# ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (2017) > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Acher-ae_heights%3A10eb985573888d56 ## Record - **Collection:** Tribal code - **Document type:** Tribal code ## Text ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TRINIDAD RANCHERIA STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT AND INTERPRETIVE VISITOR CENTER PROJECT ."3$) 2017 LEAD AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 978-6000 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TRINIDAD RANCHERIA STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT AND INTERPRETIVE VISITOR CENTER PROJECT ."3$) 2017 LEAD AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 978-6000 PREPARED BY: Analytical Environmental Services 1801 7th Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 447-3479 www.analyticalcorp.com TABLE OF CONTENTS TRINIDAD RANCHERIA STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT AND INTERPRETIVE VISITOR CENTER PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Background......................................................................................................................1-1 1.3 Location and Setting ........................................................................................................1-3 1.4 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action .....................................................................1-3 1.5 Overview of the Environmental Review Process ............................................................1-8 1.6 Environmental Issues Addressed .....................................................................................1-8 1.7 Regulatory Requirements and Approvals ........................................................................1-8 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 2.1 Selection of Alternatives for Detailed Evaluation ...........................................................2-1 2.2 Proposed Action and Proposed Project............................................................................2-1 2.3 No-Action Alternative .....................................................................................................2-9 2.4 Comparison of the Proposed Action and the Project Alternatives.................................2-10 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Land Resources................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Water Resources ..............................................................................................................3-5 3.3 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas ...................................................................................3-10 3.4 Biological Resources .....................................................................................................3-15 3.5 Cultural Resources.........................................................................................................3-21 3.6 Socioeconomic Conditions / Environmental Justice......................................................3-24 3.7 Transportation and Circulation ......................................................................................3-27 3.8 Land Use ........................................................................................................................3-28 3.9 Agriculture .....................................................................................................................3-29 3.10 Public Services...............................................................................................................3-31 3.11 Noise ..............................................................................................................................3-33 3.12 Hazardous Materials ......................................................................................................3-36 3.13 Visual Resources............................................................................................................3-36 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4.1 Proposed Action...............................................................................................................4-1 4.2 No-Action Alternative ...................................................................................................4-17 4.3 Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................................4-19 4.4 Indirect and Growth-Inducing Effects ...........................................................................4-25 Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 i Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment Table of Contents 5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.1 Land Resources................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Water Resources ..............................................................................................................5-3 5.3 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................5-3 5.4 Biological Resources .......................................................................................................5-3 5.5 Cultural Resources...........................................................................................................5-5 5.6 Socioeconomic Conditions / Environmental Justice........................................................5-6 5.7 Transportation and Circulation ........................................................................................5-6 5.8 Land Use ..........................................................................................................................5-6 5.9 Agriculture .......................................................................................................................5-6 5.10 Public Services.................................................................................................................5-6 5.11 Noise ................................................................................................................................5-6 5.12 Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................................5-7 5.13 Visual Resources..............................................................................................................5-7 6.0 CONSULTATION, COORDINATION AND LIST OF PREPARERS 6.1 Federal Agencies..............................................................................................................6-1 6.2 Local Government ...........................................................................................................6-1 6.3 Preparers of Environmental Assessment .........................................................................6-1 7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................................7-1 LIST OF TABLES 2-1 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 3-7 3-8 3-9 3-10 3-11 3-12 4.1-1 4.1-2 4.1-3 4.1-4 4.1-5 4.3-1 4.3-2 Requested Trust Parcels...................................................................................................2-2 Soil Properties for Soils on the Project Site.....................................................................3-2 General Water Quality Objectives for the Eel River ......................................................3-9 2010 Clean Water Act Section 303(D) List .....................................................................3-9 Water Quality Objectives for Groundwater .....................................................................3-9 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.......................................................................3-11 NCAB Attainment Status...............................................................................................3-14 Potentially Occurring Federal Special-Status Species ...................................................3-20 Trinidad, Humboldt County, California Demographics ................................................3-25 Trinidad, Humboldt County, California Employment ...................................................3-25 Cher-Ae Heights Inidan Community of Trinidad Rancheria Estimates ........................3-26 Humboldt County Race/Income Profile.........................................................................3-26 Typical Sound Levels of Common Noise Sources ........................................................3-34 Wastewater Flows for Alternative A ...............................................................................4-3 Unmitigated Construction Emissions ..............................................................................4-7 Unmitigated Operational Emissions ................................................................................4-7 Typical Construction Noise Levels................................................................................4-15 Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment ....................................................4-15 Greenhouse Gas CO2 Equivalent ...................................................................................4-22 Alternative A GHG Emissions.......................................................................................4-22 Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 ii Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES 1-1 1-2 1-3 2-1 2-2 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 Regional Location............................................................................................................1-4 Site and Vicinity ..............................................................................................................1-5 Aerial Photograph ............................................................................................................1-6 Site Plan ...........................................................................................................................2-4 Interpretive Center Site Plan............................................................................................2-5 Regional Faults ................................................................................................................3-3 Soil Types ........................................................................................................................3-4 Habitat Types and Potential Waters of the U.S. ............................................................3-18 General Plan Land Use ..................................................................................................3-30 APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Bay Street Stormwater Improvement Plans New Interpretive Center Building at Trinidad Pier Plans Pier Stormwater Plans Biological Resources Cultural Resources Study (Bound Under Separate Cover) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment CalEEMod Results Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 iii Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is the federal agency that is charged with reviewing and approving tribal applications pursuant to 25 C.F.R. Part 151 to take land into federal trust status. This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared for the BIA to support the application of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria (Tribe) for land to be placed into federal trust (Proposed Action) in Humboldt County, California. This land, also referred to as the Tribe’s Harbor Properties, consists of nine parcels and three non-parceled areas, in part and whole, totaling approximately nine acres adjacent to Trinidad Bay. The land is currently owned by the Tribe in fee simple status. This land is intended to be used for an interpretive visitor center (visitor center), open space, and operation of currently existing facilities (Proposed Project). Currently existing facilities consist of the Seascape Restaurant, Seascape vacation rental house, Trinidad pier, a vessel haul-out hoist, surface parking, and several outbuildings. The BIA will use this EA to determine if the Proposed Action would result in adverse effects to the environment. This document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements set out in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 United States Code [USC] §4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Guidelines for Implementing NEPA (40 C.F.R. Parts 1500-1508), and the BIA’s NEPA Guidebook (59 Indian Affairs Manual [IAM] 3-H). Section 2.0 of this EA provides a detailed description of the Project Alternatives. Section 3.0 provides a description of the existing environmental conditions on and in the vicinity of the project site. Section 4.0 provides an analysis of the potential environmental consequences associated with the Project Alternatives. A discussion of impact avoidance and mitigation measures is provided in Section 5.0. Consistent with the requirements of NEPA, the BIA will review and analyze the environmental consequences associated with the Proposed Action and Project Alternatives, and either determine that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate, request additional analysis, or request that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared. 1.2 BACKGROUND The Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria is a federally-recognized Indian Tribe with ancestral ties to the Yurok, Wiyot, Tolowa, Chetco, Karuk, and Hupa peoples. The Tribe is located within the ancestral territories of the Yurok, with core land holdings located on a coastal bluff east of Highway 101, just south of the town of Trinidad. Trinidad is located approximately 25 miles north of the Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-1 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment_v2 1.0 Introduction City of Eureka. Under a 1906 Congressional act authorizing the purchase of land for “homeless Indians,” 60 acres were purchased in 1908 on Trinidad Bay for the original members of the Tribe. Federal recognition was subsequently granted by the Department of the Interior in 1917, Articles of Association were enacted by 1961, and a new Tribal Constitution was passed in 2008. The Tribe currently has approximately 228 members. The governing body of the Tribe is ultimately the Community Council, which consists of enrolled members who are eligible to vote. Eligible voters are tribal members at least 18 years of age who satisfy a number of annual requirements to maintain