SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION E. & J. GALLO WINERY EASTSIDE USE PERMIT MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. MM13‐009
P R E P A R E D F O R :
MercedCountyDepartmentofPlanningandCommunityDevelopment2222MStreetMerced,CA95340Contact:JamesHolland209.385.7654
P R E P A R E D B Y :
ICFInternational630KStreet,Suite400Sacramento,CA95814Contact:SallyZeff916.737.3000
July2013
ICFInternational.2013.SubsequentInitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclarationE.&J.GalloWineryEastsideModification.July.(ICF00237.13.)Sacramento,CA.PreparedforMercedCounty,Merced,CA.
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
i
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Contents
Tables and Figures ................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... iv
Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1‐1
Purpose of the Subsequent IS/MND ................................................................................................... 1‐1
Background .......................................................................................................................................... 1‐1
Lead Agency ......................................................................................................................................... 1‐2
Organization of the IS/MND ................................................................................................................ 1‐2
Chapter 2 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 2‐1
Project Location ................................................................................................................................... 2‐1
Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................................. 2‐1
Previously Approved Livingston Major Modification ................................................................... 2‐1
Project Characteristics ......................................................................................................................... 2‐2
Proposed Facility Eastside Revision .............................................................................................. 2‐2
Construction Equipment and Staging ........................................................................................... 2‐3
Wine Production Activities ........................................................................................................... 2‐3
Staffing .......................................................................................................................................... 2‐3
Vehicular Traffic ............................................................................................................................ 2‐4
Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist ................................................................................................. 3‐1
Determination ..................................................................................................................................... 3‐2
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................. 3‐3
I. Aesthetics .................................................................................................................................. 3‐4
II. Agricultural and Forestry Resources ........................................................................................ 3‐7
III. Air Quality ............................................................................................................................... 3‐9
IV. Biological Resources ............................................................................................................. 3‐21
V. Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................. 3‐26
VI. Geology and Soils .................................................................................................................. 3‐29
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................... 3‐32
VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................... 3‐40
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................... 3‐44
X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................... 3‐48
XI. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................ 3‐50
XII. Noise .................................................................................................................................... 3‐51
XIII. Population and Housing ...................................................................................................... 3‐54
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
ii
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XIV. Public Services .................................................................................................................... 3‐56
XV. Recreation ............................................................................................................................ 3‐59
XVI. Transportation/Traffic ........................................................................................................ 3‐60
XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................. 3‐63
XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................. 3‐66
Chapter 4 References Cited............................................................................................................. 4‐1
Printed References .............................................................................................................................. 4‐1
Personal Communications ................................................................................................................... 4‐3
Appendix A. Bauer and Associates Geotechnical Consultation
Appendix B. Biological Resources Field Report
Appendix C. Cultural Resources Field Report
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
iii
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Tables and Figures
Tables Page
1 National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards .................................................................... 3‐12
2 Annual Ambient Air Quality Data at Merced South Coffee Avenue and M Street
Stations ................................................................................................................................. 3‐14
3 Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Construction Activities by Phase ..................................... 3‐16
4 Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions Associated with 12 Additional Employees ................ 3‐19
5 Lifetimes and Global Warming Potentials of Several Greenhouse Gases .................................. 3‐33
6 Emissions of GHG from Construction Activities by Phase .......................................................... 3‐38
7 Emissions of GHG from Operational Activities ........................................................................... 3‐39
Figures Follows Page
1 Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 2‐2
2 Proposed Modifications ................................................................................................................ 2‐2
3 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Plan Designations in the Project Area ................................. 3‐8
4 Williamson Act and Agricultural Preserve Lands in the Project Area ........................................... 3‐8
5 Representative Photographs of the 2‐Acre Revision Site ........................................................... 3‐22
6 Project Area Flood Zone and Proposed Drainage ....................................................................... 3‐46
7 Noise Sensitive Receptors ........................................................................................................... 3‐52
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
iv
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Acronyms and Abbreviations
µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter
AAQS state ambient air quality standards
AB Assembly Bill
ADT average daily trips
ARB California Air Resources Board
Basin San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
BAU business‐as‐usual
BMPs best management practices
BOD biochemical oxygen demand
BPS best performance standards
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
CCAs Community Choice Aggregations
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CH4 methane
CNEL community noise equivalent level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
dBA A‐weighted decibels
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
ESPs energy service providers
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRMs Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
GHG greenhouse gas
gpd gallons per day
Guide Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts
GWP global warming potential
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons
HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan
IOUs investor‐owned utilities
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
v
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Ldn day‐night sound level
Leq equivalent sound level
Lmax maximum sound levels
Lmin minimum sound levels
LUSD Livingston Union School District
LUST leaking underground storage tank
Lxx percentile‐exceeded sound levels
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCAG Merced County Association of Governments
MCFD Merced County Fire Department
MCHD/EHD Merced County Health Department, Environmental Health Division
mg/L milligrams per liter
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MUHSD Merced Unified High School District
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS national ambient air quality standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOX oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
Pb lead
PFCs perfluorocarbons
PM particulate matter
PM10 PM less than or equal to 10 microns
PM2.5 PM less than or equal to 2.5 microns
ppb parts per billion by volume
ppm parts per million
ROG reactive organic gases
ROI radius of influence
ROWD Report of Waste Discharge
RPS California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard
Rule 2010 Permits Required Rule
Rule 2201 New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
sf square foot
SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SR State Route
Subsequent IS/MND Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
vi
July 2013ICF 00237.13
TACs Toxic air contaminants
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
U.S. United States
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
WDRs Waste Discharge Requirements
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
1‐1
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Chapter 1 Introduction
Purpose of the Subsequent IS/MND ThepurposeofthisSubsequentInitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration(SubsequentIS/MND)istoanalyzetheproposedmodifications(MM13‐009)toconditionalusepermitCUP2714toallowformodificationoftheapprovedexpansionplanfortheexistingE&JGalloWineryFacility.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedpermitconsistsofthefollowing:
Adda2‐acreareafor215additionalcooperagetanksusedforstorageandfermentation,withatotalcapacityofapproximately28,000,000gallons,toallowlongerstoragetimeonsite.
