Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 3.4
Biological Resources ForthepurposeofthisEIR,biologicalresourcescomprisevegetation,wildlife,naturalcommunities,
andwetlandsandotherwaters.Potentialbiologicalresourceimpactsassociatedwiththeprogram
andthetwoindividualprojectsareanalyzed.Potentialimpactsaredescribedquantitativelyand
qualitativelyinSection3.4.2,EnvironmentalImpacts.Thissectionalsoidentifiesspecificand
detailedmeasurestoavoid,minimize,orcompensateforpotentiallysignificantimpactsonbiological
resources,wherenecessary.
3.4.1
Existing Conditions Regulatory Setting Federal Endangered Species Act PursuanttothefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct(ESA),USFWSandtheNationalMarineFisheries
Service(NMFS)haveauthorityoverprojectsthatmayresultintakeofaspecieslistedasthreatened
orendangeredundertheact.TakeisdefinedundertheESA,inpart,askilling,harming,orharassing.
Underfederalregulations,takeisfurtherdefinedtoincludehabitatmodificationordegradationthat
results,orisreasonablyexpectedtoresult,indeathorinjurytowildlifebysignificantlyimpairing
essentialbehavioralpatterns,includingbreeding,feeding,orsheltering.Ifalikelihoodexiststhata
projectwouldresultintakeofafederallylistedspecies,eitheranincidentaltakepermit,under
Section10(a)oftheESA,orafederalinteragencyconsultation,underSection7oftheESA,is
required.Severalfederallylistedspecies—vernalpoolfairyshrimp(Branchinectalynchi),longhorn
fairyshrimp(Branchinectalongiantenna),vernalpooltadpoleshrimp(Lepiduruspackardi),
Californiatigersalamander(Ambystomacaliforniense),Californiared‐leggedfrog(Ranadraytonii),
Alamedawhipsnake(Masticophislateraliseuryxanthus),andSanJoaquinkitfox(Vulpesmacrotis
mutica)—havethepotentialtobeaffectedbyactivitiesassociatedwiththeGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectsaswellassubsequentrepoweringprojects.Accordingly,suchprojectswould
requireconsultationwithUSFWSasdescribedabove.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act TheFishandWildlifeCoordinationAct,asamendedin1964,wasenactedtoprotectfishandwildlife
whenfederalactionsresultinthecontrolormodificationofanaturalstreamorbodyofwater.The
statuterequiresfederalagenciestotakeintoconsiderationtheeffectthatwater‐relatedprojects
wouldhaveonfishandwildliferesources.ConsultationandcoordinationwithUSFWSandthe
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife(CDFW)arerequiredtoaddresswaystopreventlossof
anddamagetofishandwildliferesources,andtofurtherdevelopandimprovetheseresources.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act TheMigratoryBirdTreatyAct(MBTA)domesticallyimplementsaseriesofinternationaltreaties
thatprovideformigratorybirdprotection.TheMBTAauthorizestheSecretaryoftheInteriorto
regulatethetakingofmigratorybirds.Theactfurtherprovidesthatitisunlawful,exceptas
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐1 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency permittedbyregulations,“topursue,take,orkillanymigratorybird,oranypart,nestoreggofany
suchbird…”(16USC703).Thisprohibitionincludesbothdirectandindirectacts,although
harassmentandhabitatmodificationarenotincludedunlesstheyresultindirectlossofbirds,nests,
oreggs.ThecurrentlistofspeciesprotectedbytheMBTAcanbefoundintheMarch1,2010Federal
Register(75FR9281).Thislistcomprisesseveralhundredspecies,includingessentiallyallnative
birds.Permitsfortakeofnongamemigratorybirdscanbeissuedonlyforspecificactivities,suchas
scientificcollecting,rehabilitation,propagation,education,taxidermy,andprotectionofhuman
healthandsafetyandofpersonalproperty.USFWSpublishesalistofbirdsofconservationconcern
(BCC)toidentifymigratorynongamebirdsthatarelikelytobecomecandidatesforlistingunderESA
withoutadditionalconservationactions.TheBCClistisintendedtostimulatecoordinatedand
collaborativeconservationeffortsamongfederal,state,tribal,andprivateparties.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act TheBaldandGoldenEagleProtectionAct(BGEPA)(16USC668)prohibitstakeanddisturbanceof
individualsandnests.Takepermitsforbirdsorbodypartsarelimitedtoreligious,scientific,or
falconrypursuits.However,theBGEPAwasamendedin1978toallowminingdeveloperstoapplyto
USFWSforpermitstoremoveinactivegoldeneagle(Aquilachrysaetos)nestsinthecourseof
“resourcedevelopmentorrecovery”operations.Withthe2007removalofbaldeaglefromtheESA
listofthreatenedandendangeredspecies,USFWSissuednewregulationstoauthorizethelimited
takeofbaldeagles(Haliaeetusleucocephalus)andgoldeneaglesundertheBGEPA,wherethetaketo
beauthorizedisassociatedwithotherwiselawfulactivities.AfinalEaglePermitRulewaspublished
onSeptember11,2009(74FR46836–46879;50CFR22.26).
Apermitauthorizeslimited,non‐purposefultakeofbaldeaglesandgoldeneagles,andcanbe
appliedforbyindividuals,companies,governmentagencies(includingtribalgovernments),and
otherorganizationstoallowdisturbanceoforotherwisetakeeaglesinthecourseofconducting
lawfulactivities,suchasoperatingutilitiesandairports.UnderBGEPA,takeisdefinedas“pursue,
shoot,shootat,poison,wound,kill,capture,trap,collect,destroy,molestordisturb.”Disturbis
definedintheregulationsas“toagitateorbotherabaldorgoldeneagletoadegreethatcauses,oris
likelytocause,basedonthebestscientificinformationavailable:(1)injurytoaneagle;(2)a
decreaseinitsproductivity,bysubstantiallyinterferingwithnormalbreeding,feeding,orsheltering
behavior;or(3)nestabandonment,bysubstantiallyinterferingwithnormalbreeding,feeding,or
shelteringbehavior.”Mostpermitsissuedunderthenewregulationsauthorizedisturbance.In
limitedcases,apermitmayauthorizethephysicaltakeofeagles,butonlyifeveryprecautionisfirst
takentoavoidphysicaltake.
USFWSissuedtheEagleConservationPlanGuidance(ECPGuidance)intendedtoassistpartiesto
avoid,minimize,andmitigateadverseeffectsonbaldandgoldeneagles(U.S.FishandWildlife
Service2013).TheEagleGuidancecallsforscientificallyrigoroussurveys,monitoring,assessment,
andresearchdesignsproportionatetotherisktoeagles.TheEagleGuidancedescribesaprocessby
whichwindenergydeveloperscancollectandanalyzeinformationthatcouldleadtoa
programmaticpermittoauthorizeunintentionaltakeofeaglesatwindenergyfacilities.USFWS
recommendsthateagleconservationplansbedevelopedinfivestages.Eachstagebuildsonthe
priorstage,suchthattogethertheprocessisaprogressive,increasinglyintensivelookatlikely
effectsoneaglesofthedevelopmentandoperationofaparticularsiteandconfiguration.Additional
refinementstotheEagleGuidanceareexpectedatsomepointinthefuture.Todate,no
programmaticeagletakepermitshavebeenissuedbyUSFWS.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐2 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Clean Water Act WetlandsandotherwatersoftheUnitedStatesareprotectedunderSection404oftheCleanWater
Act(CWA).Anyactivitythatinvolvesanydischargeofdredgedorfillmaterialintowatersofthe
UnitedStates,includingwetlands,issubjecttoregulationbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers
(USACE).WatersoftheUnitedStatesisdefinedtoencompassnavigablewatersoftheUnitedStates;
interstatewaters;allotherwaterswheretheiruse,degradation,ordestructioncouldaffect
interstateorforeigncommerce;tributariesofanyofthesewaters;andwetlandsthatmeetanyof
thesecriteriaorareadjacenttoanyofthesewatersortheirtributaries.Wetlandsaredefinedunder
Section404asthoseareasthatareinundatedorsaturatedbysurfacewaterorgroundwaterata
frequencyanddurationsufficienttosupport,andthatundernormalcircumstancesdosupport,a
prevalenceofvegetationtypicallyadaptedforlifeinsaturatedsoilconditions.Jurisdictional
wetlandsmustmeetthreewetlanddelineationcriteria.

Theysupporthydrophyticvegetation(i.e.,plantsthatgrowinsaturatedsoil).

Theyhavehydricsoiltypes(i.e.,soilsthatarewetormoistenoughtodevelopanaerobic
conditions).

Theyhavewetlandhydrology(i.e.,conditionsofflooding,inundation,orsaturationthatsupport
wetlandcommunities).
Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands ExecutiveOrder11990(May24,1977)establishedtheprotectionofwetlandsandripariansystems
astheofficialpolicyofthefederalgovernment.Theexecutiveorderrequiresallfederalagenciesto
considerwetlandprotectionasanimportantpartoftheirpolicies;takeactiontominimizethe
destruction,loss,ordegradationofwetlands;andpreserveandenhancethenaturalandbeneficial
valuesofwetlands.
Federal Noxious Weed Act and Code of Federal Regulations (Title 7, Part 360) Theselawsandregulationsareprimarilyconcernedwiththeintroductionoffederallydesignated
noxiousweedplantsorseedsacrosstheUnitedStates’internationalborders.TheFederalNoxious
WeedAct(7USC2801–2813)alsoregulatestheinterstatemovementofdesignatednoxiousweeds
undertheU.S.DepartmentofAgriculture’spermitsystem.
Executive Order 11312: Invasive Species ExecutiveOrder11312(February3,1999)directsallfederalagenciestopreventandcontrolthe
introductionandspreadofinvasivenonnativespeciesinacost‐effectiveandenvironmentallysound
mannertominimizetheireffectsoneconomic,ecological,andhumanhealth.Theexecutiveorder
wasintendedtobuilduponexistinglaws,suchasNEPA,theNonindigenousAquaticNuisance
PreventionandControlAct,theLaceyAct,thePlantPestAct,theFederalNoxiousWeedAct,and
ESA.TheexecutiveorderestablishedanationalInvasiveSpeciesCouncilcomposedoffederal
agenciesanddepartments,aswellasasupportingInvasiveSpeciesAdvisoryCommitteecomposed
ofstate,local,andprivateentities.Thecouncilandadvisorycommitteeoverseeandfacilitate
implementationoftheexecutiveorder,includingpreparationoftheNationalInvasiveSpecies
ManagementPlan.Federalactivitiesaddressinginvasiveaquaticspeciesarenowcoordinated
throughthiscouncilandthroughtheNationalAquaticNuisanceSpeciesTaskForce.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐3 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency State Plans, Policies, and Regulations California Environmental Quality Act CEQAistheregulatoryframeworkbywhichCaliforniapublicagenciesidentifyandmitigate
significantenvironmentalimpacts.Aprojectnormallyhasasignificantenvironmentalimpacton
biologicalresourcesifitsubstantiallyaffectsarareorendangeredspeciesorthehabitatofthat
species,substantiallyinterfereswiththemovementofresidentormigratoryfishorwildlife,or
substantiallydiminisheshabitatforfish,wildlife,orplants.TheStateCEQAGuidelinesdefinerare,
threatened,andendangeredspeciesasthoselistedunderESAortheCaliforniaEndangeredSpecies
Act(CESA)oranyotherspeciesthatmeetthecriteriaoftheresourceagenciesorlocalagencies(e.g.,
speciesofspecialconcern,asdesignatedbyCDFW).Theguidelinesstatethattheleadagency
preparinganEIRmustconsultwithandreceivewrittenfindingsfromCDFWconcerningproject
impactsonspecieslistedasendangeredorthreatened.Theeffectsofaproposedprojectonthese
resourcesareimportantindeterminingwhethertheprojecthassignificantenvironmentalimpacts
underCEQA.
California Endangered Species Act CESA(CaliforniaFishandGameCodeSections2050–2116)statesthatallnativespeciesoffishes,
amphibians,reptiles,birds,mammals,invertebrates,andplantsandtheirhabitatsthatare
threatenedwithextinctionandthoseexperiencingasignificantdeclinethat,ifnothalted,wouldlead
toathreatenedorendangereddesignationwillbeprotectedorpreserved.
UnderSection2081oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCode,anincidentaltakepermitfromCDFWis
requiredforprojectsthatcouldresultinthetakeofaspeciesthatisstate‐listedasthreatenedor
endangered.UnderCESA,takeisdefinedasanactivitythatwoulddirectlyorindirectlykillan
individualofaspecies.Thedefinitiondoesnotincludeharmorharass,asdoesthedefinitionoftake
underESA.Consequently,thethresholdfortakeunderCESAishigherthanthatunderESA.For
example,habitatmodificationisnotnecessarilyconsideredtakeunderCESA.
Fully Protected Species Sections3511,3513,4700,and5050oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCodepertaintofullyprotected
wildlifespecies(birdsinSections3511and3513,mammalsinSection4700,andreptilesand
amphibiansinSection5050)andstrictlyprohibitthetakeofthesespecies.CDFWcannotissuea
takepermitforfullyprotectedspecies,exceptundernarrowconditionsforscientificresearchorthe
protectionoflivestock,orifaNaturalCommunityConservationPlan(NCCP)hasbeenadopted.
California Native Plant Protection Act TheCNPPAof1977gavetheCaliforniaFishandGameCommissiontheauthoritytolistplantspecies
asrareorendangeredandauthorizedthemtoadoptregulationsprohibitingimportationofrareand
endangeredplantsintoCalifornia,takeofrareandendangeredplants,andsaleofrareand
endangeredplants.TheCNPPAprohibitstake,possession,transportation,exportation,importation,
orsaleofrareandthreatenedplants,exceptasaresultofagriculturalpractices,firecontrol
measures,timberoperations,mining,oractionsofpublicagenciesorprivateutilities.Private
landownersarealsoexemptfromtheprohibitionagainstremovingrareandendangeredplants,
althoughtheymustprovide10‐daynoticetoCDFWbeforeremovingtheplants.TheCNPPPAhas
mostlybeensupersededbyCESA.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐4 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency California Rare Plant Rankings CDFWmaintainslistsofplantsofspecialconcerninCalifornia,inadditiontothoselistedas
threatenedorendangered.ThesespecieshavenoformalprotectionunderCESA,butthevaluesand
importanceoftheselistsarewidelyrecognized.PlantswithaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1A,1B,
and2meetthedefinitionsofSection1901oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeandmayqualifyfor
statelisting.Accordingly,forpurposesofthisanalysis,suchplantspeciesareconsideredrareplants
pursuanttoSection15380ofCEQA.
Protection of Birds and Raptors Section3503oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeprohibitsthekillingofbirdsand/orthe
destructionofbirdnests.Section3503.5prohibitsthekillingofraptorspeciesand/orthe
destructionofraptornests.Typicalviolationsincludedestructionofactivebirdandraptornestsasa
resultoftreeremoval,andfailureofnestingattempts(lossofeggsand/oryoung)asaresultof
disturbanceofnestingpairscausedbynearbyhumanactivity.Section3513prohibitsanytakeor
possessionofbirdsdesignatedbytheMBTAasmigratorynongamebirdsexceptasallowedby
federalrulesandregulationspursuanttotheMBTA.
Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code Sections1600–1603oftheCaliforniaFishandGameCodestatethatitisunlawfulforanypersonor
agencytosubstantiallydivertorobstructthenaturalfloworsubstantiallychangethebed,channel,
orbankofanyriver,stream,orlakeinCaliforniathatsupportswildliferesources,ortouseany
materialfromthestreambeds,withoutfirstnotifyingCDFW.ALakeandStreambedAlteration
Agreement(LSAA)mustbeobtainedifeffectsareexpectedtooccur.Theregulatorydefinitionofa
streamisabodyofwaterthatflowsatleastperiodicallyorintermittentlythroughabedorchannel
havingbanksandthatsupportswildlife,fish,orotheraquaticlife.Thisdefinitionincludes
watercourseshavingasurfaceorsubsurfaceflowthatsupportsorhassupportedriparian
vegetation.CDFW’sjurisdictionwithinalteredorartificialwaterwaysisbasedonthevalueofthose
waterwaystofishandwildlife.
Porter‐Cologne Water Quality Control Act UnderthePorter‐CologneAct,watersofthestatefallunderjurisdictionofthenineRegionalWater
QualityControlBoards(RWQCBs).Underthisact,eachRWQCBmustprepareandperiodically
updatewaterqualitycontrolbasinplans.Eachbasinplansetsforthwaterqualitystandardsfor
surfacewaterandgroundwater,aswellasactionstocontrolnonpointandpointsourcesof
pollution.Projectsthataffectwetlandsorwatersmustmeetthewastedischargerequirementsof
theRWQCB.PursuanttoCWASections401,anapplicantforaSection404permittoconductany
activitythatmayresultindischargeintonavigablewatersmustprovideacertificationfromthe
RWQCBthatsuchdischargewillcomplywithstatewaterqualitystandards.Aspartofthewetlands
permittingprocessunderSection404,aprojectapplicantwouldberequiredtoobtainawater
qualitycertificationfromtheapplicableRWQCB.
Section13050ofthePorter‐CologneAct(CaliforniaWaterCode,Division7)authorizestheState
WaterResourcesControlBoardandtherelevantRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard(inthecase
oftheAPWRA,theCentralValleyandSanFranciscoBayWaterBoards)toregulatebiological
pollutants.TheCaliforniaWaterCodegenerallyregulatesmoresubstancescontainedindischarges,
anddefinesdischargestoreceivingwatersmorebroadlythantheCWAdoes.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐5 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency California Wetlands Conservation Policy ThegoalsoftheCaliforniaWetlandsConservationPolicy,adoptedin1993(ExecutiveOrderW‐59‐
93),are“toensurenooverallnetloss,andachievealong‐termnetgaininthequantity,quality,and
permanenceofwetlandsacreageandvaluesinCalifornia,inamannerthatfosterscreativity,
stewardship,andrespectforprivateproperty”;toreduceproceduralcomplexityinthe
administrationofstateandfederalwetlandsconservationprograms;andtomakerestoration,
landownerincentiveprogramsandcooperativeplanningeffortstheprimaryfocusofwetlands
conservation.
Regional and Local Plans, Policies, and Regulations East County Area Plan LanduseplanningintheeasternportionofAlamedaCountyisgovernedbytheECAP,whichwas
adoptedbytheCountyinMay1994.InNovember2000,theAlamedaCountyelectorateapproved
MeasureD,theSaveAgricultureandOpenSpaceLandsInitiative,whichamendedportionsofthe
County’sGeneralPlan,includingtheECAP(AlamedaCounty2000).TheOpenSpaceElementofthe
ECAPaddressessensitivelandsandregionallysignificantopenspace,includingbiologicalresources.
WindfarmsareaddressedintheSpecialLandUsessectionoftheECAP.
East Alameda County Conservation Strategy TheEastAlamedaCountyConservationStrategy(EACCS)isacollaborativeeffortamongseveral
local,state,andfederalagenciesintendedtoprovideaneffectivevoluntaryframeworktoprotect,
enhance,andrestorenaturalresourcesineasternAlamedaCounty,whileimprovingand
streamliningtheenvironmentalpermittingprocessforimpactsresultingfrominfrastructureand
developmentprojects(ICFInternational2010).TheEACCSisintendedtofocusonimpactson
biologicalresourcessuchasendangeredandotherspecial‐statusspeciesandsensitivehabitattypes
(e.g.,wetlands,ripariancorridors,rareuplandcommunities).TheEACCSwillultimatelyenablelocal
projectstocomplywithstateandfederalregulatoryrequirementswithinaframeworkof
comprehensiveconservationgoalsandobjectives,andwillfacilitateimplementationusing
consistentandstandardizedmitigationrequirements.ByimplementingtheEACCS,localagencies
willbeabletomoreeasilyaddressthelegalrequirementsrelevanttothesespecies.
TheEACCSstudyareaencompasses271,485acres,orapproximately52%ofAlamedaCountyinthe
upperAlamedaCreekwatershedofthecentralcountyarea,andtheeast‐facingslopesofthe
AltamontHills.ThecitiesofDublin,Livermore,andPleasantonarewithintheEACCSstudyarea.The
westernboundaryoftheEACCSstudyareafollowsthewesternedgeoftheAlamedaCreek
watershed,andthenorthern,southern,andeasternboundariesfollowtheAlamedaCountylinewith
itsadjacentcounties.TheEACCSstudyareaincludestheprogramarea.
AfinaldraftoftheEACCSwascompletedinOctober2010andreleasedtothepublicinMarch2011.
OnMay31,2012,USFWSissuedtheProgrammaticBiologicalOpinionfortheEastAlamedaCounty
ConservationStrategy(referenceNo.08ESMFOO‐2012‐F‐0092‐1)(ProgrammaticBO).Installation,
operation,andmaintenanceofwindenergyprojectsareidentifiedascoveredinfrastructure
projectsundertheProgrammaticBO.However,avianandbateffectsassociatedwiththesetypesof
projectsarenotcoveredundertheProgrammaticBO.Individualprojectsmaybeappendedtothe
ProgrammaticBOiftheyareconsistentwiththeEACCS,occurwithintheEACCSstudyarea,andare
acoveredactivity.TheProgrammaticBOdoesnotprovideincidentaltakeauthorization;therefore,
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐6 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency individualprojectsappendedtotheProgrammaticBOwillbegrantedindividualtakecoverageas
partoftheproject’sSection7consultationprocess.BecausetheEACCSisdesignedtobeanadaptive
managementprocess,theProgrammaticBOmaybeamendedinthefuture,oranewBOmaybe
writteniftherearesubstantivechangestotheEACCS.
ForprojectswhereUSACEisnotthefederalleadagencyforSection7consultationorwhereSection
10consultationisrequired,consistencywiththeProgrammaticBOwillenableotherfederal
agenciesandnonfederalapplicantstostreamlinetheirindividualESAconsultationsbyutilizing
preapprovedmitigationstandardsandfocusingmitigationinconservationpriorityareas.
EACCSdevelopmentincludedinputandreviewbyCDFWtoaddressimpactsonstate‐listedspecies.
ConsistencywiththeEACCSalsoaidsinstreamliningCESApermitcomplianceforprojectimpactson
state‐listedspecies.
AlthoughparticipationintheEACCSbyapplicantsisvoluntary,AlamedaCountyparticipatesinthe
strategyandconsidersittobethebestavailableinformationwhenconsideringtheimpactsof
proposedprojectsonthefullrangeofprotectedwildlife,plants,andhabitats.
2007 Settlement Agreement In2007,Audubon,CARE,andthreewindenergycompanies(AES,NextEra,andEnXco)enteredinto
aSettlementAgreementtoresolvelitigationregardingtheCounty’s2005issuanceofCUPapprovals
ofcontinuedwindenergyoperations.The2007SettlementAgreement,includingExhibitG‐1
(modifiedfromthe2005CUPs),requiresparticipantstodevelopanNCCPorasimilaragreementto
“addressthelong‐termoperationofwindturbinesattheAPWRAandtheconservationofimpacted
speciesofconcernandtheirnaturalcommunities.”Inparticular,the2007SettlementAgreement
committedtheparticipatingwindcompaniestoachievea50%reductioninavianfatalitiesfroman
estimatedbaselineofannualfatalitiesoffourfocalspecies(goldeneagle,burrowingowl[Athene
cunicularia],Americankestrel[Falcosparverius],andred‐tailedhawk[Buteojamaicensis])through
theimplementationoftheAvianWildlifeProtectionProgramandSchedule(AWPPS)asestablished
in2005andmodifiedin2007.The2007SettlementAgreementandtheamendedAWPPSrequired
theimplementationofvariousmanagementactions,includingseasonalshutdownofturbinesand
removalofturbinesdeemedtobe“high‐risk”turbines,untilthe50%reductiongoalwasachieved.
TheAWPPSrequiredtheestablishmentoftheAlamedaCountyAvianFatalityMonitoringTeam
(AFMT).TheAFMTwaschargedwithdevelopingandimplementing—underthesupervisionand
directionoftheScientificReviewCommittee—aprogramtomonitorturbine‐relatedavianfatality
ratesanduseoftheAPWRAbybirdsofmanagementconcern.Underthe2007Settlement
Agreement,theemphasisoftheAFMTwasdirectedtothefourfocalspecies,anditsworkwas
centraltoevaluationofprogresstowardachievingthe50%reductiongoalestablishedbythe
SettlementAgreement.
AsanalternativetotheNCCPcalledforintheSettlementAgreement,theCountyhasdevelopeda
draftAvianProtectionProgram(APP)toprovideaframeworkandprocessforwindenergyprojects
tocomplywithapplicablestatutes(e.g.,MBTAandBGEPA)throughtherepoweringprocess.The
APPprovidedabroadevaluationofexistingenvironmentalconditions,birduse,andavianfatalities
intheprogramarea.Itfocusedonavianmortalityassociatedwithrepoweringprojects—specifically
construction,operation,monitoring,andmitigation.ThekeyprovisionsoftheAPPhavebeen
incorporatedintothisPEIRasimpactsandmitigationmeasures.Projectproponentswillbe
expectedtodevelopproject‐specificAPPs,incorporatingmitigation,monitoring,andadaptive
managementstrategiesassetforthinthisPEIR.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐7 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Environmental Setting Theprogramareaischaracterizedbyrollinghillswithelevationsrangingfrom256to1,542feet
abovemeansealevel.Windfarmoperations,livestockgrazingand,toalesserextent,dryland
farming(graincrops)aretheprimarylandusesintheprogramarea.
Theprogramareacontains19landcovertypesthatweremappedduringpreparationoftheEACCS.
LandcovertypesintheprogramareaarelistedinTable3.4‐1andshowninFigure3.4‐1.Landcover
typesintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasarelistedinTables3.4‐2and3.4‐3and
showninFigures3.4‐2and3.4‐3,respectively.MappingresourcesusedfortheEACCSincluded
digitalorthophotographyfrom2005and2007,previouslymappedwetlandsfrom2001,USFWS
wetlandsinventorydatalayer,andfieldverificationsurveysconductedbyICFin2010.Drainage
datafromU.S.GeologicalSurveyNationalHydrographyDatasetfrom2012wereaddedtothesedata
setstocreateFigures3.4‐1through3.4‐3.Theplantcommunitiesandassociatedwildlifeineach
landcovertypeintheprogramareaaredescribedbelow.Existingturbinesmaynotbepresentinall
landcovertypesdescribedbelow;however,alllandcovertypesaredescribedbecauseitisassumed
thatrepoweringactivitiescouldhaveimpactsonanylandcovertypewithintheprogramarea.Land
covertypesthatarepresentwithintheGoldenHillsorPattersonPassprojectareasaresonotedin
thelandcoverdescriptionsbelow.Mostrecently,EDFREconductedhabitatassessmentsforspecial‐
statusspeciesandadelineationofwatersoftheUnitedStates,includingwetlands,thatUSACEhas
verified.AreportdetailingtheresultsoftheEDFREbiologicalsurveyandwetlanddelineationis
includedinAppendixCofthisPEIR.
Table 3.4‐1. Approximate Acreages of Land Cover Types in the Program Area LandCover
AmountinProgramArea(acres)
Annualgrassland
Alkalimeadow/scald
Rockoutcrop
Northernmixedchaparral/chamisechaparral
Northerncoastalscrub/Diablansagescrub
Mixedevergreenforest/oakwoodland
Blueoakwoodland
Foothillpine–oakwoodland
Mixedwillowriparianscrub
Mixedriparianforestandwoodland
Alkaliwetland
Seasonalwetland
Perennialfreshwatermarsh
Canal/Aqueduct
Ponds
Reservoirs
Drainages
Cropland
DevelopedandDisturbed
39,375.79
555.06
42.05
28.65
74.51
582.18
163.61
21.11
39.27
9.93
483.17
82.76
5.01
158.21
53.74
176.58
Notcalculated
4.55
1,502.58
Total
43,358.76
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐8 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐2. Approximate Acreages of Land Cover Types in the Golden Hills Project Area LandCover
AmountinProjectArea(acres)
Annualgrassland
Alkalimeadow/scald
Mixedwillowriparianscrub
Alkaliwetland
Seasonalwetland
Ponds
Drainages
DevelopedandDisturbed
4,287.08
145.69
6.54
37.13
0.09
2.89
Notcalculated
0.71
Total
4,480.13
Table 3.4‐3. Approximate Acreages of Land Cover Types in the Patterson Pass Project Area LandCover
AmountinProjectArea(acres)
Annualgrassland
Mixedwillowriparianscrub
Seasonalwetland
Perennialfreshwatermarsh
Ponds
Drainages
939.81
4.00
1.41
4.99
0.84
0.81
Total
951.86
Grassland Grasslandconsistsofherbaceousvegetationdominatedbygrasses,althoughfloweringforbsare
oftenaconspicuouscomponentoftheplantcover.Mostofthegrasslandintheprogramareais
characterizedasCaliforniaAnnualGrassland.Twootherhabitats,alkalimeadowandrockoutcrops,
areinterspersedassmallpatcheswithinthegrasslandmatrixandare,accordingly,includedinand
discussedascomponentsofthegrasslandhabitat.
Grassland Plant Communities California Annual Grassland Californiaannualgrasslandisfoundthroughouttheprogramarea,occupyingapproximately
39,375.79acres.Californiaannualgrasslandisanherbaceousplantcommunitydominatedby
nonnativeannualgrasses(Holland1986:36–37;SawyerandKeeler‐Wolf1995:40–41).The
dominantspeciesaremostlynonnativegrassesfromtheMediterraneanbasin,suchassoftchess
(Bromushordeaceus),redbrome(Bromusmadritensissubsp.rubens),Mediterraneanbarley
(Hordeummarinumvar.gussoneanum),wildoats(Avenaspp.),ripgutbrome(Bromusdiandrus),
Italianryegrass(Festucaperennis[Loliummultiflorum]),andrat‐tailfescue(Festucamyuros).Inthe
spring,manyoftheannualgrasslandsareinterspersedwithdiversenativewildflowerstypicalofthe
innerCoastRanges.Commonlyfoundspeciesofwildflowersinthesegrasslandsincludelupine
(Lupinusspp.),fiddleneck(Amsinckiaspp.),popcornflower(Plagiobothrysspp.),bigheronbill
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐9 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency (Erodiumbotrys),redstemmedfilaree(E.cicutarium),Californiapoppy(Eschscholziacalifornica),
owl’s‐clover(CastillejaandTriphysariaspp.),andclarkia(Clarkiaspp.).Special‐statusplantspecies
thatmaybefoundinthisplantcommunityincludelarge‐floweredfiddleneck(Amsinckia
grandiflora),bigtarplant(Blepharizoniaplumosa),round‐leavedfilaree(Californiamacrophylla),
Lemmon’sjewelflower(Caulanthuslemmonii),diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppy(Eschscholzia
rhombipetala),shiningnavarretia(Navarretianigelliformisssp.radians),andcaper‐fruited
tropidocarpum(Tropidocarpumcapparideum).
AnnualgrasslandisalsothedominantlandcovertypeintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectsareas,withannualgrasslandconstituting96%(4,287.08acres)and99%(934.06acres)of
theprojectareas,respectively.
Alkali Meadow Alkalimeadowoccursinscatteredpatchestotalingapproximately555.06acresinthecentraland
northernportionsoftheprogramarea.Alkalimeadowisaperennialgrasslandcommunitythat
occursonalkalisoils(Holland1986:42–43;SawyerandKeeler‐Wolf1995:78–79).Dominantspecies
inalkalimeadowincludesaltgrass(Distichlisspicata),wildbarley(Hordeumspp.),andalkali
ryegrass(Elymustriticoides).Theassociatedherbcoverconsistsofhalophytes,includingsaltbush
(Atriplexspp.),alkaliheath(Frankeniasalina),alkaliweed(Cressatruxillensis),alkalimallow
(Malvellaleprosa),andcommonspikeweed(Centromadiapungens).Alkalimeadowisconsidereda
significantnaturalcommunitybyCDFWbecauseofitsrarityandthepressingthreatstotheremnant
communitiesfromovergrazingandlanduseconversion(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013a).Special‐statusplantspeciesthatmaybefoundinthisplantcommunityincludeSanJoaquin
spearscaleandrecurvedlarkspur.
Alkalimeadowcomprisesapproximately3%(145.69acres)oftheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Thereis
noalkalimeadowinthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Rock Outcrop Rockoutcropsarefrequentlyencounteredinsomegrasslands,andapproximately42.05acresare
presentintheprogramarea.Theseoutcropsareexposuresofbedrockthattypicallylacksoiland
havesparsevegetation.Withintheprogramarea,severaltypesofrockoutcropsarepresentandare
derivedfromsedimentaryandmetamorphicsources.Thegreatestconcentrationofrockoutcrops
occursnearBrushyPeakRegionalPreserve,althoughotherrockoutcropsareinthevicinityofTesla
Road.Onespecial‐statusplantspecies,raylessragwort(Packeraindecora),maybefoundinthis
plantcommunity.
Common Wildlife Associations Characteristicwildlifespeciesingrasslandsincludereptilessuchaswesternfencelizard(Sceloporus
occidentalis),commongartersnake(Thamnophissirtalis),andwesternrattlesnake(Crotalisviridis);
mammalssuchasblack‐tailedjackrabbit(Lepuscalifornicus),Californiagroundsquirrel
(Spermophilusbeecheyi),westernharvestmouse(Reithrodontomysmegalotis),Californiavole
(Microtuscalifornicus),andcoyote(Canislatrans);andbirdssuchasred‐tailedhawk,American
kestrel,barnowl(Tytoalba),andwesternmeadowlark(Sturnellaneglecta).Severalcommonbat
species,suchascanyonbat(Parastrellushesperus),canroostinrockyoutcropsandforageover
grassland.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐10 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Special‐statuswildlifespeciesassociatedwithgrasslandsincludegoldeneagle,Swainson’shawk,
westernburrowingowl,loggerheadshrike(Laniusludovicianus),SanJoaquinkitfox,andAmerican
badger(Taxideataxus).Californiared‐leggedfrogandCaliforniatigersalamanderusegrasslandsas
movementandaestivation(summerhibernation)habitat.Alamedawhipsnakeisknowntouse
grasslandsadjacenttoshrublandsandrockoutcropsforbreedingandrefugia.Pallidbat(Antrozous
pallidus)isknowntoroostincrevicesinrockoutcropsandforageoversurroundinggrassland.
Annualgrasslandalsoprovidesimportantforaginghabitatfornorthernharrier(Circuscyaneus)and
white‐tailedkite(Elanusleucurus).
Scrub/Chaparral Chaparralcommunitiesaredominatedbydenselypackedandnearlyimpenetrabledrought‐adapted
evergreenwoodyshrubs,6.5–13feettall,thatpossesssmall,thick,leathery,sclerophyllousleaves
(Hanes1977:419;Holland1986:20–21).Coastalscrubcommunities,incomparison,aregenerally
characterizedbylowshrubs,usually1.5–6.5feettallwithsoftnon‐scerophyllousleaves,and
interspersedwithgrassyopenings(Holland1986).Twoscrub/chaparralplantcommunitiesare
presentintheprogramarea:northernmixedchaparral/chamisechaparralandnortherncoastal
scrub/Diablansagescrub.
Scrub/Chaparral Plant Communities Northern Mixed Chaparral/Chamise Chaparral Northernmixedchaparral/chamisechaparraloccupiesapproximately28.65acresinthesouthern
endoftheprogramarea.Northernmixedchaparralmayinterminglewithnortherncoastal
scrub/Diablansagescrub,foothillpine‐oakwoodlands,andmixedevergreenforest/oakwoodland.
Dominantshrubsinthiscommunityintheprogramareaincludechamise(Adenostoma
fasciculatum),manzanita(Arctostaphylossp.),scruboak(Quercusberberidifolia),andceanothus
(Ceanothussp.).Otherimportantspeciesaretoyon(Heteromelesarbutifolia),coffeeberry(Rhamnus
californica),madrone(Arbutusmenziesii),Californiabay(Umbellulariacalifornica),birchleaf
mountain‐mahogany(Cercocarpusbetuloides),poison‐oak(Toxicodendrondiversilobum),bush
monkeyflower(Mimulusaurantiacus),andCaliforniayerbasanta(Eriodictyoncalifornicum).Some
chaparralstandsmaybealmostentirelycomposedofdensestandsofchamise.Nospecial‐status
plantsoccurinthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea.
Northern Coastal Scrub/Diablan Sage Scrub Northerncoastalscrub/Diablansagescruboccupiesapproximately74.51acresinthesouthern
portionoftheprogramarea.Northerncoastalscrub/Diablansagescrubintheprogramareais
composedprimarilyofevergreenshrubswithanherbaceousunderstoryinopenings.Northern
coastalscrub/DiablansagescrubcommunitiesaredominatedbyCaliforniasagebrush(Artemisia
californica)andblacksage(Salviamellifera),withassociatedspeciesincludingcoyotebrush
(Baccharispilularis),toyon,big‐berrymanzanita(Manzanitaglauca),Californiabuckwheat
(Eriogonumfasciculatum),poison‐oak,Californiayerbasanta,andbushmonkeyflower(Holland
1986:8–10).Rockoutcropsarealsopresentinthisplantcommunity.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccur
inthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐11 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Common Wildlife Associations Commonwildlifespeciesthatusechaparralandscrubhabitatsintheprogramareaincludegopher
snake(Pituophismelanoleucus),westernrattlesnake,westernfencelizard,brushrabbit(Sylvilagus
bachmani),Californiapocketmouse(Perognathuscalifornicus),spottedskunk(Spilogalegracilis),
muledeer,coyote,andbobcat(Lynxrufus).Commonbirdspeciesincludemourningdove(Zenaida
macroura),Californiaquail(Callipeplacalifornica),Anna’shummingbird(Calypteanna),western
scrub‐jay(Aphelocomacalifornica),Bewick’swren(Thryomanesbewickii),Californiatowhee(Pipilo
crissalis),lessergoldfinch(Carduelispsaltria),foxsparrow(Passerellailiaca),white‐crowned
sparrow(Zonotrichialeucophrys),anddark‐eyedjunco(Juncohyemalis).
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesknowntooccurinchaparralandnortherncoastalscrubcommunities
includeAlamedawhipsnakeandloggerheadshrike.Chaparralandnortherncoastalscrubarethe
primaryhabitatsforAlamedawhipsnake,whichbreeds,forages,andthermoregulatesinthis
habitat.Contiguousstandsarenecessarytosupportviablepopulationsofthisspeciesthroughoutits
range.Loggerheadshrikesareknowntonestandforageinscrubhabitatswithlowdensitiesof
shrubcanopycover.
Woodland Theprogramareacontainsthreewoodlandplantcommunities:mixedevergreenforest/oak
woodland,blueoakwoodland,andfoothillpine‐oakwoodland.TheGoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectareasdonotsupportanywoodlandplantcommunities.
Woodland Plant Communities Mixed Evergreen Forest/Oak Woodland Mixedevergreenforest/oakwoodlandisthemostcommonwoodlandcommunityintheprogram
area,occupyingapproximately582.18acresatthesouthendoftheprogramarea.Mixedevergreen
forest/oakwoodlandischaracterizedbyadiverseoverstoryoftendominatedbycoastliveoak
(Quercusagrifolia)(Holland1986:86;SawyerandKeeler‐Wolf1995:241–242).Associatedco‐
dominantspeciescanincludeblueoak(Q.douglasii),valleyoak(Q.lobata),Californiabay,madrone,
Californiabuckeye(Aesculuscalifornica),andblackoak(Q.kelloggii).Whereshrubby,the
understoryconsistsofpatchesoftoyon,poison‐oak,andscruboak.Wheremoreopen,the
understorytypicallyconsistsofannualgrassesandshade‐tolerantperennials,suchasyerbabuena
(Clinopodiumdouglasii)andcommonsnowberry(Symphoricarposalbus).Nospecial‐statusplants
occurinthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea.
Blue Oak Woodland Thereareapproximately163.61acresofblueoakwoodlandscatteredthroughoutthesouthernhalf
oftheprogramarea.Thislandcovertypicallyoccursinthelow‐tomid‐elevationhillsinslightly
driermicroclimates.Blueoakwoodlandisdominatedbyblueoak,ahighlydrought‐tolerantspecies
adaptedtogrowthonthinsoilsinthedryfoothills.Californiabuckeyeandfoothillpine(Pinus
sabiniana)areassociatedtreespeciesinthiscommunity.Theunderstoryofblueoakwoodland
variesfromshrubbytoopen.Understoryspeciestypicallyincludeannualgrasses,hollyleafcherry
(Prunusilicifolia),poison‐oak,andcoffeeberry.Someblueoakwoodlandalliancesareconsideredby
CDFWtobesensitivecommunities(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2010).Onespecial‐
statusplantspecies,shiningnavarretia,occursinthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐12 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Foothill Pine‐Oak Woodland Foothillpine‐oakwoodlandoccupiesapproximately21.11acresinthesouthernportionofthe
programarea.Thecanopyisdominatedbyfoothillpineandblueoak(Holland1986:77).Oaks
becomemoreprevalentatlowerelevations,oftenformingaclosedcanopylayerbelowtheemergent
pines,andtheunderstorylacksanappreciableshrublayer.Associatedcanopyspeciesinclude
interiorliveoak,coastliveoak,andCaliforniabuckeye.Associatedshrubspeciesincludeceanothus
species,bigberrymanzanita,Californiacoffeeberry,poison‐oak,silverlupine(Lupinusalbifrons),
blueelderberry,Californiayerbasanta,rockgooseberry(Ribesquercetorum),andCaliforniaredbud
(Cercisoccidentalis).Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthiscommunityintheprogramarea.
Common Wildlife Associations Characteristicwildlifespeciesthatcanbefoundinwoodlandhabitatsincludegophersnake,
westernfencelizard,red‐tailedhawk,Americankestrel,barnowl,greathornedowl(Bubo
virginianus),acornwoodpecker(Melanerpesformicivorus),Nuttall’swoodpecker(Picoidesnuttallii),
northernflicker(Colaptesauratus),white‐breastednuthatch(Sittacarolinensis),Californiaquail,
spottedtowhee(Pipilomaculatus),Bewick’swren,bushtit(Psaltriparusminimus),bigbrownbat
(Eptesicusfuscus),Californiamyotis(Myotiscalifornicus),deermouse(Peromyscusmaniculatus),
westerngraysquirrel(Sciurusgriseus),muledeer,andcoyote.
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesthatmaybefoundinoakwoodlandsincludeCaliforniatiger
salamander,Alamedawhipsnake,goldeneagle,loggerheadshrike,hoarybat,pallidbat,westernred
bat(Lasiurusblossevillii),SanJoaquinkitfox,andAmericanbadger.Californiatigersalamandersuse
burrowsinthegrassyunderstoryofopenwoodlandsforaestivationandrefugia.Alameda
whipsnakemayuseoakwoodlandformovementbetweenchaparralandcoastalscrubhabitats.
Goldeneaglesandloggerheadshrikesusevalleyoakwoodlandandotherwoodlandsforroosting,
nesting,andforaging.Hoarybat,pallidbat,andwesternredbatroostinwoodlandsandforage
abovethecanopy,inforestopenings,andalongforestedges.SanJoaquinkitfoxandAmerican
badgermayuseopenvalleyoakwoodlandfordenning,foraging,andmovement.
Riparian Withintheprogramarea,theriparianlandcovertypeoccursalongcreeksandaroundopenwater
bodies.Riparianvegetationintheprogramareaconsistoftwocommunitytypes:mixedwillow
riparianscrubandmixedriparianforestandwoodland.Atthestatelevel,riparianplant
communitiesareconsideredsensitivebecauseofthesubstantialreductionintheiramountand
range,andfortheirvalueashabitatforalargenumberofplantandwildlifespecies.
Riparian Plant Communities Mixed Willow Riparian Scrub Mixedwillowriparianscruboccupiesapproximately39.27acresinandalongthemarginsofthe
activechannelofintermittentandperennialdrainages.Intheprogramarea,thisplantcommunityis
foundalongPattersonRunanddrainagesnorthtoI‐580.
Conditionsinthemixedwillowriparianscrubcommunitycanrangefromopenwell‐developed
canopieswithminimalunderstorytodenseareasdominatedprimarilybyunderstoryspecieswith
littletonocanopy.Yellowwillow(Salixlasiandra),redwillow(S.laevigata),arroyowillow(S.
lasiolepis),andnarrowleafwillow(exigua)arethedominantcanopyspeciesinthishabitat.Scrub
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐13 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency communitiestypicallyconsistofscatteredwillowsandmulefat(Baccharissalicifolia),whichoccur
inandalongthemarginsofopensandywashes.Understorydevelopmentinthiscommunitytypeis
controlledbycanopydensity.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthisplantcommunityintheprogram
area.
Mixedwillowriparianscrubcomprisesapproximately0.1%(6.54acres)oftheGoldenHillsproject
areaand0.4%(4.00acres)ofthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Mixed Riparian Forest and Woodland Mixedriparianforestandwoodlandoccupiesapproximately9.93acresinthesouthernportionof
theprogramarea.ItoccursalongsectionsofArroyoSecoalongTeslaRoad,ArroyoVallenearHays
Camp,CorralHollowCreekanditstributaries,andFairchildGulchandDeadmanGulchinElyar
Canyon.
Mixedriparianforestandwoodlandcommunitiesaresimilartomixedwillowriparianscrubin
termsofhabitatrequirements.Theyarefoundinandalongthemarginsoftheactivechannelon
intermittentandperennialdrainages.Generally,nosinglespeciesdominatesthecanopy,and
compositionvarieswithelevation,aspect,hydrology,andchanneltype.Themajorcanopyspecies
includeCaliforniasycamore,valleyoak,coastliveoak,redwillow,andCaliforniabay.Associated
treesandshrubsincludeCaliforniablackwalnut,otherspeciesofwillow,Californiabuckeye,
Fremontcottonwood,andbigleafmaple.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthiscommunityinthe
programarea.
Common Wildlife Associations WildlifespeciesthatareoftenassociatedwithriparianhabitatsincludeamphibianssuchasSierran
treefrog(Pseudacrissierrae),Californianewt(Tarichatorosa),westernaquaticgartersnake
(Thamnophiscouchii),red‐shoulderedhawk(Buteolineatus),Wilson’swarbler(Wilsoniapusilla),
spottedtowhee,Bullock’soriole(Icterusbullockii),long‐tailedweasel(Mustelafrenata),grayfox
(Urocyoncinereoargenteus),raccoon(Procyonlotor),andyumamyotis(Myotisyumanensis).
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesassociatedwithriparianforestandscrubincludeCalifornia
red‐leggedfrog,Swainson’shawk,westernredbat,Townsend’sbig‐earedbat(Corynorhinus
townsendii),andhoarybat.Californiared‐leggedfrogsuseriparianhabitattypesforbreeding,
foraging,andrefugia.Swainson’shawksnestandroostinriparianforest,andhoaryandwesternred
batsusethishabitatforroostingandforaging.Townsend’sbig‐earedbatsareknowntoforagealong
ripariancorridorswhenappropriateroosthabitatisnearby.
Wetland Thewetlandlandcovertypeincludesareassubjecttoseasonalorperennialfloodingorponding,or
thatpossesssaturatedsoilconditionsandthatsupportpredominantlyhydrophyticor“water‐
loving”herbaceousplantspecies(Cowardinetal.1979).Becausewetlandsareperiodically
waterlogged,theplantsgrowinginthemmusttoleratelowlevelsofsoiloxygenassociatedwith
waterloggedorhydricsoils.Thepresenceofflood‐tolerantspeciesoftenindicatesthatasiteisa
wetlandevenifthegroundappearstobedryformostoftheyear,orifhydrologicinfluencesareless
obvious.
Thewetlandlandcovertypeintheprogramareaconsistsofthreecommunities:alkaliwetland,
seasonalwetland(includingvernalpools),andperennialfreshwatermarsh.Ingeneral,wetlandsare
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐14 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency consideredasensitivebioticcommunitybecauseoftheirlimiteddistributionandtheirimportance
tospecial‐statusplantandwildlifespeciesstatewide.
Wetland Plant Communities Alkali Wetland Alkaliwetlandsoccupyapproximately483.17acresintheprogramarea.Alkaliwetlandssupport
pondedorsaturatedsoilconditionsandoccurasperennialorseasonallywetfeaturesonalkalisoils.
Alkaliwetlandsoccurprimarilyalongstreamchannelswherealkalisoilsarepresent.Intheprogram
area,thisplantcommunityoccursalongAltamontCreek,thesouthsideofI‐580,andinseveral
drainagessouthoftheAlameda/ContraCostaCountylineandwestofBethanyReservoir.Theonly
siteinAlamedaCounty(besidestheSpringtownAlkaliSink)thatsupportslargeareasofalkalisoils
andintactstandsofvalleysinkscrubandalkaligrasslandisanareaofapproximately267acresin
thenortheasterncornerofthecounty.ThesiteoccursneartheintersectionofKelsoandBruns
RoadsbetweentheDelta‐MendotaCanalandtheCaliforniaAqueduct.
Thevegetationofalkaliwetlandsiscomposedofhalophyticplantspeciesadaptedtobothwetland
conditionsandhighsalinitylevels.Typicalspeciesincludesaltgrass,alkaliheath,andcommon
spikeweed.Theassociatedherbcoverconsistsofhalophytes,includingsaltbush,alkaliheath,
seepweed,alkaliweed,andsaltmarshsandspurry(Spergulariamarina).Standsofiodinebushmay
alsobepresent.Special‐statusplantspeciesthatoccurinthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea
includebrittlescale(Atriplexdepressa),SanJoaquinspearscale(A.joaquinana),lessersaltscale(A.
minuscula),andrecurvedlarkspur(Delphiniumrecurvatum).
Alkaliwetlandcomprisesapproximately0.8%(37.13acres)oftheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Alkali
wetlandsarenotpresentinthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Seasonal Wetlands Seasonalwetlandsoccupyapproximately82.76acresscatteredthroughouttheprogramarea,with
severallargeseasonalwetlandcomplexes(i.e.,groupsofmanysmallpoolsorwetlands)occurring
alongroadwaysanddrainagebottomsinthevicinityofAltamontPass.Thiscommunityoftenoccurs
adjacenttoalkaliwetland.
Seasonalwetlandsarefreshwaterwetlandsthatsupportpondedorsaturatedsoilconditionsduring
winterandspringandaredrythroughthesummerandfalluntilfall/winterrainfallbeginsto
saturatethesoil.Vernalpoolsareatypeofseasonalwetlandthatpondwateronthesurfacefor
extendeddurationsduringwinterandspringanddrycompletelyduringlatespringandsummer
duetoanunderlyinghardpan.Thishardpanrestrictsthepercolationofwaterandcreatesa
“perched”seasonalwatersource.Theysupportatypicalfloralargelycomposedofnativewetland
plantspecies.VernalpoolsineasternAlamedaCountyoccurindistinctivetopographywithlow
depressionsmixedwithhummocksormounds.Thesedepressionsfillwithrainwaterandrunoff
fromadjacentareasduringthewinterandmayremaininundatedduringthespringtoearly
summer.VernalpoolsarefoundeastandnorthofLivermoreandnortheastofBethanyReservoir.
Vegetationtypicallyassociatedwithotherseasonalwetlandsconsistsofwetlandgeneralists,suchas
hyssoploosestrife(Lithiumhyssopifolia),cocklebur(Xanthiumstrumarium),Mediterraneanbarley,
andItalianryegrass.Uplandspeciessuchassoftchess,blackmustard(Brassicanigra),redstemmed
filaree,andcommontarweed(Holocarphavirgata)canalsooccur.Commonspeciesinseasonal
wetlandswithintheprojectareaincludewatercress(Rorippasp.),waterspeedwell(Veronica
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐15 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency anagallis‐aquatica),andsmartweeds(Polygonumspp.).Noknownoccurrencesofspecial‐status
plantshavebeendocumentedinthiscommunityintheprogramarea.Mostofthespecial‐status
plantsintheprogramareavicinitydonotoccurinseasonalwetlands;however,onespecies—alkali
milk‐vetch(Astragalustenervar.tener)—occursonthemarginsofalkalivernalpools.
Seasonalwetlandcomprisesapproximately0.02%(0.09acre)oftheGoldenHillsprojectareaand
0.1%(1.32acres)ofthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Perennial Freshwater Marsh Perennialfreshwatermarshoccupiesapproximately5.01acresoftheprogramarea.Perennial
freshwatermarshoccursprimarilyinsmallpatchesalongstreamcoursesordrainagesandatthe
edgesofsomeponds.Intheprogramarea,perennialfreshwatermarshispresentinthenortheast
portionoftheprogramareanearBrunsRoad.
Perennialfreshwatermarshisdominatedbyemergentherbaceousplants(reeds,sedges,grasses)
witheitherintermittentlyfloodedorperenniallysaturatedsoils(Holland1986:48–49).Inthe
programarea,plantspeciesassociatedwithperennialfreshwatermarshincludewillows,saltgrass,
Mediterraneanbarley,Italianryegrass,rabbitsfootgrass(Polypogonsp.),nutsedge(Cyperus
eragrostis),willowweed(Polygonumlapathifolium),watercress,Balticrush(Juncusbalticus),
narrow‐leavedcattail(Typhaangustifolia),ricecutgrass(Leersiaoryzoides),bur‐reed(Sparganium
eurycarpum),alkalibulrush(Bolboschoenusrobustus),stingingnettle(Urticadioicassp.holosericea),
willowherb(Epilobiumciliatum),celery‐leavedbuttercup(Ranunculusscleratus),small‐flowered
saltcedar(Tamarixparviflora),andperennialpeppergrass(Lepidiumlatifolium).Nospecial‐status
plantsoccurinthisplantcommunityintheprogramarea.
NoperennialfreshwatermarshoccursintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.
Perennialfreshwatermarshcomprisesapproximately0.5%(4.99acres)ofthePattersonPass
projectarea.
Common Wildlife Associations Alkaliandseasonalwetlandsprovideimportanthabitatforavarietyofaquaticinvertebratesand
amphibians,whichprovidefoodsourcesforvariousbirdspecies.Perennialfreshwatermarshisan
importanthabitatforawidevarietyofwildlifespecies.Wildlifespeciesthatoccurinoruse
freshwatermarshforbreedingorcoverincludewesternpondturtle(Actinemysmarmorata),several
gartersnakespecies,greatblueheron(Ardeaherodias),greategret(Ardeaalba),mallard(Anas
platyrhynchos),killdeer(Charadriusvociferus),greateryellowlegs(Tringamelanoleuca),muledeer,
andcoyote.Seasonalwetlandsarecommonlyusedbyavarietyofwildlifeduringthewetseason,
includingSierrantreefrog,Californiatoad(Bufoboreas),black‐neckedstilt(Himantopusmexicanus),
Americanavocet(Recurvirostraamericana),red‐wingedblackbird(Agelaiusphoeniceu),white‐tailed
kite,andnorthernharrier.Numerousspeciesofbatsforageoverfreshwaterwetland,including
Mexicanfree‐tailedbat(Tadaridabrasiliensismexicanus).
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesassociatedwithalkaliand/orseasonalwetlandsincludelonghorn
fairyshrimp,vernalpoolshrimp,vernalpooltadpoleshrimp,curved‐foothygrotusdivingbeetle
(Hygrotuscurvipes),Californiatigersalamander,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andhoarybat.Longhorn
fairyshrimp,vernalpoolfairyshrimp,andvernalpooltadpoleshrimparedependentonephemeral
wetlandssuchasvernalpoolsandalkaliwetlands.Californiatigersalamandersuseseasonal
wetlandsthatholdwateruntilAprilorlaterandperennialfreshwatermarshforbreedingandlarval
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐16 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency development.Californiared‐leggedfrogsuseseasonalwetlandsandfreshwatermarshforrefugia
andbreeding.Perennialfreshwatermarshispotentialhabitatforwesternpondturtle.Hoarybats
foragenearoroverwetlands.
Aquatic Theaquaticlandcovertypeconsistsofopenwaterhabitatssuchasreservoirs,rivers,streams,
canals,andponds(includingquarryandstockpondsthatdonottypicallysupportemergent
vegetation).Aquatichabitatintheprogramareacomprisescanal/aqueducts,ponds,reservoirs,and
streams.
Aquatic Plant Communities Canal/Aqueduct Canal/aqueductencompassesapproximately158.21acresoftheprogramarea.Portionsofthe
CaliforniaAqueductandtheDeltaMendotaCanal,aswellasotherirrigationcanals,arepresentin
theprogramarea.Becausethesefeaturesareintendedtomovewaterbetweenareas,theyareoften
managedforminimalvegetationtoenhancetheflowofwaterthroughthechannels.Canalsand
aqueductstypicallyconveylargeamountsofwaterandcontaindeepwaterwithswiftflowyear‐
round.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthiscommunityintheprogramarea.
Canal/aqueductisnotpresentintheGoldenHillsorPattersonPassprojectareas.
Ponds Pondsoccupyapproximately53.74acresoftheprogramareaandweredefinedasperennialor
seasonalwaterbodieslessthan20acresinsize.Pondsarescatteredthroughouttheprogramarea.
Pondsmayhavevaryingamountsofemergent,submerged,and/orfloatingvegetation,depending
onthelengthofinundationandleveloflivestockgrazing.
Themajorityofthepondsintheprogramareaaresmallstockpondswithlittleornovegetationthat
providewaterforlivestock.Plantsoftenassociatedwithpondsincludefloatingplantssuchas
duckweed(Lemnaspp.)orrootedplantssuchascattails,bulrushes,sedges,rushes,watercress,and
waterprimrose.
Stockpondsareoftensurroundedbypasturewithgrazinglivestock.Immediatelyadjacenttothe
stockpond,soilmaybeexposedbecauseofthecontinuedpresenceoflivestock.Stockpondsin
ungrazedareasorthathavebeenprotectedfromgrazingmaybesurroundedbywetlandvegetation
includingwillows,cattails,reeds,bulrushes,sedges,andtules(Scirpuscalifornicus).Nospecial‐
statusplantsoccurinthiscommunityintheprogramarea.
Pondsconstituteapproximately0.06%(2.89acres)oftheGoldenHillsprojectareaand0.1%(0.84
acre)ofthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Reservoirs Thereservoirlandcovertypeencompassesapproximately176.58acresoftheprogramarea.
Reservoirsweredefinedasbeinglargerthan20acres.Reservoirsareopenwaterbodiesthatare
highlymanagedforwaterstorage,watersupply,floodprotection,orrecreationaluses.Bethany
Reservoiristheonlyreservoirintheprogramarea.ThereservoirservesasaforebayfortheSouth
BayPumpingPlantandaconveyancefacilityinthisreachoftheCaliforniaAqueduct.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐17 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Plantsoftenassociatedwithreservoirsincludethoseplantscommontodeepwatersystems.Algae
arethepredominantplantlifefoundintheopenwatersofreservoirs.Dependingonreservoir
temperature,waterlevel,andotherenvironmentalconditions,algalbloomsmayoccur,resultingin
thickalgalmatsonthesurfaceofthereservoir.Ifthereservoiredgesareshallow,plantspecies
similartothosefoundinpondsmaybepresent.Ifthereservoirhassteeperedges,waterdepthand
fluctuationsinreservoirheightmaypreventtheestablishmentofvegetation.Uplandandriparian
treesthatwerenotremovedduringconstructionofthereservoirorthatwereplantedafterward
maybepresentalongtheperimeterofthereservoir.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthis
communitytypeintheprogramarea.
DrainagesTherearenumerousperennial,intermittent,andephemeraldrainagesintheprogram
area.Becausethesearelinearfeatures,theareaofdrainageintheprogramareawasnotcalculated.
MajordrainageswithintheprogramareaincludeBrushyCreek,AltamontCreek,MountainHouse
Creek,CorralHollowCreek,andPattersonRun.Largerdrainagesoftenhaveriparianvegetation
alongthem(seethediscussionoftheriparianlandcovertypeabove).Theriparianplant
compositionandwidthoftheripariancorridorvarydependingonchannelslope,magnitudeand
frequencyofchannelandoverbankflows,andthefrequency/durationoffloodingflowsthat
inundatethebroaderfloodplain.Willowsmaybecomeestablishedin‐channelinareasofsediment
deposition,unlesssuppressedbyintensivegrazing.
Intermittent,ephemeral,andpotentiallyperennialdrainagesarepresentintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareas.Theacreageofdrainageswasnotcalculatedfortheprogramareaor
theGoldenHillsprojectareabecausenodelineationofwaterswasconductedfortheseareas.
AwetlanddelineationwaspreparedforthePattersonPassproject,and0.85acreofdrainageswas
mappedinthePattersonPassprojectareaaspartofthewetlanddelineation.
Common Wildlife Associations Openwatersupportsavarietyofducksincludingmallard,green‐wingedteal,cinnamonteal(Anas
cyanoptera),gadwall(A.strepera),Americanwigeon(A.americana),andAmericancoot.Many
speciesofcommonandspecial‐statusbats,includingyumamyotisandsilver‐hairedbat
(Lasionycterisnoctivagans),forageonemergentaquaticinvertebratesandobtainfreshwaterfrom
openwaterhabitats.
Whilecanalsandaqueductscanserveasloafinghabitatforsomewaterfowlspecies,theygenerally
donothavemuchhabitatvalue.Becausethesewaterwaysaresowideanddeep,theyalsocreate
barrierstomovementonthelandscapeforterrestrialspecies.However,thesefeaturesmayprovide
theopenexpansesofwaternecessaryforbatspeciesthatdrinkonthewingandlackthe
maneuverabilitytoaccesssmallerwatersources,suchaswesternmastiffbat(Eumopsperotis).
Pondsattractmanybirdsthatarenormallyfoundintheadjacentgrasslands;forexample,California
quail,mourningdove,andbarnandcliffswallows(HirundorusticaandH.pyrrhonota)allrequire
dailywaterandareknowntousepondsaswatersources.Pondsthatcontaineithersubmergedor
emergentvegetationareofparticularimportancetonativeamphibiansasbreedinghabitat.In
perennialponds,nonnativebass(Micropterusssp.)andbullfrog(Lithobatescatesbeianus)are
commonandareoftenprevalentwildlifespecies.Raccoonsforagealongtheedgesofpondsforadult
andlarvalamphibians,fish,andcrayfish.
Reservoirsprovidefoodforsomeraptors,whichmayalsonestinnearbytrees.Shoreandwading
birdsincludingkilldeer,black‐neckedstilt,greateryellowlegs,andseveralgullspeciesmaybefound
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐18 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency inandattheedgesofreservoirs.Reservoirsprovidehabitatforsomenativefishsuchashitch,
Sacramentoblackfish,Californiaroach,andSacramentosucker,butmorecommonlysupport
nonnativefishsuchasbluegill,sunfish,brownbullhead,carp,goldfish,andlargemouthbass.
Reservoirscanalsoprovidesuitablerearinghabitatfornonmigratoryrainbowtroutifconditions
arefavorable.
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesthatmaybefoundinoruseponds,streams,themarginsofreservoirs,
ortheinletswherestreamsflowintoreservoirsincludeCaliforniatigersalamander,Californiared‐
leggedfrog,westernpondturtle,andtricoloredblackbird.Tricoloredblackbirdsrelyonvegetation
associatedwithponds(cattailsandbulrush)fornesting.Westernredbat,hoarybat,Townsend’s
big‐earedbat,andsilver‐hairedbatcouldforageaboveordrinkfromcanalsoraqueducts.
Cropland Cropland Plant Communities Thecroplandlandcovertypeencompassesallareaswherethenativevegetationhasbeencleared
forirrigatedagriculturaluseordrylandfarming.Thiscommunitydoesnotincluderangeland,which
isoftencharacterizedasanagriculturallanduse(mostrangelandintheprogramareaisclassifiedas
annualgrassland).Approximately4.55acresofcroplandispresentinthenortheastcornerofthe
programarea.Nospecial‐statusplantsoccurinthislandcovertypeintheprogramarea.
Common Wildlife Associations Somenativewildlife,suchassmallmammals,certainraptors,andmigratorywaterfowl,utilize
croplandseasonallyoryear‐round.Year‐roundactivitytendstobeconcentratedalongthemargins
ofactivefarmlandwherevegetationislessdisturbedorwheretreesandshrubstendtooccur(some
areplanteddeliberatelyaswindbreaks).Openfieldsthatareirrigatedforforagecropsarealsoused
bywildlife.Cultivatedagricultureisbisectedbystreams,ditches,andchannels.Someamphibians
andreptilesutilizetheselinearaquaticfeaturesandtheadjacentuplandhabitat.
Special‐statuswildlifespeciesexpectedtobefoundinoralongtheedgesofcroplandareburrowing
owl,white‐tailedkite,loggerheadshrike,Swainson’shawk,andgoldeneagle.SanJoaquinkitfoxes
andAmericanbadgersmaymovethroughorforagealongtheedgesofcroplandsifitoccursnear
suitablegrasslandareas.CaliforniatigersalamandersandCaliforniared‐leggedfrogsmaymove
throughcroplandstoreachsuitablebreedingandaestivationhabitat.
Developed and Disturbed Approximately1,502.58acresofthedevelopedanddisturbedlandcovertypearepresentinthe
programarea.Developedlandcomprisesalltypesofdevelopmentforresidential,commercial,
industrial,transportation,landfill,landscaping,andrecreationaluses(e.g.,siteswithstructures,
pavedsurfaces,horticulturalplantings,golfcourses,andirrigatedlawns).Developedanddisturbed
landsintheprogramareaincluderuderalland,urban/suburbandevelopment,ruralresidential,
landfill,golfcourses/urbanparks,andwindturbinesandassociatedinfrastructure.
Developed and Disturbed Plant Communities Ruderalareasareperiodicallydisturbedandarecharacterizedbysparsenonnative,typicallyweedy
vegetation.Mostruderalareasarevacantparcelssurroundedbydevelopedareas.Wherevegetation
ispresent,ruderallandcoverisdominatedbyamixtureofnonnativeannualgrassesandweedy
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐19 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency species,suchasblackmustard(Brassicanigra),thistles(Cirsiumspp.),andwildradish(Raphanus
sativa),thattendtocolonizequicklyafterdisturbance.
Vegetationfoundinotherdevelopedlandsisusuallyintheformoflawns,landscaping,andplanted
streettrees(e.g.,elm,ash,liquidambar,pine,palm).Theruralresidentiallandsmayalsoinclude
smallareasofirrigatedpasture.
Landfillsarehighlydisturbedareaswhileinuse.Afteralandfillisclosedandcapped,itmaybe
returnedtonaturalcommunitytypesthroughplantingandmanagement.
Common Wildlife Associations Developedanddisturbedareasprovidelimitedhabitatforwildlifebutareoftenknowntosupport
commonurban‐dwellingspeciessuchasnorthernmockingbird(Mimuspolyglottos),rockpigeon
(Columbalivia),mourningdove,housesparrow(Passerdomesticus),housefinch(Carpodacus
mexicanus),westernscrub‐jay,Botta’spocketgopher(Thomomysbottae),Californiagroundsquirrel,
housemouse(Musmusculus),blackrat(Rattusrattus),andcoyote.Semi‐developedareascontaining
grass,trees,orwatersources(smallpondsandditches)maysupportadditionalwildlifespecies.
Mexicanfree‐tailedbatisknowntoformlargecoloniesinurbanbuildingsandbridges,andother
commonspecies,suchasbigbrownbat,arefoundinresidentialatticsandornamentaltreesincity
parks.Thesespeciesaretypicallygeneralizedopportunisticforagersthatarehighlytolerantof
humanactivity.
Whiledevelopedlandscapesdonotprovidehigh‐qualityhabitatforspecial‐statuswildlifespecies,
somedevelopedareasmaybeusedforforagingandmovement.SanJoaquinkitfoxes,goldeneagles,
andloggerheadshrikesmaymovethroughand/orforageinruderalareas,golfcourses/urbanparks,
andornamentalwoodlands.Burrowingowlsmayuseruderalareas,urban/suburban,andgolf
coursesforforagingandbreeding.CaliforniatigersalamandersandCaliforniared‐leggedfrogsmay
migratethroughsomedevelopedareasbetweenhabitatpatches.Californiatigersalamandersand
Californiared‐leggedfrogsmayalsousegolfcoursesifpondsarepresentonornearthegolfcourse
andsuitableuplandhabitatisnearby.Somespecial‐statusbatsmayuseartificialstructures
associatedwithurbanlandscapes—suchasbuildings,bridges,andtunnels—formaternityroosts.
Pallidbatsareknowntoroostincrevicesinbridgesorbuildings,andTownsend’sbig‐earedbats
havebeenfoundinopenspacesinabandonedbuildings,tunnelsandotherartificialstructures.
Special‐Status Species Special‐statusspeciesareplantsandanimalsthatarelegallyprotectedunderESA,CESA,orother
regulations;andspeciesthatareconsideredsufficientlyrarebythescientificcommunitytoqualify
forsuchlisting.Special‐statusspeciesaredefinedasfollows.