voting privileges. The Community Council meets monthly as a forum opportunity to discuss aspects of Tribal business and services. The Tribal Council is elected from those members comprising the Community Council. The duty of the Tribal Council is to govern all the people, resources, land, and water reserved to the Tribe, in accordance with the Tribe’s Constitution, all laws adopted by the Tribal Council, and any limitations lawfully imposed by the Tribal Council and/or the United States through statute or Constitution. The Tribal Council Officers’ duties include a wide range of responsibilities including attending all meetings, serving as liaisons to advisory committees, and most importantly, upholding the Tribal Constitution. Specific responsibilities, duties, expectations, and guidelines are thoroughly outlined in the Trinidad Rancheria’s Tribal Constitution. The Tribal Council consists of a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Secretary/Treasurer, and two additional Council members. The Tribe’s culture, including but not limited to traditional and customary fishing and gathering, is inextricably tied to the land and marine resources found within the traditional homeland, which is defined as a 20-mile area of interest and concern surrounding the Tribe’s lands. The Tribe has made a significant investment to revitalize the local economy and preserve the Tribe’s cultural heritage, and has developed a model that advances economic development and stewardship. In January 2000, Trinidad Rancheria purchased the Trinidad Pier, harbor facilities, and the Seascape Restaurant, including the parking along Bay Street. The Trinidad Pier was built between 1945 and 1946 to serve commercial and recreational users. A cannery at the end of the pier was swept away by a storm in 1957 and never replaced. Due to the deterioration of the original wooden supports, the Tribe, with funding in part by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the California Coastal Conservancy (CCC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfield Grant, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the BIA, completed a reconstruction of the pier in 2013. The deteriorated creosote-treated wood pilings and the wood decking were replaced by polymer-coated steel pilings and pre-cast concrete decking. The Trinidad Pier is currently the northernmost oceanfront pier in California and serves a fleet of commercial winter crab fishing vessels and year-round water angling for salmon and near shore fish species. The Trinidad Rancheria currently operates the pier, and upland improvements including a boat launch ramp and the Seascape Restaurant. Since taking over the operations of the Trinidad Pier and upland improvements in 2000, the Tribe has incurred losses of over $1.3 million. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-2 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 1.0 Introduction 1.3 LOCATION AND SETTING The trust acquisition parcels addressed in this EA are located west of Highway 101 in Humboldt County, approximately 18 miles north of the City of Eureka and within the City of Trinidad (project site). The project site is located in Section 26 of the ‘Trinidad, CA’ U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle within Township 8 North and Range 1 West, and unsectioned areas of Trinidad Bay. Figures 1-1 and 1-2 show the regional location and vicinity of the project site. Figure 1-3 shows an aerial photograph of the project site. The project site includes nine parcels, totaling approximately six and a half acres, which are held partially or wholly in fee by the Tribe. These parcels are identified by Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 042-07-101, 042-07-102, 042-07-105, 042-07-108, 042-07-112, 042-07-113, 042-07-114, 042-09108, and 042-09-110. The project site also includes approximately two and a half acres that do not have APNs for a total of nine acres of lands for the requested trust transfer. Although these parcels are not contiguous with the current Rancheria, they are within approximately 0.5 miles of the Tribe’s Reservation. Regional access is provided by Highway 101, which travels in a general north-south direction and is located approximately 0.5 miles east of the site. Local access to the project site is provided by Lighthouse Road and Bay Street. Lighthouse Road is a two-lane road that runs adjacent to the northwestern half of the project site. Bay Street, which transitions from Lighthouse Road, runs northwest to southeast though the western half of the project site. Access to Lighthouse Road from Highway 101 is provided via Main Street, Trinity Street, and Edwards Street. Edwards Street parallels the northern border of the project site. The project site is composed of a mosaic of ruderal and developed habitat, coastal dune grass habitat, beach, and two vegetated rock heads which project southwards into Trinidad Bay. The topography of the site consists of coastal beachfront and bluffs with elevations of 0 to 55 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Surrounding land uses include private residences, surface parking, Humboldt State University’s Marine Laboratory, Trinidad State Beach, and undeveloped parcels. The current Rancheria, approximately 0.5 miles east and opposite the bay from the project site, includes Tribal government center, Tribal housing, and a casino and associated facilities. 1.4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION The Tribe’s purpose for taking the approximately nine acres of land into trust is to: ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ Facilitate Tribal self-governance and self-determination by allowing the Tribal Government to exercise Tribal sovereign authority over the land; Protect and enhance the economic well-being of Tribal resources further establishing economic self-sufficiency; Further the Tribe’s goal to restore its original land base; Further the Tribe’s goal to preserve the surrounding environment and cultural resources for future generations and the entire community; Reduce the current stormwater runoff into Trinidad Bay from Harbor Properties improving the quality of the Trinidad Bay; Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-3 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment _ ^ _ Project Site ^ Humboldt County SCALE ¢ Ð NOR TH ! Miles 0 4 8 _ ^ P A C I F I C O C E A N Project Site SOURCE: ESRI Data, 2016; AES, 2/12/2016 Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 Figure 1-1 Regional Location Patric oint ks P Dr 101 £ ¤ h a ve n Dr W es t Propery Boundary Sc e ni c P Dr A C I F I C O C E A N SCALE ¢ Ð N O R TH ! Feet 0 1,000 2,000 SOURCE: "Trinidad, CA" USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle, T8N R1W Section 26 and Unsectioned Areas of Trinidad Bay, Humboldt Baseline & Meridian; AES, 2/25/2016 Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 Figure 1-2 Site and Vicinity Ewing St Galindo St Pacific Ct Edwards St Azale a Way Property Boundary Van Wycke St 2 Ba y 9 St 1 8 3 4 5 6 LEGEND 7 Property Boundary 9.38 ac PARCELS: Pie r 1, APN 04207101, 2.02ac 2, APN 04207102, 0.50ac h Lig tho 3, 04207105, 0.01ac us eR d 4, APN 04207108, 2.81ac 5, APN 04207112, 0.40ac 6, APN 04207113, 0.80ac 7, 04207114, 0.46ac 8, APN 04209108, 0.22ac 9, APN 04209110, 0.38ac No APN, 2.85ac ¢ Ð N O R TH ! Feet 0 125 250 SOURCE: Humboldt County Parcel GIS Data, 2013; DigitalGlobe aerial photograph, 6/6/2013; AES, 2/25/2016 Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 Figure 1-3 Aerial Photograph 1.0 Introduction ƒ ƒ Highlight the cultural and economic background and importance of the Trinidad Harbor to the surrounding region; and Form a Trinidad Harbor District which would include all of the Tribe’s current harbor properties. The Tribe’s culture, including but not limited to traditional and customary fishing and gathering, is inextricably tied to the land and marine resources found within traditional homeland, which we define as a 20 mile area of interest and concern around the Tribe’s lands. The Tribe has made a significant investment to revitalize the local economy and preserve the Tribe’s cultural heritage, and we have developed a model that advances economic development and stewardship as complementary goals. Land acquisition and transfer to trust is now, and has historically been, a top priority for the Tribe, which owns less than eighty percent of the land originally purchased under the 1906 Congressional act. The Trinidad Pier and development of harbor businesses represent the best parcels of land for economic development for the Rancheria. Trinidad Harbor is designated by the California Coastal Commission as a Critical Coastal Area and by the State Water Board as an Area of Special Biological Significant (ASBS). In 2005, the Rancheria received a cease and desist order (CDO) from the SWRCB for prohibited discharges from the Trinidad harbor and pier facilities to the Trinidad Head ASBS. The list of prohibited discharges in the CDO included the freshwater hose on the pier, the fish cleaning station, runoff from the pier itself, boat cleaning activities in and around the boat launch, and runoff from the harbor parking lot facility. Since 2005, the Rancheria has completed significant modifications at the Trinidad harbor and pier facilities to eliminate the prohibited discharges as set forth in the CDO. Major site improvements that have been undertaken include removal of the fish cleaning station and freshwater hose at the pier, construction of a new wastewater treatment system for the Seascape Restaurant and adjacent vacation rental, construction of new public restrooms, and reconstruction of the pier including installation of a stormwater capture and treatment system for runoff from the pier. These modifications resulted in elimination of all of the discharges of concern with the exception of stormwater runoff from the parking lot. The Rancheria is continuing to implement facility improvement efforts to reduce nonpoint sources of discharge further, with the goal of eliminating all nonpoint-source discharges from the Trinidad harbor and pier facilities. Public parking areas associated with the Trinidad harbor and pier facilities include the main parking lot and boat launch area. These parking areas are used by beachgoers, boaters, and patrons of the Seascape Restaurant, tackle shop, and pier. A significant portion of the traffic at the main parking lot is from boaters with trailers using the launching facilities or boaters without trailers using the mooring facilities. The main parking area contributes stormwater runoff as a nonpoint-source to the adjacent beach area referred to as Launcher Beach. The parking lot is often used as a staging area for boat and trailer repairs, potentially contributing repair-related pollutants to the harbor. This parking lot has been identified by the SWRCB as a nonpoint source area that contributes discharges to the Trinidad ASBS, and this area falls under the CDO issued in 2005 As a governmental entity, the Tribe has a responsibility to meet the economic, social, cultural and environmental needs and concerns of its people. The primary task of the Tribe is to increase the standard of Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-7 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment_v2 1.0 Introduction living and quality of life for Tribal members for the Cher-ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria; and to provide employment opportunities, education and job training. Placing this land into trust will allow the tribe to develop a stronger economic foundation, employing more tribal members, and developing additional amenities to enhance the overall operation. It will allow the land to fall under the Tribe’s authority, critical for the exercise of Tribal self-governance and self-determination, and is consistent with the Bureau’s trust responsibility to Indian Tribes and the federal policies supporting Indian selfdetermination and self-sufficiency. 1.5 OVERVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS This EA is intended to satisfy the environmental review process of 59 IAM 3-H, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 1501.3, and 40 CFR § 1508.9. The EA has been released for a 30-day comment period. Comments will be considered by the BIA, and either a FONSI will be prepared, or additional environmental analysis will be conducted. After the NEPA process is complete, the BIA may issue a determination on the Tribe’s fee-to-trust application. 1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ADDRESSED In accordance with NEPA and because the Proposed Action is located within a coastal zone, this EA evaluates the following environmental issue areas outlined within the BIA’s NEPA Guidebook: ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ 1.7 Land Resources; Water Resources; Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources; Socioeconomic Conditions / Environmental Justice; Transportation and Circulation; Land Use; Agriculture; Public Services; Noise; Hazardous Materials; and Visual Resources. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVALS The following direct and indirect federal approvals and actions may occur as a result of the Proposed Action: Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-8 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 1.0 Introduction ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ Transfer of the approximately nine-acre site into federal trust status for the Tribe by the Secretary of the Interior. Submission of inventory information to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the Class V stormwater wells under the Safe Drinking Water Act Underground Injection Control Program. Application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with construction activity. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), if endangered species may be impacted by the Proposed Action. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Request for a California Coastal Commission Federal Consistency Determination. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 1-9 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment SECTION 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES The Project Alternatives are described in this section. This section also summarizes the protective measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) incorporated into each alternative to reduce potential adverse impacts to environmental resources. 