Relocatethepreviouslyapprovedadministrationandprocessbuildingswithinthesite.
Theproposedmodificationdoesnotchangetheproductioncapacityofthefacility,butallowsforlongeronsitestoragetoaccommodatetheongoingshifttohigher‐qualitywinesmadeatthefacility.In2011,anIS/MNDwasapprovedforamajormodification(No.MM11‐018)toGallo’sexistingconditionalusepermit(CUP2714)forexpansionoftheGalloLivingstonWineryfacility.ThisdocumentisavailableforreviewattheMercedCountyDepartmentofPlanningandCommunityDevelopment,2222MStreet,Merced.
Thisprojectwastoallowfortheconstructionandoperationofanew‐technologyprocessingfacilitytoincreasewineproductioncapacityandproducehigher‐qualitywinefromexistinginputs.Althoughconsistentwiththenew‐technologyprocessingfacility,theproposedmodifications,includingthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandtheadditional215cooperagetankswerenotexaminedinthe2011IS/MND.Therefore,thisSubsequentIS/MNDhasbeenpreparedtoanalyzetheimpactsofthisproposedmodificationtothepreviouslyapprovedexpansion.
UnderCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)GuidelinesSection15162,whenanegativedeclarationhasbeenadoptedforaproject,subsequentactivitiesinvolvingtheprojectmustbeexaminedinlightoftheIS/MND.ThisSubsequentIS/MNDspecificallyconsiderswhethertheadditionof2acrestotheprojectsite,theadditionof215cooperagetanks,andotherminorchangesproposedwouldresultinnewsignificantimpactsnotidentifiedinthe2011IS/MND,orasubstantialincreaseintheseverityofthepreviouslyidentifiedpotentialimpacts.Themitigationmeasuresfromthe2011IS/MNDapplytothismodification,and,whereappropriatetomitigateanynewimpacts,arerevised.ThisSubsequentIS/MNDalsoidentifieswhethernewmitigationmeasuresarerequired.
Background Thepreviouslyapprovedwineryexpansionprojectincludeddevelopmentofthemajorityofthe33‐acreprojectsiteadjacenttotheexistingproductionfacilityonGalloproperty.Theapprovedexpansionincludedinstallationof70newfermentationtanks,approximately123newwinestoragetanks,anapproximately10,000‐squarefoot(sf)filtrationbuilding,anapproximately45,000‐sfprocessbuilding,andanapproximately15,000‐sfadministrationbuilding.
Merced County Introduction
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
1‐2
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Lead Agency TheleadagencyfortheproposedprojectisMercedCounty.TheCountyastheCEQALeadAgencyhaspreparedthisSubsequentIS/MNDtoprovideagenciesandthepublicwithinformationabouttheproposedproject’spotentialimpactsonthelocalandregionalenvironment.
Organization of the IS/MND ThisSubsequentIS/MNDisorganizedintothefollowingchapters.
Chapter1,Introduction:Discussestheoveralldocumentpurpose,providesabriefprojectbackground,andsummarizestheorganizationofthedocument.
Chapter2,ProjectDescription:Providesbackgroundontheproposedproject,adescriptionoftheprojectsite,andprojectcomponents.
Chapter3,EnvironmentalChecklist:Thischapterprovidesadescriptionofexistingsiteconditionsfortheproposedprojectandanevaluationofanychangesinimpactsthatwouldoccurasaresultoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject.
Chapter4,References:Identifiesreferencesusedandpersonsandorganizationscontacted.
