requires a careful
examination and documentation of the physical location(s) and hydrologic connections among
waters/wetlands. To determine federal jurisdiction, particular focus is given to (1) surface
hydrologic connections between a wetland and “navigable waters in fact,” (2) “adjacency” of a
wetland to traditionally navigable waters, and thus (3) a “significant nexus” to interstate
commerce. In addition, waters/wetlands features can be determined to be under federal
jurisdiction by the US ACOE or EPA if a “significant nexus” can be shown between the wetland
feature in question and its contribution to the maintenance or restoration of the physical,
chemical, or biological integrity of downstream waters that are traditionally navigable.
Federal guidance for field delineation procedures that address the Rapanos decision has been
offered by the EPA and the US ACOE in a joint memorandum issued June 5, 2007 (EPA and US
ACOE 2007). To the extent possible, the WSP/Padre team adhered to extant SWANCC and
Rapanos guidance in offering suggestions for determination of federal jurisdiction in
waters/wetlands at the SLO Tank Farm.
To begin, we recognized that the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek from the SLO Tank Farm
reach and then downstream is infrequently intermittent or perennial. Thus, it is regularly
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-13 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
8
connected via surface flows to the traditionally navigable waters of the Pacific Ocean. Having
established the connection of San Luis Obispo Creek system to the Pacific Ocean, we recognized
relatively natural riverine, slope or depressional waters/wetlands features that were either within
or “adjacent” to (i.e., bordering, neighboring, or contiguous) East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek
and its main tributaries (e.g., Tank Farm Creek) as likely to be jurisdictional under current
federal guidance. Non-adjacent isolated depressions or slopes, whether they were relatively
natural or human-made features generally were not recommended by the WSP/Padre team as
being under federal jurisdiction.
C. Office Methods & Review of Background Materials
Prior to our field delineation, the WSP/Padre team reviewed available public domain information
including current and historic aerial photographs, the San Luis Obispo County Soil Survey
(NRCS 2008), U.S. Geological Survey maps, weather data, etc. We also reviewed site
documentation provided by EMC Staff and their consultants. These documents included a
chronology of land uses and events on the site (Avocet Environmental 2007) and previous
delineation maps and/or reports (EDAW 1999, BBL 1999, Jenesis 2003, and Rincon 2003).
Table 1 compares methodologies and results from the previous reports.
D. Field Delineation Methods
1. Delineation Team Members
The WSP/Padre delineation team consisted of Ms. Jessica Peak and Mr. Brian Dugas of Padre
Associates, and Drs. Lyndon C. Lee and Peggy L. Fiedler of WSP. Both Lee and Fiedler are
Professional Wetland Scientists certified by the Society of Wetland Scientists. Both Lee and
Fiedler have over 20 years experience delineating waters/wetlands throughout the California
Central coast. Resumes are included in Appendix C.
2. Field Review and Verification of Other Delineations, Sample Plot
Locations, and Data Documenting Site Conditions
During past delineation efforts on the Tank Farm property (Table 1), different types of
vegetation, soils, and hydrology data have been collected to characterize and document site
conditions. In developing this report, we reviewed each delineation map in the field to assess the
accuracy of wetland identifications and delineated wetland boundaries. When necessary, we
adjusted wetland boundaries to reflect current conditions in the field, current federal guidance,
etc. Table 2 provides a summary of waters/wetland areas removed, adjusted, or added based on
our 2007-2008 field observations. While we reviewed all previous reports and supporting data
from other consultant teams (e.g. EDAW 1999, BBL 1999, Jenesis 2003, and Rincon 2003), for
the sake of brevity we did not duplicate these data (field sheets, charts, graphs, etc.) or
incorporate them into this report. Instead, in this document we provide a general summary of the
delineation approach taken by the various consultants (Table 1), and with this explanation, we
incorporate their supporting data by reference.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-14 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
9
WSP/Padre technical team data sheets for wetlands identified for the first time in this report are
included in Appendix B. Consistent with current US ACOE guidance, the Appendix B data
sheets are tabulated on the Arid West Supplement forms (Environmental Laboratory 2006).
3. Hydrology
The WSP/Padre field team spent the late fall of 2007, and the winter/early spring wet season of
2007 – 2008 observing patterns of ponding and saturation of soils on the SLO Tank Farm site.
Consistent with the 1987 Manual “Atypical Situation” protocols, the Arid West Regional
Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2006), and current regulatory guidance (i.e., US ACOE
1992), wetland hydrology can be determined by evaluating a variety of direct and indirect
indicators. Direct indicators, include gage or well data, flood predictions (i.e., FEMA maps), and
historic records pertaining to the study area. Indirect field indicators include, but are not limited
to visual observation of inundation and/or saturation, sediment deposition, drainage patterns in
wetlands, hydric soil characteristics, watermarks, drift lines, oxidized channels (i.e.,
rhizospheres) associated with living roots and rhizomes, and water stained leaves (Environmental
Laboratory 1987).
Wetland hydrology is considered to be present at a location if field observations indicate the area
has a high probability of being periodically inundated or saturated to the soil surface for a
sufficient duration of the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the surface soil
environment (i.e., root zone) (Environmental Laboratory 1987). According to guidance in the
Arid West Regional Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2006), if at least one primary
indicator or at least two secondary indicators are present at a sample point, the wetland
hydrology criterion is met.
Due to the degrees and types of disturbances on the SLO Tank Farm property, we examined
several types of evidence that would allow us to determine whether wetland hydrology
previously existed or currently exists. The delineation team considered the type and frequency of
site alterations that occurred, the effects of alterations on site hydrology, and, to the extent
possible, hydrologic conditions that previously existed.
4. Soils
The WSP/Padre team determined the presence of hydric soils consistent with criteria articulated
in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), current regulatory guidance, Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 6.0, Hydric Soils of the United States
(USDA, NRCS 2006), and information provided in the Arid West Regional Supplement
(Environmental Laboratory 2006).
Hydric soils are defined as soils “that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or
ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper
part” (Federal Register July 13, 1994). Determination of whether or not a soil is hydric is based
on the fulfillment of at least one of four technical criteria (Federal Register September 18, 2002;
Table 3).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-15 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
10
The technical criteria can be satisfied using a combination of published soils information and
field indicators. Field indicators for determining whether a soil satisfies the hydric soil definition
and the technical criteria for hydric soils are listed in the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States (USDA NRCS 2006). Field indicators published in the above-referenced document
supersede guidance provided in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
On the SLO Tank Farm property, the WSP/Padre team used direct field observations in
combination with the San Luis Obispo County Soil Survey (NRCS 1979, 2004, 2008) and San
Luis Obispo County Hydric Soils list (NRCS 2008). Specifically, we examined soils and
historical air and site photographs for evidence that hydric conditions currently exist or
previously existed. In particular, we considered the type and timing of alteration(s) (e.g., fires,
grazing, plowing, disking, ditching), historic and extant effects of alteration(s) on soil conditions,
and locations and types of soils that previously occurred on the site.
5. Vegetation
Presence of hydrophytic vegetation was determined using criteria and procedures outlined in the
1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Dominant species in each of four strata (tree,
sapling/shrub, herb, and woody vine) were identified. Species identifications and taxonomic
nomenclature follow The Jepson Manual (Hickman 1993) with the exception of the Cyperaceae,
which follows the Flora of North America, Volume 23 (FNA 2002). Each species' indicator
status was assigned using the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: California
(Region 0) (Reed 1988) (hereafter “The National List”). A species indicator status refers to the
relative frequency with which the species occurs in jurisdictional wetlands (Table 4).
The Arid West Regional Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2006) recommends that
presence of dominant species is determined using the 50/20 rule. Dominant species are those
species that individually or collectively cover more than 50% of the total vegetative cover within
each stratum, in addition to those species that by themselves cover 20% or more of the total
cover within each vegetation stratum. According to both the 1987 Manual and the Arid West
Regional Supplement, the hydrophytic vegetation parameter for wetlands is met when, under
normal circumstances, more than 50% of the dominant species from each stratum are obligate
wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC) species. The 1987
Manual (but not the Arid West Regional Supplement) calls, in certain circumstances, for a plus
(+) or a minus (-) sign to be included for the purpose of designating a higher or lower level of the
indicator status. A FAC- indicator status is generally not considered to be an indicator of
hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., it is treated in the same way as facultative upland (FACU), upland
(UPL), and not listed (NL) status).
On the SLO Tank Farm property, we examined existing vegetation and historical aerial and site
photographs for evidence that hydrophytic vegetation conditions currently exist or previously
existed. In particular, we considered the type and timing of alteration(s) (e.g., plowing, disking,
ditching, mowing, burning [historic and extant]), effects of alteration(s) on vegetation conditions,
and locations and types of plant community types that previously occurred on the site.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-16 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
11
V. RESULTS
A. Geographic Extent of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands
1. Summaries of Previous Consultants’ Reports
Table 1 provides a tabular summary of previous waters/wetland delineation work by consultant
teams. Below, we offer an expanded summary and synthesis of previous work.
a. EDAW – 1999
In 1999, EDAW was retained by UNOCAL to delineate waters/wetlands on the property then
known as the “Unocal Tank Farm.” EDAW used as a baseline a previous waters/wetlands
delineation that had been conducted in 1994 by the US ACOE, Los Angeles District, for the tank
farm south of Tank Farm Road. The delineation effort documented a total of 39.15 acres of
jurisdictional waters/wetlands at that time, but the delineation was considered to have expired by
June 1999.
EDAW used both routine and comprehensive approach to the delineation of waters/wetlands at
the SLO Tank Farm site. Initially, EDAW identified areas of potential jurisdiction on a 1997
1:200 aerial photograph. These areas were identified and further mapped in the field. The field
effort was conducted by two EDAW scientists, who collected representative data at 64 sampling
points in May, 1999. Sixty-four data sheets are contained in the EDAW (1999) report.
Subsequent to the field effort, the waters/wetlands polygons were digitized using a GIS system to
calculate area. EDAW (1999) reported a total of 57.2 acres of jurisdictional waters/wetlands,
with 55.8 acres of wetlands and 1.4 acres of “other waters.” Wetlands were categorized as
freshwater wetlands, season wet meadow, jurisdictional tar flats, and riparian wetlands. EDAW
described the 1.4 acres of “other waters” as the tributary to Acacia Creek and several areas in
which standing water was observed but in which no hydrophytic vegetation was present.
b. Ted Winfield & Associates – 2001
The map that resulted from Mr. Ted Winfield’s adjustments to the EDAW (1999) delineation in
2002 is included in this report as Figure 3. It is important to note the following points:
(1) Ted Winfield did not conduct his own delineation. Instead, Dr. Winfield used
EDAW’s original 1999 map as the basis for his field exercise in the identification of what
he called “isolated non-jurisdictional wetlands.”
(2) From all appearances, and without the ability to confirm, it is probable that the 1999
map developed by EDAW was the one also used later by Blasland, Bouck & Lee (BBL),
and all subsequent reviews of waters/wetlands (e.g., Jenesis [2003]).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-17 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
12
(3) In 1999, NRCS/US ACOE verified the EDAW delineation. The response letter from
Ms. Cheryl Zelus of NRCS to Mr. Gary Jakobs of EDAW is included in Appendix A.
(4) Dr. Winfield’s analysis of the extent of US ACOE jurisdiction is no longer supported
as a result of the SWANCC decision. Winfield argued that a single berm is sufficient to
effect “isolation” in this regulatory context. The key sentence is found on the first major
paragraph on page 4 (lines 17-19) of his letter report:
In situations where there are multiple barriers [berms] between the wetland and
the nearest navigable water or tributary water, these wetlands should be
considered isolated.
