4.10 Paleontological Resources

Transcription

1 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern This section of the Draft Plan Amendment, Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) addresses potential impacts of the Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) on paleontological resources. The applicable environmental and regulatory settings are discussed in Chapter The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) defines significant paleontological resources as any fossil that is considered to be of scientific interest, including most vertebrate fossil remains and traces, and certain rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils. A significant paleontological resource is considered to be of scientific interest if it is a rare or previously unknown species, it is of high quality and well preserved, it preserves a previously unknown anatomical or other characteristic, provides new information about the history of life on earth, or has an identified educational or recreational value. Paleontological resources that may be considered not to have scientific significance include those that lack provenience (the source, origin, or location of a fossil and the recording thereof) or context, lack physical integrity because of decay or natural erosion, or that are overly redundant or are otherwise not useful for research. Vertebrate fossil remains and traces include bone, scales, scutes (bony external plate or scale, as on the shell of a turtle), skin impressions, burrows, tracks, tail drag marks, vertebrate coprolites (fossilized feces), gastroliths (stomach stones), or other physical evidence of past vertebrate life or activities (BLM, 2011p) Methodology for Analysis The BLM, Ridgecrest District, manages approximately 78 percent of the land considered for development by the AEWP. The BLM recognized the potential for encountering significant, nonrenewable paleontological resources on portions of the AEWP. The paleontological assessment was conducted in accordance with the scope of work approved by the BLM and was accomplished under BLM permit number CA P (Exp. 8/11). In its standard guidelines for assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources, the SVP (1995) established three categories of sensitivity for paleontological resources: high, low, and undetermined. To these categories is added that of moderate, following common usage in CEQA reviews of paleontological sensitivity of sediments for sites on coastal California. These four classifications are also similar to the BLM Potential Fossil Yield Classification System (PFYC). The paleontological importance or sensitivity of a stratigraphic unit reflects its potential paleontological productivity and the scientific significance of the fossils it has produced. The potential paleontological productivity of a stratigraphic unit exposed in the project area is inferred from the abundance of fossil specimens and/or previously recorded fossil sites in exposures of the unit. The underlying assumption of this assessment method is that a stratigraphic unit is most likely to yield fossil remains in a quantity and of a quality similar to those previously recorded from the unit elsewhere in the area (CH2MHILL, 2010d). An individual fossil specimen is considered scientifically important and therefore significant if it is identifiable; complete; well preserved; age diagnostic; useful in paleoenvironmental reconstruction; a type or topotypic specimen; a member of a rare species; and/or a skeletal element different from, or a specimen more complete than, those now available for the species. For example, vertebrate remains, such as those previously uncovered in the Horned Toad Hills, are comparatively rare in the fossil record and most identifiable vertebrate remains are therefore scientifically significant (CH2MHILL, 2010d). The Horned Toad Formation continues to produce remains of large and small vertebrate fossils and new taxonomic occurrences, such as the first Mojave Desert record of an early Pliocene sloth. Using these locality records, the PFYC system can rank sensitivity of the members of the Horned Toad Formation and other sedimentary formations associated with the AEWP. The important character of the time-sensitive fossils allows significance criteria Classes 3 through 5 to be assigned to sediments of the Horned Toad Formation. Based on the PFYC system there is no Class 4 acreage present on the AEWP. Figure June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