SpeciesthatarelistedorproposedforlistingasthreatenedorendangeredunderESA(50CFR
17.11[listedanimals];50CFR17.12[listedplants];andvariousnoticesintheFederalRegister.

SpeciesthatarecandidatesforpossiblefuturelistingasthreatenedorendangeredunderESA
(77FR69993,November21,2012).

SpeciesthatarelistedorproposedforlistingbytheStateofCaliforniaasthreatenedor
endangeredunderCESA(14CCR670.5).

SpeciesthatmeetthedefinitionsofrareorendangeredunderCEQA(StateCEQAGuidelines
Section15380).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐20 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
PlantslistedasrareundertheCNPPA(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlifeCommission
1900etseq.).

PlantswithaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1A,1B,2A,and2B(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Wildlife2013).

AnimalslistedasCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernonCDFW’sSpecialAnimalsList
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2011).

AnimalsthatarefullyprotectedinCalifornia(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
Commission3511[birds],4700[mammals],5050[amphibiansandreptiles],and5515[fish]).

BatsidentifiedasmediumorhighpriorityontheWesternBatWorkingGroupregionalpriority
speciesmatrix(WesternBatWorkingGroup2007).
Special‐Status Plants Thirty‐sixspecialstatusplantspeciesoccurinorwithin5milesoftheprogramarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b)(Table3.4‐4).Twenty‐fourofthespeciesarenotknownto
occurintheprogramarea(i.e.,theyoccurwithinthe5‐mileradiusbutnotwithintheprogramarea
boundary)andarenotdiscussedfurther.Thefollowingdiscussionfocusesonthe12speciesthat
occurintheprogramarea.
Large‐Flowered Fiddleneck Large‐floweredfiddleneckisstate‐andfederallylistedasendangered,withaCaliforniaRarePlant
Rankof1B.1.Historically,itwasknownfromtheMountDiablofoothillsinContraCosta,Alameda,
andSanJoaquinCounties,butitiscurrentlyknownonlyfromtwonaturaloccurrencesnearCorral
HollowRoadinSanJoaquinCounty(KelleyandGanders2012:454;CaliforniaDepartmentofFish
andWildlife2013b).Large‐floweredfiddleneckgrowsingrasslands,generallyonnorth‐facing
slopes.Asinglepopulationwasknownfromtheprogramarea,locatedonLawrenceLivermore
Laboratory’sSite300testarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Thisoccurrence
hasnotbeenobservedsince1997andappearstohavebeenextirpatedbyerosion(Carlsenetal.
1999).Californiaannualgrasslandsintheprogramareaarepotentialhabitatforthisspecies.
Brittlescale BrittlescalehasnofederalorstatelistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1B.2.Itis
presentalongthewesternsideoftheGreatValleyfromGlenntoMercedCountiesandinthesmall
valleysoftheinnerCoastRanges,includingtheLivermoreValley(Zacharias2012:633–634;
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Atthelandscapelevel,brittlescaleoccursinthe
broadfloodbasinsofthevalleyfloorandonalluvialfansassociatedwiththemajordrainages
drainingfromtheinnerCoastRangefoothills.Itgrowsiniodinebushscrubandalkaligrasslandson
themarginsofvernalpools,swales,slickspots,andscalds.Itisgenerallyfoundatlowelevationsbut
hasbeencollectedupto1,055feetabovesealevel.Brittlescalehasbeenreportedintheprogram
areafromscaldsinthevicinityofAltamontPassRoad(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013b).Potentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinalkaliwetlandsintheprogramarea;alkali
wetlandsoccurintheGoldenHillsprojectareabutnotinthePattersonPassprojectarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐21 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency San Joaquin Spearscale SanJoaquinspearscalehasnofederalorstatelistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof
1B.2.ItoccursalongthewesternsideoftheGreatValleyfromGlenntoFresnoCountiesandinthe
smallvalleysoftheinnerCoastRanges,includingtheLivermoreValley(Zacharias2012:634;
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Itoccursinthebroadfloodbasinsofthevalley
floorandonalluvialfansassociatedwiththemajordrainagesdrainingfromtheinnerCoastRanges
foothills.Itgrowsiniodinebushscrub,alkalimeadow,andalkaligrasslands.Itisgenerallyfoundat
lowelevations,buthasbeencollectedupto820feetabovesealevel.Intheprogramarea,San
JoaquinspearscalehasbeenrecordedinalkaliwetlandsalongAltamontPassRoad,BrunsRoad,and
MountainHouseRoad(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Potentialhabitatforthis
speciesoccursinalkaliwetlandsintheprogramarea;alkaliwetlandsoccurintheGoldenHills
projectareabutnotinthePattersonPassprojectarea.
Lesser Saltscale LessersaltscalehasnofederalorstatelistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1B.1.Itis
knownprimarilyfromtheSanJoaquinValleyandtheLivermoreValley,althoughotherdisjunct
occurrenceshavebeenreportedinButteandwesternAlamedaCounties(Zacharias2012:634–636;
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Lessersaltscaleoccursinvalleysinkscruband
alkaligrasslandhabitatsonsandy,alkalisoils,oftenonthemarginsofslickspotsoralkalinerain
pools.Intheprogramarea,lessersaltscalehasbeenreportedfromalkaliwetlandsalongDyerRoad
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Potentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinalkali
wetlandsintheprogramarea;alkaliwetlandsoccurintheGoldenHillsprojectareabutnotinthe
PattersonPassprojectarea.
Big Tarplant BigtarplanthasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1B.1.Itis
knownfromtheeasternSanFranciscoBayAreaandthenorthwesternSanJoaquinValley(Baldwin
2012).Bigtarplantoccursinannualgrasslandonclaytoclay‐loamsoils,usuallyonslopesandoften
inburnedareas,below1,500feet.Intheprogramarea,bigtarplantoccursinthevicinityofCorral
HollowRoadandtheMidwaySubstation(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).
PotentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinCaliforniaannualgrasslandintheprogramarea,including
intheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareas.
Round‐Leaved Filaree Round‐leavedfilareehasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof
1B.1.ItisknownfromscatteredoccurrencesintheCentralValley,southernNorthCoastRanges,San
FranciscoBayArea,SouthCoastRanges,ChannelIslands,TransverseRanges,andPeninsularRanges
(Alarcónetal.2012;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Itoccursingrasslandsand
open,grassyareasinoakwoodland.Intheprogramarea,round‐leavedfilareeisknownfromsix
occurrencesalongCorralHollowRoad,atLawrenceLivermoreLaboratory’sSite300testarea,along
AltamontPassRoad,atMountainHouse,andinthehillseastofAltamontPassRoadandDyerRoad
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Potentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursin
Californiaannualgrasslandintheprogramarea,includingtheGoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectsareas.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐22 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Table 3.4‐4. Special‐Status Plant Species Known or with Potential to Occur in the Altamont Pass Wind Repowering Program Area Page 1 of 4 Statusa
Federal/
State/CRPR
Distribution
Habitat
Sharsmith’sonion
Alliumsharsmithii
–/–/1B.3
MountHamiltonRange
Rockyserpentineslopes,inchaparral NearestoccurrencesonCedar
orcypresswoodland;bloomsMarch– Mountain;programareaoutside
May
knownrangeofspecies
Large‐floweredfiddleneck
Amsinckiagrandiflora
E/E/1B.1
HistoricallyknownfromMountDiablo Valleygrasslandslopesbelow1,200
foothillsinContraCosta,Alameda,and feet;bloomsApril–May
SanJoaquincounties;currentlyknown
fromtwonaturaloccurrences
Occursinprogramarea
Alkalimilk‐vetch
Astragalustenervar.tener
–/–/1B.2
SouthernSacramentoValley,northern Grassyflatsandvernalpoolmargins,
SanJoaquinValley,eastSanFrancisco onalkalisoils;bloomsMarch–June
BayArea
NearestoccurrencesinLivermore
Valley,ByronHotSprings(both
occurrencesextirpated)
Heartscale
Atriplexcordulata
–/–/1B.2
CentralValleyfromColusaCountyto
KernCounty
Alkaligrassland,alkalimeadow,
alkaliscrub;bloomsMay–October
Occurrencerecordsnearprogram
areabasedonmisidentifications
Brittlescale
Atriplexdepressa
–/–/1B.2
WesternandeasternCentralValley
andadjacentfoothillsonwestsideof
CentralValley
Alkaligrassland,alkalimeadow,and
alkaliscrub
Occursinprogramarea
SanJoaquinsaltbush
Atriplexjoaquiniana
–/–/1B.2
EasternSanFranciscoBayArea,west
edgeofCentralValleyfromGlenn
CountytoFresnoCounty
Alkalimeadow,alkaligrassland,
saltbushscrub;bloomsApril–
September
Occursinprogramarea
Lessersaltscale
Atriplexminuscula
–/–/1B.1
SanJoaquinValleyfromMerced
CountytoKernCounty;ButteCounty
Alkalisinkandsandyalkalinesoilsin
grasslands,between65–325feet;
bloomsMay–October
Occursinprogramarea
Bigscalebalsamroot
Balsamorhizamacrolepis
–/–/1B.2
ScatteredoccurrencesintheCoast
RangesandSierraNevadafoothills
Fieldsandrockyhillsides,below
2,000feet;grassland,foothill
woodland;bloomsMarch–June
NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
(occurrenceextirpated)
Bigtarplant
Blepharizoniaplumosa
–/–/1B.1
InteriorCoastRangefoothillsfrom
ContraCostaCountytoStanislaus
County
Annualgrassland,ondryhillsand
plains,between50–1,500feet;
bloomsJuly–October
Occursinprogramarea
Round‐leavedfilaree
Californiamacrophylla
–/–/1B.1
ScatteredoccurrencesintheGreat
Valley,southernNorthCoastRanges,
SanFranciscoBayArea,SouthCoast
Ranges,ChannelIslands,Transverse
Ranges,andPeninsularRanges
Grasslands,onfriableclaysoils;
blooms;March–May
Occursinprogramarea
CommonName
ScientificName
OccurrenceinProgramArea
Table 3.4‐4. Continued Page 2 of 4 Statusa
Federal/
State/CRPR
Distribution
Habitat
OccurrenceinProgramArea
MountDiablofairylantern
Calochortuspulchellus
–/–/1B.2
EndemictoContraCostaCounty
Cismontanewoodland;chaparral;
bloomsApril–June
NearestoccurrenceinLos
Vaqueroswatershed
Chaparralharebell
Campanulaexigua
–/–/1B.2
SanFranciscoBayregion;northern
innersouthCoastRanges;Alameda,
ContraCosta,SanBenito,SantaClara,
andStanislausCounties
Rockyareasinchaparral,usuallyon
serpentinite;bloomsMay–June
NearestoccurrencesonCedar
Mountain;programareaoutside
knownrangeofspecies
Lemmon'sjewelflower
Caulanthuslemmonii
–/–/1B.2
SoutheastSanFranciscoBayArea,
souththroughtheSouthCoastRanges
andadjacentSanJoaquinValley
Dryexposedslopesingrasslands
andpinyon‐juniperwoodland,
between260–4,000feet;blooms
March–May
Occursinprogramarea
Congdon'sspikeweed
Centromadiaparryisubsp.
Congdonii
–/–/1B.2
EastSanFranciscoBayArea,Salinas
Valley,LosOsosValley
Annualgrassland,onlowerslopes,
flats,andswales,sometimeson
alkalineorsalinesoils,below560
feet;bloomsJune–November
Occurrencerecordsinprogram
areabasedonmisidentifications
Hispidbird’s‐beak
Chloropyronmollesubsp.
Hispidum
–/–/1B.1
ScatteredlocationsinSanJoaquin
ValleyfromSolanoCountytoKern
County
Meadow,grassland,playa;onalkaline NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
soils,below500feet;bloomsJune–
September
Palmatebird’s‐beak
Chloropyronpalmatum
E/E/1B.1
LivermoreValleyandscattered
locationsintheCentralValleyfrom
ColusatoFresnoCounty
Alkalinegrasslands,chenopodscrub;
bloomsMay–October
NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
MountHamiltonthistle
Cirsiumfontinalevar.campylon
–/–/1B.2
EastSanFranciscoBayArea
Serpentineseepsandstreams;
bloomsApril–October
NearestoccurrencesonCedar
Mountain;programareaoutside
knownrangeofspecies
Livermoretarplant
Deinandrabacigalupii
–/–/1B.2
EndemictoAlamedaCounty
(LivermoreValley)
Alkaligrassland;bloomsJune–
October
NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
HospitalCanyonlarkspur
Delphiniumcalifornicumvar.
interius
–/–/1B.2
EasternSanFranciscoBayArea,
northernSouthCoastRange;Carmel
Valley
Moistravinesandslopesin
woodlands;bloomsMarch–May
Nearestoccurrencessouthof
programarea
Recurvedlarkspur
Delphiniumrecurvatum
–/–/1B.2
SanJoaquinValleyandinteriorvalleys Subalkalinesoilsinannualgrassland,
oftheSouthCoastRanges,from
saltbushscrub;bloomsMarch–May
ContraCostaCountytoKernCounty
CommonName
ScientificName
Occursinprogramarea
Table 3.4‐4. Continued CommonName
ScientificName
Page 3 of 4 Statusa
Federal/
State/CRPR
Distribution
Habitat
OccurrenceinProgramArea
Grassland,chenopodscrub;onclay
soils,wheregrasscoverissparse
enoughtoallowgrowthoflow
annuals;bloomsMarch–May
Occursinprogramarea
Diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppy
Eschscholziarhombipetala
–/–/1B.1
InteriorfoothillsofSouthCoast
RangesfromContraCostaCountyto
StanislausCounty;CarrizoPlaininSan
LuisObispoCounty
Talusfritillary
Fritillariafalcata
–/–/1B.2
SanFranciscoBayArea,InteriorSouth Chaparral,oakwoodland,coniferous
CoastRanges
forest,onserpentinetalus;blooms
March–May
NearestoccurrencesonCedar
Mountain;programareaoutside
knownrangeofspecies
Diablohelianthella
Helianthellacastanea
–/–/1B.2
SanFranciscoBayArea
Atchaparral/oakwoodlandecotone,
ofteninpartialshade,onrockysoils,
between80–3,800feet;blooms
April–June
NearestoccurrencesonCedar
Mountain
Brewer’sdwarfflax
Hesperolinonbreweri
–/–/1B.2
KnownonlyfromContraCosta,Napa,
andSolanocounties
Serpentineslopesinchaparraland
grasslands;bloomsMay–July
NearestoccurrenceinLos
Vaqueroswatershed
TehamaCountywesternflax
Hesperolinontehamense
–/–/1B.3
NorthernandcentralinteriorNorth
Chaparral,foothillwoodland,on
CoastRanges:Tehama,GlennCounties serpentine;100–1,000m;blooms
May–July
NearestoccurrencesonCedar
Mountain;nohabitatinprogram
area
Californiahibiscus
Hibiscuslasiocarpus
–/–/1B.2
Scatteredsmalllocationsincentral
California,fromButtetoSanJoaquin
County
Freshwatermarshalongriversand
sloughs;bloomsAugust–September
NearestoccurrencesnearClifton
CourtForebay
LomaPrietahoita
Hoitastrobilina
–/–/1B.1
SanFranciscoBayArea
Oakwoodland,riparianwoodland,
chaparral,onserpentinite;blooms
May–October
NearestoccurrenceonCedar
Mountain
MountHamiltoncoreopsis
Leptosynehamiltonii
–/–/1B.2
DiabloRange
Steepshaletalusslopes;blooms
March–May
NearestoccurrenceonCedar
Mountain
Mason’slilaeopsis
Lilaeopsismasonii
–/R/1B.1
Sacramento/SanJoaquinRiverdelta
Freshwaterorbrackishmarsh,in
tidalzone;bloomsApril–October
NearestoccurrencesnearClifton
CourtForebay
Deltamudwort
Limosellaaustralis
–/–/2.1
ContraCosta,Sacramento,San
Joaquin,andSolanoCounties
Marshesandswamps;bloomsMay–
August
NearestoccurrencesnearClifton
CourtForebay
Showymadia
Madiaradiata
–/–/1B.1
Scatteredpopulationsintheinterior
foothillsoftheSouthCoastRanges
Oakwoodland,grassland;slopes
NearestoccurrencesnearCorral
below3,000feet;bloomsMarch–May Hollow
Table 3.4‐4. Continued CommonName
ScientificName
Page 4 of 4 Statusa
Federal/
State/CRPR
Distribution
Habitat
OccurrenceinProgramArea
Shiningnavarretia
Navarretianigelliformissubsp.
radians
–/–/1B.2
InteriorfoothillsofSouthCoast
RangesfromMercedCountytoSan
LuisObispoCounty
Mesicareaswithheavyclaysoils,in
swalesandclayflats;inoak
woodland,grassland;between650–
3,300feet;bloomsMay–June
Occursinprogramarea
Hairlesspopcornflower
Plagiobothrysglaber
–/–/1A
CoastalvalleysfromMarinCountyto
SanBenitoCounty
Alkalinemeadows;bloomsApril–
May
NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
(extirpated)
Raylessragwort
Senecioaphanactis
–/–/2.2
ScatteredlocationsinCentralWestern Oakwoodland,coastalscrub;open
CaliforniaandSouthwestern
sandyorrockyareas;blooms
California,fromAlamedaCountyto
January–April
SanDiegoCounty
Occursinprogramarea
Salineclover
Trifoliumdepauperatumvar.
hydrophilum
–/–/1B.2
SacramentoValley,centralwestern
California
Saltmarsh,mesicalkalineareasin
grasslands,vernalpools,below990
feet(300m);bloomsApril–June
NearestoccurrenceinLivermore
Caper‐fruitedtropidocarpum
Tropidocarpumcapparideum
–/–/1B.1
Historicallyknownfromthe
northwestSanJoaquinValleyand
adjacentCoastRangefoothills
Grasslandsinalkalinehillsbelow500 Occursinprogramarea
feet;bloomsMarch–April
a
Statusexplanations:
Federal
– = nostatus.
E = listedas“endangered”underthefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct.
State
– = nostatus.
E = listedas“endangered”undertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct.
R = listedas“rare”undertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct.
CaliforniaRarePlantRank
1A = plantspresumedextinctinCalifornia.
1B = rare,threatened,orendangeredinCaliforniaandelsewhere.
2 = rare,threatened,orendangeredinCalifornia,butmorecommonelsewhere.
0.1 = seriouslyendangeredinCalifornia.
0.2 = fairlyendangeredinCalifornia.
0.3 = notveryendangeredinCalifornia.
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Lemmon’s Jewelflower Lemmon’sjewelflowerhasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof
1B.1.ItrangesfromthesoutheasternSanFranciscoBayareasouthintotheSouthCoastRangesand
adjacentSanJoaquinValley,fromAlamedatoVenturaCounties(Al‐Shehbaz2012:538;California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Lemmon’sjewelflowergrowsondryexposedslopesin
grasslandsandpinyon‐juniperwoodlands,generallybetween260and4,000feetabovesealevel.In
theprogramarea,oneoccurrenceisknownfromthevicinityofCorralHollowRoad(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).PotentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinCaliforniaannual
grasslandintheprogramarea,includingintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareas.
Recurved Larkspur RecurvedlarkspurhasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1B.2.
RecurvedlarkspurwasformerlywidespreadintheCentralValleyfromColusatoKernCounties,
althoughithasbeenextirpatedfromtheSacramentoValley(KoontzandWarnock2012:1411;
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Itoccursinchenopodscrubandgrasslandson
poorlydrained,fine,alkalinesoils(KoontzandWarnock2012:1411).Intheprogramarea,one
occurrenceofrecurvedlarkspurisknownfromalkaligrasslandsalongBrunsRoad(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Plantcommunitiesintheprogramareathatmayprovide
habitatforrecurvedlarkspurarealkalimeadowandalkaliwetlands.AlkaliwetlandsintheGolden
Hillsprojectareamayprovidehabitatforrecurvedlarkspur;therearenoalkaliwetlandsinthe
PattersonPassprojectarea.
Diamond‐Petaled California Poppy Diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppyhasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRare
PlantRankof1B.1.ThisspecieswasknownhistoricallyfromtheinteriorfoothillsoftheNorthand
SouthCoastRangesbutiscurrentlyknownfromonlythreelocationsinAlamedaandSanLuis
ObispoCounties(HannanandClark2012:984;CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).
Diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppygrowsinclaysoilswithinCaliforniaannualgrassland.Inthe
programarea,diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppyisknownfromtwolocationsatLawrence
LivermoreLaboratory’sSite300testarea,northofCorralHollowRoad(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013b).PotentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinCaliforniaannualgrasslandin
theprogramarea,includingintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareas.
Shining Navarretia ShiningnavarretiahasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof1B.2.
ThisspeciesrangesthroughouttheSouthCoastRanges,althoughadditionaloccurrencesare
reportedfromthecentralSanJoaquinValley(Johnson2012:1066;CaliforniaDepartmentofFish
andWildlife2013b).Shiningnavarretiagrowsonclaysoilsingrasslandsandoakwoodland,
sometimesinassociationwithdryingdepressions.Intheprogramarea,shiningnavarretiaisknown
fromasingleoccurrenceatLawrenceLivermoreLaboratory’sSite300testarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).PotentialhabitatforthisspeciesoccursinCaliforniaannual
grasslandintheprogramarea,includingtheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareas,andin
blueoakwoodland,whichdoesnotoccurintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareas.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐23 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Rayless Ragwort RaylessragworthasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlantRankof2.2.Itis
knownfromscatteredlocationsintheCaliforniaCoastRangessouthofSanFranciscoBay,the
TransverseRanges,southwestCalifornia(includingSantaCruzIsland),andBajaCalifornia(Preston
2000).Itisfoundinareaswithlowvegetationcoveringrasslandandcoastalscrub,onvarious
substrates:clay,coarsesand,rockoutcrops(includingserpentinite),andsoilswithhighgypsum
contentorhighalkalinity(Preston2000).Intheprogramarea,raylessragwortisknownfroma
singleoccurrenceinthevicinityofCorralHollowRoad(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013b).Rockoutcropsintheprogramareaarepotentialhabitatforthisspecies.Rockoutcropsdo
notoccurintheGoldenHillsorPattersonPassprojectsareas.
Caper‐Fruited Tropidocarpum Caper‐fruitedtropidocarpumhasnostateorfederallistingstatusbuthasaCaliforniaRarePlant
Rankof1B.1.ItwashistoricallyknownfromthenorthwestSanJoaquinValleyandadjacentDiablo
Rangefoothills,butalloftheseoccurrencesarebelievedtobeextirpated.Ithasrecentlybeen
reportedtooccurinFresno,Monterey,andSanLuisObispoCounties.Itgrowsonclaysoilsin
grasslands.Intheprogramarea,caper‐fruitedtropidocarpumisknownfromasingleoccurrence
nearMountainHouse(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013b).Potentialhabitatforthis
speciesoccursinCaliforniaannualgrasslandintheprogramarea,includingintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectsareas.
Special‐Status Wildlife BasedontheUSFWSspecieslist(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2013);CNDDB(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c)recordssearchforthequadranglesoverlappingthe
programarea(Altamont,CedarMountain,ByronHotSprings,CliftonCourtForebay,andMidway);
andfatalityrecordsfromAPWRAfatalitymonitoring,36special‐statuswildlifespecieswere
identifiedashavingpotentialtooccurintheprogramarea.Ofthese35species,9weredetermined
tohavelowornopotentialtooccurintheprogramareaandarenotdiscussedfurther(Table3.4‐5);
26ofthe35speciesareknowntooccurorhaveamoderatetohighlikelihoodofoccurringwithin
theprogramareabecausesuitablehabitatispresent(longhornfairyshrimp,vernalpoolfairy
shrimp,vernalpooltadpoleshrimp,valleyelderberrylonghornbeetle[Desmoceruscalifornicus
dimorphus],curved‐foothygrotusdivingbeetle,Californiatigersalamander,westernspadefoot
[Speahammondii],Californiared‐leggedfrog,foothillyellow‐leggedfrog[Ranaboylii],westernpond
turtle,Blainville’s[coast]hornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,SanJoaquincoachwhip[Masticophis
flagellumruddocki],white‐tailedkite,northernharrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,western
burrowingowl,loggerheadshrike,tricoloredblackbird,littlebrownbat,westernredbat,hoarybat,
pallidbat,Americanbadger,andSanJoaquinkitfox).Inadditiontothese26species,threespecies
(baldeagle,Townsend’sbig‐earedbat,andsilver‐hairedbat)wereaddedtothistablebasedon
suitablehabitatconditionsandprofessionaljudgment.
AllwildlifespeciesconsideredarelistedinTable3.4‐5,whichpresentstheirregulatorystatus,
distribution,habitatrequirements,andarationalefortheirpotentialtooccurintheprogramarea.
The29special‐statuswildlifespeciesthatareknowntooccurorhaveamoderatetohighpotential
tooccurintheprogramareaarediscussedbrieflybelow.
Inadditiontohabitatconditions,APWRAfatalitydata,andCNDDBdata,informationfromavianuse
surveysoftheprogramareacollectedbytheAFMTwasusedtoevaluatethepotentialforspecial‐
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐24 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Table 3.4‐5. Special‐Status Wildlife Species Known or with Potential to Occur in the Altamont Pass Wind Repowering Program Area Page 1 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Invertebrates
Conservancyfairyshrimp
Branchinectaconservatio
E/–/–
DisjunctoccurrencesinSolano,Merced,
Tehama,Ventura,Butte,andGlenn
Counties
Large,deepvernalpoolsinannual
grasslands
Low—suitablehabitatmaybe
presentbutnotknowntooccurin
AlamedaCounty.
Longhornfairyshrimp
Branchinectalongiantenna
E/–/–
EasternmarginofcentralCoastRanges
fromContraCostaCountytoSanLuis
ObispoCounty;disjunctpopulationin
MaderaCounty
Small,clearpoolsinsandstonerock
outcropsofcleartomoderately
turbidclay‐orgrass‐bottomedpools
High—suitablehabitatpresentin
theprogramarea;known
populationatBrushyPeakPreserve
nearprogramarea;designated
criticalhabitatforthespecies
overlapswithasmallportionofthe
programarea.
Vernalpoolfairyshrimp
Branchinectalynchi
T/–/–
CentralValley,centralandsouthCoast
RangesfromTehamaCountytoSanta
BarbaraCounty;isolatedpopulations
alsoinRiversideCounty
Commoninvernalpools;alsofound
insandstonerockoutcroppools
High—alkaliandseasonalwetlands
intheprogramareaprovide
potentialhabitatforthespecies;
occurrencesknowninprogram
area.
Vernalpooltadpoleshrimp
Lepiduruspackardi
T/–/–
ShastaCountysouthtoMercedCounty
Vernalpoolsandephemeralstock
ponds
High—programareaiswithinthe
speciesknownrangeandstock
pondsandalkaliwetlandsinthe
programareaprovidepotential
habitatforthespecies.Notknown
tooccurinprogramarea.
Valleyelderberrylonghorn
beetle
Desmoceruscalifornicus
dimorphus
T/–/–
Streamsidehabitatsbelow3,000feet
abovesealevelthroughouttheCentral
Valley.
Riparianandoaksavannahabitats
withelderberryshrubsand
streamsidehabitatsbelow3,000feet
abovesealevel.Elderberryshrubis
thehostplant.
Moderate—projectareasupports
elderberryshrubs,butnoCNDDB
occurrencesinprogramarea.
Curved‐foothygrotusdiving
beetle
Hygrotuscurvipes
–/–/–
KelloggCreekwatershedandonesite
nearOakley,ContraCostaCountyand
AlamedaCounty
Aquatic;smallseasonalpoolsand
wetlandsandsmallpoolsleftindry
creekbeds,associatedwithalkaline‐
tolerantvegetation
High—suitablehabitatinprogram
area;severalCNDDBoccurrencesin
northwesternportionofprogram
area.
Table 3.4‐5. Continued Page 2 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Fish
Greensturgeon
Acipensermedirostris
T/SSC/–
InmarinewatersofthePacificOcean
fromtheBeringSeatoEnsenada,
Mexico.InriversfromBritishColumbia
southtotheSacramentoRiver,
primarilyintheKlamath/Trinityand
SacramentoRivers.
Primarilymarine,usinglarge
anadromousfreshwaterriversand
associatedestuariesforspawning
andrearing.
None—outsideofspeciesknown
rangeandnosuitablehabitatinthe
programarea.
Deltasmelt
Hypomesustranspacificus
T/T/–
PrimarilyintheSacramento–San
JoaquinEstuary,buthasbeenfoundas
farupstreamasthemouthofthe
AmericanRiverontheSacramento
RiverandMossdaleontheSanJoaquin
River;rangeextendsdownstreamto
SanPabloBay.
OccursinestuaryhabitatintheDelta
wherefreshandbrackishwatermix
inthesalinityrangeof2–7partsper
thousand(Moyle2002).
None—outsideofspeciesknown
range.
CentralCaliforniaCoast
steelhead
Oncorrhynchusmykiss
T/–/–
Coastaldrainagesalongthecentral
Californiacoast.
Ananadromousfishthatspawnsand
spendsaportionofitslifeininland
streams,typicallymaturinginthe
openocean
None—outsideofspeciesknown
rangeandnosuitablehabitatinthe
programarea.
CentralValleysteelhead
Oncorrhynchusmykiss
T/–/–
SacramentoandSanJoaquinRiverand
theirtributaries.
Ananadromousfishthatspawnsand
spendsaportionofitslifeininland
streams,typicallymaturinginthe
openocean
None—noperennialstreams
suitableforanadromousfishare
presentintheprogramarea.
CentralValleyspring‐run
Chinooksalmon
Oncorhynchustshawytscha
T/T/–
UpperSacramentoRiverandtributaries Occursinwell‐oxygenated,cool,
ofFeatherandYubaRivers
riverinehabitatwithwater
temperaturesfrom8.0to12.5°C.
Habitattypesareriffles,runs,and
pools.Coldwaterpoolsareneeded
forholdingadults(Moyle2002.)
None—outsideofspeciesknown
range.
SacramentoRiverwinter‐run
Chinooksalmon
Oncorhynchustshawytscha
E/E/–
MainstemSacramentoRiverbelow
KeswickDam(Moyle2002)
None—outsideofspeciesknown
range.
Occursinwell‐oxygenated,cool,
riverinehabitatwithwater
temperaturesfrom8.0to12.5°C.
Habitattypesareriffles,runs,and
pools.(Moyle2002.)
Table 3.4‐5. Continued Page 3 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Amphibians
Californiatigersalamander
Ambystomacaliforniense
T/T/–
CentralValley,includingSierraNevada
foothills,uptoapproximately1,000
feet,andcoastalregionfromSonoma
CountysouthtoSantaBarbaraCounty
Smallponds,lakes,orvernalpoolsin
grasslandsandoakwoodlandsfor
breedingandlarvaldevelopment;
rodentburrows,rockcrevices,or
fallenlogsforcoverforadultsand
juvenilesforsummerdormancy.
High—specieshasbeen
documentedatnumerouslocations
withinandneartheprogramarea.
Alluplandandsuitableaquatic
habitatswithintheprogramarea
areconsideredpotentially
occupied.
Westernspadefoot
Speahammondii
–/SSC/–
SierraNevadafoothills,CentralValley,
CoastRanges,coastalcountiesin
southernCalifornia
Shallowstreamswithriffles;
seasonalwetlands,suchasvernal
poolsinannualgrasslandsandoak
woodlands
High—programareaiswithinthe
speciesknownrangeandsuitable
habitatispresentintheprogram
area.
Californiared‐leggedfrog
Ranadraytonii
T/T/–
Foundalongthecoastandcoastal
mountainrangesofCaliforniafrom
MendocinoCountytoSanDiegoCounty
andintheSierraNevadafromButte
CountytoStanislausCounty.
Permanentandsemipermanent
aquatichabitats,suchascreeksand
cold‐waterponds,withemergent
andsubmergentvegetation;may
estivateinrodentburrows,soil
cracks,ordownedlogsduringdry
periods
High—specieshasbeen
documentedatnumerouslocations
withinandneartheprogramarea;
alluplandandsuitableaquatic
habitatswithintheprogramarea
areconsideredpotentially
occupied.Theprogramareais
entirelywithindesignatedcritical
habitatforthespecies.
Foothillyellow‐leggedfrog
Ranaboylii
–/SSC/–
OccursintheKlamath,Cascade,north
Coast,southCoast,Transverse,and
SierraNevadaRangesupto
approximately1,800meters(6,000
feet).
Creeksorriversinwoodland,forest,
mixedchaparral,andwetmeadow
habitatswithrockandgravel
substrateandlowoverhanging
vegetationalongtheedge.Usually
foundnearriffleswithrocksand
sunnybanksnearby.
Moderate—streamswithinthe
programareathatcontainsuitable
substrateandcovercouldsupport
thespecies;CNDDBrecordsfor
occurrenceswithin2milesofthe
programarea.
Table 3.4‐5. Continued Page 4 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Reptiles
Westernpondturtle
Actinemysmarmorata
–/SSC/–
Thewesternpondturtleisuncommon
tocommoninsuitableaquatichabitat
throughoutCalifornia,westofthe
Sierra‐Cascadecrestandabsentfrom
desertregions,exceptintheMojave
DesertalongtheMojaveRiverandits
tributaries.
Occupiesponds,marshes,rivers,
streams,andirrigationcanalswith
muddyorrockybottomsandwith
watercress,cattails,waterlilies,or
otheraquaticvegetationin
woodlands,grasslands,andopen
forests.Nestsaretypically
constructedinuplandhabitatwithin
0.25mileofaquatichabitat.
High—suitableaquaticandupland
nestinghabitatintheprogram
area;tablehabitat;knowntooccur
inandneartheprogramarea.
Blainville’s(Coast)horned
lizard
Phyrnosomablainvillii
–/SSC/–
SacramentoValley,includingfoothills,
southtosouthernCalifornia;Coast
RangessouthofSonomaCounty;below
1,200meters(4,000feet)innorthern
California.
Grasslands,brushlands,woodlands,
andopenconiferousforestwith
sandyorloosesoil;requires
abundantantcoloniesforforaging
High—suitablehabitat(grassland
andwoodland)ispresent
throughouttheprogramarea
althoughsuitablesubstrate
conditionsmaynotbepresent
throughouttheprogramarea;
knowntooccurinandnearthe
programarea.
Silveryleglesslizard
Anniellapulchra
–/SSC/–
AlongtheCoast,Transverse,and
PeninsularRangesfromContraCosta
CountytoSanDiegoCountywithspotty
occurrencesintheSanJoaquinValley;
elevationrangeextendsfromsealevel
toabout5,100feet.
Occursinmoistwarmloosesoilwith Low—limitedsuitablehabitatin
plantcover.Moistureisessential.
programareaandsoilmoisture
Habitatconsistofsparselyvegetated conditionsunlikely.
areasofbeachdunes,chaparral,
pine‐oakwoodlands,desertscrub,
sandywashes,andstreamterraces
withsycamores,cottonwoods,or
oaks.Leaflitterundertreesand
bushesinsunnyareas,anddunes
stabilizedwithbushlupineandmock
heatheroftenindicatesuitable
habitat.Usesurfaceobjectssuchas
rocks,boards,driftwood,andlogsfor
cover.
Table 3.4‐5. Continued CommonName
ScientificName
Page 5 of 9 Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Giantgartersnake
Thamnophisgigas
T/T/–
CentralValleyfromthevicinityof
BurrelinFresnoCountytonearChico
inButteCounty.Extirpatedfromareas
southofFresno.
Sloughs,canals,low‐gradient
streams,andfreshwatermarshes
wherethereisapreybaseofsmall
fishandamphibians.Alsoirrigation
ditchesandricefields.Requires
grassybanksandemergent
vegetationforbaskingandareasof
highgroundprotectedfromflooding
duringwinter.
None—programareaisoutsideof
speciesrangeexceptforextreme
northeastcornerofprogram;no
suitablehabitatispresentinthe
programareaandnonearby
occurrences.
Alamedawhipsnake
Masticophislateralis
euryxanthus
T/T/–
RestrictedtoAlamedaandContraCosta
Counties;fragmentedintofivedisjunct
populationsthroughoutitsrange
Valleys,foothills,andlowmountains
associatedwithnortherncoastal
scruborchaparralhabitat;requires
rockoutcropsforcoverandforaging
High—suitablegrasslandhabitatis
presentthroughouttheprogram
areabutvegetationassociations
(scrubandchaparral)androck
outcropsaremorelimited;known
tooccurinandneartheprogram
area.Designatedcriticalhabitatfor
thespeciesoverlapsaportionof
theprogramarea.
SanJoaquincoachwhip
Masticophisflagellum
ruddocki
–/SSC/–
FromColusacountyintheSacramento
Valleysouthwardtothegrapevinein
theSanJoaquinValleyandwestward
intotheinnercoastranges.Anisolated
populationoccursatSutterButtes.
Knownelevationalrangefrom20to
900meters.
Occursinopen,dry,vegetative
associationswithlittleornotree
cover.Itoccursinvalleygrassland
andsaltbushscrubassociations.
Oftenoccursinassociationwith
mammalburrows
High—suitablegrasslandhabitatis
presentwithintheprogramarea;
knowntooccurinandnearthe
programarea.
Table 3.4‐5. Continued Page 6 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Birds
White‐tailedkite
Elanusleucurus
–/FP/–
LowlandareaswestofSierraNevada
fromtheheadoftheSacramentoValley
south,includingcoastalvalleysand
foothillstowesternSanDiegoCountyat
theMexicoborder
Lowfoothillsorvalleyareaswith
valleyorliveoaks,riparianareas,
andmarshesnearopengrasslands
forforaging
High—speciesisknowntooccurin
theprogramareaandislikelyto
forageintheprogramarea.Large
treessuitablefornestingare
limited.
Baldeagle
Haliaeetusleucocephalus
P/E,FP/–
NestsinSiskiyou,Modoc,Trinity,
Shasta,Lassen,Plumas,Butte,Tehama,
Lake,andMendocinoCountiesandin
theLakeTahoeBasin;reintroducedinto
centralcoast;winterrangeincludesthe
restofCalifornia,exceptthe
southeasterndeserts,veryhigh
altitudesintheSierraNevada,andeast
oftheSierraNevadasouthofMono
County
InwesternNorthAmerica,nestsand
roostsinconiferousforestswithin1
mileofalake,reservoir,orstream,
ortheocean
Moderate—suitablenestingand
foraginghabitatpresentatBethany
Reservoir;notknowntooccurin
theprogramareabutmaynest,
forage,ormovethroughit.
Northernharrier
Circuscyaneus
–/SSC/–
ThroughoutlowlandCalifornia;has
beenrecordedinfallathighelevations
Grasslands,meadows,marshes,and
seasonalandagriculturalwetlands
providingtallcover
High—suitablenestingand
foraginghabitatispresent
throughouttheprogramarea;
knowntooccurintheprogram
area.
Swainson’shawk
Buteoswainsoni
–/T/–
LowerSacramentoandSanJoaquin
Valleys,KlamathBasin,andButte
Valley.Highestnestingdensitiesoccur
nearDavisandWoodland,YoloCounty.
Nestsinoaksorcottonwoodsinor
nearriparianhabitats.Foragesin
grasslands,irrigatedpastures,and
grainfields.
High—speciesisknowntooccurin
theprogramareabutislargelya
CentralValleyspeciesandisless
likelytoforageintheprogramarea.
Largetreessuitablefornestingare
limited.
Goldeneagle
Aquilachrysaetos
P/FP/–
Foothillsandmountainsthroughout
California;uncommonnonbreeding
visitortolowlandssuchastheCentral
Valley
Nestsincliffsandescarpmentsortall High—suitablenestingand
trees;foragesinannualgrasslands,
foraginghabitatpresent;knownto
chaparral,oroakwoodlandsthat
occurinprogramarea.
provideabundantmediumandlarge‐
sizedmammalsforprey
Table 3.4‐5. Continued CommonName
ScientificName
Page 7 of 9 Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
Westernburrowingowl
Athenecunicularia
–/SSC/–
LowlandsthroughoutCalifornia,
includingtheCentralValley,
northeasternplateau,southeastern
deserts,andcoastalareas;rarealong
southcoast
Level,open,dry,heavilygrazedor
lowstaturegrasslandordesert
vegetationwithavailableburrows
High—suitablenestingand
foraginghabitatispresent
throughouttheprogramarea;
numerousknownoccurrences
throughouttheprogramarea.
Loggerheadshrike
Laniusludovicianus
–/SSC/–
Residentandwintervisitorinlowlands
andfoothillsthroughoutCalifornia;rare
oncoastalslopenorthofMendocino
County,occurringonlyinwinter
Prefersopenhabitatswithscattered
shrubs,trees,posts,fences,utility
lines,orotherperches.Nestsin
denselyfoliagedtreesorshrubs
High—suitablenestingand
foraginghabitatpresent;knownto
occurinprogramarea;nesting
habitatislimitedtoareasthat
supportshrubsandtrees.
Tricoloredblackbird
Agelaiustricolor
–/SSC/–
PermanentresidentintheCentral
ValleyfromButteCountytoKern
County;breedsatscatteredcoastal
locationsfromMarinCountysouthto
SanDiegoCountyandatscattered
locationsinLake,Sonoma,andSolano
Counties;rarenesterinSiskiyou,
Modoc,andLassenCounties
Nestsindensecoloniesinemergent
marshvegetation,suchastulesand
cattails,oruplandsiteswith
blackberries,nettles,thistles,and
grainfields;habitatmustbelarge
enoughtosupport50pairs;probably
requireswateratornearthenesting
colony
High—suitablenestingand
foraginghabitatpresent;knownto
occurinprogramarea;nesting
habitatislimitedtoareasthat
supportlargerexpansesof
emergentfreshwatermarshand
blackberry.
Mammals
Littlebrownbat
Myotislucifugus
–/–/WBWG
Moderate
Foundthroughoutthenorthernportion
ofCalifornia,primarilyathigher
elevations.
Oftenassociatedwithconiferous
forest.Requiresnearbywater.
Roostsinhollowtrees,rock
outcrops,buildings,andoccasionally
minesandcaves.
High—mayroost,forageordrink
intheprogramarea.Assuming
identificationwascorrect,this
specieshasbeendocumentedin
fatalityrecordsatAPWRA.
Silver‐hairedbat
Lasionycterisnoctivagans
–/–/WBWG
Moderate
FoundfromtheOregonbordersouth
alongthecoasttoSanFranciscoBay
andalongtheSierraNevadaandGreat
BasinregiontoInyoCounty.Also
occursinsouthernCaliforniafrom
VenturaandSanBernardinoCounties.
southtoMexico.Hasbeenrecordedin
Sacramento,Stanislaus,Montereyand
YoloCounties
Duringspringandfallmigrationsthe
silver‐hairedbatmaybefound
anywhereinCalifornia.Summer
habitatsincludecoastalandmontane
coniferousforests,valleyfoothill
woodlands,pinyon‐juniper
woodlands,andvalleyfoothilland
montaneriparianhabitats.Roostsin
hollowtrees,snags,buildings,rock
crevices,caves,andunderbark.
Moderate—mayroost,forageor
drinkintheprogramarea;few
fatalityrecordsfromwindfarmsin
theDelta,approximately25miles
north/northwest.Thisspecieshas
beenacousticallydocumentedata
neighboringwindfarm(Pandion
2010).
Table 3.4‐5. Continued Page 8 of 9 CommonName
ScientificName
Status
Federal/State/
Other
Westernredbat
Lasiurusblossevillii
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
–/SSC/WBWG
High
CoastalareasfromtheSanFrancisco
Bayareasouth,plustheCentralValley
andsurroundingfoothills,witha
limitednumberofrecordsfrom
southernCalifornia,extendingasfar
eastaswesternRiversideandcentral
SanDiegocounties,upperSacramento
RivernearDunsmuir,SiskiyouCounty.
Foundprimarilyinriparianand
woodedhabitats.Occursatleast
seasonallyinurbanareas.Dayroosts
intreeswithinthefoliage.Foundin
fruitorchardsandsycamoreriparian
habitatsintheCentralValley.
High—mayroost,forageordrinkin
theprogramarea.Documentedin
fatalityrecordatAPWRA.
Hoarybat
Lasiuruscinereus
–/–/WBWG
Moderate
OccursthroughoutCaliforniafromsea
levelto13,200feet.Statewidein
woodedareas.Winterinsouthern
California.
Primarilyroostsinforestedhabitats.
Alsofoundinriparianareasandin
parkandgardensettingsinurban
areas.Dayroostswithinfoliageof
trees.
High—mayroost,forageordrinkin
theprogramarea.Documentedin
fatalityrecordatAPWRA.
Townsend’sbig‐earedbat
Corynorhinustownsendii
–/SSC/WBWG
High
WidespreadthroughoutCalifornia,
fromlowdeserttomid‐elevation
montanehabitats.
Roostsincaves,tunnels,mines,
buildings,andothercave‐likespaces.
Willnightroostinmoreopen
settings,includingunderbridges.
Moderate—Mayroostincavesor
structureswithinoradjacenttothe
programarea;couldforageordrink
withinprogramarea.
Pallidbat
Antrozouspallidus
–/SSC/WBWG
High
OccursthroughoutCaliforniaexceptthe
highSierrafromShastatoKernCounty
andthenorthwestcoast,primarilyat
lowerandmidelevations(upto6,000
feet).
Occursinavarietyofhabitatsfrom
deserttoconiferousforest.Most
closelyassociatedwithoak,mixed
conifer,redwood,andgiantsequoia
habitatsinnorthernCaliforniaand
oakwoodland,grassland,anddesert
scrubinsouthernCalifornia.Relies
heavilyontreesforroostsbutalso
usescaves,mines,bridges,and
buildings.
High—mayroost,forageordrink
intheprogramarea;onerecordfor
anoccurrencewithin5milesofthe
programarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013b).
Table 3.4‐5. Continued CommonName
ScientificName
Page 9 of 9 Status
Federal/State/
Other
GeographicDistribution
HabitatRequirements
Occursinawidevarietyofopen,arid
habitatsbutaremostcommonly
associatedwithgrasslands,
savannas,mountainmeadows,and
openareasofdesertscrub;the
principalhabitatrequirementsfor
thespeciesappeartobesufficient
food(burrowingrodents),friable
soils,andrelativelyopen,
uncultivatedground.
Americanbadger
Taxideataxus
–/SSC
InCalifornia,badgersoccurthroughout
thestateexceptinhumidcoastalforests
ofnorthwesternCaliforniainDelNorte
andHumboldtCounties
SanJoaquinkitfox
Vulpesmacrotismutica
E/T
PrincipallyoccursintheSanJoaquin
Saltbushscrub,grassland,oak,
Valleyandadjacentopenfoothillstothe savanna,andfreshwaterscrub.
west;recentrecordsfrom17counties
extendingfromKernCountynorthto
ContraCostaCounty
a
LikelihoodtoOccurintheProgram
Area
High—suitablegrasslandhabitat
throughouttheprogramarea;
knowntooccurwithinandnearthe
programarea.
High—suitablegrasslandhabitatis
presentthroughouttheprogram
area;althoughrecentsightingsare
limited,thespecieshasbeen
documentedatseverallocalities
withinandneartheprogramarea.
Statusexplanations:
Federal
E
T
–
= listedasendangeredunderthefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct.
= listedasthreatenedunderthefederalEndangeredSpeciesAct.
= nolisting.
State
E
T
FP
SSC
–
=
=
=
=
=
listedasendangeredundertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct.
listedasthreatenedundertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct.
fullyprotectedundertheCaliforniaFishandGameCode.
speciesofspecialconcerninCalifornia.
nolisting.
Other
WesternBatWorkingGroup(WBWG)Priority
High
= speciesareimperiledorathighriskofimperilment.
Moderate = thisdesignationindicatesalevelofconcernthatshouldwarrantcloserevaluation,moreresearch,andconservationactionsofboththespeciesand
possiblethreats.Alackofmeaningfulinformationisamajorobstacleinadequatelyassessingthesespecies'statusandshouldbeconsideredathreat.
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency statusbirdstooccurintheprogramareaandtobepotentiallyadverselyaffectedbyconstruction
andoperationofnewwindturbines.Collectionofavianusedatawasinitiatedin2004andinvolves
samplingavianpresenceat70–90observationpointsdistributedthroughouttheAPWRAfor10–30
minutesateachobservationpoint.Themethodsusedtoestimateavianfatalityratesandtomeasure
andmonitoravianuseoftheprogramareaaredetailedintheAltamontPassWindResourceArea
BirdFatalityStudy,BirdYears2005–2011(ICFInternational2013).
Longhorn Fairy Shrimp Longhornfairyshrimpisfederallylistedasendangered.Therangeoflonghornfairyshrimpis
restrictedtotheeasternedgeofthecentralCoastRanges.Thespecieshasbeenfoundinthefoothill
grasslandswestofTracy,atKestersonNationalWildlifeRefugeinMercedCounty,andnearSoda
LakeinSanLuisObispoCounty(EriksenandBelk1999:91).
Longhornfairyshrimphavebeenfoundinclear‐waterdepressionalpoolsinsandstoneoutcrops,in
grasslandpools,andinpoolsinvalleysaltbushscrub.Thespecieshasbeenobservedfromlate
Decembertomid‐Mayinpoolsthatarefilledbywinterandspringrains.Inhabitedpoolsin
sandstoneoutcropstendtobeverysmallwithclearwaterandlowlevelsofsolublesubstances.
Clay‐andgrass‐bottomedpoolsthatlonghornfairyshrimpinhabitarecleartofairlyturbid.Pools
wherelonghornfairyshrimpoccurareprobablyshort‐lived(approximately3weeks).Larvaehatch
soonafterpoolsfillandwatertemperatureisapproximately10ºC.Longhornfairyshrimpneed
watertemperaturesof15–20ºCtoattainmaturity.Maturationisachievedin23daysunderoptimal
conditions,but43daysismoretypical(EriksenandBelk1999:91‐92).
Intheprogramarea,seasonalwetlandsandrockoutcropsprovidesuitablehabitatforlonghorn
fairyshrimp.ThereisoneCNDDBrecordforanoccurrenceoflonghornfairyshrimpinthenortheast
portionoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Thereisan
additionalrecordforanoccurrenceoflonghornfairyshrimpwithin0.5milenorthoftheprogram
area.LonghornfairyshrimpisalsoknowntooccurneartheprogramareaatBrushyPeakPreserve
(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2007:3).Criticalhabitatforlonghornfairyshrimpislocatedinthe
northwestportionoftheprogramarea(Figure3.4‐4).
Grass‐bottomseasonalpoolsthataresuitableforlonghornfairyshrimpmaybepresentwithinthe
GoldenHillsprojectarea.OneseasonalwetlandinthePattersonPassprojectareaprovidessuitable
habitatforlonghornfairyshrimp.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesoflonghornfairy
shrimpineitheroftheprojectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Thereisno
designatedcriticalhabitatforlonghornfairyshrimpintheGoldenHillsorPattersonPassproject
areas(Figure3.4‐4).
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Vernalpoolfairyshrimpisfederallylistedasthreatened.ThespeciesisfoundfromShastaCountyin
thenorththroughouttheCentralValleytoTulareCountyandwesttothecentralCoastRanges.
DisjunctpopulationsoccurinSanLuisObispo,SantaBarbara,andRiversideCounties(Eriksenand
Belk1999:92,125).Vernalpoolfairyshrimpinhabitsandstonedepressionpoolsandvernalpoolsin
grasslandhabitats.Vernalpoolfairyshrimparemostcommonlyfoundingrassormud‐bottomed
swales,earthslumps,orbasalt‐flowdepressionpoolsinunplowedgrasslands(Engetal.1990:257).
Thechemicalcompositionofthehabitatandwatertemperaturevariationsresultingfrompools
fillingatdifferenttimesanddistributionofpoolsalongaltitudinalandlongitudinalgradientsarethe
mostimportantfactorsindeterminingthedistributionofdifferentspeciesoffairyshrimp(Engetal.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐25 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 1990:273).Vernalpoolfairyshrimpalsooccurinotherwetlandsthatprovidehabitatcharacteristics
similartothoseofvernalpools;theseotherwetlandsincludealkalinerainpools,rockoutcroppools,
andsomedisturbedandconstructedsites(59FR48136–48153,September16,1994;Eriksenand
Belk1999:93).Occupiedhabitatsrangeinsizefrom6‐square‐footpuddlestopoolsexceeding24
acres.Suitablepoolsmuststayinundatedlongenoughforvernalpoolfairyshrimptocompletetheir
lifecycle,whichtypicallytakes3–6weeks(EriksenandBelk1999:93).Vernalpoolfairyshrimpis
notfoundinriverine,marine,orotherpermanentwaters(59FR4813648153,September16,
1994).
Alkaliandseasonalwetlandsintheprogramareaprovidesuitablehabitatforvernalpoolfairy
shrimp.ThereisoneCNDDBrecordforanoccurrenceofvernalpoolfairyshrimpinthenorthwest
portionoftheprogramareaandfiveadditionalrecordsforoccurrencesthatarewest,north,and
northeastoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Thereisno
designatedcriticalhabitatforvernalpoolfairyshrimpwithintheprogramarea(Figure3.4‐4).
Alkaliandseasonalwetlandsthatprovidesuitablehabitatforvernalpoolfairyshrimpmaybe
presentwithintheGoldenHillsprojectarea;however,habitatsurveyshavenotbeenconducted.One
seasonalwetlandinthePattersonPassprojectareaprovidessuitablehabitatforvernalpoolfairy
shrimp.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofvernalpoolfairyshrimpineitherofthe
projectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Vernalpooltadpoleshrimpisfederallylistedasendangered.ThisspeciesisaCaliforniaCentral
Valleyendemicspecies,withthemajorityofpopulationsintheSacramentoValley.Vernalpool
tadpoleshrimphasalsobeenreportedfromtheSacramentoRiverDeltaeastofSanFranciscoBay
andfromscatteredlocalitiesintheSanJoaquinValleyfromSanJoaquintoMaderaCounties(Rogers
2001:1002).
Vernalpooltadpoleshrimpoccurinawidevarietyofseasonalhabitatsincludingvernalpools,
pondedclayflats,alkalinepools,ephemeralstocktanks,androadsideditches.Habitatswherevernal
pooltadpoleshrimphavebeenobservedrangeinsizefromsmall(lessthan25squarefeet),clear,
vegetatedvernalpoolstohighlyturbidalkaliscaldpoolstolarge(morethan100acres)winterlakes
(Helm1998:134–138;Rogers2001:1002–1005).Thesepoolsandotherephemeralwetlandsmust
dryoutandbeinundatedagainforthevernalpooltadpoleshrimpcyststohatch.Thisspecieshas
notbeenreportedinpoolsthatcontainhighconcentrationsofsodiumsalts,butmayoccurinpools
withhighconcentrationsofcalciumsalts(Helm1998:134–138;Rogers2001:1002–1005).
Seasonalwetlandsandephemeralpondsintheprogramareathatremaininundatedforaminimum
of6–8weekswouldprovidesuitablehabitatforvernalpooltadpoleshrimp.Althoughthereareno
CNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofvernalpooltadpoleshrimpintheprogramarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c),theprogramareaislocatedwithintheirknownrange.
Thereisnodesignatedcriticalhabitatforvernalpooltadpoleshrimpwithintheprogramarea.
Seasonalwetlandsandephemeralpondsthatprovidesuitablehabitatforvernalpooltadpole
shrimpmaybepresentwithintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Oneareaofperennialfreshwatermarsh
inthePattersonPassprojectareaprovidessuitablehabitatforvernalpooltadpoleshrimp.There
arenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofvernalpooltadpoleshrimpineitheroftheprojectareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐26 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Valleyelderberrylonghornbeetleisfederallylistedasthreatened.OnOctober2,2012,USFWS
proposedtoremovevalleyelderberrylonghornbeetlefromthefederallistofendangeredand
threatenedspecies(77FR60237–60276).Theproposedrule,ifmadefinal,wouldalsoremovethe
designationofcriticalhabitatforthesubspecies.Thepubliccommentperiodontheproposed
delistingendedDecember3,2012,andwasextendedthroughJanuary23,2013(78FR4812–4813).
USFWSwillreviewcommentsandmakeafinaldeterminationontheproposedrule.Thereisno
officialtimeperiodforthisdetermination;untilitismade,thebeetleretainsitsprotectedstatusand
criticalhabitatdesignation.
ThecurrentknownrangeofvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetleextendsthroughoutCalifornia’s
CentralValleyandassociatedfoothillsfromaboutthe3,000‐footcontourontheeastandthe
watershedoftheCentralValleyonthewest(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1999:1).Valley
elderberrylonghornbeetleisdependentonitshostplant,elderberry,whichisacommon
componentofripariancorridorsandadjacentuplandareasintheCentralValley(Barr1991:5).
Valleyelderberrylonghornbeetlehasfourstagesoflife:egg,larva,pupa,andadult.Femalesdeposit
eggsonoradjacenttothehostelderberry.Eggproductionvaries;femaleshavebeenobservedtolay
between16and180eggs.Eggshatchwithinafewdaysofbeingdeposited.Larvaeemergeandbore
intothewoodofthehostplant,creatingalongfeedinggalleryinthepithoftheelderberrystem.The
larvaefeedonthepithoftheplantfor1–2years.Whenalarvaisreadytopupate,itchewsanexit
holetotheoutsideofthestemandthenplugsitwithfrass.Thelarvathenretreatsintothefeeding
galleryandconstructsapupalchamberfromwoodandfrass.Thelarvaemetamorphosebetween
DecemberandApril;thepupalstagelastsaboutamonth.Theadultremainsinthechamberfor
severalweeksaftermetamorphosisandthenemergesfromthechamberthroughtheexithole.
Adultsemergebetweenmid‐Marchandmid‐June,thefloweringseasonoftheplant.Adultsfeedon
elderberryleavesandmatewithintheelderberrycanopy(Talleyetal.2006:7‐9).
Elderberryshrubsintheprogramareaprovidesuitablehabitatforvalleyelderberrylonghorn
beetle.Elderberryshrubsmaybeassociatedwiththemixedriparianforestandwoodland,mixed
willowriparianscrub,blueoakwoodland,foothillpine‐oakwoodland,mixedevergreenforestoak
woodland,andgrasslandlandcovertypes.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetleintheprogramarea.Theclosestrecordisforthreeadultsobservedat
LawrenceLivermoreNationalLaboratorySite300(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013c).
ElderberryshrubsmaybepresentintheGoldenHillsprojectareaandwouldprovidesuitable
habitatforvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.Elderberryshrubsmaybeassociatedwiththemixed
willowriparianscrubandgrasslandlandcovertypes.AnICFbiologistfound39elderberryshrubsin
thePattersonPassprojectareaduringasurveytoassesshabitatsforspecial‐statusspeciesin
November2013.Severaloftheshrubshadvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetleexitholes.
Curved‐Footed Hygrotus Diving Beetle Curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetledoesnothaveanystateorfederalstatusbutisconsidered
rareunderCEQA.IntheNovember15,1994NoticeofReview(50FR58982–59028),USFWS
concludedthatcurved‐foothygrotusdivingbeetlewaspossiblyappropriateforlistingasthreatened
orendangeredbutlackingpersuasivedatatosupportaproposalforlisting.Itsstatustrendwas
listedasunknown.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐27 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Theknownrangeofthecurved‐foothygrotusdivingbeetleislimitedtoContraCostaandAlameda
Counties(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Littleinformationisavailableforthe
curved‐foothygrotusdivingbeetle.Thespeciesisknowntoinhabitvernalandseasonalpoolsand
wetlands(EssigMuseumofEntomology2013),aswellasstockponds,irrigationcanals,roadside
ditches,poolsincreeksandcreekswithslowflows(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013c).Bothlarvalandadultlifestagesarepredaceousand,likeotherspeciesinthefamily,winged
adultscandispersebetweenhabitats(PowellandHogue1979).Reasonsfordeclineofthespecies
includelossofhabitattodevelopmentandnon‐targeteffectsofmosquitocontrol(EssigMuseumof
Entomology2013).
Seasonalwetlands,ponds,andsomecreeksintheprogramareamayprovidesuitablehabitatfor
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle.TherearethreeCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofcurved‐
footedhygrotusdivingbeetleinthenorthwestportionoftheprogramareaandeightadditional
recordsforoccurrencesthatarewest,north,andeastoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013c).
Seasonalwetlands,ponds,andsomecreeksmayprovidesuitablehabitatforcurved‐footedhygrotus
divingbeetleintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Pondsandsomecreeksmayprovidesuitablehabitat
forthisbeetleinthePattersonPassprojectarea.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesof
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetleineitheroftheprojectareas;howeveroneoftheoccurrences
intheprogramareaisjustoutsideoftheGoldenHillsprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFish
andWildlife2013c).
California Tiger Salamander TheCentralCaliforniadistinctpopulationsegmentofCaliforniatigersalamander(whichoverlaps
withtheprogramarea)isfederallylistedasthreatened(50CFR47212–47248,August4,2004).
Californiatigersalamanderisalsostate‐listedasthreatened(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Game2011).
CaliforniatigersalamanderisendemictotheSanJoaquin–SacramentoRivervalleys,bordering
foothills,andcoastalvalleysofcentralCalifornia(BarryandShaffer1994:159).Californiatiger
salamanderisalowlandspeciesrestrictedtograsslandsandlowfoothillregionswhereitsbreeding
habitatoccurs(JenningsandHayes1994:14).Breedinghabitatconsistsoftemporarypondsor
pools,slowerportionsofstreams,andsomepermanentwaters(Stebbins2003:153–154).
Permanentaquaticsitesareunlikelytobeusedforbreedingunlesstheylackfishpredators
(JenningsandHayes1994:14).Californiatigersalamandersalsorequiredry‐seasonrefugesitesin
thevicinityofbreedingsites(within1mile)(JenningsandHayes1994:14).Californiaground
squirrel(Spermophilusbeecheyi)burrowsareimportantrefugesitesforadultsandjuveniles
(Loredoetal.1996:283–284).
AdultCaliforniatigersalamandersmovefromsubterraneanrefugesitestobreedingpoolsduring
relativelywarmlatewinterandspringrains(JenningsandHayes1994:12).Breedinggenerally
occursfromDecemberthroughMarch(Stebbins2003:154).Developmentthroughmetamorphosis
requires3–6months(69FR47215).Metamorphosedjuvenilesleavetheirpondsinthelatespring
orearlysummerandmovetoterrestrialrefugesitesbeforeseasonalpondsdry(Loredoetal.
1996:282).However,inlatefall1993,onelarvaloverwinteringsalamanderwasobservedin
MontereyCountyandmanyoverwinteringsalamanderswereobservedinthreeperennialstock
pondsinContraCostaCountyfrom1998to2001(Alvarez2004:344).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐28 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Ponds,longerlastingseasonalwetlands,andportionsofdrainagesintheprogramareamayprovide
suitablebreedinghabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,andsurroundinggrasslandsandoak
woodlandprovidesuitableuplandrefugeanddispersalhabitat.Therearenumerous(morethan20)
CNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofCaliforniatigersalamanderintheprogramarea.Themajorityof
theseoccurrencesareinthenorthernportionoftheprogramarea.Therearemorethan70
additionalrecordsforoccurrencesofCaliforniatigersalamandersurroundingtheprogramarea
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Thereisnodesignatedcriticalhabitatfor
Californiatigersalamanderintheprogramarea.
PondsandpooledportionsofdrainagesintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasprovide
suitablebreedinghabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,andsurroundinggrasslandsprovide
suitableuplandrefugeanddispersalhabitat.LongerlastingseasonalwetlandsintheGoldenHills
projectareamayalsoprovidesuitablehabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander.ThereareCNDDB
recordsforoccurrencesofCaliforniatigersalamanderinbothprojectareas(CaliforniaDepartment
ofFishandWildlife2013c).
Western Spadefoot WesternspadefootisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.Westernspadefootisalowlandtoad
thatoccursinwashes,riverfloodplains,alluvialfans,playas,andalkaliflatswithinvalleyand
foothillgrasslands,openchaparral,andpine‐oakwoodlands.Itbreedsinquietstreamsand
temporaryrainpools.Westernspadefootprefershabitatswithopenvegetationandshortgrasses
wherethesoilissandyorgravely(Stebbins2003:203).Westernspadefoottoadsspenda
considerableportionoftheyearundergroundinburrows(Zeineretal.1988:56).Dependingon
temperatureandrainfall,egglayingoccursbetweenlateFebruaryandlateMay.Eggshatchwithin6
days,andlarvaldevelopmentcanbecompletedwithin3–11weeks(JenningsandHayes1994:94)
Recentlymetamorphosedtoadsdisperseafterspendingafewhoursordaysatthepondmargin
(Zeineretal.1988:56).
Seasonalwetlands,pooledportionsofdrainages,andephemeralpondsintheprogramareathat
remaininundatedforaminimumof4weekswouldprovidesuitablehabitatforwesternspadefoot.
AlthoughtherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofwesternspadefootintheprogramarea
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c),theprogramareaiswithintheirknownrange.
Seasonalwetlands,pooledportionsofdrainages,andephemeralpondsthatprovidesuitablehabitat
forwesternspadefootmaybepresentintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Oneseasonalwetlandand
twopooledareasinadrainageprovidesuitablehabitatforwesternspadefootinthePattersonPass
projectarea.TherearenoCNDDBoccurrencesofwesternspadefootineitheroftheprojectareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
California Red‐Legged Frog Californiared‐leggedfrogisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernandisfederallylistedas
threatened.ThetaxonisknownfromisolatedlocationsintheSierraNevada,NorthCoast,and
northernTransverseRanges.ItisrelativelycommonintheSanFranciscoBayAreaandalongthe
centralcoast.Californiared‐leggedfrogisbelievedtobeextirpatedfromtheflooroftheCentral
Valley(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002a:5).
Californiared‐leggedfrogsuseavarietyofhabitats;theseincludevariousaquatic,riparian,and
uplandhabitats(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002a:12).However,Californiared‐leggedfrogsmay
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐29 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency completetheirentirelifecycleinapondorotheraquaticsitethatissuitableforalllifestages(66FR
14626).Californiared‐leggedfrogsinhabitmarshes;streams;lakes;ponds;andother,usually
permanent,sourcesofwaterthathavedenseriparianvegetation(Stebbins2003:225).Habitat
consistsofdeep(atleast2.5feet)stillorslow‐movingwaterwithshrubbyriparianvegetation