(5) The US ACOE (Mr. Bruce Henderson) met with John Ljung of Unocal on September
9, 2002 to review Winfield’s new map; however there appears to be no follow-up letter or
documentation from the US ACOE pertaining to the results of the 2002 review.
c. Jenesis – 2003
Jenesis used a one-parameter approach (i.e., presence of wetland plants, or wetland soils, or
wetland hydrology) to determine whether a “state wetland” was present at each “federal”
wetland as delineated by EDAW. In so doing, Jenesis staff appeared to have relied primarily on
the presence of wetland vegetation. The report states:
The presence of hydrophytic vegetation at an observation point typically was the
parameter satisfying the definition of a state wetland, more commonly than the presence
of evidence of suitable hydrology (p. 4, ¶6, lines 29-31).
Delineating wetlands by using a one-parameter approach is the methodology generally accepted
by the California Coastal Commission for wetlands protected by the state under the California
Coastal Act (CCA) (California Public Resources Code Division 20, §§30000 – 30012). Within
the Coastal Zone as defined by the CCA, wetland protection is determined by the Local Coastal
Program for the coastal city or county. As discussed at the outset of this report, the
waters/wetlands on the SLO Tank Farm are not protected by the California Coastal Act as
designated by the LCP for San Luis Obispo County because they are not within the designated
local coastal zone.
Therefore, the Jenesis wetlands delineation used an approach that is appropriate only for
identification and delineation of “state wetlands” as protected by the CCA, and not by any other
California Public Resources Code. Further, as a consequence of an inappropriate extension of the
“riparian zone” protected by the 1600 series public code, and the inappropriate use of a CCA
wetland delineation methodology, the wetlands protected by the State of California should be re-
delineated, and focused on the riverine waters and/or wetlands on the SLO tank farm project site.
The result of this exercise would be to decrease significantly the area of “state wetlands” that
have been presented and discussed throughout the planning processes for site remediation and
development.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-18 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
13
d. Blasland, Bouck and Lee (BBL) – 1999/2003
In 2003, staff from BBL apparently obtained (electronic) polygons from the original 1999
EDAW delineation map and overlaid them on a base map with enhanced site topographic
information (2 ft. contour intervals). No data sheets, survey information, or reports accompany
the BBL effort.
e. Rincon Consultants, Inc. – 2003
In 2003, staff from Rincon Consultants, Inc. mapped the distribution of vernal pool fairy shrimp
in wet and dry seasons. Figure 4 is the WSP/Padre team synthesis of the Rincon work. It shows
the distribution of vernal pool fairy shrimp (as well as other special status species identified
subsequently) in waters/wetlands mapped by the WSP/Padre team.
2. The WSP/Padre Delineation
The WSP/Padre field team delineated one hundred three (103) polygons on the SLO Tank Farm
project site (Figure 5 and Table 5). In addition to delineation, Figure 6 and Table 5 offer a
classification of waters/wetland consistent with the hydrogeomorphic classes described by
Brinson (1993) and Brinson et al. (1995). On the SLO Tank Farm site, we observed and mapped
riverine, depressional and slope waters/wetlands. Examples of each are given in Photographs 5,
6, and 7, respectively.
As introduced at the outset of this report, Mr. Bruce Henderson of the US ACOE Los Angeles
District worked in the field with the WSP/Padre technical team on June 9, 2008. Results of this
field review effort are that Mr. Henderson determined that, of the 103 waters/wetlands polygons
mapped by the WSP/Padre team, 38 are wetlands per se and under federal CWA jurisdiction.
Their combined area is 49.0 acres (Table 5). Another six (6) polygons are so-called “other
waters” of the U.S. Their combined total area is 3.9 acres (Table 5). Therefore, the total area of
waters/wetlands under federal CWA jurisdiction at the SLO Tank Farm site is 52.9 acres.
A total of 44 mapped polygons on the SLO Tank Farm project site are not under federal CWA
jurisdiction because they are isolated depressional features that either have no connection with or
adjacency to traditionally navigable waters and/or have no significant nexus with interstate
commerce, or maintenance of the physical, biological, or chemical integrity of downstream
waters (Figure 5 and Table 5). However, in all instances, these wetland features support special
status species that are protected at federal and/or state levels of jurisdiction (Figure 4 and Table
5). Total area of the waters/wetlands not under federal CWA jurisdiction but which do support
special status species is 15.8 acres (Table 5).
Finally, fifteen (15) wet depressional features mapped on the SLO Tank Farm site do not support
any special status species. Their combined total area is 3.4 acres (Figure 5 and Table 5).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-19 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
14
B. Hydrology
1. Landscape-Scale Mapping
The California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR) has mapped the SLO Tank Farm site
within the 44,370-acre “San Luis Obispo Hydrologic Subunit” of the 11,326 mi2 Central Coast
Hydrologic Region (Figure 7). The CA DWR websites provides extensive information regarding
general characteristics of water and water resources for the San Luis Obispo Subunit. For the
2005 Update to the California Water Plan, please refer to www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/previous/
cwpu2005/index.cfm (CA DWR 2005 a). For maps of hydrologic units, please refer to
http://www.landwateruse.water.ca.gov/studyarea/maps.cfm (CA DWR 2005b).
Similarly, the U.S. Geological Survey has identified the SLO Tank Farm site as existing within
the #18060006 Central Coastal Hydrologic Unit. Information pertaining to the 18060006
hydrologic unit can be obtained at [http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/huc.cfm?huc_code=18060006].
2. Site Specific Mapping and Hydrologic Processes
a. Maps and Photographs
In 2008, Avocet Environmental characterized the SLO Tank Farm project site with respect to the
storm water catchment areas that contribute flows to the site or that exist entirely within the site
(Figure 8). Also in 2008, the WSP/Padre Technical team (1) arranged for an aerial photograph to
be taken of the site during wet conditions (Figure 2), and (2) developed an estimate of the
directions of flow for surface waters on the SLO Tank Farm site (Figure 9). The Avocet and
WSP/Padre maps are overwhelmingly in agreement, departing only in their estimates/treatment
of the frequency of intermittent or ephemeral connections of surface flows from the southern
portions of the SLO Tank Farm site to the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek.
b. The North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek System
The North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek system occupies the western portions of the SLO Tank Farm
property, both north and south of Tank Farm Road (Figures 6, 8, and 9). The North Marsh/Tank
Farm Creek system collects precipitation and storm water from a catchment approximately 485
acres in size, including approximately 150 acres on the SLO Tank Farm proper (Figure 8 and 9).
Much of the catchment that contributes flow to the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek system is
located north of the northern SLO Tank Farm property boundary. Water currently enters the SLO
Tank Farm site as sheet flow or is concentrated into natural channels that flow in a generally
westerly direction parallel to the northern property line. Development plans for the area
immediately north of the property likely will change the configuration of catchment areas
upgradient of the SLO Tank Farm site. Specifically, flows are likely to concentrate toward one or
possibly a few locations in the northwest property corner. As of this writing, it appears that the
water storage capacity of the “North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek” complex that will be retained on
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-20 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
15
the SLO Tank Farm site will be more-than-adequate to store and process any reasonable
hydrologic changes that may result from up-gradient developments.
Water from the north-central and north-eastern portions of the SLO Tank Farm site flows in a
generally southwesterly direction (1) in and through the gently sloping alluvial soils that have
aggraded in the North Marsh complex, upstream of the Tank Farm Road thru fill, and (2) in the
highly modified and degraded channel system known as Tank Farm Creek (Photographs 16, 17,
and 18). Water in this channel system passes under Tank Farm Road via twin corrugated metal
pipe (CMP) culverts or twin concrete culverts installed through the Tank Farm Road roadway
fills (Photographs 19). At this point in the landscape, it appears that water can flow either way
through the twin concrete culverts that pass under Tank Farm Road. In addition, several ditches
along the Tank Farm Road right-of-way collect storm water from adjacent frontage properties. A
local high point is located approximately 1,000 feet east of South Higuera Street. Storm water
collected east of this point drains toward the SLO Tank Farm and eventually discharges into the
North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek complex.
After passing under Tank Farm Road, water in the main stem of the North Marsh/Tank Farm
Creek system flows generally southeast (Figure 9). At high water and during floods, the Tank
Farm Creek channel system overflows its banks and engages several depressional features
adjacent to the main channel system (e.g., wetlands #42 and #43, Figure 9). South of Tank Farm
Road and immediately north of the extreme southeast corner of the SLO Tank Farm property is a
discharge point for surface water flows in the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek system
(Photograph 20). This discharge point and surrounding area is the downstream end of the North
Marsh/Tank Farm Creek channel system on the SLO Tank Farm site.
c. Depressions North of Tank Farm Road
In addition to the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek complex, a series of depressional wetlands is
located throughout the northern portion of the SLO Tank Farm project site. These wetland
features are either man-made (e.g. within old containment berms for oil storage tanks – Wetlands
#15, 16, 21, 30, 32, 35, 37, Figure 9) or relatively natural or excavated concave features that
pond water for long (e.g., 7-30 days) or very long (e.g., > 30 days) duration (e.g., Wetlands #6,
33, 7, 8, 101, Figure 9). The bottom of these depressions can consist of concrete, urban fill, or
relatively native soils that are highly compacted by domestic livestock, machinery, etc. These
depressions receive water from direct precipitation, or in some instances, from storm flows that
emanate from the immediately surrounding small sub-watershed areas.
d. Hydrologic Processes for Areas South of Tank Farm Road
As discussed previously, the SLO Tank Farm is situated adjacent to and north of the East Fork of
San Luis Obispo Creek, an infrequently intermittent, mostly perennial tributary to the main stem
of San Luis Obispo Creek (Photographs 5 and 15). The main stem of San Luis Obispo Creek is a
perennial stream that joins the tidal and traditionally navigable waters of the Pacific Ocean.
Although infrequent in occurrence, a large portion of the southern extent of the SLO Tank Farm
site (e.g., areas mapped as “Closed Catchment” in Figure 8, including the areas south of the East
Fork San Luis Obispo Creek levee system and Catchment Areas B1, B2, B3, and B4 in Figure 8)
discharges directly to the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek (Figures 8 and 9) via twin culverts
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-21 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
16
controlled by old gate structures (Photograph 20). However, most of the time the southern
portion of the SLO Tank Farm site acts as a closed catchment that retains precipitation and storm
water (Figure 8). This retention is a legacy of the historical containment structures and other
topographic and hydrologic system modifications that were made to facilitate oil and water
storage and containment operations on the SLO Tank Farm site. To this end, there are a series of
depressional wetlands located throughout the southern portion of the SLO Tank Farm site that
are either man-made (e.g., within old containment berms for oil storage tanks – Wetlands #45,
55, 70, 81, 83, Figure 9) or relatively natural or excavated concave features that pond water for
long (e.g., 7-30 days) or very long (e.g. > 30 days) duration (e.g., Wetlands #53, 54, 58, 60, 84,
85, 86, 90, 92, Figure 9). As observed in the depressions on the northern portion of the site, the
southern depressions have bottoms that can consist of concrete, urban fill, or highly compacted
soils. They also receive water from direct inputs of precipitation or via storm flows that emanate
from the small sub-watersheds that surround them.
e. Relationship of SLO Tank Farm Site Hydrology to Waters/Wetland Delineations
For the purposes of determining federal CWA jurisdiction, the presence or absence of water in
SLO Tank Farm waters/wetlands is usually the dominant parameter for determining final
geometries of mapped polygons. In the case of the riverine features on the site (e.g., the North
Marsh/Tank Farm Creek and East Fork San Luis Obispo Creek systems), bed and bank features
and ordinary high water (OHW) marks are often the principal hydrologic features that determine
the lateral extent (width) of federal jurisdiction. That is, the lateral extent of many of the
jurisdictional calls in these riverine waters/wetland is driven by the location of OHW on bank
features and not by adjacent wetland boundaries.