2 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern shows the potential fossil yield classification of the AEWP vicinity. Table summarizes the paleontological sensitivity of the geologic formations within the AEWP area. Table Paleontological Sensitivity of Geologic Formations Geologic Formations Sensitivity Potential Fossil Yield Classification Horned Toad FM Member 1 Lower Undetermined 3b Horned Toad FM Member 1 Upper Very High 5a Horned Toad FM Member 2 Very High 5a Horned Toad FM Member 3 Very High 5a Horned Toad FM Member 4 Very High 5a Horned Toad FM Member 5 Undetermined 3b Older Pleistocene Alluvium Undetermined 3b Quaternary Alluvium Low 2 Rhyolitic Felsite Very Low 1 Cretaceous Cameron Granodiorite Very Low 1 Source: LSA, The field assessment located 12 previously reported sites and 69 new localities from exposures of the Horned Toad Formation within the AEWP area. In all, paleontological research and field inventory studies for the AEWP documented 103 fossil localities in the Horned Toad Formation containing 35 different taxa. Of the 103 total localities, 69 were identified through the current survey, and an additional 12 previously recorded localities were re-located (LSA, 2011). The remaining 22 localities were recorded by the Paleontology Museum of the University of California, Berkeley. Precise location data for these sites was not provided (LSA, 2011:20) CEQA Thresholds of Significance and Criteria The Kern County CEQA Implementation Document and Kern County Environmental Checklist state that a project would have a significant impact on paleontological resources if it would: PALEO-1 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. While Section of the State CEQA Guidelines defines unique archaeological resources, CEQA does not define a unique paleontological resource. Therefore, for purposes of this document, a paleontological resource or site is considered unique where it meets any of the following criteria: It is the best example of its kind locally or regionally; Illustrates a geologic principle; Provides a critical piece of paleobiological data; Encompasses any part of a type locality of a fossil or formation; Contains a unique or particularly unusual assemblage of fossils; Occupies a unique position stratigraphically; and/or Occupies a unique position, proximally, distally or laterally within a formation s extent or distribution. Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

3 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Alternative A: Project Alternative A would generate up to 318 MW of electricity through wind power via up to 106 WTGs, a substation, transmission interconnection, access roads, and ancillary facilities. The project area comprises 2,592 acres; however, the total wind energy development area (on both private and public land) would cover less acreage, as only a portion of wind energy development area would be temporarily or permanently disturbed Direct and Indirect Impacts Construction The potential exists for unique paleontological resources to be encountered within Alternative A during ground-disturbing construction activities, including grubbing, grading, and excavation. Potential adverse impacts on these resources include, but are not limited to, being directly impacted and destroyed by construction equipment and AEWP-related vehicles, exposure of alluvium during construction that may subject any potentially fossil-bearing units to increased weathering and erosion, unauthorized collection of fossils by AEWP personnel (as well as amateur and commercial collectors who would have greater access to the area), vandalism, and the loss of associated scientific information. As shown in Figure , the majority of the northernmost portion of the Alternative A is underlain by low or very low sensitivity (PFYC Class 1 and 2) igneous and metamorphic units. Therefore, construction activities in units which have little to no potential to yield significant paleontological resources would not be expected to result in impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features. However, there are portions of Alternative A that is underlain by undetermined-sensitivity (PFYC Class 3b) Older Pleistocene Alluvium (1,262 acres). The highest potential (PFYC Class 5a) for Alternative A to impact paleontological resources is in areas underlain by the Horned Toad Formations 1 Upper, 2, 3, and 4, which in Figure appears throughout the central and southwestern portion of the site (368 acres). As noted above, the project site-specific field assessment located 12 previously reported sites and 69 new localities from exposures of the Horned Toad Formation within the AEWP area. In all, paleontological research and field inventory studies for the AEWP documented 103 fossil localities in the Horned Toad Formation containing 35 different taxa. Of the 103 total localities, 69 were identified through the current survey, and an additional 12 previously recorded localities were re-located (LSA, 2011). The remaining 22 localities were recorded by the Paleontology Museum of the University of California, Berkeley. Precise location data for these sites was not provided (LSA, 2011:20). Construction activities in these deposits could impact unique paleontological resources. The potential for direct impacts to paleontological resources during construction activities would be substantially reduced with the implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology) (see Section , below). Operation and Maintenance No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, including (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

4 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Construction for Paleontology) (see Section , below), potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. Decommissioning No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative A: Project Significance conclusions for the impacts identified for each phase of the AEWP (Construction, Operation and Maintenance, Decommissioning) are presented below based on the CEQA Significance Criteria presented in Section Construction PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). CEQA requires that all feasible and reasonable mitigation be applied to reduce the AEWP s impacts to the paleontological resources in the environment. As described above, Alternative A has the potential to impact unique paleontological resources during construction. Implementation of Mitigation Measure would develop a Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan; Mitigation Measure requires full-time construction monitoring in areas that are highly sensitive for paleontological resources; and Mitigation Measure requires personnel be trained on the recognition of the types of paleontological resources that could be encountered in the AEWP area and the procedures to be followed (see Section ). With implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts on paleontological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Operation PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. With the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, including (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology), potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be less than significant. Decommissioning PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, there would be no impacts. Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

