3.6 Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological ...
Transcript of 3.6 Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological ...
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐1
October 2014ICF 00323.08
3.6 Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
Thissectiondescribestheregulatoryandenvironmentalsettingforgeology,soils,mineralresources,andpaleontologicalresourcesintheprogramandprojectareas.Italsodescribesimpactsongeology,soils,mineralresources,andpaleontologicalresourcesthatwouldresultfromimplementationoftheprogramandtwoindividualprojects.Mitigationmeasuresareprescribedwherefeasibleandappropriate.
3.6.1 Existing Conditions
Regulatory Setting
Federal
NofederalregulationsapplytomineralresourcesorpaleontologicalresourcesintheAPWRA.Thefollowingfederalregulationsarerelatedtogeologichazardsorsoils.
International Building Code
ThedesignandconstructionofengineeredfacilitiesinCaliforniamustcomplywiththerequirementsoftheInternationalBuildingCode(IBC)(InternationalCodeCouncil2011)andtheadoptionsofthatcodebytheStateofCalifornia(seeCaliforniaBuildingStandardsCodeunderStateRegulations).
U.S. Geological Survey Landslide Hazard Program
TofulfilltherequirementsofPublicLaw106‐113,theU.S.GeologicalSurveycreatedtheNationalLandslideHazardsProgramtoreducelong‐termlossesfromlandslidehazardsbyimprovingunderstandingofthecausesofgroundfailureandsuggestingmitigationstrategies.TheFederalEmergencyManagementAgencyistheresponsibleagencyforthelong‐termmanagementofnaturalhazards.
Clean Water Act Section 402 (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program)
Section402oftheCleanWaterAct(CWA)mandatesthatcertaintypesofconstructionactivitycomplywiththerequirementsofEPA’sNationalPollutantDischargeEliminationSystem(NPDES)program.EPAhasdelegatedtotheStateWaterBoardtheauthorityfortheNPDESprograminCalifornia,whereitisimplementedbythestate’snineRegionalWaterBoards.Constructionactivitydisturbing1acreormoremustobtaincoverageunderthestate’sGeneralPermitforStormWaterDischargesAssociatedwithConstructionandLandDisturbanceActivities(Order2010‐0014‐DWQ).(SeeConstructionActivitiesStormWaterConstructionGeneralPermit[2010‐0014‐DWQPermit]).
AdditionaldetailsoftheCWAaredescribedinSection3.9,HydrologyandWaterQuality.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐2
October 2014ICF 00323.08
State
Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
California’sAlquist‐PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningAct(Alquist‐PrioloAct)(PublicResourcesCode[PRC]Section2621etseq.)isintendedtoreduceriskstolifeandpropertyfromsurfacefaultruptureduringearthquakes.TheAlquist‐PrioloActprohibitsthelocationofmosttypesofstructuresintendedforhumanoccupancy1acrossthetracesofactivefaultsandstrictlyregulatesconstructioninthecorridorsalongactivefaultscapableofsurfaceruptureorfaultcreep(earthquakefaultzones).Generallytherequiredsetbackis50feetfromanactivefaulttrace.Theactalsodefinescriteriaforidentifyingactivefaults,givinglegalweighttotermssuchasactive,andestablishesaprocessforreviewingbuildingproposalsinandadjacenttoearthquakefaultzones.
UndertheAlquist‐PrioloAct,faultsarezoned,andconstructionalongoracrossthemisstrictlyregulatediftheyaresufficientlyactiveandwelldefined.AfaultisconsideredsufficientlyactiveifoneormoreofitssegmentsorstrandsshowsevidenceofsurfacedisplacementduringHolocenetime(definedforpurposesoftheactasreferringtoapproximatelythelast11,000years).Afaultisconsideredwell‐definedifitstracecanbeidentifiedclearlybyatrainedgeologistatthegroundsurface,orintheshallowsubsurfaceusingstandardprofessionaltechniques,criteria,andjudgment(BryantandHart2007).
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
LiketheAlquist‐PrioloAct,theSeismicHazardsMappingActof1990(PRCSections2690–2699.6)isintendedtoreducedamageresultingfromearthquakes.WhiletheAlquist‐PrioloActaddressessurfacefaultrupture,theSeismicHazardsMappingActaddressesotherearthquake‐relatedhazards,includingstronggroundshaking,liquefaction,andseismicallyinducedlandslides.ItsprovisionsaresimilarinconcepttothoseoftheAlquist‐PrioloAct—thestateischargedwithidentifyingandmappingareasatriskofstronggroundshaking,liquefaction,landslides,andothercorollaryhazards;andcitiesandcountiesarerequiredtoregulatedevelopmentwithinmappedseismichazardzones.
UndertheSeismicHazardsMappingAct,permitreviewistheprimarymechanismforlocalregulationofdevelopment.Specifically,citiesandcountiesareprohibitedfromissuingdevelopmentpermitsforsiteswithinseismichazardzonesuntilappropriatesite‐specificgeologicand/orgeotechnicalinvestigationshavebeencarriedoutandmeasurestoreducepotentialdamagehavebeenincorporatedintothedevelopmentplans.GeotechnicalinvestigationsconductedwithinseismichazardzonesmustincorporatestandardsspecifiedbyCaliforniaGeologicalSurveySpecialPublication117a,GuidelinesforEvaluatingandMitigatingSeismicHazardsinCalifornia(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2008).
Construction Activities Storm Water Construction General Permit (2010‐0014‐DWQ Permit)
Dischargerswhoseprojectsdisturb1ormoreacresofsoil,orwhoseprojectsdisturblessthan1acrebutarepartofalargercommonplanofdevelopmentthatintotaldisturbs1ormoreacres,arerequiredtoobtaincoverageundertheGeneralPermitOrder2010‐0014‐DWQ.Constructionactivity
1WithreferencetotheAlquist‐PrioloAct,astructureforhumanoccupancyisdefinedasone“usedorintendedforsupportingorshelteringanyuseoroccupancy,whichisexpectedtohaveahumanoccupancyrateofmorethan2,000person‐hoursperyear”(CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,Title14,Div.2,Section3601[e]).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐3
October 2014ICF 00323.08
subjecttothispermitincludesclearing,grading,anddisturbancestothegroundsuchasstockpilingorexcavation,butdoesnotincluderegularmaintenanceactivitiesperformedtorestoretheoriginalline,grade,orcapacityofthefacility.
CoverageundertheGeneralPermitisobtainedbysubmittingpermitregistrationdocumentstotheStateWaterBoardthatincludearisklevelassessmentandasite‐specificstormwaterpollutionpreventionplan(SWPPP)identifyinganeffectivecombinationoferosioncontrol,sedimentcontrol,andnon‐stormwaterBMPs.TheGeneralPermitrequiresthattheSWPPPdefineaprogramofregularinspectionsoftheBMPsand,insomecases,samplingofwaterqualityparameters.TheSanFranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardadministerstheNPDESstormwaterpermitprograminAlamedaCounty.The14cities,theunincorporatedarea,andthetwofloodcontroldistrictsofAlamedaCountyshareoneNPDESpermitthatismanagedthroughaconsortiumofagenciescalledtheAlamedaCountywideCleanWaterProgram.
2010 California Building Standards Code
TheCaliforniaBuildingStandardsCode(CBSC)(24CaliforniaCodeofRegulations)providestheminimumstandardsforstructuraldesignandconstruction.TheCBSCisbasedontheIBC,whichisusedwidelythroughoutUnitedStates(generallyadoptedonastate‐by‐stateordistrict‐by‐districtbasis)andhasbeenmodifiedforCaliforniaconditionswithnumerous,moredetailedormorestringentregulations.TheCBSCrequiresthat“classificationofthesoilateachbuildingsitewillbedeterminedwhenrequiredbythebuildingofficial”andthat“theclassificationwillbebasedonobservationandanynecessarytestofthematerialsdisclosedbyboringsorexcavations.”Inaddition,theCBSCstatesthat“thesoilclassificationanddesign‐bearingcapacitywillbeshownonthe(building)plans,unlessthefoundationconformstospecifiedrequirements.”TheCBSCprovidesstandardsforvariousaspectsofconstruction,including(i.e.,notlimitedto)excavation,grading,andearthworkconstruction;fillsandembankments;expansivesoils;foundationinvestigations;andliquefactionpotentialandsoilstrengthloss.InaccordancewithCalifornialaw,certainaspectsoftheprogramwouldberequiredtocomplywithallprovisionsoftheCBSC.
TheCBSCrequiresextensivegeotechnicalanalysisandengineeringforgrading,foundations,retainingwalls,andotherstructures,includingcriteriaforseismicdesign.
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
TheprincipallegislationaddressingmineralresourcesinCaliforniaistheSurfaceMiningandReclamationActof1975(SMARA)(PRCSections2710–2719),whichwasenactedinresponsetolanduseconflictsbetweenurbangrowthandessentialmineralproduction.ThestatedpurposeofSMARAistoprovideacomprehensivesurfaceminingandreclamationpolicythatwillencouragetheproductionandconservationofmineralresourceswhileensuringthatadverseenvironmentaleffectsofminingarepreventedorminimized;toensurethatminedlandsarereclaimedandresidualhazardstopublichealthandsafetyareeliminated;andtogiveconsiderationtorecreation,watershed,wildlife,aesthetic,andotherrelatedvalues.SMARAgovernstheuseandconservationofawidevarietyofmineralresources,althoughsomeresourcesandactivitiesareexemptfromitsprovisions,includingexcavationandgradingconductedforfarming,construction,orrecoveryfromfloodingorothernaturaldisaster.
SMARAprovidesfortheevaluationofanarea’smineralresourcesusingasystemofMineralResourceZone(MRZ)classificationsthatreflecttheknownorinferredpresenceandsignificanceofagivenmineralresource.TheMRZclassificationsarebasedonavailablegeologicinformation,
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐4
October 2014ICF 00323.08
includinggeologicmappingandotherinformationonsurfaceexposures,drillingrecords,andminedata,andonsocioeconomicfactorssuchasmarketconditionsandurbandevelopmentpatterns.TheMRZclassificationsaredefinedasfollows.
MRZ‐1—areaswhereadequateinformationindicatesthatnosignificantmineraldepositsarepresent,orwhereitisjudgedthatlittlelikelihoodexistsfortheirpresence.
MRZ‐2—areaswhereadequateinformationindicatesthatsignificantmineraldepositsarepresent,orwhereitisjudgedthatahighlikelihoodfortheirpresenceexists.
MRZ‐3—areascontainingmineraldeposits,thesignificanceofwhichcannotbeevaluatedfromavailabledata.
MRZ‐4—areaswhereavailableinformationisinadequateforassignmentintoanyother MRZ.
AlthoughtheStateofCaliforniaisresponsibleforidentifyingareascontainingmineralresources,thecountyorcityisresponsibleforSMARAimplementationandenforcementbyprovidingannualmininginspectionreportsandcoordinatingwiththeCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey(CGS).
Miningactivitiesthatdisturbmorethan1acreorinvolveexcavationofatleast1,000cubicyardsofmaterialrequireaSMARApermitfromtheleadagency,whichisthecounty,city,orboardthatisresponsibleforensuringthatadverseenvironmentaleffectsofminingarepreventedorminimized.Theleadagencyestablishesitsownlocalregulationsandrequiresaminingapplicanttoobtainasurfaceminingpermit,submitareclamationplan,andprovidefinancialassurancespursuanttoSMARA.
Certainland‐disturbingactivitiesdonotrequireapermit,suchasexcavationrelatedtofarming,gradingrelatedtorestoringthesiteofanaturaldisaster,andgradingrelatedtoconstruction.
California Public Resources Code
SeveralsectionsoftheCaliforniaPublicResourcesCodeprotectpaleontologicalresources.Section5097.5prohibits“knowingandwillful”excavation,removal,destruction,injury,anddefacementofanypaleontologicalfeatureonpubliclands(landsunderstate,county,city,district,orpublicauthorityjurisdiction,orthejurisdictionofapubliccorporation),exceptwheretheagencywithjurisdictionhasgrantedexpresspermission.Section30244requiresreasonablemitigationforimpactsonpaleontologicalresourcesthatoccurasaresultofdevelopmentonpubliclands.