2.1 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR DETAILED EVALUATION As discussed in Section 1.4, the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action relates to the protection of the harbor and harbor environment (including cultural resources) while furthering Tribal goals of economic self-sufficiency, reestablishment of its original land base, self-governance, and self-determination. The only reasonable alternatives are to either take no action or take the requested parcels into trust on behalf of the Tribe. Other potential alternatives to the Proposed Action, such as alternative locations or a reduction in the size of the area taken in to trust, do not meet the definition of “reasonable” under the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ’s) Regulations for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the purpose and need would not be met. Being the only harbor currently owned by the Tribe in close proximity to Tribe’s existing lands, there are no other available comparable lands that would meet the purpose and need of the Proposed Action. Furthermore, all the parcels constitute the Trinidad Harbor lands and are vital to the operation of the pier and protection of cultural resources. For example, as shown on Figure 1-3, the spacing between Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 042-071-08 and 042-071-01 is vital to maintain public access to the trail head of Trinidad Head, which can be seen on the aerial photograph. Furthermore, APN 042-071-01 is an important storage area for operation of the pier during the crab and fishing seasons. Accordingly, a smaller area for the trust acquisition is not evaluated within the Environmental Assessment (EA). The Tribe has proposed the development of a visitors’ center and formation of a Trinidad Harbor District (Proposed Project). There are no alternative lands available that would allow the Tribe to form the Trinidad Harbor District. Furthermore, all of the currently proposed lands are vital to the protection of the Trinidad Harbor District. Therefore, alternative locations for trust acquisitions are not evaluated within this EA. The Proposed Project would allow the Tribe to better market, manage, and operate its harbor properties more effectively. The Proposed Project is detailed below in Section 2.2. 2.2 PROPOSED ACTION AND PROPOSED PROJECT The Proposed Action consists of placing nine parcels and three non-parceled areas totaling approximately nine acres as detailed in Table 2-1 into Federal trust status. These parcels are collectively known as the Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-1 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Tribe’s Harbor Businesses. This includes the pier, boat launch, boat cleaning and maintenance facilities, two parking lots (Bay Street and western parking lots), the Seascape Restaurant, a bait and gift shop, a vacation rental house, recreation areas, and areas for boat parking. The Proposed Action would include the construction of a visitor center, improvements to the existing parking lot, and the formation of a Trinidad Harbor District for the Tribe’s Harbor Businesses (Proposed Project). The development footprint of the visitor center would be approximately 0.03 acres. Approximately one acre of the project site is currently paved or otherwise developed with existing structures and signs of surface and subsurface disturbance (such as the presence of utilities). The majority of the project site (approximately five acres) would remain undeveloped and would be maintained as open space. TABLE 2-1 REQUESTED TRUST PARCELS Assessor’s Parcel # Size (acres) 1 042-07-101 0.99 2 042-07-102 0.44 3 042-07-105 0.01 4 042-07-108 2.64 5 042-07-112 0.26 6 042-07-113 0.80 7 042-07-114 0.38 8 042-09-108 0.24 9 042-09-110 0.35 10 No APN 3.24 Total Acreage 9.35 SOURCE: AES 2016. PROPOSED ACTION The Proposed Action consists of the fee simple conveyance of the approximately nine-acre project site into federal trust status for the benefit of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria (Tribe) in accordance with procedures set forth in 25 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §151.3. This trust action would shift civil regulatory jurisdiction over the approximately nine-acre site from the State of California, Humboldt County (County), and City of Trinidad (City) to the Tribe and the federal government. The State, County, and City would continue to exercise criminal jurisdiction under Public Law 280 (18 United States Code [USC] §1162) for the law enforcement activities identified under the Tribal Law Order Act of 2010. While the pier would be included within the trust action, in accordance with an agreement executed April 18, 2012 between the Tribe and the California Coastal Conservancy (CCC), the Tribe would maintain public access to the Trinidad Pier and associated marine access and recreational improvements until 2032. Federal laws, such as the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), would continue to apply to tribal trust lands. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-2 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives ALTERNATIVE A – PROPOSED PROJECT The Tribe proposes to develop the Trinidad Harbor District. As components of the new Trinidad Harbor District, the Tribe would designate the beaches and bluffs as protected open space, improve stormwater quality, reduce stormwater flows generated along Bay Street, and construct a visitor center where the existing tackle shop is located. Alternative A is further discussed below. HARBOR DISTRICT The Trinidad Harbor District would include all of the Tribe’s Harbor Businesses. The Trinidad Harbor District Board of Directors would be comprised of Tribal members and staff that have current experience with the Harbor Businesses. The board of the Trinidad Harbor District would develop a more cohesive organization that markets, manages, and operates the businesses within the district more effectively. The establishment of this district would provide the Tribe with means of meeting the purpose and need of the proposed trust action. OPEN SPACE COMPONENT All existing open space within the project site (approximately five acres) would be preserved as open space and the Tribe would maintain public access to the open space. The open space would include Trinidad Little Head, all beach front, all Coastal Bluffs lands on the property, and current open space west of the residence. Development under Alternative A would occur on existing disturbed lands constituting the existing parking lot, storage area, and the tackle and gift shop. BAY STREET STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS 2.2 of the Attached (Figure 2-1). Design plans for the improved stormwater facilities are included as Appendix A. To reduce stormwater flow four dry wells, two cisterns, and two rain gardens would be installed around the Tribe’s Harbor Businesses and parking lot along Bay Street. In addition, rain gardens would be developed as shown on Figure 2-1 to collect rainwater. To reduce flows from Bay Street into the bay, the southeastern portion of the parking lot would be replaced with permeable pavers. Linear drains would be installed throughout the parking lot to transfer runoff to a bioswale that runs along the northern boundary of the parking lot before discharging onto the beach. The concrete rubble along the beach east of the proposed visitor center would be removed (Figure 2-1) and replaced with rip rap. Minor excavation would be required to develop the rain gardens, linear drains, bioswale, and the permeable pavement. INTERPRETIVE VISITOR CENTER COMPONENT The Tribe would develop a visitor center within the currently developed footprint between the boat launch and Seascape Restaurant in the central portion of the site, as shown in Figure 2-2. Design plans are included as Appendix B. The visitor center footprint would cover approximately 1,300 square feet and would be located on previously disturbed lands that currently house storage units and the tackle and Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-3 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 9.27 ac 0 30 Feet 60 Visitors Center 0.03 ac INSTALL RAIN GARDEN #2 INSTALL DRY WELL #2 ON DOWNSPOUTS RESTROOM INSTALL DRY WELL #1 ON DOWNSPOUTS INSTALL DRY WELL #3 ON DOWNSPOUTS TRINIDAD BAY CISTERN #1 89 GAL. UNDERGROUND SEPTIC PUMP SEWER PIPES Pie r Bay St CISTERN #2 392 GAL. PIER RESIDENCE INSTALL DRY WELL #4 ON DOWNSPOUTS E Galindo St Figure 2-1 Site Plan Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 SEASCAPE RESTAURANT INSTALL CONCRETE CURB PLACE RIP RAP ON BANK (1 TON ROCK) E LAUNCHER BEACH INSTALL PERMEABLE PAVERS INSTALL CONCRETE BLOCK MAT INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #7 INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #6 INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #5 INSTALL BIOSWALE INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #4 INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #3 RESIDENCE E E INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #8 INSTALL SPEED HUMP #2 E INSTALL RAIN GARDEN INSTALL RETAINING WALL E E E INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #2 E E E INSTALL LINEAR DRAIN #1 E PLANT INDIGENOUS PLANTS NATIVE TO BEACH DUNES E E SOURCE: Pacific Watershed Associates, 6/1/2016; Humboldt County Parcel GIS Data, 2013; DigitalGlobe aerial photograph, 5/28/2014; AES, 7/13/2016 ¢ LEGEND Property Boundary ! NOR T H Ð Rd E se E ou h th Lig E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E RT 0 2.5 Feet 5 Project Site 0.03 ac 7.5 Figure 2-2 Interpretive Center Site Plan Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 H SOURCE: TVCE, 11/4/2015; AES, 2/23/2016 ¢ Ð LEGEND Property Boundary 9.27 ac ! NO 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives giftshop building. The visitor center would provide educational opportunities for tribal citizens and nontribal members of the public and would focus on regional resources including Tribal cultural resources. The visitor center would include a seating area, reception area, two offices, a restroom, and a food preparation area. Two public entrances would be provided at the western and southern portion of the building. Parking for the visitor center would be provided by the existing parking lot along Bay Street. Lighting around the building and in the parking lot would be downcast and minimized to ensure that effects to local marine life are minimized, while remaining adequate for public safety and security. Site access would be obtained from Lighthouse Road and Bay Street. The visitor center would result in the hiring of one full-timeequivalent employee (FTE) and would also house the existing Harbor Manager. The Tribe estimates approximately five visitors a day are expected to patronize the visitor center during peak season. Water Supply Water would be supplied though the existing infrastructure connections to the City. Except for connections from the visitor center to the existing system serving the Seascape Restaurant, no additional water infrastructure is needed for Alternative A. Based on the addition of one FTE, the additional water demand to the site would be de minimis compared to existing water users on the site (rental house, bait and gift shop, and Seascape Restaurant). Visitors to the site would obtain water from the existing fountains near the restrooms or from the Seascape Restaurant. Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Wastewater generated by the one toilet and from the two sinks within the visitor center would be treated by the existing wastewater treatment system. The on-site system consists of a series of seven above ground recirculating packed bed units located south of the public restroom/storage building and situated behind a chain link fence. The on-site system utilizes engineered textile filter media, which works similarly to a sand filter and produces treated effluent higher in quality than the California standard for secondary treated wastewater (which can be discharged through land application). The seven tanks have the ability to treat up to approximately 35,000 gallons per day (Orenco, 2016). A pump transfers the treated wastewater up to the leach fields located along the northwestern slope of the hill near the western boundary of APN 04207108, between the access drive to the vacation rental home and the western parking lot. Grading and Drainage Grading would be limited to the development footprint area of the visitor center as shown on the proposed Site/Grading Plan (refer to Sheet C4 of Appendix B). The building would be constructed in manner consistent with the California Building Code (CBC) applicable to the site, including seismic design criteria. To improve drainage over existing conditions, a storm drainage inlet system would be installed west and south of the visitor center to capture runoff from the building and from Bay Street. Three storm inlets Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-6 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives would discharge to the existing retention system located beneath the asphalt in front of Seascape Restaurant. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION The project components would be constructed after the approximately nine-acre property has been placed into federal trust. The new visitor center and accompanying parking lot improvements would be constructed over a five to sixth month period, with an anticipated completion date of 2017. The stormwater improvements would be constructed during the first phases of the visitor center development. Construction would involve earthwork, placement of concrete foundations, steel and wood structural framing, masonry, electrical and mechanical work, building finishing, and paving, among other construction trades. Prior to finalization of the grading and development plans for the property, design-level geotechnical specifications addressing the specific grading and development plans would be developed meeting seismic requirements of the CBC. The specifications would include, but not be limited to, the following: ƒ Site, building and facility-specific grading recommendations regarding site preparation, clearing and grubbing. ƒ Select grading procedures, remedial grading procedures, material suitability, and compaction criteria. ƒ Cut and fill slope stability analyses, recommended slope configurations and inclinations. ƒ Evaluation of soil expansion and corrosion potential. ƒ Building-specific foundation design parameters. ƒ Site-specific seismic design parameters. ƒ Lateral earth pressure parameters for retaining wall design, if any. ƒ Pavement design specifications. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND CONSERVATION MEASURES Air Quality Generation of construction-related emissions is a short-term nuisance impact. The following BMPs, required through contractual obligations, would be implemented to reduce these temporary construction emissions. ƒ The contractor will designate an on-site Air Quality Construction BMP Manager (AQCBM) who will be responsible for directing compliance with the following BMPs for project construction relating to heavy-duty equipment use: o All diesel-powered equipment shall be properly maintained and minimize idling time to 5 minutes when construction equipment is not in use, unless per engine manufacturer’s specifications or for safety reasons more time is required. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-7 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives o ƒ Engines shall be kept in good mechanical condition to minimize exhaust emissions. The AQCBM will be responsible for directing compliance with the following BMPs for fugitive dust control practices during project construction: o o o o o o o Spray exposed soil with water or other suppressant at least twice a day or as needed. Minimize dust emissions during transport of fill material or soil by wetting down loads, ensuring adequate freeboard (space from the top of the material to the top of the truck bed) on trucks, and/or covering loads. Promptly clean up spills of transported material on public roads. Restrict traffic on site to reduce soil disturbance and the transport of material onto roadways. Locate construction equipment and truck staging areas away from sensitive receptors as practical and in consideration of potential effects on other resources. Provide wheel washers to remove particulate matter that would otherwise be carried off site by vehicles to decrease deposition of particulate matter on area roadways. Cover dirt, gravel, and debris piles as needed to reduce dust and wind-blown debris. Fire Protection The following BMPs, required through contractual obligations, would be included as part of Alternative A to minimize the risk of fire during construction: ƒ Any construction equipment that normally includes a spark arrester would be equipped with an arrester in good working order. This includes, but is not limited to, vehicles, heavy equipment, and chainsaws. ƒ During construction, staging areas, welding areas, or areas slated for development using sparkproducing equipment would be cleared of dried vegetation or other materials that could serve as fire fuel. To the extent feasible, the contractor would keep these areas clear of combustible materials in order to maintain a firebreak. ƒ Structural fire protection would be provided through compliance with Uniform Fire Code requirements for residences and commercial structures similar in size to the proposed clubhouse. The Tribe will cooperate with the fire district by allowing routine inspections The Tribe would ensure that appropriate water supply and pressure is available for emergency fire flows. Typical fire flow allowances would be confirmed with the local Fire Marshall prior to construction of any water storage tank. ƒ Hazardous Materials The following BMPs will be required through contractual obligations and would be included as part of Alternative A to minimize the risk from use of hazardous materials during construction: ƒ Personnel shall follow best management practices (BMPs) for filling and servicing construction equipment and vehicles. To reduce the potential for accidental release, fuel, oil, and hydraulic Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-8 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives fluids shall be transferred directly from a service truck to construction equipment and shall not be stored on site. 2.3 ƒ Catch-pans shall be placed under equipment to catch potential spills during servicing. ƒ Refueling shall be conducted only with approved pumps, hoses, and nozzles. ƒ Vehicle engines shall be shut down during refueling and idling shall be kept to a minimum. ƒ No smoking, open flames, or welding shall be allowed in refueling or service areas. ƒ Refueling shall be performed away from bodies of water to prevent contamination of water in the event of a leak or spill. ƒ Service trucks shall be provided with fire extinguishers and spill containment equipment, such as absorbents. ƒ Should a spill contaminate soil, the soil shall be put into containers and disposed of in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. ƒ All containers used to store hazardous materials shall be inspected at least once per week for signs of leaking or failure. All maintenance, refueling, and storage areas shall be inspected monthly. ƒ Hazardous materials must be stored in appropriate and approved containers in accordance with applicable regulatory agency protocols. ƒ Potentially hazardous materials, including fuels, shall be stored away from drainages, and secondary containment shall be provided for all hazardous materials stored during construction and operation. ƒ In the event that contaminated soil and/or groundwater is encountered during construction related earth-moving activities, all work shall be halted until a professional hazardous materials specialist or other qualified individual assesses the extent of contamination. If contamination is determined to be hazardous, representatives of the Tribe shall consult with the BIA and EPA to determine the appropriate course of action, including development of a Sampling and Remediation Plan, if necessary. Any and all contaminated soils that are determined to be hazardous shall be disposed of in accordance with federal regulations. ALTERNATIVE B – NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the approximately nine-acre site would not be placed in trust for the benefit of the Tribe and would not be developed as identified under Alternative A. Jurisdiction of the property would remain within the City. Ultimately, the nine-acre site could be developed consistent with the existing commercial and recreation land uses by the Tribe. However, for the purposes of the environmental analysis in this EA, it is assumed that, due to the economic considerations for operating the Harbor Properties by the Tribe, the property will continue to be utilized in its current state for recreation, parking, restaurant, boating, and fishing with no additional facilities constructed under this alternative. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-9 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.4 COMPARISON OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ALTERNATIVE A Alternative A would result in significant but mitigable environmental impacts in the following areas: ƒ Land Resources ƒ Water Resources ƒ Biological Resources ƒ Cultural Resources Of the project alternatives evaluated in Section 4.0, Alternative A would best meet the Tribe’s objectives by providing the Tribe with a Trinidad Harbor Visitor Center and recreational facilities for the benefit of the Tribe and community while minimizing or eliminating adverse environmental impacts. ALTERNATIVE B While the No-Action alternative would not result in most of the environmental effects identified for Alternative A, this alternative would not meet the Tribe’s objectives of exercising tribal sovereign authority over the land and enhance the wellbeing of tribal resources; further the Tribe’s goal to reestablish its original land base; further the Tribe’s goal to preserve the surrounding environment and cultural resources for future generations; construct a visitor center; and form a tribal Trinidad Harbor District. The property would continue to release contaminants from the impervious parking lots into Trinidad Bay during rain events, potentially harming wildlife and sensitive ecosystems. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 2-10 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment SECTION 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This section presents relevant information concerning existing resources and other values that may be affected by the Project Alternatives. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA’s) NEPA Guidebook (59 IAM 3-H), the existing conditions described herein provide the baseline for determining the environmental effects identified in Section 4.0. As used herewithin, the terms “project site” and “project parcels” both refer to the approximately nine acres being requested by the Tribe for trust acquisition by the BIA. Accordingly, the term “proposed development” refers to the proposed visitor center, roadway, and drainage improvements. Existing setting descriptions are provided for the following resource and issue areas: ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ 3.1 Land Resources Water Resources Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Biological Resources Cultural Resources Socioeconomic Conditions / Environmental Justice Transportation and Circulation Land Use Agriculture Public Services Noise Hazardous Materials Visual Resources LAND RESOURCES The following section provides the existing topographical, geological and seismic, soil, and mineral resource settings of the project parcels. 3.1.1 TOPOGRAPHY The topography of the project site is influenced by the coastal beaches, dunes, and graded landscapes and ranges from gentle slopes where the areas have been previous graded to steep and rugged bluffs. There are also two coastal heads that project out into Trinidad Bay on the south central and south eastern portion of the site. Overall, the northern, central, and eastern portions of the site slope south whereas the western Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-1 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment portion of the site slopes east to west, draining onto Trinidad State Beach. Slopes within the project site are varied; the proposed development area has gentle slopes between 5 to 6 percent having been previously disturbed during paving of the access roadways and parking serving the restaurant, pier, and beaches. The elevations of the project site range from 0 to 55 feet above mean sea level (amsl). 3.1.2 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SEISMICITY The bedrock underlying the project site is primarily made up of Mesozoic-Paleozoic-Precambrian Sedimentary and Metasedimentary Rocks, more specifically, the Franciscan Complex which comprises 54.0 percent of the Trinidad Watershed (County of Humboldt, 2012a). Primary seismic concerns in Humboldt County (County) include ground shaking and rupture along existing fault traces. Secondary concerns include liquefaction, settlement, landslides, and tsunamis. The County is a seismically active region. Offshore, three major faults meet at what is known as the “triple junction.” These include the San Andreas, the Mendocino fracture zone, and the southern end of the Cascade subduction zone. The faults separate the Pacific plate, Gorda plate, and North American plate. The project site is located outside of a designated Alquist-Priolo zone, which is an area determined by the California Geological Survey (CGS) to be a welldefined area with sufficiently active seismicity, according to mandates of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972. These Alquist-Priolo zone areas are located along active faults that are susceptible to the hazard of surface fault rupture. The nearest Alquist-Priolo zone is approximately 0.43 miles east of the project site along the Trinidad fault and extends northwest just north of Elk Head (Figure 3-1). With the distance to the Trinidad fault and based on the regional geology, the project site is located in an area of California determined to have a high potential for ground shaking during a seismic event (DOC, 2003). 3.1.3 SOILS Table 3-1 lists soils found on the project site and their respective properties. The project site is composed primarily of Oxyaquic Udipsamments – Sonoma Complex soils, but small areas of Candymountain soils are also present (Figure 3-2). TABLE 3-1 SOIL PROPERTIES FOR SOILS ON THE PROJECT SITE Soil Type 157 – Oxyaquic Udipsamments – Somoa Complex 299 – Candymountain Slope Limitations 0-50% Eroded 30-75% Eroded SOURCE: NRCS, 2016 The coastal bluffs in the northern and eastern portion of the project site are comprised of Candymountain soils. The remainder of the project parcels are comprised of Oxyaquic Udipsamments – Somoa Complex soils. Oxyaquic Udipsamments soils are typically comprised of unvegetated beaches with parent material consisting of beach sand and gravel derived from mixed sources, typical of oceanic beaches. These are Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-2 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment Mo <100,000 - late Quaternary ult Bal d a n fa <15,000 - latest Quaternary u nt a in < 750,000 years mid to late Quaternary " M Lo st Surpur Creek fault LEGEND -B ig lt z o fau Other Faults 3 M ne Miles 0 0 9 .1 ile s ^" _ " oon La g <1.600,000 Quaternary 4 0. " 3 ile M s PROJECT SITE 6 M Ri Bald ad ve nt ne zo ou lt au M rf ai n- Bi g lt e O C E A N au nf on tz ul fa ga on go G ro La Ma d _ ^ Ri v er u lt fa PROJECT SITE f er au lt z (o on on R iv a lm ad le S P A C I F I C ne zo L itt M e ffs ho r e) M ad Riv er fa u tle on Sa lt z L it e lm on sh o (off M ad r ve Ri fa er d re ) R iv Ma ult fa n tz ul zo e tl Lit on e eS a lm fau ou gh e on nR lt z s fau SOURCE: USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, 2010; AES 11/19/2015 ne au lt lt z o Blu ff f E a to on Ta ble Trinidad Rancheria / 215569 Figure 3-1 Regional Fault Map Azalea Way Galindo St Pa c if i c C t Edwards St Van Wycke St Bay St Pier R se ou hth Lig d LEGEND ! N O R TH ¢ SOILS ON PROJECT SITE Ð Property Boundary Feet 0 110 220 157 - Oxyaquic Udipsamments-Samoa complex, 0 to 50 percent slopes 299 - Candymountain, 30 to 75 percent slopes 596 - Flintrock-Highprairie complex, 15 to 75 percent slopes SOURCE: USDA NRCS SSURGO Soils Data, 9/10/2015; DigitalGlobe aerial photograph, 6/6/2013; AES, 2/25/2016 Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 Figure 3-2 Project Site Soil Types 3.0 Affected Environment typically moderately well drained soils with a very low runoff class and a high to very high capacity to transmit water. Somoa soils typically comprise coastal dunes with parent material consisting of eolian and marine sand derived from mixed sources. These are typically somewhat excessively drained soils with a medium runoff class and a high to very high capacity to transmit water. Candymountain soils typically comprise bluffs and marine terraces with parent material consisting of marine deposits from mixed sources. These are typically well drained soils with a high runoff class and a moderately high to high capacity to transmit water (NRCS, 2016). 