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
2‐1
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Chapter 2 Project Description
Project Location TheE.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryislocatedonapproximately5,000acresofvineyardsinanagriculturearea,andissurroundedbyfarmlands(Figure1).TheproposedprojectislocatedinMercedCounty,approximately4.5milessouthwestoftheCityofLivingston.Theexistingareaofactivewineryoperationsisapproximately81acres.Itislocatedapproximately8mileswestofStateRoute(SR)99andisaccessedfromRiverRoad,whichbordersthewineryonthesouthandeast.
Existing Conditions E.&J.GalloLivingstonWinerycurrentlyemploys195to460employeesduringoff‐crushandcrushseasons,respectively.Thefacilityispermittedtoprocessapproximately628,000tonsofgrapesperyear,whichareanticipatedtoproduceapproximately125milliongallonsofwine.
Currentonsiteprocessingfacilitiesconsistofagrapereceivingareaandconveyerandprocessingsystem,afermentationsystem,winestoragetanks,apomace(solidsbyproductoffermentation)storagearea,adistilleryforethanolrecovery,awastewaterprocessingfacility,andacompostingarea.
Previously Approved Major Modification 2011
ThepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectincreasedGallo’spermittedproductioncapacityto628,000tonsperyearfromitsprevious538,000tonsperyear.Thatprojectalloweddevelopmentofthemajorityofthe33‐acreprojectsiteadjacenttotheexistingproductionfacilityonGalloproperty.Itincludedinstallationof70newfermentationtanks,approximately123newwinestoragetanks,anapproximately10,000‐sffiltrationbuilding,anapproximately45,000‐sfprocessbuilding,andanapproximately15,000squarefootadministrationbuilding.Theundevelopedportionoftheexpansionsitewastobesurfacedwithgravelfordustcontrol,ormaintainedforagriculturaluses.
Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojecthadthreephasesofconstruction.Phase1wastooccurfromJanuary2012toOctober2012.Thisphaseofconstructioniscompletewiththeexceptionofthe10,000squarefootfiltrationbuilding.Thescheduleforconstructionofthisbuildingisundecidedatthistime.Phase2ofconstructionwastooccurfromNovember2012toSeptember2013.Constructionisbehindscheduleonthisphase.The24winestoragetankshavebeeninstalled,butnootherconstructionhasstarted.Constructionofthe24redfermentersthatremaininthisphaseisscheduledtobegininearly2014.ConstructionofPhase3hasnotyetbegun,butisplannedtooccurfromNovember2013toSeptember2014.
Merced County Project Description
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
2‐2
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Project Characteristics
Proposed Modification 2013
Theproposedmodificationinvolvesanadditional2‐acreareaforcooperagetankstosupportthepreviouslyapprovedLivingstonEastsideExpansion.Theproposedmodificationdoesnotchangetheproductioncapacityofthefacility.Itallowsforlongeronsitestoragetoaccommodatetheongoingshifttohigher‐qualitywinesmadeatthefacility.Theadditional2acresarelocatedinafallowareaontheeastperimeteroftheapprovedprojectsite,nearRiverRoad.Undertheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject,anadditional215cooperagetankswithatotalcapacityofapproximately28,000,000gallonswouldbeinstalled.Thenewtankswillbedual‐purpose,withthecapabilitytobothfermentwhitegrapejuiceduringharvestandserveaswinestorageduringtheoff‐season.Thenewtankswillbeapproximately45feettallandlooksimilartotheexistingtanks.Thenewcooperagetankswouldbelocatedinthe2‐acreexpansionareaandthroughoutthepreviouslyapproved33‐acreexpansionarea.
Theproposedmodificationincludesrelocatingthepreviouslyapproved45,000‐sfprocessbuildingand15,000‐sfadministrationbuildingwithintheprojectsite.Theprocessbuildingwillbemovedapproximately475feettothewest,andtheadministrationbuildingwillbemovedapproximately400feettothewest.Figure2showsthesiteplanforthecooperagetanks.Thesiteplanshowstheapproximatetanklayout.
Project Phasing
Thecooperageexpansionwillbeinstalledinfivephases.Theanticipatedrangeoftanksizesis35,000gallonsto640,000gallonstomatchtheexistingcooperagetanksonsite.Thedistributionofgallonspertankhasnotyetbeenfinalized.
Phase1:Approximately4,000,000gallons
Phase2:Approximately8,000,000gallons
Phase3:Approximately7,000,000gallons
Phase4:Approximately6,000,000gallons
Phase5:Approximately3,000,000gallons
Approximately5to25constructionworkerswouldbeonsiteduringeachphaseoverthecourseofprojectconstruction,whichwouldlastapproximatelyoneyearinadditiontotheongoingconstructionactivitiesanalyzedinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND,whichwouldcontinuefor3to5years.Theexacttimingofthebuildoutwillbedeterminedbymarketconditions.