Local
Thepoliciesandregulationsofthecountygovernmentthataddressissuesrelatedtogeology,suchasseismichazards,slopestability,anderosion,andmineralresourcesarefoundintheAlamedaGeneralPlan,theECAP,theAlamedaCountyCodeofOrdinances,andtheAlamedaCountyStormwaterManagementPlanandaredescribedbelow.Therearenogeneralplanpoliciesrelatedtopaleontologicalresources.
Alameda County General Plan
TheSafetyElementoftheAlamedaCountyGeneralPlanspecifiesnumerouspoliciesandactiontomeetitsrelevantgoal,whichis,“Tominimizeriskstolivesandpropertyduetoseismicandgeologichazards.”Thesepoliciesandactionsarelistedbelow(AlamedaCountyCommunityDevelopmentAgency2013).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐5
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Policies
P1.Totheextentpossible,projectsshouldbedesignedtoaccommodateseismicshakingandshouldbesitedawayfromareassubjecttohazardsinducedbyseismicshaking(landsliding,liquefaction,lurking,etc.)wheredesignmeasurestomitigatethehazardswillbeuneconomicorwillnotachieveasatisfactorydegreeofriskreduction.
P2.Structuresshouldbelocatedatanadequatedistanceawayfromactivefaulttraces,suchthatsurfacefaultingisnotanunreasonablehazard.
P3.Aspectsofalldevelopmentinhillsideareas,includinggrading,vegetationremovalanddrainage,shouldbecarefullycontrolledinordertominimizeerosion,disruptiontonaturalslopestability,andlandslidehazards.
P4.Withinareasofdemonstratedorpotentialslopeinstability,developmentshouldbeundertakenwithcautionandonlyafterexistinggeologicalandsoilconditionsareknownandconsidered.Inareassubjecttopossiblewidespreadmajorlandsliding,onlyverylowdensitydevelopmentshouldbepermitted,consistentwithsiteinvestigations;gradingintheseareasshouldberestrictedtominimalamountsrequiredtoprovideaccess.
P5.Allexistingstructuresorfeaturesofstructureswhicharehazardousintermsofdamage,threattolifeorlossofcriticalandessentialfunctionintheeventofanearthquakeshouldbe,totheextentfeasible,broughtintoconformancewithapplicableseismicandrelatedsafety(fire,toxicmaterialsstorageanduse)standardsthroughrehabilitation,reconstruction,demolition,orthereductioninoccupancylevelsorchangeinuse.
P6.TheCountyshallnotapprovenewdevelopmentinareaswithpotentialforseismicandgeologichazardsunlesstheCountycandeterminethatfeasiblemeasureswillbeimplementedtoreducethepotentialrisktoacceptablelevels,basedonsite‐specificanalysis.TheCountyshallreviewnewdevelopmentproposalsintermsoftheriskcausedbyseismicandgeologicactivity.
P7.TheCounty,priortoapprovingnewdevelopment,shallevaluatethedegreetowhichthedevelopmentcouldresultinlossoflivesorproperty,bothwithinthedevelopmentandbeyonditsboundaries,intheeventofanaturaldisaster.
P8.TheCountyshallensurethatnewmajorpublicfacilities,includingemergencyresponsefacilities(e.g.,hospitalsandfirestations),andwaterstorage,wastewatertreatmentandcommunicationsfacilities,aresitedinareasoflowgeologicrisk.
P9.Sitespecificgeologichazardassessments,conductedbyalicensedgeologist21,shallbecompletedpriortodevelopmentapprovalinareaswithlandslideandliquefactionhazardsasindicatedinFiguresS‐2andS‐4andfordevelopmentproposalssubmittedinAlquist‐PrioloZonesasindicatedinFigureS‐1,hazardstobemappedinclude:
Seismicfeatures
Landslidepotential
Liquefactionpotential
Mitigationmeasuresneededtoreducetherisktolifeandpropertyfromearthquakeinducedhazardsshouldbeincluded.
P10.Buildingsshallbedesignedandconstructedtowithstandgroundshakingforcesofaminorearthquake(1–4magnitude)withoutdamage,ofamoderate(5magnitude)earthquakewithoutstructuraldamage,andofamajorearthquake(6–8magnitude)withoutcollapseofthestructure.TheCountyshallrequirethatcriticalfacilitiesandstructures(e.g.,hospitals,emergencyoperationscenters)bedesignedandconstructedtoremainstandingandfunctionalfollowinganearthquake.
P11.AllconstructioninunincorporatedareasshallconformtotheAlamedaCountyBuildingOrdinance,whichspecifiesrequirementsforthestructuraldesignoffoundationsandotherbuildingelementswithinseismichazardareas.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐6
October 2014ICF 00323.08
P12.Totheextentfeasible,majorinfrastructureincludingtransportation,pipelines,andwaterandnaturalgasmains,shallbedesignedtoavoidorminimizecrossingsofactivefaulttracesandtoaccommodatefaultdisplacementwithoutmajordamagethatcouldresultinlong‐termservicedisruptions.
P13.TheCountyshallencouragetheretrofittingofexistingstructuresandotherseismicallyunsafebuildingsandstructurestowithstandearthquakeground‐shaking.
P14.Inordertominimizeoff‐siteimpactsofhillsidedevelopment,newconstructiononlandslide‐proneorpotentiallyunstableslopesshallberequiredtoimplementdrainageanderosioncontrolprovisionstoavoidslopefailureandmitigatepotentialhazards.
Actions
A1.Requireallnewconstructiontomeetthemostcurrent,applicable,lateralforcerequirements.
A2.RequireapplicationsfordevelopmentwithinAlquist‐PrioloStudyZonestoincludegeologicaldatathatthesubjectpropertyisnottraversedbyanactiveorpotentiallyactivefault,orthatanadequatesetbackcanbemaintainedbetweenthefaulttraceandtheproposednewconstruction.
A3.Requiresitestobedevelopedinaccordancewithrecommendationscontainedinthesoilandgeologicinvestigationsreports.
A4.EstablishstandardsforareaspreviouslyinAlquist‐PrioloStudyZones,andeliminatedinthelastupdate.
A5.Regulate,withcollaborationfromutilityowners,theextensionofutilitylinesinfaultzones.
A6.Establish(withcollaborationfromutilityowners)andenforcedesignstandardsfortransportationfacilitiesandundergroundutilitylinestobelocatedinfaultzones.
A7.Requiresoilsand/orgeologicreportsfordevelopmentproposedinareasoferodiblesoilsandpotentialslopeinstability.
A8.Pursueprogramstoidentifyandcorrectexistingstructuralhazards,withprioritygiventohazardsincritical,essentialandhighoccupancystructuresandinstructuresbuiltpriortotheenactmentofapplicablelocalorstateearthquakedesignstandards.
A9.Supportregionalorstatewideprogramsprovidingfundingortechnicalassistancetolocalgovernmentstoallowidentificationofexistingstructuralhazardsinprivatedevelopmentandprovidingassistancetopublicandprivatesectorstofacilitateandtominimizethesocialandeconomiccostsofhazardsabatement.
A10.Continuetorequiretheupgradingofbuildingsandfacilitiestoachievecompliancewithcurrentearthquakebracingrequirementsasaconditionofgrantingbuildingpermitsformajoradditionsandrepairs.
A11.Continue,andasrequired,expandprogramstoprovidethepublicinformationregardingseismichazardsandrelatedstructuralhazards.
A12.Requiregeotechnicalstudiespriortodevelopmentapprovalingeologicand/orseismichazardareasasidentifiedbyfuturestudiesbyfederal,state,andregionalagencies.Requireorundertakecomprehensivegeologicandengineeringstudiesforcriticalstructuresregardlessoflocation.
A13.AdoptandamendasneededthemostcurrentversionoftheCaliforniaBuildingCode(CBC)toensurethatnewconstructionandrenovationprojectsincorporateEarthquake‐resistantdesignandmaterialsthatmeetorexceedthecurrentseismicengineeringstandardsoftheCBC.
A14.Periodicallyupdatedetailedguidelinesforpreparationofsite‐specificgeologichazardassessments.TheseguidelinesshallbepreparedinconsultationwiththeCountyBuildingOfficial,CountyEngineer,CountyCounselandtheCountyRiskManagerandshallensurethatsite‐specificassessmentsfordevelopmentrequiringdiscretionarypermitsarepreparedaccordingtoconsistentcriteria.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐7
October 2014ICF 00323.08
A15.Developandimplementanearthquakeretrofitplantoreducehazardsfromearthquakes.Theplanshouldidentifyandtallytheseismicallyunsafebuildingsandstructures,includingunreinforcedmasonry,unreinforcedconcreteandsoft‐storybuildings,andrequireinspectionforthesestructures.Itshouldalsoidentifysourcesoffundingtohelpreconstructorreplaceinadequatestructuresandassisthomeownerswithearthquakeretrofitting.
A16.Onsiteswithslopesgreaterthan30percent,requirealldevelopmenttobeclusteredoutsideofthe30percentslopearea,withtheexceptionthatdevelopmentuponanyareaoutsideoftheUrbanGrowthBoundarywheretheslopeexceeds25%shallnotbepermitted.
A17.Aspectsofalldevelopmentinhillsideareas,includinggrading,vegetationremovalanddrainage,shouldbecarefullycontrolledinordertominimizeerosion,disruptiontonaturalslopestability,andlandslidehazards.TheCounty’sdevelopmentstandardsandguidelines,permitapplicationreviewprocess,Section15.08.240ofitsBuildingOrdinance,theGradingErosionandSedimentControlOrdinance(Chapter15.36oftheAlamedaCountyGeneralOrdinanceCode),theStormwaterManagementandDischargeControlOrdinance(Chapter13.08),andSubdivisionOrdinance(Title16)shallservetoimplementthispolicy.
Alameda County Code of Ordinances
IntheCodeofOrdinances,Chapter15.08,BuildingCode,theCountysetsforthrequirementsfornewconstructioninareasaffectedbyseismicandgeologichazards.ThecoderequiresthattheprojectproponentsubmitsoilandgeotechnicalreportsbeforetheCountywillpermitconstructionofafoundation.Inaddition,Chapter15.36,GradingErosionandSedimentControl,knownasthegradingordinance,setsforthrequirementsforgrading,construction,andthecontroloferosionandsedimentsinordertosafeguardhumanhealthandproperty,protectwaterways,andensurethatthegradedsiteispreparedinaccordancewiththegeneralplan.
Alameda County Stormwater Management Plan
TheAlamedaCountyCleanWaterProgram’s(ACCWP)StormwaterManagementPlanforunincorporatedAlamedaCountyisdiscussedinSection3.9,HydrologyandWaterQuality.
Alameda County East County Area Plan
TheECAPsetsforththefollowinggoals,policies,andimplementationprogramstominimizetherisksrelatedtoseismichazards(AlamedaCounty2000)andopenspace.
Hazard Zones
Goal:Tominimizetheriskstolivesandpropertyduetoenvironmentalhazards.
Policy134:TheCountyshallnotapprovenewdevelopmentinareaswithpotentialnaturalhazards(flooding,geologic,wildlandfire,orotherenvironmentalhazards)unlesstheCountycandeterminethatfeasiblemeasureswillbeimplementedtoreducethepotentialrisktoacceptablelevels,basedonsite‐specificanalysis.
Policy135:TheCounty,priortoapprovingnewdevelopment,shallevaluatethedegreetowhichthedevelopmentcouldresultinlossoflivesorproperty,bothwithinthedevelopmentandbeyonditsboundaries,intheeventofanaturaldisaster.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐8
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Environmental Hazards
Soil and Slope Stability
Goal:Tominimizetheriskstolivesandpropertyduetosoilandslopeinstabilityhazards.