3.1.4 MINERAL RESOURCES The County has over 90 extraction sites that produce sand, gravel, metals, stone, and clay. Most mining activity is sand and gravel extraction along the Mad River, Eel River-Van Duzen River complex, Willow Creek, and Trinity River. There are over 30 permitted active hard rock quarries (County of Humboldt, 2012a). The nearest rock extraction site, Trinidad Quarry, is east of Highway 101 and greater than 1.5 miles northeast of the project parcels (USGS, 2015). No known mineral resources exist within the project parcels. 3.2 WATER RESOURCES The following section presents the existing surface water, drainage, flooding, water supply, groundwater, and water quality settings of the project parcels. 3.2.1 SURFACE WATER, DRAINAGE, AND FLOODING WATERSHEDS AND HYDROLOGY The project site is situated within the Luffenholtz Creek-Frontal Pacific Ocean subwatershed of the Trinidad Hydrologic Unit (HU). The Trinidad HU watershed lies immediately between the Redwood Creek HU, approximately 16 miles to the north, and the Mad River HU, approximately 6 miles south of the project parcels. Together, with the Eureka Plain HU, these major watersheds form the Mad-Redwood basin, which comprises 617,426 acres within the County (Department of Conservation, 2014). Within the Trinidad HU, Mill Creek flows to the west just north of the City and McConnahas Mill Creek flows west bisecting the City and flowing adjacent to the north boundary of the Trinidad Rancheria. Luffenholtz Creek is one of the main flowing water bodies in the watershed at over 12 miles in length and a starting elevation of 269 feet, where it eventually flows and discharges into the Trinidad Bay of the Pacific Ocean approximately 1.75 miles southeast of the project parcels. Mill Creek is the nearest inland waterbody, which discharges to the Pacific Ocean approximately 0.3 miles north of the project parcels. However, the project parcels are situated in Trinidad Harbor and based on the topography do not contribute hydraulically to the surrounding watersheds. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-5 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment City Water Supply The City’s water system serves approximately 315 connections within its sphere of influence using surface water as the source. The City has a domestic water right for supplies from Luffenholtz Creek, located approximately a 1.5 miles south of the City. Originally, homes in the City had individual wells or were served from an untreated water supply from Mill Creek (also referred to as Old Mill Creek). An infiltration gallery and water treatment plant were constructed to supply the City with water from Luffeholtz Creek when it became clear that Mill Creek could not meet long term needs. The pumps located at the infiltration gallery that supply pressure to move water through treatment to the storage tanks were inundated with sediment a few years back. The pumps were rehabilitated, but have never worked as well as expected since their repair. The pumps should be capable of delivering 120 gallons per minute (gpm), but only deliver about 100 gallons per minute. The City of Trinidad has an operations and maintenance program that keeps the storage, treatment, and distribution systems in good condition. The storage tanks are regularly inspected and the steel bands tightened to prevent water losses. The City conducted leak detection testing on the distribution system in 2003 and tested all water meters in 2003. Major leaks detected have been repaired, and poorly functioning water meters are being replaced as funds become available (County of Humboldt, 2007). DRAINAGE Slopes on the project site range from 0 to 60 percent, with the proposed development area sloping to the west at approximately 5 to 6 percent and the steepest slopes being the coastal bluffs. Runoff across the parking surfaces is generated as sheet flow and follows the topography towards Trinidad Bay. This sheet flow is not collected, but drains onto the beach near the old boat launch to the south of the proposed development. Sheet flow from the coastal bluff immediately upslope of the proposed development area is conveyed via natural drainages in the cliff. This water also drains onto the beach. Pier Stormwater System Stormwater generated on the pier is collected in a series of gutters and piping where it is treated in a sedimentation chamber and filter system located adjacent to where the pier connects to land. All stormwater runoff from the new pier is directed thru the filters and into the infiltration chambers. Filter cartridges are removed and maintained once every two years as per the manufacturer’s recommendations. The stormwater filter system treats runoff captured from the pier deck, thus eliminating potential sources of contamination from pier-generated petroleum products and other pollutants that result from activities on the pier. Treated stormwater is then diverted to subsurface percolation chambers located beneath the asphalt directly adjacent to the Seascape Restaurant. The Tribe has implemented a Contingency Plan for Failure of Stormwater Disposal System plan and a Maintenance and Monitoring of Stormwater Disposal System plan to ensure adequate operation and maintenance of the stormwater system. Both plans and the storm drain plan sheet are included as Appendix C. Currently, only stormwater generated on the newly refurbished pier is collected and treated in the system. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-6 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment FLOODING The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for predicting the potential for flooding in most areas. FEMA routinely performs this function through the update and issuance of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), which depict various levels of predicted inundation. FEMA has not completed an analysis of flood hazards in Trinidad; as such, a FEMA flood map is unavailable. Areas immediately northwest of Trinidad including the Trinidad State Beach are zoned D on FEMA flood hazard maps. Directly north of Trinidad along the Mill Creek’s crossing of Highway 101, a small area of Zone A is identified. Zone D is reserved for areas where there is a possible but undetermined flood hazard. Zone A is reserved for areas within the hazard of a 100-year flood (FEMA, 2016). Areas subject to flood hazards are generally located along the Mill Creek corridor and its associated ravines. Flood hazard concerns associated with development along the Mill Creek corridor and ravine have been reduced by the City via a general plan amendment to not allow construction along the corridor. In general, flooding hazard in the Trinidad area is very slight with the exception of just north of the City and on the southern boundary where water features are located. The only waterways are small streams flowing into the ocean and those are typical of high stream banks not subject to frequent flooding. Flooding on Luffenholtz Creek has affected the City water pumps at times. Within the City, some ponding may occur due to poorly drained soils. According to the Plate No. 3B in the City’s General Plan, the area just south of Bay Street (which borders the subject property) is indicated to experience flooding. However, due to the previous grading conducted at the project site and topography of the upland portions of the City adjacent to the project parcels, the potential for flooding on the project site is minimal. 3.2.2 GROUNDWATER The County has 4 main groundwater basins and 10 minor basins. The total potential groundwater yoeld within the County is approximately 100,000 acre feet. The project site is located in the Big Lagoon Area minor groundwater basin, which is approximately 34,000 acres (County of Humboldt, 2012b). These watersheds are within the Coast Ranges geologic province and are mainly composed of highly unstable and easily eroded rock which contributes to the high amounts of sedimentation in the features streams (County of Humboldt, 2012b). Outside of the beach areas, depth to groundwater ranges from 20 to 39 inches (NRCS, 2016). There are no groundwater wells within the project parcels. 3.2.3 WATER QUALITY SURFACE WATER The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC 1251-1376), as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987, is the major federal legislation governing water quality. The objective of the CWA is “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is delegated as the authoritative body under the CWA. Important sections of the CWA applicable to the Proposed Action are as follows: Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-7 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment ƒ ƒ Sections 303 and 304 provide for water quality standards, criteria, and guidelines. Section 303(d) requires states to identify impaired water bodies and develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for the contaminant(s) of concern. Section 402 establishes the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), a permitting system for the discharge of any pollutant (except for dredged or fill material) into waters of the U.S. Each NPDES permit contains limits on pollutant concentrations of wastes discharged to surface waters to prevent degradation of water quality and protect beneficial uses. Antidegradation Policy The federal antidegradation policy (40 CFR Part 131.6) is designed to protect water quality and water resources. The policy directs states to adopt a statewide policy that includes the following primary provisions: (1) existing instream uses and the water quality necessary to protect those uses shall be maintained and protected; (2) where existing water quality is better than necessary to support fishing and swimming conditions, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the state finds that allowing lower water quality is necessary for important local economic or social development; and (3) where highquality waters constitute an outstanding national resource, such as waters of national and state parks, wildlife refuges, and waters of exceptional recreational or ecological significance, that water quality shall be maintained and protected. Each state must also develop procedures to implement its anti-degradation policy through water quality management processes. Each state’s anti-degradation policy must include implementation methods consistent with the provisions outlined in 40 CFR 131.12 (USEPA, 1994). Complying with the anti-degradation provision of the CWA, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) has established general water quality objectives for all inland surface waters under State jurisdiction to protect designated beneficial uses. The Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region (Basin Plan) outlines these surface water quality objectives. Table 3-2 lists the specific water quality objects outlined in the Basin Plan by parameter for surface waters under State jurisdiction within the surrounding watersheds. The Basin Plan does not currently list water quality objectives for the Trinidad Hydraulic Unit. The State Water Resources Control Board, in compliance with Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), has prepared a list of impaired water bodies in California. Impaired water bodies occur where industrial and technological waste limits or other legal mechanisms for pollution control are not enough to meet water quality standards. The list includes a priority schedule for the development of TMDLs for each contaminant or “stressor” impacting the water body. The Trinidad Bay is not listed on the 303(d) list for impaired water bodies; however, Trinidad State Beach is listed for impairment of one or more beneficial uses due to indicator bacteria (Table 3-3). Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-8 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment TABLE 3-2 GENERAL WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR THE EEL RIVER Specific Conductance (micro-ohm) Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 90% Upper Limit1 50% Upper Limit2 90% Upper Limit1 50% Upper Limit2 Min 90% Upper Limit1 50% Upper Limit2 Min Max 50% Upper Limit2 90% Upper Limit1 50% Upper Limit2 Redwood Creek 2203 1253 1153 753 7.0 7.5 10.0 8.5 6.5 None None None Mad River 3003 1503 1603 903 7.0 7.5 10.0 8.5 6.5 None None None Waterbody Hardness (mg/L) pH Boron (mg/L) 1 50% upper and lower limits represent the 50 percentile values of the monthly means for a calendar year. 50% or more of the monthly means must be less than or equal to an upper limit and greater than or equal to a lower limit. 2 90% upper and lower limits represent the 90 percentile values for a calendar year. 90% or more of the values must be less than or equal to an upper limit and greater than or equal to a lower limit. 