Constructionactivitieswouldstartwithsitepreparation,roughgrading,andcompactionofloosesurfacesoils.Excavationforsiteutilitiesandequipmentfoundationswouldfollowgradingactivities.Undergroundsiteutilityinstallationwouldbeconstructedatthesametimeasgradingandfootingexcavationactivities.Spoilsfromfootingandtrenchingoperationswouldbestockpiledforuseonsite.
Followingsitepreparationandutilityinstallation,footingswouldbeplacedforinstallationofthetanks.Concreteslabswouldbeformedandpouredafterthefootingsarecompleted.Stainlesssteeltankswouldbefabricatedonsiteadjacenttotheconstructionzoneontemporaryconcreteslabs.
K I N G S
C O U N T Y
T U L A R E C O U N T Y
F R E S N O C O U N T Y
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY
MERCED
COUNTY
99
4
4
424
26
49
49
65
49
84
88
88
12
99
99
33
33
25
33
99
99
99
32
45
70
20
20
65
180
120
120
120
162
132
152
156
152
165
140
140
43
33
41
5
5
5
80
80
5
5
205
580
580
680
5
101
50
395
1
Fresno
San Francisco
Monterey
San José
Sacramento
Marysville
Stockton
Vacaville
Davis
ChicoOrland
Merced
Tracy
Lodi
Woodland
Auburn
Modesto
Turlock
Livingston
River Rd
Gri�
th Av
e
Mer
ced A
ve
Oak St
Gri�
th Av
e
Howa
rd Rd
River Rd
Merced River
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
3,000 4,000
Project Location
Figure 1Project Location
Gra
phic
s …
002
37.1
3 00
3 (0
5-13
) SS
Expansion Site
NOT TO SCALE
Source: Summit Engineering, 3-6-2013.
Gra
ph
ics
… 0
0237
.13
003
(6-2
5-13
)
Feet
200 300 4001000
Figure 2Proposed Modifications
Approved, not constructed,to be relocated
Proposed Modification 2013
Expansion Site 2011
Proposed revisions
Legend
Merced County Project Description
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
2‐3
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Tankfabricationandinstallationisexpectedtotake2to4months.Aftercompletionoffoundationitems,processequipmentwouldbedeliveredtothesite,wired,andpipedasrequiredforfunctionality.
Construction Equipment and Staging
Constructionequipmentthatwouldbeusedduringeachofthephaseswouldbesimilar.Typicalequipmentthatmaybeusedincludesthefollowing.
Backhoe
Compactor
ConcreteMixerTruck
ConcretePumpTruck
DumpTruck,Standard
EmployeeVehicle
Generators
HydraulicExcavator,Small
MotorGrader
FlatbedTruck
TractorTrailer
SkidSteerLoader
Telehandler
Trencher,Chain
VibratoryCompactor
WaterTruck
WheeledDozer
WheeledScraper
TruckCrane
BoxTruck
ConstructionstagingwouldoccuradjacenttothepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsiteonGalloproperty;staginglocationswouldvarybyphasedependingonwhatisbeingconstructed.Soilstockpileswouldbelocatedonthedesignatedstagingareas.
Wine Production Activities
Noproductionincreaseisanticipatedundertheproposedmodification.Fermentationcapacitywillremainat628,000tonsofgrapesannually,aspreviouslyapprovedundertheLivingstonEastsideExpansionproject.Therewillbenomodificationstothepreviouslyapprovedproductionprocesses,facilityuse,oroperations.Noincreasesinwastewaterorsolidsareanticipatedaspartofthismodification.
Staffing
UndertheLivingstonEastsideExpansionproject,staffingwasincreasedbyapproximately45employees.Becauseproductionremainsunchanged,Galloexpectsonlyasmallincreaseinstaffduetotheincreasedcomplexityofwinemaking.Thestaffincreaseisestimatedatsixemployeesduringtheoff‐seasonandanadditionalsixduringtheharvestseason(atotalof12additionalemployees).Theemployeeswouldworkinthreeshiftsperday,24hoursperday,and365daysperyear.Duringtheharvestseason,employeeswouldwork7daysperweekfromapproximatelyAugust1throughNovember15ofeachyear.Duringthenon‐harvestseason,employeeswouldwork5daysperweek.
Merced County Project Description
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
2‐4
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Vehicular Traffic
Trucktraffictoandfromthesiteconsistsofgrapedeliverytrucksduringcrushseasonandbulktankerwineshipmentsandby‐productsyear‐round.Theproposedmodificationswouldnotincreasethenumberoftrucksperdaybecauseproductionvolumewouldnotchange.Itisestimatedthattheadditionalemployeeswouldgenerateamaximumofabout12additionalaveragedaily(round)trips(ADT)duringthecrushseason.