With respect to depressional wetlands, soils on the SLO Tank Farm site are highly compacted as
a consequence of grazing/trampling by domestic livestock, operation of machinery on soil
surfaces, construction activities, etc. Consequently, they tend to pond water for long (e.g., 7-30
days) or very long (e.g., >30 days) duration (Photographs 6 and 8). The geographic extent of
these depressions is usually defined by the extent of long duration ponding, which is easily
mapped during the wet season. At times, and in addition to ponding, we observed long duration
saturation of soils to the surface. Saturation usually occurred in the large slope wetlands
associated with the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek complex, in smaller slope features, or in
depressions that had been ponded for long duration but that were drying out as a result of
evapotranspiration.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-22 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
17
C. Soils
1. Natural Resources Conservation Service Mapping & Other Studies
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County
identifies and describes soils within the SLO Tank Farm project site as consisting of the Xererts-
Xerolls-Urban land complex with 0-15 percent slopes (Figure 10) (Soil Survey Staff 2004).
These soils have some hydric inclusions. Soils at the SLO Tank Farm project site also were
described by Jenesis (2003). The WSP/Padre team confirmed the presence of the NRCS mapped
soils unit on the SLO Tank Farm site.
The Xererts component of the Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land unit as mapped by NRCS makes up
approximately 30 percent of this map unit. Xererts formed from weathered sedimentary rocks.
Xererts soils are deep and well drained, with little available water to a depth of 60 inches. The
Xererts component is not flooded, or ponded, and there is no zone of water saturation within 72
inches of the soil surface. The soil does not meet the hydric criteria. The Xererts component of
the Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex includes Cropley or Diablo soils. Cropley soils are clays
that occur on alluvial fans and plains. These soils form in alluvium that weathered from
sedimentary rocks and typically are very dark gray to black in the top 32 inches.
The Xerolls component makes up 30 percent of the Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land map unit. Xerolls
form from alluvium and/or residual materials derived from weathered sedimentary rock. This
soil type is deep and well drained, with little available water to a depth of 60 inches. The Xerolls
component is not flooded or ponded, and there is no zone of water saturation within 72 inches.
The soil does not meet the hydric criteria. Urban land makes up 20 percent of the Xererts-
Xerolls-Urban land map unit.
2. WSP/Padre Observations
On the SLO Tank Farm site, the WSP/Padre team observed that the modal soils have been
disturbed extensively by historic petroleum fires, earthmoving equipment, filling, compaction by
domestic livestock, and construction or demolition activities for the tank farm infrastructure.
Consequently, much of the shape and physical characteristics of the soil materials have been
altered. Given the types and degrees of disturbances to soils on the site, the hydric soil parameter
usually is met via ponding or saturation to the surface for long (e.g., 7-30 days) or very long
(e.g., >30 days) durations (National Technical Committee on Hydric Soils Criteria #3, Table 3).
Ponding occurs frequently in compacted soils associated with very slight to pronounced concave
microtopography on the site (Photographs 3, 6, 8, and 21). In the most highly compacted soils, it
is not uncommon to observe non-saturated conditions immediately below ponding. If surface
compaction of soils is not as pronounced, then some redoximorphic features can and often do
develop within the upper 12 inches of soil profiles throughout the SLO Tank Farm site. These
features include redox concentrations, redox depletions, oxidized rhizospheres, organic matter
streaking and/or stripped matrices in sandy soils, gleying, and production of hydrogen sulfide
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-23 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
18
odors (especially in the North Marsh soils), etc. Soil colors vary a great deal throughout the site,
given the amount of filling, earthwork, and import of concrete and other materials.
On a particular note, in areas around the old storage tank foundations is the presence of burned
crude oil incorporated into many soil profiles. Depending on the type and intensity of fire that
occurred in the area, residual burned crude oil can be present in forms ranging from relatively
large aggregates up to 3-4 inches in mesh diameter, to small, pebble-sized granules. Structure of
the granules can range from strong angular blocky to very weak, sub-angular blocky. Colors of
aggregates depend greatly on the degree of weathering, but tend to range from dark brown to
almost black (e.g., Munsell [2000] Colors 10YR3/2 to 10YR 2/1). In some areas of the SLO
Tank Farm, very dark and smooth, tar-like accumulations of residual oil will occupy the soil
surface or interstices in desiccation cracks. These tar-like deposits will change markedly in
viscosity with heating and become tacky to the touch or actually flow if the diurnal heat peak is
intense. For the purposes of delineation, the residual oils incorporated in soil profiles are obvious
and not confusing as either structure or morphology derived from saturation, low oxidation-
reduction states, etc.
D. Vegetation
Vegetation on the site has been described by EDAW (1999), Jenesis (2003), and Rincon
Associates (2003). However, a brief summary is provided in the following text.
1. General Description of SLO Tank Farm Vegetation
Plant communities along the streams of the central coast of California support a dynamic
complement of native trees and other woody species, many of which can and do occur outside of
the riparian corridor. Perhaps the most conspicuous feature of the mature, native riparian
vegetation within the southern portion of California’s central coast is the dominance of large
coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia). Stands of live oak range in density from woodland (wherein
individual tree canopies do not interdigitate) to forest (i.e., tree canopies overlap). These stands
occur along stream terraces in the upper and middle reaches of moderately-sized riverine
systems. The riparian overstory is mixed, with arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and California
walnut (Juglans californica var. californica) dominant in many places, particularly in the
downstream reaches, such as at the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek on the SLO Tank Farm
site.
The understory along the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek has been disturbed throughout the
reach on the SLO Tank Farm site, and supports a mix of native and nonnative plant species.
Understory shrubs occurring on creek banks include coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) and
California sage (Artemisia californica) where the canopy is open, and blackberries (California
blackberry [Rubus ursinus] and Himalayan blackberry [Rubus discolor]) in both sun and shade.
Herbaceous species occurring in the riparian corridor include mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana),
poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), smilo grass (Piptatherum miliaceum), wild oats (Avena
barbata, A. fatua), and Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-24 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
19
In the less disturbed stream reaches in this geographic region, typically higher in the watershed
than the SLO Tank Farm site, large oaks are joined by white alder (Alnus rhombifolia) and
western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) as dominants, particularly immediately adjacent to the
stream channel. In addition to these tree species, the riparian plant communities (i.e., vegetation
adjacent to, and influenced by, the presence of moving water), consist of a small suite of native
shrubs and vines found in the understory. Poison oak (Toxicodendron diversiloba) is ubiquitous,
as is California blackberry (Rubus ursinus). Less common, but still frequently occurring in the
shrub layer, are several species of gooseberry (Ribes spp.) and honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.).
These taxa are critically important food sources for the native fauna, providing a varied and
abundant source of berries throughout much of the year. In the low elevation coastal plain,
willows and California walnut are prominent in the lowland riparian ecosystems. Native oak
savannah/bunch grass mosaic is the reference standard condition in upland areas along the
riparian corridor.
Invasion by exotic species is a significant concern in California. Many streams in the region are
now completely devoid of a native riparian ecosystem, consisting instead of a large suite of
exotic Eurasian weeds (e.g., Bromus diandrus, Carduus pycnocephalus, Melilotus officinale,
Piptatherum miliaceum, Sonchus oleraceus), ornamental escapes (e.g., Delairea odorata
[Senecio mikanioides], Tropaeoleum majus, Vinca major), or a planted riparian corridor of
nonnative trees (e.g., Eucalyptus globulus).
Grassland areas within the region which are not frequently disturbed are characterized by a
native perennial bunch grassland community type which has an occasional tree or shrub (e.g.,
Mexican elderberry [Sambucus mexicana]). Grassland species found in the SLO Tank Farm site
(EDAW 1999) include ripgut brome, soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), purple needlegrass
(Nasella pulchra), tarweed (Deinandra congesta ssp. luzulifolia and Centromadia parryi ssp.
congdonii), owl’s clover (Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis), and fennel (Foeniculum
vulgare). Exotics occurring in frequently disturbed areas within the uplands include yellow star-
thistle (Centaurea solstitalis) intermixed with non-native grasses and herbaceous species such as
wild oats (Avena barbata), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), annual fescue (Vulpia myuros var.
hirsuta), perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), rip-gut brome (Bromus diandrus), black mustard
(Brassica nigra), Russian thistle (Salsola iberica), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and sweet
fennel (Foeniculum vulgare).
Five special status plant species have been observed within the project site. These species are
Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Hoover’s button-celery (Eryngium
aristatulum var. hooveri), San Luis Obispo County morning glory (Calystegia subacaulis ssp.
subacaulis), Obispo Indian paintbrush (Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis), and San Luis
Obispo serpentine dudleya (Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae). All five species are California
Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 1B species.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-25 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
20
2. Wetland Classes
Three classes of wetlands (sensu Brinson 1993) are found at the project site – depression, slope,
and riverine with associated riparian communities, with the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek
representing a slope/riverine complex (Figure 6). Each class is described in the following text.
a. Depressional Waters/Wetlands
Most if not all of the depressional waters/wetlands on the SLO Tank Farm project site are not
natural features of the landscape (Photographs 6 and 8). Depressional waters/wetlands have
formed as a result of site activities, specifically, they are found in the bottom of the old storage
tanks, at the base of human made berms surrounding the tanks, and as isolated depressions
resulting from the site’s long history of ranching and industrial use. While many of the
depressions support no vegetation for all or a portion of the year, some of them support large
populations of rare plant species, including Congdon’s tarplant and Hoover’s button-celery.
Other species commonly present include foxtail fescue (Vulpia myuros), rabbit’s foot grass
(Polypogon monspeliensis), dwarf wooly marbles (Psilocarphus brevissimus), popcorn flower
(Plagiobothry undulatus), spikerush (Eleocharis spp.), birdfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), and
various native and widespread rushes (Juncus bufonius var. bufonius, J. phaeocephalus, J. tenuis,
J. xiphioides).
b. Slope Waters/Wetlands
Few slope wetlands are found on the SLO Tank Farm site. Those present are primarily the result
of the ditching, diking and berming from both ranching and industrial activities.
c. Slope/Riverine Waters/Wetlands Complex
A large slope/riverine wetland known as the North Marsh/Tank Farm Creek occurs on the
northern portion of the SLO Tank Farm (Photograph 7). This wetland complex resulted from the
impoundment and subsequent sedimentation of an unnamed second order channel of San Luis
Obispo Creek due to the construction of Tank Farm Road. This construction transformed a
riverine wetland ecosystem into a slope riverine proximal wetland type. Currently, the North
Marsh is dominated by bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), Eleocharis macrostachya and common
cattail (Typha latifolia). Curly dock (Rumex crispus), chain speedwell (Veronica catenata), and
the rare Congdon’s tarplant are also present, sometimes locally abundant.
Where Tank Farm Creek flows upgradient of the North Marsh, vegetation within the channel is
dominated by widespread palustrine persistent and non-persistent emergent species. These
include common cattail and water plantain (Alisma plantago-aquatica), as well as the common
curly dock, water speedwell, among others. Several isolated arroyo willows occur along the
banks, particularly within the upper reach of Tank Farm Creek on the SLO Tank Farm site.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-26 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
21
d. Riverine Waters/Wetlands & Associated Riparian Zones
Two prominent riverine features, East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek and Tank Farm Creek,
comprise most of the riverine waters/wetlands on the Project Site. However, a notable number of
artificial drainage ditches have been constructed, again, as a result of site history. Tank Farm
Creek, itself, is largely an artificial ditch, clearly the result of relocation of the original creek
channel to facilitate ranching and industrial uses. This is particularly true below Tank Farm
Road, where the creek takes the form of several large, parallel, and intricately plumbed ditches
that drain to the southeastern corner of the Project Site. Vegetation associated with this drainage
network reflects primarily weedy native and non-native species described previously.