Policy307:TheCountyshallencourageZone7,cities,andagriculturalgroundwateruserstolimitthewithdrawalofgroundwaterinordertominimizethepotentialforlandsubsidence.
Policy308:TheCountyshallnotpermitdevelopmentwithinanyareaoutsidetheUrbanGrowthBoundaryexceeding25percentslopestominimizehazardsassociatedwithslopeinstability.
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
Goal:Tominimizetheriskstolivesandpropertyduetoseismicandgeologichazards.
Policy309:TheCountyshallnotapprovenewdevelopmentinareaswithpotentialforseismicandgeologichazardsunlesstheCountycandeterminethatfeasiblemeasureswillbeimplementedtoreducethepotentialrisktoacceptablelevels,basedonsite‐specificanalysis.TheCountyshallreviewnewdevelopmentproposalsintermsoftheriskcausedbyseismicandgeologicactivity.
Policy310:TheCounty,priortoapprovingnewdevelopment,shallevaluatethedegreetowhichthedevelopmentcouldresultinlossoflivesorproperty,bothwithinthedevelopmentandbeyonditsboundaries,intheeventofanaturaldisaster.
Policy311:TheCountyshallensurethatnewmajorpublicfacilities,includingemergencyresponsefacilities(e.g.,hospitalsandfirestations),andwaterstorage,wastewatertreatmentandcommunicationsfacilities,aresitedinareasoflowgeologicrisk.
Policy312:TheCountyshallensurethatmajortransportationfacilitiesandpipelinesaredesigned,totheextentfeasible,toavoidorminimizecrossingsofactivefaulttracesandtoaccommodatefaultdisplacementwithoutmajordamagethatcouldresultinlong‐termdisruptionofservice.
Policy313:TheCountyshallrequiredevelopmentinhillyareastominimizepotentialerosionanddisruptionofnaturalslopestabilitywhichcouldresultfromgrading,vegetationremoval,irrigation,anddrainage.
Policy314:TheCountyshallprohibittheconstructionofanystructureintendedforhumanoccupancywithin50feetoneithersideoftheCalaveras,Greenville,orVeronaearthquakefaultzonesasdefinedbytheAlquist‐PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningAct.
Policy315:TheCountyshallrequirethatbuildingsbedesignedandconstructedtowithstandgroundshakingforcesofaminorearthquakewithoutdamage,ofamoderateearthquakewithoutstructuraldamage,andofamajorearthquakewithoutcollapseofthestructure.TheCountyshallrequirethatcriticalfacilitiesandstructures(e.g.,hospitals,emergencyoperationscenters)bedesignedandconstructedtoremainstandingandfunctionalfollowinganearthquake.
ImplementationPrograms:
Program111:TheCountyshalldelineateareaswithinEastCountywherethepotentialforgeologichazards(includingseismichazards,landslides,andliquefaction)warrantspreparationofdetailedsitespecificgeologichazardassessments.Areasshallbedelineatedbasedupondatafrompublishedsourcesandfieldinvestigations.Mapsshallbemaintainedandupdatedasnewdatabecomeavailable.ThesemapsshallnotbeusedbytheCountytodeterminewherehazardousconditionsexist,butinsteadtoidentifythepresenceofconditionswhichwarrantfurtherstudy.
Program112:TheCountyshalldevelopdetailedguidelinesforpreparationofsite‐specificgeologichazardassessments.TheseguidelinesshallbepreparedinconsultationwiththeCountyBuildingOfficial,theCountyEngineer,CountyGeologist,CountyCounsel,andtheCountyRisk
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐9
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Manager,andshallensurethatsite‐specificassessmentsfordevelopmentrequiringdiscretionarypermitsarepreparedaccordingtoconsistentcriteria.
General Open Space
Goal:Toprotectregionallysignificantopenspaceandagriculturallandfromdevelopment
Policy52:TheCountyshallpreserveopenspaceareasfortheprotectionofpublichealthandsafety,provisionofrecreationalopportunities,productionofnaturalresources(e.g.,agriculture,windpower,andmineralextraction),protectionofsensitiveviewsheds,preservationofbiologicalresources,andthephysicalseparationbetweenneighboringcommunities.
Environmental Setting
Topography
TheprogramareaislocatedintheAltamontHillsintheDiabloRangeoftheCoastRanges.TheAltamontHillsaresituatedbetweentheeasternedgeofLivermoreValleyandthewesternedgeoftheSanJoaquinValley.Elevationsintheprogramarearangefromapproximately100feetabovemeansealevel(msl)onthefarnortheasternsideoftheprogramareatomorethan2,100feetabovemslinthesouth.Thetopographyintheprojectareasvariesbutoverallissteep,withgenerallymoresmooth,roundedhillsandridgesinthenorthernportionoftheprogramareaandsteeper,moresharp‐crestedterraininthesouthernportionoftheprogramarea.
Thetopographyofthetwoprojectareasissummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—ThenorthernportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectareaisinthemoreroundedhillsoftheprogramarea,andelevationsrangefromapproximately200to700feetabovemsl.Thesouthernportionoftheprojectareaisinthesteeperterrainoftheprogramarea,andelevationshererangefrom500tonearly1,600feetabovemsl.
PattersonPassProject—ThePattersonPassprojectareaisthecentralportionoftheprogramareainfairlysteep,sharp‐crestedterrain.Elevationsrangefromapproximately700to2,000feetabovemsl.
Geology
Regional
Theprogramareaisintheeast‐centralportionofCalifornia’sCoastRangesgeomorphicprovince(e.g.,NorrisandWebb1990:359–363;CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2002:3).TheCoastRangesprovinceischaracterizedbyenechelon(i.e.,paralleltosubparallel)northwest‐trendingmountainrangesformedbyactiveupliftrelatedtocomplextectonicsoftheSanAndreasfault/plateboundarysystem(NorrisandWebb1990:359–380).
TheeasternCoastRangesarebroadlyantiformal(i.e.,foldisconvex,witholdestgeologicunitsinthecore).Atthegenerallatitudeoftheprogramarea,theyconsistofacentralcoreofMesozoicunits—primarilytheCretaceousPanocheFormation—flankedontheeastbyanupwardyoungingsequenceofmarineandterrestrialsedimentaryunitsthatincludetheSanPabloFormation,aMiocenefanglomerate,andQuaternaryalluvialdeposits(Wagneretal.1991).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐10
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Local
ThebedrockgeologyoftheprogramvicinityisshowninFigure3.6‐1.Graymeretal.havedividedthegeologyofAlamedaCountyintoninestratigraphicassemblages,eachofwhichisafault‐boundedblock.Twooftheseassemblages,VIandXI,occurintheprogramarea.Adescriptionoftheseassemblages,ratherthantheindividualgeologicunits,isprovidedherebecauseofthelargeextentoftheprogramarea.
AssemblageVImakesupmostoftheprogramarea.ThisassemblageisboundedbytheGreenvillefaulttothewestandtheCarnegiefaulttothesouth.ThenorthernhalfoftheassemblageismadeupoftheGreatValleySequence,whichconsistsprimarilyofsandstoneandinterbeddedsandstoneandshaleofCretaceousage.ThesouthernhalfoftheassemblageismadeupofmassivemarinesandstoneandbasalconglomerateofthelateMioceneCierboSandstone(Tc)andNerolyFormation(Tn)(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a:27–30).TheCierboSandstoneisalightgraytowhite,thick‐bedded,fine‐tocoarse‐grained,moderatelyconsolidated,quartzsandstone.Insomelocationsitcontainsabundantmolluskfossils.TheNerolySandstoneisabluesandstonewithminorconglomerate(Graymeretal.1996:12).
AssemblageXIisawedge‐shapedblockinthesouthwestcorneroftheprogramarea,boundedbytheCarnegiefaulttonorthandtheGreenvillefaulttothewest.MostofthisassemblageismadeupofMiocenesedimentarydeposits,primarilytheNerolysandstoneandTeslaFormation.TheTeslaFormationisamarinetobrackishwatersandstone.TheextremesouthernedgeoftheassemblageintheprogramareaismadeupthesandstonesoftheGreatValleySequence(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a:27–30).
Thegeologyofthetwoprojectareasissummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—InthenorthernportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectarea,thegeologicunitexposedatthesurfaceisaCretaceoussandstone(KdonFigure3.6‐1).Inthesouthernportionoftheprojectarea,theunitsexposedareaCretaceousshaleinthecenter(Kcu),theCretaceoussandstone(Kd)tothewestandeastoftheshale,theMioceneCierbosandstone(Tc)tothewestandeastoftheCretaceoussandstone,andtheMioceneNerolyFormation(Tn)ontheeasternedgeoftheCierboSandstone.
PattersonPassProject—ThegeologicunitsexposedatthesurfaceinthePattersonPassprojectareaaretheCretaceousshale(KcuonFigure3.6‐1)tothenorth,theMioceneCierboSandstone(Tc)inthecenter,andtheMioceneNerolyFormation(Tn)tothesouth.
Seismicity
Primary Seismic Hazards
TheStateofCaliforniaconsiderstwoaspectsofearthquakeeventsasprimaryseismichazards:surfacefaultrupture(i.e.,visualdisruptionoftheEarth’ssurfaceasaresultoffaultactivity)andseismicgroundshaking.
Surface Fault Rupture
Thereisariskofsurfaceruptureintheprogramareabecausetwoactivefaults(theMarshCreeksectionoftheGreenvillefaultzoneandtheCorralHollow‐Carnegiefaultzone)occurintheprogramarea.Inaddition,anotheractivefault(theLosPositasfault)isjustwestoftheprogramarea.AlamedaCountyisinaseismicallyactiveregionandAlquist‐Prioloearthquakefaultzonemapshave
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐11
October 2014ICF 00323.08
beenpreparedformuchofthecounty(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2007).Oneofthesemapscoversthewesternportionoftheprogramarea,whichisinanAlquist‐Prioloearthquakefaultzone.Twoactivefaultshavebeenmappedaspartofthisstudy:theGreenvillefaultzone(CaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeology1982),specificallytheMarshCreek‐Greenvillesection,andtheLosPositasfault(Figure3.6‐2).TheGreenvillefaultzoneisanorthwesttrendingstrike‐slipfaultzonethatisapproximately30mileslong,extendingfromtheTassajaraquadrangle(justnorthofLivermorequadrangle)totheEylarquadrangle(inSantaClaraCounty)alongthewesternsideoftheDiabloRange(CaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeology1981:3;BryantandCluett2002:1;CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2007).TheMarshCreeksectionoftheGreenvillefaultoccursonthewesternedgeoftheprogramarea.Thefaultisactive,withsomesegmentshavingbeenactivehistorically(includingportionsthatshowedminorruptureduringtheLivermoreValleyquakein1980)andothersegmentsactiveinthelast11,000to15,000years(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2010;BryantandCluett2002:1)(Figure3.6‐2).TheLosPositasfaultisaneast‐westtrendingfaultjustwestoftheAPWRAthathasbeenactiveinthelast200years(CaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeology1981).
ThethirdactivefaultintheprogramareaistheCorralHollow‐Carnegiefaultzone,portionsofwhichhavebeenactiveinthelast15,000years(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2010;U.S.GeologicalSurvey2013a)(Figure3.6‐2).
ItshouldalsobenotedthattheMidwayfaultextendsthroughtheeasternedgeoftheprogramarea.AlthoughtheU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)QuaternaryFaultDatabase(2013b)andCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey(2010)designatethisfaultaspotentiallyactive(i.e.,experiencedmovementinthelast130,000years),ratherthanactive(i.e.,experiencedmovementinthelast11,000years),workconductedbyUnruhandKrug(2007:17)fortheUSGSconcluded“thattheMidwayfaultisanactivestructurethatprimarilyaccommodatesstrike‐slipdisplacement.”