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐1
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist
1. ProjectTitle: SubsequentIS/MNDE&JGalloWineryEastsideUsePermitMajorModificationNo.MM13‐009
2. LeadAgencyNameandAddress: MercedCounty
3. ContactPersonandPhoneNumber: JamesHolland
(209)385‐7654,Extension4407
4. ProjectLocation: 18000RiverRoadLivingston,CA95334
5. ProjectSponsor’sNameandAddress: E.&J.GalloWineryKeithBader18000RiverRoadLivingston,CA95334
6. GeneralPlanDesignation: Agriculture
7. Zoning: GeneralAgriculture(A‐1)
8. DescriptionofProject:
MercedCountyisconsideringanapplicationbyE.&J.GalloWineryforamodification(MajorModificationNo.MM13‐009)toanexistingConditionalUsePermit(CUP2714)toaddanadditional2acrestotheprojectsitetoallowfortheconstructionanduseof215additionalcooperagetanks.Themodificationalsoinvolvesrelocatingthepreviouslyapprovedadministrativeandprocessbuildingswithintheexpansionsite.Theprojectwouldnotincreasewineproduction.
9. SurroundingLandUsesandSetting:
Rural/Agricultural
10. OtherPublicAgenciesWhoseApprovalisRequired:
MercedCountyDepartmentofPublicWorks,BuildingandSafetyDivision,SanJoaquinValleyUnifiedAirPollutionControlDistrict,MercedCountyHealthDepartment,EnvironmentalHealthDivision.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐3
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1. Abriefexplanationisrequiredforallanswersexcept“NoImpact”answersthatareadequately
supportedbytheinformationsourcesaleadagencycitesintheparenthesesfollowingeachquestion.A“NoImpact”answerisadequatelysupportedifthereferencedinformationsourcesshowthattheimpactsimplydoesnotapplytoprojectsliketheoneinvolved(e.g.,theprojectfallsoutsideafaultrupturezone).A“NoImpact”answershouldbeexplainedifitisbasedonproject‐specificfactorsaswellasgeneralstandards(e.g.,theprojectwillnotexposesensitivereceptorstopollutants,basedonaproject‐specificscreeninganalysis).
2. Allanswersmusttakeaccountofthewholeactioninvolved,includingoffsiteaswellasonsite,cumulativeaswellasproject‐level,indirectaswellasdirect,andconstructionaswellasoperationalimpacts.ThisincludesconsiderationoftheimpactanalysisinthepriorMND.
3. Oncetheleadagencyhasdeterminedthataparticularphysicalimpactwouldoccur,thechecklistanswersmustindicatewhethertheimpactispotentiallysignificant,lessthansignificantwithmitigation,orlessthansignificant.“PotentiallySignificantImpact”isappropriateifthereissubstantialevidencethataneffectmaybesignificant.Ifthereareoneormore“PotentiallySignificantImpact”entrieswhenthedeterminationismade,anEnvironmentalImpactReport(EIR)isrequired.
4. “NegativeDeclaration:LessthanSignificantwithMitigationIncorporated”applieswhentheincorporationofmitigationmeasureshasreducedaneffectfroma“PotentiallySignificantImpact”toa“Less‐than‐SignificantImpact”.Theleadagencymustdescribethemitigationmeasuresandbrieflyexplainhowtheyreducetheeffecttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.(MitigationmeasuresfromSectionXVII,“EarlierAnalyses”,maybecross‐referenced.)
5. TheearlieranalysisintheMNDforMM11‐018isusedasthebasisforconsiderationoftheimpactsoftheproposedMM13‐009.Wherepertinent,currentanalysiswillidentifythefollowing:
a. EarlierAnalysisUsed.Identifyandstatewhereearlieranalysesareavailableforreview.
b. ImpactsAdequatelyAddressed.Identifywhicheffectsfromthefollowingchecklistwerewithinthescopeofandadequatelyanalyzedinanearlierdocumentpursuanttoapplicablelegalstandardsandstatewhethersucheffectswereaddressedbymitigationmeasuresbasedontheearlieranalysis.
c. MitigationMeasures.Foreffectsthatare“LessthanSignificantwithMitigationIncorporated,”describethemitigationmeasuresthatwereincorporatedorrefinedfromtheearlierdocumentandtheextenttowhichtheyaddresssite‐specificconditionsfortheproject.
6. Leadagenciesareencouragedtoincorporateintothechecklistreferencestoinformationsourcesforpotentialimpacts(e.g.,generalplans,zoningordinances).Referencetoapreviouslypreparedoroutsidedocumentshould,whenappropriate,includeareferencetothepageorpageswherethestatementissubstantiated.
7. SupportingInformationSources:Asourcelistshouldbeattached,andothersourcesusedorindividualscontactedshouldbecitedinthediscussion.
8. Thisisonlyasuggestedform,andleadagenciesarefreetousedifferentformats;however,leadagenciesshouldnormallyaddressthequestionsfromthischecklistthatarerelevanttoaproject’senvironmentaleffectsinwhateverformatisselected.