(willows[Salixsp.],tules[Scirpussp.],orcattails[Typhasp.])(JenningsandHayes1994:64).
Californiared‐leggedfrogsarehighlyaquaticandspendthemajorityoftheirlivesintheriparian
zone(BrodeandBury1984:32).Adultsmaytakerefugeduringdryperiodsinrodentholesorleaf
litterinriparianhabitats(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002a:14).
Californiared‐leggedfrogsbreedfromNovemberthroughAprilandtypicallylaytheireggsin
clustersaroundaquaticvegetation(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002a:16).Larvaeundergo
metamorphosisbetweenJulyandSeptember,3.5–7monthsafterhatching(66FR14626).However,
larvaehavebeenobservedtotakemorethan1yeartocompletemetamorphosisinfourcountiesin
centralcoastCalifornia(Fellersetal.2001:156).
Ponds,perennialmarsh,seasonalwetlands,drainages,andmixedwillowriparianscrubinthe
programareaprovidesuitablebreedingand/orforaging/dispersalhabitatforCaliforniared‐legged
frog,andsurroundinggrasslandsandoakwoodlandprovidesuitableuplandrefugeanddispersal
habitat.Therearenumerous(morethan40)recordsforoccurrencesofCaliforniared‐leggedfrog
throughouttheprogramarea.TherearemanyadditionalCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesof
Californiared‐leggedfrogsurroundingtheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013c).TheentireprogramareaiswithindesignatedcriticalhabitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrog.
Ponds,perennialmarsh,seasonalwetlands,drainages,andmixedwillowriparianscrubwithinthe
GoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasprovidesuitablebreedingand/orforaging/dispersal
habitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrog,andsurroundinggrasslandsprovidesuitableuplandrefuge
anddispersalhabitat.ThereareCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofCaliforniared‐leggedfroginboth
projectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).TheGoldenHillsandPatterson
PassprojectareasarelocatedentirelywithindesignatedcriticalhabitatforCaliforniared‐legged
frog(Figure3.4‐4).
Foothill Yellow‐Legged Frog Foothillyellow‐leggedfrogisdesignatedasaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.Historically,
foothillyellow‐leggedfrogsoccurredinthecoastalfoothillsandmountainsfromtheOregonborder
southtoLosAngelesCountyandintheSierraNevadafoothillssouthtoKernCounty(Zweifel
1955:215;Stebbins2003:232).ThecurrentrangeexcludescoastalareassouthofnorthernSanLuis
ObispoCountyandfoothillareassouthofFresnoCountywherethespeciesisapparentlyextirpated
(JenningsandHayes1994:67–69).Thespeciescanoccurfromsealevelto6,000feetabovesealevel
(Stebbins2003:232).Foothillyellow‐leggedfrogsoccupyrockydrainagesinvalley‐foothill
hardwood,valley‐foothillhardwood‐conifer,valley‐foothillriparian,ponderosapine,mixedconifer,
coastalscrub,mixedchaparral,andwetmeadowtypesofhabitat(Zeineretal.1988:86).The
streambedisusuallygravellyorsandyandthestreamgradientisgenerallynotsteep(Zweifel
1955:221).Foothillyellow‐leggedfrogsaretypicallyfoundnearwater,especiallynearriffleswith
rocksnearbyandsunnybanks(Stebbins2003:232).Foothillyellow‐leggedfrogsareactivefromlate
FebruaryorearlyMarchthroughsummerandintothefall(Zweifel1955:226).Thespeciesbreeds
frommid‐MarchtoMayafterthehigh‐waterstageinstreamshaspassedandlesssedimentisbeing
conveyed(Stebbins1954:130).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐30 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Perennialandintermittentdrainagesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheprogramareamay
providesuitablehabitatforfoothillyellow‐leggedfrog.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrences
offoothillyellow‐leggedfrogwithintheprogramarea;howevertherearetworecordsfor
occurrencesthataresouthandsouthwestoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Wildlife2013c).
PerennialandintermittentdrainagesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareasmayprovidesuitablehabitatforfoothillyellow‐leggedfrog.Thereare
noCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesoffoothillyellow‐leggedfrogineitheroftheprojectareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Western Pond Turtle WesternpondturtleisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.InCalifornia,therangeis
discontinuouslydistributedthroughoutthestatewestoftheCascade‐Sierrancrest(Jenningsand
Hayes1994:99).Aquatichabitatsusedbywesternpondturtlesincludeponds,lakes,marshes,
rivers,streams,andirrigationditcheswithamuddyorrockybottomingrassland,woodland,and
openforestareas(Stebbins2003:250).Westernpondturtlesspendaconsiderableamountoftime
baskingonrocks,logs,emergentvegetation,mudorsandbanks,orhuman‐generateddebris
(Jenningsetal.1992:11).Westernpondturtlesmovetouplandareasadjacenttowatercoursesto
depositeggsandoverwinter(JenningsandHayes1994:98).Turtleshavebeenobserved
overwinteringseveralhundredmetersfromaquatichabitat.Inthesouthernportionoftherange
andalongthecentralcoast,westernpondturtlesareactiveyear‐round.Intheremainderoftheir
range,theseturtlestypicallybecomeactiveinMarchandreturntooverwinteringsitesbyOctober
orNovember(Jenningsetal.1992:11).
Ponds,reservoirs,BrushyCreek,andportionsofotherdrainagesintheprogramareamayprovide
suitableaquatichabitatforwesternpondturtle.Theymayalsodepositeggsinmixedwillow
riparianscruborgrasslandareasnearaquatichabitatintheprogramarea.TherearetwoCNDDB
recordsforoccurrencesofwesternpondturtlewithintheprogramareaandmanyadditional
recordsforoccurrenceswithin5milesoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Wildlife2013c).
PondsandportionsofdrainagesintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasmayprovide
suitableaquatichabitatforwesternpondturtle.Theymayalsodepositeggsinmixedwillow
riparianscruborgrasslandareasnearaquatichabitatintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassproject
areas.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofwesternpondturtleineitheroftheproject
areas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Blainville’s (Coast) Horned Lizard Blainville’shornedlizardisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.Althoughfragmented,therange
ofBlainville’shornedlizardgenerallyextendsalongthePacificcoastfromBajaCaliforniawestofthe
desertsandtheSierraNevada,northtotheBayArea,andinlandasfarnorthasShastaReservoir.It
alsooccursontheKernPlateaueastofthecrestoftheSierraNevada(CaliforniaHerps.com2013).
Thespeciesoccursbetweensealevelandanelevationof8,000feet(Stebbins2003:301).
Blainville’shornedlizardoccupiesavarietyofhabitats,includingareaswithanexposedgravelly‐
sandysubstratesupportingscatteredshrubs,chamisechaparral,annualgrassland(Jenningsand
Hayes1994:132),broadleafwoodland,andconiferforest(Stebbins2003:300).Theyaremost
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐31 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency commoninlowlandsalongsandywasheswithscatteredshrubsforcover.Habitatrequirements
includeopenareasforbasking;patchesoffine,loosesoilwhereitcanburyitself;andantsandother
insectprey(Stebbins2003:300–301).Forextendedperiodsofinactivityorhibernation,horned
lizardsoccupysmallmammalburrowsorburrowintoloosesoilsundersurfaceobjects(Zeineretal.
1988:48).Blainville’shornedlizardshavebeenobservedtobeactivebetweenAprilandOctober,
andhatchlingsfirstappearinJulyandAugust(JenningsandHayes1994:130).
Portionsofgrassland,chaparral,andoakwoodlandintheprogramareaprovidesuitablehabitatfor
Blainville’shornedlizard.TherearethreeCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofBlainville’shorned
lizardinthesoutheastportionoftheprogramarea,andadditionalrecordsforoccurrencesoutside
oftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
PortionsofgrasslandintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasmayprovidesuitable
habitatforBlainville’shornedlizard,buttherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofBlainville’s
hornedlizardineitheroftheprojectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Alameda Whipsnake Alamedawhipsnakeisstateandfederallylistedasthreatened.TheAlamedawhipsnakeisa
subspeciesoftheCaliforniawhipsnake.TheNorthAmericandistributionfortheCalifornia
whipsnakeincludesNorthernCaliforniawestoftheSierranCrestanddeserttocentralBaja
California.Thisspeciesisfoundprimarilyinthefoothillsbutitsrangeextendsintodeciduousand
pineforestsofmountains.(Stebbins2003:353–354.)Historically,Alamedawhipsnakeprobably
occurredwithintheentirecoastalscrubandoakwoodlandcommunitiesthroughouttheEastBayin
ContraCosta,Alameda,andpartsofSanJoaquinandSantaClaraCounties.Currently,itsdistribution
encompassesfiveseparatepopulationswithlittleornointerchangewithinthesesamecounties(70
FR60608–60656,October18,2005).
Alamedawhipsnakesareprimarilyfoundwithinamixtureofhabitattypescontainingscrub/shrub
communities,withasignificantportionofannualgrassland,andotherwoodedhabitatssuchasblue
oak‐foothillpine,blueoakwoodland,coastaloakwoodland,valleyoakwoodland,riparian
communities,orrockoutcrops.Theywillalsomoveintoadjacentgrassland,oaksavannah,and
occasionally,oak‐baywoodlandhabitats.Alamedawhipsnakespreferhabitatswithwoodydebris
andexposedrockoutcrops,whichprovidebaskingareas,shelterfrompredators,andanabundance
ofwesternfencelizards,whichareamajorpreyitemofthissnake.Thesubspecieshasbeen
observedtoregularlymove200meters(656feet)fromscrubandchaparralandwillremainin
grasslandsforseveralhourstoweeksatatime.Grasslandsareusedextensivelyduringthebreeding
season(MarchthroughJuly).Malesnakesusegrasslandareasextensivelyduringthematingseason
andfemalesnakesusegrasslandsaftermating,possiblytosearchforegg‐layingsites.(70FR60610,
October18,2005.)
Annualgrassland,scrub,chaparral,oakwoodland,andmixedwillowriparianscrubintheprogram
areaprovidesuitablehabitatforAlamedawhipsnake.TherearesevenCNDDBrecordsfor
occurrencesofAlamedawhipsnakealongtheeasternportionoftheprogramareaandnumerous
additionalrecordsforoccurrencesoutsidebutneartheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFish
andWildlife2013c).DesignatedcriticalhabitatforAlamedawhipsnakeislocatedinthesoutheast
portionoftheprogramarea(Figure3‐4‐4).
AnnualgrasslandandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassproject
areasmayprovidesuitablehabitatforAlamedawhipsnake.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsfor
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐32 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency occurrencesofAlamedawhipsnakeineitheroftheprojectareas;howeverthereareseveralrecords
foroccurrencesjustsoutheastoftheprojectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013c).AnICFbiologistconductedhabitatassessmentsforspecial‐statusspeciesinthePatterson
PassprojectareaanddeterminedthatAlamedawhipsnakehasalowpotentialtooccurthere
becauseofthedistancetoscrubandchaparralhabitats,whicharetheprimaryhabitatsforthe
species.ThereisnodesignatedcriticalhabitatforAlamedawhipsnakeintheGoldenHillsor
PattersonPassprojectareas(Figure3.4‐4).
San Joaquin Coachwhip TheSanJoaquincoachwhip(whipsnake)isoneofsixsubspeciesofthecoachwhipthathasaknown
rangeextendingfromColusaCountyintheSacramentoValley,southtotheGrapevineinKern
CountyintheSanJoaquinValley,andwesttotheinnerSouthCoastRanges.Anisolatedpopulation
occursintheSutterButtes.Thetaxonisknowntooccurfrom65to2,950feetabovesealevel.San
Joaquincoachwhiplivesinopen,dryvegetativeassociationswithlittleornotreecover.Inthe
westernSanJoaquinValley,coachwhipinhabitsgrasslandandsaltbushscrubassociations,andis
knowntoclimbbushessuchassaltbushtoviewpreyandpredators.Mammalburrowsareusedby
SanJoaquincoachwhipsforrefugeandlikelyasovipositionsites.Coachwhipsubspecieswillnot
emergefromburrowsuntilnear‐surfacetemperaturesreach280Coneitheradailyorseasonal
basis.Forthisreason,emergencetendstobelateintheseason(ApriltoearlyMay)andlaterinthe
morning(10–11a.m.),althoughyoungerindividualsmayemergeearlierintheday.Thesubspecies
primarilyeatslizardsandrobsthenestsofbirdsandmammals,butmayalsoeatcarrion.Land
conversionfromgrasslandandgrassland/scrubhabitattoagriculturehasremovedhabitatand
eliminatedthefoodbaseandmammalburrowassociationsonwhichthecoachwhipdependsfor
refuge.Urbandevelopmentanddroughthavealsobeenimplicatedinthedepletionand
fragmentationofSanJoaquincoachwhippopulations(JenningsandHayes1994:162–164).
AnnualgrasslandintheprogramareaprovidessuitablehabitatforSanJoaquincoachwhip.Thereis
oneCNDDBrecordforanoccurrenceofSanJoaquincoachwhipalongtheeasternportionofthe
programareaandtworecordsforoccurrenceseastandwestoftheprogramarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
AnnualgrasslandintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasprovidessuitablehabitatfor
SanJoaquincoachwhip.TherearenoCNDDBoccurrencesofSanJoaquincoachwhipineitherofthe
projectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
White‐Tailed Kite White‐tailedkiteisfullyprotectedundertheCaliforniaFishandGameCode.White‐tailedkites
generallyinhabitlow‐elevationgrassland,savannah,oakwoodland,wetland,agricultural,and
riparianhabitats.Somelargeshrubsortreesarerequiredfornestingandforcommunalroosting
sites.Nesttreesrangefromsmall,isolatedshrubsandtreestotreesinrelativelylargestands(Dunk
1995).White‐tailedkitesmakenestsoflooselypiledsticksandtwigs,linedwithgrassandstraw,
nearthetopofdenseoaks,willows,andothertreestands.ThebreedingseasonlastsfromFebruary
throughOctoberandpeaksbetweenMayandAugust.White‐tailedkitesforageinundisturbed,open
grassland,meadows,farmland,andemergentwetlands(Zeineretal.1990a:120).
Foraginghabitatandasmallamountofsuitablenestinghabitatforwhite‐tailedkitesarepresentin
theprogramarea.TheCNDDBliststworecordsofwhite‐tailedkitenestsinthenortheastand
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐33 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency southeastportionsoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c)andTwo
additionalrecordswithin2milessouthwestoftheprogramarea.
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatforwhite‐tailedkiteispresentintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareas.TherearenoCNDDBoccurrencesofwhite‐tailedkitenestsineither
projectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).White‐tailedkiteshavebeen
documentedforaginginbothprojectareasduring2005–2011avianusesurveysconductedbythe
AFMT(AlamedaCountyunpublisheddata).
Bald Eagle Baldeagleisstate‐listedasendangeredandisprotectedundertheMBTA,theBGEPA,andseveral
sectionsoftheCaliforniaFishandGameCode.Baldeagleisapermanentresidentanduncommon
wintermigrantinCalifornia(Zeineretal.1990a:122).Baldeaglesbreedatcoastalareas,rivers,
lakes,andreservoirswithforestedshorelinesorcliffsinnorthernCalifornia.Winteringbaldeagles
areassociatedwithaquaticareascontainingsomeopenwaterforforaging.Baldeaglesnestintrees
inmatureandoldgrowthforeststhathavesomehabitatedgeandaresomewhatclose(within1.25
miles)towaterwithsuitableforagingopportunities.Althoughnestscanbecloser,theaverage
distanceofbaldeagleneststohumandevelopmentanddisturbanceismorethan1,640feet
(Buehler2000:6).ThebreedingseasonisFebruarythroughJuly(Zeineretal.1990a:122).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitat(BethanyReservoir)forbaldeagleispresentintheprogram
area.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofbaldeaglenestsorwinteringbaldeaglesinor
neartheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c),althoughtheAFMThas
documentedthemflyingthroughtheprogramareawithincreasingfrequency.
SuitablenestingandforaginghabitatforbaldeaglemaybepresentintheGoldenHillsprojectarea
nearBethanyReservoir.NosuitablenestingorforaginghabitatispresentinthePattersonPass
projectarea,butbaldeaglesmayforageinorflythroughthisarea.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsfor
occurrencesofbaldeaglenestsorwinteringbaldeaglesineitherprojectarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).TheAFMThasdetectedbaldeaglesfourtimesinthe
vicinityoftheGoldenHillsprojectareawithinthelast4years,butnotinthePattersonPassproject
area.
Northern Harrier NorthernharrierisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.Northernharrierisayear‐roundresident
throughouttheCentralValleyandisoftenassociatedwithopengrasslandhabitatsandagricultural
fields.Nestsarefoundonthegroundintall,denseherbaceousvegetation(MacWhirterandBildstein
1996).NorthernharriernestsfromApriltoSeptember,withpeakactivityinJuneandJuly.The
breedingpopulationhasbeenreduced,particularlyalongthesoutherncoast,throughthe
destructionofwetlandhabitat,nativegrassland,andmoistmeadowsandthroughtheburningand
plowingofnestingareasduringearlystagesofbreeding(Zeineretal.1990a:124).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatfornorthernharrierispresentintheprogramarea.Thereare
noCNDDBrecordsofnorthernharriernestswithintheprogramarea;thereisonerecordforanest
within2milesnortheastoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
TheAFMThasdocumentednorthernharriersforaginginallmonthsoftheyearthroughoutthe
programarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐34 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Suitablenestinghabitatmaybepresentandsuitableforaginghabitatispresentfornorthernharrier
intheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareas.AlthoughtherearenoCNDDBrecordsof
northernharriernestsineitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c),the
AFMThasdocumentednorthernharriersyear‐roundintheAPWRAasnotedabove.
Swainson’s Hawk Swainson’shawkisastate‐listedthreatenedspeciesandanAPWRAfocalspecies.Swainson’shawks
forageingrasslands,grazedpastures,alfalfaandotherhaycrops,andcertaingrainandrow
croplands.Vineyards,orchards,rice,andcottoncropsaregenerallyunsuitableforforagingbecause
ofthedensityofthevegetation(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame1992:41).Themajorityof
Swainson’shawkswinterinSouthAmerica,althoughsomewinterintheUnitedStates.Swainson’s
hawksarriveinCaliforniainearlyMarchtoestablishnestingterritoriesandbreed(California
DepartmentofFishandGame1994).Theyusuallynestinlarge,maturetrees.Mostnestsites(87%)
intheCentralValleyarefoundinriparianhabitats(Estep1989:35),primarilybecausetreesare
moreavailablethere.Swainson’shawksalsonestinmatureroadsidetreesandinisolatedtreesin
agriculturalfieldsorpastures.ThebreedingseasonisfromMarchthroughAugust(Estep1989:12,
35).
AlthoughsuitablenestingandforaginghabitatforSwainson’shawksispresentintheprogramarea,
Swainson’shawksmoretypicallyoccurinflatterrainandrarelyoccurinthefoothillsoftheCoast
Ranges.ThereisoneCNDDBrecordofaSwainson’shawknestinthenortheasternportionofthe
programarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Thereare11additionalCNDDB
recordsofSwainson’shawknestseastandnortheastoftheprogramarea,includingonethatisjust
outsideoftheprogramarea.Swainson’shawkhasbeendocumentedasafatalityonlyonceinmore
than7yearsofintensivefatalitymonitoring(ICFInternational2013),andonly11sightingsof
Swainson’shawkshavebeenrecordedintheprogramareainmorethan7yearsofavianuse
monitoringconductedthroughouttheprogramareabytheAFMT(AlamedaCountyunpublished
data).
ForaginghabitatandasmallamountofsuitablenestinghabitatforSwainson’shawksispresentin
theGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareas.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofSwainson’shawk
nestsineitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c),and,asnotedabove,
theAFMThasrarelyobservedSwainson’shawksintheAPWRA.
Red‐Tailed Hawk Red‐tailedhawkisnotastate‐orfederallylistedspecies.However,itisprotectedundertheMBTA
andtheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeandisanAPWRAfocalspecies.Red‐tailedhawksoccurin
Californiathroughouttheyear.Largenumbersofmigratoryandwinteringred‐tailedhawksenter
theCentralValleyfromOctoberthroughFebruary,substantiallyaugmentingthepopulation
occurringwithinthestate.Migratory,wintering,andresidentred‐tailedhawksinhabitCaliforniain
openareas,suchasgrasslands,agriculturalfields,pastures,andopenbrushhabitats,thatare
interspersedwithpatchesoftreesorstructurallysimilarfeaturesfornesting,perching,androosting
(PoliteandPratt1990).Thisspeciesisprimarilyasit‐and‐waitpredatorthatrequireselevated
perchsitesforhunting;however,red‐tailedhawkscanalsobeseensoaringoveropenlandscapes
andswoopingforprey.Theirdietincludesawidevarietyofsmalltomedium‐sizedmammals,birds,
andsnakes,withoccasionalinsectsandfreshcarrion(PrestonandBeane1993).Nestlocationsvary
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐35 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency withvegetationandtopography.1InthewesternUnitedStates,satellitetrackingindicatesthatadult
red‐tailedhawksshowhighfidelitytotheirsummerandwinterrangesandtomigrationroutes
(GoodrichandSmith2008).
WhiletheCNDDBdoesnotcontainrecordsforred‐tailedhawks,previousstudiesfoundthe
programareaandthesurroundingregiontobeanimportantwinterforagingareaandmigration
corridorforraptors,includingred‐tailedhawks(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame1993).
NaturalperchesfromwhichthisspecieshuntswerescarcebeforedevelopmentoftheAPWRA.
Turbinesandtransmissiontowers,poles,andlinesprovideabundantperchesandmayhave
resultedinasubstantialincreaseinwinteringred‐tailedhawksintheprogramareaoverhistoric
numbers(OrloffandFlannery1992).
Golden Eagle GoldeneagleisfullyprotectedundertheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeandisanAPWRAfocal
species.ItisalsoprotectedbytheMBTA,theBGEPA,andseveralsectionsoftheCaliforniaFishand
GameCode.
Goldeneagleisayear‐roundresidentthroughoutmuchofCalifornia.Thespeciesdoesnotbreedin
thecenteroftheCentralValleybutbreedsinmuchoftherestofthestate.Goldeneaglestypically
occurinrollingfoothills,mountainareas,sage‐juniperflats,anddeserts(Zeineretal.1990a:142–
143).InCalifornia,goldeneaglesnestprimarilyinopengrasslandsandoak(Quercusspp.)savanna
butwillalsonestinoakwoodlandandopenshrublands.Goldeneaglesforageinopengrassland
habitats(Kochertetal.2002:6).Preferredterritorysitesincludethosethathaveafavorablenest
site,adependablefoodsupply(mediumtolargemammalsandbirds),andbroadexpansesofopen
countryforforaging.Hillyormountainouscountrywheretakeoffandsoaringaresupportedby
updraftsisgenerallypreferredtoflathabitats(Johnsgard1990:262).IntheinteriorcentralCoast
RangesofCalifornia,goldeneaglesfavoropengrasslandsandoaksavanna,withlessernumbersin
oakwoodlandandopenshrublands.IntheDiabloRangeofCalifornia,allexceptafewpairsnestin
treesinoakwoodlandandoaksavannahabitatsduetoalackofsuitablerockoutcropsorcliffs.Nest
treespeciesincludeseveraloakspecies(Quercusspp.),foothillpine(PinussabianianaandP.
coulteri),Californiabaylaurel(Umbellulariacalifornica),eucalyptus(Eucalyptusspp.),andwestern
sycamore(Platanusracemosa).Afewpairsofeaglesnestonelectricaltransmissiontowers
traversinggrasslands(Huntetal.1999:13).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatforgoldeneagleispresentintheprogramarea.ThePredatory
BirdResearchGroupestimatedthatatleast70activegoldeneagleterritoriesexistedwithin20
milesoftheprogramarea,basedonannualsurveysfromJanuary1994toDecember1997(Huntet
al.1999).Theseterritorieswereresurveyedandoccupancyverifiedin2005(HuntandHunt2006).
TheCNDDBincludes18occurrencesofgoldeneagleswithin10milesoftheProjectArea.The
majorityoftheserecordsarelocatedtothenorthwestoftheProjectAreaaroundLosVaqueros
Reservoir.Nineoftheoccurrencerecordsdocumentednestingpairsofgoldeneaglesduringatleast
onebreedingseasonbetween2005and2008(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofgoldeneaglenestswithintheprogramarea;however,thereare10
recordsofnestswithin3.5milesnorthandnorthwestoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013c).
1Observationsofnestingred‐tailedhawksintheAPWRAin2005to2006wereconfirmedinthefieldbyJones&
StokeswildlifebiologistJuliaCamp.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐36 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency SuitablenestinghabitatforgoldeneagleisunlikelytobepresentintheGoldenHillsandPatterson
Passprojectareasbecausenowoodlandhabitattypesoccurthere,andtheCNDDBlistsnorecords
ofeaglenestsintheseareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c);however,suitable
foraginghabitatispresentthroughouttheseareas,andtheAFMTregularlydocumentsgoldeneagles
foraginginthePattersonPassandGoldenHillsprojectareas.
American Kestrel Americankestrelisnotastate‐orfederallylistedspecies.However,itisprotectedundertheMBTA
andtheCaliforniaFishandGameCodeandisanAPWRAfocalspecies.
Americankestrelsarefoundinavarietyofopentosemi‐openhabitats,includingmeadows,
grasslands,deserts,earlyfieldsuccessionalcommunities,openparkland,agriculturalfields,and
bothurbanandsuburbanareas(SmallwoodandBird2002).GrinnellandWythe(1927)described
AmericankestrelasacommonresidentthroughouttheSanFranciscoBayregion.Americankestrels
arecavitynesters,usingtress,snags,rockcrevices,cliffs,banks,andbuildings(PoliteandAhlborn
1990).Theydisplaystrongsitefidelitytobreedingterritoriesandwinteringareas;however,little
informationexistsregardingtheactualdelineationofterritorysize.Thebreedingseasonin
CaliforniaoccursbetweenlateFebruaryandAugust,withegglayingoccurringfrommid‐Marchto
lateJune(SmallwoodandBird2002).
Americankestrelsforageonawidevarietyofinsects,includinggrasshoppers,cicadas,beetles,
dragonflies,butterflies,andmoths;smallrodents,especiallyvolesandmice;andsmallbirds
(Sherrod1978).Americankestrelsareperchandpounceorhoverandpouncepredators,rarely
pursuingpreyonwing(PoliteandAhlborn1990);theytendtoperchloweraswindspeedincreases
(SmallwoodandBird2002).
WhiletheCNDDBdoesnotcontainrecordsforAmericankestrel,previousstudiesintheregionhave
foundtheprogramareavicinitytobeanimportantwinterforagingareaandmigrationcorridorfor
raptors,includingAmericankestrels(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame1993).Natural
perchesfromwhichthisspecieshuntswerescarcebeforedevelopmentoftheAPWRA.Turbinesand
transmissiontowers,poles,andlinesprovideabundantperchesandhavelikelyresultedina
substantialincreaseinAmericankestrelnumbersintheAPWRAoverhistoricnumbers(Orloffand
Flannery1992).
Prairie Falcon Prairiefalconisnotastate‐orfederallylistedspecies.However,itisprotectedundertheMBTAand
theCaliforniaFishandGameCodeandisanAPWRAfocalspecies.Prairiefalconinhabitsarid
environmentsofwesternNorthAmericainopenplainsandshrub‐steppedesertswithcliffs,bluffs,
orrockoutcroppings.Anefficientandspecializedpredatorofmedium‐sizeddesertmammalsand
birds,prairiefalconsrangewidely,searchinglargeareasforpatchilydistributedprey.Nesting,
postnesting,andwinteringrangesaregenerallywidelyseparated,withmovementsbetweenranges
beingpotentiallydependentonseasonalavailabilityofprey.Thesediurnalhuntersprey
predominantlyongroundsquirrels,smallbirds,reptiles,andinsects.Huntingstrategiesinclude
still‐huntingfromperches,soaring,andlowactiveflight(Phipps1979).Prairiefalconsnestoncliffs
witheagles,ravens,andred‐tailedhawks,buthavealsobeenknowntousetrees,caves,buildings,
andtransmissionlines(Nelson1974;Pitcher1977;HaakandDenton1979;MacLarenetal.1984;
Roppeetal.1989;Bunnelletal.1997).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐37 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Thirteenobservationsofprairiefalconswererecordedduringmonitoringattwositeswithinthe
programarea,includingonenestobservedwithbothmaleandfemaleadultsandoneyoung(Howell
andDiDonato1991).TheCNDDB(2013c)liststwoprairiefalconoccurrenceswithintheprogram
area,and11morewithin10milesoftheprogramareaboundary.Twenty‐sixobservationsofprairie
falconswererecordedduringfixedpointsurveysaroundtheDiabloWindsrepoweringprojectfrom
2005to2007(WesternEcosystemsTechnology2008).
Barn Owl Barnowlisnotastate‐orfederallylistedspecies.However,itisontheDFGWatchList,isprotected
undertheMBTAandtheCaliforniaFishandGameCode,andisanAPWRAfocalspecies.Barnowlis
foundthroughoutmostoftheUnitedStates,exceptinthenorthernportionsoftheRockies,midwest,
andnortheast(Martietal.2005).WithinCalifornia,thisspeciesisayear‐roundresidentranging
fromsealevelto5,500feet,preferringhabitatingrasslands,agriculturalfields,chaparral,and
marshesandotherwetlandareas.Barnowlsnestinawidevarietyofcavities,naturalandartificial,
suchastrees,cliffs,caves,riverbanks,churchsteeples,barnlofts,haystacks,andnestboxes.The
species’breedingnumbersseemlimitedbytheavailabilityofnestcavitiesnearadequatedensities
ofprey.Mosthuntingoccurswhileflyingabout5–15feetabovethegroundinopenhabitats,using
excellentlow‐lightvisionandsoundtodetectprey(Marti1974;Bunnetal.1982).Barnowls
occasionallyhuntfromperchesandfeedprimarilyonmice,rats,voles,pocketgophers,andground
squirrels.Theyalsoconsumeshrews,insects,crustaceans,reptiles,amphibians,andbirds,including
meadowlarksandblackbirds(Polite1990).
ThebarnowlbreedingseasoninCaliforniaoccursbetweenJanuaryandNovember,withegglaying
potentiallyoccurringduringmostmonths,asbarnowlstypicallyhavetwobroodsayear(Polite
1990;Martietal.2005).Reproductivesuccessvarieswithage,priorbreedingexperience,prey
availability,andweather(Martietal.2005).Barnowlsdefendonlytheimmediatevicinityofthe
nest,allowingtwoormorepairstonestincloseproximityandsharethesameforaginghabitat.
Thereisnosignificantcontinent‐widebarnowlpopulationtrend.Populationdeclineshavebeen
evidentintheMidwestandNortheast,whilewesternU.S.populationsappeartobemostlystable.
Localthreatsordeclinesdonotposeamajorconservationproblemfromaglobalperspective
(NatureServe2012).TheCNDDBdoesnotcontainrecordsforbarnowlsastheyarenotastate‐or
federallylistedspecies.Studiesofwind‐turbine‐relatedfatalitiesintheAPWRAhavefound
numerousbarnowls,suggestingthisspeciesisfairlycommoninportionsoftheprogramarea.Barn
owlsareparticularlycommonintheareasofBrushyPeakandVascoCavesRegionalPreserves,
usingavailablerockoutcrops,palmtrees,andstructuresfornestingandroosting(EastBayRegional
ParksDistrict2000).
Western Burrowing Owl WesternburrowingowlisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernandanAPWRAfocalspecies.
Westernburrowingowlisayear‐roundresidentintheCentralValley,SanFranciscoBayregion,
CarrizoPlain,andImperialValley.Theyoccurprimarilyingrasslandhabitatsbutmayalsooccurin
landscapesthatarehighlyalteredbyhumanactivity.Suitablehabitatmustcontainburrowswith
relativelyshortvegetationandminimalamountsofshrubsortallervegetation.Westernburrowing
owlmayalsooccurinagriculturalareasalongroads,canals,ditches,anddrains.Theymost
commonlynestandroostinCaliforniagroundsquirrelburrows,butmayalsouseburrowsdugby
otherspecies,aswellasculverts,pilesofconcreterubble,andpipes.ThebreedingseasonisMarch
toAugust,butcanbeginasearlyasFebruary.Duringthebreedingseason,owlsforageneartheir
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐38 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency burrowsbuthavebeenrecordedhuntingupto1.7milesaway.Rodentpopulations,particularly
Californiavolepopulations,maygreatlyinfluencesurvivalandreproductivesuccessofCalifornia
burrowingowls(ShufordandGardali2008:219,221).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatforwesternburrowingowlispresentintheprogramarea.
Thereare30recordsforoccurrencesofbreedingand/orwinteringowlsintheprogramarea
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Themajorityoftheserecordsareinthe
northernportionoftheprogramarea.Therearemorethan40additionalCNDDBrecordsfor
occurrencesofburrowingowlsurroundingtheprogramarea.Moreover,westernburrowingowl
fatalitieshavebeendocumentedduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICFInternational2013).Arecent
studyconductedundertheauspicesoftheAFMTproducedanestimateoftheAPWRA‐wide
breedingseasonpopulationofburrowingowlsofapproximately635pairs(90%confidenceinterval
368–903,P228)(Smallwoodetal.2011).
SuitablenestingandforaginghabitatforwesternburrowingowlispresentintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareas.TherearetwoCNDDBrecordsofoccurrencesofburrowingowlinthe
PattersonPassprojectareaandoneCNDDBrecordforburrowingowlintheGoldenHillsproject
area(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Burrowingowlshavebeendocumentedin
boththeGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasduringavianusesurveysconductedbythe
AFMT(AlamedaCountyunpublisheddata).
Loggerhead Shrike LoggerheadshrikeisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernandanAPWRAfocalspecies.In
California,therangeofloggerheadshrikeextendsthroughoutmostofthestateexceptforthe
heavilyforestedareasofthecoastalslope,CoastRanges,KlamathandSiskiyoumountains,Sierra
NevadaandsouthernCascades,andhighelevationsoftheTransverseRanges.Loggerheadshrikes
breedinshrublandsandopenwoodlandswithgrasscoverandbareground.Theysearchforprey
fromtallshrubs,trees,fences,andpowerlines,andfrequentlyimpaletheirpreyonsharp,thorny,or
multi‐stemmedplantsandbarbed‐wirefences.Loggerheadshrikesforageinopenareaswithshort
grassesandforbsorbareground.(ShufordandGardali2008:274)Nestsarebuiltintreesorshrubs
withdensefoliageandareusuallyhiddenwell.ThenestingperiodforloggerheadshrikesisMarch
throughJune(Zeineretal.1990a:546).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatforloggerheadshrikeispresentintheprogramarea.Thereare
threeCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofloggerheadshrikenestsinthesoutheastportionofthe
programarea.TherearefouradditionalCNDDBrecordsforoccurrenceseast,southeast,and
southwestoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Loggerhead
shrikefatalitieshavebeendocumentedduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICFInternational2013),and
loggerheadshrikesareregularlydocumentedintheprogramareaduringavianusesurveys
conductedbytheAFMT(AlamedaCountyunpublisheddata).
SuitableforaginghabitatforloggerheadshrikeispresentintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectareas,andsuitablebreedinghabitatmaybepresent.AlthoughtherearenoCNDDBrecords
ofloggerheadshrikenestsineitheroftheprojectareas(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife
2013c),loggerheadshrikesareregularlydocumentedinportionsofbothprojectareasduringavian
usesurveysconductedbytheAFMT(AlamedaCountyunpublisheddata).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐39 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Tricolored Blackbird TricoloredblackbirdisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.Tricoloredblackbirdisahighly
colonialspeciesthatislargelyendemictoCalifornia.Tricoloredblackbirdbreedingcolonysites
requireopen,accessiblewater;aprotectednestingsubstrate,includingeitherflooded,thorny,or
spinyvegetation;andasuitableforagingspaceprovidingadequateinsectpreywithinafewmilesof
thenestingcolony.Tricoloredblackbirdbreedingcoloniesoccurinfreshwatermarshesdominated
bytulesandcattails,inHimalayanblackberries(Rubusarmeniacus),andinsilageandgrainfields
(BeedyandHamilton1997:3–4).ThebreedingseasonisfromlateFebruarytoearlyAugust(Beedy
andHamilton1999).Tricoloredblackbirdforaginghabitatsinallseasonsincludeannualgrasslands,
dryseasonalpools,agriculturalfields(suchaslargetractsofalfalfawithcontinuousmowing
schedules,andrecentlytilledfields),cattlefeedlots,anddairies.Tricoloredblackbirdsalsoforage
occasionallyinriparianscrubhabitatsandalongmarshborders.Weed‐freerowcropsand
intensivelymanagedvineyardsandorchardsdonotserveasregularforagingsites.Mosttricolored
blackbirdsforagewithin3milesoftheircolonysitesbutcommutedistancesofupto8mileshave
beenreported(BeedyandHamilton1997:5).
Surveysduringthe1990s(Hamiltonetal.1995;BeedyandHamilton1997;Hamilton2000)
confirmedasignificantdecliningtrendinCaliforniapopulationssincethe1930s,withaparticularly
dramaticdeclinenotedafter1994.Statewidesurveysconductedduringthe2000sindicatesome
recoveryfromthe1999low;however,thepopulationincreaseshaveprimarilybeenlimitedtothe
SanJoaquinValleyandtheTulareBasin(KyleandKelsey2011).Atotalof259,322adultswere
countedduringthemostrecent(2011)statewidesurvey,withKern,Tulare,andMercedCountiesin
theSanJoaquinValleyaccountingforabout88%ofthetotalpopulationinearlyspring(Kyleand
Kelsey2011).The2011countrepresentsapopulationdeclineofabout35%fromtheprevious
statewidecountof394,848birdsin2008.Breedingsurveysconductedoverthelast15yearshave
documentedwidefluctuationsintricoloredblackbirdpopulations,withpopulationsstabilizing
between250,000and400,000overthelast6years(KyleandKelsey2011).Thedataalsoindicate
thatpopulationscontinuetodeclineinseveralareasofthestatewherethespecieswasformerly
common,particularlyinsouthernCaliforniaandseveralCentralValleycounties,includingSan
JoaquinCounty,wherenoactivecolonieshavebeendocumentedsince2004,andinSacramentoand
FresnoCounties.Thus,whilepopulationnumbersstatewidemayhavestabilized,tricolored
blackbirdsappeartohaveconcentratedintoasignificantlysmallereffectiverange(KyleandKelsey
2011).
Suitablenestingandforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdispresentintheprogramarea.There
aretwoCNDDBrecordsoftricoloredblackbirdnestingcoloniesintheprogramarea.Thesenesting
coloniesarelocatedinthenorth‐centralportionoftheprogramareaandjustsoutheastofBethany
Reservoir.Thereisoneadditionalrecordforatricoloredblackbirdcolonyapproximately1.5miles
eastoftheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Tricoloredblackbird
hasalsobeendocumentedduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICFInternational2013).
SuitableforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdispresentintheGoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectareas,andsuitablebreedinghabitatmaybepresent.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsof
tricoloredblackbirdnestingcoloniesineitheroftheprojectareas;however,thereisonerecordfora
nestingcolonynearBethanyReservoirjustoutsidetheGoldenHillsprojectarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐40 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Little Brown Bat LittlebrownbatisconsideredamoderatepriorityspeciesinCaliforniabytheWesternBatWorking
Group(2007).Thespeciesoccursprimarilyinmid‐toupperelevationsinCalifornia.Itisassociated
withwoodlandhabitatsinbothurbanandwildernessareasbutmayoccuranywhereinCalifornia
duringseasonalmovements.Littlebrownbatsforageoverwaterandalongwoodlandedges.They
useawidevarietyofcreviceandcavity‐typeroostsitesintrees,buildings,otherartificialstructures,
androckformationsandcaves,andrelyonnightroostsbetweenforagingbouts(Anthonyetal.
1981:151).Maternitycoloniescancontainseveralhundredbats.Thespeciescongregatesinmating
swarmsinthefall,thoughmatingcontinuesinhibernaculathroughoutthewinter.Littlebrownbats
hibernateincavesandabandonedmines,potentiallyinlargeaggregations.
Suitableforaginghabitatforlittlebrownbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsandother
aquatichabitatsintheprogramarea.Smallamountsofsuitableroostinghabitatmaybepresentin
theprogramareaaswell.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsoflittlebrownbatroostsintheprogramarea
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c);however,asinglelittlebrownbatfatalityhas
beententativelyidentifiedintheprogramareaduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICFInternational
2013).
AsmallamountofsuitableroostinghabitatmaybepresentinthegoldenHillsandPattersonPass
projectareas.However,giventhecurrentlyknownelevationpreferencesandrangeforthisspecies
inCalifornia,itisunlikelythatanylocationintheAPWRAcontainshibernaculaorsignificant
maternityroostinghabitat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsoflittlebrownbatroostsineitherproject
area(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c);nevertheless,littlebrownbatsmayforage
inorflythroughbothprojectareas.
Silver‐Haired Bat Silver‐hairedbatisconsideredamoderatepriorityspeciesinCaliforniabytheWesternBatWorking
Group(2007).Silver‐hairedbatsoccurprimarilyinthenorthernportionofCaliforniaandathigher
elevationsinthesouthernandcoastalmountainranges(BrownandPierson1996)butmayoccur
anywhereinCaliforniaduringtheirspringandfallmigrations.Theyareassociatedwithcoastaland
montaneconiferousforests,valleyfoothillwoodlands,pinyon‐juniperwoodlands,andvalleyfoothill
andmontaneriparianhabitats(Zeineretal.1990b:54).Silver‐hairedbatsroostintreesalmost
exclusivelyinthesummer,andmaternityrooststypicallyarelocatedinwoodpeckerhollowsorin
gapsunderbark.Maternalcoloniesrangefromseveraltoabout75individuals(BrownandPierson
1996).
Suitableforaginghabitatforsilver‐hairedbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsandother
aquatichabitatsintheprogramarea.Treesintheprogramareamayprovidesuitableroosting
habitatforsilver‐hairedbat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofsilver‐hairedbatroostsintheprogram
area(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Suitableforaginghabitatforsilver‐hairedbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsinthe
GoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareas.Treesintheprojectareasmayprovidesuitable
roostinghabitatforsilver‐hairedbat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofsilver‐hairedbatroostsin
eitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐41 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Western Red Bat WesternredbatisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernandisconsideredahighpriorityspeciesin
CaliforniabytheWesternBatWorkingGroup(2007).ItoccursthroughoutmuchofCaliforniaat
lowerelevations.Itisfoundprimarilyinriparianandwoodedhabitatsbutalsooccursseasonallyin
urbanareas(BrownandPierson1996).Westernredbatsroostinthefoliageoftreesthatareoften
locatedontheedgeofhabitatsadjacenttostreams,fields,orurbanareas.Thisspeciesbreedsin
AugustandSeptemberandyoungareborninMaythroughJuly(Zeineretal.1990b:60).
Suitableforaginghabitatforwesternredbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsandother
aquatichabitatsintheprogramarea.Treesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheprogramarea
mayprovidesuitableroostinghabitatforwesternredbat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofwestern
redbatroostsintheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c);however,
westernredbathasbeendocumentedintheprogramareaduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICF
International2013).
Suitableforaginghabitatforwesternredbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsinthe
GoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareas.Treesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheproject
areasmayprovidesuitableroostinghabitatforwesternredbat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsof
westernredbatroostsineitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Hoary Bat HoarybatisconsideredamoderatepriorityspeciesinCaliforniabytheWesternBatWorkingGroup
(2007).HoarybatsoccurthroughoutCaliforniabutarethoughttohaveapatchydistributioninthe
southeasterndeserts(Zeineretal.1990b:62).Hoarybatsarefoundprimarilyinforestedhabitats,
includingriparianforests,andmayoccurinparkandgardensettingsinurbanareas.Dayroostsites
areinthefoliageofconiferousanddeciduoustrees(BrownandPierson1996).Woodlandswith
mediumtolargetreeswithdensefoliageprovidesuitablematernityroostsites(Zeineretal.
1990b:62).Matingoccursinthefall,andafterdelayedfertilization,youngarebornMay–June
(Zeineretal.1990b:62;BrownandPierson1996).
Suitableforaginghabitatforhoarybatsispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsandotheraquatic
habitatsintheprogramarea.Treesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheprogramareamay
providesuitableroostinghabitatforhoarybat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofhoarybatroostsin
theprogramarea;however,thereisonehistoricrecordofaroostnearLakedelValle,southwestof
theprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).Inaddition,hoarybathas
beendocumentedintheprogramareaduringAPWRAfatalitysurveys(ICFInternational2013)and
inacousticsurveysattheVascoWindrepoweringsite(PandionSystems2010;Szewczak2013).
SuitableforagingandpotentiallysuitableroostinghabitatforhoarybatsispresentintheGolden
HillsandPattersonPassprojectareas.Treesandmixedwillowriparianscrubintheprojectareas
mayprovidesuitableroostinghabitatforhoarybat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofhoarybatroosts
ineitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Townsend’s Big‐Eared Bat Townsend’sbig‐earedbatisacandidatespeciesforlistingundertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpecies
Act,isaCaliforniastatespeciesofspecialconcern,andahighpriorityspeciesundertheWesternBat
WorkingGroup’sconservationprioritymatrix(WesternBatWorkingGroup2007).Townsend’sbig‐
earedbatoccursthroughoutCaliforniabutdistributionappearstobelimitedbytheavailabilityof
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐42 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency cavern‐likerooststructures.Townsend’sbig‐earedbatshavebeenfoundinawidevarietyof
habitatsfromdeserttoriparianandcoastalwoodland,buttheyarefoundingreatestnumbersin
areaswithcavern‐formingrockorabandonedmines(WesternBatWorkingGroup2005).
Townsend’sbig‐earedbatsroostindome‐likespacesincavesormines,wheretheyroosthangingin
theopenfromtheceiling.Theyhavealsobeenknowntousecavern‐likespacesinabandoned
buildingsorbridges,andinthebasalhollowsinlargecoastredwoodtrees(Mazurek2004:60).
Matingoccursinfallandspring,andpupsareborninlatespringtoearlysummer(Piersonand
Rainey1998:2).Maternityroostsizevaries,andmaycontainonlyafeworuptoseveralhundred
individuals.Thespeciesisbelievedtoberelativelysedentary,hibernatingincavesandminesnear
summermaternityroosts,thoughseasonalmovementsarenotwellunderstood.Townsend’sbig‐
earedbatsmayhavehibernatedhistoricallyinaggregationsofthousandsofindividuals(Pierson
andRainey1998:1).Theyarehighlysensitivetoroostdisturbance.
SuitableforaginghabitatforTownsend’sbig‐earedbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverponds
andotheraquatichabitatsintheprogramarea.Smallamountsofsuitableroostinghabitatmaybe
presentintheprogramareaaswell.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofTownsend’sbig‐earedbat
roostsintheprogramarea;howeverthereisonerecordofaroostsitesouthwestoftheprogram
areanearLakedelValle(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
ItisunlikelythatsuitableroostinghabitatforTownsend’sbig‐earedbatispresentintheGolden
HillsandPattersonPassprojectareas;however,Townsend’sbig‐earedbatsmayforageinorfly
throughbothoftheseprojectareas.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofTownsend’sbigearedbatroosts
ineitherprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
Pallid Bat PallidbatisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcernandisconsideredahighpriorityspeciesin
CaliforniabytheWesternBatWorkingGroup(2007).ItisfoundthroughoutmostofCaliforniaat
lowtomiddleelevations(6,000feet).Pallidbatsarefoundinavarietyofhabitatsincludingdesert,
brushyterrain,coniferousforest,andnon‐coniferouswoodlands.Daytimeroostsitesincluderock
outcrops,mines,caves,hollowtrees,buildings,andbridges.Nightroostsarecommonlyunder
bridgesbutarealsoincavesandmines(BrownandPierson1996).Hibernationmayoccurduring
lateNovemberthroughMarch.PallidbatsbreedfromlateOctoberthroughFebruary(Zeineretal.
1990b:70)andoneortwoyoungareborninMayorJune(BrownandPierson1996).
Suitableforaginghabitatforpallidbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsandotheraquatic
habitatsintheprogramarea.Smallamountsofsuitableroostinghabitatmaybepresentinthe
programareaaswell.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofpallidbatroostsintheprogramarea;
howevertherearetworecordsforoccurrencessouthwestoftheprogramarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
SuitableforaginghabitatforpallidbatispresentalongdrainagesandoverpondsintheGoldenHills
andPattersonPassprojectareas.Treesintheprojectareasmayprovidesuitableroostinghabitat
forpallidbat.TherearenoCNDDBrecordsofpallidbatroostsineitherprojectarea(California
DepartmentofFishandWildlife2013c).
American Badger AmericanbadgerisaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern.InCalifornia,Americanbadgersoccur
throughoutthestateexceptinhumidcoastalforestsofnorthwesternCaliforniainDelNorteand
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐43 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency HumboldtCounties.Americanbadgersoccurinawidevarietyofopen,aridhabitatsbutmost
commonlyareassociatedwithgrasslands,savannas,andmountainmeadows.Theyrequire
sufficientfood(burrowingrodents),friablesoils,andrelativelyopen,uncultivatedground.
(Williams1986:66–67.)Badgersdigburrows,whichareusedforcoverandreproduction.The
speciesmatesinsummerandearlyautumn,andyoungareborninMarchandearlyApril.(Zeineret
al.1990b:312.)
SuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforAmericanbadgerispresentintheprogramarea.Thereare
eightrecordsforoccurrencesofbadgersintheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Wildlife2013c).TherearefouradditionalCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofAmericanbadger
outsidebutneartheprogramarea.
SuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforAmericanbadgerispresentintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareas.TherearetwoCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofAmericanbadgerin
theGoldenHillsprojectarea,andanadditionaloccurrencejustoutsideit(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013c).TherearenoCNDDBrecordsforAmericanbadgerinthePattersonPass
projectarea.
San Joaquin Kit Fox TheSanJoaquinkitfoxisstate‐andfederallylistedasendangered.SanJoaquinkitfoxesoccurin
someareasofsuitablehabitatontheflooroftheSanJoaquinValleyandinthesurroundingfoothills
oftheCoastRanges,SierraNevada,andTehachapiMountainsfromKernCountynorthtoContra
Costa,Alameda,andSanJoaquinCounties(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1998).Since1998,the
populationstructurehasbecomemorefragmented,withsomeresidentsatellitepopulationshaving
beenlocallyextirpated;thoseareashavebeenusedbydispersingkitfoxesratherthanresident
animals(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2010:15).ThelargestextantpopulationsofkitfoxareinKern
County(ElkHillsandBuenaVistaValley)andSanLuisObispoCountyintheCarrizoPlainNatural
Area(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1998).
NaturalhabitatsforSanJoaquinkitfoxincludealkalisink,alkaliflat,andgrasslands.SanJoaquinkit
foxesmayuseagriculturallandssuchasrowcrops,orchards,andvineyardstoalimitedextent,but
theyareunabletooccupyfarmlandonalong‐termbasis.(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2010:19–
21.)SanJoaquinkitfoxesusuallypreferareaswithloose‐texturedsoilssuitablefordenexcavation
(Orloffetal.1986:62)butarefoundonvirtuallyeverysoiltype(U.S.FishandWildlifeService
1998:129).Wheresoilsmakediggingdifficult,kitfoxesmayenlargeormodifyburrowsbuiltby
otheranimals,particularlythoseofCaliforniagroundsquirrels(Orloffetal.1986:63;U.S.Fishand
WildlifeService1998:127).Structuressuchasculverts,abandonedpipelines,andwellcasingsmay
alsobeusedasdensites(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1998:127).
ThebreedingseasonbeginsduringSeptemberandOctoberwhenadultfemalesbegintocleanand
enlargenatalorpuppingdens.LittersoftwotosixpupsarebornbetweenlateFebruaryandlate
March.(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1998:126.)
SuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxispresentintheprogramarea.There
are11recordsforoccurrencesofSanJoaquinkitfoxintheprogramarea(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013c).Themajorityoftheoccurrencesareinthenorthandeasternportionsof
theprogramarea.Thereare15additionalCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofSanJoaquinkitfox
outsidebutneartheprogramarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐44 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency SuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxispresentintheGoldenHillsand
PattersonPassprojectareas.TherearethreeCNDDBrecordsforoccurrencesofSanJoaquinkitfox
intheGoldenHillsprojectareaandoneinthePattersonPassprojectarea(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlife2013c).
Birds and Bats Subject to Turbine‐Related Mortality Inadditiontothespecial‐statuswildlifespeciesdiscussedabove,severalnon‐special‐statusspecies
ofbirdsandbatsareconsideredinthisEIRbecauseoftheirpotentialtobekilledbyoperatingwind
turbines.Batsareparticularlyvulnerablebecauseoftheirlowreproductiverateandsusceptibility
toturbine‐relatedmortality.Pastandexistingturbine‐relatedavianandbatmortalityand
monitoringarediscussedbelowtoprovidecontextfortheturbine‐relatedavianandbatmortality
impactdiscussions.
Avian Mortality and Monitoring TheAPWRAsupportsabroaddiversityofresident,migratory,andwinteringbirdspeciesthat
regularlymovethroughthearea(OrloffandFlannery1992).Inparticular,diurnalraptors(eagles
andhawks)usetheprevailingwindsandupdraftsforsoaringandglidingduringdailytravel,
foraging,andmigration.Birdspassingthroughtherotorplaneofoperatingwindturbinesareatrisk
ofbeinginjuredorkilled.MultiplestudiesofavianmortalityintheAPWRAshowthatsubstantial
numbersofgoldeneagles,red‐tailedhawks,Americankestrels,burrowingowls,barnowls,anda
diversemixofnon‐raptorspeciesarekilledeachyearinturbine‐relatedincidents(Howelland
DiDonato1991;OrloffandFlannery1992;Howell1997;SmallwoodandThelander2004;ICF
International2013).
Untilrecently,attemptstoreduceavianfatalitiesintheAPWRAhavefocusedprimarilyontwo
managementactions:theshutdownofturbinesduringthewinterperiodwhenuseoftheareaby
red‐tailedhawks,goldeneagles,andAmericankestrelsishighest,andtheremovalofturbines
determinedtoposethehighestcollisionriskbasedonhistoryoffatalities,topographicpositionof
theturbine,andotherfactors(SmallwoodandSpiegel2005a,2005b,2005c;ICFInternational
2013).Whiletheseactionshavemetwithsomesuccess,theireffectivenesshasbeenlessthan
predictedforreasonsthatarenotyetclear.However,anincreasingbodyofevidencesuggeststhat
repowering—inthiscasethereplacementofnumerousolder,smallerturbineswithfewernewer,
largerturbines—couldresultinasubstantialreductioninavianfatalities.Usingthefirstfewyearsof
datafromtheAlamedaCountyAvianFatalityMonitoringProgram,SmallwoodandKaras(2009)
concludedthatthemosteffectivewaytoreduceturbine‐relatedavianfatalitiesintheAPWRAisto
repower.EvidencecollectedtodatefromthethreesitesintheAPWRAthathavebeenrepowered
suggeststhatthelargermodernturbinescausesubstantiallyfewerturbine‐relatedavianfatalities
thantheoldergenerationturbines(Brownetal.2013;ICFInternational2013),althoughitshouldbe
pointedoutthattwoofthethreesitesinvolvedmuchsmallerturbinesthanthoseproposedforuse
intheprogram.
ThemonitoringprogramestablishedbytheSettlementAgreementdescribedinChapter1ofthisEIR
andconductedbytheAlamedaCountyAFMThasresultedinconsiderableinformationonwhichto
baseconclusionsabouttheeffectsoftheAPWRA‐wideprogramandtheGoldenHillsandPatterson
Passrepoweringprojects.Themonitoringprogramhasbeenrunningcontinuouslysince2005,and
annualestimatesofturbine‐relatedavianfatalityratesandestimatesofthetotalnumberofbirds
killedeachyearareavailableforeachbirdyearfrom2005through2011.Abirdyearstartson
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐45 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency October1andendsonSeptember30andisnamedforthecalendaryearinwhichitstarts.Bird
yearsareusedasthebasisforanalysisbecausetheybetterreflectthetimingofavianmovements
andecologythandocalendaryears(ICFInternational2013).
Bat Fatality and Monitoring TheAPWRAsupportshabitattypessuitableformaternity,foraging,andmigrationforspecial‐status
andcommonbats.Severalofthesespeciesaresusceptibletodirectmortalitythroughcollisionor
otherinteractionswithwindturbines.
StudiesatwindenergyfacilitiesinNorthAmericagenerallyshowstrongseasonalandspecies‐
compositionpatternsinbatfatalities,withthebulkoffatalitiesconsistingofmigratoryspeciesand
occurringinlatesummertomid‐autumn.
Historically,thenumberofbatfatalitiesdetectedaspartoftheavianfatalitymonitoringprogramat
old‐generationturbinesintheAPWRAhasbeenextremelylow,dueatleastinparttothemonitoring
program’sdesign,whichhasfocusedonbirdmortality.Fivespeciesofbathavebeendocumentedas
fatalitiesintheAPWRA:littlebrownbat,Californiamyotis,westernredbat,hoarybat,andMexican
free‐tailedbat(Table3.4‐6)(InsigniaEnvironmental2012:47–48;ICFInternational2013:3‐3).Asin
otherpartsofNorthAmerica,themajorityofdocumentedfatalitiesintheAPWRAhaveoccurred
duringthefallmigrationseasonandhaveconsistedofmigratorybatspecies.Hoarybatsand
Mexicanfree‐tailedbatshavemadeupthemajorityofdocumentedfatalities;westernredbat,
anothermigratoryspeciesandaCaliforniaspeciesofspecialconcern,hassustainedthethird
highestnumberofdocumentedfatalities.
Otherthanfatalityrecords,occurrencedataforbatspeciesintheAPWRAarelimited,and
expectationsofpresencearegenerallybasedonknownrangesandhabitatassociations.However,
preliminaryanalysisofpre‐andpostconstructionacousticsurveydatafromtherecentlyrepowered
VascoWindsfacilityintheContraCostaCountyportionoftheAPWRAdocumentsthepresenceof
fouradditionalspecies(bigbrownbat,silver‐hairedbat,canyonbat,andYumamyotis).Acoustic
surveysindicatedbatactivityinallthreeseasonsinwhichsurveyswereconducted,withaspikein
activityinthefall(PandionSystems2010;Szewczak2013).Mexicanfree‐tailedbatandhoarybat
comprisedthemajorityoftheacousticdetections(PandionSystems2010).Thelimiteddata
availablefortheprogramareaandvicinitysuggestthepotentialforsimilarspeciescompositionand
temporalpatternsofbatmortalitytothosethathavebeendocumentedattheVascoWinds
repoweringprojectandatotherfourth‐generationwindenergyfacilities,suchasthoseinthe
MontezumaHillsWindResourceArea.Assumptionsofspeciesvulnerabilitybasedonextrapolation
fromtheolderturbinetechnologiespresentintheAPWRAarenotnecessarilyvalid(CaliforniaBat
WorkingGroup2006).
Relativelylittleisknownaboutbatbiologyasitrelatestofatalityriskatwindenergyfacilities.
Limitedknowledgeofsuchfactorsasmigration,matingbehavior,behavioraroundturbines,and
seasonalmovementsimpedeeffortstopredictriskofturbinecollision.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐46 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐6. Raw Bat Fatalities by Species Detected in Standardized Searches at Various APWRA Monitoring Projects Species
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
APWRAMonitoringa
Hoarybat
Mexicanfree‐tailedbat
Westernredbat
Littlebrownbat
Unidentifiedbat
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
2
5
4
3
2
7
0
6
4
3
5
3
21
1
0
0
5
1
0
3
2
1
9
3
1
1
6
6
13
10
7
1
1
Totalbats
BuenaVistaRepoweringProjectb
Hoarybat
Mexicanfree‐tailedbat
Californiamyotis
Totalbats
Total
VascoWindsRepoweringProject,YearOnec
Hoarybat
Mexicanfree‐tailedbat
Westernredbat
Unidentifiedbat
Totalbats
19
Sources:APWRA:ICFInternational2013:3‐3;BuenaVista:InsigniaEnvironmental2012:47‐8.
Note:Fatalitiesareshownforallyearsforwhichmonitoringdataareavailable.
a Variable:upto417MWinstalled,turbineheightsof60–164feet.
b 38MWinstalled,turbineheightsof147–196feet.MonitoringresultsfromFebruary2008toJanuary
2011.
c 78MWinstalled,turbineheightsof263feet.MonitoringresultsfromMay2012–May2013.
3.4.2
Environmental Impacts Methods for Analysis Thissectiondescribesthemethodsandassumptionsusedtodeterminethedirectandindirect
impactsoftheprogramandthetwospecificprojectsonbiologicalresources.Thegeneralmethods
foranalysisarefollowedbydiscussionsofthemethodsusedtoevaluateandquantifyavianandbat
fatalityimpacts.Themethodsforanalysisofimpactsonbiologicalresourcesarebasedon
professionalstandardsandinformationcitedthroughoutthissection.Thekeyeffectswere
identifiedandevaluatedbasedontheenvironmentalcharacteristicsoftheprogramandproject
areasandtheexpectedmagnitude,intensity,anddurationofactivitiesrelatedtotheconstruction
andoperationoftheprogramandthePattersonPassandGoldenHillsprojects.
Directimpactsarethoseeffectsthataredirectlycausedbyprojectconstructionandoperation(even
iftheresultingeffectbecomesapparentovertime).Indirectimpactsarethoseeffectsofaproject
thatoccureitherlaterintimeoratadistancefromtheprojectlocationbutarereasonably
foreseeable,suchasconversionofwetlandstouplandsfromdiversionofupstreamwatersources.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐47 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Directandindirectimpactscanbeeitherpermanentortemporary.Impactsonlandcoverare
generallyconsideredtemporarywhenthelandcoverisrestoredtopreconstructionconditions
within1year.
Theactivitieslistedbelowcouldhavedirecteffectsonbiologicalresources.