3 Does not apply to estuarine areas. SOURCE: NCRWQCB, 2011a TABLE 3-3 2010 CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 303(D) LIST Location Trinidad State Beach Pollutants/ Stressors Indicator Bacteria Potential Sources TMDL Status Unknown TMDL developed (Category 5a) TMDL Completion Proposed 2019 SOURCE: NCRWQCB, 2011b GROUNDWATER The Basin Plan also specifies water quality objectives for groundwater in the north coast. Objectives for groundwater are listed in Table 3-4. TABLE 3-4 WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR GROUNDWATER Tastes and Odors Cannot exceed concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses Bacteria1 Radioactivity1 Chemical Constituents1 Cannot exceed 1.1 MPN/100mL Or 1 colony/100mL Cannot exceed California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Article 5, Section 64443, Table 4 and listed in Table 3-2 of the Basin Plan Cannot exceed limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Article 4, Section 64435 Tables 2 and 3, and Section 64444.5 (Table 5) and listed in Table 3-2 of the Basin Plan 1 Domestic or municipal sources only. SOURCE: NCRWQCB, 2011a. In order to protect drinking water supplies and under the mandate of the Safe Drinking Water Act, USEPA defines National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (primary standards). These are legally enforceable standards that apply to public water systems. These standards are established to protect human health by Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-9 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment limiting the levels of contaminants in drinking water. The USEPA also defines National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations (secondary standards). Water is supplied to facilities within the project site by the City. The vacation rental and Seascape restaurant’s wastewater is treated by above ground treatment tanks with disposal via a leach field. 3.3 AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS The following describes existing air quality conditions, including greenhouse gases (GHG) that occur within the project site and general vicinity. 3.3.1 REGULATORY SETTING CLEAN AIR ACT The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was enacted for the purposes of protecting and enhancing the quality of the nation’s air resources to benefit public health, welfare, and productivity. Basic components of the CAA and its amendments include national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for major air pollutants and state implementation plans (SIPs) to ensure country-wide NAAQS compliance. Regulation of air pollution is achieved through both the NAAQS and emissions limitations for individual sources of air pollutants established through permitting requirements. The USEPA is the federal agency responsible for identifying criteria air pollutants (CAPs) for which NAAQS are established, updating and revising the NAAQS, and approving and overseeing SIPs as they relate to compliance with the CAA. The USEPA has identified six CAPs that are both common indicators of regional air quality and detrimental to human health. The six CAPs are ozoneFDUERQPRQR[LGH &2 SDUWLFXODWHPDWWHU ”PLFURQVDQG”PLFURQVLQGLDPHWHU (PM10 and PM2.5)), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. The NAAQS, appropriate metrics, and violation criteria for the six CAPs are presented in Table 3-5. Federal General Conformity Under the General Conformity Rule of the CAA, recently updated in 2010, the lead agency with respect to a federal action is required to demonstrate that a proposed federal action conforms to the applicable SIP(s) before the action is taken. There are two phases to a demonstration of general conformity: 1) The Conformity Review process, which entails an initial review of the federal action to assess whether a full conformity determination is necessary, and 2) The Conformity Determination process, which requires that a proposed federal action be demonstrated to conform to the applicable SIP(s). The Conformity Review requires the lead agency to compare estimated emissions attributable to the federal action to the applicable general conformity de minimis threshold(s) for all CAPs for which the applicable air basin or region is in nonattainment for the applicable NAAQS. If the emission estimate(s) from step one is below the applicable de minimis threshold(s), then a General Conformity Determination is not required Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-10 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment under the CAA (40 CFR Part 93). If emission estimates are greater than de minimis levels, the lead agency must conduct a Conformity Determination. TABLE 3-5 NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS Pollutant Averaging Time Ozone (O3) a Primary NAAQS Secondary NAAQS 1 hour 0.12 ppm 0.12 ppm 8 hour 0.08 ppm 0.08 ppm 1 hour 8 hour 35 ppm 9.0 ppm NA NA Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 hour Annual Mean 100 ppb 0.053 ppm NA 0.053 ppm Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 1 hour 75 ppb NA 3 hour NA 0.05 ppm 24 hour 150 Pg/m3 150 Pg/m3 24 hour Annual Mean 35 Pg/m3 12 Pg/m3 35 Pg/m3 15 Pg/m3 Quarterly Average 0.15 Pg/m3 0.15 Pg/m3 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Lead (Pb) Note: a) Standard for existing ozone non-attainment area only Source: EPA, 2011 Federal Class I Areas Title 1, Part C of the CAA was established, in part, to preserve, protect, and enhance the air quality in national parks, national wilderness areas, national monuments, national seashores, and other areas of special national or regional natural, recreational, scenic, or historic value. The CAA designates all international parks, national wilderness areas, and memorial parks larger than 5,000 acres and national parks larger than 6,000 acres as “Class I areas.” The CAA prevents significant deterioration of air quality in Class I areas under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. The PSD Program protects Class I areas by allowing only a small increment of air quality deterioration in these areas by requiring assessment of potential impacts on air quality related values of Class I areas. There are no federal Class I areas within or adjacent to the project site; refer to Section 3.3.4 for further discussion. Federal Hazardous Air Pollutant Program Title III of the CAA requires the USEPA to promulgate National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). The NESHAPs may differ between regional sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Major sources are defined as stationary sources with potential to emit more than 10 Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-11 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment tpy of any HAP or more than 25 tpy of any combination of HAPs (all other non-major sources are considered area sources under the NESHAPs program). HAPs are a specific group of airborne chemicals designated by the USEPA. Sources of HAPs include industrial processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust. Cars and trucks release at least 40 different HAPs. The most important, in terms of health risk, is diesel particulate matter (DPM), benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acetaldehyde. HAPs are less pervasive in the urban atmosphere than CAPs, but are linked to short-term (acute) or longterm (chronic or carcinogenic) adverse human health effects. There are hundreds of different types of HAPs, with varying degrees of toxicity. Currently, there are over 188 HAPs listed by the USEPA. The majority of the estimated health risk from HAPs can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being DPM (CARB, 2005). Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, composed of gaseous and solid material. The visible emissions in diesel exhaust are particulate matter that includes carbon. Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gases and over 40 other cancer-causing substances. CLIMATE CHANGE Federal In 2002, President George W. Bush established a national policy goal of reducing the GHG emission intensity (tons of GHG emissions per million dollars of gross domestic product) of the U.S. economy by 18% by 2012. No binding reductions were associated with the goal. Rather, the USEPA administers a variety of voluntary programs and partnerships with GHG emitters, in which the USEPA partners with industries producing and utilizing GHGs to reduce associated emissions. Clean Air Act In Massachusetts et al. vs. Environmental Protection Agency et al. (April 2, 2007), the US Supreme Court ruled that the CAA authorizes the USEPA to regulate CO2 emissions from new motor vehicles. The Court did not mandate that the USEPA enact regulations to reduce GHG emissions, but found that the only instances where the USEPA could avoid taking action were if it found that GHGs do not contribute to climate change or if it offered a “reasonable explanation” for not determining that GHGs contribute to climate change. On December 15, 2009, the USEPA issued a final endangerment and cause finding (74 FR 66496), stating that high atmospheric levels of GHGs “are the unambiguous result of human emissions, and are very likely the cause of the observed increase in average temperatures and other climatic changes.” The USEPA further found that “atmospheric concentrations of GHG endanger public health and welfare within the meaning of Section 202 of the Clean Air Act.” The finding itself does not impose any requirements on industry or other entities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency On December 7, 2009, USEPA Administrator Lisa Jackson signed a Final Action, under Section 202(a) of the CAA, finding that six key well-mixed GHG constitute a threat to public health and welfare, and that the Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-12 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment combined emissions from motor vehicles cause and contribute to the climate change problem. The following are the most recent regulatory actions taken by the USEPA: ƒ On July 23, 2009, the USEPA published a final “rule which proposes to establish the criteria for including sources or sites in a Registry of Recoverable Waste Energy Sources (Registry),” as required by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Waste energy can be used to produce clean electricity. The clean electricity produced by waste energy would reduce the need for non-renewable forms of electricity production, thus reducing GHG emissions. ƒ On September 15, 2009, the USEPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a new national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for all new cars and trucks sold in the United States. The USEPA proposed the first national GHG emissions standards under the Clean Air Act, and NHTSA proposed an increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. ƒ In response to the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 2764; Public Law 110–161), the USEPA issued the Final Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule. Signed by the Administrator on September 22, 2009, the rule requires that suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and engines outside of the light duty sector, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of GHGs per year to submit annual reports to the USEPA. The rule is intended to collect accurate and timely emissions data to guide future policy decisions on climate change. ƒ On September 30, 2009, the USEPA proposed new thresholds for GHGs that define when CAA permits under the New Source Review and title V operating permits programs would be required. ƒ In December, 2014 The CEQ Chair released a memorandum, Revised Draft NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The memorandum provides guidance on how project-related GHG emission should be analyzed in NEPA documents. The Revised Draft Guidance provides that a NEPA climate change analysis shall provide quantification and mitigation to reduce GHG emissions. The guidance also provides that 25,000 metric tons of GHG emissions per year may be a helpful guideline to assist lead agencies in making informed decisions on climate change impacts resulting from a project subject to NEPA. The guidance notes that the 25,000 metric tons is not an indicator of a threshold of significant effects, but rather, it is an indicator of a minimum level of GHG emissions that may warrant some description in the appropriate NEPA analysis for agency actions involving emissions of GHGs. 3.3.2 PROJECT AREA AND VICINITY The project site is located in the North Coast Air Basin (NCAB), which extends for 250 miles from Sonoma County in the south to the Oregon border in the north and east through Trinity County. The climate of the Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-13 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment NCAB is influenced by two major topographic units: the Klamath Mountains and the Coast Range provinces. Both provinces are marked by large areas of rugged, mountainous terrain. The coastal plains, which are part of the Coast Range province, constitute less than 10 percent of the area of the NCAB but contain the major industrial and population centers. The project site is located on the edge of the coastal plain in the foothills of the Klamath Mountains. 3.3.3 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY NAAQS DESIGNATIONS As shown in Table 3-6, the NCAB is in attainment or is unclassified for all CAPs under the current NAAQS designation. TABLE 3-6 NCAB ATTAINMENT STATUS Pollutant NAAQS Ozone Attainment/ Unclassified PM10 Attainment/ Unclassified PM2.5 Attainment/ Unclassified CO Attainment/ Unclassified NO2 Attainment/ Unclassified SO2 Attainment Lead Attainment/ Unclassified SOURCE: NCUAQMD, 2015. POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN Pollutants of concern are CAPs that are present in quantities exceeding the NAAQS in the applicable air basin or region and air pollutants that are not designated as CAPs, such as CAP precursors (NOx and ROG), yet can be temporarily present in high concentrations in a localized region of the SCCAB. No CAPs exceed the NAAQS in NCAB and no CAP precursors would be temporarily present in high concentration in the NCAB. Therefore, pollutants of concerns are not present in the NCAB. HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS The current operations at the project site do not meet the definition of a major source for HAPs. Operations often involve idling diesel vehicles associated with the commercial fishing operations of the pier and result in releases of DPM. 3.3.4 FEDERAL CLASS I AREAS The nearest federal Class I area, Redwood Creek National Park, is located approximately 10 miles east of the project site. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-14 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment 3.3.5 GREENHOUSE GASES The extent to which human activities affect global climate change is a subject of considerable scientific debate. It is anticipated that the average global temperature could rise 0.6 to 4.0 oC (1.08 to 7.18 oF) between the years 2000 and 2100 (IPCC, 2007). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report identifies anthropogenic GHGs as a contributing factor to changes in the Earth’s climate (IPCC, 2007). To err on the side of caution, the analysis in this EA assumes anthropogenic GHGs are in fact contributing to global climate change. The Humboldt County Climate Action Plan includes a GHG inventory and establishes an emission reduction target. The Climate Action Plan also identifies numerous goals and policies aimed at reducing GHG emissions. These goals and policies are to be incorporated into the County of Humboldt General Plan (County of Humboldt, 2012c). Primary sources of GHG emissions in the region include vehicles, trucks, airplanes, mills, ships, canneries, and electricity generation facilities. However, there are many other sources of GHG emissions in the region. 3.3.6 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residential areas are examples of sensitive receptors. The project site vicinity is characterized by low-density residential uses. One existing single family residence (vacation rental) is present on the project site and is therefore the nearest sensitive receptor. Construction would occur adjacent to this residence. The nearest off-site residence is located adjacent to the northeastern boundary of the project site. The nearest school (Trinidad Elementary School) is located approximately 0.4 miles northeast of the project site. There are no other types of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project site. 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The following describes existing biological resource conditions, including habitat conditions and listed species that occur within the project site and general vicinity. Existing biological resources were evaluated through a review of pertinent literature, consultation of relevant databases, and biological field surveys to document habitat types and the potential occurrence for federally listed species on the approximately nine-acre project site. Biological field assessments were conducted by AES staff on November 19 and 20, 2015. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-15 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment 3.4.1 REGULATORY SETTING FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT The USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implement the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA) (16 USC 1531 et seq.). Threatened and endangered species on the federal list (50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12) are protected from “take” (direct or indirect harm), unless a Section 10 Permit is granted or a Biological Opinion with incidental take provisions is rendered. Pursuant to the requirements of FESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any federally listed species may be present in the project area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact upon such species. Under FESA, habitat loss is considered to be an impact to the species. In addition, the agency must determine whether a project is likely to jeopardize the existence of species or habitat for species proposed to be listed under FESA (16 USC 1536[3], [4]). USFWS also designates species of concern. Species of concern receive attention from federal agencies during environmental review, although they are not otherwise protected under FESA. Project-related impacts to such species would also be considered significant and would require mitigation. WATERS OF THE U.S. Any person, firm, or agency planning to alter or work in navigable waters of the U.S., including the discharge of dredged or fill material, must first obtain authorization from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Permits, licenses, variances, or similar authorization may also be required by other federal, state and local statutes. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 prohibits the obstruction or alteration of navigable waters of the United States without a permit from the Corps of Engineers (33 U.S.C. 403). Section 301 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and Amendments of 1972 (Clean Water Act or CWA) prohibits the discharge of pollutants, including dredged or fill material, into waters of the United States without a Section 404 permit from USACE (33 U.S.C. 1344). Water Quality Certification (a CWA Section 401 permit) may be required by the USEPA before other permits are issued. MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT Most bird species, especially those that are breeding, migratory, or of limited distribution, are protected under federal and state regulations. Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 USC 703-711), migratory bird species, and their nests and eggs, that are on the federal list (50 CFR 10.13) are protected from injury or death, and project-related disturbances must be reduced or eliminated during the nesting cycle. 3.4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site has a maritime climate regime with warm, temperate summers and cool, wet winters. The vicinity of the project site is a rural residential area to the east-northeast, one residence to the adjacent west, surrounding open space, coastal bluffs, and coastal shorelines. The terrain on the project site is rolling hills with the parking lot being relatively flat. The remaining property ranges from hilly with low elevation Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-16 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment changes to coastal bluffs with extreme elevation changes. The predominant geological features are the Trinidad Head to the west, the Trinidad Bay to the west-southwest, and Little Head to the east. The area of the City is characterized by steep coastline. Within the developed area of the City, the topography is relatively flat with the coastal bluffs being the most dramatic changes in topography. VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES Vegetative communities are assemblages of plant species that occur together in the same area that are defined by species composition and relative abundance. Vegetation communities were classified using the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Terrestrial Natural Communities of California system, or “Holland type.” Habitat types occurring within the project site include ruderal/developed and coastal scrub. These habitats are located within a close vicinity of urban residential and open spaces associated with coastal bluffs and shoreline. A habitat map of the project site is presented as Figure 3-3. Ruderal/Developed Most of the project site consists of ruderal/developed land (Figure 3-3). Bay Street is a paved street that connects to the site’s parking lot. Buildings and infrastructure are located on the site as described in Section 2. Native vegetation surrounds the site and borders the site’s impervious surfaces. Northern Coastal Scrub Most of the undeveloped portions of the property are characterized by northern coastal scrub. Northern coastal scrub is characterized by low shrubs in dense patches. Usually occurring on windy, exposed sites with shallow and rocky soils. The most dominating species include Cascara (Frangula purshiana), Blue Blossom (Ceonothus thyrsiflorus), Twinberry (Lonicera involucrate), and Silk Tassel (Garrya elliptica). Associated native species include Douglas Iris (Iris douglasiana), Sticky Monkey Flower (Mimulus aurantiacus), Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens), Bee Plant (Scrophularia californica), and Wild Cucumber (Marah oreganum). Northern coastal bluff scrub is less abundant and usually only occurs where there is high salt content, constant high winds, and poor soil conditions. All flora is similar to Northern Coastal Scrub, however, many species are dwarfed and highly influenced by high winds and salinity of the ocean. Common native species include Coyote Brush (Baccharis pilularis), Salal (Gaultheria shallon), Leather Fern (Polypodium scouleri), Beach Strawberry (Fragaria chiloensis), Pacific Stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium), Ocean bluff blue grass (Poa unilateralis), California Bentgrass (Agrostis densiflorus), and Alumroot (Heuchera micrantha). WILDLIFE A variety of wildlife utilize the habitats that occur on or near the project site. Species observed or identified by physical evidence during the November 19 and 20, 2015 site visit include: black oyster catcher (Haematopus bachmani), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), California gull (Larus californicus), Swainson’s thrush (Catharus ustulatus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), and harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-17 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment Ewing St Azale a Way Galindo St Pacific Ct Edwards St Property Boundary Van Wycke St Ba y St Pie r h Lig tho us eR d LEGEND Property Boundary 9.38 ac HABITAT TYPES Coastal Scrub Ruderal/Developed Shoreline/Beach ¢ Ð N O R TH ! Feet 0 125 250 SOURCE: Humboldt County Parcel GIS Data, 2013; DigitalGlobe aerial photograph, 6/6/2013; AES, 4/21/2016 Trinidad Rancheria Fee-to-Trust and Interpretive Visitor Center Project EA / 215569 Figure 3-3 Habitat Types 3.0 Affected Environment MIGRATORY BIRD HABITAT Although the project site does not contain suitable habitat for nesting birds, there is a potential for migratory birds to occur directly adjacent to the project parcels on the shoreline and on the coastal bluffs. POTENTIAL WATERS OF THE U.S. There are no surface water features, outside of the ocean, that are present within the boundaries of the project parcels that have the potential to be classified as waters of the U.S. or wetlands. 3.4.3 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES For the purposes of this assessment, “special status” is defined to be species that are of management concern to federal resource agencies and include those species that are: ƒ ƒ Listed as endangered, threatened, or candidate for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act; or Designated as species of concern or species of local concern by USFWS. A list of special-status plant and animal species that have potential to occur on the project site was compiled based on a review of pertinent literature, a reconnaissance-level site assessment, informal consultation with the USFWS, and the results of a California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) query (Appendix D). Based upon the review of regionally occurring special-status species and their habitat requirements and the results of the field assessment, the project site and/or surrounding vicinity represents potential habitat for one special-status plant species and three special-status animal species. The name, regulatory status, habitat requirements, and period of identification for potentially occurring special-status species are identified in Table 3-7. WESTERN LILY The western lily is a perennial herb that grows from a bulb. The species typically grows in bogs, freshwater marshes, coastal scrub or prairie, or gaps in coniferous forest. It often grows in association with such species as sundew (Drosera spp.), California rose-bay (Rhododendron marcrophyllum), California huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), and red alder (Alnus rubra). Populations are found within six miles of the coast and from near sea level to 320 feet amsl in elevation. The western lily blooms from June through July (Hickman, 1993; CNPS, 2016). No western lilies were observed during the December site visit. Since western lily often grows in association with other species that were observed adjacent and to the west of the vacation rental, western lily has the potential to occur on the project site. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-19 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment TABLE 3-7 POTENTIALLY OCCURRING FEDERAL SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS PLANTS Lilium occidentale western lily ANIMALS Birds Brachyramphus marmoratus Marbled Murrelet Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus Western Snowy Plover Mammals Eumetopias jubatus Steller Sea Lion PERIOD OF IDENTIFICATION DISTRIBUTION HABITAT REQUIREMENTS FE From Coos Bay in Oregon to Humboldt Bay in California. Bogs and fens, coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, freshwater marshes and swamps, and openings within North Coast coniferous forest habitat. June - July FT From San Francisco Bay to Southern Alaska From Mexico to Southern Washington Breeding requires north coast conifer old forests while foraging habitat requires shallow shoreline and tidal pools. Tidal pools and shallow tidal marshes, coastal shoreline with or without shrubs. Year-round North Pacific from Japan to Central California Rocky shores and haul-out areas in coastal areas. FT FT Year-round NOTES: FEDERAL STATUS CODES: (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service) FE = Listed as Endangered by the Federal Government FT = Listed as Threatened by the Federal Government SOURCE: USFWS, 2016. MARBLED MURRELET The marbled murrelet is a small seabird found in the north pacific. It nests in old growth forests and forages in shallow shoreline and tidal pools. They range from the San Francisco Bay area to Southern Alaska along the Pacific coastline. Breeding habitat requirements include north coast conifer old growth forests. Foraging habitats include shallow shoreline and tidal pools with bare beaches and some rocky outcroppings in shallow bays. Although breeding habitat is not located on or adjacent to the proposed project site, potential foraging habitat is located directly adjacent to the site and therefore marbled murrelet as the potential to occur on the project site. WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER The western snowy plover is a small shorebird near the size of a sparrow. During the breeding season, March through September, plovers are present on shores, peninsulas, islands, bays, estuaries, and rivers of the Pacific coast, especially beaches and shores with plenty of wrack (debris). Breeding on the California Coast occurs between March and June. Although the prime habitat for snowy plover has been designated in on the shoreline of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, snowy plover have the potential to occur on the project site. STELLER SEA LION (EUMETOPIAS JUBATUS) (EASTERN DPS) Steller sea lions are found around the rim of the North Pacific Oceana and in the Bering Sea. This includes Northern California, Oregon, Washington, Canada, and Alaska along with some spotted in Japan. Like all eared seals, Steller sea lions hunt at sea and return to shore to rest, breed, and give birth. Steller sea lions Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-20 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment can be found in rookeries and haul-outs. Rookeries are the breeding colonies where reproduction occurs. Haul-outs are where animal rest on shore but no reproduction occurs on haul-outs. Breeding season occurs between June and July. Due do potential rookeries and haul-outs on or near the project site, the Steller sea lion has the potential to occur. 