Thesurfacefaultrupturepotentialofthetwoprojectareasissummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—AlthoughnoportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectareaiswithinanAlquist‐Prioloearthquakefaultzoneornearasegmentofafaultdesignatedasactive,aportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectareadoesoverlieasegmentoftheCorralHollow‐CarnegiefaultzonedesignatedasQuaternaryundifferentiated(i.e.,thedateofthemostrecentrupturehasnotbeendetermined)(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2010)(Figure3.6‐2).Thisoccursatthenorthernendofthefaulttrace.TheMarshCreeksectionoftheGreenvillefaultzoneisneartheGoldenHillsprojectarea,buttheprojectareadoesnotcrossorcomewithin50feetofthisfaultzone.
PattersonPassProject—NoportionofthePattersonPassprojectareaislocatednearaQuaternaryfaulttrace.
Seismic Ground Shaking
Unlikesurfacerupture,groundshakingisnotconfinedtothetraceofafault,butrathergroundshakingpropagatesintothesurroundingareasduringanearthquake.Theintensityofgroundshakingtypicallydiminisheswithdistancefromthefault,butgroundshakingmaybelocallyamplifiedand/orprolongedbysometypesofsubstratematerials.Thesefactorsareusedtomaptheprobabilisticshakinghazardsthroughoutthestate.
Basedontheprobabilisticseismichazardmap,whichdepictsthepeakhorizontalgroundaccelerationvaluesexceededata10%probabilityin50years(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2003;Caoetal.2003),theprobabilisticpeakhorizontalgroundaccelerationvaluesfortheprogramarea
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐12
October 2014ICF 00323.08
rangefrom0.2gto0.5g(wheregequalstheaccelerationofgravity)(Figure3.6‐3).Asapointofcomparison,probabilisticpeakhorizontalgroundaccelerationvaluesfortheSanFranciscoBayArearangefrom0.4gtomorethan0.8g.Theaccelerationvaluefortheprogramareaindicatesamoderateground‐shakinghazard(Figure3.6‐3).
ThemainsourceofstronggroundshakingistheGreenvillefaultzone,whichhasexperiencedmovementasrecentlyas1980duringtheLivermoreValleyearthquake(Figure3.6‐2).TheGreenvillefaultzoneextendsalongtheeasternedgeoftheLivermoreValleyandisconsideredtobepartofthelargerSanAndreasfaultsystem(BryantandCluett2002:1).OtheractivefaultsintheprojectvicinityincludetheHayward‐RogersCreekfault,theLosPositasfault(associatedwiththeGreenvillefault),andtheCalaverasfault.
Theseismicground‐shakingpotentialofthetwoprojectareasissummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—TheprobabilisticpeakhorizontalgroundaccelerationvaluesfortheGoldenHillsprojectarearangefrom0.2gto0.5g—thesameasfortheentireprogramarea.
PattersonPassProject—TheprobabilisticpeakhorizontalgroundaccelerationvaluesforthePattersonPassprojectareaalsorangefrom0.2gto0.5g,withmostoftheprojectareainthehigherendoftheshakingintensityrange.
Secondary Seismic Hazards
Secondaryseismichazardsareseismicallyinducedlandslide,liquefaction,andrelatedtypesofgroundfailureevents.AsdiscussedinRegulatorySettinginSection3.6.1,ExistingConditions,theStateofCaliforniamapsareasthataresubjecttosecondaryseismichazardspursuanttotheSeismicHazardsMappingAct.Thesehazardsareaddressedbrieflybelowbasedonavailableinformation.
Landslide and Other Slope Stability Hazards
Severalsquaremilesonthewesternsideoftheprogramareaareinearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazardzones(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a,2000b)(Figure3.6‐4).ThesezonesaredesignatedasaZoneofRequiredInvestigationforlandslidehazardbytheStateofCalifornia.
AccordingtotheCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey(2009b:Section2,page25):
Earthquake‐inducedlandslidezonemapsareintendedtopromptmoredetailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationsasrequiredbytheAct.Assuch,thesezonemapsidentifyareaswherethepotentialforearthquake‐inducedlandslidesisrelativelyhigh.Duetolimitationsinmethodology,itshouldbenotedthatthesezonemapsdonotnecessarilycaptureallpotentialearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazards.Earthquake‐inducedgroundfailuresthatarenotaddressedbythismapincludethoseassociatedwithridge‐topspreadingandshatteredridges.Itshouldalsobenotedthatnoattempthasbeenmadetomappotentialrun‐outareasoftriggeredlandslides.Itispossiblethatrunoutareasextendbeyondthezoneboundaries.
Thelandslidezonestendtobeconcentratedinareaswheretheslopesaresteeperand/orrockstrengthsareweaker.NumeroushistoricallyactivelandslidesoccuralongtheGreenvillefault.ManyofthemoderatetolargerockslidesareunderlainbytheMioceneunitsoftheNerolySandstone(Tn),OroLomaFormation(Tol),andTeslaFormation(Tte),andalsotheCierboSandstone(Tc)buttoalesserextent.Steepslopesandproximitytofaultsappeartobethepredominantcausesoflandslidinginthearea(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a:vandSection2,pages31–32).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐13
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Althoughtheremainderoftheprogramareaisnotinanearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazardzone(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2007),severalfactorsmakeslopeinstability(bothseismicallyandnonseismicallyinduced)aconcerninthisarea.Thesefactorsincludethesteeptopography,thepotentialformoderategroundshaking,andtheproximitytoareasdesignatedaslandslidehazardzones.Inaddition,slopestabilityrelatedtoprecipitationisalsofactorintheprogramarea(seeSlopeStability[Nonseismic‐Related]below).
Liquefaction and Related Ground Failure
Liquefactionistheprocessinwhichsoilsandsedimentsloseshearstrengthandfailduringseismicgroundshaking.Thevibrationcausedbyanearthquakecanincreaseporepressureinsaturatedmaterials.Iftheporepressureisraisedtobeequivalenttotheloadpressure,thiscausesatemporarylossofshearstrength,allowingthematerialtoflowasafluid.Thistemporaryconditioncanresultinseveresettlementoffoundationsandslopefailure.Thesusceptibilityofanareatoliquefactionisdeterminedlargelybythedepthtogroundwaterandtheproperties(e.g.,grainsize,density,degreeofconsolidation)ofthesoilandsedimentwithinandabovethegroundwater.Thesedimentsmostsusceptibletoliquefactionaresaturated,unconsolidatedsandandsiltwithin40feetofthegroundsurface.AccordingtotheCGSreportpreparedfortheadjacentAltamontquadrangle,CGSevaluationsfocusonareascoveredbyQuaternary(lessthanabout1.6millionyears)sedimentarydeposits(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a:Section1,pages2–4).Improperlycompactedartificialfillmayalsobesusceptibletoliquefaction.
Althoughaportionoftheprogramareaisinaseismichazardzone(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2007),noliquefactionhazardzonesaremappedintheprogramarea(Figure3.6‐4).Becausethedepthtogroundwaterinthefoothills,whichareoutsidethegroundwaterbasin,isgenerallygreaterthan60feet(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2009a:Section1,page9),theliquefactionhazardintheprogramareaislikelylow.Inaddition,theagesoftherockunitsintheAPWRAaregenerallyTertiaryandCretaceous,whichareolderthanmostliquefiablesediments.However,landslidedepositsmaybelessconsolidatedand,therefore,moresusceptibletoliquefaction.
Othertypesofgroundfailurerelatedtoliquefactionincludelateralspreadinganddifferentialsettlement.Lateralspreadingisafailureofsoil/sedimentwithinanearlyhorizontalzonethatcausesthesoiltomovetowardafreeface(suchasastreambankorcanal)ordownagentleslope.Lateralspreadingcanoccuronslopesasgentleas0.5%.Evenarelativelythinlayerofliquefiablesedimentcancreateplanesofweaknessthatcouldcausecontinuouslateralspreadingoverlargeareas(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2008:36).
Thepotentialforlateralspreadingintheprojectareaisunknown.
Differentialsettlement—theunevensettlingofsoil—isthemostcommonfilldisplacementhazard(CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey2008:56).Thepotentialfordifferentialsettlementisunknownbecauseitsdeterminationrequiressite‐specifictesting.
Slope Stability (Nonseismic‐Related)
Nonseismic‐relatedlandslidingiscommonintheAPWRA.
In1998,heavyrainfallcausedwidespreadlandslidinginthe10‐countySanFranciscoBayregion.Asaresult,USGSgeologistsconductedalandslideinventoryoftheaffectedcounties,includingAlamedaCounty.Figure3.6‐5showsthelandslidesthatweremappedinandneartheprogramarea,includingoneverynearthePattersonPassprojectarea.However,becauseoftheextentofthelandsliding,
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐14
October 2014ICF 00323.08
onlylandslidesassociatedwithdamagetothebuiltenvironmentweremapped(U.S.GeologicalSurvey1999:2andmap).Becausetheprogramareaisinaruralarea,manylandslidesarenotshown.
Inaddition,thewideextentoflandslidinginandaroundtheprogramareaisfurtherexemplifiedbytheomissionoflandslidesfromthebedrockgeologicmapofAlamedaCounty“becausetheyaresonumeroustheywouldconcealmuchoftheinformationonbedrockgeology”(Graymeretal.1996:6).
Soils
Becausetheprogramareaislarge,thesoilsarebestdescribedatalandscapescale,ratherthanatadetailedscale.NaturalResourcesConservationServicemapssoilsatalandscapescalebymappingsoilassociations.Soilassociationsaregroupingsofindividualsoilsthatoccurtogetherinarepeatingpatternonthelandscapeandaretypicallynamedafterthetwoorthreedominantsoilseries.
Severalsoilassociationsoccurintheprogramarea(Figure3.6‐6).Table3.6‐1summarizesimportantissuesofconcernrelatedtosuitabilityforconstruction.Theprimaryissueofconcernistheshrink‐swellpotentialofthesoils(i.e.,linearextensibilityorexpansiveness).ManyofthesoilsthatmakeuptheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation,whichoccursovermostoftheprogramarea,haveahighshrink‐swellpotential.Severalotherminorsoilassociationsalsohaveahighshrink‐swellpotential.
Thesoilassociationsofthetwoprojectareasaresummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—AlloftheGoldenHillsprojectareaisunderlainbytheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation.AsdescribedinTable3.6‐1,twoconstructionissuesassociatedwiththesoilsinthisassociationarehighshrink‐swellpotentialandsusceptibilitytowatererosion.
PattersonPassProject—MuchofthePattersonPassprojectareaisalsounderlainbytheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation.Inaddition,thesoutheasternportionoftheprojectareaisunderlainbytheCarbona‐Callasoilassociation.Somesoilsinthisassociationhaveahighshrink‐swellpotential(Table3.6‐1).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐15
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Table 3.6‐1. General Characteristics of Soil Associations in the Program Area
MapSymbol SoilAssociation LocationandCharacteristics
s697 SanYsidro‐Rincon Occursinnortheastcornerofprogramarea.Somesoilsinthisassociationaresusceptibletowinderosion.
s694 Fontana‐Diablo‐Altamont
Dominantsoilassociationinprogramarea;occursovermostofthearea.Mostsoilsinthisassociationhaveahighshrink‐swellpotential.Somesoilsinthisassociationhaveahighersusceptibilitytowatererosion.
s863 Carbona‐Capay‐Calla
Occursintheeast‐centraledgeofprogramarea.Allsoilsinthisassociationhaveamoderatetohighshrink‐swellpotential.
s864 Carbona‐Calla Occursintheeast‐centralportionofprogramarea.Mostsoilsinthisassociationhaveamoderatetoveryhighshrink‐swellpotential.
s792 Wisflat‐Badland‐Arburua
Smallareaoccursinthesoutheastedgeofprogramarea.Severalsoilsinthisassociationhaveahighshrink‐swellpotential.Somesoilsinthisassociationhaveahighersusceptibilitytowatererosion.
s892 Vallecitos‐Honker‐Gonzaga‐Franciscan
Smallareaoccursinthesouthedgeofprogramarea.Mostsoilsinthisassociationhaveamoderatetohighshrink‐swellpotential.
s970 Vallecitos‐Parrish‐LosGatos‐Gaviota
Smallareaoccursinthesouthwestedgeofprogramarea.Mostsoilsinthisassociationhaveamoderatetohighshrink‐swellpotential.