Vegetationclearing;grading;excavating/trenching;andconstructionofcranepads,turbine
foundations,andbatchplants.

Constructionofnewdirtorgravelroadsandwideningofexistingroads.

Temporarystockpilingandsidecastingofsoil,constructionmaterials,orotherconstruction
wastes.

Soilcompaction,dust,andwaterrunofffromconstructionsites.

Increasedvehicletraffic.

Short‐termconstruction‐relatednoise(fromequipment)andvisualdisturbance.

Degradationofwaterqualityindrainagesandotherwaterbodiesresultingfromconstruction
runoffcontainingpetroleumproducts.

Introductionorspreadofinvasiveplantspecies.

Operationofwindturbines.

Reclamationoflandscape.

Maintenanceoffirebreaksandroads.
Theconditionslistedbelowareexamplesofindirecteffectsonbiologicalresources.

Permanentalterationstolightandnoiselevels.

Damagethroughtoxicityassociatedwithherbicidesandrodenticides.
Mostofthebiologicalimpactsassociatedwithrepoweringactivitiesanalyzedinthissectionare
directimpacts.Whereindirectimpactswouldresultfromsuchactivities,theyaresoidentifiedinthe
impactdiscussion.
Permanentdirecteffectsonbiologicalresourceswerequantifiedusingtheestimatedamountofland
coverthatwouldbeconvertedasaresultofconstructionofnewfacilities.Temporaryeffectson
biologicalresourceswerequantifiedusingtheestimatedamountoflandcoverthatwouldbe
temporarilydisturbedduringprojectconstructionbutwouldberestoredtopreprojectconditions
within1yearofdisturbance.
Fortheprogram,specificlocationsoffacilitiesandroadsarenotavailable.Toestimatepermanent
andtemporaryimpactacreagesintheprogramarea,impactinformationderivedfromtheGolden
Hillsprojectdescriptionwasusedtocalculateaveragepermanentandtemporaryareasof
disturbanceforan80MWprojectusingturbinessimilartothoseproposedfortheprogram.These
standardizedareasofimpactwereappliedtothespecificationsoftheprogram(seeChapter2,
ProgramDescription).Thetotalamountsofpermanentandtemporaryimpactswerethenallocated
tothevariouslandcovertypesbasedontheproportionoftheprogramareacomprisingeachland
covertype.Accordingly,theestimatedpermanentandtemporarylandcoverimpactsare
proportionaltotheamountofeachlandcovertypeintheprogramarea.Theseestimatedimpacts
areshowninTable3.4‐7.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐48 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐7. Estimated Permanent and Temporary Impacts on Land Cover Types in the Program Areaa LandCoverType
Amountin
Program
Area
(acres)
Percentof
Total
Program
Area
Alt1
Alt2
Annualgrassland
39,381.63
90.83
598.57
645.80
555.06
1.28
8.44
9.10
Rockoutcrop
42.05
0.001
0.01
Northernmixedchaparral/
chamisechaparral
28.65
0.0007
Northerncoastalscrub/Diablan
sagescrub
74.51
Mixedevergreenforest/oak
woodland
Blueoakwoodland
TemporaryImpact
Estimate(acres)c
PermanentImpact
Estimate(acres)b
Alt1
Alt2
526.81
568.60
7.42
8.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.002
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
582.18
0.01
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
163.61
0.004
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
Foothillpine–oakwoodland
21.11
0.0005
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Mixedwillowriparianscrub
39.27
0.0009
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
9.93
0.0002
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
483.17
1.11
7.31
7.89
6.44
6.95
81.44
0.002
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
158.21
0.004
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
54.19
0.001
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Reservoirs
176.58
0.004
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
Drainagesd
–
–
–
–
–
–
Cropland
4.55
0.0001
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.21
0.17
0.19
Alkalimeadow
Mixedriparianforestand
woodland
Alkaliwetland
Seasonalwetland
Perennialfreshwatermarsh
Canal/Aqueduct
Ponds
DevelopedandDisturbed
0.01
1,502.58
a
Theseimpactestimatesdonotincludeoffsetoflandcoverthatisreturnedtonaturalconditionsfromremovalof
facilitiesandroads.Therefore,acreagesofimpactsarelikelytobelowerthanthoseshownhere.
b Percentoftotalprogramareamultipliedby659acres(Alternative1)and711acres(Alternative2)oftotal
permanentimpactsassociatedwiththeprogram.
c Percentoftotalprogramareamultipliedby580acres(Alternative1)and626acres(Alternative2)oftotal
temporaryimpactsassociatedwiththeprogram.
d Acreagewasnotcalculatedforimpactsondrainages.Typically,suchimpactsaremeasuredinlinearfeet;these
impactswillbequantifiedwhendesigndrawingsareavailable.
Itshouldbenotedthatsitingconsiderationsduringdesignanddevelopmentofindividualprojects
andimplementationofavoidanceandminimizationmeasureswouldlikelymodifysuchimpacts.For
example,becausemostroadsandfacilitieswouldnotbeconstructedinlowareaswheremostponds
andwetlandsarelocated,permanentlossoftheselandcovertypesisnotanticipated.Additionally,
impactestimatesdonottakeintoaccountthatsomedevelopedareasmaybereturnedtonatural
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐49 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency conditions;suchrestorationwouldoffsettheacreagesofaffectedlandcover.Consequently,the
estimatesinTable3.4‐7likelyexceedtheactualimpactsthatwouldresultfromconstruction.
LandcoverimpactsassociatedwiththeGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsweredetermined
byoverlayingthefootprintoftheproposedprojectcomponentsonthemappedlandcovertypesand
calculatingtheareaofeachlandcovertypethatwouldbepermanentlyandtemporarilyaffected.
Permanentandtemporaryimpactsonlandcover(andspecial‐statusspecieshabitat)resultingfrom
theGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectsareshowninTables3.4‐8and3.4‐9,respectively.
Table 3.4‐8. Estimated Permanent and Temporary Impacts on Land Cover Types in the Golden Hills Project Area (acres)a Temporary
LandCover
Permanent Construction Decommissioning
AssociatedWildlifeSpecies
Annual
grassland
124.89
91.80
28.47(existing
turbines)
117.00(roads)
Californiatigersalamander,western
spadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,
westernpondturtle,Blainville’shorned
lizard,Alamedawhipsnake,SanJoaquin
coachwhip,white‐tailedkite,northern
harrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,
westernburrowingowl,loggerhead
shrike,tricoloredblackbird,American
badger,SanJoaquinkitfox,non–special‐
specialstatusmigratorybirds
Alkalimeadow
0.30
3.69
–
Sameasannualgrassland
Ponds
0.15
0.00
–
Vernalpooltadpoleshrimp,curved‐
footedhygrotusdivingbeetle,California
tigersalamander,westernspadefoot,
Californiared‐leggedfrog,westernpond
turtle
Drainagesb
–
–
Curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle,
Californiatigersalamander,California
red‐leggedfrog,foothillyellow‐legged
frog,westernpondturtle
a
b
Theseimpactestimatesdonotincludeoffsetoflandcoverthatisreturnedtonaturalconditionsfrom
removaloffacilitiesandroads.Therefore,acreagesofimpactsarelikelytobelowerthanthoseshownhere.
Acreagewasnotcalculatedforimpactsondrainages.Typically,suchimpactsaremeasuredinlinearfeet;
theseimpactswillbequantifiedwhendesigndrawingsareavailable.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐50 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐9. Permanent and Temporary Impacts (acres) on Land Cover Types in the Patterson Pass Project Area (acres)a Temporary
LandCover
Permanent Construction Decommissioning
Annual
grassland
15.59
56.38
12.34(existing
turbines)
66.00(roads)
AssociatedWildlifeSpecies
Californiatigersalamander,western
spadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,
westernpondturtle,Blainville’shorned
lizard,Alamedawhipsnake,SanJoaquin
coachwhip,white‐tailedkite,northern
harrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,
westernburrowingowl,loggerhead
shrike,tricoloredblackbird,American
badger,SanJoaquinkitfox,non–special‐
specialstatusmigratorybirds
Seasonal
Wetland
–
0.01
–
Longhornfairyshrimp,vernalpoolfairy
shrimp,vernalpooltadpoleshrimp,
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle,
westernspadefoot
Perennial
freshwater
marsh
–
0.02
–
Californiatigersalamander,California
red‐leggedfrog,westernpondturtle
Drainages
0.01
0.03
–
Curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle,
Californiatigersalamander,western
spadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,
foothillyellow‐leggedfrog,western
pondturtle
a
Theseimpactestimatesdonotincludeoffsetoflandcoverthatisreturnedtonaturalconditionsfrom
removaloffacilitiesandroads.Therefore,acreagesofimpactsarelikelytobelowerthanthoseshownhere.
Potentialindirectimpactsresultingfromtheprogramandthetwoprojectswereevaluated
qualitativelyfortworeasons:(1)indirectimpactswouldoccurfartherfromtheprojectareaorlater
intime,and(2)evaluatingindirecteffectsquantitativelywouldbehighlyspeculative.
Avian Fatality Analysis Methods Fatality Rates Estimatingthenumberofbirdskilledatwindenergyfacilitiesisarapidlydevelopingfield,witha
varietyofmetrics,methods,andestimatorsusedtoquantifyturbine‐relatedavianfatalities.Most
commonlyusedestimatorsfirstcalculatetherateatwhichbirdsarekilled.Historically,themost
commonlyusedratehasbeenthenumberofbirdskilledpermegawatt(MW)peryear,whereMWs
aremeasuredastheratednameplatecapacitiesoftheturbines.Theratednameplatecapacityofa
turbineistheamountofpoweritcangenerateunderitsidealconditions(differentturbinesare
designedtooperatemostefficientlyunderdifferentconditions).
ThenumberoffatalitiesperMWperyearhasbeenusedmostoftenbecauseitfacilitates
comparisonsacrossanumberofdifferentturbinetypeswithdifferentratednameplatecapacities.
However,thenumberofbirdskilledperturbineperyearisbeingusedmoreoftenatfacilitiesusing
modernturbinesbecausetheselargerturbinesarereachingasizeatwhichahigherdensityof
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐51 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency turbinesisnolongerfeasible.Whilemodernturbinesmayvaryinratednameplatecapacityfrom1
to3MW,theirspacingisnotcloselycorrelatedwiththeircapacitybecauseofvarioustechnical
constraints.Forexample,alargernumberof1MWturbinesthan2.3MWturbinescannotbe
installedinagivenspace,withtheresultthatagivenproject,dependingonitssize,mightsupporta
roughlyequivalentnumberof1MWor2.3MWturbines.Consequently,inviewoftheirsizeand
design,thenumberofturbinesmightbeamoreimportantfactorthannameplatecapacityin
estimatingfatalityrates.
Regardlessofthemetricused,thefatalityrate(expressedeitherperMWorperturbine)isthen
multipliedbyeitherthetotalnumberofMWsinthefacilityorthetotalnumberofturbinesinthe
facility,respectively,toobtaintheestimateofthetotalnumberofbirdskilledeachyearatthe
facility.
Thebaselineestimateofthenumberofbirdskilledannuallyforeachprojectandfortheprogram
areawasbasedonthetotalnumberofMWsthatwereinstalled(referredtoasthetotalinstalled
capacity)atthetimetheNoticeofPreparationforthisPEIRwasfiled.Theinstalledcapacityatthe
timetheNOPwasfiledwas329MWfortheprogramarea,80.5MWfortheGoldenHillsprojectarea,
and21.8MWforthePattersonPassprojectarea(theprogramareatotalincludesthecapacityofthe
twoprojectareas).
Forthefatalityrates,theaverageoftheannualestimatesofeachfatalityratefromthe2005–2011
birdyears(n=7years)providedbytheAlamedaCountyAvianFatalityMonitoringProgram(ICF
International2013)wasbasedonold‐generationturbinesonly(i.e.,resultsfromtheDiabloWinds
andBuenaVistaturbineswereexcludedbecausetheyarenotconsideredold‐generationturbines).
Thisaveragewasusedbecausetheannualfatalityratesvaryconsiderablyfromyeartoyear.
Theanalysiswasbasedonfourgroupsofspecies:focalspecies,raptors(includingowlsandturkey
vultures),non‐raptors,andallbirds.Focalspeciesweredefinedinthe2007SettlementAgreement
asAmericankestrel,burrowingowl,goldeneagle,andred‐tailedhawkforthepurposeofmeasuring
thereductioninraptorfatalitiesresultingfromimplementationofmanagementactions.Four
additionalspecies(loggerheadshrike[Californiaspeciesofspecialconcern],prairiefalcon[CDFW
WatchList],Swainson’shawk[listedasthreatenedunderCESA],andbarnowl)wereaddedforthe
analysesinthisPEIRbecauseofahighfatalityrate,generalconcernsabouttheconservationstatus
ofthesespecies,orboth.
ICFbiologistscomparedthebaselinenumberoffatalitiesforeachspeciesandspeciesgroup
calculatedasoutlinedabovetothenumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurasaresultofrepowering.
Thenumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurasaresultofrepoweringwasbasedonthe417and450
MWcapsforthetwoprogramalternativesandonthesizeofeachoftheprojectsmeasuredinMWs
asoutlinedintheprojectdescription.Theratesusedtocalculatethenumberoffatalitiesexpectedto
occurasaresultofrepoweringwerederivedfromtheratesatthreerepoweringprojectsinthe
APWRAthatusenewer,repoweredturbines:DiabloWinds,BuenaVista,andVascoWinds.Diablo
Windscomprisesthirty‐one660kWturbines,BuenaVistathirty‐eight1MWturbines,andVasco
Windsthirty‐four2.3MWturbines(InsigniaEnvironmental2012;Brownetal.2013;ICF
International2013).Althoughthereisconsiderablerangeinturbinesizesamongthesethree
projects,theyareallconsiderednew‐generationturbinesrelativetotherestoftheturbines
installedintheAPWRA.Theannualfatalityrates(expressedasfatalitiesperMWperyear)forthese
threerepoweringprojectsarepresentedinTable3.4‐10(with95%confidenceintervalswhere
available),alongwiththeaverageoftheannualfatalityratesatnonrepoweredturbinesfor
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐52 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency comparison.However,itshouldbenotedthattherateestimatesavailablefromnew‐generation
repoweredturbinesintheAPWRAmaynotberepresentativeofratesthatwouldoccuratother
locationsintheAPWRA.Thisisbecausethethreeexistingrepoweredprojectsiteseachhave
differentturbinetypesandarelocatedinthreerelativelysmall,distinctareaswithsite‐specific
geographic,topographic,andotherecologicalconditions,andbecausetheprimaryspeciesof
concernarenotevenlydistributedthroughouttheAPWRA.
Table 3.4‐10. Annual Adjusted Fatality Rates for Nonrepowered and Repowered APWRA Turbines Repowered
Species/Group
Nonrepowereda
DiabloWindsb
BuenaVistac
VascoWindsd
Americankestrel
Barnowl
Burrowingowl
Goldeneagle
Loggerheadshrike
Prairiefalcon
Red‐tailedhawk
Swainson’shawk
0.59
0.24
0.78
0.08
0.19
0.02
0.44
0.00
0.09
0.02
0.84
0.01
0.00
–
0.20
–
0.15
0.00
–
0.04
–
0.00
0.10
–
0.30
0.03
0.05
0.02
–
–
0.25
–
Allraptors
Allnativenon‐raptors
2.43
4.50
1.21
2.51
0.31
1.01
0.64
2.09
Notes: fatalityratesreflectannualfatalitiesperMW.“–”denotesthatnofatalitiesweredetected.“0.00”
signifiesthat,althoughfatalitiesweredetected,therateislowerthantwosignificantdigits.
a Averageof2005–2011birdyears.
b Averageof2005–2009birdyears.
c Averageof3years(2007–2009).
d Valuesfromfirstyearofmonitoring(2013).
Potential Biases in the Avian Fatality Analysis Methods Severalfactorsconfoundthecomparisonofavianfatalityratesbetweenold‐andnew‐generation
turbines.Thefatalityratesfromnonrepoweredturbineswereobtainedwhilemanagementactions
werebeingimplementedtoreduceavianfatalities.Theseactionsincludedtheshutdownofturbines
duringthewinterperiod,atimewhenwindsarelowestbutavianuseoftheareaishighestforthree
ofthefourfocalspecies.Inaddition,hazardousturbineswerebeingremovedduringtheperiodof
datacollection.Theseactionsincombinationresultedinareductionofavianfatalityrates,tending
tounderestimatethedifferencesbetweenold‐generationturbinesandnewerturbinesbecausethe
newerturbinesarenotshutdownduringthewinterperiodandnoneweredeemedhazardous
enoughtowarrantremoval.
Thefatalityratesfromtwoofthethreerepoweredprojectsareassociatedwithturbines
considerablysmallerthanthoselikelytobeusedinallfuturerepoweringprojects.Evidence
collectedtodatesuggeststhatavianfatalityratesmaydecreaseasturbinesizeincreases
(SmallwoodandKaras2009).Consequently,theseratesmaybebiasedhighrelativetotheturbines
likelytobeusedinthetwoprojectsdescribedinthisPEIRandfutureprojectsimplementedinthe
restoftheAPWRA.Inaddition,thereisconsiderablevariationincollisionriskacrossthevarious
topographiesandgeographiesoftheAPWRA,presumablydueinparttovariationsinabundance
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐53 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency anduseoftheseareasbydifferentspecies.Forexample,burrowingowlswereknowntobe
abundantintheareaaroundtheDiabloWindsturbineswhentheywereinstalled,andthusthereisa
relativelyhighrate(fornew‐generationturbines)offatalitiesattheseturbines.Conversely,no
burrowingowlfatalitiesweredetectedintheBuenaVistaprojectareainthe3yearsoffatality
monitoringafterrepowering.Thus,thefatalityratesatthethreerepoweredprojectsitesmaynotbe
representativeofthefatalityrateslikelytooccuratotherrepoweringprojectsites.Becauseofthe
variationbetweentheseprojects,fatalityratesfromallthreeprojectswereusedtoprovidearange
intheestimatesoftotalannualfatalitieslikelytooccurasaresultofrepowering.
Finally,oneofthebiggestdifferencesamongallstudiesisvariationindetectionprobability.
Detectionprobabilityasitisusedherereferstotheprobabilitythataturbine‐relatedfatalityis
actuallydetected.Therearevariouswaysofmeasuringdetectionprobability,themostcommon
beingtheuseofcarcassplacementtrialstomeasuretherateatwhichcarcassesareremovedfrom
thesearchareaandtherateatwhichsearchersdetectcarcassesgiventhattheyarestillpresent.
Detectionprobabilityvariesamongsearchers,habitattypes,seasons,years,andmanyotherfactors.
TheAlamedaCountyAvianFatalityMonitoringProgrammeasureddetectionprobabilitiesinonly
oneyear,andtheseprobabilitieswereusedtoestimatethenumberofkilledbirdsinallyearsofthe
study.Ifdetectionprobabilityvariesconsiderablyacrossyears,suchvariationcanalsoconfoundto
anunknowndegreecomparisonsoffatalityratesandestimatesoftotalfatalitiesacrossprojects.
Bat Fatality Analysis Methods Fatality Rates Theassessmentofbatspeciespotentiallyatriskisbasedonareviewofexistingbatfatalitydatafor
theAPWRA,speciesoccurrencedatainandaroundtheprogramandprojectareas,thecurrent
understandingofthosespecies’susceptibilitytofourth‐generationturbine–relatedmortality,and
knowntrendsinbatfatalitiesatwindenergyfacilitiesingeneral.
Methodsusedtoconducttheanalysisweresimilartothoseusedtoassessthepotentialimpactson
avianspecies.ThetotalinstalledcapacityatthetimetheNOPforthisPEIRwasfiledwasusedto
estimatethebaselinenumberoffatalitiesthatwouldoccuriftheold‐generationturbineswereto
continueoperatingwithoutanyrepowering.Thisvaluewasmultipliedbythefatalityrateforbats
providedbySmallwoodandKaras(2009:1066)usingdatafromtheAFMTforthe2005–2007bird
yearstoobtainestimatesoftotalbatfatalitiesperyearfortheprogramandthetwoprojects.These
numberswerecomparedtothenumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurifold‐generationturbines
werereplacedwithnewer,modernturbines.Thenumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurasaresultof
repoweringwasbasedonthe417MWcapfortheprogramareaandthesizeofeachoftheprojects
measuredinMWsasoutlinedintheprojectdescription.
Estimatesofbatfatalityratesfromseveralsourceswereusedtoprovidearangeofbatfatality
estimatesthatcouldoccurasaresultofrepowering.Theprimarysource,VascoWinds,was
supplementedwithbatfatalityrateestimatesfromthetwootherrepoweringprojectsinthe
APWRA—DiabloWindsandBuenaVista—bothofwhichusedturbinessmallerthanthoseusedin
currentandfuturerepoweringprojects.BatfatalityratesfromthenearbyMontezumaHillsWind
ResourceAreawerealsousedbecausethisisthenearestarea—beyondVascoWinds—where
fourth‐generationturbinesareinoperation.Theresultantrangeofpossiblefatalityrateswas
comparedtothebaselineestimatesoftotalfatalitiesforthetwoprojectareasandtheprogramarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐54 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Potential Biases in the Bat Fatality Analysis Methods Althoughthebestavailableevidencewasusedtoestimatethenumberofbatfatalitiespotentially
resultingfromimplementationoftheproposedprogramandprojects,thereismoreuncertaintyin
theseestimatesthanthereisforbirdfatalityestimates.BecausetheAlamedaCountyAvianFatality
Programwasnotdesignedtocountbats,thebaselinefatalityrateislikelyunderestimated.
Moreover,becauseVascoWindsisnotrepresentativeoftheentireprogramarea,extrapolationof
resultsfromthissitetootherareasshouldbeinterpretedwithcaution.Finally,thenearby
MontezumaHillsWindResourceArea,whilesharingsomelandusecharacteristics(e.g.,grazing),
supportsmoredrylandfarmingthantheAPWRAandhasadifferenttopographicalprofile.
Determination of Significance Thebasisfordeterminingwhenagivenimpactexceedsthethresholdofsignificance—thatis,when
ithasasubstantialadverseeffect—wasdeterminedbytheprofessionaljudgmentofqualified
biologists.Underlong‐establishedCEQApracticeandprinciple,suchdeterminationsarederived
fromcomparisonwiththebaselineofexistingconditions,asthefocusofCEQAison“substantial
adverseeffect”asachangefromexistingconditions.Theanalysisofimpactsonbiologicalresources,
andinparticularonavianspeciesintheprogramarea,accordingly,entailedthecomparisonofthe
existingconditionofinfrequentbutregularandmoreorlesspredictablelevelsofavianmortality
associatedwiththeexistingwindturbines—thebaselinemortalityratedefinedaboveinAvian
FatalityAnalysisMethods—withtheanticipatedorcalculatedprojectionofthemortalityratethat
wouldresultfromimplementationoftheprogramorprojects.Wheretheprojectedratewould
exceedthebaselinerate,theimpactwouldbesignificant;iftheprojectedrateisbelowthebaseline
rate,theimpactwouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant.Thesecalculationsareinformedbytwo
factors:(1)avianmortalityiscomprisedofaseriesoftemporal,moment‐to‐momenteventsthatis
notaconstantinthewaythatotherbaselineenvironmentalconditionsexist,suchasexistinghabitat
areas,airquality,oranearthquakefault;and(2)estimationoffatalityratesfromexistingandnew‐
generationturbinesis,asdiscussedinmoredetailbelow,variableanduncertain.
Anotherconditionunderwhichadeterminationofsignificancewouldbemadewouldbeifwind
turbineoperationswouldviolatespecificlawsandregulations(e.g.,ESA,CESA,MBTA)thatarenot
basedonratesofmortality.
TheanalysisinthisPEIRisalsoinformedbythecommitmentsdocumentedinthe2007Settlement
Agreementbythemajorityofthewindoperatorstoachievea50%reductioninavianfatalitiesfrom
anestimatedbaselineofannualfatalitiesoffourfocalspecies(goldeneagle,burrowingowl,
Americankestrel,andred‐tailedhawk)throughtheimplementationoftheAvianWildlifeProtection
ProgramandSchedule(AWPPS)asestablishedin2005andmodifiedin2007.
InaccordancewithAppendixGoftheStateCEQAGuidelines,theprogramalternativesandthe
PattersonPassandGoldenHillsprojectswouldbeconsideredtohaveasignificanteffectifthe
programorprojectwouldresultinanyoftheconditionslistedbelow.

Haveasubstantialadverseeffect,eitherdirectlyorthroughhabitatmodifications,onany
speciesidentifiedasacandidate,sensitive,orspecial‐statusspeciesinlocalorregionalplans,
policies,orregulations,orbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlifeorU.S.Fishand
WildlifeService.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐55 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Haveasubstantialadverseeffectonanyriparianhabitatorothersensitivenaturalcommunity
identifiedinlocalorregionalplans,policies,orregulations,orbytheCaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandWildlifeorU.S.FishandWildlifeService.

HaveasubstantialadverseeffectonfederallyprotectedwetlandsasdefinedbySection404of
theCleanWaterAct(including,butnotlimitedto,marshes,vernalpools,coastalwetlands,etc.)
throughdirectremoval,filling,hydrologicalinterruption,orothermeans.

Interferesubstantiallywiththemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfishorwildlife
speciesorwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,orimpedetheuseof
nativewildlifenurserysites.

Substantiallyreducethehabitatofacommonplantorwildlifespecies,causeaplantorwildlife
populationtodropbelowself‐sustaininglevels,orthreatentoeliminateaplantoranimal
community.

Conflictwithanylocalpoliciesorordinancesprotectingbiologicalresources,suchasatree
preservationpolicyorordinance.

ConflictwiththeprovisionsofanadoptedHCP,NCCP,orotherapprovedlocal,regional,orstate
habitatconservationplan.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures Thefollowingdiscussionassessespotentialimpactsonbiologicalresourcesresultingfrom
implementationoftheprogramandtheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojects.Wildlifespecies
withsimilarhabitatuse(e.g.,tree‐nestingspecies)weregroupedintheimpactdiscussionsbelow.
MitigationmeasuresforpotentialimpactsoftheprogramandPattersonPassandGoldenHills
projectsweredevelopedtobeconsistentwiththeavoidance,minimization,andmitigation
measuressetforthintheEastAlamedaCountyConservationStrategy(EACCSorConservation
Strategy).TheConservationStrategywasdevelopedtoassistwithenvironmentalcompliance
requirementsofESA,CESA,CEQA,NEPA,andotherapplicablelawsforallprojectswithinthearea
coveredbythestrategythatwouldhaveimpactsonbiologicalresources.TheConservationStrategy
establishesgoalsandobjectivesandacompensationprogramtooffsetimpactsfromprojectsinthe
coveredarea.TheprogramarealieswithintheareacoveredbytheConservationStrategy.Where
applicable,thegoalsandobjectivesintheConservationStrategywereusedtodevelopmitigation
measurestominimizepotentialimpactsresultingfromtheprogramandtheindividualprojects
addressedinthisEIR.Likewise,compensatorymitigationfortheprogramandindividualprojects
referstomitigationratiosfromtheConservationStrategy.Intheeventthattakeauthorizationis
obtainedforanyspecieslistedunderESAorCESA,avoidance,minimization,andcompensatory
mitigationwillbeundertakeninaccordancewiththeauthorizationinconsultationwithUSFWS
and/orCDFW.Implementationofstateandfederalrequirementscontainedinsuchauthorization
willconstitutecompliancewithcorrespondingmeasuresinthisPEIR.
ImpactBIO‐1a‐1:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultinadverseeffectson
special‐statusplantsorhabitatoccupiedbyspecial‐statusplants—programAlternative1:
417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Ground‐disturbingactivitiesassociatedwithAlternative1couldresultinadverseeffectsonspecial‐
statusplantsortheirhabitat.Directeffectsincludethoseeffectswhereplantsmayberemoved,
damaged,orcrushed(seedlings)byground‐disturbingactivities,themovementorparkingof
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐56 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency vehicles,and/ortheplacementofequipmentandsupplies.Grounddisturbancecankillordamage
matureindividualsoreliminatetheirhabitat.Excavationalterssoilpropertiesandmaycreate
conditionsunsuitableforthegrowthofsomespeciesorfavortheirreplacementbyotherspecies.
Therootsofshrubsandotherperennialspeciesaresusceptibletodamagefromsoilcompactionby
equipmentorconstructionmaterials.Possibleindirecteffectsonplantscouldresultfromerosion
thatdegradeshabitatoraccidentalignitionofafirethatdamagesorkillsindividuals.Becausethese
ground‐disturbingactivitiescouldhavesubstantialadverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantspecies,
thisimpactissignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐1ewould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusplantspecies
Projectproponentswillconductsurveysforthespecial‐statusplantspecieswithinandadjacent
toallprojectsites.Allsurveyswillbeconductedbyqualifiedbiologistsinaccordancewiththe
appropriateprotocols.
Special‐statusplantsurveyswillbeconductedinaccordancewithProtocolsforSurveyingand
EvaluatingImpactstoSpecialStatusNativePlantPopulationsandNaturalCommunities
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2009)duringtheseasonthatspecial‐statusplant
specieswouldbeevidentandidentifiable—i.e.,duringtheirbloomingseason.Nomorethan3
yearspriortoground‐disturbingrepoweringactivitiesandduringtheappropriateidentification
periodsforspecial‐statusplants(Table3.4‐4),aqualifiedbiologist(asdeterminedbyAlameda
County)willconductfieldsurveyswithindecommissioningworkareas,proposedconstruction
areas,andtheimmediatelyadjacentareastodeterminethepresenceofhabitatforspecial‐
statusplantspecies.Theprojectproponentwillsubmitareportdocumentingthesurveyresults
toAlamedaCountyforreviewandapprovalpriortoconductinganyrepoweringactivities.The
reportwillincludethelocationanddescriptionofallproposedworkareas,thelocationand
descriptionofallsuitablehabitatforspecial‐statusplantspecies,andthelocationand
descriptionofothersensitivehabitats(e.g.,vernalpools,wetlands,riparianareas).Additionally,
thereportwilloutlinewhereadditionalspeciesand/orhabitat‐specificmitigationmeasuresare
required.Thisreportwillprovidethebasisforanyapplicablepermitapplicationswhere
incidentaltakeoflistedspeciesmayoccur.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
ProjectproponentswillensurethatthefollowingBMPs,inaccordancewithpractices
establishedintheEACCS,willbeincorporatedintoindividualprojectdesignandconstruction
documents.

Employeesandcontractorsperformingdecommissioningandreclamationactivitieswill
receiveenvironmentalsensitivitytraining.Trainingwillincludereviewofenvironmental
laws,mitigationmeasures,permitconditions,andotherrequirementsthatmustbefollowed
byallpersonneltoreduceoravoideffectsonspecial‐statusspeciesduringconstruction
activities.

Environmentaltailboardtrainingswilltakeplaceonanas‐neededbasisinthefield.These
trainingswillincludeabriefreviewofthebiologyofthecoveredspeciesandguidelinesthat
mustbefollowedbyallpersonneltoreduceoravoidnegativeeffectsonthesespecies
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐57 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency duringdecommissioningandreclamationactivities.Directors,managers,superintendents,
andthecrewleaderswillberesponsibleforensuringthatcrewmemberscomplywiththe
guidelines.

Vehiclesandequipmentwillbeparkedonpavement,existingroads,andpreviously
disturbedareastotheextentpracticable.

Offroadvehicletravelwillbeavoided.

Materialwillbestockpiledonlyinareasthatdonotsupportspecial‐statusspeciesor
sensitivehabitats.

Gradingwillberestrictedtotheminimumareanecessary.

Priortoground‐disturbingactivitiesinsensitivehabitats,projectconstructionboundaries
andaccessareaswillbeflaggedandtemporarilyfencedduringconstructiontoreducethe
potentialforvehiclesandequipmenttostrayintoadjacenthabitats.

Vehiclesorequipmentwillnotberefueledwithin100feetofawetland,stream,orother
waterwayunlessabermedandlinedrefuelingarea(i.e.,acreatedbermmadeofsandbags
orotherremovablematerial)isconstructed.

Erosioncontrolmeasureswillbeimplementedtoreducesedimentationinnearbyaquatic
habitatwhenactivitiesarethesourceofpotentialerosion.Plasticmonofilamentnetting
(erosioncontrolmatting)orsimilarmaterialcontainingnettingwillnotbeusedatthe
project.Acceptablesubstitutesincludecoconutcoirmattingortackifiedhydroseeding
compounds.

Significantearthmoving‐activitieswillnotbeconductedinriparianareaswithin24hoursof
predictedstormsoraftermajorstorms(definedas1‐inchofrainormore).

Thefollowingwillnotbeallowedatornearworksitesforprojectactivities:trashdumping,
firearms,openfires(suchasbarbecues)notrequiredbytheactivity,hunting,andpets
(exceptforsafetyinremotelocations).
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
Wheresurveysdeterminethataspecial‐statusplantspeciesispresentinoradjacenttoaproject
area,directandindirectimpactsoftheprojectonthespecieswillbeavoidedthroughthe
establishmentofactivityexclusionzones,withinwhichnoground‐disturbingactivitieswilltake
place,includingconstructionofnewfacilities,constructionstaging,orothertemporarywork
areas.Activityexclusionzonesforspecial‐statusplantspecieswillbeestablishedaroundeach
occupiedhabitatsite,theboundariesofwhichwillbeclearlymarkedwithstandardorange
plasticconstructionexclusionfencingoritsequivalent.Theestablishmentofactivityexclusion
zoneswillnotberequiredifnoconstruction‐relateddisturbanceswilloccurwithin250feetof
theoccupiedhabitat.Thesizeofactivityexclusionzonesmaybereducedthroughconsultation
withaqualifiedbiologistandwithconcurrencefromCDFWbasedonsite‐specificconditions.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
Allprojectproponentswillavoidorminimizetemporaryandpermanentimpactsonspecial‐
statusplantsthatoccuronprojectsitesandwillcompensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplant
species.Althoughallimpactsonlarge‐floweredfiddleneck,diamond‐petaledCaliforniapoppy,
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐58 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency andcaper‐fruitedtropidocarpumwillbeavoided,impactsonotherspecial‐statusplantspecies
willbeavoidedtotheextentfeasible,andanyunavoidableimpactswillbeaddressedthrough
compensatorymitigation.
Whereavoidanceofimpactsonaspecial‐statusplantspeciesisinfeasible,lossofindividualsor
occupiedhabitatofaspecial‐statusplantspeciesoccurrencewillbecompensatedforthrough
theacquisition,protection,andsubsequentmanagementinperpetuityofotherexisting
occurrencesata2:1ratio(occurrencesimpacted:occurrencespreserved).Theproject
proponentwillprovidedetailedinformationtotheCountyandCDFWonthelocationofthe
preservedoccurrences,qualityofthepreservedhabitat,feasibilityofprotectingandmanaging
theareasin‐perpetuity,responsibilityparties,andotherpertinentinformation.Ifsuitable
occurrencesofaspecial‐statusplantspeciesarenotavailableforpreservation,thentheproject
willberedesignedtoremovefeaturesthatwouldresultinimpactsonthatspecies.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
Allprojectproponentswillretainaqualifiedbiologist(asdeterminedbyAlamedaCounty)to
conductperiodicmonitoringofdecommissioning,repowering,andreclamationactivitiesthat
occuradjacenttosensitivebiologicalresources(e.g.,special‐statusspecies,sensitivevegetation
communities,wetlands).Thebiologistwillassistthecrew,asneeded,tocomplywithallproject
implementationrestrictionsandguidelines.Inaddition,thebiologistwillberesponsiblefor
ensuringthattheprojectproponentoritscontractorsmaintainexclusionareasadjacentto
sensitivebiologicalresources,andfordocumentingcompliancewithallbiologicalresources–
relatedmitigationmeasures.
ImpactBIO‐1a‐2:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultinadverseeffectson
special‐statusplantsorhabitatoccupiedbyspecial‐statusplants—programAlternative2:
450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Ground‐disturbingactivitiesassociatedwithAlternative2couldresultinadverseeffectsonspecial‐
statusplantsortheirhabitat.DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunder
Alternative1,excepttheoverallareaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumber
ofturbinesandassociatedinfrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbance
area.Directeffectsincludethosewhereplantsmayberemoved,damaged,orcrushed(seedlings)by
ground‐disturbingactivities,themovementorparkingofvehicles,and/ortheplacementof
equipmentandsupplies.Grounddisturbancecankillordamagematureindividualsoreliminate
theirhabitat.Excavationalterssoilpropertiesandmaycreateconditionsunsuitableforthegrowth
ofsomespeciesorfavortheirreplacementbyotherspecies.Therootsofshrubsandotherperennial
speciesaresusceptibletodamagefromsoilcompactionbyequipmentorconstructionmaterials.
Possibleindirecteffectsonplantscouldresultfromerosionthatdegradeshabitatoraccidental
ignitionofafirethatdamagesorkillsindividuals.Becausetheseground‐disturbingactivitiescould
havesubstantialadverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantspecies,thisimpactissignificant.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐1ewouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐
than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusplantspecies
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐59 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
ImpactBIO‐1b:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultinadverseeffectson
special‐statusplantsorhabitatoccupiedbyspecial‐statusplants—GoldenHillsProject(less
thansignificantwithmitigation)
Ground‐disturbingactivitiesassociatedwiththeGoldenHillsProjectcouldresultinadverseeffects
onspecial‐statusplantsortheirhabitat.Directeffectsincludethoseeffectswhereplantsmaybe
removed,damaged,orcrushed(seedlings)byground‐disturbingactivities,themovementor
parkingofvehicles,and/ortheplacementofequipmentandsupplies.Grounddisturbancecankillor
damagematureindividualsoreliminatetheirhabitat.Excavationalterssoilpropertiesandmay
createconditionsunsuitableforthegrowthofsomespeciesorfavortheirreplacementbyother
species.Therootsofshrubsandotherperennialspeciesaresusceptibletodamagefromsoil
compactionbyequipmentorconstructionmaterials.Possibleindirecteffectsonplantscouldresult
fromerosionthatdegradeshabitatoraccidentalignitionofafirethatdamagesorkillsindividuals.
Becausetheseground‐disturbingactivitiescouldhavesubstantialadverseeffectsonspecial‐status
plantspecies,thisimpactissignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐
1ewouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
ImpactBIO‐1c:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultinadverseeffectson
special‐statusplantsorhabitatoccupiedbyspecial‐statusplants—PattersonPassProject
(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Ground‐disturbingactivitiesassociatedwiththePattersonPassProjectcouldresultinadverse
effectsonspecial‐statusplantsortheirhabitat.Directeffectsincludethoseeffectswhereplantsmay
beremoved,damaged,orcrushed(seedlings)byground‐disturbingactivities,themovementor
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐60 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency parkingofvehicles,and/ortheplacementofequipmentandsupplies.Grounddisturbancecankillor
damagematureindividualsoreliminatetheirhabitat.Excavationalterssoilpropertiesandmay
createconditionsunsuitableforthegrowthofsomespeciesorfavortheirreplacementbyother
species.Therootsofshrubsandotherperennialspeciesaresusceptibletodamagefromsoil
compactionbyequipmentorconstructionmaterials.Possibleindirecteffectsonplantscouldresult
fromerosionthatdegradeshabitatoraccidentalignitionofafirethatdamagesorkillsindividuals.
Becausetheseground‐disturbingactivitiescouldhavesubstantialadverseeffectsonspecial‐status
plantspecies,thisimpactissignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐
1ewouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
ImpactBIO‐2a‐1:Adverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantsandnaturalcommunitiesresulting
fromtheintroductionandspreadofinvasiveplantspecies—programAlternative1:417MW
(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitieshavethepotentialtofacilitatetheintroductionandspreadofinvasive
nonnativeplantspeciesbyremovingvegetationanddisturbingsoils.Constructionvehiclesand
machineryareprimaryvectorsforthespreadofsuchspecies.Invasivespeciescompetewithnative
speciesforresourcesandcanalternaturalcommunitiesbyinfluencingfireregimes,hydrology(e.g.,
sedimentationanderosion),lightavailability,nutrientcycling,andsoilchemistry(Randalland
Hoshovsky2000).Invasivespeciesalsohavethepotentialtoharmhumanhealthandtheeconomy
byadverselyaffectingnaturalecosystems,recreation,agriculturallands,anddevelopedareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2008).Theintroductionandspreadofinvasivenonnative
plantspeciesasaresultofactivitiesassociatedwiththeprogramwouldconstituteasignificant
indirectimpact.However,implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐2wouldreducethisimpactto
aless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐2:Preventintroduction,spread,andestablishmentofinvasive
plantspecies
Toavoidandminimizetheintroductionandspreadofinvasivenonnativeplantspecies,all
projectproponentswillimplementthefollowingBMPs.

Constructionvehiclesandmachinerywillbecleanedpriortoenteringtheconstructionarea.
Cleaningstationswillbeestablishedattheperimeteroftheconstructionareaalongall
constructionroutes.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐61 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Vehicleswillbewashedonlyatapprovedareas.Nowashingofvehicleswilloccuratjob
sites.

Todiscouragetheintroductionandestablishmentofinvasiveplantspecies,seedmixtures
andstrawusedwithinnaturalvegetationwillbeeitherricestraworweed‐freestraw.
Inaddition,theprojectproponentswillprepareandimplementerosionandsedimentcontrol
planstocontrolshort‐termandlong‐termerosionandsedimentationeffectsandtorestoresoils
andvegetationinareasaffectedbyconstructionactivities.Priortoinitiatinganyconstruction
activitiesthatwillresultintemporaryimpactsonnaturalcommunities,arestorationand
monitoringplanwillbedevelopedfortemporarilyaffectedhabitatsineachprojectarea.
RestorationandmonitoringplanswillbesubmittedtotheCountyandCDFWforapproval.
Theseplanswillincludemethodsforrestoringsoilconditionsandrevegetatingdisturbedareas,
seedmixes,monitoringandmaintenanceschedules,adaptivemanagementstrategies,reporting
requirements,andsuccesscriteria.Followingcompletionofprojectconstruction,theproject
proponentswillimplementtherevegetationplanstorestoreareasdisturbedbyproject
activitiestoaconditionofequalorgreaterhabitatfunctionthanoccurredpriortothe
disturbance.
ImpactBIO‐2a‐2:Adverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantsandnaturalcommunitiesresulting
fromtheintroductionandspreadofinvasiveplantspecies—programAlternative2:450MW
(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitieshavethepotentialtofacilitatetheintroductionandspreadofinvasive
nonnativeplantspeciesbyremovingvegetationanddisturbingsoils.Constructionvehiclesand
machineryareprimaryvectorsforthespreadofsuchspecies.Invasivespeciescompetewithnative
speciesforresourcesandcanalternaturalcommunitiesbyinfluencingfireregimes,hydrology(e.g.,
sedimentationanderosion),lightavailability,nutrientcycling,andsoilchemistry(Randalland
Hoshovsky2000).Invasivespeciesalsohavethepotentialtoharmhumanhealthandtheeconomy
byadverselyaffectingnaturalecosystems,recreation,agriculturallands,anddevelopedareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2008).Theintroductionandspreadofinvasivenonnative
plantspeciesasaresultofactivitiesassociatedwiththeprogramwouldconstituteasignificant
indirectimpact.EffectsunderAlternative2wouldbethesameasthoseunderAlternative1.
Althoughtheareaofdisturbancewouldbe8%greaterunderAlternative2,theseverityoftheeffects
ofintroductionandspreadofinvasiveplantspeciesdoesnotnecessarilycorrelatedirectlytothe
arealextentofdisturbance,butrathertothepracticesthatfacilitateintroduction.Implementationof
MitigationMeasureBIO‐2wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐2:Preventintroduction,spread,andestablishmentofinvasive
plantspecies
ImpactBIO‐2b:Adverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantsandnaturalcommunitiesresulting
fromtheintroductionandspreadofinvasiveplantspecies—GoldenHillsProject(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitieshavethepotentialtofacilitatetheintroductionandspreadofinvasive
nonnativeplantspeciesbyremovingvegetationanddisturbingsoils.Constructionvehiclesand
machineryareprimaryvectorsforthespreadofsuchspecies.Invasivespeciescompetewithnative
speciesforresourcesandcanalternaturalcommunitiesbyinfluencingfireregimes,hydrology(e.g.,
sedimentationanderosion),lightavailability,nutrientcycling,andsoilchemistry(Randalland
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐62 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Hoshovsky2000).Invasivespeciesalsohavethepotentialtoharmhumanhealthandtheeconomy
byadverselyaffectingnaturalecosystems,recreation,agriculturallands,anddevelopedareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2008).Theintroductionandspreadofinvasivenonnative
plantspeciesasaresultofactivitiesassociatedwiththeGoldenHillsProjectwouldconstitutea
significantindirectimpact.However,implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐2wouldreduce
thisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐2:Preventintroduction,spread,andestablishmentofinvasive
plantspecies
ImpactBIO‐2c:Adverseeffectsonspecial‐statusplantsandnaturalcommunitiesresulting
fromtheintroductionandspreadofinvasiveplantspecies—PattersonPassProject(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitieshavethepotentialtofacilitatetheintroductionandspreadofinvasive
nonnativeplantspeciesbyremovingvegetationanddisturbingsoils.Constructionvehiclesand
machineryareprimaryvectorsforthespreadofsuchspecies.Invasivespeciescompetewithnative
speciesforresourcesandcanalternaturalcommunitiesbyinfluencingfireregimes,hydrology(e.g.,
sedimentationanderosion),lightavailability,nutrientcycling,andsoilchemistry(Randalland
Hoshovsky2000).Invasivespeciesalsohavethepotentialtoharmhumanhealthandtheeconomy
byadverselyaffectingnaturalecosystems,recreation,agriculturallands,anddevelopedareas
(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame2008).Theintroductionandspreadofinvasivenonnative
plantspeciesasaresultofactivitiesassociatedwiththePattersonPassProjectwouldconstitutea
significantindirectimpact.However,implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐2wouldreduce
thisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐2:Preventintroduction,spread,andestablishmentofinvasive
plantspecies
ImpactBIO‐3a‐1:Potentialmortalityoforlossofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsand
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant
withmitigation)
Constructionactivitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonlonghornfairyshrimp,
vernalpoolfairyshrimp,vernalpooltadpoleshrimp(vernalpoolbranchiopods),andcurved‐footed
hygrotusdivingbeetleortheirhabitats.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceon
grasslandhabitatalongridgelines;consequently,lossofpotentialvernalpoolbranchiopodand
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlehabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided.However,directimpacts
onhabitatassociatedwithroadconstructionorwideningandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresult
fromsomeconstructionactivities.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonalkaliwetland,
seasonalwetland,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐
footedhygrotusdivingbeetleareshowninTable3.4‐7.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovide
potentialhabitatforthebeetlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeen
delineated.Constructionactivitiessuchasexcavation,grading,orstockpilingofsoil,couldfill,
remove,orotherwisealtersuitablehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footed
hygrotusdivingbeetleandcouldresultininjuryormortalityofthesespecies.Suchground‐
disturbingactivitiesmaybeassociatedwithinstallationofpowercollectionandcommunication
systemsandroadconstructionandwidening.Vernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotus
divingbeetlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifvehiclesorconstructionequipmentaredriven
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐63 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency throughoccupiedhabitat,orifgasoline,oil,orothercontaminantsentertheirhabitat.Changesin
hydrologyorsedimentationofhabitatfromerosionassociatedwithprojectconstructioncouldalter
thesuitabilityofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetleand
couldcausemortality.
Operationandmaintenanceactivitiesmayalsoresultinimpactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsor
theirhabitats.Useofherbicidesnearoccupiedhabitatcouldresultinmortalityorreducedfitnessof
vernalpoolbranchiopods(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1996).Herbicideorpesticideusenearor
upstreamofsuitablehabitatforcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlecouldresultinmortalityor
reducedfitnessofthebeetle.Roadandfirebreakmaintenancemayalsoresultindegradationof
habitatorinjuryormortalityofvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdiving
beetles.Theseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheprojectcouldreducethelocalpopulationsof
federallylistedvernalpoolbranchiopodsandararebeetlespeciesthroughdirectmortalityand
habitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,andBIO‐3bwould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
Nomorethan3yearspriortoground‐disturbingrepoweringactivities,aqualifiedbiologist(as
determinedbyAlamedaCounty)willconductfieldsurveyswithindecommissioning,
repowering,andrestorationworkareasandtheirimmediatesurroundingstodeterminethe
presenceofhabitatforspecial‐statuswildlifespecies.Theprojectproponentwillsubmita
reportdocumentingthesurveyresultstoAlamedaCountyforreviewpriortoconductingany
repoweringactivities.Thereportwillincludethelocationanddescriptionofallproposedwork
areas,thelocationanddescriptionofallsuitablehabitatforspecial‐statuswildlifespecies,and
thelocationanddescriptionofothersensitivehabitats(e.g.,vernalpools,wetlands,riparian
areas).Additionally,thereportwilloutlinewhereadditionalspecies‐and/orhabitat‐specific
mitigationmeasuresarerequired.Thisreportwillprovidethebasisforanyapplicablepermit
applicationswhereincidentaltakemayoccur.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3b:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
Wheresuitablehabitatforlistedvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdiving
beetleareidentifiedwithin250feet(oranotherdistanceasdeterminedbyaqualifiedbiologist
basedontopographyandothersiteconditions)ofproposedworkareas,thefollowingmeasures
willbeimplementedtoensurethattherepoweringprojectsdonothaveadverseimpactson
listedvernalpoolbranchiopodsorcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle.Thesemeasuresare
basedonmeasuresfromtheEACCS,withsomemodificationsandadditions.Additional
conservationmeasuresorconditionsofapprovalmayberequiredinapplicableprojectpermits
(e.g.,ESAincidentaltakepermit).

Avoidalldirectimpactsonsandstonerockoutcropvernalpools.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐64 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Grounddisturbancewillbeavoidedfromthefirstdayofthefirstsignificantrain(1inchor
more)untilJune1,oruntilpoolsremaindryfor72hoursandnosignificantrainisforecast
onthedayofsuchgrounddisturbance.

Ifvernalpools,clayflats,alkalinepools,ephemeralstocktanks(orponds),sandstonepools,
orroadsideditchesarepresentwithin250feetoftheworkarea(oranotherappropriate
distanceasdeterminedbyaqualifiedbiologistonthebasisoftopographyandothersite
conditions),thebiologistwillstakeandflaganexclusionzonepriortoconstruction
activities.Thewidthoftheexclusionzonewillbebasedonsiteconditionsandwillbethe
maximumpracticabledistancethatensuresprotectionofthefeaturefromdirectand
indirecteffectsoftheproject.Exclusionzoneswillbeestablishedaroundfeatureswhether
theyarewetordryatthetime.Theexclusionzonewillbefencedwithorangeconstruction
zoneanderosioncontrolfencing(tobeinstalledbyconstructioncrew).

Noherbicidewillbeappliedwithin100feetofexclusionzones,exceptwhenappliedtocut
stumpsorfrilledstemsorinjectedintostems.Nobroadcastapplicationswillbeallowed.

Avoidmodifyingorchangingthehydrologyofaquatichabitats.

Minimizetheworkareaforstreamcrossingsandconductworkduringthedryseason(June
1throughthefirstsignificantrainofthefall/winter).

Installutilitycollectionlinesacrossperennialcreeksbyboringunderthecreek.
Whereimpactscannotbeavoidedorminimized,compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakenin
accordancewithmitigationratiosandrequirementsdevelopedundertheEACCS(AppendixC).
Intheeventthatanincidentaltakepermitisrequired,compensatorymitigationwillbe
undertakeninaccordancewiththetermsofthepermitinconsultationwithUSFWS.
ImpactBIO‐3a‐2:Potentialmortalityoforlossofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsand
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant
withmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐
footedhygrotusdivingbeetleortheirhabitats.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtake
placeongrasslandhabitatalongridgelines;consequently,lossofpotentialvernalpoolbranchiopod
andcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlehabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided.However,direct
impactsonhabitatassociatedwithroadconstructionorwideningandimpactsonwaterquality
couldresultfromsomeconstructionactivities.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactson
alkaliwetland,seasonalwetland,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopods
andcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetleareshowninTable3.4‐7.Impactsondrainagesthatmay
providepotentialhabitatforthebeetlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyet
beendelineated.Constructionactivitiessuchasexcavation,grading,orstockpilingofsoil,couldfill,
remove,orotherwisealtersuitablehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footed
hygrotusdivingbeetleandcouldresultininjuryormortalityofthesespecies.Suchground‐
disturbingactivitiesmaybeassociatedwithinstallationofpowercollectionandcommunication
systemsandroadconstructionandwidening.Vernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotus
divingbeetlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifvehiclesorconstructionequipmentaredriven
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐65 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency throughoccupiedhabitat,orifgasoline,oil,orothercontaminantsentertheirhabitat.Changesin
hydrologyorsedimentationofhabitatfromerosionassociatedwithprojectconstructioncouldalter
thesuitabilityofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetleand
couldcausemortality.
Operationandmaintenanceactivitiesmayalsoresultinimpactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsor
theirhabitats.Useofherbicidesnearoccupiedhabitatcouldresultinmortalityorreducedfitnessof
vernalpoolbranchiopods(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1996).Herbicideorpesticideusenearor
upstreamofsuitablehabitatforcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlecouldresultinmortalityor
reducedfitnessofthebeetle.Roadandfirebreakmaintenancemayalsoresultindegradationof
habitatorinjuryormortalityofvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdiving
beetles.Theseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheprojectcouldreducethelocalpopulationsof
federallylistedvernalpoolbranchiopodsandararebeetlespeciesthroughdirectmortalityand
habitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,andBIO‐3bwould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3b:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
ImpactBIO‐3b:Potentialmortalityoforlossofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsand
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGoldenHillsprojectonvernalpool
branchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlewouldbesimilartothosedescribedabove
fortheprogram.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalong
ridgelines;consequently,lossofpotentialvernalpoolbranchiopodandcurved‐footedhygrotus
divingbeetlehabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided.However,directimpactsonhabitatassociated
withroadconstructionorwideningandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresultfromsome
constructionactivities.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonalkaliwetland,seasonal
wetland,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footed
hygrotusdivingbeetleareshowninTable3.4‐8.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotential
habitatforthebeetlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.
Theseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheprojectcouldreducethelocalpopulationsof
federallylistedvernalpoolbranchiopodsandararebeetlespeciesthroughdirectmortalityand
habitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,andBIO‐3bwould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐66 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3b:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
ImpactBIO‐3c:Potentialmortalityoforlossofhabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsand
curved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
Theseasonalwetlandthatprovidessuitablehabitatforvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footed
hygrotusdivingbeetlewouldnotbefilledorremoved.However,mortalityoftheseaquaticspecies
couldoccurifoilorothercontaminantsenterthewetlandduringconstruction.Additionally,the
seasonalwetlandcouldbeindirectlyaffectedifthehydrologyofthewetlandismodifiedasaresult
ofprojectconstruction.Smallareasofotherseasonalwetlandsandstream/freshwatermarshthat
mayprovidesuitablehabitatforcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetlewouldbetemporarilyaffected
duringconstructionofcollectorlines.Noneofthepondsthatprovidesuitablehabitatforcurved‐
footedhygrotusdivingbeetlewouldbefilledorremoved.Estimatedpermanentandtemporary
impactsonseasonalwetlandandstream/freshwatermarshthatmayprovidehabitatforvernalpool
branchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetleareshowninTable3.4‐9.Theseimpacts
wouldbesignificantbecausetheprojectcouldreducethelocalpopulationsoffederallylistedvernal
poolbranchiopodsandararebeetlespeciesthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,andBIO‐3bwouldreducethis
impacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3b:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
ImpactBIO‐4a‐1:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
Removalofhabitat(elderberryshrubs)andpotentialinjuryormortalityofvalleyelderberry
longhornbeetleassociatedwithremovalofelderberryshrubswouldbeconsidereddirecteffectson
thespecies.Trimmingofelderberrybranches1inchormoreindiametercouldalsoresultininjury
ormortalityofvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.Becausevalleyelderberrylonghornbeetlelarvae
mayfeedontherootsofelderberries,disturbanceofelderberryrootswithintheshrubdripline
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐67 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency couldalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Reductionofwaterinfiltrationtoelderberry
shrubscausedbychangesintopographyorcompactionofsoilfromconstructioncouldresultin
reducedshrubvigor/vitalityandanassociateddecreaseinshoot,leaf,andflowerproductionand
couldultimatelyreducethesuitabilityoftheshrubstoprovidehabitatforvalleyelderberry
longhornbeetle.
Operationsandmaintenanceactivitiessuchasuseofherbicidesmayalsoaffectvalleyelderberry
longhornbeetleoritshabitat.Valleyelderberrylonghornbeetlescouldbeindirectlyaffectedifthere
isalossofconnectivitybetweenelderberryshrubswhenelderberriesorassociatedvegetationis
removed.Removalofsuchvegetationcouldresultingapsinvegetationthataretoowideforbeetles
tocrossbecauseoftheirfairlylimitedmovementdistances(Talleyetal.2006),resultingin
separationofindividualsorreducingthepossibilityofcolonizationofadjacentareas.Althoughmore
researchisneeded,valleyelderberrylonghornbeetleshavebeenobservedtoflyamileormorein
contiguousorfairlycontiguoushabitat,andexitholeshavebeenobservedonisolatedshrubs0.25
mile(0.4kilometer)ormorefromthenextnearestelderberry(Arnoldpers.comm.).Because
elderberriesareexpectedtobewidelyseparatedduetothelimitedamountofriparianhabitatinthe
programarea,theremovalofanyelderberryshrubscouldconstituteasignificantimpact.Anyof
theseimpactscouldbesignificantbecausetheycouldreducethelocalpopulationsizeofafederally
listedspeciesthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐4a,andBIO‐4bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
IfrequiredpursuanttoMitigationMeasureBIO‐3,andwhereelderberryshrubsareidentified
withinproposedworkareasorwithin100feetoftheseareas,thefollowingmeasureswillbe
implementedtoensurethattheproposedprojectdoesnothaveasignificantimpactonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle.