9. Theexplanationofeachissueshouldidentify:
a. thesignificancecriteriaorthreshold,ifany,usedtoevaluateeachquestion;and
b. themitigationmeasureidentified,ifany,toreducetheimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐4
July 2013ICF 00237.13
I.Aesthetics
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Haveasubstantialadverseeffectonascenicvista?
b. Substantiallydamagescenicresources,including,butnotlimitedto,trees,rockoutcroppings,andhistoricbuildingsalongascenichighway?
c. Substantiallydegradetheexistingvisualcharacterorqualityofthesiteanditssurroundings?
d. Createanewsourceofsubstantiallightorglarethatwouldadverselyaffectdaytimeornighttimeviewsinthearea?
Affected Environment
ThewineryfacilityislocatedsouthwestofLivingstoninaruralagriculturalsetting.Thefacilityconsistsofanumberofbuildingsandwinemakingandstoragestructuressuchasfermentationtanks,storagetanks,grapereceivingconveyersystem,andothermachinery.Thesestructuresvaryinheightandareupto45feettall.Someofthesestructuresareonraisedplatforms.Otherdevelopedfeaturesincludeanadministrationbuilding,pavedaccessroads,andsurfaceparkingareas.Areasdirectlyadjacenttothedevelopedportionofthewineryincludevineyards,rowcroplands,somevacantland,andotheragriculturalusessuchasthepomaceprocessingandstorageareas.Thesurroundingareasaredominatedbycommercialagriculturallanduses,withscatteredruralresidences.Distantviewsofthemountainrangescanbeseenbuttheseviewsdonotdominatethevisuallandscape.
Typicalviewersoftheprojectsitearemotoristsontheperimeterroadways,employees,andvisitors.Viewsarelimitedtotheexistingfacilityandthesurroundingagriculturallands.IntermittentviewsoftheMercedRivercanbeseen,butareprimarilyblockedduetothesizeoftheexistingwinemakingandstoragefacilities.Aswiththepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,thesiteoftheproposedmodification,includingthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite,isnotlocatedwithinascenicvistaorwithinviewofascenichighway.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsonscenicvistas,andnomitigationwasrequired.Liketherestoftheexpansionsite,thesiteoftheproposedmodificationisnotconsideredascenicvistaanddoesnotprovideviewsofscenicvistasasdefinedbytheCounty.Thesiteoftheproposedmodificationislocatedapproximately0.5mileeast
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐5
July 2013ICF 00237.13
oftheMercedRiver.Asaresult,itwouldnotbereadilyvisiblefromtheriverandthisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:b
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsonvisualcharacterandquality,andnomitigationwasrequired.Liketherestoftheexpansionsite,thesiteoftheproposedmodificationisnotlocatedadjacenttoscenichighways.Therearenorockoutcroppings,trees,orhistoricstructureswithinthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Becausetherearenosignificantscenicresourcesatthesiteorinitsproximity,theproposedprojectwouldnotsubstantiallydamagesuchresources.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:c
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsonvisualcharacterandquality,andnomitigationwasrequired.The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitewouldcontainadditionalcooperagetanksthatwouldbeupto45feettall,looksimilartoexistingtanksontherestoftheexpansionsite,andwouldbeconsistentwiththeexistingdevelopedcharacteratthesite.Thepreviouslyapproved45,000squarefootprocessbuildingand15,000squarefootadministrativebuildingwillberelocatedwithintheprojectsite.The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitewouldbeentirelyonGallopropertyandwouldnotaltertheexistingvisualcharacterofthesurroundingarea.Therefore,theproposedprojectwouldnothaveanewormoresevereimpactontheexistingvisualcharacterofthesiteorsurroundingsareas.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:d
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsfromlightorglare,andnomitigationwasrequired.Similartothepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,constructionoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldbelimitedtodaytimehours,typicallybetween7a.m.and6p.m.,andwouldnotcreateanewsourceofsubstantiallightingthatwouldaffectnighttimeviewsinthearea.Constructionofthenewtankson‐sitewouldnotcontributenewsourcesofglareasthenewtankswouldbeinsulatedandsurface‐treatedwithurethanefoamtopreventreflectionsontoadjacentroadways(Rubinspers.comm.).Therefore,constructionoftheproposedmodificationwouldnotcreateanewsourceofsubstantiallightorglarethatwouldaffectnighttimeordaytimeviewsinthearea,andimpactsareconsideredlessthansignificant.
Operationoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldlikelyrequiretheuseofarangeofexteriorlightsources.Theprojectapplicanthasnotidentifiedthetype,number,orlocationofexteriorlights;however,aswiththepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,itislikelythattherewouldbelightingfromwithinthebuildings,fromlightsatbuildingentryways,andlightingfromtheprojectparkingfacilities.Theproposedmodificationwouldrelocatepreviouslyapprovedbuildingswithinthewinerygroundsandthereforewouldnotsubstantiallyincreasethepotentialforlightandglarefromexteriorlighting.NewprojectlightingwouldberequiredtomeetMercedCounty’slightingcode(Section18.41.060),whichrequirestheuseofdirectionallightingandminimizationofglareandreflections.Asstatedabove,theadditionalcooperagetankswouldbeinsulatedandsurfacetreatedwithurethanefoamtopreventanyglarefrombeingreflectedtowardsadjacentroadways(Rubinspers.comm.).Therefore,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectisnot
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐6
July 2013ICF 00237.13
expectedtocreatenewsourcesofsubstantiallightorglarethatwouldadverselyaffectdayornighttimeviewsinthearea,andthisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐7
July 2013ICF 00237.13
II.AgriculturalandForestryResources
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Indeterminingwhetherimpactsonagriculturalresourcesaresignificantenvironmentaleffects,leadagenciesmayrefertotheCaliforniaAgriculturalLandEvaluationandSiteAssessmentModel(1997)preparedbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofConservationasanoptionalmodeltouseinassessingimpactsonagricultureandfarmland.Indeterminingwhetherimpactsonforestresources,includingtimberland,aresignificantenvironmentaleffects,leadagenciesmayrefertoinformationcompiledbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofForestryandFireProtectionregardingthestate’sinventoryofforestland,includingtheForestandRangeAssessmentProjectandtheForestLegacyAssessmentProject,andforestcarbonmeasurementmethodologyprovidedintheForestProtocolsadoptedbytheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.Wouldtheproject:
a. ConvertPrimeFarmland,UniqueFarmland,orFarmlandofStatewideImportance(Farmland),asshownonthemapspreparedpursuanttotheFarmlandMappingandMonitoringProgramoftheCaliforniaResourcesAgency,tonon‐agriculturaluse?
b. ConflictwithexistingzoningforagriculturaluseorconflictwithaWilliamsonActcontract?
c. Conflictwithexistingzoningfor,orcauserezoningofforestland(asdefinedinPublicResourcesCodeSection12220(g)),timberland(asdefinedbyPublicResourcesCodeSection4526),ortimberlandzonedTimberlandProduction(asdefinedbyGovernmentCodeSection51104(g))?
d. Resultinthelossofforestlandorconversionofforestlandtonon‐forestuse?
e. Involveotherchangesintheexistingenvironmentthat,duetotheirlocationornature,couldresultinconversionofFarmlandtonon‐agriculturaluseorconversionofforestlandtonon‐forestuse?
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐8
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Affected Environment
The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteislocatedadjacenttothepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsite,nearRiverRoadandiscurrentlymadeupoffallowland.Likethepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsite,the2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteareidentifiedasprimefarmlandbytheDepartmentofConservation’sFarmlandMappingandMonitoringProgram(FMMP)(CaliforniaDepartmentofConservation2010),iszonedA‐1GeneralAgriculture,andisdesignatedAgricultural(“A”)bytheCountyGeneralPlan.TheexpansionsiteisalsounderaWilliamsonActcontractandidentifiedasAgriculturalPreservelandsbytheCounty(seeFigures3and4,respectively).Existingwineryoperationsandwineproductionareidentifiedasusesthatareallowedunderthezoningdesignation.
Likethepreviouslyapprovedexpansion,the2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitedonotcontainanyforestlandsortimberlandsnorisitzonedforforestortimberlanduses.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a,b,c
Theproposedmodificationwouldresultinthechangeofuseforanadditional2acresoffallowlandstoagriculturalmanufactureandstorageuses.Thischangewouldnotconvertprimefarmlandstoanon‐agriculturaluse,astheproposeduseisconsideredanagriculturaluseunderCountyzoning.Changeinuseofprimefarmlandfromcropproductiontoagriculturalprocessingormanufacturingisnotidentifiedasa“conversion”byexistingorproposedMercedCountypoliciesandregulations.SuchachangeinuseisconsistentwithGeneralPlanpoliciescallingfordiversificationandstrengtheningoftheagriculturalsectorwithintheCounty.Theexistingwinerysupportsthousandsofacresofvineyardsforwineproduction.Therefore,project‐relatedimpactsonprimefarmlandsandagriculturalusesareconsideredlessthansignificant.
Asdescribedabove,the2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteiszonedasA‐1“GeneralAgriculture.”Manufacturingandstorageusesofthewineryoperations—boththeapprovedandtheproposeduses—areallowedunderthezoningdesignation.Additionally,theexistingwineryfacilityisapermittedagriculturaluseundertheWilliamsonActcontractandthemodificationwouldnotrequireterminationofthesecontracts.BecausetheproposedmodificationwouldbeconsistentwithexistingzoningforagriculturalusesandwouldnotconflictwithexistingWilliamsonActcontracts,therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:d,e
Likethepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsite,the2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandsurroundingareasdonotincludeforestlandortimberland,arenotzonedforforestryortimberlanduses,andwouldnotresultinthelossorconversionofsuchlandstonon‐forestuses.Therefore,noimpactswouldoccur.