Source:NaturalResourcesConservationService2006.
Mineral Resources
Therearenoknownmineralresourcesintheprogramarea.AccordingtotheCaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeologylandclassificationmappreparedfortheSouthSanFranciscoBayProduction‐Consumption(P‐C)Region,whichincludesAlamedaCounty,therenoareasdesignatedasMRZ‐2(Kohler‐Antablin1996:viiiandPlate17).Nominingisknowntooccurinthearea.Inaddition,thegeneralplandoesnotidentifymineralresourcesintheprogramarea.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontologicalsensitivityisaqualitativeassessmentbasedonthepaleontologicalpotentialofthestratigraphicunitspresent,thelocalgeologyandgeomorphology,andotherfactorsrelevanttofossilpreservationandpotentialyield.AccordingtotheSocietyofVertebratePaleontology(SVP)(2010),standardguidelinesforsensitivityare(1)thepotentialforageologicalunittoyieldabundantorsignificantvertebratefossilsortoyieldafewsignificantfossils,largeorsmall,vertebrate,invertebrate,orpaleobotanicalremainsand(2)theimportanceofrecoveredevidencefornewandsignificanttaxonomic,phylogenetic,paleoecological,orstratigraphicdata(Table3.6‐2).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐16
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Table 3.6‐2. Paleontological Sensitivity Ratings
Potential Definition
High Rockunitsfromwhichvertebrateorsignificantinvertebrate,plant,ortracefossilshavebeenrecoveredareconsideredtohaveahighpotentialforcontainingadditionalsignificantpaleontologicalresourcesPaleontologicalpotentialconsistsofboth(a)thepotentialforyieldingabundantorsignificantvertebratefossilsorforyieldingafewsignificantfossils,largeorsmall,vertebrate,invertebrate,plant,ortracefossilsand(b)theimportanceofrecoveredevidencefornewandsignificanttaxonomic,phylogenetic,paleoecologic,taphonomic,biochronologic,orstratigraphicdata.
Undetermined Rockunitsforwhichlittleinformationisavailableconcerningtheirpaleontologicalcontent,geologicage,anddepositionalenvironmentareconsideredtohaveundeterminedpotential.Furtherstudyisnecessarytodetermineiftheserockunitshavehighorlowpotentialtocontainsignificantpaleontologicalresources.
Low Reportsinthepaleontologicalliteratureorfieldsurveysbyaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistmayallowdeterminationthatsomerockunitshavelowpotentialforyieldingsignificantfossils.Suchrockunitswillbepoorlyrepresentedbyfossilspecimensininstitutionalcollections,orbasedongeneralscientificconsensus,willonlypreservefossilsinrarecircumstancesandthepresenceoffossilsistheexceptionnottherule.
No Somerockunits,suchashigh‐grademetamorphicrocks(suchasgneissesandschists)andplutonicigneousrocks(suchasgranitesanddiorites),havenopotentialtocontainsignificantpaleontologicalresources.Rockunitswithnopotentialrequireneitherprotectionnorimpactmitigationmeasuresrelativetopaleontologicalresources.
Source:SocietyofVertebratePaleontology2010.
Becauseofthelargeareaoftheprogramareaandthemanygeologicunitsthatoccurinthatarea,itisnotpossibletomakeadeterminationofthesensitivityforpaleontologicalresourcesofeachunit.However,mostofthegeologicunitsintheAPWRAarelikelyhighlysensitiveforpaleontologicalresources,basedprimarilyonrocktype.BothassemblagesintheAPWRA(seediscussionunderGeology)aremadeupofsedimentaryrocks,suchassandstoneandshale.Theserocks,ingeneral,haveahighpotentialtocontainpaleontologicalresources.Inaddition,someoftheseunitsareknowntocontainfossils.Forexample,theUniversityofCaliforniaMuseumofPaleontology(UCMP)databasecontainsfourrecordsofmammalfossilsintheNerolyFormation(UniversityofCaliforniaMuseumofPaleontology2013a).AnotherexampleistheGreatValleySequence,whichcontainsunitswithadiverseassemblageofinvertebrates,plusmarinereptilesandnumeroustypesofplants(PaleoPortal2013).
ItshouldalsobenotedthattheUCMPdatabasecontains1,241recordsofvertebratefossilsinAlamedaCounty.However,mostoftheserecordsarefromgeologicunitsnotfoundintheprogramarea.(UniversityofCaliforniaMuseumofPaleontology2013b).
Thepaleontologicalresourcesofthetwoprojectareasissummarizedbelow.
GoldenHillsProject—TheGoldenHillsprojectareaisunderlainbyCretaceousandMiocenesedimentaryunitswithpotentialtocontainsensitivepaleontologicalresources.TheseunitsincludeCretaceoussandstoneandshale(KdandKcuonFigure3.6‐1),theMioceneCierboSandstone(Tc),andtheMioceneNerolyFormation(Tn).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐17
October 2014ICF 00323.08
PattersonPassProject—ThePattersonPassprojectareaisalsounderlainbyCretaceousandMiocenesedimentaryunitswithpotentialtocontainsensitivepaleontologicalresources.TheseunitsincludeCretaceousshale(KcuonFigure3.6‐1),theMioceneCierboSandstone(Tc),andtheMioceneNerolyFormation(Tn).
3.6.2 Environmental Impacts
Theimpactsassociatedwiththeexposureoftheprogramandtwoindividualprojectstotheexistingknowngeologicandsoilhazards,mineralresources,andpaleontologicalresourcesarediscussedbelow.Mitigationmeasuresareprovided,whereappropriate.
Methods for Analysis
Evaluationofthegeologyandsoilimpactsinthissectionisbasedoninformationfrompublishedmaps,reports,andotherdocumentsthatdescribethegeologic,seismic,soil,andmineralresourceconditionsoftheprogramarea,andonprofessionaljudgment.TheanalysisassumesthattheprojectproponentswillconformtothelatestCBSCstandards,countygeneralplanseismicsafetystandards,countygradingordinance,andNPDESrequirements.
TheprimarysourceofinformationusedindevelopingthepaleontologicalresourcessectionisthepaleontologicaldatabaseattheUniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.Effectsonpaleontologicalresourceswereanalyzedqualitativelyonalarge‐scalelevel,basedonprofessionaljudgmentandtheSVPguidelinesbelow.
SVP’sStandardProceduresfortheAssessmentandMitigationofAdverseImpactstoPaleontologicalResourcesprovidesstandardguidelinesthatarewidelyfollowed(SocietyofVertebratePaleontology2010).Theseguidelinesreflecttheacceptedstandardofcareforpaleontologicalresources.TheSVPguidelinesidentifytwokeyphasesintheprocessforprotectingpaleontologicalresourcesfromprojectimpacts.
Assessthelikelihoodthattheareacontainssignificantnonrenewablepaleontologicalresourcesthatcouldbedirectlyorindirectlyimpacted,damaged,ordestroyedasaresultoftheproject.
Formulateandimplementmeasurestomitigatepotentialadverseimpacts.
AnimportantstrengthofSVP’sapproachtoassessingpotentialimpactsonpaleontologicalresourcesisthattheSVPguidelinesprovidesomestandardizationinevaluatingpaleontologicalsensitivity.Table3.6‐3definestheSVP’ssensitivitycategoriesforpaleontologicalresourcesandsummarizesSVP’srecommendedtreatmentstoavoidadverseeffectsineachsensitivitycategory.
Nonewfieldwork,research,orengineeringleveldesignwasconductedforthepreparationofthisEIR.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐18
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Table 3.6‐3. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s Recommended Treatment for Paleontological Resources
SensitivityCategory MitigationTreatment
HighorUndetermined
Anintensivefieldsurveyandsurfacesalvagepriortoearthmoving,ifapplicable.
Monitoringbyaqualifiedpaleontologicalresourcemonitorofexcavations.
Salvageofunearthedfossilremainsand/ortraces(e.g.,tracks,trails,burrows).
Screenwashingtorecoversmallspecimens,ifapplicable.
Preliminarysurveyandsurfacesalvagebeforeconstructionbegins.
Preparationofsalvagedfossilstoapointofbeingreadyforcuration(i.e.,removalofenclosingmatrix,stabilizationandrepairofspecimens,andconstructionofreinforcedsupportcradleswhereappropriate).
Identification,cataloging,curation,andprovisionforrepositorystorageofpreparedfossilspecimens.
Afinalreportofthefindsandtheirsignificance.
Loworno Rockunitswithlowornopotentialtypicallywillnotrequireimpactmitigationmeasurestoprotectfossils.
Source:SocietyofVertebratePaleontology2010.
Determination of Significance
InaccordancewithAppendixGoftheStateCEQAGuidelines,programAlternative1,programAlternative2,theGoldenHillsproject,orthePattersonPassprojectwouldbeconsideredtohaveasignificanteffectifitwouldresultinanyoftheconditionslistedbelow.
Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeathinvolvinganyofthefollowing.
Ruptureofaknownearthquakefault,asdelineatedonthemostrecentAlquist‐PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningMapissuedbytheStateGeologistfortheareaorbasedonothersubstantialevidenceofaknownfault.(RefertoDivisionofMinesandGeologySpecialPublication42).
Strongseismicgroundshaking.
Seismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includingliquefaction.
Landslides.
Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil.
Belocatedonexpansivesoil,creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty.
Havesoilsincapableofadequatelysupportingtheuseofseptictanksoralternativewastewaterdisposalsystemsinareaswheresewersarenotavailableforthedisposalofwastewater?
Resultinthelossofavailabilityofaknownmineralresourcethatwouldbeofvaluetotheregionandtheresidentsofthestate.
Resultinthelossofavailabilityofalocallyimportantmineralresourcerecoverysitedelineatedonalocalgeneralplan,specificplan,orotherlanduseplan.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐19
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature.
Theprogramwouldnotincludeinstallationofsepticsystemsoralternativewastewaterdisposal.ThereforethistopicwasdismissedfromfurtherdiscussionduringthescopingperiodandthereisnoneedtoaddressimpactsrelatedtothisCEQAchecklistcriterion.
Inaddition,theprogramwouldnotaffectmineralresourcesbecausetherearenoknownmineralresourcesintheprogramareaandnominingisknowntooccurinthearea.Therefore,thereisnoneedtoaddressimpactsrelatedtothisCEQAchecklistcriterion.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
ImpactGEO‐1a‐1:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofruptureofaknownearthquakefault—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Placementofaturbineorpowercollectionsystemonornearafaultcouldresultindamageordestructionoftheturbine.Ifaturbinewereconstructedonornearafault,ruptureofthatfaultcoulddamageaturbineorcauseharmtopersonnelonthesite.Theturbinecouldbedamagedorcollapseandpossiblyinjurepersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Twoactivefaults,twoofwhicharezonedundertheAlquist‐PrioloAct,arepresentintheprogramarea.Inaddition,athird,theMidwayfault,thoughdesignatedonlyaspotentiallyactive,alsooccursintheprogramarea.Ruptureofafaultandthesubsequentdamageandharmthatcouldresultwouldbeasignificantimpact.
AportionoftheGreenvillefaultzoneintheprogramareaisaSpecialStudiesZone;however,becausetheturbinesarenotdesignedforhumanoccupancy,theyarenotregulatedbytheAlquist‐PrioloAct.TheCountywouldneverthelessrequiregeotechnicalinvestigationbeforetheCountyapprovesconstructionneartheGreenvilleandCorralHollow‐Carnegiefaultzonesbecausetheyaredesignatedasactivebythestate.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissuesandmaynotapplytotheMidwayfault,whichisdesignatedaspotentiallyactivebythestate.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldbelocatedonornearafaulttracethatrupturesandcausesdamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
Priortoconstructionactivitiesatanysite,theprojectproponentwillretainageotechnicalfirmwithlocalexpertiseingeotechnicalinvestigationanddesigntoprepareasite‐specificgeotechnicalreport.ThisreportwillbepreparedbyalicensedgeotechnicalengineerorengineeringgeologistandwillbesubmittedtotheCountybuildingdepartmentaspartoftheapprovalprocess.Thisreportwillbebasedondatacollectedfromsubsurfaceexploration,laboratorytestingofsamples,andsurfacemappingandwilladdressthefollowingissues.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐20
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Potentialforsurfacefaultruptureandturbinesitelocation:ThegeotechnicalreportwillinvestigatetheGreenville,CorralHollow‐Carnegie,andtheMidwayfaults(asappropriatetothelocation)anddeterminewhethertheyposeariskofsurfacerupture.Turbinefoundationsandpowercollectionsystemswillbesitedaccordingtorecommendationsinthisreport.