Avoidremovalofelderberryshrubs.

Elderberryshrubs/clusterswithin100feetoftheconstructionareathatwillnotbe
removedwillbeprotectedduringconstruction.Aqualifiedbiologist(i.e.,with
elderberry/VELBexperience)willmarktheelderberryshrubsandclustersthatwillbe
protectedduringconstruction.Orangeconstructionbarrierfencingwillbeplacedatthe
edgeofthebufferareas.Thebufferareadistanceswillbeproposedbythebiologistand
approvedbyUSFWS.Noconstructionactivitieswillbepermittedwithinthebufferzone
otherthanthoseactivitiesnecessarytoerectthefencing.Signswillbepostedevery50feet
(15.2meters)alongtheperimeterofthebufferareafencing.Thesignswillcontainthe
followinginformation:Thisareaishabitatofthevalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle,a
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐68 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency threatenedspecies,andmustnotbedisturbed.ThisspeciesisprotectedbytheEndangered
SpeciesActof1973,asamended.Violatorsaresubjecttoprosecution,fines,andimprisonment.

Bufferareafencesaroundelderberryshrubswillbeinspectedweeklybyaqualified
biologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbingactivitiesandmonthlyafterground‐disturbing
activitiesuntilprojectconstructioniscompleteoruntilthefencesareremoved,asapproved
bythebiologicalmonitorandtheresidentengineer.Thebiologicalmonitorwillbe
responsibleforensuringthatthecontractormaintainsthebufferareafencesaround
elderberryshrubsthroughoutconstruction.Biologicalinspectionreportswillbeprovidedto
theprojectproponentandUSFWS.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
IfelderberryshrubscannotbeavoidedandprotectedasoutlinedinMitigationMeasure4a,the
projectproponentwillobtainanincidentaltakepermitfromUSFWSandcompensateforthe
lossofanyelderberryshrubs.Surveysofelderberryshrubstobetransplantedwillbeconducted
byaqualifiedbiologistpriortotransplantation.Surveyswillbeconductedinaccordancewith
theConservationGuidelinesfortheValleyElderberryLonghornBeetle(U.S.FishandWildlife
Service1999).Surveyresultsandananalysisofthenumberofelderberryseedlings/cuttings
andassociatednativeplantsbasedonthesurveyresultswillbesubmittedtoUSFWSina
biologicalassessmentoranHCP.Afterreceiptofanincidentaltakepermitandbefore
constructionbegins,theprojectproponentwillcompensatefordirecteffectsonelderberry
shrubsbytransplantingshrubsthatcannotbeavoidedtoaUSFWS‐approvedconservationarea.
Elderberryseedlingsorcuttingsandassociatednativespecieswillalsobeplantedinthe
conservationarea.Eachelderberrystemmeasuring1inchormoreindiameteratgroundlevel
thatisadverselyaffected(i.e.,transplantedordestroyed)willbereplaced,intheconservation
area,withelderberryseedlingsorcuttingsataratiorangingfrom1:1to8:1(newplantingsto
affectedstems).Thenumbersofelderberryseedlings/cuttingsandassociatedripariannative
trees/shrubstobeplantedasreplacementhabitataredeterminedbystemsizeclassofaffected
elderberryshrubs,presenceorabsenceofexitholes,andwhethertheshrubliesinariparianor
nonriparianarea.Stockofeitherseedlingsorcuttingswouldbeobtainedfromlocalsources.
AtthediscretionofUSFWS,shrubsthatareunlikelytosurvivetransplantationbecauseofpoor
conditionorlocation,oraplantthatwouldbeextremelydifficulttomovebecauseofaccess
problems,maybeexemptedfromtransplantation.Incaseswheretransplantationisnot
possible,minimizationratioswouldbeincreasedtooffsettheadditionalhabitatloss.
TherelocationoftheelderberryshrubswillbeconductedaccordingtoUSFWS‐approved
proceduresoutlinedintheConservationGuidelines(U.S.FishandWildlifeService1999).
Elderberryshrubswithintheprojectconstructionareathatcannotbeavoidedwillbe
transplantedduringtheplant’sdormantphase(Novemberthroughthefirst2weeksof
February).Aqualifiedbiologicalmonitorwillremainonsitewhiletheshrubsarebeing
transplanted.
Evidenceofvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetleoccurrenceintheconservationarea,thecondition
oftheelderberryshrubsintheconservationarea,andthegeneralconditionoftheconservation
areaitselfwillbemonitoredoveraperiodof10consecutiveyearsorfor7yearsovera15‐year
periodfromthedateoftransplanting.Theprojectproponentwillberesponsibleforfundingand
providingmonitoringreportstoUSFWSineachoftheyearsinwhichamonitoringreportis
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐69 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency required.AsspecifiedintheConservationGuidelines,thereportwillincludeinformationon
timingandrateofirrigation,growthrates,andsurvivalratesandmortality.
ImpactBIO‐4a‐2:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Removalof
elderberryshrubsandpotentialinjuryormortalityofvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetleassociated
withremovalofelderberryshrubswouldbeconsidereddirecteffectsonthespecies.Trimmingof
elderberrybranches1inchormoreindiametercouldalsoresultininjuryormortalityofvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle.Becausevalleyelderberrylonghornbeetlelarvaemayfeedontheroots
ofelderberries,disturbanceofelderberryrootswithintheshrubdriplinecouldalsoresultininjury
ormortalityofindividuals.Reductionofwaterinfiltrationtoelderberryshrubscausedbychangesin
topographyorcompactionofsoilfromconstructioncouldresultinreducedshrubvigor/vitalityand
anassociateddecreaseinshoot,leaf,andflowerproductionandcouldultimatelyreducethe
suitabilityoftheshrubstoprovidehabitatforvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.
Operationsandmaintenanceactivitiessuchasuseofherbicidesmayalsoaffectvalleyelderberry
longhornbeetleoritshabitat.Valleyelderberrylonghornbeetlescouldbeindirectlyaffectedifthere
isalossofconnectivitybetweenelderberryshrubswhenelderberriesorassociatedvegetationis
removed.Removalofsuchvegetationcouldresultingapsinvegetationthataretoowideforbeetles
tocrossbecauseoftheirfairlylimitedmovementdistances(Talleyetal.2006),resultingin
separationofindividualsorreducingthepossibilityofcolonizationofadjacentareas.Althoughmore
researchisneeded,valleyelderberrylonghornbeetleshavebeenobservedtoflyamileormorein
contiguousorfairlycontiguoushabitat,andexitholeshavebeenobservedonisolatedshrubs0.25
mile(0.4kilometer)ormorefromthenextnearestelderberry(Arnoldpers.comm.).Because
elderberriesareexpectedtobewidelyseparatedduetothelimitedamountofriparianhabitatinthe
programarea,theremovalofanyelderberryshrubscouldconstituteasignificantimpact.Anyof
theseimpactscouldbesignificantbecausetheycouldreducethelocalpopulationsizeofafederally
listedspeciesthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐4a,andBIO‐4bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐70 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐4b:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
IfelderberryshrubsarepresentintheGoldenHillsprojectarea,theycouldbeaffectedbyproject
constructionandoperation.Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGolden
Hillsprojectwouldbesimilartothosedescribedfortheprogram.Removalofhabitat(elderberry
shrubs),injuryormortalityofbeetles,cuttingelderberrybranchesorrootsthatare1inchormore
indiameter,andchangesinhydrologywoulddirectlyaffectvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.The
beetlemayalsobeindirectlyaffectedbyoperationsandmaintenanceactivitiessuchasuseof
herbicidesorthroughthelossofconnectivitybetweenelderberryshrubswhenshrubsorassociated
vegetationareremoved.Becauseelderberriesareexpectedtobewidelyseparatedduetothe
limitedamountofriparianhabitatintheprojectvicinity,theremovalofanyelderberryshrubscould
constituteasignificantimpact.Anyoftheseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheycouldreduce
thelocalpopulationsizeofafederallylistedspeciesthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐4a,andBIO‐4bwouldreduce
thisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
ImpactBIO‐4c:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Noneofthe39elderberryshrubsinthePattersonPassprojectareawouldberemovedinorderto
constructtheproject.Oneoftheshrubsislocatedwithin100feetofaconstructionaccessroadand
couldbesubjectedtoincreasedlevelsofdustduringconstruction,potentiallyleadingtoreduced
vigoroftheshrubandconsequentlyaffectingvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.However,according
toTalleyetal.(2006b:654–655),anexperimentalongtheAmericanRiverParkway(Sacramento
County)showedthatconditionsofelderberryshrubsassociatedwithdustfromnearbytrailsand
roads(pavedanddirt)didnotaffectthepresenceofvalleyelderberrylonghornbeetle.Thebeetle
mayalsobeindirectlyaffectedbyoperationsandmaintenanceactivitiessuchasuseofherbicides,
whichcouldharmelderberryshrubsand/orthebeetle.Impactsonvalleyelderberrylonghorn
beetlewouldbesignificantbecausesuchimpactscouldreducethelocalpopulationsizeofa
federallylistedspeciesthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigation
MeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐4a,andBIO‐4bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significant
level.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐71 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
ImpactBIO‐5a‐1:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Californiatigersalamander,westernspadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andfoothill
yellow‐leggedfrog—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
ConstructionactivitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonCaliforniatiger
salamander,westernspadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andfoothillyellow‐leggedfrog
(collectivelyreferredtoasspecial‐statusamphibians)ortheirhabitats(seasonalwetland,
freshwatermarsh,mixedwillowriparianscrub,ponds,drainages,andsurroundinguplandareas).
Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonseasonalwetland,freshwatermarsh,mixedwillow
riparianscrub,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforspecial‐statusamphibiansareshowninTable
3.4‐7.ImpactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotentialhabitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrogand
foothillyellow‐leggedfrogcouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeen
delineated.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceonsuitableuplandgrassland
dispersalandaestivationhabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,westernspadefoot,andCalifornia
red‐leggedfrog.Aquatichabitatsforspecials‐statusamphibianswouldgenerallybeavoided;
however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresultfromroad
constructionorwideningactivities.
Constructionactivitiessuchasexcavation,grading,orstockpilingofsoil,couldfill,removeor
otherwisealtersuitablehabitatforspecial‐statusamphibiansorresultininjuryormortalityof
individualamphibians.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjurybyequipment,
entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceofupland
habitatthatresultsindamageoreliminationofsuitableaestivationburrows.Specificactivitiesthat
mayaffectthesespeciescouldincludeinstallationofpowercollectionandcommunicationsystems,
turbineconstruction,roadinfrastructureconstruction/maintenanceandupgrades,meteorological
towerinstallationandremoval,temporarystagingareaset‐up,andreclamationactivities.Special‐
statusamphibianscouldbeinjuredorkilledifvehiclesorconstructionequipmentaredriven
throughoccupiedhabitat,orifgasoline,oil,orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Changesin
hydrologyorsedimentationofhabitatfromerosionassociatedwithprojectconstructioncouldalter
thesuitabilityoftheirhabitatorcausemortality.
Operationandmaintenanceactivitiesmayalsoresultinimpactsonspecial‐statusamphibiansor
theirhabitats.Travelonmaintenanceroadsduringtherainyseasonorwhenamphibiansare
dispersingcouldresultinmortalityofindividuals.Roadandfirebreakmaintenancecouldresultin
degradationofhabitatorinjuryormortalityofspecial‐statusamphibians.Theseimpactswouldbe
significantbecausetheycouldreducethelocalpopulationsizesoffederallylistedandsensitive
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐72 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency amphibiansthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐5athroughBIO‐5cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
AllprojectproponentswillensurethatBMPsandotherappropriatemeasures,inaccordance
withmeasuresdevelopedfortheEACCS,beincorporatedintotheappropriatedesignand
constructiondocuments.Implementationofsomeofthesemeasureswillrequirethattheproject
proponentobtainincidentaltakepermitsfromUSFWS(Californiared‐leggedfrogandCalifornia
tigersalamander)andfromCDFW(Californiatigersalamanderonly)beforeconstructionbegins.
Additionalconservationmeasuresorconditionsofapprovalmayberequiredinapplicable
projectpermits(e.g.,ESAorCESAincidentaltakeauthorization).

Ground‐disturbingactivitieswillbelimitedtodryweatherbetweenApril15andOctober
31.Noground‐disturbingworkwilloccurduringwetweather.Wetweatherisdefinedas
whentherehasbeen0.25inchofrainina24‐hourperiod.Grounddisturbingactivities
haltedduetowetweathermayresumewhenprecipitationceasesandtheNationalWeather
Service72‐hourweatherforecastindicatesa30%orlesschanceofprecipitation.No
ground‐disturbingworkwilloccurduringadry‐outperiodof48hoursaftertheabove
referencedwetweather.

Whereapplicable,barrierfencingwillbeinstalledaroundtheworksitetoprevent
amphibiansfromenteringtheworkarea.Barrierfencingwillberemovedwithin72hoursof
completionofwork.

Beforeconstructionbegins,aqualifiedbiologistwilllocateappropriaterelocationareasand
preparearelocationplanforspecial‐statusamphibiansthatmayneedtobemovedduring
construction.TheproponentwillsubmitthisplantoUSFWSandCDFWforapprovala
minimumof2weekspriortothestartofconstruction.

Aqualifiedbiologistwillconductpreconstructionsurveysimmediatelypriortoground‐
disturbingactivities(includingequipmentstaging,vegetationremoval,grading).The
biologistwillsurveytheworkareaandallsuitablehabitatswithin300feetoftheworkarea.
Ifindividuals(includingadults,juveniles,larvae,oreggs)arefound,workwillnotbegin
untilUSFWSand/orCDFWiscontactedtodetermineifmovingtheselife‐stagesis
appropriate.Ifrelocationisdeemednecessary,itwillbeconductedinaccordancewiththe
relocationplan.IncidentaltakepermitsarerequiredforrelocationofCaliforniatiger
salamander(USFWSandCDFW)andCaliforniared‐leggedfrog(USFWS).Relocationof
westernspadefootandfoothillyellow‐leggedfrogrequiresaletterfromCDFWauthorizing
thisactivity.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐73 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Nomonofilamentplasticwillbeusedforerosioncontrol.

Allprojectactivitywillterminate30minutesbeforesunsetandwillnotresumeuntil30
minutesaftersunriseduringthemigration/activeseasonfromNovember1toJune15.
SunriseandsunsettimesareestablishedbytheU.S.NavalObservatoryAstronomical
ApplicationsDepartmentforthegeographicareawheretheprojectislocated.

Vehicleswillnotexceedaspeedlimitof15mphonunpavedroadswithinnaturallandcover
types,orduringoffroadtravel.

Trenchesorholesmorethan6inchesdeepwillbeprovidedwithoneormoreescaperamps
constructedofearthfillorwoodenplanksandwillbeinspectedbyaqualifiedbiologistprior
tobeingfilled.Anysuchfeaturesthatareleftopenovernightwillbesearchedeachdayprior
toconstructionactivitiestoensurenocoveredspeciesaretrapped.Workwillnotcontinue
untiltrappedanimalshavemovedoutofopentrenches.

Workcrewsortheonsitebiologicalmonitorwillinspectopentrenches,pits,andunder
constructionequipmentandmaterialleftonsiteinthemorningandeveningtolookfor
amphibiansthatmayhavebecometrappedorareseekingrefuge.

Ifspecial‐statusamphibiansarefoundintheworkareaduringconstructionandcannotor
donotmoveoffsiteontheirown,aqualifiedbiologistwhoisUSFWSand/orCDFW‐
approvedunderabiologicalopinionand/orincidentaltakepermitforthespecificproject,
willtrapandmovespecial‐statusamphibiansinaccordancewiththerelocationplan.
Relocationofwesternspadefootandfoothillyellow‐leggedfrogrequiresaletterpermit
fromCDFWauthorizingthisactivity.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
Whereimpactsonaquaticanduplandhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibianscannotbeavoided
orminimized,compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakeninaccordancewithmitigationratios
andrequirementsdevelopedundertheEACCS(AppendixC).Intheeventthattakeauthorization
isrequired,compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakeninaccordancewiththetermsofthe
authorizationinconsultationwithUSFWSand/orCDFW.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
Within30dayspriortoanygrounddisturbance,aqualifiedbiologistwillprepareaGrassland
RestorationPlanincoordinationwithCDFWandsubjecttoCDFWapproval,toensurethat
temporarilydisturbedannualgrasslandsandareasplannedfortheremovalofpermanentroads
andturbinepadareasarerestoredtopreprojectconditions.TheGrasslandRestorationPlanwill
includebutnotbelimitedtothefollowingmeasures.

Gravelwillberemovedfromareasproposedforgrasslandrestoration.

Tothemaximumextentfeasible,topsoilwillbesalvagedfromwithinonsiteworkareas
priortoconstruction.Importedfillsoilswillbelimitedtoweed‐freetopsoilsimilarin
texture,chemicalcomposition,andpHtosoilsfoundattherestorationsite.

Whereappropriate,restorationareaswillbeseeded(hydroseedingisacceptable)toensure
erosioncontrol.Seedmixeswillbetailoredtocloselymatchthatofreferencesite(s)within
theprogramareaandshouldincludenativeornaturalized,noninvasivespeciessourced
withintheprojectareaorfromthenearestavailablelocation.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐74 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Reclaimedroadswillberestoredinsuchawayastopermanentlypreventvehiculartravel.
Theplanwillincludearequirementtomonitorrestorationareasannually(betweenMarchand
May)forupto3yearsfollowingtheyearofrestoration.Therestorationwillbeconsidered
successfulwhenthepercentcoverforrestoredareasis70%absolutecoverofthe
planted/seededspeciescomparedtothepercentabsolutecoverofnearbyreferencesites.No
morethan5%relativecoverofthevegetationintherestorationareaswillconsistofinvasive
plantspeciesratedas“high”inCal‐IPC’sCaliforniaInvasivePlantInventoryDatabase
(http://www.cal‐ipc.org).Remedialmeasuresprescribedintheplanwillincludesupplemental
seeding,weedcontrol,andotheractionsasdeterminednecessarytoachievethelong‐term
successcriteria.Monitoringmaybeextendedifnecessarytoachievethesuccesscriteria.Other
performancestandardsmayalsoberequiredastheyrelatetospecial‐statusspecieshabitat;
thesewillbeidentifiedincoordinationwithCDFWandincludedintheplan.Theproject
proponentwillprovideevidencethatCDFWhasreviewedandapprovedtheGrassland
RestorationPlan.Additionally,theprojectproponentwillprovideannualmonitoringreportsto
theCountybyAugust1ofeachyear,summarizingthemonitoringresultsandanyremedial
measuresimplemented(ifanyarenecessary).
ImpactBIO‐5a‐2:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Californiatigersalamander,westernspadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andfoothill
yellow‐leggedfrog—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonspecial‐statusamphibiansortheir
habitats(seasonalwetland,freshwatermarsh,mixedwillowriparianscrub,ponds,drainages,and
surroundinguplandareas).Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonseasonalwetland,
freshwatermarsh,mixedwillowriparianscrub,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforspecial‐
statusamphibiansareshowninTable3.4‐7.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotential
habitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrogandfoothillyellow‐leggedfrogcouldnotbeestimatedbecause
thesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplace
onsuitableuplandgrasslanddispersalandaestivationhabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,
westernspadefoot,andCaliforniared‐leggedfrog.Aquatichabitatsforspecials‐statusamphibians
wouldgenerallybeavoided;however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycould
resultfromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.
Constructionactivitiessuchasexcavation,grading,orstockpilingofsoil,couldfill,removeor
otherwisealtersuitablehabitatforspecial‐statusamphibiansorresultininjuryormortalityof
individualamphibians.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjurybyequipment,
entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceofupland
habitatthatresultsindamageoreliminationofsuitableaestivationburrows.Specificactivitiesthat
mayaffectthesespeciescouldincludeinstallationofpowercollectionandcommunicationsystems,
turbineconstruction,roadinfrastructureconstruction/maintenanceandupgrades,meteorological
towerinstallationandremoval,temporarystagingareaset‐up,andreclamationactivities.Special‐
statusamphibianscouldbeinjuredorkilledifvehiclesorconstructionequipmentaredriven
throughoccupiedhabitat,orifgasoline,oil,orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Changesin
hydrologyorsedimentationofhabitatfromerosionassociatedwithprojectconstructioncouldalter
thesuitabilityoftheirhabitatorcausemortality.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐75 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Operationandmaintenanceactivitiesmayalsoresultinimpactsonspecial‐statusamphibiansor
theirhabitats.Travelonmaintenanceroadsduringtherainyseasonorwhenamphibiansare
dispersingcouldresultinmortalityofindividuals.Roadandfirebreakmaintenancecouldresultin
degradationofhabitatorinjuryormortalityofspecial‐statusamphibians.Theseimpactswouldbe
significantbecausetheycouldreducethelocalpopulationsizesoffederallylistedandsensitive
amphibiansthroughdirectmortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐5athroughBIO‐5cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
ImpactBIO‐5b:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Californiatigersalamander,westernspadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andfoothill
yellow‐leggedfrog—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGoldenHillsProjectwouldbesimilar
tothosedescribedfortheprogram.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceon
potentialuplandgrasslanddispersalandaestivationhabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,western
spadefoot,andCaliforniared‐leggedfrog.Aquatichabitatsforspecials‐statusamphibianswould
generallybeavoided;however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresult
fromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactson
seasonalwetland,mixedwillowriparianforest,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforspecial‐
statusamphibiansareshowninTable3.4‐8.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotential
habitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrogandfoothillyellow‐leggedfrogcouldnotbeestimatedbecause
thesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.Theseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheycould
reducethelocalpopulationsizesoffederallylistedandsensitiveamphibiansthroughdirect
mortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐5a
throughBIO‐5cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐76 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
ImpactBIO‐5c:PotentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforCalifornia
tigersalamander,westernspadefoot,Californiared‐leggedfrog,andfoothillyellow‐legged
frog—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceofthePattersonPassProjectwouldbe
similartothosedescribedfortheprogram.Themajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplace
onpotentialuplandgrasslanddispersalandaestivationhabitatforCaliforniatigersalamander,
westernspadefoot,andCaliforniared‐leggedfrog.Aquatichabitatsforspecials‐statusamphibians
wouldgenerallybeavoided;however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycould
resultfromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpacts
onseasonalwetland,mixedwillowriparianforest,andpondsthatmayprovidehabitatforspecial‐
statusamphibiansareshowninTable3.4‐9.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotential
habitatforCaliforniared‐leggedfrogandfoothillyellow‐leggedfrogcouldnotbeestimatedbecause
thesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.Theseimpactswouldbesignificantbecausetheycould
reducethelocalpopulationsizesoffederallylistedandsensitiveamphibiansthroughdirect
mortalityorhabitatloss.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,Bio‐3,BIO‐5a
throughBIO‐5cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
ImpactBIO‐6a‐1:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
westernpondturtle—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonwesternpondturtleor
itshabitats(ponds,reservoirs,drainages,andsurroundingriparianandgrasslandareas).Estimated
permanentandtemporaryimpactsonponds,reservoirs,riparian,andgrasslandthatmayprovide
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐77 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency habitatforwesternpondturtleareshowninTable3.4‐7.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovide
potentialhabitatforwesternpondturtlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyet
beendelineated.Becausethemajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrassland
habitatalongridgelines,suitableaquatichabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided;however,direct
impactsonhabitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresultfromroadconstructionorwidening
activities.
Aquaticandupland(overwintering,nesting)habitatforwesternpondturtlemayberemovedor
temporarilydisturbedbyconstructionactivities.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjury
byequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceof
aquaticoruplandnestinghabitat.Westernpondturtlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifgasoline,oil,
orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Declinesinpopulationsofwesternpondturtlethroughoutthe
species’rangehavebeendocumented(JenningsandHayes1994).Lossofindividualsintheprogram
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthespecies.Thelossofuplandnestingsitesoreggswouldalsodecreasethelocal
population.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐6wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐6:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforwesternpondturtleand
monitorconstructionactivitiesifturtlesareobserved
IfrequiredpursuanttoMitigationMeasureBIO‐3,andwheresuitableaquaticoruplandhabitat
forwesternpondturtleisidentifiedwithinproposedworkareas,thefollowingmeasures,
consistentwithmeasuresdevelopedfortheEACCS,willbeimplementedtoensurethatthe
proposedprojectdoesnothaveasignificantimpactonwesternpondturtle.

Oneweekbeforeandwithin24hoursofbeginningworkinsuitableaquatichabitat,a
qualifiedbiologist(onewhoisfamiliarwithdifferentspeciesofturtles)willconductsurveys
forwesternpondturtle.Thesurveysshouldbetimedtocoincidewiththetimeofdayand
yearwhenturtlesaremostlikelytobeactive(duringthecoolerpartofthedaybetween8
a.m.and12p.m.duringspringandsummer).Priortoconductingthesurveys,thebiologist
shouldlocatethemicrohabitatsforturtlebasking(logs,rocks,brushthickets)and
determinealocationtoquietlyobserveturtles.Eachsurveyshouldincludea30‐minutewait
timeafterarrivingonsitetoallowstartledturtlestoreturntoopenbaskingareas.The
surveyshouldconsistofaminimum15‐minuteobservationperiodforeachareawhere
turtlescouldbeobserved.

Ifwesternpondturtlesareobservedduringeithersurvey,abiologicalmonitorwillbe
presentduringconstructionactivitiesintheaquatichabitatwheretheturtlewasobserved.
Thebiologicalmonitoralsowillbemindfulofsuitablenestingandoverwinteringareasin
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐78 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency proximitytosuitableaquatichabitatandwillperiodicallyinspecttheseareasfornestsand
turtles.

Ifoneormorewesternpondturtlesarefoundintheworkareaduringconstructionand
cannotordonotmoveoffsiteontheirown,aqualifiedbiologistwillremoveandrelocatethe
turtletoappropriateaquatichabitatoutsideandawayfromtheconstructionarea.
RelocationofwesternpondturtlerequiresaletterfromCDFWauthorizingthisactivity.
ImpactBIO‐6a‐2:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
westernpondturtle—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonwesternpondturtleoritshabitats
(ponds,reservoirs,drainages,andsurroundingriparianandgrasslandareas).Estimatedpermanent
andtemporaryimpactsonponds,reservoirs,riparian,andgrasslandthatmayprovidehabitatfor
westernpondturtleareshowninTable3.4‐7.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotential
habitatforwesternpondturtlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeen
delineated.Becausethemajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitat
alongridgelines,suitableaquatichabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided;however,directimpactson
habitatandimpactsonwaterqualitycouldresultfromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.
Aquaticandupland(overwintering,nesting)habitatforwesternpondturtlemayberemovedor
temporarilydisturbedbyconstructionactivities.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjury
byequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceof
aquaticoruplandnestinghabitat.Westernpondturtlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifgasoline,oil,
orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Declinesinpopulationsofwesternpondturtlethroughoutthe
species’rangehavebeendocumented(JenningsandHayes1994).Lossofindividualsintheprogram
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthespecies.Thelossofuplandnestingsitesoreggswouldalsodecreasethelocal
population.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐6wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐6:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforwesternpondturtleand
monitorconstructionactivitiesifturtlesareobserved
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐79 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐6b:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforwestern
pondturtle—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGoldenHillsProjectwouldbesimilar
tothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonponds,mixed
willowriparianscrub,andgrasslandthatmayprovidehabitatforwesternpondturtleareshownin
Table3.4‐8.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotentialhabitatforwesternpondturtlecould
notbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.Becausethemajorityof
constructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalongridgelines,suitableaquatic
habitatwouldgenerallybeavoided;however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactsonwater
qualitycouldresultfromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.
Aquaticandupland(overwintering,nesting)habitatforwesternpondturtlemayberemovedor
temporarilydisturbedbyconstructionactivities.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjury
byequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceof
aquaticoruplandnestinghabitat.Westernpondturtlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifgasoline,oil,
orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Declinesinpopulationsofwesternpondturtlethroughoutthe
species’rangehavebeendocumented(JenningsandHayes1994).Lossofindividualsintheproject
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthespecies.Thelossofuplandnestingsitesoreggswouldalsodecreasethelocal
population.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐6wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐6:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforwesternpondturtleand
monitorconstructionactivitiesifturtlesareobserved
ImpactBIO‐6c:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatforwestern
pondturtle—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceofthePattersonPassProjectwouldbe
similartothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonponds,
mixedwillowriparianscrub,andgrasslandthatmayprovidehabitatforwesternpondturtleare
showninTable3.4‐9.Impactsondrainagesthatmayprovidepotentialhabitatforwesternpond
turtlecouldnotbeestimatedbecausethesefeatureshavenotyetbeendelineated.Becausethe
majorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalongridgelines,suitable
aquatichabitatwouldgenerallybeavoided;however,directimpactsonhabitatandimpactson
waterqualitycouldresultfromroadconstructionorwideningactivities.
Aquaticandupland(overwintering,nesting)habitatforwesternpondturtlemayberemovedor
temporarilydisturbedbyconstructionactivities.Potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjury
byequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceof
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐80 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency aquaticoruplandnestinghabitat.Westernpondturtlescouldalsobeinjuredorkilledifgasoline,oil,
orothercontaminantsenterhabitat.Declinesinpopulationsofwesternpondturtlethroughoutthe
species’rangehavebeendocumented(JenningsandHayes1994).Lossofindividualsintheproject
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthespecies.Thelossofuplandnestingsitesoreggswouldalsodecreasethelocal
population.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,andBIO‐6wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐6:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforwesternpondturtleand
monitorconstructionactivitiesifturtlesareobserved
ImpactBIO‐7a‐1:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Blainville’shornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhip—program
Alternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
ConstructionactivitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonBlainville’shornedlizard,
Alamedawhipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhiportheirhabitats(grassland,chaparral,oak
woodland,andscrub).Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsongrassland,chaparral,oak
woodland,andscrubthatmayprovidehabitatforthesespeciesareshowninTable3.4‐7.Itis
anticipatedthatthemajorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalong
ridgelinesandthatlossofchaparral,oakwoodland,andscrubhabitatwouldbeminimal.Potential
directimpactsincludemortalityorinjurybyequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorother
projectfacilities,andremovalordisturbanceofhabitat.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,such
asroadandfirebreakmaintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Blainville’s
hornedlizardhasdisappearedfromportionsofitsrangeandcontinuestobethreatenedby
developmentinotherportionsofitsrange(JenningsandHayes1994:132).Alamedawhipsnakeis
state‐andfederallylistedasthreatenedbecauseofhabitatlossandfragmentationresultingfrom
urbandevelopment(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002b:69).SanJoaquincoachwhiphasa
restrictedgeographicrangeandisthreatenedbycontinuedconversionofitshabitattocroplandand
urbandevelopment(JenningsandHayes1994:164).Lossofindividualsintheprogramareacould
diminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationof
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,andBIO‐7bwouldreducethisimpactto
aless‐than‐significantlevelbyreducingthepotentialforinjuryandmortalityofindividuals,
restoringdisturbedhabitat,andcompensatingforpermanenthabitatloss.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐81 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
WheresuitablehabitatforBlainville’shornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,orSanJoaquin
coachwhipisidentifiedinproposedworkareas,allprojectproponentswillensurethatBMPs
andotherappropriatemeasures,inaccordancewithmeasuresdevelopedfortheEACCS,be
incorporatedintotheappropriatedesignandconstructiondocuments.Implementationofsome
ofthesemeasureswillrequirethattheprojectproponentobtainincidentaltakepermitsfrom
USFWSandCDFW(Alamedawhipsnake)beforeconstructionbegins.Additionalconservation
measuresorconditionsofapprovalmayberequiredinapplicableprojectpermits(i.e.,ESA
incidentaltakepermit).

Aqualifiedbiologistwillconductpreconstructionsurveysimmediatelypriortoground‐
disturbingactivities(e.g.,equipmentstaging,vegetationremoval,grading)associatedwith
theprogram.IfanyBlainville’shornedlizards,Alamedawhipsnakes,orSanJoaquin
coachwhipsarefound,workwillnotbeginuntiltheyaremovedoutoftheworkareatoa
USFWS‐and/orCDFW‐approvedrelocationsite.IncidentaltakepermitsfromUSFWSand
CDFWarerequiredforrelocationofAlamedawhipsnake.RelocationofBlainville’shorned
lizardandSanJoaquincoachwhiprequiresaletterfromCDFWauthorizingthisactivity.

Nomonofilamentplasticwillbeusedforerosioncontrol.

Whereapplicable,barrierfencingwillbeusedtoexcludeBlainville’shornedlizard,Alameda
whipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhip.Barrierfencingwillberemovedwithin72hoursof
completionofwork.

Workcrewsoranonsitebiologicalmonitorwillinspectopentrenchesandpitsandunder
constructionequipmentandmaterialsleftonsiteforspecial‐statusreptileseachmorning
andeveningduringconstruction.

Grounddisturbanceinsuitablehabitatwillbeminimized.

Vegetationwithintheproposedworkareawillberemovedpriortograding.Priorto
clearingandgrubbingoperations,aqualifiedbiologistwillclearlymarkvegetationwithin
theworkareathatwillbeavoided.Vegetationoutsidetheworkareawillnotberemoved.
Wherepossiblehandtools(e.g.,trimmer,chainsaw)willbeusedtotrimorremove
vegetation.Allvegetationremovalwillbemonitoredbythequalifiedbiologisttominimize
impactsonspecial‐statusreptiles.

Ifspecial‐statusreptilesarefoundintheworkareaduringconstructionandcannotordo
notmoveoffsiteontheirown,aqualifiedbiologistwhoisUSFWS‐and/orCDFW‐approved
underanincidentaltakepermitforthespecificprojectwilltrapandmovetheanimal(s)toa
USFWSand/orCDFW‐approvedrelocationarea.IncidentaltakepermitsfromUSFWSand
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐82 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency CDFWarerequiredforrelocationofAlamedawhipsnake.RelocationofBlainville’shorned
lizardandSanJoaquincoachwhiprequiresaletterfromCDFWauthorizingthisactivity.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
Whereimpactsonhabitatforspecial‐statusreptilescannotbeavoidedorminimized,
compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakeninaccordancewithmitigationratiosand
requirementsdevelopedundertheEACCS(AppendixC).Intheeventthatincidentaltake
permitsarerequiredforAlamedawhipsnake,compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakenin
accordancewiththetermsofpermitsinconsultationwithUSFWSandCDFW.
ImpactBIO‐7a‐2:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Blainville’shornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhip—program
Alternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonBlainville’shornedlizard,Alameda
whipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhiportheirhabitats(grassland,chaparral,oakwoodland,and
scrub).Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsongrassland,chaparral,oakwoodland,and
scrubthatmayprovidehabitatforthesespeciesareshowninTable3.4‐7.Itisanticipatedthatthe
majorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalongridgelinesandthat
lossofchaparral,oakwoodland,andscrubhabitatwouldbeminimal.Potentialdirectimpacts
includemortalityorinjurybyequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,
andremovalordisturbanceofhabitat.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchasroadand
firebreakmaintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Blainville’shorned
lizardhasdisappearedfromportionsofitsrangeandcontinuestobethreatenedbydevelopmentin
otherportionsofitsrange(JenningsandHayes1994:132).Alamedawhipsnakeisstate‐and
federallylistedasthreatenedbecauseofhabitatlossandfragmentationresultingfromurban
development(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2002b:69).SanJoaquincoachwhiphasarestricted
geographicrangeandisthreatenedbycontinuedconversionofitshabitattocroplandandurban
development(JenningsandHayes1994:164).Lossofindividualsintheprogramareacould
diminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesandlowerreproductivepotential,contributingtothe
furtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationof
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,andBIO‐7bwouldreducethisimpactto
aless‐than‐significantlevelbyreducingthepotentialforinjuryandmortalityofindividuals,
restoringdisturbedhabitat,andcompensatingforpermanenthabitatloss.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐83 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
ImpactBIO‐7b:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Blainville’shornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhip—GoldenHills
Project(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGoldenHillsProjectwouldbesimilar
tothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsongrassland,
chaparral,oakwoodland,andscrubthatmayprovidehabitatforBlainville’shornedlizard,Alameda
whipsnake,orSanJoaquincoachwhipareshowninTable3.4‐8.Itisanticipatedthatthemajorityof
constructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalongridgelinesandthatlossof
chaparral,oakwoodland,andscrubhabitatwouldbeminimal.Potentialdirectimpactsinclude
mortalityorinjurybyequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,and
removalordisturbanceofhabitat.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchasroadandfirebreak
maintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Lossofindividualsintheproject
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesandlowerreproductivepotential,
contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact,but
implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,andBIO‐7bwould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
ImpactBIO‐7c:Potentialdisturbanceormortalityofandlossofsuitablehabitatfor
Blainville’shornedlizard,Alamedawhipsnake,andSanJoaquincoachwhip—PattersonPass
Project(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceofthePattersonPassProjectwouldbe
similartothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactson
grasslandandmixedwillowriparianscrubthatmayprovidehabitatforBlainville’shornedlizard,
Alamedawhipsnake,orSanJoaquincoachwhipareshowninTable3.4‐9.Itisanticipatedthatthe
majorityofconstructionactivitieswouldtakeplaceongrasslandhabitatalongridgelinesandthat
lossofmixedwillowriparianscrubhabitatwouldbeminimal.Potentialdirectimpactsinclude
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐84 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency mortalityorinjurybyequipment,entrapmentinopentrenchesorotherprojectfacilities,and
removalordisturbanceofhabitat.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchasroadandfirebreak
maintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Lossofindividualsintheproject
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesandlowerreproductivepotential,
contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,
implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,andBIO‐7bwould
reducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
ImpactBIO‐8a‐1:Potentialconstruction‐relateddisturbanceormortalityofspecial‐status
andnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
Constructionactivitiesduringthenestingseason(generallyFebruary1–August31)ofwhite‐tailed
kite,baldeagle,northernharrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,westernburrowingowl,
loggerheadshrike,andtricoloredblackbirdcouldresultindirecteffectsonthesespecies,aswellas
onnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds,iftheyarenestingintheprogramarea.Suitablenesting
habitatmaybepresentinnearlyalllandcovertypesintheprogramarea.Removalofgrassland,
burrows,wetlandandmarshvegetation,andtreesorshrubswithactivenestsandconstruction
disturbanceduringthebreedingseasonmayresultinnestabandonmentandsubsequentlossof
eggsoryoung.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonsuitableforaginghabitat(grassland,
cropland,alkalimeadowandscald,andwetlands)forspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirds
areshowninTable3.4‐7.Suchlossescouldaffectthelocalpopulationofspecial‐statusandnon–
special‐statusbirds.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐8a,andBIO‐8bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significant
level.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐85 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
Wheresuitablehabitatispresentfortree/shrub‐andground‐nestingmigratorybirdswithin
500feetofproposedworkareas,thefollowingmeasures,consistentwithmeasuresdeveloped
intheEACCS,willbeimplementedtoensurethattheproposedprojectdoesnothavea
significantimpactonnestingspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirds.

Removesuitablenestinghabitat(shrubsandtrees)duringthenon‐breedingseason
(September1–January31)fornestingbirds.

Totheextentfeasible,avoidconstructionactivitiesinornearsuitableoroccupiednesting
habitatduringthebreedingseasonofbirds(generallyFebruary1–August31).

Ifconstructionactivities(includingvegetationremoval,clearing,andgrading)willoccur
duringthenestingseasonformigratorybirds,aqualifiedbiologistwillconduct
preconstructionnestingbirdsurveyswithin7dayspriortoconstructionactivities.The
constructionareaanda500‐footbufferwillbesurveyedfortree‐nestingraptors,anda50‐
footbufferwillbesurveyedforallotherbirdspecies.

Ifanactivenestisidentifiednearaproposedworkareaandworkcannotbeconducted
outsidethenestingseason(February1–August31),ano‐activityzonewillbeestablished
aroundthenestbyaqualifiedbiologistincoordinationwithUSFWSand/orCDFW.Fencing
and/orflaggingwillbeusedtodelineatetheno‐activityzone.Tominimizethepotentialto
affectthereproductivesuccessofthenestingpair,theextentoftheno‐activityzonewillbe
basedonthedistanceoftheactivitytothenest,thetypeandextentoftheproposedactivity,
thedurationandtimingoftheactivity,thesensitivityandhabituationofthespecies,andthe
dissimilarityoftheproposedactivitytobackgroundactivities.Theno‐activityzonewillbe
largeenoughtoavoidnestabandonmentandwillbebetween50and1,000feetfromthe
nest,orasotherwiserequiredbyUSFWSand/orCDFW.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
Wheresuitablehabitatforwesternburrowingowlisinorwithin500feetofproposedwork
areas,thefollowingmeasureswillbeimplementedtoavoidorminimizepotentialadverse
impactsonburrowingowls.

Tothemaximumextentfeasible(e.g.,wheretheconstructionfootprintcanbemodified),
constructionactivitieswithin500feetofactiveburrowingowlburrowswillbeavoided
duringthenestingseason(February1–August31).

Aqualifiedbiologistwillconductpreconstructiontakeavoidancesurveysforburrowingowl
nolessthan14dayspriortoandwithin24hoursofinitiatingground‐disturbingactivities.
Thesurveyareawillencompasstheworkareaanda500‐footbufferaroundthisarea.

Ifanactiveburrowisidentifiednearaproposedworkareaandworkcannotbeconducted
outsidethenestingseason(February1–August31),ano‐activityzonewillbeestablishedby
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐86 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency aqualifiedbiologistincoordinationwithCDFW.Theno‐activityzonewillbelargeenoughto
avoidnestabandonmentandwillextendaminimumof250feetaroundtheburrow.

Ifburrowingowlsarepresentatthesiteduringthenon‐breedingseason(September1–
January31),aqualifiedbiologistwillestablishano‐activityzonethatextendsaminimumof
150feetaroundtheburrow.

Ifthedesignatedno‐activityzoneforeitherbreedingornon‐breedingburrowingowls
cannotbeestablished,awildlifebiologistexperiencedinburrowingowlbehaviorwill
evaluatesite‐specificconditionsand,incoordinationwithCDFW,recommendasmaller
buffer(ifpossible)and/orothermeasurethatstillminimizesdisturbanceoftheowls(while
allowingreproductivesuccessduringthebreedingseason).Thesite‐specificbuffer(and/or
othermeasure)willconsiderthetypeandextentoftheproposedactivityoccurringnearthe
occupiedburrow,thedurationandtimingoftheactivity,thesensitivityandhabituationof
theowls,andthedissimilarityoftheproposedactivitytobackgroundactivities.

Ifburrowingowlsarepresentinthedirectdisturbanceareaandcannotbeavoidedduring
thenon‐breedingseason(generallySeptember1throughJanuary31),passiverelocation
techniques(e.g.,installingone‐waydoorsatburrowentrances)maybeused.Passive
relocationwillbeaccomplishedbyinstallingone‐waydoors(e.g.,modifieddryerventsor
otherCDFWapprovedmethod),whichwillbeleftinplaceforaminimumof1weekand
monitoreddailytoensurethattheowlshavelefttheburrow.Excavationoftheburrowwill
beconductedusinghandtools.Duringexcavationoftheburrow,asectionofflexibleplastic
pipe(atleast3inchesindiameter)willbeinsertedintotheburrowtunneltomaintainan
escaperouteforanyanimalsthatmaybeinsidetheburrow.

Avoiddestructionofunoccupiedburrowsoutsidetheworkareaandplacevisiblemarkers
nearburrowstoensurethattheyarenotcollapsed.

Conductongoingsurveillanceoftheprojectsiteforburrowingowlsduringprojectactivities.
Ifadditionalowlsareobservedusingburrowswithin500feetofconstruction,theonsite
biologicalmonitorwilldetermine,incoordinationwithCDFW,iftheowl(s)areorwouldbe
affectedbyconstructionactivitiesandifadditionalexclusionzonesarerequired.
ImpactBIO‐8a‐2:Potentialconstruction‐relateddisturbanceormortalityofspecial‐status
andnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesduringthenestingseason(generallyFebruary1–August31)ofwhite‐tailedkite,bald
eagle,northernharrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,westernburrowingowl,loggerheadshrike,
andtricoloredblackbirdcouldresultindirecteffectsonthesespecies,aswellasonnon–special‐
statusmigratorybirds,iftheyarenestingintheprogramarea.Suitablenestinghabitatmaybe
presentinnearlyalllandcovertypesintheprogramarea.Removalofgrassland,burrows,wetland
andmarshvegetation,andtreesorshrubswithactivenestsandconstructiondisturbanceduringthe
breedingseasonmayresultinnestabandonmentandsubsequentlossofeggsoryoung.Estimated
permanentandtemporaryimpactsonsuitableforaginghabitat(grassland,cropland,alkalimeadow
andscald,andwetlands)forspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable3.4‐7.
Suchlossescouldaffectthelocalpopulationofspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirds.This
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐87 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency wouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,
BIO‐8a,andBIO‐8bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐8b:Potentialconstruction‐relateddisturbanceormortalityofspecial‐statusand
non–special‐statusmigratorybirds—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
Constructionactivitiesduringthenestingseason(generallyFebruary1–August31)ofwhite‐tailed
kite,baldeagle,northernharrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,westernburrowingowl,
loggerheadshrike,andtricoloredblackbirdcouldresultindirecteffectsonthesespecies,aswellas
onnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds,iftheyarenestingintheprojectarea.Suitablenesting
habitatmaybepresentinnearlyalllandcovertypesintheprojectarea.Removalofgrassland,
burrows,wetlandandmarshvegetation,andtreesorshrubswithactivenestsandconstruction
disturbanceduringthebreedingseasonmayresultinnestabandonmentandsubsequentlossof
eggsoryoung.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonsuitableforaginghabitat(grassland,
cropland,alkalimeadowandscald,andwetlands)forspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirds
areshowninTable3.4‐8.Suchlossescouldaffectthelocalpopulationofspecial‐statusandnon–
special‐statusbirds.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐8a,andBIO‐8bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significant
level.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐88 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐8c:Potentialconstruction‐relateddisturbanceormortalityofspecial‐statusand
non‐special‐statusmigratorybirds—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
Constructionactivitiesduringthenestingseason(generallyFebruary1–August31)ofwhite‐tailed
kite,northernharrier,Swainson’shawk,goldeneagle,westernburrowingowl,loggerheadshrike,
andtricoloredblackbirdcouldresultindirecteffectsonthesespecies,aswellasonnon–special‐
statusmigratorybirds,iftheyarenestingintheprojectarea.Suitablenestinghabitatmaybe
presentinnearlyalllandcovertypesintheprojectarea.Removalofgrassland,burrows,wetland
vegetation,andtreesorshrubswithactivenestsandconstructiondisturbanceduringthebreeding
seasonmayresultinnestabandonmentandsubsequentlossofeggsoryoung.Estimatedpermanent
andtemporaryimpactsonsuitableforaginghabitat(grassland,mixedwillowriparianscrub,and
wetlands)forspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable3.4‐9.Suchlosses
couldaffectthelocalpopulationofspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirds.Thiswouldbea
significantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,BIO‐8a,
andBIO‐8bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐9a‐1:Permanentandtemporarylossofoccupiedhabitatforwesternburrowing
owlandforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdandotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐
statusbirds—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Implementationoftheprogramwouldresultinthetemporaryandpermanentlossofgrasslandthat
providessuitableforaginghabitatforburrowingowlandanumberofotherspecial‐statusandnon–
special‐statusmigratorybirds.BecauseofthelimiteduseoftheprogramareabySwainson’shawks
forforaging,nocompensationisproposedforthelossofforaginghabitatforSwainson’shawk.
Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsonsuitablegrasslandforaginghabitatforburrowing
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐89 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency owl,tricoloredblackbird,andotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable
3.4‐7.Thelossofgrasslandforaginghabitatforspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdswouldbe
compensatedthroughimplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐5b(forspecial‐statusamphibians)
and/orthroughthestandardizedmitigationratiosfornonlistedspeciesdevelopedfortheEACCS
(AppendixC).
CDFWhasdeterminedthatcompensationisrequiredforpermanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowl
habitat(i.e.,whereburrowingowlshavebeendocumentedtooccupyburrowsinthepreceding3
years).Permanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowlhabitatcouldaffectthelocalpopulationand
wouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐5b,BIO‐5c,and
BIO‐9wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofoccupiedhabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
Ifconstructionactivitieswouldresultintheremovalofoccupiedburrowingowlhabitat
(determinedduringpreconstructionsurveysdescribedinMitigationMeasureBIO‐8a),this
habitatlosswillbemitigatedbypermanentlyprotectingmitigationlandthroughaconservation
easementorbyimplementingalternativemitigationdeterminedthroughconsultationwith
CDFWasdescribedinitsStaffReportonBurrowingOwlMitigation(CaliforniaDepartmentof
FishandGame2012:11–13).
ImpactBIO‐9a‐2:Permanentandtemporarylossofoccupiedhabitatforwesternburrowing
owlandforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdandotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐
statusbirds—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Implementationof
theprogramwouldresultinthetemporaryandpermanentlossofgrasslandthatprovidessuitable
foraginghabitatforburrowingowlandanumberofotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐status
migratorybirds.BecauseofthelimiteduseoftheprogramareabySwainson’shawksforforaging,
nocompensationisproposedforthelossofforaginghabitatforSwainson’shawk.Estimated
permanentandtemporaryimpactsonsuitablegrasslandforaginghabitatforburrowingowl,
tricoloredblackbird,andotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable3.4‐7.
Thelossofgrasslandforaginghabitatforspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdswouldbe
compensatedthroughimplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐5b(forspecial‐statusamphibians)
and/orthroughthestandardizedmitigationratiosfornonlistedspeciesdevelopedfortheEACCS
(AppendixC).
CDFWhasdeterminedthatcompensationisrequiredforpermanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowl
habitat(i.e.,whereburrowingowlshavebeendocumentedtooccupyburrowsinthepreceding3
years).Permanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowlhabitatcouldaffectthelocalpopulationand
wouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐5b,BIO‐5c,and
BIO‐9wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐90 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofoccupiedhabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐9b:Permanentandtemporarylossofoccupiedhabitatforwesternburrowing
owlandforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdandotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐
statusbirds—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
ConstructionoftheGoldenHillsProjectwouldresultinthetemporaryandpermanentlossof
grasslandthatprovidessuitableforaginghabitatforburrowingowl,tricoloredblackbird,anda
numberofotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds.Estimatedpermanentand
temporaryimpactsonsuitablegrasslandforaginghabitatforburrowingowl,tricoloredblackbird,
andotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable3.4‐8.Thelossofgrassland
foraginghabitatforspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdswouldbecompensatedthrough
implementationofMitigationMeasure5b(forspecial‐statusamphibians)and/orthroughthe
standardizedmitigationratiosfornon‐listedspeciesdevelopedfortheEACCS(AppendixC).
CDFWhasdeterminedthatcompensationisrequiredforpermanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowl
habitat(i.e.,whereburrowingowlshavebeendocumentedtooccupyburrowsinthepreceding3
years).Permanentlossofoccupiedhabitatcouldaffectthelocalpopulationandwouldbea
significantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐5b,BIO‐5c,andBIO‐9
wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofoccupiedhabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐9c:Permanentandtemporarylossofoccupiedhabitatforwesternburrowing
owlandforaginghabitatfortricoloredblackbirdandotherspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐
statusbirds—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
ConstructionofthePattersonPassProjectwouldresultinthetemporaryandpermanentlossof
grasslandthatprovidessuitableforaginghabitatforburrowingowl,tricoloredblackbird,anda
numberofotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusmigratorybirds.Estimatedpermanentand
temporaryimpactsonsuitablegrasslandforaginghabitatforburrowingowl,tricoloredblackbird,
andotherspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdsareshowninTable3.4‐9.Thelossofgrassland
foraginghabitatforspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusbirdswouldbecompensatedthrough
implementationofMitigationMeasure5b(forspecial‐statusamphibians)and/orthroughthe
standardizedmitigationratiosfornon‐listedspeciesdevelopedfortheEACCS(AppendixC).
CDFWhasdeterminedthatcompensationisrequiredforpermanentlossofoccupiedburrowingowl
habitat(i.e.,whereburrowingowlshavebeendocumentedtooccupyburrowsinthepreceding3
years).Permanentlossofoccupiedhabitatcouldaffectthelocalpopulationandwouldbea
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐91 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency significantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐5candBIO‐9wouldreduce
thisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofoccupiedhabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
ImpactBIO‐10a‐1:PotentialinjuryormortalityofandlossofhabitatforSanJoaquinkitfox
andAmericanbadger—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
ConstructionactivitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonSanJoaquinkitfoxand
Americanbadgerortheirgrasslandhabitat.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactson
grasslandthatprovidesuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmerican
badgerareshowninTable3.4‐7.Inadditiontothepermanentandtemporaryremovalofhabitat,
otherpotentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromconstructionvehicles
orheavyequipment,directmortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromdencollapseandsubsequent
suffocation,temporarydisturbancefromnoiseandhumanpresenceassociatedwithconstruction
activities,andharassmentofindividualsbyconstructionpersonnel.Additionally,exposedpipes,
largeexcavatedholes,ortrenchesthatareleftopenafterconstructionhasfinishedforthedaycould
entrapSanJoaquinkitfoxesorAmericanbadgers.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchas
roadandfirebreakmaintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.SanJoaquinkit
foxisfederallylistedasendangeredandstate‐listedasthreatenedbecauseofhabitatlossresulting
fromagriculturaldevelopment,infrastructureconstruction,andurbandevelopment(U.S.Fishand
WildlifeService2010:25).Americanbadgerhasexperienceddrasticdeclines,particularlyinthe
CentralValley,andhasbeenextirpatedfrommanyareasinsouthernCalifornia(Williams1986:66).
Lossofindividualsintheprogramareacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesand
reducereproductivepotential,contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbea
significantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,
BIO‐10a,andBIO‐10bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐92 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
WheresuitablehabitatispresentforSanJoaquinfitfoxandAmericanbadgerinandadjacentto
proposedworkareas,thefollowingmeasures,consistentwithmeasuresdevelopedinthe
EACCS,willbeimplementedtoensurethatproposedprojectsdonothaveasignificantimpact
onSanJoaquinkitfoxorAmericanbadger.Implementationofsomeofthesemeasureswillrequire
thattheprojectproponentobtainincidentaltakepermitsfromUSFWSandCDFW(SanJoaquinkit
fox)beforeconstructionbegins.Additionalconservationmeasuresorconditionsofapprovalmay
berequiredinapplicableprojectpermits.

Tothemaximumextentfeasible,suitabledensforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
willbeavoided.

Allprojectproponentswillretainqualifiedapprovedbiologists(asdeterminedbyUSFWS)
toconductapreconstructionsurveyforpotentialSanJoaquinkitfoxdens(U.S.Fishand
WildlifeService2011).ResumesofbiologistswillbesubmittedtoUSFWSforreviewand
approvalpriortothestartofthesurvey.

PreconstructionsurveysforAmericanbadgerswillbeconductedinconjunctionwithSan
Joaquinkitfoxpreconstructionsurveys.

AsdescribedinU.S.FishandWildlifeService2011,thepreconstructionsurveywillbe
conductednolessthan14daysandnomorethan30daysbeforethebeginningofground
disturbance,oranyactivitylikelytoaffectSanJoaquinkitfox.Thebiologistswillconduct
densearchesbysystematicallywalkingtransectsthroughtheprojectareaandabufferarea
tobedeterminedincoordinationwithUSFWSandCDFW.Transectdistanceshouldbebased
ontheheightofvegetationsuchthat100%visualcoverageoftheprojectareaisachieved.If
apotentialorknowndenisfoundduringthesurvey,thebiologistwillmeasurethesizeof
theden,evaluatetheshapeofthedenentrances,andnotetracks,scat,preyremains,and
recentexcavationsatthedensite.Thebiologistswillalsodeterminethestatusofthedens
andmapthefeatures.Denswillbeclassifiedinoneofthefollowingfourdenstatus
categoriesdefinedbyUSFWS(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2011).



Potentialden:Anysubterraneanholewithinthespecies’rangethathasentrancesof
appropriatedimensionsandforwhichavailableevidenceissufficienttoconcludethatit
isbeingusedorhasbeenusedbyakitfox.Potentialdensinclude(1)anysuitable
subterraneanhole;or(2)anydenorburrowofanotherspecies(e.g.,coyote,badger,red
fox,groundsquirrel)thatotherwisehasappropriatecharacteristicsforkitfoxuse;oran
artificialstructurethatotherwisehasappropriatecharacteristicsforkitfoxuse.
Knownden:Anyexistingnaturaldenorartificialstructurethatisusedorhasbeenused
atanytimeinthepastbyaSanJoaquinkitfox.Evidenceofusemayincludehistorical
records;pastorcurrentradiotelemetryorspotlightingdata;kitfoxsignsuchastracks,
scat,and/orpreyremains;orotherreasonableproofthatagivendenisbeingorhas
beenusedbyakitfox(USFWSdiscouragesuseofthetermsactiveandinactivewhen
referringtoanykitfoxdenbecauseagreatpercentageofoccupieddensshowno
evidenceofuse,andbecausekitfoxeschangedensoften,withtheresultthatthestatus
ofagivendenmaychangefrequentlyandabruptly).
Knownnatalorpuppingden:Anydenthatisused,orhasbeenusedatanytimeinthe
past,bykitfoxestowhelpand/orreartheirpups.Natal/puppingdensmaybelarger
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐93 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency withmorenumerousentrancesthandensoccupiedexclusivelybyadults.Thesedens
typicallyhavemorekitfoxtracks,scat,andpreyremainsinthevicinityoftheden,and
mayhaveabroaderapronofmatteddirtorvegetationatoneormoreentrances.Anatal
den,definedasadeninwhichkitfoxpupsareactuallywhelpedbutnotnecessarily
reared,isamorerestrictiveversionofthepuppingden.Inpractice,however,itis
difficulttodistinguishbetweenthetwo;therefore,forpurposesofthisdefinitioneither
termapplies.

Knownatypicalden:AnyartificialstructurethathasbeenorisbeingoccupiedbyaSan
Joaquinkitfox.Atypicaldensmayincludepipes,culverts,anddiggingsbeneathconcrete
slabsandbuildings.
WrittenresultsofthesurveyincludingthelocationsofanypotentialorknownSanJoaquinkit
foxdenswillbesubmittedtoUSFWSwithin5daysfollowingcompletionofthesurveyandprior
tothestartofgrounddisturbanceorconstructionactivities.

Afterpreconstructiondensearchesandbeforethecommencementofrepoweringactivities,
exclusionzoneswillbeestablishedasmeasuredinaradiusoutwardfromtheentranceor
clusterofentrancesofeachden.Repoweringactivitieswillbeprohibitedorgreatly
restrictedwithintheseexclusionzones.Onlyessentialvehicularoperationonexistingroads
andfoottrafficwillbepermitted.Allotherrepoweringactivities,vehicleoperation,material
andequipmentstorage,andothersurface‐disturbingactivitieswillbeprohibitedinthe
exclusionzones.Barrierfencingwillberemovedwithin72hoursofcompletionofwork.
Exclusionzoneswillbeestablishedusingthefollowingparameters.



Potentialandatypicaldens:Atotaloffourorfiveflaggedstakeswillbeplaced50feet
fromthedenentrancetoidentifythedenlocation.
Knownden:Orangeconstructionbarrierfencingwillbeinstalledbetweentheworkarea
andtheknowndensiteataminimumdistanceof100feetfromtheden.Thefencingwill
bemaintaineduntilconstruction‐relateddisturbanceshaveceased.Atthattime,all
fencingwillberemovedtoavoidattractingsubsequentattentiontotheden.
Natal/puppingden:USFWSwillbecontactedimmediatelyifanatalorpuppingdenis
discoveredinorwithin200feetoftheworkarea.

Anyoccupiedorpotentiallyoccupiedbadgerdenwillbeavoidedbyestablishingan
exclusionzoneconsistentwithaSanJoaquinkitfoxpotentialburrow(i.e.,fourorfive
flaggedstakeswillbeplaced50feetfromthedenentrance).

Incaseswhereavoidanceisnotareasonablealternative,limiteddestructionofpotential
SanJoaquinkitfoxdensmaybeallowedasfollows.


Natal/puppingdens:Natalorpuppingdensthatareoccupiedwillnotbedestroyeduntil
theadultsandpupshavevacatedthedensandthenonlyafterconsultationwithUSFWS.
Removalofnatal/puppingdensrequiresincidentaltakeauthorizationfromUSFWSand
CDFW.
Knowndens:Knowndenswithinthefootprintoftheactivitymustbemonitoredfor3
dayswithtrackingmediumoraninfraredcameratodeterminecurrentuse.Ifnokitfox
activityisobservedduringthisperiod,thedenshouldbedestroyedimmediatelyto
precludesubsequentuse.Ifkitfoxactivityisobservedduringthisperiod,thedenwillbe
monitoredforatleast5consecutivedaysfromthetimeofobservationtoallowany
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐94 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency residentanimaltomovetoanotherdenduringitsnormalactivity.Useofthedencanbe
discouragedbypartiallypluggingitsentrance(s)withsoilinsuchamannerthatany
residentanimalcanescapeeasily.Onlywhenthedenisdeterminedtobeunoccupied
willthedenbeexcavatedunderthedirectionofabiologist.Ifthefoxisstillpresentafter
5ormoreconsecutivedaysofmonitoring,thedenmaybeexcavatedwhen,inthe
judgmentofthebiologist,itistemporarilyvacant,suchasduringthefox’snormal
foragingactivities.Removalofknowndensrequiresincidentaltakeauthorizationfrom
USFWSandCDFW.

Potentialdens:Ifincidentaltakepermitshavebeenreceived(fromUSFWSandCDFW),
potentialdenscanberemoved(preferablybyhandexcavation)bybiologistorunder
thesupervisionofabiologistwithoutmonitoring,unlessotherrestrictionswereissued
withtheincidentaltakepermits.Ifnotakeauthorizationshavebeenissued,the
potentialdenswillbemonitoredasiftheyareknowndens.Ifanydenwasconsidereda
potentialdenbutwaslaterdeterminedduringmonitoringordestructiontobecurrently
orpreviouslyusedbykitfoxes(e.g.,kitfoxsignisfoundinside),thenallconstruction
activitieswillceaseandUSFWSandCDFWwillbenotifiedimmediately.