5 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Alternative B: Revised Site Layout Alternative B consists of a revised site layout, relocating a number of WTG locations and resulting in the rerouting access roads. All other features associated with Alternative B would remain unchanged compared to that discussed above for Alternative A (Project). Alternative B contains 106 WTGs generating 318 MWs Direct and Indirect Impacts Construction The potential exists for unique paleontological resources to be encountered within Alternative B during ground-disturbing construction activities, including grubbing, grading, and excavation. Potential adverse impacts on these resources include, but are not limited to, being directly impacted and destroyed by construction equipment and AEWP-related vehicles, exposure of alluvium during construction that may subject any potentially fossil-bearing units to increased weathering and erosion, unauthorized collection of fossils by AEWP personnel (as well as amateur and commercial collectors who would have greater access to the area), vandalism, and the loss of associated scientific information. As shown in Figure , the majority of the northernmost portion of the Alternative B is underlain by low or very low sensitivity (PFYC Class 1 and 2) igneous and metamorphic units. Therefore, construction activities in units which have little to no potential to yield significant paleontological resources would not be expected to result in impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features. However, there are portions of Alternative B that is underlain by undetermined-sensitivity (PFYC Class 3b) Older Pleistocene Alluvium (1,262 acres). The highest potential (PFYC Class 5a) for Alternative B to impact paleontological resources is in areas underlain by the Horned Toad Formations 1 Upper, 2, 3, and 4, which in Figure appears throughout the central and southwestern portion of the site (368 acres). Construction activities in these deposits could impact unique paleontological resources. The potential for direct impacts to paleontological resources during construction activities would be substantially reduced with the implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology) (see Section , below). Operation and Maintenance No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, including (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology) (see Section , below), potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. Decommissioning No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

6 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative B: Revised Site Layout Construction/Operation and Maintenance/Decommissioning The CEQA significance determinations for Alternative B would be identical to that for Alternative A as described in Section above Alternative C: Reduced Project North Under Alternative C, all WTGs and ancillary facilities would remain identical to that of Alternative A. However, Alternative C would eliminate the central parcel within the AEWP (Alternative A) boundary, which is north of SR 58. This alternative would result in a total of 97 WTGs capable of generating up to 291 MWs. The Alternative C area comprises 2,342 acres, reducing the amount of BLM lands utilized to a total of 1,750 acres Direct and Indirect Impacts Construction The potential exists for unique paleontological resources to be encountered within Alternative C during ground-disturbing construction activities, including grubbing, grading, and excavation. Potential adverse impacts on these resources include, but are not limited to, being directly impacted and destroyed by construction equipment and AEWP-related vehicles, exposure of alluvium during construction that may subject any potentially fossil-bearing units to increased weathering and erosion, unauthorized collection of fossils by AEWP personnel (as well as amateur and commercial collectors who would have greater access to the area), vandalism, and the loss of associated scientific information. As shown in Figure , the majority of Alternative C is underlain by undetermined-sensitivity (PFYC Class 3b) Older Pleistocene Alluvium (1,222 acres). However, the highest potential (PFYC Class 5a) for Alternative C to impact paleontological resources is in areas underlain by the Horned Toad Formations 1 Upper, 2, 3, and 4, which in Figure appears throughout the central and southwestern portion of the site (363 acres). Construction activities in these deposits could impact unique paleontological resources. The potential for direct impacts to paleontological resources during construction activities would be substantially reduced with the implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology) (see Section , below). Operation and Maintenance No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, including (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology)(see Section , below), potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. Decommissioning No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