The East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek is a highly entrenched channel with members of the
native riparian forest found upslope within the riparian slopes (Photograph 14 and 15). California
walnut, Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), western sycamore, Mexican elderberry, Coast
live oak and arroyo willow are most common. Above ordinary high water the vegetation is
primarily the annual grassland dominated by Italian ryegrass, slender wild oat, soft chess,
bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), with remnant native elements, such as purple needlegrass,
coyote brush, and California buttercup (Ranunculus californicus).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-27 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
22
VI. REGULATORY CONTEXTS
Three levels of government have jurisdiction over the waters/wetlands on the Tank Farm
property. These jurisdictions include the U.S. Federal government, the State of California, and
San Luis Obispo County. A summary of each level of jurisdiction is presented below.
A. Federal Jurisdiction
1. Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404
As reported above, the delineation and mapping of the geographic extent of waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands, shows that there are waters/wetlands within the Chevron Tank Farm Project
Site. Section 404 of the CWA requires authorization from the US ACOE for the discharge of
dredged or fill material into all waters of the United States, including wetlands. This delineation
is conditional upon a field review and final jurisdictional determination by the US ACOE, Los
Angeles District. Recent decisions in the U.S. Supreme Court (i.e., Solid Waste Agency of
Northern Cook County [SWANCC] v. US ACOE (531 U.S. 159, 2001) January 9, 2001;
Rapanos et ux., et al. v. United States, June 19, 2006) require a careful examination and
documentation of the physical location(s) and hydrologic characteristics of waters/wetlands.
Particular focus is given to surface hydrologic connections to “navigable waters in fact,” and/or
adjacency and thus a significant nexus to interstate commerce.
As addressed in Section IV.B., federal guidance for field delineation procedures that address the
Rapanos decision has been offered by the EPA and the US ACOE in a joint memorandum issued
June 5, 2007. Permanent to intermittent stream flow in Tank Farm Creek and East Fork of San
Luis Obispo Creek passes through and across the SLO Tank Farm site, converging immediately
south of the project boundary. This reach of the East Fork then joins the main stem of San Luis
Obispo Creek, where flow is perennial. San Luis Obispo Creek flows year round to the Pacific
Ocean, where it enters tidal waters at the town of Avila, San Luis Obispo County.
Waters/wetlands on the Project Site have direct hydrologic connection to a navigable water in
fact, and therefore are regulated by CWA §404.
2. Clean Water Act, Section 401
Section 401 of the CWA addresses water quality in the nation’s waters, including wetlands. The
State of California administers §401. Please see B.1 and 2 below.
3. Clean Water Act, Section 402
Section 402 of the CWA addresses the discharge of pollutants from point sources into the
Nation’s surface waters. The State of California administers §402. Please see B.3 below.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-28 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
23
4. Endangered Species Act, Section 7 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
Projects that require a CWA §404 permit are obligated to show consistency with the provisions
of §7 (or §10, depending on the applicant) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. The
purpose of the ESA is “. . . to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered
species and threatened species depend upon may be conserved, to provide a program for the
conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be
appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions as set forth in subsection (a)
of this section.”
Section 7 requires interagency consultation to protect listed species. Under Section 7(a)(1)
federal agencies are directed, in consultation with the Service, to use their resources to further
the purposes of the act. Section 7(a)(2) precludes federal agencies from authorizing, funding, or
carrying out any activities that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed
species or result in the adverse modification of critical habitat. Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National
Marine Fisheries Service.
Two species protected by the federal ESA is found on the SLO Tank Farm site, and both listed as
“threatened.” The vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) is found in many of the
depressional and riverine features, as documented by a comprehensive survey (wet and dry
seasons) by Rincon Consultants (2005). South-central California coast steelhead ESU
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) is known to occur in the East Branch of San Luis Obispo Creek.
Therefore, a (at minimum, informal) Section 7 consultation will be required prior to any site
activities.
5. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Section 106
For any projects that require a CWA §404 permit, applicants are obligated to show consistency
with the provisions of §106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Section 106 of
NHPA granted legal status to historic preservation in Federal planning, decision-making, and
project execution. Section 106 requires all Federal agencies to take into account the effects of
their actions on historic properties, and provide a reasonable opportunity to comment on those
actions and the manner in which Federal agencies are taking historic properties into account in
their decisions (http://www.achp.gov/overview.html). Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act is administered by the State of California Historic Preservation Officer (See B.6
below).
B. California State
As described above, approximately 72.2 acres of waters/wetlands and/or wetland features exist at
the SLO Tank Farm site. These waters/wetlands will be regulated under CWA Section 401, 402,
California Department of Fish & Game, and the State Historic Preservation Officer under the
authority of the National Historic Preservation Act, among others.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-29 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
24
1. Clean Water Act (Water Quality Certification), Section 401
Section 401 of the CWA requires that federal agencies issuing licenses or permits for
construction or other activities obtain a written certification that the activity will not cause or
contribute to a violation of the state’s water quality standards. After receiving the certification,
the federal agency issuing the permit must include conditions in the permit to prevent the project
from degrading water quality of a downstream state or tribe. The CWA's 401 certification
requirement applies to many types of permits and is an important tool for states and tribes to
control projects that might degrade state waters. Work involving discharges to waters/wetlands
must be reviewed by the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board in the context
of the Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification Program.
2. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act was enacted in 1969 under the California Water Code
§§13000 et seq. Its purpose is “. . . to preserve, enhance and restore the quality of California's
water resources, and ensure their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and
future generations.” The Act established the State Water Resources Control Board and nine
Regional Water Quality Control Boards as the principal state agencies with the responsibility for
controlling water quality in California (see B.1. above). Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality
Act, the State Board has the ultimate authority over State water rights and water quality policy;
the nine regional boards oversee water quality on a day-to-day basis at the regional level by (1)
determining beneficial uses of water for all bodies of water in their area; (2) establishing and
enforcing water quality standards for both surface and groundwater; and (3) taking any and all
actions needed to maintain the standards by controlling point and non-point sources of pollution.
3. Clean Water Act, Section 402
Work involving discharges to waters/wetlands must be reviewed by the State of California in the
context of the Clean Water Act §402, which regulates discharges pollutants from point sources
into surface waters under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit (NPDES)
program. The NPDES program is implemented either by the EPA, or in California, by the State
Water Quality Control Board. The NPDES program requires those implementing projects
involving discharges to waters/wetlands to have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP is reviewed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the city or
county in which the project takes place. The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control
Board is headquartered in San Luis Obispo.
4. Stream Bed Alteration – Section 1600 Series Permit
The California Department of Fish and Game administers §§1600-1607 of the Fish & Game
Code. Sections 1600-1607 address any project that will “(1) divert, obstruct, or change the
natural flow or the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by the
department [California Fish and Game] in which there is at any time an existing fish or wildlife
resource or from which these resources derive benefit, (2) use materials from the streambeds
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-30 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
25
designated by the department, or (3) result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste, or other
material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass in to any river,
stream, or lake designated by the department” (Section 1601) (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/1600/). A
1600 series permit is required in any water or wetland with bed and bank features.
On the Chevron Tank Farm Project Site, only those wetlands that occur within the riparian zone
of any stream, river or lake would be regulated by DFG under the 1600 series public resource
code. The only stream, river or lake features on the SLO project site are the Tank Farm Creek
riverine complex and the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek. As such, these riverine
waters/wetlands on the SLO tank farm project site are within DFG jurisdiction given by Section
1600-1616.
5. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The California Environmental Quality Act, made into law in 1970, requires state and local
agencies to identify significant environmental impacts of their actions, and to avoid and mitigate
those impacts where feasible (California Public Resources Code §§21000-21177). Depending
upon the type and extent of the project, different level(s) of environmental analysis may be
required, and make take the form of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative
Declaration (ND).
6. National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106
As part of the CWA §404 permit review process, the US ACOE is obliged to review records kept
by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to determine if the proposed project will (or is
likely to) impact cultural resources. In addition, if cultural resources are encountered during any
work that may occur at the Property, the appropriate state agencies must be notified.
7. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (CWA 401)
Work involving discharges to waters/wetlands needs to be reviewed by the State of California
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in the context of the Clean Water Act 401
Water Quality Certification Program.
8. California Coastal Commission (CCC)
The project area that includes the delineated waters/wetlands is not within Coastal Zone of the
Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the delineation will not need to be reviewed by the California Coastal
Commission.
C. Local Jurisdiction - San Luis Obispo County
Standard measures for building, grading and encroachment permits, including sediment and
erosion control, will need to be followed to prevent inadvertent discharges to waters/wetlands.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-31 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
26
VII. LITERATURE CITED
Avocet Environmental, Inc., September 7, 2007, Working Draft, Remedial Action Plan for
Former San Luis Obispo Tank Farm, 276 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, California.
Brinson, M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Technical Report WRP-DE-4,
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Brinson, M., F. R. Hauer, L. C. Lee, W. L. Nutter, R. D. Rheinhardt, R. D. Smith, and Whigham,
D. 1995. A guidebook for application of hydrogeomorphic assessments to riverine
wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-11, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS. NTIS No. AD A308 365.
Blasland, Bouck and Lee (BBL). 1999. Wetlands map created by BBL based on EDAW, Inc.
1999 Wetland Delineation for Unocal Tank Farm. San Luis Obispo, CA.
California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR). 2005a. California Water Plan Update
2005. California Department of Water Resources. Bulletin 160-05 December 2005.
California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR). 2005b. California Land and Water Use –
Study Area Maps – Detailed Analysis Units. California Department of Water Resources.
Available online at http://www.landwateruse.water.ca.gov/studyarea/maps.cfm. Accessed
6/6/2008.
EDAW, Inc. 1999. Wetland Delineation for Unocal Tank Farm. San Luis Obispo, CA.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
Environmental Laboratory.. 2006. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, Washington, DC
Federal Register. 1986. Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Volume 51,
No. 219; 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in Hydric Soils of the United States. Washington, D.C.
(Hydric soil definition).
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric Soils of the United States. Washington, D.C.
(Hydric Soil Criteria).
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (FNA). 2002. Volume 23. Magnoliophyta:
Commelinidae (in part): Cyperaceae. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Hickman, J. C., ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: higher plants of California. University of
California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. 1400 pp.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-32 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
27
Jenesis. 2003. State Wetland Delineation Report - Unocal’s SLO Tank Farm. San Luis Obispo,
CA.
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Munsell Color, Macbeth Division of
Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., New Windsor, NY.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2002. Climate Information – Wetlands
Retrieval for California. Natural Resource Conservation Service. Web:
http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/cgibin/getwetco.pl?state=ca accessed April 2008.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States, Version 6.0. G.W. Hurt, L.M. Vasilas, editors. United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA), NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for
Hydric Soils, Fort Worth, TX.
Reed, P. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: California Region 0. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88 (26.9).
Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2003-2004. Unocal San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Phase I, II, III
Biological Resources Studies. Union Oil Company of California. San Luis Obispo, CA.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture (NRCS). 2004. Web Soil Survey – San Luis Obispo County, Coastal Part,
Soil Maps Version 1, July 29, 2004. Available online at
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed 6/5/2008.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture (NRCS). 2008. Web Soil Survey – San Luis Obispo County, Coastal Part,
Soil Data Version 4, Jan 2, 2008. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.
Accessed 6/5/2008.
Ted Winfield and Associates. 2001. Letter report and delineation map. Correspondence to Ms.
Tiffany Welsh, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Nov. 29, 2001.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US ACOE). 1992. “Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987
Manual.” 3-92 Memorandum.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. June 5, 2007. Clean
Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v.
United States & Carabell v. United States. Joint memorandum issued June 5, 2007.
Washington, D.C.
United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1979. Soil Survey of San
Luis Obispo County.