Nighttimeworkwillbeminimizedtotheextentpossible.Thevehicularspeedlimitwillbe
reducedto10milesperhourduringnighttimework.

Pipes,culverts,andsimilarmaterialsgreaterthan4inchesindiameterwillbestoredsoas
topreventwildlifespeciesfromusingtheseastemporaryrefuges,andthesematerialswill
beinspectedeachmorningforthepresenceofanimalspriortobeingmoved.

Arepresentativeappointedbytheprojectproponentwillbethecontactforanyemployeeor
contractorwhomightinadvertentlykillorinjureakitfoxorwhofindsadead,injured,or
entrappedkitfox.Therepresentativewillbeidentifiedduringenvironmentalsensitivity
training(MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b)andhis/hernameandphonenumberwillbeprovided
toUSFWSandCDFW.Uponsuchincidentorfinding,therepresentativewillimmediately
contactUSFWSandCDFW.

TheSacramentoUSFWSofficeandCDFWwillbenotifiedinwritingwithin3workingdaysof
theaccidentaldeathorinjuryofaSanJoaquinkitfoxduringproject‐relatedactivities.
Notificationmustincludethedate,time,andlocationoftheincident,andanyother
pertinentinformation.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
WherepermanentimpactsonhabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadgercannotbe
avoidedorminimized,compensatorymitigationwillbeundertakeninaccordancewith
mitigationratiosandrequirementsdevelopedundertheEACCS(AppendixC).Intheeventthat
incidentaltakepermitsarerequiredforSanJoaquinkitfox,compensatorymitigationwillbe
undertakeninaccordancewiththetermsofpermitsinconsultationwithUSFWSandCDFW.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐95 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐10a‐2:PotentialinjuryormortalityofandlossofhabitatforSanJoaquinkitfox
andAmericanbadger—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwith
mitigation)
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Construction
activitiesintheprogramareacouldresultindirecteffectsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmerican
badgerortheirgrasslandhabitat.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsongrasslandthat
providesuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadgerare
showninTable3.4‐7.Inadditiontothepermanentandtemporaryremovalofhabitat,other
potentialdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromconstructionvehiclesor
heavyequipment,directmortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromdencollapseandsubsequent
suffocation,temporarydisturbancefromnoiseandhumanpresenceassociatedwithconstruction
activities,andharassmentofindividualsbyconstructionpersonnel.Additionally,exposedpipes,
largeexcavatedholes,ortrenchesthatareleftopenafterconstructionhasfinishedforthedaycould
entrapSanJoaquinkitfoxesorAmericanbadgers.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchas
roadandfirebreakmaintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.SanJoaquinkit
foxisfederallylistedasendangeredandstate‐listedasthreatenedbecauseofhabitatlossresulting
fromagriculturaldevelopment,infrastructureconstruction,andurbandevelopment(U.S.Fishand
WildlifeService2010:25).Americanbadgerhasexperienceddrasticdeclines,particularlyinthe
CentralValley,andhasbeenextirpatedfrommanyareasinsouthernCalifornia(Williams1986:66).
Lossofindividualsintheprogramareacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsofthesespeciesand
reducereproductivepotential,contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbea
significantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,
BIO‐10a,andBIO‐10bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
ImpactBIO‐10b:PotentialinjuryormortalityofandlossofhabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxand
Americanbadger—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceoftheGoldenHillsProjectwouldbesimilar
tothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactsongrasslandthat
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐96 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency providesuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadgerare
showninTable3.4‐8.Inadditiontothepermanentandtemporaryremovalofhabitat,otherdirect
impactsincludemortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromconstructionvehiclesorheavyequipment,
directmortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromdencollapseandsubsequentsuffocation,temporary
disturbancefromnoiseandhumanpresenceassociatedwithconstructionactivities,andharassment
ofindividualsbyconstructionpersonnel.Additionally,exposedpipes,largeexcavatedholes,or
trenchesthatareleftopenafterconstructionhasfinishedforthedaycouldentrapSanJoaquinkit
foxesorAmericanbadgers.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchasroadandfirebreak
maintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Lossofindividualsintheproject
areacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsand/orlowerthereproductivepotentialofSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger,contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswouldbea
significantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,BIO‐5c,
BIO‐10a,andBIO‐10bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
ImpactBIO‐10c:PotentialinjuryormortalityofandlossofhabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxand
Americanbadger—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Impactsfromconstruction,operation,andmaintenanceofthePattersonPassProjectwouldbe
similartothosedescribedfortheprogram.Estimatedpermanentandtemporaryimpactson
grasslandthatprovidesuitabledenningandforaginghabitatforSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmerican
badgerareshowninTable3.4‐9.Inadditiontothepermanentandtemporaryremovalofhabitat,
otherdirectimpactsincludemortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromconstructionvehiclesorheavy
equipment,directmortalityorinjuryofindividualsfromdencollapseandsubsequentsuffocation,
temporarydisturbancefromnoiseandhumanpresenceassociatedwithconstructionactivities,and
harassmentofindividualsbyconstructionpersonnel.Additionally,exposedpipes,largeexcavated
holes,ortrenchesthatareleftopenafterconstructionhasfinishedforthedaycouldentrapSan
JoaquinkitfoxesorAmericanbadgers.Operationandmaintenanceactivities,suchasroadand
firebreakmaintenance,mayalsoresultininjuryormortalityofindividuals.Lossofindividualsin
theprojectareacoulddiminishthelocalpopulationsand/orlowerthereproductivepotentialofSan
JoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger,contributingtothefurtherdeclineofthesespecies.Thiswould
beasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3,
BIO‐5c,BIO‐10a,andBIO‐10bwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐97 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
ImpactBIO‐11a‐1:Avianmortalityresultingfrominteractionwithwindenergyfacilities—
programAlternative1:417MW(significantandunavoidable)
Theoperationofwindenergyfacilitieshasbeenshowntocauseavianfatalitiesthroughcollisions
withwindturbinesandpowerlinesandthroughelectrocutiononpowerlines.
Mostcollectionlinesforfirst‐andsecond‐generationturbinesareabovegroundfacilities.As
repoweringprojectsareimplemented,oldcollectionsystemswouldberemovedandnewcollection
systemswouldbeinstalled.Themajorityofnewcollectionlinesassociatedwiththeprogramwould
beundergrounded,reducingtheriskofavianfatalityfromelectrocutionorcollisionwith
powerlines.
DiabloWinds,BuenaVista,andVascoWindsaretheonlyrepoweredprojectsintheAPWRAfor
whichestimatesofavianfatalityratesareavailable.Basedontheseestimates,aviancollisionriskis
expectedtobesubstantiallyreducedwhenolder‐generationturbinesarereplacedbynewer,larger
turbineswiththesametotalratednameplatecapacity(Table3.4‐10).However,whiletheavailable
evidencesuggeststhatrepoweringcouldsubstantiallyreduceturbine‐relatedavianfatalitiesbelow
thelevelsdocumentedforoldergenerationturbines,avianfatalitieswouldcontinuetooccur.
Moreover,whilerepoweringisintendedtoreducefatalities,enoughuncertaintyremainsinlightof
project‐andsite‐specificdatatowarrantaconservativeapproachintheimpactanalysis.
Accordingly,thecontinuedorincreasedlossofbirds(includingspecial‐statusspecies)atarate
exceedingthebaselineratewouldbeasignificantadverseimpact.Thereisalsoevidencethatthe
repoweringprogramwouldresultincontinuedavianmortalityinconflictwithspecificlawsand
regulations(e.g.,ESA,CESA,MBTA)thatarenotbasedonmortalityrates,asdescribedabovein
DeterminationofSignificance,andwiththeobjectivesofthe2007SettlementAgreementthatbound
thewindenergyoperatorsandtheCountytoprovidestrategiesandmeasurestoconserveavian
speciesofconcernandtheirhabitats.Thisconflictisconsideredasignificantimpactonprotected
andspecial‐statusavianspecies,andadoptingaconservativeexpectationthatsomelevelofavian
mortalitywillcontinueevenwiththeimplementationofeveryfeasiblemitigationmeasureand
conservationstrategy,thiswouldbeasignificantandunavoidableimpact.
Itshouldbenotedthatturbinesusedinfuturerepoweringprojectsarelikelytobeofsimilarsizeto
theVascoWindsturbinesbutmuchlargerthantheDiabloWindsandBuenaVistaturbinesinboth
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐98 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency overallsizeandratednameplatecapacity.Thereisevidencetosuggestthatlargerturbines—like
thoseusedintheVascoWindsproject—couldresultinadditionaldecreasesinavianfatalityrates
forbirdspeciescurrentlykilledintheAPWRA(SmallwoodandKaras2009).However,itisalso
possiblethatlargerturbinesmaynegativelyaffectadifferentsuiteofbirdspeciesthathavebeen
relativelyunaffectedbyolder(i.e.,smaller)turbines.Inaddition,fatalityratesintheAPWRAare
highlyvariable(thatis,becausetheydifferacrossyears,turbinestypes,geographies,and
topographies,speciesimpactsmaydifferbetweensitesduetodifferentlevelsofuse)andpotentially
imprecise(Smallwoodetal2010.;ICFInternational2013).Nonetheless,thesethreerepowering
projectsrepresentthebestavailableinformationtounderstandthepotentialforavianfatalities
associatedwithrepowering;accordingly,datafromtheseprojectswereusedtoformthebasisfor
avianfatalityestimates.TheestimatedchangesassociatedwithAlternative1areshowninTable
3.4‐11anddiscussedbelow.Postconstructionmonitoring,oncetheturbinesareinoperation,will
providedatatoquantifytheactualextentofchangeinavianfatalitiesfromrepoweringandthe
extentofavianfatalityforprojectsintheprogramarea,andwillcontributetothebodyof
knowledgesupportingfutureanalyses.
Table 3.4‐11. Estimated Annual Avian Fatalities for Existing and Repowered Program Area—
Alternative 1 (417 MW) EstimatedAnnualFatalitiesforProgramArea
Nonrepowered
Repowered
BuenaVistab
DiabloWindsa
Species
Average
Annual
Fatalities
Americankestrel
Barnowl
Burrowingowl
Goldeneagle
Loggerheadshrike
Prairiefalcon
Red‐tailedhawk
Swainson’shawk
Allraptors
Allnativenon‐raptors
Average
Annual
%
Fatalities Decrease
Average
Annual
%
Fatalities Decrease
VascoWindsc
Average
Annual
Fatalities
%
Decrease
194.2
79.5
255.1
26.6
61.8
6.6
144.5
0.5
37.5
8.3
350.3
4.2
0.0
0.0
83.4
0.0
81%
90%
‐37%
84%
100%
100%
42%
100%
62.6
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
0.0
41.7
0.0
75%
100%
100%
44%
100%
100%
71%
100%
123.8
13.8
20.9
6.7
0.0
0.0
102.6
0.0
36%
83%
92%
75%
100%
100%
29%
100%
799.9
1,482.0
504.6
1,046.7
37%
29%
129.3
421.2
84%
81%
267.7
873.2
67%
41%
Note:fatalityratesreflectannualfatalities(95%confidenceinterval).
a DiabloWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
b BuenaVistafatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
c VascoWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
AmericanKestrel.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated38–124Americankestrelfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby36–81%.
TheNorthAmericanpopulationofAmericankestrelsisestimatedatmorethan4,000,000birds,
representing75%oftheglobalpopulation.PopulationshavedeclinedoverthewesternU.S.since
the1980s,pronouncedlysosincethe1990s(HawkMountain2007).Thistrendisalsoapparentfor
California’sfoothillandCentralValleypopulations(Saueretal.2008).NorthAmericanBreeding
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐99 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency BirdSurvey(BBS)dataindicateadeclineinAmericankestrelsforCoastalCaliforniaandthestateas
awhole(Saueretal.2011),asdoChristmasBirdCountdataforCalifornia(NationalAudubon
Society2011).
BasedontheestimatedannualfatalitiesinTable3.4.12,adverseeffectsonAmericankestrelfrom
windturbineswouldsubstantiallydecreasewithrepoweringintheprogramarea.Inaddition,
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐11candBIO‐11fwillfurtherlimitpreyavailabilityandreducethenumber
ofpotentialperchsitesintheprogramarea,potentiallyreducingtheexposureofAmericankestrels
toturbinehazards.Furthermore,therotor‐sweptareaofrepoweredturbineswouldbehigheroff
thegroundthanthatofexistingturbines,potentiallyreducingtherisktokestrels,astheyare
generallyperchandpouncepredators,perchinglowerinhigherwindspeeds(SmallwoodandBird
2002).ConsideringthatAmericankestrelfatalitiesarelikelytosubstantiallydeclinewith
repowering(Smallwoodetal.2009;Smallwood2010;ICFInternational2012),repoweringthe
programareaisunlikelytohaveadverseimpactsonAmericankestrelsatthepopulationlevel.
BarnOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbeexpectedto
resultinanestimated8–14barnowlfatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,theprogram
coulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby83–90%.
BarnowlsarecommoninCaliforniawithastablepopulationinthestate(AudubonCalifornia2010).
AlthoughBBSresultsmayindicateadecliningpopulationinthestate,thedataareoflimited
creditabilityduetosamplingdeficiencies(Saueretal.2011).Barnowlsareusedthroughout
Californiaforrodentcontrolinorchardsandvineyards(BarnOwlBoxCompany2012).Itis
uncertainwhattheeffectofrepoweringtheprogramareawouldhaveonlocalbarnowlpopulations.
Thehigherrotor‐sweptareaofrepoweredturbinesmayreducetheriskofturbinecollision,asmost
huntingisdoneinlowquarteringflightsatabout1.5–4.5meters(5–15feet)abovetheground
(Martietal.2005).MitigationMeasureBIO‐11cwouldalsoreducetheperchavailabilityinthe
programarea.Itisunclearwhattheeffectsoftheestimated8–14turbine‐relatedfatalitiesofbarn
owlsperyearwouldhaveonthelocalpopulation,butthespecies’relativeabundanceinthestate
wouldindicatethatfatalitiesasaresultofrepoweringwouldbeunlikelytohaveadverseimpactson
thespeciesatthepopulationlevel.
BurrowingOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated30–350burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear—achangerangingfrom
a92%decreasetoa37%increaseinfatalities.ThisfatalityestimateisbasedondatafromDiablo
WindsandVascoWindsbecausenoburrowingowlfatalitiesweredetectedatBuenaVista.Current
evidencesuggeststhatburrowingowlfatalityratesarenotreducedbythetransitionfromold‐to
new‐generationturbinestothesameextentasthefatalityratesofotherspecies.Theincreasein
energyproductionfrom329MWto417MWwouldlikelyresultinasmallestimatedincreasein
burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear.
FocusedsurveysinContraCostaCountyin2006on3.3squaremilesand2007on4.4squaremiles
intheAPWRAfound56pairsand67pairs,respectively(BarclayandHarman2008unpublished
data),suggestingthattheAPWRAcouldsupportseveralhundredpairsofburrowingowls
distributedinclusters.Smallwoodetal.’s(2012)surveysin2011and2012estimated
approximately500–600breedingpairs,rangingindensityfrom0toapproximately28breeding
pairspersquarekilometer.SincethisspecieshasbeenextirpatedfrommuchoftheSanFrancisco
BayArea,itisbelievedthattheAPWRAmaysupportthelargestnumberofbreedingpairsintheBay
Area(BarclayandHarman2008unpublisheddata).StudiesofburrowingowlsintheAPWRAhave
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐100 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency suggestedthatturbine‐relatedmortalitiesmayloweradultandjuvenilesurvivorshipsufficiently
suchthatthelocalpopulationisnotself‐sustaininginsomeyears(Smallwoodetal.2008),but
recentsurveysindicatethatburrowingowlabundanceintheAPWRAmaybemuchgreaterthan
previouslyestimated(Smallwoodetal.2012).Agrowingbodyofcircumstantialevidenceindicates
thatmanyoftheburrowingowlfatalitiesfoundduringfatalitysurveysareduetopredationrather
thanturbinecollision.Becauseofthisconfoundingeffect,thepotentialreductioninturbine‐related
burrowingowlfatalitiesmaybeunderestimatedbecauseoftheinabilitytodistinguishfatalities
resultingfrompredationfromthosecausedbyturbinecollision(ICFInternational2013).
GoldenEagle.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated4–17goldeneaglefatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,
theprogramcoulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby44–84%.
PortionsoftheDiabloRangeinsouthernAlamedaCountyandeasternContraCostaCountysupport
someofthehighestknowndensitiesofgoldeneaglenestingterritoriesintheworld(HuntandHunt
2006).Inthepast15years,severalcomprehensivestudies,discussedbelow,estimatedterritory
occupancy(numberofbreedingpairs);assessedreproductiverates;andmonitoredjuvenile,
subadult,andfloater2rangeandmortality.
Hunt(2002)examineddatacollecteddataovera7‐yearperiodbetween1994and2002that
includedthemonitoringof60–70activeterritorieswithin30km(11.6miles)oftheAPWRA.In
2005,theseterritorieswerefoundtostillbe100%occupied(HuntandHunt2006).Theconclusions
ofthesestudieswerethatthegoldeneaglepopulationremainsstable(Hunt2002;HuntandHunt
2006).Inaddition,thestudiesfoundnoincreaseinthenumberofactivelybreedingsubadults,
indicatingthatthereareenoughfloaterstobufferanylossofbreedingadults(Hunt2002;Huntand
Hunt2006).TheconclusionofastablegoldeneaglepopulationintheAPWRAvicinityissupported
bytheresultsofapopulationdynamicsmodelthatusedreproductionratesandfatalityrates,among
othervariables(Hunt2002).However,themodelresultsalsosuggestedthatthenumberof
estimatedannualfatalitiesusedinthemodel,50individuals,couldnotbesustainedbythenumber
ofbreedingadultswhenconsideringthelossofreproductivepotentialincurredbyeacheagle
fatality(HuntandHunt2006).Althoughthevacantterritoriesarefilledbyfloatersandsubadultsto
stabilizetheAPWRApopulation,becausethepopulationdemandsaflowofrecruitsfromoutsidethe
areatofillbreedingvacanciesastheyoccur,theAPWRAcanbeconsideredapopulationsink.The
researchersconclude,therefore,thatturbine‐relatedmortalityreducestheresilienceofthelocal
goldeneaglepopulation.
Table3.4.12showsanestimated4–17fatalitiesperyearinafullyrepoweredprogramarea,or
between8and36%ofthe50fatalitiesestimatedfortheHunt(2002)model.Itisnotpossibleto
determinetheproportionofthesefatalitiesthatwouldconsistofindividualsfromthelocal
population.However,theseannualfatalityestimates,whencomparedtocurrentconditions,would
indicatethatrepoweringtheprogramareawouldreducegoldeneaglefatalitiesandincreasethe
potentialforrestoringaself‐sustaininglocalbreedingpopulation.Theimplementationofmitigation
measuresdescribedbelow—includingMitigationMeasureBIO‐11e,whichwouldrequirethat
existingpowerlinesassociatedwithraptorstrikesberetrofittedtoberaptor‐safe—wouldfurther
reducegoldeneaglefatalitiesintheprogramarea.
2Ajuvenileis3–15monthsofage,asubadultis1–3yearsofage,andafloaterisanonbreeding,nonterritorialadult
individualmorethan4yearsofage(Hunt2002).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐101 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency LoggerheadShrike.NodocumentedfatalitiesofloggerheadshrikeshaveoccurredattheDiablo
Winds,BuenaVista,orVascoWindsprojects(Table3.4‐10),althoughloggerheadshrikesare
regularlydetectedinthevicinityoftheDiabloWindsturbines.Thelackofdocumentedfatalities
maysuggestareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthesesites.
AccordingtoShufordandGardali(2008),loggerheadshrikewasanabundantresidentintheSan
FranciscoBayregionintheearlytwentiethcentury.However,birdshavebeenextirpatedlocallyor
reducedinnumbersbyhabitatloss(ShufordandGardali2008).BBSdataforCalifornia’sshrike
populationshowanegativetrendfrom1968to2010(Saueretal.2011).Giventhelackof
documentedfatalitiesatrepoweredfacilitiesintheprogramarea,itisdifficulttoquantifytheeffects
ofafullyrepoweredprogramareaontheregionalloggerheadshrikepopulation.Minimizing
availableperchesthroughMitigationMeasureBIO‐11candincreasingtheheightoftherotor‐swept
areaofrepoweredturbinesmayreducetheriskofturbinecollisionsforshrikes,astheymostlytake
preyontheground(Yosef1996).Carefulmonitoringoffatalitiesandimplementingmonitoring
protocolsthatarelikelytodetectloggerheadshrikefatalitieswillbeimportantforunderstanding
impactsonthisspeciesandimplementingadaptivemanagementmeasures,asappropriate.
PrairieFalcon.Fatalityestimatesatrepoweredsitesarenotavailableforprairiefalconbecauseno
fatalitieshavebeendocumentedatDiabloWindsorVascoWindsandonlyonefatalityhasbeen
recordedatBuenaVista(Table3.4‐10).Consequently,itisdifficulttoestimatetheannualfatalities
thatwouldresultfromafullyrepoweredprogramarea.Thelackofdocumentedfatalitiesmay
suggestareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthesesites.However,the
nonrepoweredfatalityrateforprairiefalconisalreadyrelativelylow(0.02fatality/MW/year),
suggestingthatthecollisionriskforthisspeciesislow.Prairiefalconsarepresentmostlyinwinter,
andthebaselinefatalityrateismeasuredduringaperiodwhentheseasonalshutdownhasbeenin
effect.Repoweredturbinesarenotanticipatedtoshutdowninwinter.
AcrossNorthAmerica,theprairiefalconpopulationisstablebutexperiencinglocaldeclines;in
California,thespeciesisvulnerabletoextirpation(NatureServe2012).Withintheprogramareaand
itsvicinity,thespeciesissomewhatrare,withlessthanthreeyearlysightingsintheregionduring
summerBBScountsfrom2006to2010(Saueretal.2011).State‐wide,however,BBStrendsmay
indicateanincreaseinabundance,althoughthedataareoflimitedvalueduetothesmallsample
size(Saueretal.2011).Giventhelackofdocumentedfatalitiesatrepoweredfacilitiesinthe
programarea,itisdifficulttoquantifytheeffectsofafullyrepoweredprogramareaontheregional
prairiefalconpopulation.Prairiefalconsuseavarietyofforagingflightcharacteristics,including
highsoaring,makingitdifficulttohypothesizehowrepoweredturbinesmayaffecttheriskof
turbinecollision.Carefulmonitoringoffatalitiesandimplementingmonitoringprotocolsthatare
likelytodetectprairiefalconfatalitieswillbeimportantforunderstandingimpactsonthisspecies
andimplementingadaptivemanagementmeasures,asappropriate.
Red‐TailedHawk.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,thefullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated42–103red‐tailedhawkfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreasetheaverageannualfatalitiesby29–71%.
Anestimated89%oftheglobalpopulationofred‐tailedhawks(approximately1,960,000breeding
birds)isfoundinNorthAmerica(HawkMountain2007).Populationshaveremainedstableor
increasedthroughoutmostofthewesternUnitedStatessincethe1980s,growing1.5%inCalifornia
between1983and2005(HawkMountain2007;Saueretal.2008).Californiafoothillpopulations
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐102 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency haveremainedstablesince1968,whiletheCentralValleypopulationhassignificantlyincreased
(Saueretal.2008).
Althoughasubstantialnumberofred‐tailedhawkfatalitiesoccurintheAPWRA,theannualfatalities
haveshownagenerallydecreasingtrendsince2005(ICFInternational2012)andarepredictedto
continuetodeclineasrepoweringproceedsintheAPWRA(Smallwood2010;ICFInternational
2012).Theyearlyfatalitiesforred‐tailedhawkspresentedinTable3.4.11coincidewiththeseother
studies,suggestingthatrepoweringtheprogramareaislikelytocontinuetoreducethenumberof
red‐tailedhawkskilledeachyear.Consideringthatthered‐tailedhawkpopulationinCaliforniahas
grownwhiletheAPWRAhasbeeninoperation,continuedoperationofrepoweredturbinesinthe
programareaisunlikelytohaveanypopulation‐levelimpactsonred‐tailedhawk.
Swainson’sHawk.OnlyoneSwainson’shawkfatalityhasbeenrecordedintheAPWRA,yieldingan
annualestimatedfatalityrateofapproximatelyzero(Table3.4‐10).NoSwainson’shawkfatalities
weredetectedatDiabloWinds,BuenaVista,orVascoWinds.Basedonthelowestimatedfatality
ratefromnonrepoweredsites,thelackoffatalitiesdetectedatrepoweredsites,andtherelatively
lowuseoftheAPWRAbySwainson’shawks,itisexpectedthatthefatalityrateforSwainson’shawk
wouldremainlowundertheprogram.
Swainson’shawkisoneoftwo(theotherissandhillcrane)state‐listedspeciesthathasarecorded
fatalityintheAPWRA(ICFInternational2012).Whiletheprogramareadoesnotprovidehigh‐value
nestingorforaginghabitatfortheSwainson’shawk,neighboringagriculturalareasinthe
northeasternmostcornerofAlamedaCountyandnorthoftheAPWRAinContraCostaCountydo
provideprimeforaginghabitat,andSwainson’shawkmaycrossintotheprogramareaoccasionally.
TheAudubonSociety(2007)includesSwainson’shawkonitsWatchListasadecliningorrare
speciesofnationalconservationconcern.EvidencefromeggcollectionssuggeststhattheCalifornia
populationhasbeenreducedbyasmuchas90%fromitsestimatedhistoricallevels(Bloom1980).
ThisseverepopulationdeclineintheCentralValleyofCaliforniaiscorroboratedbymicrosatellite
analysesofDNAthatsuggestthatthedeclinehastakenplaceover68–75generations,orabout200
years,correspondingwiththetimeofEuropeansettlement(AudubonSociety2007;Hulletal.
2008).BasedonmigrationcountsinVeraCruz,Mexico,thepresentglobalpopulationmayapproach
1millionindividuals(HawkWatchInternational2009).TheCaliforniapopulationisestimatedat
more1,900nestingpairs,95%ofwhichareintheCentralValley(Andersonetal.2007).TheBBS
reportsarisingCaliforniapopulationsincesurveysbeganin1968,butalsoreportsthatimportant
deficienciesintheunderlyingdatamaymakethesetrendsinaccurate(Saueretal.2011).
Theverysmallnumberofestimatedfatalitiesintheprogramareacomparedtothesizeofthelocal
populationeastoftheprogramareaintheCentralValleyindicatesthatturbine‐relatedfatalitiesin
theprogramareaareunlikelytohaveanadverseeffectonthelocalSwainson’shawkpopulation.
Theimplementationofsubsequentproject‐levelavianuseandfatalitystudiesdescribedin
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11gwillcontinuetoprovidedataforassessingtheeffectofturbine
operationontheSwainson’shawkpopulationinthearea.
Raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbeexpectedto
resultinanestimated129–505raptorfatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,theprogram
coulddecreaseaverageannualraptorfatalitiesby37–84%.
Nativenon‐raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐11,afullyrepowered417MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated421–1,047nativenon‐raptorfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreasetheaverageannualfatalitiesby29–81%.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐103 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Asdescribedabove,forallavianspeciesanalyzed,afullyrepoweredprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoreduceestimatedfatalityrates.However,fatalitieswouldstillbeexpectedtoresultfrom
theoperationoftherepoweredturbines,anduncertaintysurroundingtheaccuracyoftheestimated
fatalityratesandthetypesofspeciespotentiallyaffectedremains.Consideringthisinformation,and
despitetheanticipatedreductionsinavianimpactscomparedtothebaselinerates,theCountyhas
determinedtouseaconservativeapproachfortheimpactassessment,concludingthatturbine‐
relatedfatalitiescouldconstituteasubstantialadverseeffectonavianspeciesbecausetheratesfor
someorallofthespeciescouldbegreaterthanthebaselinerates.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐11athroughBIO‐11iwouldreducethisimpact,butnot
toaless‐than‐significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
Thesemeasures,whichindividualprojectproponentswouldberequiredtocarryoutasappropriate
inlightofproject‐specificconditions,werederivedfromtheEACCS,basedonestablishedpractice,
ordevelopedinthecontextoftheprogram’sconservationobjectives.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11a:Prepareaproject‐specificavianprotectionplan
Allprojectproponentswillprepareaproject‐specificAPPtospecifymeasuresandprotocols
consistentwiththeprogram‐levelmitigationmeasuresthataddressavianmortality.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
Micro‐sitingofturbines—usinganalysesoflandscapefeaturesandlocation‐specificbirduseand
behaviordatatoidentifylocationswithreducedcollisionrisk—mayresultinreducedfatalities
(Smallwoodetal.2009).Allprojectproponentswillusethebestinformationavailabletosite
turbinestoreduceaviancollisionrisk:avianuseofthearea;topographicfeaturesknownto
increasecollisionrisk(trees,riparianareas,waterbodies,andwetlands);andthelatestmodels
ofcollisionrisk).Theprojectproponentswillcompiletheresultsofthemicro‐sitinganalysesfor
eachturbineanddocumenttheseintheproject‐levelAPP,alongwiththespecificlocationof
eachturbine.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
Useofturbineswithcertaincharacteristicsisbelievedtoreducethecollisionriskforavian
species.Projectproponentswillimplementthedesign‐relatedmeasureslistedbelow.

Thedistanceofthelowestpointoftheturbinerotor(i.e.,thetipofanybladeatthe6:00
position),willbenolessthan29meters(95feet)fromthegroundsurface.Thisdesign
characteristicaddressesthefindingthatroughly74%ofallbirdobservations(54%of
raptorobservations)occurredatheightslessthan30meters(CurryandKerlinger2009).

Turbinedesignwilllimitoreliminateperchingopportunities.Designswillincludeatubular
towerwithinternalladders;externalcatwalks,railings,orladderswillbeprohibited.

Turbinedesignwilllimitoreliminatenestingorroostingopportunities.Openingson
turbineswillbecoveredtopreventcavity‐nestingspeciesfromnestingintheturbines.

LightingwillbeinstalledonthefewestnumberofturbinesallowedbyFAAregulations,and
allpilotwarninglightswillfiresynchronously.Turbinelightingwillemployonlyredordual
red‐and‐whitestrobe,strobe‐like,orflashinglights(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2012a).
Alllightingonturbineswillbeoperatedattheminimumallowableintensity,flashing
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐104 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency frequency,andquantityallowedbyFAA(Gehringetal.2009;U.S.FishandWildlifeService
2012a).DurationbetweenflasheswillbethelongestallowablebytheFAA.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
Allprojectproponentswillapplythefollowingmeasureswhendesigningandsitingturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure.Thesemeasureswillreducetheriskofbirdelectrocutionandcollision.

Permanentmeteorologicalstationswillavoiduseofguywires.Ifitisnotpossibletoavoid
usingguywires,thewireswillbeatleast4/0gaugetoensurevisibilityandwillbefitted
withbirddeterrentdevices.

AllpermanentmeteorologicaltowerswillbeunlitunlesslightingisrequiredbyFAA.If
lightingisrequired,itwillbeoperatedattheminimumallowableintensity,flashing
frequency,andquantityallowedbyFAA.

Totheextentpossible,allpowerlineswillbeplacedunderground.However,linesmaybe
placedabovegroundimmediatelypriortoenteringthesubstation.Allabovegroundlines
willbefittedwithbirdflightdivertersorvisibilityenhancementdevices(e.g.,spiral
dampingdevices).Whenlinescannotbeplacedunderground,appropriateavianprotection
designsmustbeemployed.Asaminimumrequirement,thecollectionsystemwillconform
withthemostcurrenteditionoftheAvianPowerLineInteractionCommitteeguidelinesto
preventelectrocutions.

Lightingwillbefocuseddownwardandminimizedtolimitskywardillumination.Sodium
vaporlampsandspotlightswillnotbeusedatanyfacility(e.g.,laydownareas,substations)
exceptwhenemergencymaintenanceisneeded.Lightingatcollectionfacilities,including
substations,willbeminimizedusingdowncastlightingandmotion‐detectiondevices.The
useofhigh‐intensitylighting;steady‐burningorbrightlightssuchassodiumvapor,quartz,
orhalogen;orotherbrightspotlightswillbeminimized.Wherelightingisrequireditwillbe
designedfortheminimumintensityrequiredforsafeoperationofthefacility.Greenorblue
lightingwillbeusedinplaceofredorwhitelighting.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
Anyexistingpowerlinesinaspecificprojectareathatareownedbythewindprojectoperator
andthatareassociatedwithelectrocutionofaneagleorotherraptorwillberetrofittedwithin
30daystomakethemraptor‐safeaccordingtoAvianPowerLineInteractionCommittee
guidelines.Allotherexistingstructurestoremaininaprojectareaduringrepoweringwillbe
retrofitted,asfeasible,accordingtospecificationsofMitigationMeasureBIO‐11cpriorto
repoweredturbineoperation.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11f:Discouragepreyforraptors
Allprojectproponentswillapplythefollowingmeasureswhendesigningandsitingturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure.Thesemeasuresareintendedtominimizeopportunitiesforfossorial
mammalstobecomeestablishedandtherebycreateapreybasethatcouldbecomeanattractant
forraptors.

Rodenticidewillnotbeutilizedontheprojectsitetoavoidtheriskofraptorsscavengingthe
remainsofpoisonedanimals.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐105 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Boulders(rocksmorethan12inchesindiameter)excavatedduringprojectconstruction
maybeplacedinabovegroundpilesintheprojectareasolongastheyaremorethan200
yards(656feet)fromanyturbine.Existingrockpilescreatedduringconstructionoffirst‐
andsecond‐generationturbineswillalsobemovedatleast200yardsfromturbines.

Gravelwillbeplacedaroundeachtowerfoundationtodiscouragesmallmammalsfrom
burrowingnearturbines.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11g:Implementpostconstructionavianfatalitymonitoringforall
repoweringprojects
Apostconstructionmonitoringprogramwillbeconductedateachrepoweringprojectfora
minimumof3yearsbeginningwithin3monthsofthecommercialoperationdate(COD)ofthe
project.Monitoringmaycontinuebeyond3yearsifconstructioniscompletedinphases.
Moreover,iftheresultsofthefirst3yearsindicatethatbaselinefatalityrates(i.e.,
nonrepoweredfatalityrates)areexceeded,monitoringwillbeextendeduntiltheaverage
annualfatalityratehasdroppedbelowbaselinefatalityratesfor2years,andtoassessthe
effectivenessofadaptivemanagementmeasuresspecifiedinMitigationMeasureBIO‐11i.An
additional2‐yearmonitoringwillbeimplementedatyear10(i.e.,thetenthanniversaryofthe
COD).ProjectproponentswillprovideaccesstoqualifiedthirdpartiesauthorizedbytheCounty
toconductanyadditionalmonitoringaftertheinitial3‐yearmonitoringperiodhasexpiredand
beforeandaftertheadditional2‐yearmonitoringperiod,providedthatsuchadditional
monitoringutilizesscientificallyvalidmonitoringprotocols.
Atechnicaladvisorycommittee(TAC)willbeformedtooverseethemonitoringprogramandto
consultonadaptivemanagementmeasuresthatmaybenecessaryiffatalityratessubstantially
exceedthosepredictedfortheproject(asdescribedbelowinMitigationMeasureBIO‐11i).The
TACwillhaveastandingmeetingevery6monthstoreviewmonitoringreportsproducedby
operatorsintheprogramarea.Inthesemeetings,theTACwilldiscussanyissuesraisedbythe
monitoringreportsanddeterminenextstepstoaddressissues,includingschedulingadditional
meetings,ifnecessary.
TheTACwillcompriserepresentativesfromtheCounty(includingatechnicalconsultant
contractedbytheCountyatitsdiscretion),wildlifeagencies(CDFW,USFWS),and
representativesofoperatorsofrepoweredwindprojectsinAlamedaCounty.AdditionalTAC
membersmayalsobeconsidered(e.g.,arepresentativefromAudubon,alandownerinthe
programarea).TheTACwillbeavoluntaryandadvisorygroupthatwillsupportdecisionsmade
bytheCounty.Assuch,theTACisnotadecision‐makingbodyandwillnotbeboundtothe
publicnoticingrequirementsoftheBrownAct.However,tomaintaintransparencywiththe
public,allTACmeetingswillbeopentothepublic,andnoticeofmeetingswillbegivento
interestedparties.
TheTACwillhavethreeprimaryroles:(1)toreviewprojectplanningdocumentstoensurethat
project‐specificmitigationmeasuresandcompensatorymitigationmeasuresdescribedinthis
PEIRareappropriatelyapplied,(2)toreviewmonitoringdocuments(protocolsandreporting)
forconsistencywiththemitigationmeasures,and(3)toreviewandmonitorimplementationof
theadaptivemanagementplans.
Shouldfatalitymonitoringrevealthatimpactsexceedthebaselinethresholdsestablishedinthis
PEIR,theTACwilladvisetheCountyonrequiringimplementationofadaptivemanagement
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐106 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency measures.TheCountywillhavetheultimatedecision‐makingauthority,asitistheorganization
issuingtheCUPs.However,theTACwillcollaborativelyinformthedecisionsoftheCounty.
Themonitoringprogramforeachprojectwillincludethecomponentslistedbelow,in
accordancewiththeprogram‐levelmitigationmeasurespresentedinthisPEIRorconditions
requiredbythewildlifeagencies(USFWSandCDFW).

Avianusesurveystodeterminetheseasonalandannualvariationsinrelativeabundance
andspeciesusepatterns.

Carcasssurveystoestimatefatalityratesandtotalnumberoffatalities.

Detectionprobabilitysurveys(toaccountforchangesanddifferencesindetection
probabilitybetweenlocations,seasons,years,surveyscrews,andotherfactors.Such
surveyshavehistoricallyinvolvedseparatetrialstoestimatescavengerremovaland
searcherefficiencyrates).

Annualmonitoringreportstoreportthefindingsofavianuseoftheprojectareaand
postconstructionfatalitymonitoringresults.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11h:Compensateforthelossofraptors,includinggoldeneagles,
bycontributingtoconservationefforts
Discussion Severaloptionstocompensateforimpactsonraptorsarecurrentlyavailable.Somearetargeted
tobenefitcertainspecies,buttheymayalsohavebenefitsforotherspecies.Forexample,
USFWS’sECPGuidelinescurrentlyoutlineacompensatorymitigationstrategyforgoldeneagles
usingtheretrofitofhigh‐riskpowerpoles(polesknownorsuspectedtoelectrocuteandkill
eagles).Thegoalofthisstrategyistoeliminatehazardsforgoldeneagles.However,becausethe
polesarealsodangerousforotherlargeraptors(e.g.,red‐tailedhawk,Swainson’shawk),
retrofittingthemcanbenefitsuchspeciesaswellaseagles.
Similarly,althoughtheretrofittingofelectricalpolesmayhavebenefitsforlargeraptors,such
anapproachmayprovideminimalbenefitsforsmallerraptorssuchasAmericankestreland
burrowingowl.Consequently,additionalmeasureswouldberequiredcomponentsofanoverall
mitigationpackagetocompensateforimpactsonraptorsingeneral.
TheSecretaryoftheInteriorissuedOrder3330onOctober31,2013,outlininganewapproach
tomitigationpoliciesandpracticesoftheDepartmentoftheInterior.Thisapproachrecognizes
thatcertainstrategiesaimedatsomespeciescanprovidesubstantialbenefittoothersandtothe
ecologicallandscapeasawhole.Thelandscape‐scaleapproachtomitigationandconservation
effortsisnowcentraltotheDepartment’smitigationstrategy.AlthoughtheOrderwasintended
forusebyfederalagenciesandassuchisnotdirectlyapplicabletotheCounty,itisevidentthat
suchanapproachwouldlikelyhavethegreatestmitigationbenefits,especiallywhen
consideringongoingandlong‐termimpactsfromwindenergyprojects.
Withtheseconsiderationsinmind,theCountyhasoutlinedseveraloptionsthatarecurrently
availabletocompensateforimpactsonraptors.Theoptionsdiscussedbelowarecurrently
consideredacceptableapproachestocompensationforimpactsonraptors.Althoughnotevery
optionisappropriateforallspecies,itishopedthatastimeproceeds,amorecomprehensive
landscape‐levelapproachtomitigationwillbeadoptedtobenefitabroadersuiteofspeciesthan
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐107 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency mightbenefitfrommorespecies‐specificmeasures.TheCountyrecognizesthatthescienceof
raptorconservationandtheunderstandingofwind‐wildlifeimpactsarecontinuingtoevolve
andthatthesuiteofavailablecompensationoptionsmayconsequentlychangeoverthelifeof
theproposedprojects.
Conservation Measures Topromotetheconservationofraptors,projectproponentswillcompensateforraptorfatalities
estimatedwithintheirprojectareas.Mitigationwillbeprovidedin10‐yearincrements,withthe
firstincrementbasedontheestimates(raptors/MW/year)providedinthisPEIRfortheVasco
WindsProject(Table3.4‐10)ortheproject‐specificEIRforfutureprojects.TheVascoWinds
fatalityrateswereselectedbecausetheVascoturbinesarethemostsimilartothoselikelytobe
proposedforfuturerepoweringprojectsandconsequentlyrepresentthebestavailablefatality
estimates.Eachprojectproponentwillconductpostconstructionfatalitymonitoringforatleast
3years,asmandatedunderMitigationMeasureBIO‐11g,toestimatetheaveragenumberof
raptorstakeneachyearbyeachindividualproject.Theprojectproponentwillcompensatefor
thisnumberofraptorsinsubsequent10‐yearincrementsforthelifeoftheprojectasoutlined
below.MitigationMeasureBIO‐11galsorequiresadditionalfatalitymonitoringatyear10ofthe
project.Theresultsofthefirst3yearsofmonitoringand/orthemonitoringatyear10maylead
torevisionsoftheestimatedaveragenumberofraptorstaken,andmitigationprovidedcanbe
adjustedaccordinglyinfuture10‐yearincrements.
Priortothestartofoperations,projectproponentswillsubmitforCountyapprovalaRaptor
MitigationPlanoutliningtheestimatednumberofraptorfatalitiesbasedonthenumberand
typeofturbinesbeingconstructed,andthetypeortypesofcompensationoptionstobe
implemented.ProjectproponentswillusetheRaptorMitigationPlantocraftanappropriate
strategyusingabalancedmixoftheoptionspresentedbelow,aswellasconsideringnew
optionssuggestedbythegrowingbodyofknowledgeduringthecourseoftheprojectlifespan,
assupportedbyaResourceEquivalencyAnalysis(REA)(seeexampleinAppendixC)orsimilar
typeofcompensationassessmentacceptabletotheCountythatdemonstratestheefficacyof
proposedmitigationforimpactsonraptors.
TheCountyPlanningDirector,inconsultationwiththeTAC,willconsider,basedontheREA,
whethertheproposedRaptorMitigationPlanisadequate,includingconsiderationofwhether
eachRaptorMitigationPlanincorporatesalandscape‐scaleapproachsuchthattheconservation
effortsachievethegreatestpossiblebenefits.Compensationmeasuresasdetailedinan
approvedRaptorMitigationPlanmustbeimplementedwithin1yearofthestartofoperations.
RaptorMitigationPlansmayberevised—andwillbereviewedbytheCounty—every10years.

Retrofittinghigh‐riskelectricalinfrastructure.USFWS’sECPGuidelinesoutlinea
compensatorymitigationstrategyusingtheretrofitofhigh‐riskpowerpoles(polesknown
orsuspectedtoelectrocuteandkilleagles).USFWShasdevelopedanREA(U.S.Fishand
WildlifeService2013)asatooltoestimatethecompensatorymitigation(numberof
retrofits)requiredforthetakeofeagles.TheREAtakesintoaccountthecurrent
understandingofeaglelifehistoryfactors,theeffectivenessofretrofittingpoles,the
expectedannualtake,andthetimingofimplementationofthepoleretrofits.Theproject
proponentsmayneedtocontractwithautilityorathird‐partymitigationaccount(suchas
theNationalFishandWildlifeFoundation)toretrofitthenumberofpolesneededas
demonstratedbyaproject‐specificREA.Ifcontractingdirectly,theprojectproponentwill
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐108 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency consultwithutilitycompaniestoensurethathigh‐riskpoleshavebeenidentifiedfor
retrofitting.Proponentswillagreeinwritingtopaytheutilityowner/operatortoretrofit
therequirednumberofpowerpolesandmaintaintheretrofitsfor10yearsandwillprovide
theCountywithdocumentationoftheretrofitagreement.Thefirstretrofitswillbebasedon
theestimatednumberofeaglefatalitiesasdescribedaboveinthismeasureorasdeveloped
intheproject‐specificEIRforfutureprojects.Subsequentnumbersofretrofitsrequiredfor
additional10‐yeardurationswillbebasedontheresultsofproject‐specificfatality
monitoringasoutlinedinMitigationMeasureBIO‐11g.Iffewereaglefatalitiesareidentified
throughthemonitoring,thenumberoffuturerequiredretrofitsmaybereducedthrougha
project‐specificREA.Althoughretrofittingpoleshasnotbeenidentifiedasappropriate
mitigationforotherlargeraptors,theywouldlikelybenefitfromsuchefforts,asthey
(particularlyred‐tailedandSwainson’shawks)constitutethelargestnon‐eaglegroupto
sufferelectrocutiononpowerlines(AvianPowerLineInteractionCommittee2006).

MeasuresoutlinedinanapprovedEagleConservationPlanandBirdandBat
ConservationStrategy.Projectproponentsmayelecttoapplyforprogrammaticeagletake
permitsfromUSFWS.Theprogrammaticeagletakepermitprocesscurrentlyinvolves
preparationofanECPandaBirdandBatConservationStrategy(BBCS).TheECPspecifies
avoidanceandminimizationmeasures,advancedconservationpractices,andcompensatory
mitigationforeagles—conditionsthatmeetUSFWS’scriteriaforissuanceofapermit.The
BBCSoutlinesmeasuresbeingimplementedbytheapplicanttoavoidandminimizeimpacts
onmigratorybirds,includingraptors.Ifprogrammaticeagletakepermitsareobtainedby
projectproponents,thosepermitterms,includingthemeasuresoutlinedintheapproved
ECPandBBCS,mayconstituteanappropriateconservationmeasureforestimatedtakeof
goldeneaglesandotherraptors,providedsuchtermsaredeemedbytheCountytobe
comparabletoormoreprotectiveofraptorsthantheotheroptionslistedherein.

Contributetoraptorrecoveryefforts.Projectproponentsmayelecttocontributefundsto
raptorrecoverycenterssuchastheCaliforniaRaptorCenter(Center).TheCenteris
affiliatedwiththeUCDavisSchoolofVeterinaryMedicine,anditsprogramsfocusonraptor
education,raptorhealthcareandrehabilitation,andraptorresearch.Theaveragecostto
rehabilitateoneraptorisapproximately$580(Stedmanpers.comm.).TheCenterreceives
morethan200injuredorillraptorsannually.Approximately60–65%arerehabilitatedand
returnedtothewild.Inatypicalyear,thefourraptorspeciesmostcommonlybroughtinfor
carearebarnowl(96admissionsin2006),Americankestrel(20admissions),red‐tailed
hawk(19admissions),andSwainson’shawk(15admissions)(CaliforniaRaptorCenter
2011).TheCenterreliesondonationsoftimeandresourcestoprovideresidentraptorcare
andfeeding,underwriteeducationprograms,providerehabilitationmedicalsuppliesand
medication,andmaintainitsfacilities.Thefirstcontributionsforanygivenprojectwillbe
basedontheestimatednumberofraptorfatalitiesasdescribedaboveinthismeasureoras
developedintheproject‐specificEIRforfutureprojects.Subsequentfundsrequiredfor
additional10‐yearinstallmentswillbeprovidedonthebasisoftheaverageannualraptor
fatalityratesdeterminedthroughpostconstructionmonitoringefforts.Ten‐year
installmentsaremoreadvantageousthanmorefrequentinstallmentsforplanningand
budgetingpurposes.ThedonationreceiptwillbeprovidedtotheCountyasevidenceof
payment.Iffewerraptorfatalitiesaredeterminedthroughthemonitoringeffort,thesecond
installmentamountmaybereducedtoaccountforthedifferencebetweenthefirst
estimatednumbersandthemonitoringresults.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐109 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Contributetoraptorconservationefforts.Projectproponentswillcontributefunds,
equivalenttoraptorrecoveryeffortsabove(i.e.,$580/raptor),in10‐yearincrementsto
otherlocaland/orregionalconservationeffortsdesignedtoprotect,recover,andmanage
landsforraptors,ortoconductresearchinvolvingmethodstoreduceraptorfatalitiesor
increaseraptorproductivity.Thesefundswillbecontributedtoanentityorentitiesengaged
intheseactivitiesincluding,butnotnecessarilylimitedto,theEastBayRegionalPark
DistrictandtheLivermoreAreaRegionalParkDistrict.Conservationeffortsmayinclude
constructingandinstallingnestboxesandperches,conductinganawarenesscampaignto
reducetheuseofrodenticide,andconductingresearchtobenefitraptors.Thespecific
conservationefforttobepursuedwillbesubmittedtotheCountyforapprovalaspartofthe
RaptorMitigationPlanreviewprocess.

Contributetoregionalconservationofraptorhabitat.Projectproponentsmayaddress
regionalconservationofraptorhabitatbyfundingtheacquisitionofconservation
easementswithintheAPWRAoronlandsinthesameeco‐regionoutsidetheAPWRA,
subjecttoCountyapproval,forthepurposeoflong‐termregionalconservationofraptor
habitat.Landsproposedforconservationmustbewell‐managedgrazinglandssimilarto
thoseonwhichtheprojectshavebeendeveloped.Projectproponentswillfundtheregional
conservationandimprovementoflands(throughhabitatenhancement,leadabatement
activities,eliminationofrodenticides,and/orothermeasures)usinganumberofacres
equivalenttotheconservationbenefitoftheraptorrecoveryandconservationefforts
describedabove,orasdeterminedthroughaproject‐specificREA(seeexampleREAin
AppendixC).Theconservationlandsmustbeprovidedforcompensationofaminimumof
10yearsofraptorfatalities,as10‐yearincrementswillminimizethetransactioncosts
associatedwiththeidentificationandconservationoflands,therebyincreasingoverallcost
effectiveness.Theconservationeasementswillbeheldbyanorganizationwhosemissionis
topurchaseand/orotherwiseconservelands,suchasTheTrustforPublicLands,The
NatureConservancy,CaliforniaRangelandTrust,ortheEastBayRegionalParksDistrict.
TheprojectproponentswillobtainapprovalfromtheCountyregardingtheamountof
conservedlands,anyenhancementsproposedtoincreaseraptorhabitatvalue,andthe
entityholdingthelandsand/orconservationeasement.