Stronggroundshaking:Thegeotechnicalreportwillanalyzethepotentialforstronggroundshakinginprojectareaandprovideturbinefoundationdesignrecommendations,aswellasrecommendationsforpowercollectionsystems.
Slopefailure:Thegeotechnicalreportwillinvestigatethepotentialforslopefailure(bothseismicallyandnonseismicallyinduced)anddevelopsite‐specificturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemplansengineeredfortheterrain,rockandsoiltypes,andotherconditionspresentattheprogramareainordertoprovidelong‐termstability.
Expansivesoils:Thegeotechnicalreportwillassessthesoiltypesintheprogramareaanddeterminethebestengineeringdesignstoaccommodatethesoilconditions.
Unstablecutorfillslopes:Thegeotechnicalreportwilladdressgeologichazardsrelatedtothepotentialforgradingtocreateunstablecutorfillslopesandmakesite‐specificrecommendationsrelatedtodesignandengineering.
ImpactGEO‐1a‐2:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofruptureofaknownearthquakefault—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Placementofaturbineorpowercollectionsystemonornearafaultcouldresultindamageordestructionoftheturbine.Ifaturbinewereconstructedonornearafault,ruptureofthatfaultcoulddamageaturbineorcauseharmtopersonnelonthesite.Theturbinecouldbedamagedorcollapseandpossiblyinjurepersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Twoactivefaults,twoofwhicharezonedundertheAlquist‐PrioloAct,arepresentintheprogramarea.Inaddition,athird,theMidwayfault,thoughdesignatedonlyaspotentiallyactive,alsooccursintheprogramarea.Ruptureofafaultandthesubsequentdamageandharmthatcouldresultwouldbeasignificantimpact.
AportionoftheGreenvillefaultzoneintheprogramareaisaSpecialStudiesZone;however,becausetheturbinesarenotdesignedforhumanoccupancy,theyarenotregulatedbytheAlquist‐PrioloAct.TheCountywouldneverthelessrequiregeotechnicalinvestigationbeforetheCountyapprovesconstructionneartheGreenvilleandCorralHollow‐Carnegiefaultzonesbecausetheyaredesignatedasactivebythestate.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissuesandmaynotapplytotheMidwayfault,whichisdesignatedaspotentiallyactivebythestate.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldbelocatedonornearafaulttracethatrupturesandcausesdamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐21
October 2014ICF 00323.08
ImpactGEO‐1b:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofruptureofaknownearthquakefault—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Placementofaturbineorpowercollectionsystemonornearafaultcouldresultindamageordestructionoftheturbine.Ifaturbinewereconstructedonornearafault,ruptureofthatfaultcoulddamageaturbineorcauseharmtopersonnelonthesite.Theturbinecouldbedamagedorcollapseandpossiblyinjurepersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
AportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectareaoverliesasegmentoftheCorralHollow‐CarnegiefaultzonedesignatedasQuaternaryundifferentiated(i.e.,thedateofthemostrecentrupturehasnotbeendetermined).AsdiscussedunderImpactGEO‐1a‐1andGEO‐1a‐2,ifaturbinewereconstructedonornearafault,ruptureofthatfaultcoulddamageaturbineorcauseharmtopersonnelonthesite.Theturbinecouldbedamagedorcollapseandpossiblyinjurepersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldbelocatedonornearafaulttracethatrupturesandcausesdamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐1c:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofruptureofaknownearthquakefault—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)
Placementofaturbineorpowercollectionsystemonornearafaultcouldresultindamageordestructionoftheturbine.Ifaturbinewereconstructedonornearafault,ruptureofthatfaultcoulddamageaturbineorcauseharmtopersonnelonthesite.Theturbinecouldbedamagedorcollapseandpossiblyinjurepersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
TherearenoactivefaulttracesinornearthePattersonPassprojectarea.Therefore,constructionoftheprojectwouldbeunlikelytoexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffectsasaresultofruptureofaknownfault.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
ImpactGEO‐2a‐1:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofstrongseismicgroundshaking—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencestronggroundshakingcouldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationswerenotproperlydesignedtowithstandtheappropriatelevelofgroundshaking,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowers.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐22
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Theprogramareaisinaseismicallyactivearea,withthepotentialformoderatelystronggroundshakingfromsourcessuchastheGreenvillefaultandtheCalaverasfault.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfrommoderatelystronggroundshakingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailduringstronggroundshakingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐2a‐2:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofstrongseismicgroundshaking—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencestronggroundshakingcouldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationswerenotproperlydesignedtowithstandtheappropriatelevelofgroundshaking,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowers.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramareaisinaseismicallyactivearea,withthepotentialformoderatelystronggroundshakingfromsourcessuchastheGreenvillefaultandtheCalaverasfault.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfrommoderatelystronggroundshakingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailduringstronggroundshakingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐2b:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofstrongseismicgroundshaking—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencestronggroundshakingcouldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationswerenotproperlydesignedtowithstandtheappropriatelevelofgroundshaking,they
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐23
October 2014ICF 00323.08
couldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowers.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
TherangeofshakingintensityintheGoldenHillsprojectareaextendsacrossallshakingintensitiesexperiencedintheprogramarea,fromlowtohigh.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfrommoderatelystronggroundshakingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailduringstronggroundshakingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐2c:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofstrongseismicgroundshaking—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencestronggroundshakingcouldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationswerenotproperlydesignedtowithstandtheappropriatelevelofgroundshaking,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowers.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
TherangeofshakingintensityinthePattersonPassprojectareaisonthehigherendofshakingintensitiesexperiencedintheprogramarea.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfrommoderatelystronggroundshakingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedsafetyissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailduringstronggroundshakingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐24
October 2014ICF 00323.08
ImpactGEO‐3a‐1:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includinglandslidingandliquefaction—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperienceseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,suchaslandsliding,liquefaction,lateralspread,anddifferentialsettlement,couldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedfortheearthquake‐inducedgroundfailureconditionspresentattheprogramarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramareaisknowntobesusceptibletoearthquake‐inducedlandslidingandthesouthwesternportionoftheprogramareaisinastate‐designatedearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazardzone(Figure3.6‐4).Inaddition,althoughthepotentialforliquefactionislikelylowbecauseofthedepthtogroundwaterandtheageofthegeologicunitsintheprogramarea,theriskoflateralspreadanddifferentialsettlementisunknown.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedgroundfailureissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐3a‐2:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includinglandslidingandliquefaction—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperienceseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,suchaslandsliding,liquefaction,lateralspread,anddifferentialsettlement,couldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedfortheearthquake‐inducedgroundfailureconditionspresentattheprogramarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramareaisknowntobesusceptibletoearthquake‐inducedlandslidingandthesouthwesternportionoftheprogramareaisinastate‐designatedearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazardzone(Figure3.6‐4).Inaddition,althoughthepotentialforliquefactionislikelylowbecauseofthedepthtogroundwaterandtheageofthegeologicunitsintheprogramarea,theriskoflateral
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐25
October 2014ICF 00323.08
spreadanddifferentialsettlementisunknown.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedgroundfailureissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐3b:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includinglandslidingandliquefaction—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperienceseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,suchaslandsliding,liquefaction,lateralspread,anddifferentialsettlement,couldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedfortheearthquake‐inducedgroundfailureconditionspresentattheprojectarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
ThesouthwesternportionoftheGoldenHillsprojectareaisinastate‐designatedearthquake‐inducedlandslidehazardzoneandtheremainingareaisinanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding(Figure3.6‐4).Inaddition,althoughthepotentialforliquefactionislikelylowbecauseofthedepthtogroundwaterandtheageofthegeologicunitsintheprogramarea,theriskoflateralspreadanddifferentialsettlementisunknown.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedgroundfailureissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐26
October 2014ICF 00323.08
ImpactGEO‐3c:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultofseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includinglandslidingandliquefaction—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperienceseismic‐relatedgroundfailure,suchaslandsliding,liquefaction,lateralspread,anddifferentialsettlement,couldexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedfortheearthquake‐inducedgroundfailureconditionspresentattheprojectarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
ThePattersonPassprojectareaisinanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding.Inaddition,althoughthepotentialforliquefactionislikelylowbecauseofthedepthtogroundwaterandtheageofthegeologicunitsintheprogramarea,theriskoflateralspreadanddifferentialsettlementisunknown.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedgroundfailureissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandsliding,lateralspread,ordifferentialsettlementandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐4a‐1:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultoflandsliding—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Inadditiontotheseismic‐relatedgroundfailuredescribedinImpactGEO‐3a‐1andGEO‐3a‐2,constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencenonseismic‐relatedlandslidingcausedbyheavyprecipitationcouldalsoexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedforthelandslidingconditionspresentattheprogramarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramareaisinsteep,hillyterraininanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandslidingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedlandslidingissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationor
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐27
October 2014ICF 00323.08
collectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandslidingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐4a‐2:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultoflandsliding—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Inadditiontotheseismic‐relatedgroundfailuredescribedinImpactGEO‐3a‐1andGEO‐3a‐2,constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencenonseismic‐relatedlandslidingcausedbyheavyprecipitationcouldalsoexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedforthelandslidingconditionspresentattheprogramarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramareaisinsteep,hillyterraininanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandslidingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedlandslidingissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandslidingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐4b:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeath,asaresultoflandsliding—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Inadditiontotheseismic‐relatedgroundfailuredescribedinimpactGEO‐3b,constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencenonseismic‐relatedlandslidingcausedbyheavyprecipitationcouldalsoexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedforthelandslidingconditionspresentattheprojectarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐28
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Theprogramarea,includingtheGoldenHillsprojectarea,isinsteep,hillyterraininanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandslidingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedlandslidingissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandslidingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐4c:Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeathasaresultoflandsliding—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Inadditiontotheseismic‐relatedgroundfailuredescribedinimpactGEO‐3c,constructionofturbinesorpowercollectionsystemsinareaswithpotentialtoexperiencenonseismic‐relatedlandslidingcausedbyheavyprecipitationcouldalsoexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects.Ifturbinefoundationsorpowercollectionsystemswerenotproperlydesignedandsitedforthelandslidingconditionspresentattheprojectarea,theycouldfailandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbinetowersorcollectionsystem.Thisdamageorcollapsecouldcauseharmtopersonnelorpropertyintheimmediatearea.
Theprogramarea,includingthePattersonPassprojectarea,isinsteep,hillyterraininanareaknowntobesusceptibletolandsliding.Thepotentialdamageandharmthatcouldresultfromlandslidingwouldbeasignificantimpact.
BoththeStateofCaliforniaandAlamedaCountyhavestringentbuildingsafetyrequirements,andallconstructionwouldhavetocomplywiththeCBSC.However,thismaynotaddressallseismic‐relatedlandslidingissues.Iftheturbinefoundationandpowercollectionsystemdesignandconstructionwerenotbasedonrigorous,detailed,site‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation,thefoundationorcollectionsystemcouldfailasaresultoflandslidingandcausedamagetoorcollapseoftheturbineorcollectionsystem.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐5a‐1:Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingearthworkassociatedwithconstructionoftheproposedprogrammayincreasesoilerosionrates.Theseactivities,whichincludeexcavation,grading,trenching,compaction,and
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐29
October 2014ICF 00323.08
roadwidening,wouldcausesurfacedisturbanceandvegetationremovalduringturbinefoundationconstructionandpowercollectionsystemandcommunicationlinesinstallationand,toalesserextent,duringpreparationanddecommissioningofthestagingareas.Asaresult,soilwouldbeexposedtorainandwind,potentiallycausingacceleratederosion,therebyresultinginsignificantimpacts.Inaddition,ifdecommissionedsiteswereleftunvegetated,thebaregroundcouldbeexposedtoacceleratederosion.