7 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative C: Reduced Project North Construction/Operation and Maintenance/Decommissioning The CEQA significance determinations for Alternative C would be identical to that for Alternative A as described in Section above Alternative D: Reduced Project Southwest Under Alternative D, all WTGs and ancillary facilities would remain identical to that of Alternative A. Alternative D would eliminate the southwestern most parcel within the AEWP boundary to reduce the potential to impact existing and allowed livestock grazing on this parcel of BLM land. This alternative would result in a total of 87 WTGs capable of generating up to 267 MWs. The Alternative D area comprises 2,108 acres, reducing the amount of BLM lands utilized to a total of 1,516 acres Direct and Indirect Impacts Construction The potential exists for unique paleontological resources to be encountered within Alternative D during ground-disturbing construction activities, including grubbing, grading, and excavation. Potential adverse impacts on these resources include, but are not limited to, being directly impacted and destroyed by construction equipment and AEWP-related vehicles, exposure of alluvium during construction that may subject any potentially fossil-bearing units to increased weathering and erosion, unauthorized collection of fossils by AEWP personnel (as well as amateur and commercial collectors who would have greater access to the area), vandalism, and the loss of associated scientific information. As shown in Figure , the majority of Alternative D is underlain by undetermined-sensitivity (PFYC Class 3b) Older Pleistocene Alluvium (891 acres). However, the highest potential (PFYC Class 5a) for Alternative C to impact paleontological resources is in areas underlain by the Horned Toad Formations 1 Upper, 2, 3, and 4, which in Figure appears throughout the central portion of the site (293 acres). Construction activities in these deposits could impact unique paleontological resources. The potential for direct impacts to paleontological resources during construction activities would be substantially reduced with the implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology)(see Section , below). Operation and Maintenance No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, including through (see Section , below), potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

8 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Decommissioning No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative D: Reduced Project Southwest Construction/Operation and Maintenance/Decommissioning The CEQA significance determinations for Alternative D would be identical to that for Alternative A as described in Section above Alternative E: No Issuance of ROW Grant and No LUP Amendment (No Action) Under Alternative E (No Issuance of a ROW Grant and No LUP Amendment) to the AEWP, no action would occur and existing conditions relevant to paleontological resources would continue. Existing conditions relevant to paleontological resources would continue, but may be altered at some point in the future by construction of a wind energy or other development project Direct and Indirect Impacts No impact associated with the AEWP would occur CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative E: No Issuance of ROW Grant and No LUP Amendment (No Action) Alternative E would not result in impacts to paleontological resources Alternative F: No Issuance of ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Unsuitable for Wind Energy Development (No Project) Under Alternative F (No Issuance of a ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Unsuitable for Wind Energy Development), no action would occur and no future development of the site for wind energy would occur. Existing conditions relevant to paleontological resources would continue, but may be altered at some point in the future by construction of a potential project other than the AEWP Direct and Indirect Impacts No impacts associated with the AEWP would occur CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative F: No Issuance of ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Unsuitable for Wind Energy Development (No Project) Alternative F would not result in impacts to paleontological resources. However, in the absence of the AEWP, other renewable energy projects may be constructed at the project site or elsewhere to meet State Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