OtherConservationMeasuresIdentifiedintheFuture.Asnotedabove,additional
conservationmeasuresforraptorsmaybecomeavailableinthefuture.Conservation
measuresforraptorsarecurrentlybeingdevelopedbyUSFWSandnongovernmental
organizations(e.g.,AmericanWindWildlifeInstitute)—forexample,activitiesservingto
reducesuchfatalitieselsewhere,andenhancingforagingandnestinghabitat.Underthis
option,theprojectproponentmaymakealternativeproposalstotheCountyfor
conservationmeasures—basedonanREAorsimilarcompensationassessment—thatthe
CountymayacceptasmitigationiftheyaredeemedbytheCountytobecomparabletoor
moreprotectiveofraptorspeciesthantheotheroptionsdescribedherein.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
Eachprojectproponentwillprepareandimplementaproject‐specificadaptivemanagement
plan.Theseplanswillbeusedtoadjustoperationandmitigationtotheresultsofmonitoring,
newtechnology,andnewresearchtoensurethatthebestavailablescienceisusedtoassess
impactsandthatimpactsareminimizedtothegreatestextentpossible.Baselinefatality
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐110 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency estimates(i.e.,estimatesatthenonrepoweredturbines)willbeusedasthethresholdstotrigger
implementationofadaptivemanagementmeasures(ADMMs).
Threshold 1 Ifpostconstructionfatalitymonitoringresultsinapointestimatefortotalfatalitiesthatexceeds
thepreconstructionbaselinefatalityestimatesfor1yearforanyfocalspeciesorspeciesgroup
(i.e.,allfocalspecies,allraptors,allnon‐raptors,allbirdscombined),thenthefollowingADMMs
foravianspecieswillbeimplemented.
ADMM‐1:VisualModifications.Theprojectproponentwillpaintapatternonaproportionof
theturbineblades.Theproportionandthepatternofthebladestobepaintedwillbe
determinedbytheCountyinconsultationwiththeTAC.USFWSrecommendstestingmeasures
toreducemotionsmear—theblurringofturbinebladesduetorapidrotationthatrendersthem
lessvisibleandhencemoreperiloustobirdsinflight.Suggestedtechniquesincludepainting
bladeswithstaggeredstripesorpaintingonebladeblack.Theprojectproponentwillconduct
fatalitystudiesonacontrollednumberofpaintedandunpaintedturbines.Theproject
proponentwillcoordinatewiththeTACtodeterminethelocationofthepaintedturbines,but
theintentistoimplementthismeasureinareasthatappeartobecontributingmosttothehigh
numberoffatalitiesdetected.
Threshold 2 Ifpostconstructionfatalitymonitoringresultsinapointestimatefortotalfatalitiesthatexceeds
thepreconstructionbaselinefatalityestimatesfor2consecutiveyearsforanyfocalspeciesor
speciesgroup(i.e.,allfocalspecies,allraptors,allnon‐raptors,allbirdscombined),thenthe
followingADMMswillbeimplementedinadditiontoADMM‐1.
ADMM‐2:Anti‐PerchingMeasures.Anti‐perchingdeviceswillbeinstalledonallartificial
structureswithin1mileofprojectfacilities(withlandownerpermission)todiscouragebirduse
ofthearea.
ADMM‐3:ContributiontoResearch.Theprojectproponentwillcontribute$2,000foreach
goldeneaglefatalityexceedingthresholdstosupportresearchofnewtechnologiestohelp
reduceturbine‐relatedfatalities.Similarly,theprojectproponentcoulddeployexperimental
technologiesatacomparablecost(ifappropriateinnovationsbecomeavailable)atitsfacilities
totesttheirefficacyinreducingturbine‐relatedfatalities.Researchcouldalsoinvestigatebird‐
turbineinteractions,includingpopulation‐leveleffects.Thelastgoldeneagleinventoryofthe
APWRAvicinitywasconductedin2005(HuntandHunt2006).Theresearcherssuggestedthat
aninventoryoftheAPWRAgoldeneaglepopulationbeconductedevery5yearstotrack
populationtrendsandtheimpactsofturbine‐relatedfatalitiesintheAPWRA.
Threshold 3 Ifpostconstructionfatalitymonitoringresultsinapointestimatefortotalfatalitiesthatexceeds
thepreconstructionbaselinefatalityestimatesfor3consecutiveyearsforanyfocalspeciesor
speciesgroup(i.e.,allfocalspecies,allraptors,allnon‐raptors,allbirdscombined),thenthe
followingADMMswillbeimplementedinadditiontoADMM‐1throughADMM‐3.
ADMM‐4:TurbineCurtailment.Ifpostconstructionmonitoringindicatespatternsofturbine‐
causedfatalities—suchasseasonalspikesinfatalities,topographicorotherenvironmental
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐111 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency featuresassociatedwithhighnumbersoffatalities,orotherfactorsthatcanpotentiallybe
manipulatedandthatsuggestthatcurtailmentofaspecificturbine’soperationwouldresultin
reducingfutureavianfatalities—theprojectoperatorwillcurtailoperationsoftheoffending
turbineorturbines.CurtailmentrestrictionswouldbedevelopedincoordinationwiththeTAC
andbasedoncurrentlyavailablefatalitydata,usedata,andresearch.
ADMM‐5:Cut‐inSpeedStudy.Astatisticallyvalidcut‐in‐speedstudywillbeconductedtoseeif
changingcut‐inspeedsfrom3meterspersecondto5meterspersecondwouldsignificantly
reduceavianfatalities.TheproponentwillcoordinatewiththeTACindesigningthestudy.
Shouldincreasingthecut‐inspeedbeshowntohavepositiveresultswhilebirdfatalitiesbeyond
thethresholdcontinueatotherturbines,cut‐inspeedrestrictionswillbeimplemented.
ADMM‐6:Real‐TimeTurbineCurtailment(onlyifthresholdforraptorsisexceeded).Ifthe
abovemeasuresproveineffective,thentheprojectproponentwillemployareal‐timeturbine
curtailmentprogramdesignedinconjunctionwiththeTAC.Theintentistodeployabiologistto
monitoronsiteconditionsandissueacurtailmentorderwhenraptorsarenearoperating
turbines.Alternatively,radar,video,orothermonitoringmeasuresmaybedeployedinplaceof
abiologicalmonitorifthereisevidencetoindicatethatsuchasystemwouldbeaseffectiveand
moreefficientthanuseofahumanmonitor.
ImpactBIO‐11a‐2:Avianmortalityresultingfrominteractionwithwindenergyfacilities—
programAlternative2:450MW(significantandunavoidable)
Theoperationofwindenergyfacilitieshasbeenshowntocauseavianfatalitiesthroughcollisions
withwindturbinesandpowerlinesandthroughelectrocutiononpowerlines.
Mostcollectionlinesforfirst‐andsecond‐generationturbinesareabovegroundfacilities.As
repoweringprojectsareimplemented,oldcollectionsystemswouldberemovedandnewcollection
systemswouldbeinstalled.Themajorityofnewcollectionlinesassociatedwiththeprogramwould
beundergrounded,reducingtheriskofavianfatalityfromelectrocutionorcollisionwith
powerlines.
DiabloWinds,BuenaVista,andVascoWindsaretheonlyrepoweredprojectsintheAPWRAfor
whichestimatesofavianfatalityratesareavailable.Basedontheseestimates,aviancollisionrisk
maybesubstantiallyreducedwhenolder‐generationturbinesarereplacedbynewer,larger
turbineswiththesametotalratednameplatecapacity(Table3.4‐10).However,whiletheavailable
evidencesuggeststhatrepoweringcouldsubstantiallyreduceturbine‐relatedavianfatalitiesbelow
thelevelsdocumentedforoldergenerationturbines,avianfatalitieswouldcontinuetooccur.
Moreover,whilerepoweringisintendedtoreducefatalities,enoughuncertaintyremainsinlightof
project‐andsite‐specificdatatowarrantaconservativeapproachintheimpactanalysis.
Accordingly,thecontinuedlossofbirds(includingspecial‐statusspecies)ataratepotentially
greaterthantheexistingbaselinefatalityratesisconsideredasignificantandunavoidableimpact.
Itshouldbenotedthatturbinesusedinfuturerepoweringprojectsarelikelytobeofsimilarsizeto
theVascoWindsturbinesbutmuchlargerthantheDiabloWindsandBuenaVistaturbinesinboth
overallsizeandratednameplatecapacity.Thereisevidencetosuggestthatlargerturbines—like
thoseusedintheVascoWindsproject—couldresultinadditionaldecreasesinavianfatalityrates
forbirdspeciescurrentlykilledintheAPWRA(SmallwoodandKaras2009).However,itisalso
possiblethatlargerturbinesmaynegativelyaffectadifferentsuiteofbirdspeciesthathavebeen
relativelyunaffectedbyolder(i.e.,smaller)turbines.Inaddition,fatalityratesintheAPWRAare
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐112 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency highlyvariable(thatis,becausetheydifferacrossyears,turbinestypes,geographies,and
topographies,speciesimpactsmaydifferbetweensitesduetodifferentlevelsofuse)andpotentially
imprecise(Smallwoodetal.2010;ICFInternational2013).Nonetheless,thesethreerepowering
projectsrepresentthebestavailableinformationtounderstandthepotentialforavianfatalities
associatedwithrepowering;accordingly,datafromtheseprojectswereusedtoformthebasisfor
avianfatalityestimates.TheestimatedchangesassociatedwithAlternative2areshowninTable
3.4‐12anddiscussedbelow.Postconstructionmonitoring,oncetheturbinesareinoperation,will
providedatatoquantifytheactualextentofchangeinavianfatalitiesfromrepoweringandthe
extentofavianfatalityforprojectsintheprogramarea,andwillcontributetothebodyof
knowledgesupportingfutureanalyses.
Table 3.4‐12. Estimated Annual Avian Fatalities for Existing and Repowered Program Area—
Alternative 2 (450 MW) EstimatedAnnualFatalitiesforProgramArea
Nonrepowered
Repowered
BuenaVistab
DiabloWindsa
Species
Average
Annual
Fatalities
Americankestrel
Barnowl
Burrowingowl
Goldeneagle
Loggerheadshrike
Prairiefalcon
Red‐tailedhawk
Swainson’shawk
Average
Annual
%
Fatalities Decrease
Average
Annual
%
Fatalities Decrease
VascoWindsc
Average
Annual
Fatalities
%
Decrease
194.2
79.5
255.1
26.6
61.8
6.6
144.5
0.5
40.5
9.0
378.0
4.5
0.0
0.0
90.0
0.0
79
89
‐48
83
100
100
38
100
67.5
0.0
0.0
18.0
0.0
0.0
45.0
0.0
65
0
100
32
100
100
69
100
133.7
14.9
22.5
7.2
0.0
0.0
110.7
0.0
31
81
91
73
100
100
23
100
Allraptors
799.9
Allnativenon‐raptors 1,482.0
544.5
1,129.5
32
24
139.5
454.5
83
69
288.9
942.3
64
36
Note:fatalityratesreflectannualfatalities(95%confidenceinterval).
a DiabloWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
b BuenaVistafatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
c VascoWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheoverallprogramarea.
AmericanKestrel.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated41–138Americankestrelfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby31–79%.Thepotentialimpactof
repoweringontheAmericankestrelpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐
11a‐1.
BarnOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbeexpectedto
resultinanestimated9–15barnowlfatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,theprogram
coulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby81–89%.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringonthebarn
owlpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
BurrowingOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated23–378burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear—achangerangingfrom
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐113 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency a91%decreasetoa48%increaseinfatalities.ThisfatalityestimateisbasedondatafromDiablo
WindsandVascoWindsbecausenoburrowingowlfatalitiesweredetectedatBuenaVista.Current
evidencesuggeststhatburrowingowlfatalityratesarenotreducedbythetransitionfromold‐to
new‐generationturbinestothesameextentasthefatalityratesofotherspecies.Theincreasein
energyproductionfrom329MWto450MWwouldlikelyresultinasmallestimatedincreasein
burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear.However,agrowingbodyofcircumstantialevidenceindicates
thatmanyoftheburrowingowlfatalitiesfoundduringfatalitysurveysareduetopredationrather
thanturbinecollision.Becauseofthisconfoundingeffect,thepotentialreductioninturbine‐related
burrowingowlfatalitiesmaybeunderestimatedbecauseoftheinabilitytodistinguishfatalities
resultingfrompredationfromthosecausedbyturbinecollision(ICFInternational2013).The
potentialimpactofrepoweringontheburrowingowlpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribed
inImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
GoldenEagle.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated5–18goldeneaglefatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,
theprogramcoulddecreaseaverageannualfatalitiesby32–83%.Thepotentialimpactof
repoweringonthegoldeneaglepopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
LoggerheadShrike.NodocumentedfatalitiesofloggerheadshrikeshaveoccurredattheDiablo
Winds,BuenaVista,orVascoWindsprojects(Table3.4‐10),althoughloggerheadshrikesare
regularlydetectedinthevicinityoftheDiabloWindsturbines.Thelackofdocumentedfatalities
maysuggestareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthesesites.Thepotential
impactofrepoweringontheloggerheadshrikepopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedin
ImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
PrairieFalcon.Fatalityestimatesatrepoweredsitesarenotavailableforprairiefalconbecauseno
fatalitieshavebeendocumentedatDiabloWindsorVascoWindsandonlyonefatalityhasbeen
recordedatBuenaVista(Table3.4‐10).Therefore,itisdifficulttoestimatetheannualfatalitiesthat
wouldresultfromafullyrepoweredprogramarea.Thelackofdocumentedfatalitiesmaysuggesta
reducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthesesites.However,thenonrepowered
fatalityrateforprairiefalconisalreadyrelativelylow(0.02fatality/MW/year),suggestingthatthe
collisionriskforthisspeciesislow.Prairiefalconoccursmostlyinwinter,andthebaselinefatality
rateismeasuredduringaperiodwhentheseasonalshutdownhasbeenineffect.Repowered
turbinesdonotshutdowninwinter.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringontheprairiefalcon
populationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
Red‐TailedHawk.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,thefullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated45–111red‐tailedhawkfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreasetheaverageannualfatalitiesby23–69%.Thepotential
impactofrepoweringonthered‐tailedhawkpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedin
ImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
Swainson’sHawk.ThereisonlyonerecordedSwainson’shawkfatalityintheAPWRA,resultingin
anannualestimatedfatalityrateofapproximatelyzero(Table3.4‐10).NoSwainson’shawk
fatalitiesweredetectedatDiabloWinds,BuenaVista,orVascoWinds.Basedonthelowestimated
fatalityratefromnonrepoweredsites,thelackoffatalitiesdetectedatrepoweredsites,andthe
relativelylowuseoftheAPWRAbySwainson’shawks,itisexpectedthatthefatalityratefor
Swainson’shawkwouldremainlowundertheprogram.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringonthe
Swainson’shawkpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐114 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbeexpectedto
resultinanestimated140–545raptorfatalitiesperyear.Basedontheseestimates,theprogram
coulddecreaseaverageannualraptorfatalitiesby32–83%.
Nativenon‐raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐12,afullyrepowered450MWprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated455–1,130nativenon‐raptorfatalitiesperyear.Basedonthese
estimates,theprogramcoulddecreasetheaverageannualfatalitiesby24–69%.
Asdescribedabove,forallavianfocalspeciesanalyzed,afullyrepoweredprogramareawouldbe
expectedtoreduceestimatedfatalityrates.However,fatalitieswouldstillbeexpectedtoresultfrom
theoperationoftherepoweredturbines,anduncertaintysurroundingtheaccuracyoftheestimated
fatalityratesandthetypesofspeciespotentiallyaffectedremains.Consideringthisinformation,and
despitetheanticipatedreductionsinavianimpactscomparedtothebaselinerates,theCountyhas
determinedtouseaconservativeapproachfortheimpactassessment,concludingthatturbine‐
relatedfatalitiescouldconstituteasubstantialadverseeffectonavianspeciesbecausetheratesfor
someorallofthespeciescouldbegreaterthanthebaselinerates.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐11athroughBIO‐11iwouldreducethisimpact,butnot
toaless‐than‐significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11a:Prepareaproject‐specificavianprotectionplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11f:Discouragepreyforraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11g:Implementpostconstructionavianfatalitymonitoringforall
repoweringprojectsandimplementadaptivemanagementmeasuresasnecessary
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11h:Compensateforthelossofraptors,includinggoldeneagles,
bycontributingtoconservationefforts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
ImpactBIO‐11b:Avianmortalityresultingfrominteractionwithwindenergyfacilities—
GoldenHillsProject(significantandunavoidable)
TheoperationofrepoweredturbinesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawouldbeexpectedtoresultin
areductioninavianfatalitiesbelowthenumberestimatedtooccurfromnonrepoweredturbines.
However,asdiscussedaboveinImpactBIO‐11a‐1,repoweringwouldnoteliminateavianturbine‐
relatedfatalities,considerableuncertaintysurroundingthecomparativedatasetremains,and
fatalitiesfromturbinecollisionwouldstillconstituteasignificantandunavoidableimpact.The
estimatedreductioninannualfatalitiesdiffersbyspeciesandspeciesgroup.Thesereductionsare
presentedinTable3.4‐13andsummarizedbelow.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐115 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐13. Estimated Annual Avian Fatalities for Existing and Repowered Golden Hills Project Area EstimatedAnnualFatalitiesforProgramArea
Nonrepowered
Repowered
DiabloWindsa
Species
Average
Annual
Fatalities
Average
Annual
Fatalities
47.5
19.4
62.4
6.5
15.1
1.6
35.4
0.1
195.7
362.6
Americankestrel
Barnowl
Burrowingowl
Goldeneagle
Loggerheadshrike
Prairiefalcon
Red‐tailedhawk
Swainson’shawk
Allraptors
Allnativenon‐raptors
BuenaVistab
VascoWindsc
%
Decrease
Average
Average
Annual
%
Annual
Fatalities Decrease Fatalities
%
Decrease
8.0
1.8
74.3
0.9
0.0
0.0
17.7
0.0
83
91
‐19
86
100
100
50
100
13.3
–
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.0
8.8
0.0
72
–
100
46
100
100
75
100
26.3
2.9
4.4
1.4
0.0
0.0
21.7
0.0
45
85
93
78
100
100
39
100
107.0
221.9
45
39
27.4
89.3
86
75
56.8
185.1
71
49
Note:fatalityratesreflectannualfatalities(95%confidenceinterval).
a DiabloWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheGoldenHillsprojectarea.
b BuenaVistafatalityratesextrapolatedtotheGoldenHillsprojectarea.
c VascoWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtotheGoldenHillsprojectarea.
AmericanKestrel.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated8–26Americankestrelfatalitiesperyear—a45–83%decrease.
ThepotentialimpactofrepoweringontheAmericankestrelpopulationwouldbesimilartothat
describedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
BarnOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimatedtwotothreebarnowlfatalitiesperyear—an85–91%decrease.
ThisfatalityestimateisbasedonfatalityratesfortheDiabloWindsandVascoWindsprojects;
fatalityestimatesforbarnowlwerenotavailablefromtheBuenaVistaproject.Thepotentialimpact
ofrepoweringonthebarnowlpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
BurrowingOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated4–74burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear—achangerangingfroma
91%decreasetoa19%increaseinfatalities.
However,agrowingbodyofcircumstantialevidenceindicatesthatmanyoftheburrowingof
fatalitiesfoundduringfatalitysurveysareduetopredationratherthanturbinecollision.Becauseof
thisconfoundingeffect,thepotentialreductioninturbine‐relatedburrowingowlfatalitiesmaybe
underestimatedbecauseoftheinabilitytodistinguishfatalitiesresultingfrompredationfromthose
causedbyturbinecollision.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringontheburrowingowlpopulation
wouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
GoldenEagle.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinfromlessthanonetofourgoldeneaglefatalitiesperyear—a46–86%decrease.
Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringonthegoldeneaglepopulationwouldbesimilartothat
describedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐116 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency LoggerheadShrike.NodocumentedfatalitiesofloggerheadshrikeshaveoccurredattheDiablo
Winds,BuenaVista,orVascoWindsprojects(Table3.4‐13),althoughloggerheadshrikesare
regularlydetectedinthevicinityoftheDiabloWindsturbines.Thelackofdocumentedfatalities
suggeststhattheremaybeareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesattheGolden
Hillsprojectsite.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringontheloggerheadshrikepopulationwouldbe
similartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
PrairieFalcon.Fatalityestimatesatrepoweredsitesarenotavailableforprairiefalconbecauseno
fatalitieshavebeendocumentedatDiabloWindsorVascoWindsandonlyonefatalityhasbeen
recordedatBuenaVista(Table3.4‐13).Therefore,itisdifficulttoestimatetheannualfatalitiesthat
wouldresultfromtherepoweredGoldenHillsproject.Thelackofdocumentedfatalitiessuggests
theremaybeareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesattheGoldenHillsprojectsite.
However,thenonrepoweredfatalityrateforprairiefalconisalreadyrelativelylow(0.02
fatality/MW/year),suggestingthatthecollisionriskforthisspeciesislow.Prairiefalconoccurs
mostlyinwinter,andthebaselinefatalityrateismeasuredduringaperiodwhentheseasonal
shutdownhasbeenineffect.Repoweredturbinesdonotshutdowninwinter.Thepotentialimpact
ofrepoweringontheprairiefalconpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐
11a‐1.
Red‐TailedHawk.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsProjectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated9–22red‐tailedhawkfatalitiesperyear—a35–75%decrease.
Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringonthered‐tailedhawkpopulationwouldbesimilartothat
describedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
Swainson’sHawk.ThereisonlyonerecordedSwainson’shawkfatalityintheAPWRA,resultingin
anannualestimatedfatalityrateofapproximatelyzero(Table3.4‐13).NoSwainson’shawk
fatalitiesweredetectedatDiabloWinds,BuenaVista,orVascoWinds.Basedonthelowestimated
fatalityratefromnonrepoweredsites,thelackoffatalitiesdetectedatrepoweredsites,andthe
relativelylownumberofdetectionsduringavianusesurveysconductedbytheAFMT(Alameda
Countyunpublisheddata),itisexpectedthatthefatalityrateforSwainson’shawkwouldremain
nearzeroattherepoweredGoldenHillsproject.Thepotentialimpactofrepoweringonthe
Swainson’shawkpopulationwouldbesimilartothatdescribedinImpactBIO‐11a‐1.
Raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwouldbeexpected
toresultinanestimated27–107raptorfatalitiesperyear—a45–86%decrease.
Nativenon‐raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐13,therepowered88.4MWGoldenHillsprojectwould
beexpectedtoresultinanestimated89–222nativenon‐raptorfatalitiesperyear—a39–75%
decrease.
Asdescribedabove,forallavianfocalspeciesanalyzed,therepoweredGoldenHillsprojectwouldbe
expectedtoreduceestimatedfatalityrates.However,fatalitieswouldstillbeexpectedtoresultfrom
theoperationoftherepoweredturbines,anduncertaintysurroundingtheaccuracyoftheestimated
fatalityratesandthetypesofspeciespotentiallyaffectedremains.Consideringthisinformation,and
despitetheanticipatedreductionsinavianimpactscomparedtothebaselinerates,theCountyhas
determinedtouseaconservativeapproachfortheimpactassessment,concludingthatturbine‐
relatedfatalitiescouldconstituteasubstantialadverseeffectonavianspeciesbecausetheratesfor
someorallofthespeciescouldbegreaterthanthebaselinerates.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐12athroughBIO‐12jwouldreducethisimpact,butnot
toaless‐than‐significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐117 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐11a:Prepareaproject‐specificavianprotectionplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11f:Discouragepreyforraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11g:Implementpostconstructionavianfatalitymonitoringforall
repoweringprojectsandimplementadaptivemanagementmeasuresasnecessary
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11h:Compensateforthelossofraptors,includinggoldeneagles,
bycontributingtoconservationefforts
TheCountyanticipatesthatthemitigationfeesrequiredbythe2010AgreementtoRepower
TurbinesattheAltamontPassWindResourceAreawillsatisfythismitigationmeasureforthe
GoldenHillsProject.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
ImpactBIO‐11c:Avianmortalityresultingfrominteractionwithwindenergyfacilities—
PattersonPassProject(significantandunavoidable)
TheoperationofrepoweredturbinesinthePattersonPassprojectareawouldbeexpectedtoresult
inareductioninestimatedavianfatalityrateincomparisonwiththefatalityestimatesfrom
nonrepoweredturbines.However,asdiscussedaboveinImpactBIO‐11a‐1and11a‐2,repowering
wouldnoteliminateavianturbine‐relatedfatalities,considerableuncertaintysurroundingthe
comparativedatasetremains,andfatalitiesfromturbinecollisionwouldstillresultinasignificant
andunavoidableimpact.Theestimatedreductioninannualfatalitiesdiffersbyspeciesandspecies
group.ThesereductionsarepresentedinTable3.4‐13andsummarizedbelow.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐118 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐14. Estimated Annual Avian Fatalities for Existing and Repowered Patterson Pass Project Area EstimatedAnnualFatalitiesforProgramArea
Nonrepowered
Repowered
DiabloWindsa
Species
Average
Annual
Fatalities
Average
Annual
%
Fatalities Decrease
BuenaVistab
VascoWindsc
Average
Average
Annual
%
Annual
Fatalities Decrease Fatalities
%
Decrease
Americankestrel
Barnowl
Burrowingowl
Goldeneagle
Loggerheadshrike
Prairiefalcon
Red‐tailedhawk
Swainson’shawk
12.9
5.2
16.9
1.8
4.1
0.4
9.6
0.0
1.8
0.4
16.6
0.2
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
86
92
2
89
100
100
59
0.0
3.0
–
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
77
–
100
56
100
100
79
0
5.9
0.7
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
4.9
0.0
54
87
94
82
100
100
49
0
Allraptors
Allnativenon‐raptors
53.1
98.4
24.0
49.7
55
49
6.1
20.0
88
80
12.7
41.5
76
58
Note:fatalityratesreflectannualfatalities(95%confidenceinterval).
a DiabloWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtothePattersonPassprojectarea.
b BuenaVistafatalityratesextrapolatedtothePattersonPassprojectarea.
c VascoWindsfatalityratesextrapolatedtothePattersonPassprojectarea.
AmericanKestrel.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwould
beexpectedtoresultinanestimatedtwotosixAmericankestrelfatalitiesperyear—a54–86%
decrease.
BarnOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinlessthanonebarnowlfatalityperyear—an87–92%decrease.
BurrowingOwl.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwould
beexpectedtoresultinanestimated1–17burrowingowlfatalitiesperyear—a2–94%decreasein
fatalities.ThisfatalityestimateisbasedondatafromDiabloWindsandVascoWinds;noburrowing
owlfatalitiesweredetectedatBuenaVista.
However,agrowingbodyofcircumstantialevidenceindicatesthatmanyoftheburrowingof
fatalitiesfoundduringfatalitysurveysareduetopredationratherthanturbinecollision.Becauseof
thisconfoundingeffect,thepotentialreductioninturbine‐relatedburrowingowlfatalitiesmaybe
underestimatedbecauseoftheinabilitytodistinguishfatalitiesresultingfrompredationfromthose
causedbyturbinecollision.
GoldenEagle.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinlessthanonegoldeneaglefatalityperyear—a56–89%decrease.
LoggerheadShrike.NodocumentedfatalitiesofloggerheadshrikeshaveoccurredattheDiablo
Winds,BuenaVista,orVascoWindsprojects(Table3.4‐14),althoughloggerheadshrikesare
regularlydetectedinthevicinityoftheDiabloWindsturbines.Thelackofdocumentedfatalities
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐119 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency suggeststhattheremaybeareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthePattern
Passprojectsite.
PrairieFalcon.Fatalityestimatesatrepoweredsitesarenotavailableforprairiefalconbecauseno
fatalitieshavebeendocumentedatDiabloWindsorVascoWindsandonlyonefatalityhasbeen
recordedatBuenaVista(Table3.4‐14).Therefore,itisdifficulttoestimatetheannualfatalitiesthat
wouldresultfromtherepoweredPattersonPassproject.Thelackofdocumentedfatalitiessuggests
thattheremaybeareducedleveloffatalityfromtherepoweredturbinesatthePattersonPass
projectsite.However,thenonrepoweredfatalityrateforprairiefalconisalreadyrelativelylow
(0.02fatality/MW/year),suggestingthatthecollisionriskforthisspeciesislow.Prairiefalcon
occursmostlyinwinter,andthebaselinefatalityrateismeasuredduringaperiodwhenthe
seasonalshutdownhasbeenineffect.Repoweredturbinesdonotshutdowninwinter.
Red‐TailedHawk.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwould
beexpectedtoresultinanestimatedtwotofivered‐tailedhawkfatalitiesperyear—a49–79%
decrease.
Swainson’sHawk.ThereisonlyonerecordedSwainson’shawkfatalityintheAPWRA,resultingin
anannualestimatedfatalityrateofapproximatelyzero(Table3.4‐14).NoSwainson’shawk
fatalitiesweredetectedatDiabloWinds,BuenaVista,orVascoWinds.Basedonthelowestimated
fatalityratefromnonrepoweredsitesandthelackoffatalitiesdetectedatrepoweredsites,itis
expectedthatthefatalityrateforSwainson’shawkwouldremainlowattherepoweredPatterson
Passprojectsite.
Raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassprojectwouldbe
expectedtoresultinanestimated6–24raptorfatalitiesperyear—a55–88%decrease.
Nativenon‐raptors.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,therepowered19.8MWPattersonPassproject
wouldbeexpectedtoresultinanestimated20–50nativenon‐raptorfatalitiesperyear—a49–80%
decrease.
Asdescribedabove,forallavianfocalspeciesanalyzed,therepoweredPattersonPassprojectwould
beexpectedtoreduceestimatedfatalityrates.However,fatalitieswouldstillbeexpectedtoresult
fromtheoperationoftherepoweredturbines,anduncertaintysurroundingtheaccuracyofthe
estimatedfatalityratesandthetypesofspeciespotentiallyaffectedremains.Consideringthis
information,anddespitetheanticipatedreductionsinavianimpactscomparedtothebaselinerates,
theCountyhasdeterminedtouseaconservativeapproachfortheimpactassessment,concluding
thatturbine‐relatedfatalitiescouldconstituteasubstantialadverseeffectonavianspeciesbecause
theratesforsomeorallofthespeciescouldbegreaterthanthebaselinerates.Thisimpactwouldbe
significant.Implementationofthemitigationmeasureslistedbelowwouldreducethisimpactbut
nottoaless‐than‐significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantand
unavoidable.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐11athroughBIO‐11iwouldreducethis
impactbutnottoaless‐than‐significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantand
unavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11a:Prepareaproject‐specificavianprotectionplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐120 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11f:Discouragepreyforraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11g:Implementpostconstructionavianfatalitymonitoringforall
repoweringprojectsandimplementadaptivemanagementmeasuresasnecessary
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11h:Compensateforthelossofraptors,includinggoldeneagles,
bycontributingtoconservationefforts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
ImpactBIO‐12a‐1:Potentialmortalityordisturbanceofbatsfromroostremovalor
disturbance—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Severalspeciesofbothcommon(Myotisspp.)andspecial‐status(westernredbat,pallidbat,
Townsend’sbig‐earedbat)batsareknowntooccurorcouldoccurinoraroundtheprogramarea,
andcouldusetheareaforforaging,dispersal,andmigration.Batsmayuserockoutcrops,trees,
buildings,bridges,andotherstructuresintheprogramareaasmaternityormigratorystopover
roosts.Permanentwaterbodiesandstocktanksinandadjacenttotheprogramareaprovide
sourcesoffreshwaterforbothresidentandmigratorybats.
Constructionanddecommissioningofturbinescouldresultindisturbanceorlossofactivebat
rooststhroughincreasedtraffic,noise,lighting,andhumanaccess.Removalordisturbanceoftrees,
rockoutcrops,debrispiles,outbuildings,orotherartificialstructurescouldresultinremovalof
roosthabitatandmortalityofbatsusingthestructureasaroost.Severalspeciesofbataresensitive
todisturbanceandmayabandonflightlessyoung,ortheymaysimplynotreturntotheroostonce
disturbed,resultinginthelossofthatroostashabitatforthelocalpopulation.Becausesomebats
roostcolonially,removalofspecial‐statusspecies’rooststructuresinaroost‐limitedhabitatcould
resultinthelossofasignificantportionofthelocalbatpopulation.Thiswouldbeasignificant
impact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐3,BIO‐12a,andBIO‐12bwouldreduce
thisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
Priortodevelopmentofanyrepoweringproject,aqualifiedbatbiologistwillconductaroost
habitatassessmenttoidentifypotentialcolonialroostsitesofspecial‐statusandcommonbat
specieswithin750feetoftheconstructionarea.Ifsuitableroostsitesaretoberemovedor
otherwiseaffectedbytheproposedproject,thebatbiologistwillconducttargetedroostsurveys
ofallidentifiedsitesthatwouldbeaffected.Becausebatactivityishighlyvariable(both
spatiallyandtemporally)acrossthelandscapeandmaymoveunpredictablyamongseveral
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐121 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency roosts,severalseparatesurveyvisitsmayberequired.Surveyswillberepeatedatdifferent
timesofyearifdeemednecessarybythebatbiologisttodeterminethepresenceofseasonally
activeroosts(hibernacula,migratorystopovers,maternityroosts).Appropriatefieldmethods
willbeemployedtodeterminethespecies,type,andvulnerabilityoftheroosttoconstruction
disturbance.Methodswillfollowbestpracticesforroostsurveyssuchthatspeciesarenot
disturbedandadequatetemporalandspatialcoverageisprovidedtoincreaselikelihoodof
detection.
Roostsurveysmayconsistofbothdaylightsurveysforsignsofbatuseandevening/night
visit(s)toconductemergencesurveysorevaluatethestatusofnightroosts.Surveytiming
shouldbeadequatetoaccountforindividualbatsorspeciesthatmightnotemergeuntilwell
afterdark.
Methodsandapproachesfordeterminingroostoccupancystatusshouldincludeacombination
ofthefollowingcomponentsasthebiologistdeemsnecessaryfortheparticularroostsite.

Passiveand/oractiveacousticmonitoringtoassistwithspeciesidentification.

Guanotrapstodetermineactivitystatus.

Night‐visionequipment.

Passiveinfraredcameratraps.
Atthecompletionoftheroostsurveys,areportwillbeprepareddocumentingareassurveyed,
methods,results,andmappingofhigh‐qualityhabitatorconfirmedroostlocations.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts

Activebatroostswillnotbedisturbed,andwillbeprovidedaminimumbufferof500feet
wherepreexistingdisturbanceismoderateor750feetwherepreexistingdisturbanceis
minimal.Confirmationofbufferdistancesanddeterminationoftheneedforabiological
monitorforactivematernityroostsorhibernaculawillbeobtainedinconsultationwith
CDFW.Ataminimum,whenanactivematernityroostorhibernaculumispresentwithin
750feetofaconstructionsite,aqualifiedbiologistwillconductaninitialassessmentofthe
roostresponsetoconstructionactivitiesandwillrecommendbufferexpansionifthereare
signsofdisturbancefromtheroost.

Structures(naturalorartificial)showingevidenceofsignificantbatusewithinthepastyear
willbeleftinplaceashabitatwhereverfeasible.Shouldsuchastructureneedtoberemoved
ordisturbed,CDFWwillbeconsultedtodetermineappropriatebuffers,timingandmethods,
andcompensatorymitigationforthelossoftheroost.

Allprojectproponentswillprovideenvironmentalawarenesstrainingtoconstruction
personnel,establishbuffers,andinitiateconsultationwithCDFWifneeded.

Artificialnightlightingwithin500feetofanyroostwillbeshieldedandangledsuchthat
batsmayenterandexittheroostwithoutartificialilluminationandtheroostdoesnot
receiveartificialexposuretovisualpredators.

Treeandvegetationremovalwillbeconductedoutsidethematernityseason(April1–
September15)toavoiddisturbanceofmaternitygroupsoffoliage‐roostingbats.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐122 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 
Ifamaternityroostorhibernaculumispresentwithin500feetoftheconstructionsite
wherepreexistingdisturbanceismoderateorwithin750feetwherepreexisting
disturbanceisminimal,aqualifiedbiologicalmonitorwillbeonsiteduringgroundbreaking
activities.
ImpactBIO‐12a‐2:Potentialmortalityordisturbanceofbatsfromroostremovalor
disturbance—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Severalspeciesofbothcommon(Myotisspp.)andspecial‐status(westernredbat,pallidbat,
Townsend’sbig‐earedbat)batsareknowntooccurorcouldoccurinoraroundtheprogramarea,
andcouldusetheareaforforaging,dispersal,andmigration.Batsmayuserockoutcrops,trees,
buildings,bridges,andotherstructuresintheprogramareaasmaternityormigratorystopover
roosts.Permanentwaterbodiesandstocktanksinandadjacenttotheprogramareaprovide
sourcesoffreshwaterforbothresidentandmigratorybats.
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Constructionand
decommissioningofturbinescouldresultindisturbanceorlossofactivebatrooststhrough
increasedtraffic,noise,lighting,andhumanaccess.Removalordisturbanceoftrees,rockoutcrops,
debrispiles,outbuildings,orotherartificialstructurescouldresultinremovalofroosthabitatand
mortalityofbatsusingthestructureasaroost.Severalspeciesofbataresensitivetodisturbance
andmayabandonflightlessyoung,ortheymaysimplynotreturntotheroostoncedisturbed,
resultinginthelossofthatroostashabitatforthelocalpopulation.Becausesomebatsroost
colonially,removalofspecial‐statusspecies’rooststructuresinaroost‐limitedhabitatcouldresult
inthelossofasignificantportionofthelocalbatpopulation.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐3,BIO‐12a,andBIO‐12bwouldreducethis
impacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
ImpactBIO‐12b:Potentialmortalityordisturbanceofbatsfromroostremovalor
disturbance—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionanddecommissioningofturbinescouldresultindisturbanceorlossofactivebat
rooststhroughincreasedtraffic,noise,lightingorhumanaccess.Removalordisturbanceoftrees,
rockoutcrops,debrispiles,outbuildings,orotherartificialstructurescouldresultinremovalof
roosthabitatandmortalityofbatsusingthestructureasaroost.Severalspeciesofbataresensitive
todisturbanceandmayabandonflightlessyoung,ortheymaysimplynotreturntotheroostonce
disturbed,resultinginthelossofthatroostashabitatforthelocalpopulation.Becausesomebats
roostcolonially,removalofspecial‐statusspecies’rooststructuresinaroost‐limitedhabitatcould
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐123 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency resultinthelossofasignificantportionofthelocalbatpopulation.Thiswouldbeasignificant
impact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐3,BIO‐12aandBIO‐12bwouldreduce
thisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
ImpactBIO‐12c:Potentialmortalityordisturbanceofbatsfromroostremovalor
disturbance—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionanddecommissioningofturbinescouldresultindisturbanceorlossofactivebat
rooststhroughincreasedtraffic,noise,lightingorhumanaccess.Removalordisturbanceoftrees,
rockoutcrops,debrispiles,outbuildings,orotherartificialstructurescouldresultinremovalof
roosthabitatandmortalityofbatsusingthestructureasaroost.Severalspeciesofbataresensitive
todisturbanceandmayabandonflightlessyoung,ortheymaysimplynotreturntotheroostonce
disturbed,resultinginthelossofthatroostashabitatforthelocalpopulation.Becausesomebats
roostcolonially,removalofspecial‐statusspecies’rooststructuresinaroost‐limitedhabitatcould
resultinthelossofasignificantportionofthelocalbatpopulation.Thiswouldbeasignificant
impact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐3,BIO‐12aandBIO‐12bwouldreduce
thisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
ImpactBIO‐13a‐1:Potentialforconstructionactivitiestotemporarilyremoveoralterbat
foraginghabitat—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant)
Constructionofrepoweringprojectscoulddegradebatforaginghabitatbyreplacingvegetationwith
nonvegetatedlandcovertypes.Projectconstructionwouldcreateatemporaryincreaseintraffic,
noise,andartificialnightlightingintheprogramarea,reducingtheextentoflandscapeavailablefor
foraging.However,theamountoflandscapereturnedtoforaginghabitatintheprocessof
decommissioningthefirst‐andsecond‐generationturbineswouldoffsettheamountofforaging
habitatlosttorepoweringactivities.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationis
required.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐124 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐13a‐2:Potentialforconstructionactivitiestotemporarilyremoveoralterbat
foraginghabitat—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant)
Constructionofrepoweringprojectscoulddegradebatforaginghabitatbyreplacingvegetationwith
nonvegetatedlandcovertypes.DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunder
Alternative1,excepttheoverallareaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumber
ofturbinesandassociatedinfrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbance
area.Projectconstructionwouldcreateatemporaryincreaseintraffic,noise,andartificialnight
lightingintheprogramarea,reducingtheextentoflandscapeavailableforforaging.However,the
amountoflandscapereturnedtoforaginghabitatintheprocessofdecommissioningthefirst‐and
second‐generationturbineswouldoffsettheamountofforaginghabitatlosttorepowering
activities.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
ImpactBIO‐13b:Potentialforconstructionactivitiestotemporarilyremoveoralterbat
foraginghabitat—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificant)
ConstructionoftheGoldenHillsProjectcoulddegradebatforaginghabitatbyreplacingvegetation
withnonvegetatedlandcovertypes.Projectconstructionwouldcreateatemporaryincreasein
traffic,noise,andartificialnightlightingintheprogramarea,reducingtheextentoflandscape
availableforforaging.However,theamountoflandscapereturnedtoforaginghabitatintheprocess
ofdecommissioningthefirst‐andsecond‐generationturbineswouldoffsettheamountofforaging
habitatlosttorepoweringactivities.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationis
required.
ImpactBIO‐13c:Potentialforconstructionactivitiestotemporarilyremoveoralterbat
foraginghabitat—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)
ConstructionofthePattersonPassProjectcoulddegradebatforaginghabitatbyreplacing
vegetationwithnonvegetatedlandcovertypes.Projectconstructionwouldcreateatemporary
increaseintraffic,noise,andartificialnightlightingintheprogramarea,reducingtheextentof
landscapeavailableforforaging.However,theamountoflandscapereturnedtoforaginghabitatin
theprocessofdecommissioningthefirst‐andsecond‐generationturbineswouldoffsettheamount
offoraginghabitatlosttorepoweringactivities.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.No
mitigationisrequired.
ImpactBIO‐14a‐1:Turbine‐relatedfatalitiesofspecial‐statusandotherbats—program
Alternative1:417MW(significantandunavoidable)
Residentandmigratorybatsflyinginandthroughtheprogramareamaybekilledbycollisionwith
windturbinebladesorotherinteractionwiththewindturbinegenerators.
Insufficientdataarecurrentlyavailabletodevelopaccuratefatalityestimatesforindividualbat
species.FivebatspecieshavebeendocumentedinfatalitymonitoringprogramsintheAPWRA
(InsigniaEnvironmental2012:48;Brownetal.2013:23;ICFInternational2012:3‐3),ofwhichtwo
(westernredbatandhoarybat)arespecial‐statusspecies.Extrapolatingfromexistingfatalitydata
andfromtrendsobservedatotherwindenergyfacilitieswherefourth‐generationturbinesarein
operation,itappearslikelythatfatalitieswouldoccurpredominantlyinthelatesummertomid‐fall
migrationperiod;thatfatalitieswouldconsistmostlyofmigratorybats,particularlyMexicanfree‐
tailedbatandhoarybat;thatfatalitieswouldoccursporadicallyatothertimesofyear;andthat
fatalitiesofoneormoreotherspecieswouldoccurinsmallernumbers.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐125 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency DiabloWinds,BuenaVista,andVascoWindsaretheonlyrepoweredprojectsintheAPWRAfor
whichestimatesofbatfatalityratesareavailable.Whiletheseratesvarywidely(Smallwoodand
Karas2009:1067;InsigniaEnvironmental2012:65;Brownetal.2013:39),basedontheseestimates,
batcollisionriskincreasessubstantiallywhenold‐generationturbinesarereplacedbynewer,larger
turbines(SmallwoodandKaras2009:1068).Turbinesusedinfuturerepoweringprojectsarelikely
tobesimilarinsizetotheVascoWindsturbinesbutmuchlargerthantheDiabloWindsandBuena
Vistaturbinesinbothoverallsizeandratednameplatecapacity.Thereisevidencetosuggestthat
largerturbinessimilartothoseusedintheVascoWindsprojectwillresultinadditionalincreasesin
batfatalityratesforthosebatspeciescurrentlykilledintheAPWRA.
Somehypothesesfortheincreasedcollisionrisktomigratorybatspeciesatfourth‐generation
turbinesaresummarizedbelow.

Batstendnottoflyathighwindspeeds.Thelowerwindspeedsatwhichfourth‐generation
turbinesareabletoproducepowercreatemoreoverlapinthetimethatturbinesareoperating
andbatsareintheair.Inseveralstudies,themajorityoffatalitiesoccurredonnightsoflower
windspeed(lessthan5.5meters/second[m/s])(Arnettetal.2008:73;Goodetal.2012:iv).This
correlationsuggestsapossiblesourcefortheincreasedriskthatfourth‐generationturbines
posetobats.

Migratorytree‐roostingbatsmaybeattractedtothetubulartowerstructureofnewerturbines;
thisattractionmayberelatedtomatingbehaviorduringmigration(Arnettetal.2008:73;Cryan
2008:1).

Echolocationpulsesmaynotbeusedduringopen‐airmigratoryflight,ornotusedasoften,
resultinginbatsbeingunawareofthehazardpresentedbytheturbineblades(Kunzetal.
2007:319).

Foraging,wateracquisition,roostselection,ormatingbehaviorduringmigrationseasonmay
bringbatsthroughtherotor‐sweptareaoftallerturbinesmoreoften(CryanandBarclay
2009:1333).

Tallerturbineshavebeendocumentedtokillmorebats.Theincreasedheightoffourth‐
generationturbinesputstherotor‐sweptareaintobatflightpaths(Barclayetal2007:384).
Table3.4‐15providesacomparisonoftheestimatednumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurifold‐
generationturbinesareallowedtocontinueoperatingattheircurrentlevelandtheestimated
numberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurafterrepoweringoftheprogramareaandthetwoproject
areas.Duetothehighdegreeofuncertaintyinbatfatalityestimates,arangeofestimatesbasedon
availabledataispresented.Thelowestestimateisderivedfromthebestestimaterateof1.679
fatalities/MW/yearreportedforthefirstyearofmonitoringattheVascoWindsrepoweringproject
(Brownetal.2013:39).Theupperendofthisrangeiscalculatedusingthebatfatalityrateof3.92
fatalities/MW/yearreportedfortheShilohIprojectintheMontezumaHillsWindResourceArea.
Thebaselineestimateisderivedfromthebatfatalityrateof0.263fatalities/MW/yearreportedfor
theAPWRAfor2005–2007(SmallwoodandKaras2009:1066).AsshowninTable3.4‐15,annual
estimatedbatfatalitiesintheprogramareafromimplementationofAlternative1areanticipatedto
increasefromthecurrentestimateof87to700–1,635fatalities.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐126 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Table 3.4‐15. Estimated Range of Annual Bat Fatalities StudyArea
Existingprogramarea
ProgramAlternative1
ProgramAlternative2
GoldenHills
PattersonPass
Capacity(MW)
329
417
450
88.4
19.8
BaselineFatalitiesa
87
110
118
23
5
PredictedFatalitiesb
–
700–1,635
756–1,764
148–347
33–78
a
EstimateoftotalbaselinefatalitiesarebasedontheSmallwoodandKarasfatalityrateof0.263
fatalities/MW/yearderivedfrom2005–2007monitoringattheAPWRA.
b EstimateoftotalpredictedfatalitiesarebasedonfatalityratesfromtheVascoWindsrepowering
project(1.679fatalities/MW/year),andfromthemultiyearaverageratesfromtheShilohIprojectin
theMontezumaHillsWRA(3.92fatalities/MW/year).
Despitethehighlevelofuncertaintyinestimatesofbatfatalityrates,allavailabledatasuggestthat
repoweringwouldresultinasubstantialincreaseinbatfatalities.Thedegreeofincreasemaybe
influencedbythefollowingfactors.

Turbineplacementinareasofhighautumnbatactivityoralongmigrationroutes.

Turbineplacementalongcommutingflywaystokeyresources(e.g.,roosts,water,foraging
habitat).

Behavioroftheturbinemodelbeforeitcutsin(i.e.,whetherbladesareallowedtospinatlower
windspeeds)(Goodetal.2012:v).
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐14athroughBIO‐14ewouldreducethisimpact,butnottoaless‐than‐
significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
Allprojectproponentswillusethebestinformationavailabletositeturbinesandtoselectfrom
turbinemodelsinsuchamannerastoreducebatcollisionrisk.Thesitingandselectionprocess
willtakeintoaccountbatuseoftheareaandlandscapefeaturesknowntoincreasecollisionrisk
(trees,edgehabitats,riparianareas,waterbodies,andwetlands).Measuresincludebutarenot
limitedtositingturbinesthegreatestdistancefeasibleupto500meters(1,640)feetfromstill
orflowingbodiesofwater,riparianhabitat,knownroosts,andtreestands(CaliforniaBat
WorkingGroup2006:6).
Togeneratesite‐specific“bestinformation”toinformturbinesitingandoperationdecisions,a
bathabitatassessmentandroostsurveywillbeconductedintheprojectareatoidentifyand
maphabitatofpotentialsignificancetobats,suchaspotentialroostsites(treesandshrubs,
significantrockformations,artificialstructures)andwatersources.Roostsurveyswillbe
carriedoutaccordingtothemethodsdescribedinMitigationMeasure‐BIO‐12a.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14b:Implementpostconstructionbatfatalitymonitoring
programforallrepoweringprojects
Ascientificallydefensible,postconstructionbatfatalitymonitoringprogramwillbe
implementedtoestimateactualbatfatalitiesanddetermineifadditionalmitigationisrequired.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐127 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Bat‐specificmodificationstothe3‐yearpostconstructionmonitoringprogramdescribedin
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11g,developedinaccordancewithCEC2007andwithappropriate
recommendationsfromCaliforniaBatWorkingGroupguidelines(2006),willbeimplemented.
InadditiontotherequirementsoutlinedinMitigationMeasureBIO‐11g,thefollowingtwobat‐
specificrequirementswillbeadded.

IncludeontheTACatleastonebiologistwithsignificantexpertiseinbatresearchandwind
energyimpactsonbats.

Conductbatacousticsurveysconcurrentlywithfatalitymonitoringintheprojectareato
estimatenightly,seasonal,orannualvariationsinrelativeactivityandspeciesusepatterns,
andtocontributetothebodyofknowledgeonseasonalbatmovementsandrelationships
betweenacousticbatactivityandturbinefatality.
AcousticbatsurveyswillbeconductedbyqualifiedbiologistsinaccordancewithCalifornia
EnergyCommissionguidelines(2007),CaliforniaBatWorkingGroupguidelines(2006),and
bestavailablesciencetoobtaindataonspeciescompositionandseasonofoccurrenceand
relativebatactivitypatternsovertime.Surveydesignandmethodswillbescientifically
defensibleandinclude,ataminimum,thefollowingelements.




Acousticdetectorswillbeinstalledatmultiplestationstoadequatelysamplerangeof
habitatsintheprojectareaforbothresidentandmigratorybats.
Acousticdetectorswillbemountedonverticalstructurestosamplemultipleairspace
heightsincludingasclosetotherepoweredrotorsweptareaaspossible.Vertical
structuresusedmaybepreexistingormaybeinstalledfortheproject(e.g.,temporary
orpermanentmeteorologicaltowers).
SurveyswillbeconductedsuchthatdataarecollectedcontinuouslyfromearlyJulyto
earlyNovembertocovertheactivitytransitionfrommaternitytomigrationseasonand
determineifthereiselevatedactivityduringmigration.
Anticipatedadaptivemanagementgoals,suchasdeterminingjustifiabletimeframesto
reducerequiredperiodsofcut‐inspeedadjustments,willbereviewedwiththeTACand
incorporatedindesigningtheacousticmonitoringanddataanalysisprogram.
Modificationstothefatalitysearchprotocolwillbeimplementedtoobtainbetterinformationon
thenumberandtimingofbatfatalities.Modificationsmayincludedecreasesinthetransect
widthandsearchintervalforaperiodoftimecoincidingwithhighlevelsofbatmortality,i.e.,
thefallmigrationseason(roughlyAugusttoearlyNovember,orasappropriateintheviewof
theTAC).Theneedforbat‐specifictransectdistanceandsearchintervalswillbedeterminedin
consultationwiththeTAC.
Othermethodstoachievethegoalsofthebatfatalitymonitoringprogramwhileavoiding
prohibitivecostsmaybeconsideredsubjecttoapprovalbytheTAC,ifthesemethodshavebeen
peerreviewedandevidenceindicatesthemethodsareeffective.Oneexampleofsuchan
approachistoincreasetheefficiencyoffatalitysearchesbyreducingthesearchplotto
encompassonlythegravelroadsandpadsaroundturbines,wherebatfatalitiesmaybeeasierto
find.AtonewindenergysiteinIndiana,thisapproachhasgeneratedcomparablefatality
estimatestothoseofstandardsearchplots(Goodetal.2011:73).
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐128 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Finally,detectionprobabilitytrialswillutilizebatcarcassestodevelopbat‐specificdetection
probabilities.Careshouldbetakentoavoidintroducingnoveldiseasereservoirs;such
avoidancewillentailusingonsitefatalitiesorusingcarcassesobtainedfromwithinareasonably
anticipatedflightdistanceforthatspecies.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14c:Prepareandpublishannualmonitoringreportsonthe
findingsofbatuseoftheprojectareaandfatalitymonitoringresults
Annualreportsofbatuseresultsandfatalitymonitoringwillbeproducedwithin3monthsof
theendofthelastdayoffatalitymonitoring.Special‐statusbatspeciesrecordswillbereported
toCNDDB.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
InconcertwithMitigationMeasureBIO‐14b,allprojectproponentswilldevelopadaptive
managementplanstoensureappropriate,feasible,andcurrentincorporationofemerging
information.Thegoalsoftheadaptivemanagementplansaretoensurethatthebestavailable
scienceandemergingtechnologiesareusedtoassessimpactsonbats,andthatimpactsare
minimizedtothegreatestextentpossiblewhilemaximizingenergyproduction.
Theseplanswillbeusedtoadjustoperationandmitigationtoincorporatetheresultsofproject
areamonitoringandnewtechnologyandresearchresultswhensufficientevidenceexiststo
supportthesenewapproaches.
Determiningafatalitythresholdtotriggeradaptivemanagementisnotstraightforward,as
insufficientinformationexistsonthestatusandvitalityofthepopulationsofmigratorybat
speciessubjecttomortalityintheAPWRA.Thelowestimateofanticipatedbatfatalityratesis
fromtheVascoWindsprojectintheAPWRA.Applyingthisrateprogrammaticallywouldresult
inanestimateof21,000batskilledoverthe30‐yearlifeoftheprogram.Thehighestimateis
fromtheMontezumaHillsWindResourceArea.Applyingthisrateprogrammaticallywould
resultinanestimateof49,050batskilledoverthe30‐yearlifeoftheprogram.Batsareslowto
reproduce,andturbinesmaybemorelikelytokilladultbatsthanjuveniles,suggestingthata
conservativeapproachiswarranted.Accordingly,aninitialadaptivemanagementthresholdwill
beestablishedusingthelowfatalityestimates,or1.679fatalities/MW/year,toensurethatthe
mostconservativetriggerforimplementationofadaptivemanagementmeasuresisadopted.
Ifpostconstructionfatalitymonitoringresultsinapointestimateforthebatfatalityratethat
exceedsthe1.679fatalities/MW/yearthresholdbyastatisticallysignificantamount,then
ADMM‐7andADMM‐8(describedbelow)forbatswillbeimplemented.
Itisimportanttonotethatneitherthehighnorthelowestimatespeakstotheabilityofbat
populationstowithstandtheassociatedlevelsoftake.Thefatalityratethresholdtriggering
adaptivemanagementmaybemodifiedbytheTACifappropriateandifsuchadaptationis
supportedbythebestavailablescience.
TheTACmaydirectimplementationofadaptivemanagementmeasuresforotherappropriate
reasons,suchasanunexpectedlyandmarkedlyhighfatalityrateobservedforanybatspecies,
orspecial‐statusspeciesbeingkilledinunexpectedlyhighnumbers.
ADMMsforbatsmaybeimplementedusingasteppedapproachuntilnecessaryfatality
reductionsarereached,andmonitoringmethodsmustberevisedasneededtoensureaccurate
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐129 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency measurementoftheeffectivenessoftheADMMs.AdditionalADMMsforbatsshouldbe
developedasnewtechnologiesorsciencesupportsdoingso.
ADMM‐7:SeasonalTurbineCut‐inSpeedIncrease.Cut‐inspeedincreasesofferthemost
promisingandimmediatelyavailableapproachtoreducingbatfatalitiesatfourth‐generation
windturbines.Reductionsinfatalities(53–87%)wereobservedwhenincreasingmodern
turbinecut‐inspeedto5.0–6.5m/s(Arnettetal.2009:3;Goodetal.2012:iii).While
implementingthismeasureimmediatelyuponaproject’scommencementwouldlikelyreduce
batfatalities,thatassumptionisnotyetsupportedbyconclusivedata.Moreover,without
establishingbaselinefatalityatrepoweredprojects,therewouldbenowaytodeterminethe
effectivenessoftheapproachorwhetherthecostsofincreasedcut‐inspeeds(andconsequent
powergenerationreductions)wereprovidingfatalityreductions.
Cut‐inspeedincreaseswillbeimplementedasoutlinedbelow,witheffectivenessassessed
annually.

Theprojectproponentwillincreasecut‐inspeedto5.0m/sfromsunsettosunriseduring
peakmigrationseason(generallyAugust–October).Ifthisisineffective,theproject
proponentwillincreaseturbinecut‐inspeedbyannualincrementsof0.5m/suntiltarget
fatalityreductionsareachieved.

Theprojectproponentmayrefinesite‐specificmigrationstartdatesonthebasisofpre‐and
postconstructionacousticsurveysandongoingreviewofdatesoffatalityoccurrencesfor
migratorybatsintheAPWRA.

Theprojectproponentmayrequestashorterseasonofrequiredcut‐inspeedincreaseswith
substantialevidencethatsimilarlevelsofmortalityreductioncouldbeachieved.Should
resourceagenciesandtheTACfindthereissufficientsupportforashorterperiod(aslowas
8weeks),evidenceinsupportofthisshorterperiodwillbedocumentedforthepublic
recordandtheshorterperiodmaybeimplemented.

Theprojectproponentmayrequestshorternightlyperiodsofcut‐inspeedincreaseswith
substantialevidencefromdefensibleonsite,long‐termpostconstructionacousticsurveys
indicatingpredictablenightlytimeframeswhentargetspeciesappearnottobeactive.
Targetspeciesareheredefinedasmigratorybatsoranyotherspeciesappearingrepeatedly
inthefatalityrecords.

Theprojectproponentmayrequestexceptionstocut‐inspeedincreasesforparticular
weathereventsorwindpatternsifsubstantialevidenceisavailablefromonsiteacousticor
othermonitoringtosupportsuchexceptions(i.e.,allavailableliteratureandonsitesurveys
indicatethatbatactivityceasesduringspecificweathereventsorotherpredictable
conditions).

Intheabsenceofdefensiblesite‐specificdata,mandatorycut‐inspeedincreaseswill
commenceonAugust1andcontinuethroughOctober31,andwillbeineffectfromsunset
tosunrise.
ADMM‐8:EmergingTechnologyasMitigation.Theprojectproponentmayrequest,with
consultationandapprovalfromagencies,replacementoraugmentationofcut‐inspeed
increaseswithdevelopingtechnologyoranothermitigationapproachthathasbeenprovento
achievesimilarbatfatalityreductions.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐130 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Theprojectproponentmayalsorequestthesecondtierofadaptivemanagementtobethe
adoptionofapromisingbutnotfullyproventechnologyormitigationmethod.Theserequests
aresubjecttoreviewandapprovalbytheTACandmustincludeacontrolledresearch
componentdesignedbyaqualifiedprincipalinvestigatorsothattheeffectivenessofthemethod
maybeaccuratelyassessed.
Someexamplesofsuchemergingtechnologiesandresearchareasthatcouldbeincorporatedin
adaptivemanagementplansarelistedbelow.

Theuseofacousticdeterrents(Arnettetal.2013:1).

Applicationofemergingpeer‐reviewedstudiesonbatbiology(suchasstudiesdocumenting
migratorycorridorsorbatbehaviorinrelationtoturbines)thatsupportspecificmitigation
methods.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14e:Compensateforexpensesincurredbyrehabilitatinginjured
bats
Thecostofreasonable,licensedrehabilitationeffortsforanyinjuredbatstakentowildlifecare
facilitiesfromtheprogramareawillbeassumedinfullbyprojectproponents.
ImpactBIO‐14a‐2:Turbine‐relatedfatalitiesofspecial‐statusandotherbats—program
Alternative2:450MW(significantandunavoidable)
Residentandmigratorybatsflyinginandthroughtheprogramareamaybekilledbycollisionwith
windturbinebladesorotherinteractionwiththewindturbinegenerators.
Insufficientdataarecurrentlyavailabletodevelopaccuratefatalityestimatesforindividualbat
species.FivebatspecieshavebeendocumentedinfatalitymonitoringprogramsintheAPWRA
(InsigniaEnvironmental2012:48;Brownetal.2013:23;ICFInternational2012:3‐3),ofwhichtwo
(westernredbatandhoarybat)arespecial‐statusspecies.Extrapolatingfromexistingfatalitydata
andfromtrendsobservedatotherwindenergyfacilitieswherefourth‐generationturbinesarein
operation,itappearslikelythatfatalitieswouldoccurpredominantlyinthelatesummertomid‐fall
migrationperiod;thatfatalitieswouldconsistmostlyofmigratorybats,particularlyMexicanfree‐
tailedbatandhoarybat;thatfatalitieswouldoccursporadicallyatothertimesofyear;andthat
fatalitiesofoneormoreotherspecieswouldoccurinsmallernumbers.
DiabloWinds,BuenaVista,andVascoWindsaretheonlyrepoweredprojectsintheAPWRAfor
whichestimatesofbatfatalityratesareavailable.Whiletheseratesvarywidely(Smallwoodand
Karas2009:1067;InsigniaEnvironmental2012:65;Brownetal.2013:39),basedontheseestimates,
batcollisionriskincreasessubstantiallywhenold‐generationturbinesarereplacedbynewer,larger
turbines(SmallwoodandKaras2009:1068).Turbinesusedinfuturerepoweringprojectsarelikely
tobesimilarinsizetotheVascoWindsturbinesbutmuchlargerthantheDiabloWindsandBuena
Vistaturbinesinbothoverallsizeandratednameplatecapacity.Thereisevidencetosuggestthat
largerturbinessimilartothoseusedintheVascoWindsprojectwillresultinadditionalincreasesin
batfatalityratesforthosebatspeciescurrentlykilledintheAPWRA.
Somehypothesesfortheincreasedcollisionrisktomigratorybatspeciesatfourth‐generation
turbinesaresummarizedbelow.

Batstendnottoflyathighwindspeeds.Thelowerwindspeedsatwhichfourth‐generation
turbinesareabletoproducepowercreatemoreoverlapinthetimethatturbinesareoperating
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐131 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency andbatsareintheair.Inseveralstudies,themajorityoffatalitiesoccurredonnightsoflower
windspeed(lessthan5.5meters/second[m/s])(Arnettetal.2008:73;Goodetal.2012:iv).This
correlationsuggestsapossiblesourcefortheincreasedriskthatfourth‐generationturbines
posetobats.

Migratorytree‐roostingbatsmaybeattractedtothetubulartowerstructureofnewerturbines;
thisattractionmayberelatedtomatingbehaviorduringmigration(Arnettetal.2008:73;Cryan
2008:1).

Echolocationpulsesmaynotbeusedduringopen‐airmigratoryflight,ornotusedasoften,
resultinginbatsbeingunawareofthehazardpresentedbytheturbineblades(Kunzetal.
2007:319).

Foraging,wateracquisition,roostselection,ormatingbehaviorduringmigrationseasonmay
bringbatsthroughtherotor‐sweptareaoftallerturbinesmoreoften(CryanandBarclay
2009:1333).

Tallerturbineshavebeendocumentedtokillmorebats.Theincreasedheightoffourth‐
generationturbinesputstherotor‐sweptareaintobatflightpaths(Barclayetal2007:384).
Table3.4‐15providesacomparisonoftheestimatednumberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurifold‐
generationturbinesareallowedtocontinueoperatingattheircurrentlevelandtheestimated
numberoffatalitiesexpectedtooccurafterrepoweringoftheprogramareaandthetwoproject
areas.Duetothehighdegreeofuncertaintyinbatfatalityestimates,arangeofestimatesbasedon
availabledataispresented.Thelowestestimateisderivedfromthebestestimaterateof1.679
fatalities/MW/yearreportedforthefirstyearofmonitoringattheVascoWindsrepoweringproject
(Brownetal.2013:39).Theupperendofthisrangeiscalculatedusingthebatfatalityrateof3.92
fatalities/MW/yearreportedfortheShilohIprojectintheMontezumaHillsWindResourceArea.
Thebaselineestimateisderivedfromthebatfatalityrateof0.263fatalities/MW/yearreportedfor
theAPWRAfor2005–2007(SmallwoodandKaras2009:1066).AsshowninTable3.4‐15,annual
estimatedbatfatalitiesintheprogramareafromimplementationofAlternative2areanticipatedto
increasefromthecurrentestimateof87to756–1,764fatalities.
Despitethehighlevelofuncertaintyinestimatesofbatfatalityrates,allavailabledatasuggestthat
repoweringwouldresultinasubstantialincreaseinbatfatalities.Thedegreeofincreasemaybe
influencedbythefollowingfactors.

Turbineplacementinareasofhighautumnbatactivityoralongmigrationroutes.

Turbineplacementalongcommutingflywaystokeyresources(e.g.,roosts,water,foraging
habitat).