Mostsoilsintheprogramareaarecoveredbygrasses.Mostunvegetatedareasareassociatedwithroads.
Toaddressconstruction‐relatederosion,anapprovedSWPPP,asrequiredbytheapplicableRegionalWaterBoard,isrequiredwhenaprojectinvolves1acreormoreofdisturbance.ASWPPPspecifiesBMPsthatwouldpreventconstructionpollutantsfromcontactingstormwaterwiththeintentofkeepingallproductsoferosionfrommovingoffsiteintoreceivingwaters.Compliancewiththefederalandlocalerosion‐relatedregulationsapplicabletotheproposedprogram(i.e.,theSWPPPthatisdevelopedforthesiteandtherequirementsofthecounty’sStormwaterQualityManagementPlan)wouldensurethattheconstructionactivitiesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Toaddresserosionofdecommissionedsites,asdescribedinChapter2,ProgramDescription,decommissionedsiteswillberegradedandseededtopreprojectconditions(unlessleavingcertainroadwaysorfootingsisdeemedtobemoreprotectiveofnaturalresourcesthanremoval).TheprojectapplicantswilldevelopareclamationplanincoordinationwiththeCounty,USFWS,andCDFW.ThereclamationplanwillbecompletedandapprovedbytheCounty6monthsinadvanceofprojectdecommissioning.Compliancewiththereclamationplanwouldensurethatdecommissionedsitesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
ImpactGEO‐5a‐2:Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingearthworkassociatedwithconstructionoftheproposedprogrammayincreasesoilerosionrates.Theseactivities,whichincludeexcavation,grading,trenching,compaction,androadwidening,wouldcausesurfacedisturbanceandvegetationremovalduringturbinefoundationconstructionandpowercollectionsystemandcommunicationlinesinstallationand,toalesserextent,duringpreparationanddecommissioningofthestagingareas.Asaresult,soilwouldbeexposedtorainandwind,potentiallycausingacceleratederosion,therebyresultinginsignificantimpacts.
Mostsoilsintheprogramareaarecoveredbygrasses.Mostunvegetatedareasareassociatedwithroads.
AnapprovedSWPPP,asrequiredbytheapplicableRegionalWaterBoard,isrequiredwhenaprojectinvolves1acreormoreofdisturbance.ASWPPPspecifiesBMPsthatwouldpreventconstructionpollutantsfromcontactingstormwaterwiththeintentofkeepingallproductsoferosionfrommovingoffsiteintoreceivingwaters.Compliancewiththefederalandlocalerosion‐relatedregulationsapplicabletotheproposedprogram(i.e.,theSWPPPthatisdevelopedforthesiteandtherequirementsofthecounty’sStormwaterQualityManagementPlan)wouldensurethattheconstructionactivitiesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐30
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Toaddresserosionofdecommissionedsites,asdescribedinChapter2,ProgramDescription,decommissionedsiteswillberegradedandseededtopreprojectconditions(unlessleavingcertainroadwaysorfootingsisdeemedtobemoreprotectiveofnaturalresourcesthanremoval).TheprojectapplicantswilldevelopareclamationplanincoordinationwiththeCounty,USFWS,andCDFW.ThereclamationplanwillbecompletedandapprovedbytheCounty6monthsinadvanceofprojectdecommissioning.Compliancewiththereclamationplanwouldensurethatdecommissionedsitesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
ImpactGEO‐5b:Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingearthworkassociatedwithconstructionoftheproposedprojectmayincreasesoilerosionrates.Theseactivities,whichincludeexcavation,grading,trenching,compaction,androadwidening,wouldcausesurfacedisturbanceandvegetationremovalduringturbinefoundationconstructionandpowercollectionsystemandcommunicationlinesinstallationand,toalesserextent,duringpreparationanddecommissioningofthestagingareas.Asaresult,soilwouldbeexposedtorainandwind,potentiallycausingacceleratederosion,therebyresultinginsignificantimpacts.
Mostsoilsintheprojectareaarecoveredbygrasses.Mostunvegetatedareasareassociatedwithroads.
AnapprovedSWPPP,asrequiredbytheapplicableRegionalWaterBoard,isrequiredwhenaprojectinvolves1acreormoreofdisturbance.ASWPPPspecifiesBMPsthatwouldpreventconstructionpollutantsfromcontactingstormwaterwiththeintentofkeepingallproductsoferosionfrommovingoffsiteintoreceivingwaters.Compliancewiththefederalandlocalerosion‐relatedregulationsapplicabletotheproposedprogram(i.e.,theSWPPPthatisdevelopedforthesiteandtherequirementsofthecounty’sStormwaterQualityManagementPlan)wouldensurethattheconstructionactivitiesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Toaddresserosionofdecommissionedsites,asdescribedinChapter2,ProgramDescription,decommissionedsiteswillberegradedandseededtopreprojectconditions(unlessleavingcertainroadwaysorfootingsisdeemedtobemoreprotectiveofnaturalresourcesthanremoval).TheprojectapplicantswilldevelopareclamationplanincoordinationwiththeCounty,USFWS,andCDFW.ThereclamationplanwillbecompletedandapprovedbytheCounty6monthsinadvanceofprojectdecommissioning.Compliancewiththereclamationplanwouldensurethatdecommissionedsitesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
ImpactGEO‐5c:Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)
Ground‐disturbingearthworkassociatedwithconstructionoftheproposedprojectmayincreasesoilerosionrates.Theseactivities,whichincludeexcavation,grading,trenching,compaction,androadwidening,wouldcausesurfacedisturbanceandvegetationremovalduringturbinefoundationconstructionandpowercollectionsystemandcommunicationlinesinstallationand,toalesserextent,duringpreparationanddecommissioningofthestagingareas.Asaresult,soilwouldbe
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐31
October 2014ICF 00323.08
exposedtorainandwind,potentiallycausingacceleratederosion,therebyresultinginsignificantimpacts.
Mostsoilsintheprojectareaarecoveredbygrasses.Mostunvegetatedareasareassociatedwithroads.
AnapprovedSWPPP,asrequiredbytheapplicableRegionalWaterBoard,isrequiredwhenaprojectinvolves1acreormoreofdisturbance.ASWPPPspecifiesBMPsthatwouldpreventconstructionpollutantsfromcontactingstormwaterwiththeintentofkeepingallproductsoferosionfrommovingoffsiteintoreceivingwaters.Compliancewiththefederalandlocalerosion‐relatedregulationsapplicabletotheproposedprogram(i.e.,theSWPPPthatisdevelopedforthesiteandtherequirementsofthecounty’sStormwaterQualityManagementPlan)wouldensurethattheconstructionactivitiesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Toaddresserosionofdecommissionedsites,asdescribedinChapter2,ProgramDescription,decommissionedsiteswillberegradedandseededtopreprojectconditions(unlessleavingcertainroadwaysorfootingsisdeemedtobemoreprotectiveofnaturalresourcesthanremoval).TheprojectapplicantswilldevelopareclamationplanincoordinationwiththeCounty,USFWS,andCDFW.ThereclamationplanwillbecompletedandapprovedbytheCounty6monthsinadvanceofprojectdecommissioning.Compliancewiththereclamationplanwouldensurethatdecommissionedsitesdonotresultinsignificanterosionandthatimpactswouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
ImpactGEO‐6a‐1:Belocatedonexpansivesoil,creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Turbinefoundationsbuiltonexpansivesoilswouldbesubjecttotheexpansionandcontractionofthesesoils,whichcouldcausedamagetostructuresifthesubsoil,drainage,andfoundationarenotproperlyengineered.Themetrologicaltowerandundergroundsystemswouldbesubjecttothesameexpansionandcontraction.
Expansivesoilsoccurinmuchoftheprogramarea,particularlyintheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation.However,soilsamplingandtreatmentproceduresareaddressedbystateandlocalbuildingcodes.CompliancewiththesecodesandimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldensurethatthisisaless‐than‐significantimpact.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐6a‐2:Belocatedonexpansivesoil,creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Turbinefoundationsbuiltonexpansivesoilswouldbesubjecttotheexpansionandcontractionofthesesoils,whichcouldcausedamagetostructuresifthesubsoil,drainage,andfoundationarenotproperlyengineered.Themetrologicaltowerandundergroundsystemswouldbesubjecttothesameexpansionandcontraction.
Expansivesoilsoccurinmuchoftheprogramarea,particularlyintheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation.However,soilsamplingandtreatmentproceduresareaddressedbystateandlocal
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐32
October 2014ICF 00323.08
buildingcodes.CompliancewiththesecodesandimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldensurethatthisisaless‐than‐significantimpact.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐6b:Belocatedonexpansivesoil,creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Turbinefoundationsbuiltonexpansivesoilswouldbesubjecttotheexpansionandcontractionofthesesoils,whichcouldcausedamagetostructuresifthesubsoil,drainage,andfoundationarenotproperlyengineered.
TheGoldenHillsprojectareaisunderlainbytheFontana‐Diablo‐Altamontsoilassociation,whichcontainssoilswithhighshrink‐swellpotential.However,soilsamplingandtreatmentproceduresareaddressedbystateandlocalbuildingcodes.CompliancewiththesecodesandimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldensurethatthisisaless‐than‐significantimpact.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐6c:Belocatedonexpansivesoil,creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Turbinefoundationsbuiltonexpansivesoilswouldbesubjecttotheexpansionandcontractionofthesesoils,whichcouldcausedamagetostructuresifthesubsoil,drainage,andfoundationarenotproperlyengineered.
ThePattersonPassprojectareaisunderlainbytheFontana‐Diablo‐AltamontandtheCarbona‐Callasoilassociations,whichbothcontainsoilswithhighshrink‐swellpotential.However,soilsamplingandtreatmentproceduresareaddressedbystateandlocalbuildingcodes.CompliancewiththesecodesandimplementationofMitigationMeasureGEO‐1wouldensurethatthisisaless‐than‐significantimpact.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐1:Conductsite‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigationandimplementdesignrecommendationsinsubsequentgeotechnicalreport
ImpactGEO‐7a‐1:Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Iffossilsarepresentintheprogramarea,theycouldbedamagedbyduringearth‐disturbingactivitiesduringconstructionactivities,suchasexcavationforfoundations,placementoffills,trenchingforpowercollectionsystems,andgradingforroadsandstagingareas.Themoreextensiveanddeepertheearth‐disturbingactivity,thegreaterthepotentialfordamagetopaleontologicalresources.
Becausetheyaresedimentaryrocks,geologicunitswithpotentialtocontainpaleontologicalresourcesincludemostunitsintheprogramarea.Inparticular,theNerolyFormationandsomeunitsoftheGreatValleySequenceareknowntocontainvertebratefossils.Substantialdamagetoor
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐33
October 2014ICF 00323.08
destructionofsignificantpaleontologicalresourcesasdefinedbytheSocietyofVertebratePaleontology(2010)wouldbeasignificantimpact.