Western Region Climate Center (WRCC). 2007. San Luis Obispo Polytech climate data (1971 –
2000). Internet: www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?caslop+sca Accessed November
2007.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-33 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
28
TABLES
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-34 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
29Table 1. Delineations of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands Conducted at the Chevron Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo, California. Source Date Survey Methodology Federal Wetlands (acres) “Other” Waters of the U.S. (acres) “One Parameter” Wetlands (acres) Waters/ Wetlands Supporting Special-Status Species Flags/Electronic Locations – Record? Map? Data Sheets – Delineation? Report? EDAW, Inc. Sacramento, CA 1999 Routine Wetland Delineation based on USACE 1987 Manual 57.2 1.4 -- -- No Yes Yes Yes BBL Santa Barbara, CA 1999/ 2003 Map only – synthesized from EDAW, 1999 No wetland delineation/survey was conducted 57.2 1.4 -- -- No Yes No No Jenesis Avila Beach, CA 2003 “State” Wetland Delineation based on CDFG/USFWS definition 57.2 1.4 18.75 -- No Yes Yes Yes Ted Winfield & Associates Livermore, CA 2001 Re-evaluation of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. based on EDAW, 1999 data/map and site reconnaissance survey to verify isolated wetlands Not Cited*¹ Not Cited*¹ Not Cited*¹ -- No Yes No Yes Rincon Consultants, Inc. San Luis Obispo, CA 2003 Vernal pool fairy shrimp (VPFS) wet/dry season surveys (No wetland delineation was conducted) -- -- -- -- Yes Yes No Yes WSP/Padre Associates, Inc. San Luis Obispo, CA 2007-2008 Routine Wetland Delineation based on USACE 1987 Manual (Wetland delineations were performed in new areas only) 49.0 3.9 3.4 15.82 Yes Yes Yes Yes *¹ The Ted Winfield & Associates letter-report dated November 29, 2001 includes a map depicting the re-evaluation of jurisdictional wetlands; however, the exact acreage of jurisdictional and isolated wetlands is not included in the letter-report. Appendix C: Biological ResourcesC.8-35Chevron Tank Farm EIR
30
Table 2. Waters/Wetland Areas Removed, Adjusted, or Added Based on 2007-2008
Field Observations by WSP/Padre Technical Team, Chevron Tank Farm, San Luis
Obispo, California.
Source Map
Waters/Wetlands
Number or Sample Point
Waters/Wetlands
Removed
Boundary
Adjustment(s)
Waters/Wetlands
Added BBL*¹ Jenesis*² WSP/Padre 1 X X
8 X X
9 X X
11 X X
12 X X
30 X X
34 X X
69 X X
70 X X
71 X X
76 X X
77 X X
78 X X
79 X X
80 X X
81 X X
82 X X
84 X X
85 X X
86 X X
100 X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-36 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
31
Table 2 cont’d.
Source Map
Waters/Wetlands
Number or Sample Point
Waters/Wetlands
Removed
Boundary
Adjustment(s)
Waters/Wetlands
Added BBL*¹ Jenesis*² WSP/ Padre 101 X X
105 X X
109 X X
S-3/4/5 X X
S-12 X X
S-19 X X
Small wetland between S-19
and S-20 X X
S-20 X X
S-23 X X
S-24 X X
S-25 X X
S-28 X X
S-32 X X
S-33 X X
3 X X
4 X X
15 X X
20 X X
24 X X
31 X X
61 X X
85 X X
86 X X
*¹ The BBL map and the Ted Winfield & Associates map (2001) were synthesized from the EDAW, Inc. map
(1999). BBL wetland numbers listed in Table 2 correspond directly to the wetlands on the EDAW, Inc. map and
the Ted Winfield & Associates map, therefore, these maps are not included above.
*² The Jenesis map (2003) labels only sample points (S-19, etc.); each wetland feature is not numbered.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-37 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
32
Table 3. Criteria for Hydric Soils of the United States (Federal Register 2002).
Hydric soil criteria:
1. All Histels except for Folistels, and Histosols except for Folists, or
2. Soils in Aquic suborders, great groups, or subgroups, Albolls suborder, Aquisalids,
Historthels, and Histoturbels great groups, and Cumulic or Pachic subgroups that:
a. are somewhat poorly drained and have a water table at the surface (0.0 feet)
during the growing season, or
b. are poorly drained or very poorly drained and have either:
(1) a water table at the surface (0.0 feet) during the growing season if
textures are coarse sand, sand, or fine sand in all layers within a depth
of 20 inches, or
(2) a water table at a depth of 0.5 foot or less during the growing season if
permeability is equal to or greater than 6.0 in/hr in all layers within a
depth of 20 inches, or
(3) a water table at a depth of 1.0 foot or less during the growing season if
permeability is less than 6.0 in/hr in any layer within a depth of 20
inches, or
3. Soils that are frequently ponded for periods of long or very long duration during the
growing season or,
4. Soils that are frequently flooded for periods of long or very long duration during the
growing season.
Table 4. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service plant indicator status (Reed 1988, 1993).
Indicator Status Definition
Obligate Wetland (OBL) Occur almost always (estimated probability > 99%) under natural
conditions in wetlands.
Facultative Wetland (FACW) Usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67%-99%), but
occasionally found in non-wetlands.
Facultative (FAC) Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated
probability 34%-66%).
Facultative Upland (FACU) Usually occur in non-wetlands, but occasionally found in wetlands
(1%-33%).
Obligate Upland (UPL)
Occur in wetlands in another region, but occur almost always
(estimated probability > 99%) under natural conditions in non-
wetlands in the region specified.
No Indicator Status (NI) Insufficient information exists to assign an indicator status.
Not Listed (NL) Not on the National List in any region.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-38 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
33
Table 5. Summary of the Distribution of Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands and
Other Wetland Features at the Chevron Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo, California.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class
Waters/Wetlands
Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning-glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 1 0.07 X X
2 0.02 X X
3 0.04 X X
4 0.01 X X
5 0.07 X X X X
6 0.02 X X
7 0.04 X X
8 0.04 X X
9 0.30 X X
10 0.02 X X
11 0.05 X X
12 16.33 X X X
13 0.09 X X
14 0.03 X X
15 0.11 X X
16 0.33 X X X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-39 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
34
Table 5. Cont’d.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class
Waters/Wetlands
Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning-glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 17 0.14 X X X X
18 0.09 X X X X
19 0.21 X X X
20 0.00 X X
21 0.23 X X X X
22 0.01 X X X X
23 0.04 X X X X
24 0.01 X X X
25 0.07 X X X X
26 0.09 X X X X
27 0.08 X X X
28 0.02 X X X
29 0.44 X X X X
30 0.44 X X X X
31 0.01 X X
32 0.34 X X X X
33 0.53 X X X X X
34 0.64 X X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-40 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
35
Table 5. Cont’d.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class
Waters/Wetlands
Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning- glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 35 0.05 X X X X
36 0.03 X X X X
37 0.40 X X X X
38 0.21 X X X X
39 0.22 X X X X X
40 0.27 X X
41 0.12 X X
42 2.99 X X X X
43 6.92 X X X X
44 2.35 X X X X X
45 2.03 X X X X
46 0.14 X X X X
47 0.06 X X X X
48 0.00 X X X
49 0.07 X X X
50 1.52 X X X X
51 1.21 X X X X
52 0.18 X X X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-41 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
36
Table 5. Cont’d.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class
Waters/Wetlands
Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning- glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 53 0.98 X X X X
54 2.17 X X X X
55 2.59 X X X
56 0.22 X X X X
57 0.01 X X X
58 0.21 X X X X X X
59 0.23 X X X X
60 0.09 X X X X
61 0.01 X X
62 0.64 X X X
63 0.67 X X X X
64 0.44 X X X
65 1.64 X X X
66 0.07 X X
67 0.03 X X X X
68 0.03 X X X X
69 0.90 X X X X
70 2.76 X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-42 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
37
Table 5. Cont’d.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class
Waters/Wetlands
Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning- glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 71 0.10 X X X X
72 0.38 X X X X
73 0.08 X X
74 0.88 X X X X
75 0.75 X X X X
76 1.83 X X X X X
77 1.27 X X X X
78 0.07 X X X X
79 0.21 X X X X
80 0.47 X X X X
81 1.36 X X X
82 0.49 X X X X
83 4.24 X X X X
84 0.10 X X X X
85 0.05 X X X
86 0.02 X X X X
87 0.01 X X X
88 0.27 X X X X X
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-43 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
38
Table 5. Cont’d.
Waters/Wetlands
HGM*¹ Class Waters/Wetlands Jurisdiction Special-status Species
Wetland
Number
Area
(acres) Slope/Riverine Complex Depression Riverine Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal “Other” Waters” of the U.S. Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Do Support Special Status Species Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Congdon’s tarplant Hoover’s button-celery SLO morning- glory Purple needlegrass South-Central California Coast Steelhead 89 1.81 X X X X
90 0.31 X X X
91 0.06 X X X
92 0.09 X X X X
93 0.21 X X X X
94 0.02 X X
95 0.00 X X
96 0.01 X X
97 0.04 X X
98 0.64 X X
99 3.18 X X X X
100 0.05 X X X
101 0.01 X X
102 0.15 X X
103 0.09 X X
Total
acres: 72.2 31.8 36.5 3.9 49.0 3.9 3.4 15.8 31.1 63.8 1.3 14.5 0.0 3.2
*¹ Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Class (following Brinson, 1993)
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-44 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
39
FIGURES
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-45 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
CHEVRON SLO TANK FARM PROJECT SITE LOCATION
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
(FROM PADRE ASSOCIATES, INC 2007)
FIGURE - 1
42
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-46 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
CHEVRON PROPERTY
AERIAL IMAGE OF CHEVRON SLO TANK FARM PROJECT SITE
(FLIGHT DATE 2-4-08)
FIGURE - 2
43
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-47 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands Mapped by Winfield (2001)Figure - 344Appendix C: Biological ResourcesC.8-48 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Chevron EMC – San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Restoration and Re-development Project
June 2008
Project No.0601-3281
0 450 900 1,350 1,800225
Feet
Legend
United States Geological Blue Line Streams
Ephemeral Flow
Congdon's Tarplant
Hoover's Button Celery
Congdon's Tarplant
Hoover's Button Celery
San Luis Obispo Morning Glory
Waters/Wetlands Under Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Support Special Status Species
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp
Site Boundary
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status
Species
DISTRIBUTION OF PROTECTED PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES WITHIN
WATERS OF THE US INCLUDING WETLANDS
FIGURE - 4
45
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-49 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Chevron EMC – San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Restoration and Re-development Project
June 2008
Project No.0601-3281
0 450 900 1,350 1,800225
Feet
TANK FARM ROAD
3
42
2
8
7
6
9
1011
14 13
12
15
16
17
18
20
19
22
21
24
23
25
27
26
28
70
29
33
32
31
34
30
45
4
Legend
United States Geological Blue Line Streams
Ephemeral Flow
Site Boundary
Waters/Wetlands Under Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Support Special Status Species
43
12
83
55 81
35
36
52
46
4748
49
50
42
56
39
40
41
37
38
89
89
60
62
5351
54
68
67
9290
80
61
88
93
65
66
64
69
63
78
77
91
98
99
84
85 86
94
95
96
100
87
59
58
57
97
75
44
76
74
73
72
71
79
82
99
1
5
101
102
103
42
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status
Species
WATERS OF THE US INCLUDING WETLANDS
FIGURE - 5
46
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-50 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Chevron EMC – San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Restoration and Re-development Project
June 2008
Project No.0601-3281
0 450 900 1,350 1,800225
Feet
Legend
Site Boundary
Riverine Wetlands
Closed Depressional Wetlands
Flow-through Depressional Wetlands
Slope/Riverine Complex
United States Geological Blue Line Streams
Ephemeral Flow
HGM WETLAND CLASSES (FOLLOWING BRINSON, 1993; AND BRINSON et al., 1995)
FIGURE - 6
47
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-51 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Central Coast Hydrologic Region
San Luis Obispo
Hydrologic Subunit
THE CENTRAL COAST HYDROLOGIC REGION AND
SAN LUIS OBISPO HYDROLOGIC SUBUNIT
FIGURE - 7
48
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-52 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
A-11
125.4 Ac
A-5
82.3 Ac
A-2
69.5 Ac
A-1
41.2 Ac
A-9
36.3 Ac
A-26
35.5 AcA-18
33.7 Ac
A-4
31.3 Ac
A-13
24.9 Ac
A-10
19.4 Ac
A-6
14.6 Ac
A-3
13.2 Ac
A-25
12.7 Ac
A-7
11.5 Ac
A-19
7 Ac
A-22
7.2 Ac
A-12
6.6 Ac
A-14
5 Ac
B-4
6.2 Ac
B-1
5.4 Ac
A-8
4 Ac
A-17
10 Ac
A-16
7.8 Ac
A-15
4.9 Ac
B-3
4.2 Ac
A-24
3.6 Ac
B-2
3.3 Ac
A-27
2.8 Ac
A-21
1.3 Ac
A-20
1 Ac A-23
0.5 Ac
S:\GIS\1212_Chevron_Padre_SLOTF\005_Hydrology_Study\ArcMapDocuments\Catchment Map.mxd, 05/27/08
STORM WATER
CATCHMENT AREAS
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON CORPORATION
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STORM WATER CATCHMENT A
STORM WATER CATCHMENT B
OFFSITE CATCHMENT
CLOSED CATCHMENT
0 800 1,600400
Feet
SCALE
STORMWATER CATCHMENT AREAS (AVOCET ENVIRONMENTAL 2007)
FIGURE - 8
49
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-53 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Chevron EMC – San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Restoration and Re-development Project
WATER FLOW DIRECTIONS AMONG WATERS/WETLANDS
CHEVRON TANK FARM, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
FIGURE - 9
Project No.0601-3281
0 450 900 1,350 1,800225
Feet
TANK FARM ROAD
3
42
2
8
7
6
9
1011
14 13
12
15
16
17
18
20
19
22
21
24
23
25
27
26
28
70
29
33
32
31
34
30
45
4
Legend
United States Geological Blue Line Streams
Ephemeral Flow
Site Boundary
Waters/Wetlands Under Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction But Which Support Special Status Species
43
12
83
55 81
35
36
52
46
4748
49
50
42
56
39
40
41
37
38
89
89
60
62
5351
54
68
67
9290
80
61
88
93
65
66
64
69
63
78
77
91
98
99
84
85 86
94
95
96
100
87
59
58
57
97
75
44
76
74
73
72
71
79
82
99
1
5
101
102
103
Water Flow Vector
July 2008
42
Waters/Wetlands Not Under Federal CWA Jurisdiction And Which Do Not Support Special Status Species
Gate Valve
Twin Concrete Cow Pass Culvert
Twin CMP Culverts
Pipe Bubble Up
Plugged Outlet Pipe
6” Iron Culvert
8” Hose Culvert
Headgate
24” Iron Culvert
Cage
Road
Three Stacked Culverts
(24”, 16“ and 16” dia.)