9 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern and federal mandates, and those projects could have impacts similar to those of the AEWP (Alternative A) Alternative G: No Issuance of ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Suitable for Wind Energy Development (No Project) Under Alternative G (No Issuance of a ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Suitable for Wind Energy Development), no action would occur but the area would be available to wind power development in the future Direct and Indirect Impacts No impacts associated with the AEWP would occur CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Alternative G: No Issuance of ROW Grant with LUP Amendment to Identify the Area as Suitable for Wind Energy Development (No Project) Alternative G would not result in impacts to paleontological resources. However, if another wind development project were to be implemented, similar impacts to paleontological resources as those described for the AEWP (Alternative A) could occur if the developer of said future development adopts similar avoidance measures in the design of the wind farm Cumulative Impacts This section analyzes the cumulative impact of the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning of the elements of the AEWP, taking into account the effects in common with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The cumulative effects analysis highlights past actions that are closely related either in time or space (i.e., temporally or in geographic proximity) to the AEWP, present actions that are ongoing at the same time this Draft EIS/EIR was being prepared; and reasonably foreseeable future actions, including those for which there are existing decisions, funding, formal proposals, or which are highly probable, based on known opportunities or trends Geographic Extent/Context The geographic extent for cumulative impacts analysis of paleontological resources is limited to the AEWP site (i.e., the area contained with the project boundaries), as this is the area of ground-disturbing activities for the AEWP that could have the potential to combine with past, present, and future (planned) projects Existing Cumulative Conditions Cumulative conditions to paleontological resources involve the loss of non-renewable scientifically important fossils and associated data, and the incremental loss to science and society of these resources over time. Energy development projects, as well as commercial and residential development projects, have resulted in cumulative conditions affecting paleontological resources in Kern County. A field survey of the project area was completed in December 2010 and February 2011 and, based on the survey results, it appears that additional scientifically significant fossils remain on the ground surface within the project area. Therefore, construction activities in these deposits could impact unique paleontological resources. There is a high potential for adverse impacts to fossils on the ground surface from AEWP-related ground disturbing actions. However, the potential for direct impacts to paleontological resources during AEWPrelated ground disturbing actions will be substantially reduced with the implementation of Mitigation June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

10 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Measures PA-1 through PA-3 (see Section , below). In addition, the implementation of paleontological mitigation measures during surface disturbing projects has resulted in the salvage and permanent preservation of large numbers of scientifically significant paleontological resources that would otherwise have been destroyed. This has greatly reduced the cumulative effects of such projects on paleontological resources, and has resulted in the beneficial cumulative effect of making these fossils available for scientific research and education by placing them in museum collections Reasonably Foreseeable Projects Table provides a listing of current and reasonably foreseeable projects, including other proposed or approved renewable energy projects, various BLM-authorized actions/activities, proposed or approved projects within the County s jurisdiction, and other actions/activities that the Lead Agencies consider reasonably foreseeable. Most of these projects have either undergone independent environmental review pursuant to NEPA and/or CEQA or will do so prior to approval. Even if environmental review has not been completed for the cumulative projects described in Table 4.1-1, their effects were considered in the cumulative impacts analyses in this Draft EIS/EIR Construction Unknown, unrecorded paleontological resources may be found at nearly any present and future development site. However, as they are discovered, sites are recorded and information retrieved. If the nature of the resource requires it, the resource is protected. When discovered, paleontological resources are treated in accordance with applicable federal and State laws and regulations as well as the mitigation measures and permit requirements applicable to a project. It is not known what paleontological resources, if any, would be affected by construction of all present and future projects identified in Table However, given the density of past development in Kern County, and the large number of reasonably foreseeable projects listed in Table 4.1-1, it is reasonable to assume that resources exist and could be uncovered at several of these sites. Although significant fossils may be discovered during excavation for construction, through implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology), direct impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to a level that is less than significant. Paleontological resources are generally not considered subject to cumulative impacts because they are localized and site-specific and are either individually impacted in a way that changes the significance of the resource or are avoided. In addition, the other projects identified in Table would also be expected to reduce potential impacts on paleontological resources to a less than significant level through avoidance or mitigation and, therefore, not contribute to a significant cumulative impact. Therefore, impacts of the AEWP would not have the potential to combine with impacts from past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects to result in a cumulative impact to paleontological resources Operation and Maintenance No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible. Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