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Archaeological studies of the project site were conducted in 2011 by Donald Verwayen of the Humboldt State University Cultural Resources Facility for the reconstruction of the Trinidad Pier and by AES in November 2015; the Verwayen report is included as Appendix E under a separately bound cover due to the sensitive nature of the material addressed. Verwayen’s study included both a field survey and literature search to identify and evaluate potential prehistoric and historic resources. The AES effort included a field verification of the Verwayen results and a Native American contact program. Historic-era archaeological resources, built resources, a paleontological deposit, and several Traditional Cultural Properties were identified during these efforts. 3.5.1 REGULATORY SETTING NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The eligibility of a resource for listing in the NRHP is determined by evaluating the resource using criteria defined in 36 CFR 60.4 as follows: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history. Sites younger than 50 years, unless of exceptional importance, are not eligible for listing in the NRHP. In addition to meeting at least one of the criteria listed above, the property must also retain enough integrity to enable it to convey its historic significance. The National Register recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity. These seven elements of integrity are: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. To retain integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of these aspects. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-21 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment While most historic buildings and many historic archaeological properties are significant because of their association with important events, people, or styles (criteria A, B, and C), the significance of most prehistoric and some historic-period archaeological properties is usually assessed under criterion D. This criterion stresses the importance of the information contained in an archaeological site, rather than its intrinsic value as a surviving example of a type or its historical association with an important person or event. It places importance not on physical appearance but rather on information potential. NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) as amended, and its implementing regulations found in 36 CFR Part 800, require federal agencies to identify cultural resources that may be affected by actions involving federal lands, funds, or permitting. The significance of the resources must be evaluated using established criteria outlined in 36 CFR 60.4, as described below. If a resource is determined to be a historic property, Section 106 of the NHPA requires that effects of the federal undertaking on the resource be determined. A historic property is defined as: …any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property (NHPA Sec. 301[5])… Section 106 of the NHPA prescribes specific criteria for determining whether a project would adversely affect a historic property, as defined in 36 CFR 800.5. An impact is considered adverse when prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or objects that are listed, or eligible for listing, in the NRHP are subjected to the following: ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ Physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property; Alteration of a property; Removal of the property from its historic location; Change of the character of the property’s use or of physical features within the property’s setting that contribute to its historic significance; Introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property’s significant historic features; Neglect of a property that causes its deterioration; and Transfer, lease, or sale of the property out of federal control without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property’s historic significance. If the historic property will be adversely affected by development, then prudent and feasible measures to avoid or reduce adverse impacts must be taken. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) must be provided an opportunity to review and comment on these measures prior to project implementation. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-22 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES The 1992 amendments to the NHPA allowed for a new designation of a traditional cultural property (TCP). The amendment established "Properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization" may be determined eligible for inclusion in the NRHP (Section 101(d)(6) of the NHPA. Accordingly, a tribal TCP can only be significant and eligible for listing on the NRHP if it meets two criteria: 1) rooted in that community’s history; and 2) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community”. 3.5.2 METHODOLOGY RECORDS AND LITERATURE SEARCH Background research for the Proposed Action and Project were taken from the Verwayen report, which also covered the entire APE for the Proposed Action and Proposed Project. The records search and literature review for this study were completed: (1) to determine whether known cultural resources had been recorded within or adjacent to the study area; (2) to determine whether known resources have been reported in archaeological, ethnographic, and historical documents and literature; and (3) to assess the likelihood of unrecorded cultural resources based on the distribution of nearby archaeological sites in relation to their environmental setting. The following inventory and databases were included in the review: National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, California Inventory of Historic Resources, California Historical Landmarks, California Historic Highway Bridge Inventory, Humboldt Room of the Humboldt State University Library, County Recorder’s Office at the Humboldt County Court House, and historic maps. Verwayen’s record search results included only one ethnographic resource, the Yurok village site of Tsurai on Trinidad Bay (CA-HUM-169), east of the Proposed Action APE, and a fossil locality on the western end of the Proposed Action APE. Twenty-one cultural resource surveys have been completed within the record search area, three shipwrecks have been noted in Trinidad Bay, and a single historical resource, a logging skid road associated with the Smith and Dougherty Trinidad Mill Company, is nearby but not eligible for listing on the NRHP. Verwayen’s 2011 cultural survey recorded eight resources, Around Chicken Hawk’s Place, a TCP on Trinidad Bay that includes several individual loci; remnants of a whale skidway; the Trinidad Pier; the mid19th century Trinidad Dump, a multi component site that included historic debris and prehistoric lithic artifacts and trade beads; Muggay’s Grave; Tibbett’s Grave; a marine railway, and a soapstone quarry. Two of these were determined to be eligible for the NRHP: Around Chicken Hawk’s Place under Criterion A for its association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; and Criterion B for association with the lives of persons significant in our past. The whale skidway was found Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-23 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment eligible under Criterion C as it embodies the distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. Two of the Around Chicken Hawk’s Place TCP loci are within the Proposed Action APE. These are Chicken Hawk’s House on Little Head and Chicken Hawk’s Boat, on the small peninsula east of Little Head. The whale skidway, Trinidad Pier, the marine railway, the dump, Tibbett’s and Muggay’s graves, the soapstone quarry, and the paleontological deposit are also all within the Proposed Action APE. Charlane Gross, M.A., RPA and AES Staff Archaeologist, conducted a cultural resources field survey of the project site on November 19-20. The portions of the APE that were accessible were limited. The APE largely consisted of paved parking areas, steep, heavily vegetated embankments, the pier, or inaccessible geographic features such as Little Head/Chicken Hawk’s House and Chicken Hawk’s Boat. The only areas truly accessible for archaeological review were located west and northwest of the Seascape Restaurant and the beaches on either side of Trinidad Pier; these areas were surveyed using transects 5-10 meters apart. The two grave sites, soapstone quarry, and mid-19th century dump were either covered by dense vegetation or gone, as no evidence for any of these sites could be found. No new resources were identified. NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION Verwayen (2011) contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and attempted to contact the individuals listed by the NAHC in 2011 with no specific results. A new search request was sent to the NAHC on November 5, 2015 by AES. Results were received on November 24, 2015 and are appended to Verwayen report and are included in Appendix E. Letters were sent to those individuals identified by the NAHC on November 30, 2015. To date, no responses have been received. A consultation log is included in Appendix E. 3.5.3 EXISTING FIELD CONDITIONS The area where the stormwater improvements would be developed and the visitor’s center would be placed are already developed, with a combination of asphalt, shipping containers, sheds, utility boxes, sewer manholes, fire hydrants, and barricade posts, thoroughly disturbing any potential buried cultural resources. None of the physical resources or TCP elements are within Bay Street, the parking lot, or the visitor’s center footprints, and none should be affected by project construction. 3.6 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS / ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE The following section provides the existing socioeconomic conditions and regional setting to evaluate environmental justice considerations for the project parcels. Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-24 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment 3.6.1 TRINIDAD, HUMBOLDT COUNTY POPULATION The City had a population of approximately 236 people (Table 3-8) (U.S. Census 2014a) according to 5year estimates for population. Humboldt County had a population estimate of approximately 14,876 people whereas the State of California had a population of 38,066,920. Trinidad’s population is approximately 0.18 percent of the population of Humboldt County, and approximately 0.0006 percent of California’s population. Over the next 20 years, the County’s population is expected to grow from approximately 134,876 to approximately 139,780 (California Department of Finance, 2016.) TABLE 3-8 TRINIDAD, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DEMOGRAPHICS Trinidad Humboldt County 2009-2014 5-Year Estimates1 236 134,876 California 38,066,920 SOURCE: U.S. Census, 2014a 1Total populations EMPLOYMENT The labor force in Trinidad is approximately 149 people of which 143 are employed (Table 3-9). The labor force in the County is approximately 66,449 people of which 58,868 are employed. The unemployment rate for Trinidad is 3.4 percent whereas Humboldt County is 11.3 percent (0.3 percent over the State of California.) TABLE 3-9 TRINIDAD, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT In Labor Force1 Employed Unemployment Rate Trinidad 149 143 3.4% Humboldt County 66,449 58868 11.3% California 19,098,427 16,883,249 11.0% SOURCE: U.S. Census, 2014b 116 years and over population 3.6.2 CHER-AE HEIGHTS INDIAN COMMUNITY OF TRINIDAD RANCHERIA Statistics for the Tribe were obtained from the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ American Indian Population and Labor Force Estimate Report, 2005 (Table 3-10; note that the 2013 report does not provide the socioeconomic statistics of the Tribe). Analytical Environmental Services March 2017 3-25 Stormwater Improvement and Interpretive Visitor Center Project Environmental Assessment 3.0 Affected Environment TABLE 3-10 CHER-AE HEIGHTS INDIAN COMMUNITY OF TRINIDAD RANCHERIA ESTIMATES Total Tribal Enrollment 171 American Indians on or near Reservation 231 Under age 16 43 Age 16 through 64 131 Over age 64 12 Available for work 128 Unavailable for work 15 Employed in Public Sector Positions 11 Employed in Private Sector Positions 72 Employed but Below the Poverty Line 0 SOURCE: BIA, 2005. 3.6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FOR MINORITY AND LOW INCOME POPULATIONS On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” and an accompanying Presidential Memorandum to focus federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions in minority communities and low-income communities. The Executive Order, as amended, directs federal agencies to develop an Environmental Justice Strategy that identifies and addresses disproportionately high human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. Compliance with this Executive Order has been incorporated into the NEPA compliance requirements of the BIA for the Proposed Action. The City is located within the census block group 060230102002 with a population of 650 people. The total population that is reported as “low income” is approximately 30 percent (195 people) which is five percent lower than the State estimation of low income population (EPA, 2016). The County is approximately 18.4 percent minority (Table 3-11). In the County, American Indians make up 5.74 percent of the population, including members of the Tribe. TABLE 3-11 HUMBOLDT COUNTY RACE/INCOME PROFILE Total Race/Ethnic Population 2010 White Hispanic American Indian Multi-Race Asian Black Pacific Islander Household Median Income 2007-2011 Poverty Status (All Ages) 134,623 104,373 13,211 6,9 [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Acher-ae_heights%3A10eb985573888d56. Public record. Not legal advice.