14” Iron Culvert
Headworks/ Gated
Culverts Connecting 98
to San Luis Obispo Creek
Acacia Creek
San Luis Obispo Creek
Gate valve/
Stormwater Drop in
Orcutt Creek
East Branch San Luis
Obispo Creek
4” Iron
Culvert
50
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-54 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
227
TK FARM RD
SANTA FE RDMEISSNER LN
SUBURBAN RD
GRANADA DR
HORIZON LNTANK
F
A
R
M
R
D
ESPERANZA LN221169 1271271271
4
4
197
120
0 1,000 2,000 3,000500
Feet
0 300 600 900150
Meters
MAPPED SOILS FOR THE SLO TANK FARM PROJECT SITE (NRCS 2004)
FIGURE - 10
Soil Map Unit Descriptions
221 = Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes
197 = Salinas silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
169 = Marimel sandy clay loam, occasionally flooded
144 = Gazos - Lodo clay loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes
127 = Cropley clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes
120 = Concepcion loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes
51
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-55 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph 1. SLO Tank Farm project site is primarily open space. This photo looks
southwest across wetland feature #83 (Reservoir 3) toward a line of trees along the East
Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek.
Photograph 2. SLO Tank Farm project site looking eastward along the northern edge of
the North Marsh. Cattle graze throughout the majority of the property.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-56 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 3. Much of the SLO Tank Farm project site is dominated by non-native
forbs and grasses.
Photograph 4. Oxbow located in the south eastern portion of the site is dominated by
scrub/shrub and forested plant communities.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-57 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 5. The East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek is dominated by scrub-shrub or
forest communities along part of the reach within the SLO Tank Farm project
site.
Photograph 6. Depressional wetland (#37) in old tank footprint. Non-native dominants
including cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) are in the foreground.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-58 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 7. North Marsh/ Tank Farm Creek slope/ riverine wetland complex at the
SLO Tank Farm project site.
Photograph 8. Depressional wetland features such as those in foreground persist as a
result of the SLO Tank Farm project site’s long history of ranching and industrial
development.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-59 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 9. The highest elevations on the SLO Tank Farm project site are in the
northeastern portion. The slope grades generally southward and onto valley alluvium.
Photograph 10. Tank Farm Road bisects the SLO Tank Farm project site. Two sets of
culverts convey water southward.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-60 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 11. The old crude oil reservoirs were lined with various materials, and
berms were installed around their perimeters to contain oil if necessary.
Photograph 12. Berms that show the legacy of soil and hydrologic disturbance are
present throughout the SLO Tank Farm project site. Many of these berms are remnants of
historic reservoirs.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-61 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 13. Cattle graze across the majority of the SLO Tank Farm project site. Note
ponding in foreground.
Photograph 14. East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek at the SLO Tank Farm. Native
California walnuts (Juglans californica var. california) are not infrequent along the
adjacent riparian corridor.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-62 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 15. East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek at the SLO Tank Farm. View
looking north.
Photograph 16. Old water control structure in Tank Farm Creek, upgradient of the North
Marsh at the SLO Tank Farm project site.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-63 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 17. Tank Farm Creek in winter 2007 at the SLO Tank Farm project site.
Photograph 18. North Marsh at SLO Tank Farm project site (April 2008). Note
dominance by native rushes (Juncus spp.) and bulrush (Schoenoplectus spp.).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-64 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 19. Twin concrete culverts under Tank Farm Road.
Photograph 20. Headworks at south end of wetland #98 infrequently connect the
southern extent of the SLO Tank Farm site with the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-65 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Photograph 21. Ponding was observed in Reservoir 6 (Wetland #45) in January 2008.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-66 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix A
Correspondence between EDAW and NRCS (1999)
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-67 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-68 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-69 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-70 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-71 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-72 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-73 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-74 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix B
Arid West Manual Datasheets
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-75 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-76 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-77 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-78 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-79 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-80 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-81 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-82 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-83 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-84 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-85 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-86 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-87 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-88 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-89 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix C
Resumes of Principal Scientists
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-90 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Brian G. Dugas
Project Manager/Biologist
EDUCATION:
B.S., Natural Resources Management, College of Agriculture, California
Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1993
Continued education towards M.S., Specialization: Gen. Agriculture, Emphasis:
Fisheries & Wildlife Management, College of Agriculture, Food, and Environmental
Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 2002-2007
CERTIFICATIONS:
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 40-
Hour Hazardous Waste Operations Safety Training.
Cal OSHA, Annual Hazardous Materials/Waste Site Worker 8-Hour Refresher
EXPERIENCE: Mr. Dugas joined Padre Associates in 1998 and has been involved with all aspects of
Padre’s Environmental Science and Planning Group. Mr. Dugas has 13 years of
experience in the environmental field; 11 as an environmental specialist with
emphasis on biological resources impact analysis and 2 as a water quality technician.
His experience includes land use planning involving preparation of environmental
documents consisting of mitigated negative declarations (MND), initial studies,
environmental assessments, monitoring reports, technical reports and environmental
impact reports (EIR) with emphasis on biological resources. Typical job
responsibilities include preliminary site and environmental impact assessment,
development of site-specific mitigation strategies, multi-agency interaction and permit
facilitation. Representative projects include; Conejo Valley Reservoir MND,
Sacramento Central Delta/Phase Two Natural Gas Exploration Seismic Survey MND,
Southern California Edison Mandalay Marine Terminal Decommissioning Project
MND, Avila Beach Community Services District Marine Outfall Repair and Extension
Project MND, and Plains Exploration & Production Phase IV Expansion Project EIR.
Regulatory
Permitting
His experience includes environmental impact assessment and permitting for a variety
of projects including abandonment of offshore marine terminals and associated
onshore pipeline corridors within San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura
Counties. Permitting efforts include consultation with the State Lands Commission,
California Coastal Commission (Coastal Development Permit), Army Corps of
Engineers (404 Permit), Regional Water Quality Control Board (401 Permit), and
California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement). Such
permitting efforts have also included close coordination with other responsible
agencies, including Air Quality Control Districts, National Marine Fisheries Service,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Representative projects include the Chevron-
Aera Flowline Removal Project, Unocal Cojo Marine Terminal Decommissioning
Project, Shell Molino Flowline Removal Project, SCE Mandalay Marine Terminal
Decommissioning Project, Texaco Hollister Ranch Pipeline Abandonment Project,
Avila Beach Community Services District Marine Outfall Repair and Extension Project,
Duke Energy Morro Bay Marine Terminal Decommissioning Project, and the Chevron
Estero Bay Marine Terminal Decommissioning Project.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-91 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Biological
Surveys
Mr. Dugas has also conducted multiple biological studies consisting of riparian
habitat assessments, wetland delineations, oak tree surveys, rare plant surveys,
rapid bioassessments, and special-status wildlife species surveys. Such activities
have included the preparation of site-specific restoration plans and implementation
and monitoring of numerous restoration projects of wetland, coastal dune, coastal
scrub and desert scrub native plant habitats. Typical job responsibilities included
site analysis, site preparation and the collection of site-specific plant and seed
material. In addition, Mr. Dugas conducted exotic species eradication, planting
and seeding of restoration areas, and annual performance criteria monitoring.
Recent representative projects include a resource inventory for the City of
Carpinteria Creeks Preservation Program, Unocal Point Conception Facilities
Biological Assessment, Revegetation Plans for the Shell Molino East Slope and
Nearshore Work Areas, Plains Exploration & Production Phase IV Expansion
Project, Tank Farm Road Safety & Operational Improvements Project NES, and
Wetland Assessment, and the River Road Bridge Replacement Project.
Biological
Monitoring
Mr. Dugas has also provided mitigation monitoring services on numerous large-scale
construction projects. Job responsibilities include daily monitoring and documentation
of construction activities to ensure compliance with project specific conditions of
approval, notifying project foreman or responsible individual of non-compliance issues
and subsequent corrective measures and weekly reporting to regulatory agencies and
local governmental bodies. Representative projects include the Unocal/Guadalupe
Beach A2A Emergency Remediation Project, which involved daily monitoring of the
project site for biologically sensitive species, such as the federally listed, threatened
California red-legged frog and western snowy plover. Mr. Dugas participated as a
biological monitor during the City of Thousand Oaks - Unit W & Unit F Sewer
Interceptor Reconstruction Project. Job responsibilities included fish rescue and
relocation of special-status reptiles during construction activities. Mr. Dugas also
performed biological monitoring on behalf of the County of San Luis Obispo during the
Chevron Rio-Bravo Pipeline Pigging Operation. Daily responsibilities included pre-
activity surveys for San Joaquin kit fox dens and relocation of wildlife trapped within
pipeline excavation areas. In summary, Mr. Dugas has conducted numerous protocol
level and/or pre-construction surveys for the following species: Calif. red-legged frog,
San Joaquin kit fox, arroyo toad, southwestern pond turtle, two-striped garter snake,
Calif. tiger salamander, steelhead, tidewater goby, and western snowy plover.