11 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Decommissioning No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be negligible CEQA Significance and Impact Determinations, Cumulative Significance conclusions for the impacts identified for each phase of Cumulative Impacts (Construction, Operation and Maintenance, Decommissioning) are presented below based on the CEQA Significance Criteria presented in Section Construction PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). Although significant fossils may be discovered during excavation for construction, through implementation of Mitigation Measures (Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan), (Train Construction Personnel), and (Monitor Construction for Paleontology), direct impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to a level that is less than significant. Paleontological resources are generally not considered subject to cumulative impacts because they are localized and site-specific and are either individually impacted in a way that changes the significance of the resource or are avoided. With implementation of these mitigation measures, cumulative impacts on paleontological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Operation PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP operation and maintenance. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP operation and maintenance is anticipated to be low. With the implementation of mitigation measures for known fossil sites and unknown subsurface fossil sites, potential cumulative impacts on paleontological resources within the AEWP area would be less than significant. Decommissioning PALEO-1 (Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature). No direct impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated in association with AEWP decommissioning. The potential for indirect impacts in association with AEWP decommissioning is anticipated to be low. Areas within the AEWP that have moderate to high potential for significant paleontological resources located on the surface and potentially vulnerable to vandalism and theft will be collected prior to, or during, construction. Therefore, there would be no cumulative impacts Mitigation Measures The AEWP would include implementation of recommended BMPs from BLM s Programmatic EIS for Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (BLM, 2005e). The applicable BLM BMPs are presented below. In addition, AEWP-specific mitigation measures are presented to minimize and avoid adverse effects on paleontological resources. June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

12 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Project-Specific Mitigation Measures MM MM Develop Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits by Kern County or a Notice to Proceed by the BLM, the project proponent shall submit a Paleontological Resource Management Plan that details how paleontological resources located within the project site will be avoided and/or treated. The Paleontological Resource Management Plan shall be prepared, at the sole expense of the project proponent, and shall be based on Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) guidelines and meet all regulatory requirements. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the BLM and the Kern County Planning and Community Development Department. The Paleontological Resource Management Plan shall include the following information: 1. Identification and mapping of impact areas of moderate to high sensitivity that will be monitored during construction; 2. A coordination strategy to ensure that a qualified paleontological monitor will conduct full-time monitoring of all ground disturbances in sediments determined to have a moderate to high sensitivity. Sediments of low, marginal, and undetermined sensitivity shall be monitored on a part-time basis (as determined by the Qualified Paleontologist); 3. The significance criteria to be used to determine which resources will be avoided or recovered for their data potential; 4. Procedures for the discovery, recovery, preparation, and analysis of paleontological resources encountered during construction, in accordance with standards for recovery established by the SVP; 5. Provisions for verification that the project proponent has an agreement with a recognized museum repository (e.g., the Buena Vista Museum of Natural History or the Raymond Alf Museum), for the disposition of recovered fossils and that the fossils shall be prepared prior to submittal to the repository as required by the repository (e.g., prepared, analyzed at a laboratory, curated, or cataloged); 6. Specifications that all paleontological work undertaken by the Project Proponent on public land shall be carried out by qualified paleontologists with the appropriate current permits, including, but not limited to a Paleontological Resources Use Permit (for work on public lands administered by BLM) and a Paleontological Collecting Permit (for work on lands administered by California Department of Parks and Recreation); and, 7. Description of monitoring reports that will be prepared, which shall include daily logs and a final monitoring report with an itemized list of specimens found to be submitted to Kern County Planning and Community Development Department, the project proponent, the Buena Vista Museum of Natural History, and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County within 90 days of the completion of monitoring. Train Construction Personnel. Prior to grading or building permits by Kern County or a Notice to Proceed by the BLM, the project proponent shall submit evidence of compliance with the following: 1. The project proponent shall provide for a paleontologist to provide all construction personnel training on implementation of the Paleontological Resource Management Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012