Becausemostgeologicunitsintheprogramareaarelikelytobesensitiveforpaleontologicalresources,excavationintheseunitscoulddamagepaleontologicalresources.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresGEO‐7athroughGEO‐7cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7a:Retainaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologisttomonitorsignificantground‐disturbingactivities
TheapplicantwillretainaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistasdefinedbytheSVP’sStandardProceduresfortheAssessmentandMitigationofAdverseImpactstoPaleontologicalResources(2010)tomonitoractivitieswiththepotentialtodisturbsensitivepaleontologicalresources.Datagatheredduringdetailedprojectdesignwillbeusedtodeterminetheactivitiesthatwillrequirethepresenceofamonitor.Ingeneral,theseactivitiesincludeanyground‐disturbingactivitiesinvolvingexcavationdeeperthan3feetinareaswithhighpotentialtocontainsensitivepaleontologicalresources.Recoveredfossilswillbepreparedsothattheycanbeproperlydocumented.Recoveredfossilswillthenbecuratedatafacilitythatwillproperlyhouseandlabelthem,maintaintheassociationbetweenthefossilsandfielddataaboutthefossils’provenance,andmaketheinformationavailabletothescientificcommunity.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7b:Educateconstructionpersonnelinrecognizingfossilmaterial
Theapplicantwillensurethatallconstructionpersonnelreceivetrainingprovidedbyaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistexperiencedinteachingnon‐specialiststoensurethattheycanrecognizefossilmaterialsintheeventanyarediscoveredduringconstruction.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7c:Stopworkifsubstantialfossilremainsareencounteredduringconstruction
Ifsubstantialfossilremains(particularlyvertebrateremains)arediscoveredduringearthdisturbingactivities,activitieswithin100feetofthefindwillstopimmediatelyuntilastate‐registeredprofessionalgeologistorqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistcanassessthenatureandimportanceofthefindandaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistcanrecommendappropriatetreatment.Treatmentmayincludepreparationandrecoveryoffossilmaterialssothattheycanbehousedinanappropriatemuseumoruniversitycollectionandmayalsoincludepreparationofareportforpublicationdescribingthefinds.Theapplicantwillberesponsibleforensuringthatrecommendationsregardingtreatmentandreportingareimplemented.
ImpactGEO‐7a‐2:Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Iffossilsarepresentintheprogramarea,theycouldbedamagedbyduringearth‐disturbingactivitiesduringconstructionactivities,suchasexcavationforfoundations,placementoffills,trenchingforpowercollectionsystems,andgradingforroadsandstagingareas.Themoreextensive
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐34
October 2014ICF 00323.08
anddeepertheearth‐disturbingactivity,thegreaterthepotentialfordamagetopaleontologicalresources.
Becausetheyaresedimentaryrocks,geologicunitswithpotentialtocontainpaleontologicalresourcesincludemostunitsintheprogramarea.Inparticular,theNerolyFormationandsomeunitsoftheGreatValleySequenceareknowntocontainvertebratefossils.SubstantialdamagetoordestructionofsignificantpaleontologicalresourcesasdefinedbytheSocietyofVertebratePaleontology(2010)wouldbeasignificantimpact.
Becausemostgeologicunitsintheprogramareaarelikelytobesensitiveforpaleontologicalresources,excavationintheseunitscoulddamagepaleontologicalresources.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresGEO‐7athroughGEO‐7cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7a:Retainaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologisttomonitorsignificantground‐disturbingactivities
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7b:Educateconstructionpersonnelinrecognizingfossilmaterial
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7c:Stopworkifsubstantialfossilremainsareencounteredduringconstruction
ImpactGEO‐7b:Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Iffossilsarepresentintheprojectarea,theycouldbedamagedbyduringearth‐disturbingactivitiesduringconstructionactivities,suchasexcavationforfoundations,placementoffills,trenchingforpowercollectionsystems,andgradingforroadsandstagingareas.Themoreextensiveanddeepertheearth‐disturbingactivity,thegreaterthepotentialfordamagetopaleontologicalresources.
Becausetheyaresedimentaryrocks,geologicunitswithpotentialtocontainpaleontologicalresourcesincludemostunitsintheprogramarea.Inparticular,theNerolyFormationandsomeunitsoftheGreatValleySequenceareknowntocontainvertebratefossils.SubstantialdamagetoordestructionofsignificantpaleontologicalresourcesasdefinedbytheSVP(2010)wouldbeasignificantimpact.
Becausemostgeologicunitsintheprojectareaarelikelytobesensitiveforpaleontologicalresources,excavationintheseunitscoulddamagepaleontologicalresources.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresGEO‐7athroughGEO‐7cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7a:Retainaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologisttomonitorsignificantground‐disturbingactivities
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7b:Educateconstructionpersonnelinrecognizingfossilmaterial
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐35
October 2014ICF 00323.08
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7c:Stopworkifsubstantialfossilremainsareencounteredduringconstruction
ImpactGEO‐7c:Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Iffossilsarepresentintheprojectarea,theycouldbedamagedbyduringearth‐disturbingactivitiesduringconstructionactivities,suchasexcavationforfoundations,placementoffills,trenchingforpowercollectionsystems,andgradingforroadsandstagingareas.Themoreextensiveanddeepertheearth‐disturbingactivity,thegreaterthepotentialfordamagetopaleontologicalresources.
Becausetheyaresedimentaryrocks,geologicunitswithpotentialtocontainpaleontologicalresourcesincludemostunitsintheprogramarea.Inparticular,theNerolyFormationandsomeunitsoftheGreatValleySequenceareknowntocontainvertebratefossils.SubstantialdamagetoordestructionofsignificantpaleontologicalresourcesasdefinedbytheSVP(2010)wouldbeasignificantimpact.
Becausemostgeologicunitsintheprojectareaarelikelytobesensitiveforpaleontologicalresources,excavationintheseunitscoulddamagepaleontologicalresources.
Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresGEO‐7athroughGEO‐7cwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7a:Retainaqualifiedprofessionalpaleontologisttomonitorsignificantground‐disturbingactivities
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7b:Educateconstructionpersonnelinrecognizingfossilmaterial
MitigationMeasureGEO‐7c:Stopworkifsubstantialfossilremainsareencounteredduringconstruction
3.6.3 References Cited
AlamedaCounty.2000.EastCountyAreaPlan.AdoptedMay1994.ModifiedbypassageofMeasureD,effectiveDecember22,2000.Oakland,CA.
AlamedaCountyCommunityDevelopmentAgency.2013.SafetyElementoftheAlamedaCountyGeneralPlan.AdoptedJanuary8,2013.
Bryant,W.A.,andS.E.Cluett.2002.FaultNumber53b,GreenvilleFaultZone,MarshCreek‐GreenvilleSection,inQuaternaryFaultandFoldDatabaseoftheUnitedStates.Lastrevised:July23,2012.Available:http://geohazards.usgs.gov/cfusion/qfault/qf_web_disp.cfm?qfault_or=1303&qfault_id=53b.Accessed:May17,2013.
Bryant,W.,andE.Hart.2007.SpecialPublication42Fault‐RuptureHazardZonesinCalifornia,InterimRevision.Alquist‐PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningActwithIndextoEarthquakeFaultZones1Maps.CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey.August.Sacramento,CA.Available:ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sp/Sp42.pdf.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐36
October 2014ICF 00323.08
CaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeology.1981.FaultEvaluationReportFER112.Available:ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/fer/112/.Accessed:May17,2013.
———.1982.StateofCaliforniaSpecialStudiesZone,AltamontOfficialMap.EffectiveJanuary1,1982.Available:http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/ALTAMONT/maps/ALTAMONT.PDF.Accessed:May17,2013.
CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey.2002.CaliforniaGeomorphicProvinces.Note36.Available:http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/information/publications/cgs_notes/note_36/Documents/notn_36.pdf.Accessed:April11,2013.
———.2003.SeismicShakingHazardsinCalifornia.Lastrevised:April13,2011.Available:http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/pshamap/pshamain.html.Accessed:April2013.
———.2007.SearchforRegulatoryMaps.Available:http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/WH/regulatorymaps.htm.Accessed:April8,2013.
———.2008.GuidelinesforEvaluatingandMitigatingSeismicHazardsinCalifornia.SpecialPublication117A.Available:http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shzp/webdocs/Documents/sp117.pdf.Accessed:May21,2013.
———.2009a.CaliforniaSeismicHazardZones,AltamontQuadrangle.February27.Available:http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/ALTAMONT/maps/ozn_alta.pdf.Accessed:May16,2013.
———.2009b.SeismicHazardZoneReportfortheAltamont7.5‐MinuteQuadrangle,AlamedaCounty,California.SeismicHazardZoneReport119.Available:http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/ALTAMONT/reports/alta_eval.pdf.Accessed:May16,2013.
———.2010.2010FaultActivityMapofCalifornia.GeologicDataMapNo.6.Available:http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/FAM/faultactivitymap.html.Accessed:May2013.
Cao,T.,W.A.Bryant,B.Rowshandel,D.Branum,andC.J.Wills.2003.TheRevised2002CaliforniaProbabilisticSeismicHazardMaps.June.Available:http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/psha/fault_parameters/pdf/2002_CA_Hazard_Maps.pdf.Accessed:May21,2013.
Graymer,R.W.,D.L.Jones,andE.E.Brabb.1996.PreliminaryGeologicMapEmphasizingBedrockFormationsinAlamedaCounty,California:ADigitalDatabase.Lastrevised:March31,2013.Available:http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_22969.htm.Accessed:May21,2013.
InternationalCodeCouncil.2011.2012InternationalBuildingCode.Albany,NY:DelmarPublishers.
Kohler‐Antablin,S.1996.UpdateofMineralLandClassification:AggregateMaterialsintheSouthSanFranciscoBayProduction‐ConsumptionRegion.CaliforniaDivisionofMinesandGeology.DMGOpen‐FileReport96‐03.Sacramento,CA.
NaturalResourcesConservationService.2006.DigitalGeneralSoilMapofU.S.Lastrevised:July6,2006.Available:http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Metadata.aspx?Survey=US.Accessed:May20,2013.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Geology, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources
APWRA Repowering Final PEIR 3.6‐37
October 2014ICF 00323.08
Norris,R.M.,andR.W.Webb.1990.GeologyofCalifornia.2ndedition.NY:JohnWiley&Sons.
PaleoPortal.2013.ThePaleontologyPortal,Time&Space,CaliforniaUS.Available:http://www.paleoportal.org/index.php.Accessed:June27,2013.
SocietyofVertebratePaleontology.2010.StandardProceduresfortheAssessmentandMitigationofAdverseImpactstoPaleontologicalResources.Available:http://www.vertpaleo.org/Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines.htm.Accessed:November29,2011.
UniversityofCaliforniaMuseumofPaleontology.2013a.UCMPAdvancedSpecimenSearch:VertebratesandNerolyFormation.Available:<http://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/advanced.html>.Accessed:May22,2013.
———.2013b.UCMPSpecimenSearch:AlamedaCounty.Available:<http://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/>.Accessed:May22,2013.
U.S.GeologicalSurvey.1999.MapsShowingLocationsofDamagingLandslidesCausedbyElNiñoRainstorms,WinterSeason1997‐98,SanFranciscoBayRegion,California.PamphlettoaccompanyMiscellaneousFieldStudiesMapsMF‐2325‐A‐J.Lastrevised:March17,2003.Available:<http://pubs.usgs.gov/mf/1999/mf‐2325/>.Accessed:April8,2013.
———.2013a.EHPQuaternaryFaults,CorralHollow‐CarnegieFaultZone.Lastrevised:April17,2013.Available:<http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php>.Accessed:May20,2013.
———.2013b.EHPQuaternaryFaults,MidwayFault.Lastrevised:April17,2013.Available:<http://geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/map.php>.Accessed:May20,2013.
Unruh,J.,andK.Krug.2007.AssessmentandDocumentationofTranspressionalStructures,NortheasternDiabloRange,fortheQuaternaryFaultMapDatabase:CollaborativeResearchwithWilliamLettis&Associates,Inc.,andtheU.S.GeologicalSurvey.FinalTechnicalReport.WalnutCreek,CA.U.S.GeologicalSurveyNationalEarthquakeHazardsReductionProgram,Award06HQGR0139.Available:http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/external/reports/06HQGR0139.pdf.
Wagner,D.L.,E.J.Bortugno,andR.D.McJunkin.1991.GeologicMapoftheSanFrancisco–SanJoseQuadrangle.CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey,RegionalGeologicMapNo.5A,1:250,000scale.Available:http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/RGM/sfsj/sfsj.html.Accessed:April8,2013.