SUPPLEMENTAL
TRAINING:
San Luis Obispo County, San Joaquin Kit Fox Habitat Evaluation Workshop, 2006
AEP CEQA Workshop Series, San Luis Obispo, March 2005
Salmonid Restoration Federation and Urban Streams Conference, March 2003
Practical Streambank Restoration Workshop, NRCS, April 8, 2003
California Red-Legged Frog Workshop, Sacramento-Shasta Chapter of the Wildlife
Society, Presented by: Norman J. Scott and Galen B. Rathbun, April 8-10, 2002
California Fish Passage Workshop, Consortium of Governmental Agencies, 2001
AFFILIATIONS Morro Coast Audubon Society
Central Coast Biological Society
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-92 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Resume
JPeak Padre Resume_March08.doc - 1 -
Jessica K. Peak
Staff Biologist
EDUCATION: B.S. Botany and Environmental Biology, Humboldt State
University, 2003
CERTIFICATIONS/
WORKSHOPS:
California Division Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 40-
Hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Safety Training
Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation & Management Training Program
Alameda County Conservation Partnership Contra Costa Water District, Los
Vaqueros Reservoir & Watershed Workshop on Biology and Management of the
California red-legged frog
EXPERIENCE: Ms. Peak joined Padre Associates, Inc. in August 2006. As a Staff Biologist, she
has been involved in many aspects of the Environmental Sciences and Planning
Group. Ms Peak has over 5 years of field experience conducting biological
surveys and environmental assessments. Ms. Peak’s job responsibilities include
biological resources surveys, development of site-specific mitigation strategies,
biological and construction monitoring activities such as pre-construction
biological surveys, pre-construction worker environmental training sessions,
restoration and mitigation monitoring, multi-agency interaction, and permit
facilitation. Associated with these tasks she has prepared biological and
botanical resources assessments, constraints analyses, mitigation monitoring
reports, site-specific mitigation and restoration plans, construction monitoring
plans, and has been involved in preparation of environmental impact reports
(EIR) with emphasis on biological resources..
BIOLOGICAL
STUDIES:
Ms. Peak has conducted numerous botanical and biological resources surveys
such as special-status/rare plant surveys, special-status wildlife surveys,
vegetation mapping, habitat assessments, oak tree surveys, and routine wetland
delineations. Activities include site analysis, preparation and implementation of
restoration projects for native plant habitats and rare plant species, site
preparation and seed collection, permit facilitation, and success criteria
monitoring. Recent representative projects include Chevron EMC San Luis
Obispo Tank Farm Remediation and Redevelopment Project, Morro Bay Marina
Renovation Project, Plains Exploration and Production Produced Water
Reclamation Facility Project, San Luis Obispo County Women’s Jail Expansion
Project, Roadhouse Development Bank Stabilization Project, Nipomo
Community Services District Waterline Intertie Project, Chevron EMC Cojo/Point
Conception Decommissioning Project, and the Oak Creek Estates Development
Project.
BIOLOGICAL &
CONSTRUCTION
MONITORING:
Ms. Peak has also conducted environmental monitoring for multiple development
projects. Typical job responsibilities include daily monitoring and documentation
of construction activities to ensure compliance with project specifications and
conditions of approval, interaction with job foreman to remedy any non-
compliance issues, and weekly reporting to regulatory agencies and local
government departments. Recent representative projects include Edna Valley
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-93 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Resume
JPeak Padre Resume_March08.doc - 2 -
Estates Development Project, Valle Vista Development Project, Oak Shores
Estates Development Project, and Exxon/Mobil Venadito Canyon Storm
Damage Repair Project.
PRIOR WORK
EXPERIENCE:
Prior to joining Padre Associates, Ms. Peak served as the associate botanist for
LBJ Enterprises in Eureka, California from September 2004 to August 2006.
There she conducted various botanical and biological surveys in and around
Humboldt, Mendocino, and Trinity Counties. Typical job responsibilities included
rare and endangered plant surveys, ethnobotanical surveys, routine wetland
delineations, and terrestrial mollusk surveys.
Ms. Peak served as field botanist during the 2004 field season for the Lake
Tahoe Urban Biodiversity Project in South Lake Tahoe, California conducting
botanical surveys in and around the Lake Tahoe Basin. Typical duties included
performing line-intercept surveys, percent cover analyses, and evaluation of
forest physiognomy. She also served as a restoration crew intern for the
California Tahoe Conservancy in South Lake Tahoe in the fall of 1999. Her
duties on the restoration crew included soil erosion control, stream environment
zones and watershed restoration, re-vegetation, and restoration of public and
recreational areas.
In addition to field experience Ms. Peak worked as a greenhouse assistant at the
Humboldt State Biological Sciences Greenhouse in 2002 and 2003. Duties
included care and preservation of a large variety of plant species from around
the world and overall general maintenance of the greenhouse.
Ms. Peak has also participated in international field studies, completing a
Tropical Ethnobotany course at the Institute for Tropical Ecology and
Conservation, Bocas del Toro, Panama, in 2005.
PROFESSIONAL
AFFLIATIONS:
California Native Plant Society
California Society for Ecological Restoration
California Native Grasslands Association
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-94 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
WSP Environment & Energy 2324 Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 505
Seattle, WA 98102
Tel: 206.284.7402 Email: lyndon.lee@wspgroup.com
http://www.wspenvironmental.com
Lyndon C. Lee, Ph.D., PWS
Principal Ecologist & Vice President
Ecosystem Science & Natural Resources
Management Services
Professional Experience
Lyndon C. Lee is Principal Ecologist/Vice President with WSP
Environment & Energy (WSP). In his current capacity, Lyndon co-
leads the Ecosystem Science & Natural Resources Management
group (ESNRM) for WSP. ESNRM includes several senior
scientists who have a great deal of applied national and
international experience. ESNRM specializes in wetland and river
science, conservation biology, design/build approaches to
ecosystem restoration, regulatory assistance, and training. In
addition to waters/wetlands, ESNRM focuses its operations in
many different types of ecosystems including forests, grasslands,
riparian areas, urban landscapes, brownfields, and other
contaminated sites.
Prior to joining WSP (February, 2007), Lyndon worked as the
Senior Ecosystem Ecologist for Entrix, Inc. (2006) and as Principal
Ecologist & Vice President for BBL/Arcadis (2005-2006). During
the period 1989 – 2004, he served as Principal Ecologist and
President of L.C. Lee & Associates, Inc. (LCLA) and Director of
the National Wetland Science Training Cooperative. LCLA was a
small environmental consulting firm that specialized in river and
wetland science, regulatory assistance, and training throughout the
U.S.
From 1986 to 1989, Lyndon served as the Senior Wetland
Ecologist for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Headquarters Office of Wetlands Protection, Washington, D.C.
During this time, he was involved directly with the formulation and
application of national waters/wetlands policy, applied research,
and regulatory/enforcement procedures. At EPA, Dr. Lee directed a
national team of EPA technical and regulatory experts who dealt with top priority
waters/wetland issues throughout the U.S. He also served as the liaison from the Office of
Wetlands Protection to the EPA Superfund and RCRA programs. During his tenure at EPA,
Dr. Lyndon C. Lee came to WSP after
working in wetland, river, and forested
ecosystems, soil science, and wildlife ecology
for 30 years. Currently, his interests are
focused on responses of wetland, river, and
forested ecosystems to perturbation;
assessment of site-specific and cumulative
impacts to waters/wetland ecosystem
functions; design and construction of
waters/wetlands ecosystem restorations; and
management of the movement and fate of
contaminants in waters/wetlands ecosystems.
Education
• Ph.D. - Ecosystem Ecology with a focus
on River & Wetland Science, 1983,
University of Washington
• M.S. - Forest Ecology/Silviculture, 1979,
University of Montana
• B.S. - Forest Ecology/Botany, 1974,
Tufts University and the University of
Montana
Registrations
• Society of Wetland Scientists -
Professional Wetland Scientist (#000385
- Since 1995)
• Certified Sediment And Erosion Control
Lead
• Certified Hazwoper
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-95 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Lyndon led the team that produced a landmark study of cumulative impacts to bottomland
hardwood forests of the southeastern U.S. He also founded the National Wetland Science
Training Cooperative, which he has continued to run since leaving EPA.
Lyndon came to EPA from the University of Georgia Institute of Ecology, Savannah River
Ecology Laboratory (SREL), Aiken, South Carolina. During the interval 1984 – 1986, he was
the Research Manager of the SREL Division of Wetlands Ecology where he managed SREL’s
wetland research programs at the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Nuclear Facility
and National Environmental Research Park. Savannah River is a principal production site for
weapons-grade plutonium and many other radionuclides. SREL’s research focused on (a)
assessment and monitoring of the effects of radionuclide production on riverine wetland
ecosystems, (b) management of the movement and fate of radionuclide, heavy metal and
organic contaminants in waters/wetlands, and (c) restoration of wetland and river ecosystems
degraded by chronic thermal and/or contaminant inputs.
While pursuing his graduate degrees, Lyndon spent six years researching the structure and
functioning of riverine waters/wetlands and riparian forested ecosystems throughout the Pacific
Northwest and Northern Rocky Mountain regions. He focused on interactions among physical
and geochemical processes and development of the structure and functioning of floodplain and
riparian plant communities. Between his Master’s and Ph.D. programs, (1977 – 1980) he worked
as one of two Senior Habitat Ecologists for the Interagency Grizzly Team's Border Grizzly
Project, Montana Forest and Range Conservation Experiment Station, Missoula, Montana. There
he developed, conducted, and supervised research dealing with the definition, description,
classification, protection, and restoration of grizzly bear and grey wolf habitat throughout the
northern Rocky Mountains, southeastern British Columbia, and in northern Chihuahua, Mexico.
Lyndon placed particular emphasis on waters/wetlands ecosystems as essential components of
critical habitat for endangered bears and other wide-ranging carnivores.
The scope of Lyndon’s consulting experience over the last 18 years has taken him to all areas of
the U.S., Canada, Europe, Japan, and many Pacific and Caribbean islands. He has completed
more than 125 contracts with federal, state, and local government agencies, private industry,
research and conservation organizations, and private landowners. Dr. Lee has focused most of his
efforts on the (a) application of science to the design and construction of large and small wetland
and river restoration projects, and the (b) development and implementation of practical
silvicultural and land-use management programs for wetlands and riverine ecosystems. Currently
Lyndon’s technical and applied interests are focused on responses of wetland, river, and forested
ecosystems to perturbation, assessment of site-specific and cumulative impacts to waters/wetland
ecosystems, design and construction of waters/wetlands ecosystem restorations, and management
of the movement and fate of contaminants in waters/wetlands ecosystems.
In addition to his technical and applied work, Lyndon continues to work as a national expert on
the federal Clean Water Act jurisdictional and functional assessment issues as they relate to
management of waters/wetlands. In this capacity, his emphasis always has been on the
application of science to federal, state, and local programs that focus on protection of aquatic
ecosystems. He has a great deal of experience in U.S. federal regulatory and enforcement
procedures, assessment of impacts to waters/wetlands ecosystems, and training of others in all of
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-96 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
the above. For example, since 1993, Lyndon has been one of the principal architects responsible
for development and implementation of the “Hydrogeomorphic Approach” (HGM) for
assessment of waters/wetlands ecosystem functions. In this regard, he has extensive practical
knowledge of ecological modelling, and application of science to regulatory, enforcement, and
restoration programs. Further, since 1989, Lyndon has served as a lead expert and technical team
leader for the National Resources Conservation Service, and the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) - Environment and Natural Resources Division. Working with DOJ, Lee has helped win or
settle eight major Clean Water Act cases that have been argued in three Districts of U.S. federal
court, two circuit courts of appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Lyndon has been active in teaching and training throughout his career. He held the position of
Assistant Research Professor at the University of Georgia's Institute of Ecology while working at
the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory and at EPA Headquarters. He has also served as an
Adjunct Assistant Professor at both the University of South Carolina and George Mason University.