13 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern Plan and specifically procedures to be followed in the event that a fossil site or fossil occurrence is encountered during construction. An information package shall be provided for construction personnel not present at the initial preconstruction briefing. All personnel shall be instructed that unauthorized collection or disturbance of protected fossils will not be allowed. Violators will be subject to prosecution under the appropriate State and federal laws and violations will be grounds for removal from the project. Unauthorized resource collection or disturbance may constitute grounds for the issuance of a stop work order. 2. The project proponent shall retain a paleontologist to conduct a site survey to determine if there are any Quaternary deposits present within the project boundary that would be impacted by ground-disturbing activities. If present, those deposits shall be examined for their fossil potential in order to focus monitoring efforts. MM Monitor Construction for Paleontology. The project proponent shall continuously comply with the following during all ground-disturbing activities and during project operations: 1. Based on the paleontological sensitivity assessment and Paleontological Resource Management Plan, the project proponent shall conduct full-time construction monitoring by the qualified paleontological monitor in areas determined to have moderate to high paleontological sensitivity. Sediments of low, marginal, or undetermined sensitivity shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor on a parttime basis (as determined by the Paleontologist). Construction activities shall be diverted when data recovery of significant fossils is warranted, as determined by the Paleontologist. Monitoring shall be conducted as follows: a. Monitoring of ground disturbance shall consist of the surface collection of visible vertebrate and invertebrate fossils within the project site. Upon discovery of paleontological resources by paleontologists or construction personnel, work in the immediate area of the find shall be diverted and the Project Proponent s paleontologist notified. Once the find has been inspected and a preliminary assessment made, the project proponent s paleontologist will notify the BLM and Kern County Planning and Community Development Department of the discovery. If recovery of a large or unusually productive fossil occurrence is warranted, earthmoving activities shall be diverted temporarily around the fossil site, and a recovery crew shall be mobilized to remove the material as quickly as possible. The monitor shall be permitted to photograph and/or draw stratigraphic profiles of cut surfaces and take samples for analysis of microfossils, dating, or other specified purposes, in accordance with the research design. b. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to a point of identification, including washing of sediments to recover smaller fossil remains. Once excavation has reached specified depths, salvage of fossil material from the side walls of the cut shall resume. Specimens shall be identified and curated into a museum repository with a retrievable storage. c. All significant fossil specimens recovered from the project site as a result of the paleontological mitigation program shall be treated (prepared, identified, curated, and cataloged) in accordance with designated museum repository requirements. Samples shall be submitted to a laboratory, acceptable to the selected museum, for identification, dating, and microfossil and pollen analysis. June Alta East Wind Project (AEWP)

14 Bureau of Land Management/County of Kern BLM Best Management Practices d. Daily logs shall be kept by the paleontological monitor during field monitoring and shall be submitted weekly to Kern County. A complete set of the daily monitoring logs shall be kept on-site throughout the earthmoving activities and be available for inspection. The daily monitoring log shall be keyed to a location map to indicate the area monitored, the date, the assigned personnel, and the results of the monitoring activities, including rock unit encountered, fossil specimens recovered, and associated specimen data, as well as corresponding geologic and geographic site data. Within 90 days of the completion of the paleontological monitoring, a monitoring report, with an appended, itemized inventory of specimens, shall be submitted to Kern County, the project proponent, and the Buena Vista Museum of Natural History. Operators shall determine whether paleontological resources exist in a project area on the basis of the sedimentary context of the area, a records search for past paleontological finds in the area, and/or, depending on the extent of existing information, a paleontological survey. If paleontological resources are present at the site, or if areas with a high potential to contain paleontological material have been identified, a paleontological resources management plan shall be developed. This plan shall include a mitigation plan for collection of the fossils; mitigation may include avoidance, removal of fossils, or monitoring. If an area exhibits a high potential but no fossils were observed during survey, monitoring by a qualified paleontologist may be required during all excavation and earthmoving in the sensitive area. A report shall be prepared documenting these activities. The paleontological resources management plan also shall (1) establish a monitoring program, (2) identify measures to prevent potential looting/vandalism or erosion impacts, and (3) address the education of workers and the public to make them aware of the consequences of unauthorized collection of fossils on public land. Unexpected discovery of cultural or paleontological resources during construction shall be brought to the attention of the responsible BLM authorized officer immediately. Work shall be halted in the vicinity of the find to avoid further disturbance to the resources while they are being evaluated and appropriate mitigation measures are being developed Residual Impacts After Mitigation The implementation of the included mitigation measures would substantially reduce potential adverse impacts on scientifically significant paleontological resources. Such mitigation measures have been proven to be effective in reducing adverse effects on fossils resulting from surface-disturbing projects on BLM land throughout the western United States. However, even in the most effective paleontological mitigation monitoring program, inadvertent damage to paleontological resources does occur. This damage occurs at the point at which the fossils are uncovered by excavation equipment, and in cases in which fossils are not identified by paleontological monitors during excavation. The damage caused by construction equipment can typically be repaired in a paleontological laboratory. Alta East Wind Project (AEWP) June 2012