Behavioroftheturbinemodelbeforeitcutsin(i.e.,whetherbladesareallowedtospinatlower
windspeeds)(Goodetal.2012:v).
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐14athroughBIO‐14ewouldreducethisimpact,butnottoaless‐than‐
significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14b:Implementpostconstructionbatfatalitymonitoring
programforallrepoweringprojects
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐132 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐14c:Prepareandpublishannualmonitoringreportsonthe
findingsofbatuseoftheprojectareaandfatalitymonitoringresults
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14e:Compensateforexpensesincurredbyrehabilitatinginjured
bats
ImpactBIO‐14b:Turbine‐relatedfatalitiesofspecial‐statusandotherbats—GoldenHills
Project(significantandunavoidable)
ResidentandmigratorybatsflyinginandthroughtheGoldenHillsprojectareamaybekilledby
collisionwithwindturbinebladesorotherinteractionwiththewindturbinegenerators.
Repoweringintheprojectareawouldintroduceincreasedfatalityrisk,particularlytomigratory
bats.
Extrapolatingfromexistingfatalitydataandfromtrendsobservedatotherwindenergyfacilities
wherefourth‐generationturbinesareinoperation,itappearslikelythatfatalitieswouldoccur
predominantlyinthelatesummertomid‐fallmigrationperiod;thatfatalitieswouldconsistmostly
ofmigratorybats,particularlyMexicanfree‐tailedbatandhoarybat;thatfatalitieswouldoccur
sporadicallyatothertimesofyear;andthatfatalitiesofoneormoreotherspecieswilloccurin
smallernumbers.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,annualestimatedbatfatalitiesintheGoldenHills
projectareaareanticipatedtoincreasefromthecurrentestimateof23to148–347fatalities.
MitigationMeasuresBIO‐14athroughBIO‐14ewouldreducethisimpact,butnottoaless‐than‐
significantlevel;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14b:Implementpostconstructionbatfatalitymonitoring
programforallrepoweringprojects
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14c:Prepareandpublishannualmonitoringreportsonthe
findingsofbatuseoftheprojectareaandfatalitymonitoringresults
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14e:Compensateforexpensesincurredbyrehabilitatinginjured
bats
ImpactBIO‐14c:Turbine‐relatedfatalitiesofspecial‐statusandotherbats—PattersonPass
Project(significantandunavoidable)
ResidentandmigratorybatsflyinginandthroughthePattersonPassprojectareamaybekilledby
collisionwithwindturbinebladesorotherinteractionwiththewindturbinegenerators.
Repoweringintheprojectareawouldintroduceincreasedfatalityrisk,particularlytomigratory
bats.
Extrapolatingfromexistingfatalitydataandfromtrendsobservedatotherwindenergyfacilities
wherefourth‐generationturbinesareinoperation,itappearslikelythatfatalitieswouldoccur
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐133 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency predominantlyinthelatesummertomid‐fallmigrationperiod;thatfatalitieswouldconsistmostly
ofmigratorybats,particularlyMexicanfree‐tailedbatandhoarybat;thatfatalitieswouldoccur
sporadicallyatothertimesofyear;andthatfatalitiesofoneormoreotherspecieswilloccurin
smallernumbers.AsshowninTable3.4‐14,annualestimatedbatfatalitiesinthePattersonPass
projectareaareanticipatedtoincreasefromthecurrentestimateof5to33–78fatalities.Mitigation
MeasuresBIO‐14athroughBIO‐14ewouldreducethisimpact,butnottoaless‐than‐significant
level;accordingly,thisimpactisconsideredsignificantandunavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14b:Implementpostconstructionbatfatalitymonitoring
programforallrepoweringprojects
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14c:Prepareandpublishannualmonitoringreportsonthe
findingsofbatuseoftheprojectareaandfatalitymonitoringresults
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14e:Compensateforexpensesincurredbyrehabilitatinginjured
bats
ImpactBIO‐15a‐1:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
alkalimeadow—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingofexistingroads
andconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionandrepoweringactivities.Culverts
wouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Direct
effectswouldconsistoffillofalkalimeadowatlocationswhereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbe
widened.Indirecteffectscouldinvolvealteredhydrologyorrunoffofsedimentandother
substancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchasthoseduetorunoff,wouldbe
avoidedandminimizedthroughimplementationoferosioncontrolBMPsandpostconstruction
reclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintainexistinghydrology.
However,lossofalkalimeadowhabitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffect
onasensitivenaturalcommunity.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationof
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
Ifalkalimeadowhabitatisfilledordisturbedaspartofarepoweringproject,theproject
proponentwillcompensateforthelossofthishabitattoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctions
andvalues.Compensationratioswillbebasedonsite‐specificinformationanddetermined
throughcoordinationwithstateandfederalagencies(CDFW,USFWS,USACE).The
compensationwillbeataminimum1:1ratio(1acrerestoredorcreatedforevery1acrefilled)
andmaybeacombinationofonsiterestoration/creation,offsiterestoration,andmitigation
credits.Arestorationandmonitoringplanwillbedevelopedandimplemented.Theplanwill
describehowalkalimeadowhabitatwillbecreatedandmonitored.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐134 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐15a‐2:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
alkalimeadow—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingofexistingroads
andconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionandrepoweringactivities.Direct
effectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverallareaof
disturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Culvertswouldbe
upgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Directeffectswould
consistoffillofalkalimeadowatlocationswhereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.
Indirecteffectscouldinvolvealteredhydrologyorrunoffofsedimentandothersubstancesduring
roadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchasthoseduetorunoff,wouldbeavoidedand
minimizedthroughimplementationoferosioncontrolBMPsandpostconstructionreclamation.
Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintainexistinghydrology.However,lossofalkali
meadowhabitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffectonasensitivenatural
community.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasure
BIO‐15wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
ImpactBIO‐15b:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
alkalimeadow—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Alkalimeadowcomprisesapproximately3%(145.69acres)oftheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Road
infrastructureupgradesthatcouldaffectthishabitatwouldincludegrading,widening,and
regravellingofexistingroadsandconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionand
repoweringactivities.Culvertswouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbe
installedfornewroads.Directeffectswouldconsistoffillofalkalimeadowatlocationswhereroads
crossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.Indirecteffectscouldinvolvealteredhydrologyorrunoffof
sedimentandothersubstancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchasthosedue
torunoff,wouldbeavoidedandminimizedthroughimplementationoferosioncontrolBMPsand
postconstructionreclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintainexisting
hydrology.However,lossofalkalimeadowhabitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantial
adverseeffectonasensitivenaturalcommunity.Becausespecificdesignshavenotbeendeveloped
fortheGoldenHillsproject,itisnotpossibletoquantifythiseffect.However,ifalkalimeadowis
affectedbyroadinfrastructureupgrades,itwouldbeasignificantimpact.Implementationof
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
ImpactBIO‐15c:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
alkalimeadow—PattersonPass(noimpact)
BecausenoalkalimeadowoccursinthePattersonPassprojectarea,therewouldbenoimpact.No
mitigationisrequired.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐135 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐16a‐1:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
riparianhabitat—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingofexistingroads
andconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionandrepoweringactivities.Culverts
wouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Lossof
riparianhabitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffectonasensitivenatural
community.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasure
BIO‐16wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
Ifriparianhabitatisfilledorremovedaspartofaproject,theprojectproponentwill
compensateforthelossofriparianhabitattoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsandvalues.
Compensationratioswillbebasedonsite‐specificinformationanddeterminedthrough
coordinationwithstateandfederalagencies(CDFW,USFWS,USACE).Thecompensationwillbe
ataminimum1:1ratio(1acrerestoredorcreatedforevery1acrefilled)andmaybea
combinationofonsiterestoration/creation,offsiterestoration,andmitigationcredits.A
restorationandmonitoringplanwillbedevelopedandimplemented.Theplanwilldescribehow
riparianhabitatwillbecreatedandmonitored.
ImpactBIO‐16a‐2:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
riparianhabitat—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingofexistingroads
andconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionandrepoweringactivities.Direct
effectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverallareaof
disturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Culvertswouldbe
upgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Lossofriparian
habitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffectonasensitivenatural
community.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigationMeasure
BIO‐16wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
ImpactBIO‐16b:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
riparianhabitat—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingofexistingroads
andconstructionofnewroadstoaccommodatedecommissionandrepoweringactivities.Culverts
wouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnewculvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Lossof
riparianhabitatasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffectonasensitivenatural
community.BecausespecificdesignshavenotbeendevelopedfortheGoldenHillsproject,itisnot
possibletoquantifythiseffect.However,ifriparianhabitatisaffectedbyroadinfrastructure
upgrades,itwouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐16would
reducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐136 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐16c:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
riparianhabitat—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Undercurrentdesign,noriparianhabitatwouldbeaffectedbyroadinfrastructureupgrades.
However,iffinaldesignwouldresultinriparianhabitatbeingaffectedbyroadinfrastructure
upgrades,itwouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐16would
reducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
ImpactBIO‐17a‐1:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultindirectadverseeffects
oncommonhabitats—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingactivitieswouldresultinthepermanentlossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingnewpermanentfacilitiesandthetemporarylossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingtemporaryfacilitiesandlandscapereclamation.Theseactivitieswouldcreateminor
changesintotalacreageofcommonhabitatsintheprojectarea,primarilyintheannualgrassland
plantcommunity.
Alllandsdisturbedbyinfrastructureinstallationorremovalwouldbereturnedtopreproject
conditions.Ateachreclamationsite,thetopographywouldbegradedtomatchthecontoursofthe
naturalsurroundinglandscape,stabilized,reseededwithanappropriateseedmixture,andallowed
tobecomerevegetatedwithoutassistance.Reclamationactivitieswouldbeguidedbyareclamation
plandevelopedincoordinationwiththeCountyandotherapplicableagencies.
Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
ImpactBIO‐17a‐2:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultindirectadverseeffects
oncommonhabitats—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingactivitieswouldresultinthepermanentlossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingnewpermanentfacilitiesandthetemporarylossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingtemporaryfacilitiesandlandscapereclamation.Theseactivitieswouldcreateminor
changesintotalacreageofcommonhabitatsintheprojectarea,primarilyintheannualgrassland
plantcommunity.
DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverall
areaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Alllandsdisturbed
byinfrastructureinstallationorremovalwouldbereturnedtopreprojectconditions.Ateach
reclamationsite,thetopographywouldbegradedtomatchthecontoursofthenaturalsurrounding
landscape,stabilized,reseededwithanappropriateseedmixture,andallowedtobecome
revegetatedwithoutassistance.Reclamationactivitieswouldbeguidedbyareclamationplan
developedincoordinationwiththeCountyandotherapplicableagencies.
Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐137 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐17b:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultindirectadverseeffects
oncommonhabitats—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingactivitieswouldresultinthepermanentlossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingnewpermanentfacilitiesandthetemporarylossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingtemporaryfacilitiesandlandscapereclamation.Theseactivitieswouldcreateminor
changesintotalacreageofcommonhabitatsintheprojectarea,primarilyintheannualgrassland
plantcommunity.
Alllandsdisturbedbyinfrastructureinstallationorremovalwouldbereturnedtopreproject
conditions.Ateachreclamationsite,thetopographywouldbegradedtomatchthecontoursofthe
naturalsurroundinglandscape,stabilized,reseededwithanappropriateseedmixture,andallowed
tobecomerevegetatedwithoutassistance.Reclamationactivitieswouldbeguidedbyareclamation
plandevelopedincoordinationwiththeCountyandotherapplicableagencies.
Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
ImpactBIO‐17c:Potentialforground‐disturbingactivitiestoresultindirectadverseeffects
oncommonhabitats—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingactivitieswouldresultinthepermanentlossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingnewpermanentfacilitiesandthetemporarylossofcommonhabitatsasaresultof
constructingtemporaryfacilitiesandlandscapereclamation.Theseactivitieswouldcreateminor
changesintotalacreageofcommonhabitatsintheprojectarea,primarilyintheannualgrassland
plantcommunity.
Alllandsdisturbedbyinfrastructureinstallationorremovalwouldbereturnedtopreproject
conditions.Ateachreclamationsite,thetopographywouldbegradedtomatchthecontoursofthe
naturalsurroundinglandscape,stabilized,reseededwithanappropriateseedmixture,andallowed
tobecomerevegetatedwithoutassistance.Reclamationactivitieswouldbeguidedbyareclamation
plandevelopedincoordinationwiththeCountyandotherapplicableagencies.
Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
ImpactBIO‐18a‐1:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
wetlands—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingoftheexisting
roadsandconstructionofnewroads.Culvertswouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnew
culvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Directeffectswouldincludefillofwetlandsatlocations
whereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.Indirecteffectscouldincludealteredhydrology
orrunoffofsedimentandothersubstancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchas
thoseduetorunoff,wouldbeavoidedandminimizedthroughtheimplementationoferosioncontrol
BMPsandpostconstructionreclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintain
existinghydrology.However,lossofwetlandsasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverse
effectonasensitivenaturalcommunity.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,
implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐
significantlevel.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐138 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
Ifwetlandsarefilledordisturbedaspartofaproject,theprojectproponentwillcompensatefor
thelosstoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsandvalues.Compensationratioswillbebased
onsite‐specificinformationanddeterminedthroughcoordinationwithstateandfederal
agencies(CDFW,USFWS,USACE).Thecompensationwillbeataminimum1:1ratio(1acre
restoredorcreatedforevery1acrefilled)andmaybeacombinationofonsite
restoration/creation,offsiterestoration,andmitigationcredits.Arestorationandmonitoring
planwillbedevelopedandimplemented.Theplanwilldescribehowwetlandswillbecreated
andmonitored.
ImpactBIO‐18a‐2:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
wetlands—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingoftheexisting
roadsandconstructionofnewroads.Culvertswouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnew
culvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Directeffectswouldincludefillofwetlandsatlocations
whereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.Indirecteffectscouldincludealteredhydrology
orrunoffofsedimentandothersubstancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchas
thoseduetorunoff,wouldbeavoidedandminimizedthroughtheimplementationoferosioncontrol
BMPsandpostconstructionreclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintain
existinghydrology.DirecteffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,
excepttheoverallareaofdisturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbines
andassociatedinfrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.
However,lossofwetlandsasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverseeffectonasensitive
naturalcommunity.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,implementationofMitigation
MeasureBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
ImpactBIO‐18b:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
wetlands—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingoftheexisting
roadsandconstructionofnewroads.Culvertswouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnew
culvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Directeffectswouldincludefillofwetlandsatlocations
whereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.Indirecteffectscouldincludealteredhydrology
orrunoffofsedimentandothersubstancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchas
thoseduetorunoff,wouldbeavoidedandminimizedthroughtheimplementationoferosioncontrol
BMPsandpostconstructionreclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintain
existinghydrology.However,lossofwetlandsasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverse
effectonasensitivenaturalcommunity.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,
implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐
significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐139 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency ImpactBIO‐18c:Potentialforroadinfrastructureupgradestoresultinadverseeffectson
wetlands—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Roadinfrastructureupgradeswouldincludegrading,widening,andregravellingoftheexisting
roadsandconstructionofnewroads.Culvertswouldbeupgradedforexistingroads,andnew
culvertswouldbeinstalledfornewroads.Directeffectswouldincludefillofwetlandsatlocations
whereroadscrossingthehabitatwouldbewidened.Indirecteffectscouldincludealteredhydrology
orrunoffofsedimentandothersubstancesduringroadconstructionactivities.Someeffects,suchas
thoseduetorunoff,wouldbeavoidedandminimizedthroughtheimplementationoferosioncontrol
BMPsandpostconstructionreclamation.Installationofnewandupgradedculvertswouldmaintain
existinghydrology.However,lossofwetlandsasaresultofdirectfillwouldbeasubstantialadverse
effectonasensitivenaturalcommunity.Thiswouldbeasignificantimpact;however,
implementationofMitigationMeasureBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoalevelless‐than‐
significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
ImpactBIO‐19a‐1:Potentialimpactonthemovementofanynativeresidentormigratory
wildlifespeciesorestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,andtheuseof
nativewildlifenurserysites—programAlternative1:417MW(significantandunavoidable)
Manycommonwildlifespecies(e.g.,groundsquirrels,voles,deer,coyote,raccoon,skunk)and
special‐statuswildlifespecies(e.g.,Californiared‐leggedfrog,Alamedawhipsnake,American
badger)arelikelytooccurinandmovethroughtheprogramarea.Constructionactivitiesassociated
withtheprogramandfencingofworkareasmaytemporarilyimpedewildlifemovementthrough
theworkareaorcauseanimalstotravellongerdistancestoavoidtheworkarea.Thiscouldresultin
higherenergyexpenditureandincreasedsusceptibilitytopredationforsomespeciesandisa
potentiallysignificantimpact.Becausetheconstructionperiodforindividualprojectsinthe
repoweringprogramwouldbe9monthsforatypical80MWproject,itwouldlikelyencompassthe
movement/migrationperiodforsomespecies(e.g.,Californiatigersalamandermovementto/from
breedingponds).Inparticular,smalleranimals,whoseenergyexpenditurestotravelaroundor
avoidtheareawouldbegreaterthanforlargeranimals,couldbemoreseverelyaffected.Upon
completionoftheprogram,thenewwindturbineswouldbespacedapartandwouldnotbea
barriertoon‐the‐groundwildlifemovement.Additionally,therewouldbefewerturbinesonthe
ground,andanetincreaseintheamountofnaturalareawouldresultfromtherestorationof
decommissionedturbinepadsandfoundations.Thisremovalofturbinesandincreaseofnatural
areawouldpartiallycompensateforthisimpact.Asdiscussedaboveforspecial‐statusspecies,the
programhasthepotentialtoaffectnativewildlifenurserysites(i.e.,breedingareas).Because
commonspeciesmayalsousethesebreedingareas,theymayalsobeaffectedbytheprogram.This
wouldconstituteasignificanteffect.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,
BIO‐4a,BIO‐5a,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,andBIO‐10awouldavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwildlifenurseryareasforspecial‐statusandcommonwildlifespecies.
Asdiscussedabove,theoperationofwindturbinesafterrepoweringwouldadverselyaffectraptors,
otherbirds,andbatsmigratingthroughandwinteringintheprogramareabecausetheycouldbe
injuredorkillediftheyflythroughtherotorplaneofoperatingwindturbines.Asdiscussedabove,
thiswouldbeasignificantandunavoidableimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
11b,BIO‐11c,BIO‐11d,BIO‐11e,BIO‐11i,BIO‐12a,BIO‐12b,BIO‐14a,andBIO‐14dwouldreducethis
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐140 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency impact,butnottoaless‐than‐significantlevel.Accordingly,thisimpactwouldbesignificantand
unavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐141 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
ImpactBIO‐19a‐2:Potentialimpactonthemovementofanynativeresidentormigratory
wildlifespeciesorestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,andtheuseof
nativewildlifenurserysites—programAlternative2:450MW(significantandunavoidable)
EffectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverallareaof
disturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Manycommon
wildlifespecies(e.g.,groundsquirrels,voles,deer,coyote,raccoon,skunk)andspecial‐status
wildlifespecies(e.g.,Californiared‐leggedfrog,Alamedawhipsnake,Americanbadger)arelikelyto
occurinandmovethroughtheprogramarea.Constructionactivitiesassociatedwiththeprogram
andfencingofworkareasmaytemporarilyimpedewildlifemovementthroughtheworkareaor
causeanimalstotravellongerdistancestoavoidtheworkarea.Thiscouldresultinhigherenergy
expenditureandincreasedsusceptibilitytopredationforsomespeciesandisapotentially
significantimpact.Becausetheconstructionperiodforindividualprojectsintherepowering
programwouldbe9monthsforatypical80MWproject,itwouldlikelyencompassthe
movement/migrationperiodforsomespecies(e.g.,Californiatigersalamandermovementto/from
breedingponds).Inparticular,smalleranimals,whoseenergyexpenditurestotravelaroundor
avoidtheareawouldbegreaterthanforlargeranimals,couldbemoreseverelyaffected.Upon
completionoftheprogram,thenewwindturbineswouldbespacedapartandwouldnotbea
barriertoon‐the‐groundwildlifemovement.Additionally,therewouldbefewerturbinesonthe
ground,andanetincreaseintheamountofnaturalareawouldresultfromtherestorationof
decommissionedturbinepadsandfoundations.Thisremovalofturbinesandincreaseofnatural
areawouldpartiallycompensateforthisimpact.Asdiscussedaboveforspecial‐statusspecies,the
programhasthepotentialtoaffectnativewildlifenurserysites(i.e.,breedingareas).Because
commonspeciesmayalsousethesebreedingareas,theymayalsobeaffectedbytheprogram.This
wouldconstituteasignificanteffect.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,
BIO‐4a,BIO‐5a,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,andBIO‐10awouldavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwildlifenurseryareasforspecial‐statusandcommonwildlifespecies.
Asdiscussedabove,theoperationofwindturbinesafterrepoweringwouldadverselyaffectraptors,
otherbirds,andbatsmigratingthroughandwinteringintheprogramareabecausetheycouldbe
injuredorkillediftheyflythroughtherotorplaneofoperatingwindturbines.Asdiscussedabove,
thiswouldbeasignificantandunavoidableimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐
11b,BIO‐11c,BIO‐11d,BIO‐11e,BIO‐11j,BIO‐12a,BIO‐12b,BIO‐14a,andBIO‐14dwouldreducethis
impact,butnottoaless‐than‐significantlevel.Accordingly,thisimpactwouldbesignificantand
unavoidable.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐142 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
ImpactBIO‐19b:Potentialimpactonthemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfish
orwildlifespeciesorwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,or
impedetheuseofnativewildlifenurserysites—GoldenHillsProject(significantand
unavoidable)
Manycommonwildlifespecies(e.g.,groundsquirrels,voles,deer,coyote,raccoon,skunk)and
special‐statuswildlifespecies(e.g.,Californiared‐leggedfrog,Alamedawhipsnake,American
badger)arelikelytooccurinandmovethroughtheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Constructionactivities
associatedwiththeGoldenHillsProjectandfencingofworkareasmaytemporarilyimpedewildlife
movementthroughtheworkareaorcauseanimalstotravellongerdistancestoavoidtheworkarea.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐143 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Thiscouldresultinhigherenergyexpenditureandincreasedsusceptibilitytopredationforsome
speciesandisapotentiallysignificantimpact.Becausetheconstructionperiodisanticipatedtolast
9months,itwouldlikelyencompassthemovement/migrationperiodforsomespecies(e.g.,
Californiatigersalamandermovementto/frombreedingponds).Inparticular,smalleranimals,
whoseenergyexpenditurestotravelaroundoravoidtheareawouldbegreaterthanforlarger
animals,couldbemoreseverelyaffected.Uponcompletionofprojectconstruction,thenewwind
turbineswouldbespacedapartandwouldnotbeabarriertoon‐the‐groundwildlifemovement.
Additionally,therewouldbefewerturbinesontheground,andanetincreaseintheamountof
naturalareawouldresultfromtherestorationofdecommissionedturbinepadsandfoundations.
Thisremovalofturbinesandincreaseofnaturalareawouldpartiallycompensateforthisimpact.As
discussedaboveforspecial‐statusspecies,theGoldenHillsProjecthasthepotentialtoaffectnative
wildlifenurserysites(i.e.,breedingareas).Becausecommonspeciesmayalsousethesebreeding
areas,theymayalsobeaffectedbytheproject.Thiswouldconstituteasignificanteffect.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,BIO‐4a,BIO‐5a,BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐
8a,BIO‐8b,andBIO‐10awouldavoidandminimizepotentialimpactsonwildlifenurseryareasfor
special‐statusandcommonwildlifespecies.
Asdiscussedabove,theoperationofwindturbinesafterrepoweringwouldadverselyaffectraptors,
otherbirds,andbatsmigratingthroughandwinteringintheprojectareabecausetheycouldbe
injuredorkillediftheyflythroughtherotorplaneofoperatingwindturbines.Thiswouldbea
significantandunavoidableimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐11b,BIO‐11c,BIO‐
11d,BIO‐11e,BIO‐11i,BIO‐12a,BIO‐12b,BIO‐14a,andBIO‐14dwouldreducethisimpact,butnotto
aless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐144 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
ImpactBIO‐19c:Potentialimpactonthemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfish
orwildlifespeciesorwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,or
impedetheuseofnativewildlifenurserysites—PattersonPassProject(significantand
unavoidable)
Manycommonwildlifespecies(e.g.,groundsquirrels,voles,deer,coyote,raccoon,skunk)and
special‐statuswildlifespecies(e.g.,Californiared‐leggedfrog,Alamedawhipsnake,American
badger)arelikelytooccurinandmovethroughthePattersonPassprojectarea.Construction
activitiesassociatedwiththePattersonPassProjectandfencingofworkareasmaytemporarily
impedewildlifemovementthroughtheworkareaorcauseanimalstotravellongerdistancesto
avoidtheworkarea.Thiscouldresultinhigherenergyexpenditureandincreasedsusceptibilityto
predationforsomespeciesandisapotentiallysignificantimpact.Becausetheconstructionperiodis
anticipatedtolast6–9months,itwouldlikelyencompassthemovement/migrationperiodforsome
species(e.g.,Californiatigersalamandermovementto/frombreedingponds).Inparticular,smaller
animals,whoseenergyexpenditurestotravelaroundoravoidtheareawouldbegreaterthanfor
largeranimals,couldbemoreseverelyaffected.Uponcompletionofprojectconstruction,thenew
windturbineswouldbespacedapartandwouldnotbeabarriertoon‐the‐groundwildlife
movement.Additionally,therewouldbefewerturbinesontheground,andanetincreaseinthe
amountofnaturalareawouldresultfromtherestorationofdecommissionedturbinepadsand
foundations.Thisremovalofturbinesandincreaseofnaturalareawouldpartiallycompensatefor
thisimpact.Asdiscussedaboveforspecial‐statusspecies,thePattersonPassProjecthasthe
potentialtoaffectnativewildlifenurserysites(i.e.,breedingareas).Becausecommonspeciesmay
alsousethesebreedingareas,theymayalsobeaffectedbytheproject.Thiswouldconstitutea
significanteffect.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1b,BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,BIO‐4a,BIO‐5a,
BIO‐5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,andBIO‐10awouldavoidandminimizepotentialimpactsonwildlife
nurseryareasforspecial‐statusandcommonwildlifespecies.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐145 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Asdiscussedabove,theoperationofwindturbinesafterrepoweringwouldadverselyaffectraptors,
otherbirds,andbatsmigratingthroughandwinteringintheprojectareabecausetheycouldbe
injuredorkillediftheyflythroughtherotorplaneofoperatingwindturbines.Thiswouldbea
significantandunavoidableimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐11b,BIO‐11c,BIO‐
11d,BIO‐11e,BIO‐11i,BIO‐12a,BIO‐12b,BIO‐14a,andBIO‐14dwouldreducethisimpact,butnotto
aless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Conductpreconstructionsurveysforhabitatforspecial‐
statuswildlifespecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon–special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11b:Siteturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityofbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11c:Useturbinedesignsthatreduceavianimpacts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11d:Incorporateavian‐safepracticesintodesignofturbine‐
relatedinfrastructure
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11e:Retrofitexistinginfrastructuretominimizerisktoraptors
MitigationMeasureBIO‐11i:Implementanavianadaptivemanagementprogram
MitigationMeasureBIO‐12a:Conductbatroostsurveys
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐146 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐12b:Avoidremovingordisturbingbatroosts
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14a:Siteandselectturbinestominimizepotentialmortalityof
bats
MitigationMeasureBIO‐14d:Developandimplementabatadaptivemanagementplan
ImpactBIO‐20a‐1:Conflictwithlocalplansorpolicies—programAlternative1:417MW(less
thansignificantwithmitigation)
TheECAPencouragesthepreservationofareasknowntosupportspecial‐statusspecies,nonetloss
ofriparianandseasonalwetlands,andprotectionofexistingriparianwoodlandhabitat.
Additionally,theECAPhasseveralpoliciesrelatedtowindfarms,includingestablishingamitigation
programtominimizetheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulations.Lossofspecial‐
statusspeciesandtheirhabitat,lossofalkalimeadow,lossofriparianhabitat,andlossofexisting
wetlandsasaresultofimplementingtheprogramwouldbeinconflictwiththesepolicies.This
impactissignificant;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐1e,BIO‐
3a,BIO‐4a,BIO‐4b,BIO5athrough5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐7b,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,BIO‐9,BIO10a,BIO‐10b,and
BIO‐15,BIO‐16,andBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbecausethese
measuresrequiretheprojectapplicanttominimizeimpactsonhabitatforspecial‐statusspeciesand
compensateforthepermanentlossofsuitablehabitat,aswellastoensurethatanyimpactson
riparianandwetlandsarecompensatedfortoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsandvalues.The
mitigationmeasuresfortheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulationsfromthe
repoweringprogramareconsistentwiththeestablishmentofamitigationprogramrecommended
bytheECAP.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐147 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofforaginghabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
ImpactBIO‐20a‐2:Conflictwithlocalplansorpolicies—programAlternative2:450MW(less
thansignificantwithmitigation)
TheECAPencouragesthepreservationofareasknowntosupportspecial‐statusspecies,nonetloss
ofriparianandseasonalwetlands,andprotectionofexistingriparianwoodlandhabitat.
Additionally,theECAPhasseveralpoliciesrelatedtowindfarms,includingestablishingamitigation
programtominimizetheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulations.Lossofspecial‐
statusspeciesandtheirhabitat,lossofalkalimeadow,lossofriparianhabitat,andlossofexisting
wetlandsasaresultofimplementingtheprogramwouldbeinconflictwiththesepolicies.The
effectsunderAlternative2wouldbesimilartothoseunderAlternative1,excepttheoverallareaof
disturbancewouldbelargerbecausetheincreasednumberofturbinesandassociated
infrastructurewouldentailanestimated8%increaseintotaldisturbancearea.Thisimpactis
significant;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,BIO‐
4a,BIO‐4b,BIO5athrough5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐7b,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,BIO‐9,BIO10a,BIO‐10b,andBIO‐15,
BIO‐16,andBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbecausethesemeasures
requiretheprojectapplicanttominimizeimpactsonhabitatforspecial‐statusspeciesand
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐148 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency compensateforthepermanentlossofsuitablehabitat,aswellastoensurethatanyimpactson
riparianandwetlandsarecompensatedfortoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsandvalues.The
mitigationmeasuresfortheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulationsfromthe
repoweringprogramareconsistentwiththeestablishmentofamitigationprogramrecommended
bytheECAP.
ImpactBIO‐20b:Conflictwithlocalplansorpolicies—GoldenHillsProject(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
TheECAPencouragesthepreservationofareasknowntosupportspecial‐statusspecies,nonetloss
ofriparianandseasonalwetlands,andprotectionofexistingriparianwoodlandhabitat.
Additionally,theECAPhasseveralpoliciesrelatedtowindfarms,includingestablishingamitigation
programtominimizetheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulations.Lossofspecial‐
statusspeciesandtheirhabitat(ImpactsBIO‐1bthroughBIO‐10b),lossofalkalimeadow(Impact
BIO‐15b)lossofriparianhabitat(ImpactBIO‐16b),andlossofexistingwetlands(ImpactBIO‐18b)
asaresultofimplementingtheGoldenHillsProjectwouldbeinconflictwiththesepolicies.This
impactissignificant;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athroughBIO‐1e,BIO‐
3a,BIO‐4a,BIO‐4b,BIO5athrough5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐7b,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,BIO‐9,BIO10a,BIO‐10b,and
BIO‐15,BIO‐16,andBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbecausethese
measuresrequiretheprojectapplicanttominimizeimpactsonhabitatforspecial‐statusspeciesand
compensateforthepermanentlossofsuitablehabitat,aswellasensurethatanyimpactson
riparianandwetlandsarecompensatedfortoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsandvalues.The
mitigationmeasuresfortheimpactsofwindturbineoperationsonbirdpopulationsfromthe
repoweringprogramareconsistentwiththeestablishmentofamitigationprogramrecommended
bytheECAP.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐149 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofforaginghabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
ImpactBIO‐20c:Conflictwithlocalplansorpolicies—PattersonPassProject(lessthan
significantwithmitigation)
TheECAPencouragesthepreservationofareasknowntosupportspecial‐statusspecies,nonetloss
ofriparianandseasonalwetlands,andprotectionofexistingriparianwoodlandhabitat.Lossof
special‐statusspeciesandtheirhabitat(ImpactsBIO‐1cthroughBIO‐6c),lossofalkalimeadow
(ImpactBIO‐15c)lossofriparianhabitat(ImpactBIO‐16c),andlossofexistingwetlands(Impact
BIO‐18c)asaresultofimplementingthePattersonPassProjectwouldbeinconflictwiththese
policies.Thisimpactissignificant;however,implementationofMitigationMeasuresBIO‐1athrough
BIO‐1e,BIO‐3a,BIO‐4a,BIO‐4b,BIO5athrough5c,BIO‐7a,BIO‐7b,BIO‐8a,BIO‐8b,BIO‐9,BIO10a,
BIO‐10b,andBIO‐15,BIO‐16,andBIO‐18wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel
becausethesemeasuresrequiretheprojectapplicanttominimizeimpactsonhabitatforspecial‐
statusspeciesandcompensateforthepermanentlossofsuitablehabitat,aswellasensurethatany
impactsonriparianandwetlandsarecompensatedfortoensurenonetlossofhabitatfunctionsand
values.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐150 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐1a:Conductsurveystodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
special‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1b:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidand
minimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1c:Avoidandminimizeimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
byestablishingactivityexclusionzones
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1d:Compensateforimpactsonspecial‐statusplantspecies
MitigationMeasureBIO‐1e:Retainabiologicalmonitorduringground‐disturbing
activitiesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3a:Implementmeasurestoavoid,minimize,andmitigate
impactsonvernalpoolbranchiopodsandcurved‐footedhygrotusdivingbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4a:Implementmeasurestoavoidorprotecthabitatforvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4b:Compensatefordirectandindirecteffectsonvalley
elderberrylonghornbeetle
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusamphibians
MitigationMeasureBIO‐5c:Restoredisturbedannualgrasslands
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7a:Implementbestmanagementpracticestoavoidandminimize
effectsonspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐7b:Compensateforlossofhabitatforspecial‐statusreptiles
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonspecial‐statusandnon‐special‐statusnestingbirds
MitigationMeasureBIO‐8b:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonwesternburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐9:Compensateforthepermanentlossofforaginghabitatfor
westernburrowingowl
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10a:Implementmeasurestoavoidandminimizepotential
impactsonSanJoaquinkitfoxandAmericanbadger
MitigationMeasureBIO‐10b:CompensateforlossofsuitablehabitatforSanJoaquinkit
foxandAmericanbadger
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐151 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency MitigationMeasureBIO‐15:Compensateforthelossofalkalimeadowhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐16:Compensateforthelossofriparianhabitat
MitigationMeasureBIO‐18:Compensateforthelossofwetlands
ImpactBIO‐21a‐1:ConflictwithprovisionsofanadoptedHCP/NCCPorotherapprovedlocal,
regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan—programAlternative1:417MW(noimpact)
TherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsapplicabletotheprogramarea.TheEACCS,whilenotaformal
HCP,providesguidancefortheprojectplanningandpermittingprocesstoensurethatimpactsare
offsetinabiologicallyeffectivemanner.Asnotedabove,themitigationmeasuressetforthinthis
PEIRarebasedonmeasuresfromtheEACCS,withsomemodificationsandadditions.Becausethere
arenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsfortheprogramareaandtheprogramwouldnotconflictwiththe
EACCS,therewouldbenoimpact.
ImpactBIO‐21a‐2:ConflictwithprovisionsofanadoptedHCP/NCCPorotherapprovedlocal,
regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan—programAlternative2:450MW(noimpact)
TherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsapplicabletotheprogramarea.TheEACCS,whilenotaformal
HCP,providesguidancefortheprojectplanningandpermittingprocesstoensurethatimpactsare
offsetinabiologicallyeffectivemanner.Asnotedabove,themitigationmeasuressetforthinthis
PEIRarebasedonmeasuresfromtheEACCS,withsomemodificationsandadditions.Becausethere
arenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsfortheprogramareaandtheprogramwouldnotconflictwiththe
EACCS,therewouldbenoimpact.
ImpactBIO‐21b:ConflictwithprovisionsofanadoptedHCP/NCCPorotherapprovedlocal,
regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan—GoldenHillsProject(noimpact)
TherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsapplicabletotheGoldenHillsprojectarea.TheEACCS,whilenota
formalHCP,providesguidancefortheprojectplanningandpermittingprocesstoensurethat
impactsareoffsetinabiologicallyeffectivemanner.Asnotedabove,themitigationmeasuresset
forthinthisPEIRarebasedonmeasuresfromtheEACCS,withsomemodificationsandadditions.
BecausetherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsfortheprojectareaandtheGoldenHillsProjectwould
notconflictwiththeEACCS,therewouldbenoimpact.
ImpactBIO‐21c:ConflictwithprovisionsofanadoptedHCP/NCCPorotherapprovedlocal,
regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan—PattersonPassProject(noimpact)
TherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsapplicabletothePattersonPassprojectarea.TheEACCS,while
notaformalHCP,providesguidancefortheprojectplanningandpermittingprocesstoensurethat
impactsareoffsetinabiologicallyeffectivemanner.Asnotedabove,themitigationmeasuresset
forthinthisPEIRarebasedonmeasuresfromtheEACCS,withsomemodificationsandadditions.
BecausetherearenoadoptedHCP/NCCPsfortheprojectareaandthePattersonPassProjectwould
notconflictwiththeEACCS,therewouldbenoimpact.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐152 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency 3.4.3
References Cited Printed References AlamedaCounty.Unpublisheddata.AvianUseDatabase.Informationgatheredaspartofthe
ongoingAvianFatalityMonitoringProgram.
———.2000.EastCountyAreaPlan.AdoptedMay1994.ModifiedbypassageofMeasureD,effective
December22,2000.Oakland,CA.
Alarcón,M.,C.Aedo,andC.Navarro.2012.California.Page818inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.
Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsof
California.SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Al‐Shehbaz,I.A.2012.Caulanthus.Pages535–538inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.Keil,R.
Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsofCalifornia.
SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Alvarez,J.A.2004.OverwinteringCaliforniaTigerSalamander(Ambystomacaliforniense)Larvae.
HerpetologicalReview35(4):344.
Anderson,R.L.,J.L.Dinsdale,andR.Schlorff.2007.CaliforniaSwainson'sHawkInventory:2005–
2007.FinalReport.Sacramento,CA:DepartmentofFishandGameResourceAssessment
Program,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.
Anthony,E.L.P.,M.H.Stack,andT.H.Kunz.1981.NightRoostingandtheNocturnalTimeBudgetof
theLittleBrownBat,Myotislucifugus:EffectsofReproductiveStatus,PreyDensity,and
EnvironmentalConditions.Oecologia51(2):151–156.
Arnett,E.B.,W.K.Brown,W.P.Erickson,J.K.Fiedler,B.L.Hamilton,T.H.Henry,A.Jain,G.D.
Johnson,J.Kerns,R.R.Koford,C.P.Nicholson,T.J.O’Connell,M.D.Piorkowski,andR.D.
Tankersley,Jr.2008.PatternsofBatFatalitiesatWindEnergyFacilitiesinNorthAmerica.
JournalofWildlifeManagement72(1):61–78.
Arnett,E.B.,C.D.Hein,M.R.Schirmacher,M.M.P.Huso,andJ.M.Szewczak.2013.Evaluatingthe
EffectivenessofanUltrasonicAcousticDeterrentforReducingBatFatalitiesatWindTurbines.
PLOSONE8(6):e65794.
Arnett,E.B.,MSchirmacher,M.M.P.Huso,andJ.P.Hayes.2009.EffectivenessofChangingWind
TurbineCut‐inSpeedtoReduceBatFatalitiesatWindFacilities—2008AnnualReport.April.
AnnualreportsubmittedtotheBatsandWindEnergyCooperative.Austin,TX:BatConservation
International.
AudubonSociety.2007.The2007AudubonWatchList.Available:http://birds.audubon.org/2007‐
audubon‐watchlist.Accessed:May21,2014.
AudubonCalifornia.2010.BarnOwlNamedAudubonCalifornia’s2010BirdoftheYear:
HugeWrite‐inEffortLandsWinsitforPopularOwlSpecies.YubaNet.com.December14.
Available:http://yubanet.com/california/Barn‐Owl‐named‐Audubon‐California‐s‐2010‐Bird‐of‐
the‐Year.php.AccessedMay21,2014.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐153 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency AvianPowerLineInteractionCommittee.2006.SuggestedPracticesforAvianProtectiononPower
Lines:TheStateoftheArtin2006.PIERFinalProjectReportCEC‐500‐2006‐022.Washington,
DC,andSacramento,CA:EdisonElectricInstitute,APLIC,andtheCaliforniaEnergyCommission.
Baldwin,B.2012.Blepharizonia.P.262inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.
Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsofCalifornia.SecondEdition.
Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Barclay,R.M.R.,E.F.Baerwald,andJ.C.Gruver.2007.VariationinBatandBirdFatalitiesatWind
EnergyFacilities:AssessingtheEffectsofRotorSizeandTowerHeight.CanadianJournalof
Zoology85:381–387.
BarnOwlBoxCompany.2009.BarnOwlsbyUSStates.Available:http://www.barnowlbox.com/us‐
barn‐owl.html#california_barn_owls.AccessedMay21,2014.
Barr,C.B.1991.TheDistribution,Habitat,andStatusoftheValleyElderberryLonghornBeetle:
Desmoceruscalifornicusdimorphus.U.S.FishandWildlifeService.Sacramento,CA.
Barry,S.J.,andH.B.Shaffer.1994.TheStatusoftheCaliforniaTigerSalamander(Ambystoma
californiense)atLagunita:A50‐YearUpdate.JournalofHerpetology24(2):159–164.
Beedy,E.C.,andW.J.Hamilton,III.1997.TricoloredBlackbirdStatusUpdateandManagement
Guidelines.PreparedforU.S.FishandWildlifeService,MigratoryBirdsandHabitatPrograms,
andCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,BirdandMammalConservationProgram.
———.1999.TricoloredBlackbird(Agelaiustricolor).InA.Poole,(ed.).TheBirdsofNorthAmerica
Online.Ithaca:CornellLabofOrnithology.Available:
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/423.Accessed:February12,2012.
Bloom,P.H.1980.TheStatusoftheSwainson’sHawkinCalifornia.PreparedforTheResources
Agency:DepartmentofFishandGameandUnitedStatesDepartmentoftheInterior,Bureauof
LandManagement.
Brode,J.M.,andR.B.Bury.1984.TheImportanceofRiparianSystemstoAmphibiansandReptiles.
Pages30–36inR.E.WarnerandK.M.Hendrix(eds.).CaliforniaRiparianSystemsEcology,
Conservation,andProductiveManagement.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Brown,P.E.,andE.D.Pierson.1996.NaturalHistoryandManagementofBatsinCaliforniaand
Nevada.WorkshopsponsoredbytheWesternSectionofTheWildlifeSociety.November13–15.
Brown,K.,K.S.Smallwood,andB.Karas.2013.VascoAvianandBatMonitoringProject2012–2013
AnnualReport.Final.September.PreparedbyVentusEnvironmentalSolutions,Portland,OR.
PreparedforNextEraEnergyResources,Livermore,CA.
Buehler,D.A.2000.BaldEagle.InA.Poole,(ed.).TheBirdsofNorthAmericaOnline.Ithaca:Cornell
LabofOrnithology.Available:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/506.
Bunn,D.S.,A.B.Warburton,andR.D.S.Wilson.1982.TheBarnOwl.Vermillion,SD:ButeoBooks.
Bunnell,S.T.,C.M.White,D.Paul,andS.D.Bunnell.1997.StickNestsonaBuildingand
TransmissionTowersUsedforNestingbyLargeFalconsinUtah.GreatBasinNat.57:263–267.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐154 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Marti,C.D.1974.FeedingEcologyofFourSympatricOwls.Condor76:5–61.CaliforniaBatWorking
Group.2006.GuidelinesforAssessingandMinimizingImpactstoBatsatWindEnergy
DevelopmentSitesinCalifornia.September.
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.1992.1992AnnualReportontheStatusofCaliforniaState‐
ListedThreatenedandEndangeredAnimalsandPlants.Sacramento,CA.
———.1993.LosVaquerosProject‐FishandWildlifeImpacts.AStatusReport.
———.1994.StaffReportRegardingMitigationforImpactstoSwainson’sHawk(Buteoswainsoni)in
theCentralValleyofCalifornia.Sacramento,CA.November1.
———.2008.CaliforniaAquaticInvasiveSpeciesManagementPlan.January.Sacramento,CA.
———.2009.ProtocolsforSurveyingandEvaluatingImpactstoSpecialStatusNativePlant
PopulationsandNaturalCommunities.November24.Available:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/survey_monitor.html.
———.2010.ListofVegetationAlliancesandAssociations.September.VegetationClassificationand
MappingProgram.Sacramento,CA.Available:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/vegcamp/natural_comm_list.asp.Accessed:December10,
2013.
———.2011.SpecialAnimalsList.Available:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/SPAnimals.pdf.Accessed:January2011.
———.2012.StaffReportonBurrowingOwlMitigation.StateofCaliforniaNaturalResources
Agency.March7.
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife.2013a.CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase,RareFind4.
(May3,2013update).Reportforalkalimeadow.Sacramento,CA.Accessed:May2013.
———.2013b.CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase,RareFind4.(May3,2013update).Sacramento,
CA.Searchof7.5‐minuteMidway,Altamont,CedarMountain,ByronHotSprings,andClifton
CourtForebayquadranglesforspecial‐statusplants.Sacramento,CA.Accessed:May2013.
———.2013c.CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase,RareFind4.(July2,2013update).Sacramento,
CA.Searchof7.5‐minuteMidway,Altamont,CedarMountain,ByronHotSprings,andClifton
CourtForebayquadranglesforspecial‐statusanimals.Sacramento,CA.Accessed:July26,2013.
CaliforniaEnergyCommissionandCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.2007.California
GuidelinesforReducingImpactstoBirdsandBatsfromWindEnergyDevelopment.October.
CommissionFinalReport.CEC‐700‐2007‐008‐CMF.CaliforniaEnergyCommission,Renewables
Committee,andEnergyFacilitiesSitingDivision,andCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,
ResourcesManagementandPolicyDivision.
CaliforniaHerps.com.2013.AGuidetotheAmphibiansandReptilesofCalifornia.Rangeinformation
forPhrynosomablainvillii,Blainville'sHornedLizard(CoastHornedLizard).Accessed:April8,
2013.
CaliforniaRaptorCenter.2011.AdmissionsStatistics.Available:
http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/calraptor/rescue_rehabilitation/admissions_stats.cfm.
Accessed:November9,2011.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐155 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Carlsen,T.,E.Espelund,andB.Pavlik.1999.RestorationoftheLarge‐FloweredFiddleneck
(Amsinckiagrandiflora)atLawrenceLivermoreNationalLaboratorySite300,ProjectProgress
ReportFiscalYear1999,October1998–September1999.LawrenceLivermoreNational
Laboratory,UniversityofCalifornia,Livermore,CA.
Cowardin,L.M.,V.Carter,F.C.Golet,andE.T.LaRoe.1979.ClassificationofWetlandsandDeepwater
HabitatsoftheUnitedStates.OfficeofBiologicalServices,FishandWildlifeService,U.S.
DepartmentoftheInterior,Washington,D.C.
Cryan,P.M.2008.MatingBehaviorasaPossibleCauseofBatFatalitiesatWindTurbines.April.
JournalofWildlifeManagement72(3):845–849.
Cryan,P.M.,andR.M.R.Barclay.2009.CausesofBatFatalitiesatWindTurbines:Hypothesesand
Predictions.JournalofMammalogy90(6):1330–1340.
CurryandKerlinger,LLC.2009.AvianMonitoringStudyandRiskAssessmentfortheShilohIIIWind
PowerProject,SolanoCounty,California.December.McLean,VA.PreparedforenXco,Inc.,Tracy,
CA.
Dunk,J.R.1995.White‐TailedKite(Elanusleucurus).InA.Poole,(ed.).TheBirdsofNorthAmerica
Online.Ithaca:CornellLabofOrnithology.Available:
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/178.
EastBayRegionalParksDistrict.2000.VascoCavesRegionalPreserveResourceManagementPlan.
PreparedbyEastBayRegionalParksDistrictPlanning/StewardshipDepartmentin
CooperationwithContraCostaWaterDistrict.Oakland,CA.
Eng,L.L,D.Belk,andC.H.Eriksen.1990.CalifornianAnostraca:Distribution,Habitat,andStatus.
JournalofCrustaceanBiology10(2):247–277.
Eriksen,C.H.,andD.Belk.1999.FairyShrimpsofCalifornia’sPuddles,Pools,andPlayas.Eureka,CA:
MadRiverPress.
EssigMuseumofEntomology.2013.California’sEndangeredInsects:Curve‐FootedDivingBeetle.
EssigMuseumofEntomology,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.Available:
http://essig.berkeley.edu/endins/hygcurve1.htm.Accessed:August5,2013.
Estep,J.A.1989.Biology,Movements,andHabitatRelationshipsoftheSwainson’sHawkintheCentral
ValleyofCalifornia,1986–1987.CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,NongameBirdand
MammalSection.Sacramento,CA.
Fellers,G.M.,A.Launer,G.Rathbun,S.Bobzien,J.Alvarez,D.Sterner,R.B.Seymour,andM.
Westphal.2001.OverwinteringTadpolesintheCaliforniaRed‐LeggedFrog(Ranaaurora
draytonii).HerpetologicalReview32(3):156157.
Gehring,J.,P.Kerlinger,andA.M.ManvilleII.2009.CommunicationTowers,Lights,andBirds:
SuccessfulMethodsofReducingtheFrequencyofAvianCollisions.EcologicalApplications
19:505–514.
Good,R.E.,W.Erickson,A.Merrill,S.Simon,K.Murray,K.Bay,andC.Fritchman.2011.Bat
MonitoringStudiesattheFowlerRidgeWindEnergyFacility,BentonCounty,Indiana—April13–
October15,2010.January28.PreparedforFowlerRidgeWindFarm.Cheyenne,WY:Western
EcoSystemsTechnology,Inc.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐156 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Good,R.E.,A.Merrill,S.Simon,K.Murray,andK.Bay.2012.BatMonitoringStudiesattheFowler
RidgeWindFarm,BentonCounty,Indiana—April1–October31,2011.January31.Preparedfor
FowlerRidgeWindFarm.Bloomington,IN:WesternEcoSystemsTechnology,Inc.
Goodrich,L.J.,andJ.Smith.2008.RaptorMigrationinNorthAmerica.InK.L.Bildstein,J.Smith,and
E.Ruelas(eds.),TheStateofNorthAmerica’sBirdsofPrey(.SeriesinOrnithologyNumber3.
Orwigsburg,PA:HawkMountainSanctuary,.
Haak,B.A.,andS.J.Denton.1979.SubterraneanNestingbyPrairieFalcon.RaptorRes.13:121–122.
Hamilton,W.J.,III.2000.TricoloredBlackbird2000SurveyandPopulationAnalysis.PreparedforU.S.
FishandWildlifeService,Portland,OR.
Hanes,T.L.1977.CaliforniaChaparral.Pages41–469inM.G.BarbourandJ.Major(eds.).Terrestrial
VegetationofCalifornia.NY:JohnWileyandSons.
Hannan,G.L.,andC.Clark.2012.Eschscholzia.Pages982–984inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.
Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.),TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsof
California.SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
HawkMountain.2007.ConservationStatusReportsfortheAmericanKestrelandRed‐TailedHawk.
Available:http://www.hawkmountain.org/raptorpedia/hawks‐at‐hawk‐mountain/hawk‐
species‐at‐hawk‐mountain/hawk‐species‐at‐hawk‐mountain/page.aspx?id=344.Accessed:May
14,2014.
Helm,B.1998.BiogeographyofEightLargeBranchiopodsEndemictoCalifornia.Pages124–139in
C.W.Witham,E.T.Bauder,D.Belk,W.R.Ferren,Jr.,andR.Ornduf(eds.).Ecology,Conservation,
andManagementofVernalPoolEcosystems—Proceedingsfroma1996Conference.Sacramento,
CA:CaliforniaNativePlantSociety.285pages.
Holland,R.F.1986.PreliminaryDescriptionsoftheTerrestrialNaturalCommunitiesofCalifornia.
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,Sacramento,CA.
Howell,J.A.1997.AvianMortalityatRotorSweptAreaEquivalents,AltamontPassandMontezuma
Hills,California.TransactionsoftheWesternSectionoftheWildlifeSociety33:24–29.
Howell,J.A.,andJ.E.DiDonato.1991.AssessmentofAvianUseandMortalityRelatedtoWindTurbine
Operations,AltamontPass,AlamedaandContraCostaCounties,California,September1998
throughAugust1989.Final.SubmittedtoU.S.Windpower,Inc.Livermore,CA.
Hull,J.M.,R.Anderson,M.Bradbury,J.A.Estep,andH.B.Ernest.2008.PopulationStructureand
GeneticDiversityinSwainson’sHawks(ButeoSwainsoni):ImplicationsforConservation.
ConservationGenetics9(2):305–316.
Hunt,G.2002.TheTrendofGoldenEagleTerritoryOccupancyintheVicinityoftheAltamontPass
WindResourceArea:2005Survey.PreparedfortheCaliforniaEnergyCommission,contract500‐
01‐032,tothePredatoryBirdResearchGroup,UniversityofCalifornia,SantaCruz.
Hunt,G.,andT.Hunt.2006.TheTrendofGoldenEagleTerritoryOccupancyintheVicinityofthe
AltamontPassWindResourceArea:2005Survey.PreparedfortheCaliforniaEnergyCommission,
contract500‐01‐032,tothePredatoryBirdResearchGroup,UniversityofCalifornia,SantaCruz,
CA.ReporttoCaliforniaEnergyCommission,Sacramento,CA.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐157 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Hunt,W.G.,R.E.Jackman,T.L.Brown,D.E.Driscoll,andL.Culp.1999.APopulationStudyofGolden
EaglesintheAltamontPassWindResourceArea:PopulationTrendAnalysis1994–1997.Prepared
fortheNationalRenewableEnergyLaboratory,subcontractXAT‐6‐16459‐01tothePredatory
BirdResearchGroup,UniversityofCalifornia,SantaCruz.
ICFInternational.2010.EastAlamedaCountyConservationStrategy.Final.October.(ICF00906.08.)
SanJose,CA.PreparedforEastAlamedaCountyConservationStrategySteeringCommittee,
Livermore,CA.
———.2012.AltamontPassWindResourceAreaBirdFatalityStudy,BirdYears2005–2010.October.
(ICF00904.08.)Sacramento,CA.PreparedforAlamedaCountyCommunityDevelopment
Agency,Hayward,CA.
———.2013.AltamontPassWindResourceAreaBirdFatalityStudy,BirdYears2005–2011.
November.M87.(ICF00904.08.)Sacramento,CA.PreparedforAlamedaCountyCommunity
DevelopmentAgency,Hayward,CA.
InsigniaEnvironmental.2012.FinalReportfortheBuenaVistaAvianandBatMonitoringProject:
February2008toJanuary2011.September.PaloAlto,CA.PreparedforContraCostaCounty,
Martinez,CA.
Jennings,M.R.,andM.P.Hayes.1994.AmphibianandReptileSpeciesofSpecialConcerninCalifornia.
RanchoCordova,CA:CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.
Jennings,M.R.,M.P.Hayes,andD.C.Holland.1992.APetitiontotheU.S.FishandWildlifeServiceto
PlacetheCaliforniaRed‐LeggedFrog(Ranaauroradraytonii)andtheWesternPondTurtle
(Clemmysmarmorata)ontheListofEndangeredandThreatenedWildlifeandPlants.
Johnsgard,P.A.1990.Hawks,EaglesandFalconsofNorthAmerica:BiologyandNaturalHistory.
WashingtonandLondon:SmithsonianInstitutionPress.
Johnson,L.A.2012.Navarretia.Pages1062–1068inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.Keil,R.
Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsofCalifornia.
SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Kelley,R.N.,andF.R.Ganders.2012.Amsinckia.Pages453–454inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.
Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsof
California.SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Kochert,M.N.,K.Steenhof,C.L.McIntyre,andE.H.Craig.2002.GoldenEagle(Aquilachrysaetos).In
A.PooleandF.Gill(eds.).TheBirdsofNorthAmerica,No.684.Philadelphia,PA:TheBirdsof
NorthAmerica,Inc.
Koontz,J.A.,andM.J.Warnock.2012.Delphinium.Pages1136–1142inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,
D.J.Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsof
California.SecondEdition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Kunz,T.H.,E.B.Arnett,W.P.Erickson,A.R.Hoar,G.D.Johnson,R.P.Larkin,M.D.Strickland,R.W.
Thresher,andM.D.Tuttle.2007.EcologicalImpactsofWindEnergyDevelopmentonBats:
Questions,ResearchNeeds,andHypotheses.FrontiersinEcologyandtheEnvironment5(6):315–
324.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐158 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Kyle,K.,andR.Kelsey.2011.Resultsofthe2011TricoloredBlackbirdStatewideSurvey.Audubon
California,Sacramento,CA.Available:http://tricolor.ice.ucdavis.edu/downloads.
Loredo,I.,D.VanVuren,andM.L.Morrison.1996.HabitatUseandMigrationBehaviorofthe
CaliforniaTigerSalamander.JournalofHerpetology30(2):282–285.
Maclaren,P.A.,D.E.Runde,andS.Anderson.1984.ARecordofTree‐NestingPrairieFalconsin
Wyoming.Condor86:487–488.
MacWhirter,R.B.,andK.L.Bildstein.1996.NorthernHarrier(Circuscyaneus).InA.PooleandF.Gill,
(eds.).TheBirdsofNorthAmerica,No.210.Philadelphia,PA:TheAcademyofNaturalSciences
andWashington,DC:TheAmericanOrnithologists’Union.
Marti,C.D.,A.F.Poole,andL.R.Bevier.2005.BarnOwl(Tytoalba).InA.PooleandF.Gill(eds.),The
BirdsofNorthAmericaIthaca:CornellLabofOrnithology.RetrievedfromtheBirdsofNorth
AmericaOnline.Available:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/001.Accessed:May19,
2014.
Mazurek,M.J.2004.AMaternityRoostofTownsend’sBig‐EaredBats(Corynorhinustownsendii)in
CoastRedwoodBasalHollowsinNorthwesternCalifornia.NorthwesternNaturalist85:60–62.
NationalAudubonSociety.2011.TheChristmasBirdCountHistoricalResults[Online].Available:
http://www.christmasbirdcount.org.AccessedDecember12,2012.
NatureServe.2012.NatureServeExplorer:AnOnlineEncyclopediaofLife[webapplication].Version
7.1.NatureServe,Arlington,VA.Available:http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.Accessed:
May19,2014.
Nelson,R.W.1974.PrairieFalcons:NestingAttemptonaBuildingandEffectofWeatheron
CourtshipandIncubation.RaptorResearchFoundationEthologyInformationExchange1:10–
12.Orloff,S.,andA.Flannery.1992.WindTurbineEffectsonAvianActivity,HabitatUse,and
MortalityinAltamontPassandSolanoCountyWindResourceArea.ReporttoCaliforniaEnergy
Commission,Sacramento,CA.SantaCruz,CA:BiosystemsAnalysis,Inc.
Orloff,S.,F.Hall,andL.Spiegel.1986.DistributionandHabitatRequirementsoftheSanJoaquinKit
FoxintheNorthernExtremeofTheirRange.TransactionsoftheWesternSectionoftheWildlife
Society22:60–70.
PandionSystems,Inc.2010.AltamontVascoRepower—AcousticBatMonitoringPreliminary
Findings.October8.AppendixCofVascoWindsRepoweringProjectFinalEnvironmentalImpact
Report.StateClearinghouseNo.2010032094.April2011.Martinez,CA:ContraCostaCounty
DepartmentofConservationandDevelopment.
Phipps,K.B.1979.HuntingMethods,HabitatUseandActivityPatternsofPrairieFalconsintheSnake
RiverBirdsofPreyNaturalArea,Idaho.Master'sThesis.WesternIllinoisUniversity,Macomb.
Pierson,E.D.,andW.E.Rainey.1998.Distribution,Status,andManagementofTownsend’sBig‐Eared
Bat(Corynorhinustownsendii)inCalifornia.May.BMCPTechnicalReportNumber96‐7.Final
ReportforContractNo.FG7129.SubmittedNovember1994toWildlifeManagementDivision,
BirdandMammalConservationProgram.Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Game.
Pitcher,E.J.1977.NestSiteSelectionforPrairieFalcons.Auk94:371.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐159 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Polite,C.1990.California’sWildlife:Barnowl.CaliforniaWildlifeHabitatRelationshipsSystem,
Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaInteragencyWildlifeTaskGroup,CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
Game.
Polite,C.,andG.Ahlborn.1990.AmericanKestrel.Editor:S.Bailey.CaliforniaWildlifeHabitat
RelationshipsSystem,CaliforniaInteragencyWildlifeTaskGroup,CaliforniaDepartmentofFish
andGame.Available:http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/cawildlife.aspx.Accessed:May
19,2014.
Polite,C.,andJ.Pratt.1990.California’sWildlife:Red‐TailedHawk.CaliforniaWildlifeHabitat
RelationshipsSystem,Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaInteragencyWildlifeTaskGroup,California
DepartmentofFishandGame.
Powell,J.A.,andC.L.Hogue.1979.CaliforniaInsects.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Preston,R.E.2000.NoteworthyCollections:California.Madroño47:138.
Preston,C.R.,andR.D.Beane.1993.Red‐TailedHawk(Buteojamaicensis).InA.PooleandF.Gill
(eds.),TheBirdsofNorthAmerica.Ithaca:CornellLabofOrnithology.RetrievedfromtheBirdsof
NorthAmericaOnline.Available:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/052.Accessed:May
2014.
Randall,J.M.,andM.C.Hoshovsky.2000.California’sWildlandInvasivePlants.Pages11–19inC.C.
Bossard,J.M.Randall,andM.C.Hoshovsky(eds.).InvasivePlantsofCalifornia’sWildlands.
Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Rogers,C.2001.RevisionoftheNearcticLepidurus(Notostraca).JournalofCrustaceanBiology21(4):
991–1006.
Roppe,J.A.,S.M.Siegel,andS.E.Wilder.1989.PrairieFalconNestingonTransmissionTowers.
Condor91:711–712.
Sauer,J.R.,J.E.Hines,andJ.Fallon.2008.TheNorthAmericanBreedingBirdSurvey,Resultsand
Analysis1966–2007.Version5.15.2008.Laurel,MD:USGSPatuxentWildlifeResearchCenter.
Sauer,J.R.,J.E.Hines,J.E.Fallon,K.L.Pardieck,D.J.Ziolkowski,Jr.,andW.A.Link.2011.TheNorth
AmericanBreedingBirdSurvey,ResultsandAnalysis1966–2010.Version12.07.2011.Laurel,
MD:USGSPatuxentWildlifeResearchCenter.
Sawyer,J.O.,andT.Keeler‐Wolf.1995.AManualofCaliforniaVegetation.Sacramento,CA:California
NativePlantSociety.
Sherrod,S.K.1978.DietsofNorthAmericanFalconiforms.JournalofRaptorResearch12:49–121.
Shuford,W.D.,andT.Gardali(eds.).2008.CaliforniaBirdSpeciesofSpecialConcern:ARanked
AssessmentofSpecies,Subspecies,andDistinctPopulationsofBirdsofImmediateConservation
ConcerninCalifornia.StudiesofWesternBirdsNo.1.WesternFieldOrnithologists,Camarillo,CA,
andCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,Sacramento,CA.
Smallwood,J.A.,andD.M.Bird.2002.AmericanKestrel(Falcosparverius).InA.PooleandF.Gill
(eds.),TheBirdsofNorthAmerica.Ithaca:CornellLabofOrnithology;RetrievedfromtheBirds
ofNorthAmericaOnline.Available:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/602.Accessed:
May2014.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐160 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Smallwood,K.S.,2010.BaselineAvianandBatFatalityRatesattheTresVaquerosWindProject,
ContraCostaCounty,California.ReporttotheEastBayRegionalParkDistrict.,2010.
Smallwood,K.S.,D.A.Bell,S.A.Snyder,J.E.Didonato.2010.NovelScavengerRemovalTrials
IncreaseWindTurbine–CausedAvianFatalityEstimates.JournalofWildlifeManagement
74(5):1089–1097.
Smallwood,K.S.,andB.Karas.2009.AvianandBatFatalityRatesatOld‐GenerationandRepowered
WindTurbinesinCalifornia.JournalofWildlifeManagement73(7):1062–1071.
Smallwood,K.S.,andL.Neher.2010.SitingRepoweredWindTurbinestoMinimizeRaptorCollisions
attheTresVaquerosWindProject,ContraCostaCounty,California.April.Draft.Preparedforthe
EastBayRegionalParkDistrict.
Smallwood,K.S.,L.Neher,andD.A.Bell.2009.Map‐BasedRepoweringandReorganizationofa
WindResourceAreatoMinimizeBurrowingOwlandOtherBirdFatalities.October.Energies
2:915–943.
Smallwood,K.S.,L.A.Neher,D.A.Bell,J.E.DiDonato,B.R.Karas,S.A.Snyder,andS.R.Lopez.2008.
RangeManagementPracticestoReduceWindTurbineImpactsonBurrowingOwlsandOther
RaptorsintheAltamontPassWindResourceArea,California.CaliforniaEnergyCommission,PIER
Energy‐RelatedEnvironmentalResearchProgram.CEC‐500‐2008‐080.
Smallwood,K.S.,L.Neher,andJ.Mount.2011.NestingBurrowingOwlDistributionandAbundancein
theAltamontPassWindResourceArea,California.September16.P228.Preparedforthe
AltamontPassWindResourceAreaScientificReviewCommittee.Available:
http://www.altamontsrc.org/.Accessed:November26,2013.
Smallwood,S.,andL.Spiegel.2005a.AssessmenttoSupportanAdaptiveManagementPlanforthe
APWRA.January19.CEC‐releasedTechnicalReport.
———.2005b.PartialRe‐AssessmentofanAdaptiveManagementPlanfortheAPWRA:Accounting
forTurbineSize.March25.CEC‐releasedTechnicalReport.
———.2005c.CombiningBiology‐BasedandPolicy‐BasedTiersofPriorityforDeterminingWind
TurbineRelocation/ShutdowntoReduceBirdFatalities.June1.CEC‐releasedTechnicalReport.
Smallwood,K.S.,andC.G.Thelander.2004.DevelopingMethodstoReduceMortalityintheAltamont
PassWindResourceArea.FinalReportbyBioResourceConsultantstotheCaliforniaEnergy
Commission,PublicInterestEnergyResearch—EnvironmentalArea500‐01‐019.
Stebbins,R.C.1954.AmphibiansandReptilesofWesternNorthAmerica.NewYork,NY:McGraw‐Hill
BookCompany,Inc.
———.2003.WesternReptilesandAmphibians.ThirdEdition.NewYork,NY:HoughtonMifflin
Company.
Szewczak,J.M.2013.AcousticBatSurveyatVascoWinds,LLCWindArea2012.September.
AttachmenttoFinal2012–2013AnnualReport,AvianandBatMonitoringProject,VascoWinds,
LLC.PreparedforVentusEnvironmentalSolutions,Portland,OR.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐161 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Talley,T.S.,D.Wright,M.Holyoak.2006.Assistancewiththe5‐YearReviewoftheValleyElderberry
LonghornBeetle(Desmoceruscalifornicusdimorphus).UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService.
Sacramento,CA.
U.S.FishandWildlifeService.1996.ProgrammaticFormalEndangeredSpeciesActConsultationon
Issuanceof404PermitsforProjectswithRelativelySmallEffectsonListedVernalPoolCrustaceans
withintheJurisdictionoftheSacramentoFieldOffice,California.February28.1‐1‐96‐F‐1.Issued
byEcologicalServices,SacramentoFieldOffice,Sacramento,CA.
———.1998.RecoveryPlanforUplandSpeciesoftheSanJoaquinValley,California.Region1,
Portland,OR.
———.1999.ConservationGuidelinesfortheValleyElderberryLonghornBeetle.SacramentoFish
andWildlifeOffice,Sacramento,CA.RevisedJuly9.
———.2002a.RecoveryPlanfortheCaliforniaRed‐LeggedFrog(Ranaauroradraytonii).Portland,
OR.
———.2002b.DraftRecoveryPlanforChaparralandScrubCommunitySpeciesofSanFranciscoBay,
California.November.Portland,OR.
———.2007.LonghornFairyShrimp(Branchinectalongiantenna)5‐YearReview:Summaryand
Evaluation.PreparedbytheSacramentoFishandWildlifeOffice.Sacramento,CA.
———.2010.SanJoaquinKitFox(Vulpesmacrotismutica)5‐YearReview:SummaryandEvaluation.
PreparedbytheSacramentoFishandWildlifeOffice.Sacramento,CA.
———.2011.U.S.FishandWildlifeServiceStandardizedRecommendationsforProtectionofthe
EndangeredSanJoaquinKitFoxpriortoorduringGroundDisturbance.January.Sacramento,CA:
SacramentoFishandWildlifeOffice.Available:http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/survey‐
protocols‐guidelines/Documents/kitfox_standard_rec_2011.pdf.Accessed:December12,2013.
———.2012a.U.S.FishandWildlifeServiceLand‐BasedWindEnergyGuidelines.March23.OMB
ControlNo1018‐0148.
———.2012b.EagleConservationPlanGuidance:Module1—Land‐BasedWindEnergyTechnical
Appendices.August2012.Draftunderreview.DivisionofMigratoryBirdManagement.Available:
http://www.drecp.org/documents/docs/Draft_Eagle_Conservation_Plan_Guidance_Tech_Appnd
_Aug_17_2012.pdf.Accessed:December12,2013.
———.2013.ListofFederal,EndangeredandThreatenedSpeciesthatOccurinormaybeAffectedby
ProjectsintheU.S.GeologicalSurvey7.5‐MinuteMidway,Altamont,CedarMountain,ByronHot
Springs,CliftonCourtForebayQuadrangles.LastRevised:September18,2011.Available:
www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/spp_lists/auto_list.cfm.Accessed:July1,2013.
WesternBatWorkingGroup.2005.Townsend’sBig‐EaredBat.Speciesaccountdevelopedforthe
1998RenoBiennialMeeting;updatedatthe2005PortlandBiennialMeeting.Originalaccount
byRickSherwin;2005updatebyAntoinettePiaggio.Available:http://www.wbwg.org.
Accessed:December20,2013.
———.2007.RegionalBatSpeciesPriorityMatrix.Available:
http://www.wbwg.org/spp_matrix.html.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐162 June 2014
ICF 00323.08
Impact Analysis
Biological Resources
Alameda County Community Development Agency WesternEcoSystemsTechnology,Inc.2008.DiabloWindsWildlifeMonitoringProgressReport,
March2005–February2007.August.Cheyenne,WY.
Williams,D.F.1986.MammalianSpeciesofConcerninCalifornia.CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand
GameReport86‐1.CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,Sacramento,CA.112pages.
Yosef,R.1996.LoggerheadShrike(Laniusludovicianus).InA.PooleandF.Gill(eds.),TheBirdsof
NorthAmerica.Ithaca:CornellLabofOrnithology;RetrievedfromtheBirdsofNorthAmerica
Online.Available:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/231.Accessed:May2014.
Zacharias,E.H.2012.Atriplex.Pages630–638inB.G.Baldwin,D.H.Goldman,D.J.Keil,R.Patterson,
T.J.Rosatti,andD.H.Wilken(eds.).TheJepsonManual:VascularPlantsofCalifornia.Second
Edition.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Zeiner,D.C.,W.F.Laudenslayer,Jr.,andK.E.Mayer(eds.).1988.California’sWildlife.VolumeI:
AmphibiansandReptiles.CaliforniaStatewideWildlifeHabitatRelationshipsSystem.
Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.
———.1990a.California’sWildlife.VolumeII:Birds.CaliforniaStatewideWildlifeHabitat
RelationshipsSystem.Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.
———.1990b.California’sWildlife.VolumeIII:Mammals.CaliforniaStatewideWildlifeHabitat
RelationshipsSystem.Sacramento,CA:CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame.
Zweifel,R.G.1955.Ecology,Distribution,andSystematicsofFrogsoftheRanaboyleiGroup.
UniversityofCaliforniaPublicationsinZoology54(4):207–292.
Personal Communications Arnold,RichardA.,PhD.2011.Entomologist,EntomologicalConsultingServicesLtd.,PleasantHill,
CA.August22and23,2011—WrittencommentsontheDraftSupplementalBiological
AssessmentforPG&E’sValleyElderberryLonghornBeetleConservationProgram.
Stedman,Bret.Manager,CaliforniaRaptorCenter,UCDavis.December13,2012—Email
correspondencewithLucasBare,ICFInternational,Englewood,CO.
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.4‐163 June 2014
ICF 00323.08