While at the universities of Washington and Montana, Dr. Lee taught or assisted in teaching a
variety of forestry and natural resource management courses. He also served as a principal
instructor for the Montana Forest Habitat Type Short Courses, sponsored by the U.S. Forest Service
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Since 1987, Dr. Lee has led over 100
training courses for EPA and several other federal, state, and local agencies and organizations
through the National Wetland Science Training Cooperative.
Lyndon is an active member of the scientific community. He has published two books, more than
30 refereed professional papers, and over 150 technical reports. He has presented more than 50
oral papers and seminars at professional meetings and conferences. He edited the Bulletin and
served on the National Board of Directors of the Society of Wetland Scientists (SWS) for seven
years. Lyndon co-founded the “SWS Student Awards Program” and endowment, and served as
the Program Chairman for two national SWS meetings (Seattle, 1987 and Washington, D.C.,
1988). In 1992, Dr. Lee was awarded Life Membership in the Society of Wetland Scientists. In
1995, he earned certification as a Professional Wetlands Scientist (#385). In addition to SWS,
Lyndon is member of standing in the Society For Ecological Restoration (SER) and American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-97 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
WSP Environment & Energy
160 Franklin Street, Suite 300 Oakland, CA 94607 Tel: 510.208.3715
Email: peggy.fiedler@wspgroup.com
http://www.wspenvironmental.com
Peggy L. Fiedler, Ph.D., PWS
Principal Botanist/Conservation Ecologist &
Co-Director, Ecosystem Science & Natural Resources
Management Services
Professional Experience
Peggy L. Fiedler, Ph.D. is Principal Botanist/Conservation
Biologist and Co-Director of the Ecosystem Science &
Natural Resources Management Services Group (ESNRM).
Dr. Fiedler is recognized internationally as an expert in
conservation science, rare plant biology and on the genus
Calochortus (Liliaceae). Her primary research has focused on
the demography, evolution, and systematics of Calochortus,
in particular, and the biology and phylogeny of its rare
species. She has coauthored treatments of this genus for the
Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California (Hickman 1993),
the Flora of North America (2002), and the second edition of
the Jepson Manual (in press). More recently, Dr. Fiedler has
spent the last two decades researching the population biology
and life history characteristics of a variety rare wetland plants
in the San Francisco Bay and Golden Gate Estuary.
In addition to her rare plant expertise, Dr. Fiedler is a
recognized expert in California wetlands science. Under the
auspices of the USEPA, Dr. Fiedler, along with two
collaborators in California, developed a methodology for the
classification and description of wetlands in the coastal
watersheds of central and southern California. This work
represents the first comprehensive inventory of wetlands in a
discrete biogeographic province of the state, and serves as a
model for wetland ecologists interested in documenting and
protecting the rich wetland heritage of California. Under a
second USEPA grant, Dr. Fiedler extended this methodology
in draft form to seasonal (vernal) waters/wetlands ecosystems
in the state. With her students from San Francisco State
University (and subsequently), Dr. Fiedler has spent over 15
years researching Mason’s lilaeopsis (Lilaeopsis masonii
[Apiaceae]), a rare plant endemic to the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta and Golden Gate Estuary ecosystems. In the
early 1990s, she authored a plant identification book on
common wetland plants for the Great Valley, published by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Sacramento
District.
Dr. Peggy L. Fiedler came to WSP after
working in plant ecology and systematics and
wetlands science for over 25 years. Her
primary research has focused on the
demography, evolution, and systematics of
Calochortus, in particular, and the biology
and phylogeny of its rare species. Her current
interests are focused on understanding
landscape level processes that generate and
maintain species richness in mega diverse
floras and applying this knowledge to the
design of plant community types for
ecosystem restoration, applying population
viability models and metapopulation theory
to the reintroduction of rare plant species,
understanding demographic patterns of rare
plants, including hybrid taxa, and improving
monitoring protocols for ecosystem
restoration.
Education
B.A., cum laude, 1976, Harvard
University, Social Anthropology
(Ethnobotany) (departmental
honors magna cum laude)
M.S., 1980, University of California,
Berkeley, Wildland Resource
Science (Plant Ecology)
Ph.D., 1985, University of California,
Berkeley Wildland Resource
Science (Plant Evolutionary
Ecology)
Registrations
• Professional Wetland Scientist,
Registration #016371
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-98 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Prior to joining WSP Environment & Energy, Dr. Fiedler served as principal scientist at
Entrix, Inc. (2006-2007), BBL (2004-2006), and at L.C. Lee & Associates, Inc. (LCLA), a
small private consulting firm that specialized in waters/wetlands ecosystem restoration,
regulatory assistance, and training. While at LCLA, she managed the design and permitting
of several large, high-profile waters/wetlands restoration projects in the San Francisco Bay
Area. The majority of the projects involved the restoration of riverine wetlands and
associated riparian ecosystems. All projects included restoring habitat for endangered species
(e.g., California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, California tiger salamander, and
steelhead). She was also engaged as a botanical consultant on a ecosystem restoration
projects in the Pacific Northwest (including Alaska) and the New England States. Additional
responsibilities at LCLA included providing expert testimony, development of
monitoring/adaptive management plans, client liaison, project development, and staff
management.
Between 1987 and 2000, Dr. Fiedler served on the faculty of the Biology Department as a
conservation biologist and plant evolutionary ecologist. She taught undergraduate and
graduate courses in conservation biology as well as courses in general biology, plant ecology,
systematic biology, organic evolution, ethnobotany, and population modeling. Dr. Fiedler
also directed the graduate program in conservation biology, the first masters’ degree program
of its kind in the nation. Dr. Fiedler resigned as full professor in fall 2000.
In 1998, Dr. Fiedler received a Fulbright Senior Scholar Fellowship for collaborative research
at Kings Park and Botanic Garden in Perth, Western Australia (now the Botanic Garden and
Parks Authority). She spent six months in Western Australia working on the genus
Anigozanthos (Haemodoraceae) as a model for understanding the demographic behavior of
interspecific hybridization. Prior to her Fulbright fellowship, Dr. Fiedler traveled to Perth in
1985 as a guest speaker at the Fifth International Botanic Gardens Conservation Congress,
and in 1983, to Trondheim, Norway, to speak at the United Nations/Norway Conference on
Biodiversity. She has lectured nationally at a wide variety of venues as an invited speaker; for
example, the Center for Plant Conservation conferences on rare plants (St. Louis [1993],
Chicago [1999]), Ecological Society of America Symposium on Rare/Common Species
(Knoxville [1994]), Institute of Ecosystem Studies Cary Conference (Millbrook [1995]),
California Academy of Sciences Fellows Day (San Francisco [1989]), and at a variety of
universities, including Stanford, University of California, Berkeley, and Colorado State
University.
Dr. Fiedler is an active member of the conservation scientific community. She has published
more than 50 journal articles, book chapters, taxonomic treatments, and technical reports. She
has also edited two volumes on conservation biology published by Chapman & Hall, New
York (1992. Conservation Biology. The Theory and Practice of Nature Conservation,
Preservation, and Management. [with S.K. Jain] and Conservation Biology. For the Coming
Decade. [1998, with P.M. Kareiva]). Dr. Fiedler also wrote a popular science book entitled
Rare Lilies of California, illustrated by C. Watters and published by the California Native
Plant Society (1996). She served as President of the California Botanical Society from 1993-
94, and as a board member from 1987-88 and 1995-97. Dr. Fiedler also served on the
editorial board for the international journal Biological Conservation from 1992 - 1998
(Associate Editor 1992-95). Currently she is Associate Editor for book reviews for the
Society of Conservation Biology’s journal, Conservation Biology, a position she has held
since 2000. In 1992, Dr. Fiedler was inducted as a Fellow of the California Academy of
Sciences. In 1995, she received the Larry Heckard Fellowship at the Jepson Herbarium at the
University of California Berkeley and was a nominee for the Pew Fellowship in Conservation
and the Environment in 1995.
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-99 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Appendix D
Coordinate Location of Waters/Wetlands Under
Federal Jurisdiction
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-100 Chevron Tank Farm EIR
Federal Wetland No.Area (sq ft)Acreage Latitude Longitude
9 12905.14 0.30 1207994.63149 646805.214794
10 1006.30 0.02 1208412.63159 646781.846674
11 2369.63 0.05 1208151.41645 646799.332055
12 711264.34 16.33 1206327.54818 646778.252617
23 1812.63 0.04 1206730.57558 646754.074389
29 19353.66 0.44 1205720.73787 646854.947623
30 19067.82 0.44 1205309.13205 646898.488807
31 544.45 0.01 1205328.66325 647193.269558
32 14678.79 0.34 1205304.02449 647354.429156
33 23303.66 0.53 1205421.11213 647482.027836
34 27677.49 0.64 1205025.13761 647506.941267
34 27677.49 0.64 1205076.61912 647220.475129
34 27677.49 0.64 1205073.99888 647068.752609
34 27677.49 0.64 1205093.00729 647304.712878
35 2205.22 0.05 1205003.84771 647362.461219
36 1277.49 0.03 1204958.60999 647214.747563
37 13947.09 0.32 1204932.19620 646946.337995
37 3572.29 0.08 1204853.00525 646849.909093
38 9062.77 0.21 1205177.36353 647008.968041
38 9062.77 0.21 1205168.73611 647098.048338
38 9062.77 0.21 1205207.43895 647077.831229
39 9713.70 0.22 1205297.08388 646710.460701
40 11784.24 0.27 1205453.31757 646384.303112
41 5441.54 0.12 1205400.46991 646297.127362
42 130288.55 2.99 1205027.66877 645669.658513
43 301243.23 6.92 1205012.39641 644418.447710
44 102378.78 2.35 1205322.50418 644551.757478
48 169.21 0.00 1204924.19122 645199.243735
49 2921.55 0.07 1204933.28581 645293.577671
50 66162.96 1.52 1205207.65971 645502.605707
51 52783.50 1.21 1205225.39619 645318.752034
53 42486.19 0.98 1205660.52668 645272.350923
54 94332.54 2.17 1205670.58493 645477.896106
55 113030.24 2.59 1205833.20230 645808.729053
56 9450.32 0.22 1205516.24594 645984.254966
57 625.67 0.01 1206137.43773 645875.122313
58 9216.31 0.21 1206198.80858 645986.439719
63 7331.19 0.17 1206493.75481 645756.209030
65 71527.66 1.64 1206155.77444 645428.618450
74 38157.77 0.88 1206600.70816 644182.348030
75 32785.36 0.75 1207208.81814 644182.548508
76 79598.34 1.83 1206641.04072 644801.646160
89 79056.73 1.81 1208381.38023 645695.842412
93 8996.99 0.21 1209484.92288 645930.334271
94 1003.76 0.02 1208269.72035 645041.538818
95 67.55 0.00 1208190.41700 645207.418391
96 294.04 0.01 1207997.46303 645212.141675
97 1840.63 0.04 1207990.08516 644890.508626
98 27927.43 0.64 1207386.70887 644111.499335
99 138545.86 1.72 1208296.68253 644753.109753
Appendix C: Biological Resources
C.8-101 Chevron Tank Farm EIR