Merc
ed R
iver
ExistingFacilities
OpenLand
Vineyard
Mer
ced
Ave
Crane Ave
Youn
gsto
wn
Rd
Peach Ave
Oak St
Magnolia Ave
Hin
ton
Ave
Vinewood Ave
Willi
ams
Ave
Ran
dolf
Rd
Go l
f Lin
k R
d
Geer Ave
Grif
fith
Ave
Legion Ave
Lars
on A
ve
River Rd
How
ard
Rd
Van
Clie
f Rd
Westside Blvd
Wei
r Ave
Marianna Rd
Vinewood Cir
K:\P
roje
cts_
1\C
ount
y_of
_Mer
ced\
0070
2_11
_Gal
lo_W
iner
y\m
apdo
c\Fi
gure
s\Fi
g_3_
Gal
lo_W
iner
y_FM
MP
_zoo
med
_out
2013
0711
.mxd
Dat
e: 7
/12/
2013
Tim
e: 2
:04:
05 P
M 1
9393
Sources: Bing Maps Aerial (2010)California Department of Conservation (2010)
0 0.25 0.50.125Miles±
Legend
FMMP 2010
Farmland of StatewideImportancePrime Farmland
Other Land
Farmland of Local Importance
Unique Farmland
Urban and Built-Up Land
Figure 3Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Plan Designations in the Project Area
Expansion Site 2011
Proposed Modification 2013
Merc
ed R
iver
ExistingFacilities
OpenLand
Vineyard
Mer
ced
Ave
Crane Ave
Youn
gsto
wn
Rd
Peach Ave
Oak St
Magnolia Ave
Hin
ton
Ave
Vinewood Ave
Willi
ams
Ave
Ran
dolf
Rd
Go l
f Lin
k R
d
Geer Ave
Grif
fith
Ave
Legion Ave
Lars
on A
ve
River Rd
How
ard
Rd
Van
Clie
f Rd
Westside Blvd
Wei
r Ave
Marianna Rd
Vinewood Cir
K:\P
roje
cts_
1\C
ount
y_of
_Mer
ced\
0070
2_11
_Gal
lo_W
iner
y\m
apdo
c\Fi
gure
s\Fi
g_4_
Gal
lo_W
iner
y_W
illia
mso
n_A
ct_A
g_P
rese
rve_
zoom
ed_o
ut20
1307
10.m
xd D
ate:
7/1
2/20
13 T
ime:
9:5
0:24
AM
193
93
Sources: Bing Maps Aerial (2010)Merced County (2010, 2011)
0 0.25 0.50.125Miles±
Legend
Agricultural Preserve 2011
Williamson Act 2010
Figure 4Williamson Act and Agricultural
Preserve Lands in the Project Area
Proposed modification 2013
Expansion Site 2011
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐9
July 2013ICF 00237.13
III.AirQuality
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Whenavailable,thesignificancecriteriaestablishedbytheapplicableairqualitymanagementorairpollutioncontroldistrictmaybereliedupontomakethefollowingdeterminations.Wouldtheproject:
a. Conflictwithorobstructimplementationoftheapplicableairqualityplan?
b. Violateanyairqualitystandardorcontributesubstantiallytoanexistingorprojectedairqualityviolation?
c. Resultinacumulativelyconsiderablenetincreaseofanycriteriapollutantforwhichtheprojectregionisanonattainmentareaforanapplicablefederalorstateambientairqualitystandard(includingreleasingemissionsthatexceedquantitativethresholdsforozoneprecursors)?
d. Exposesensitivereceptorstosubstantialpollutantconcentrations?
e. Createobjectionableodorsaffectingasubstantialnumberofpeople?
Introduction
Thissectionprovidesananalysisofairqualityimpactsresultingfromtheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject.ItsummarizestheoverallregulatoryframeworkforairqualitymanagementinCaliforniaandtheregion,describesexistingairqualityconditionsintheprojectarea,andidentifiessensitiveland‐uses.Environmentalimpactsrelatedtoairqualityandmitigationmeasurestoreduceoreliminatepotentialimpactsarealsodiscussed.
Regulatory Setting
Air Quality Management
TheairqualitymanagementagenciesofdirectimportanceinSanJoaquinCountyincludetheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA),CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard(ARB),andtheSanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict(SJVAPCD).EPAhasestablishedfederalambientairqualitystandardsforwhichARBandtheSJVAPCDhaveprimaryimplementationresponsibility.ARBandtheSJVAPCDarealsoresponsibleforensuringthatstateambientairqualitystandards(AAQS)aremet.TheSJVAPCDhasfurtherresponsibilityforimplementingstrategiesforairqualityimprovementandrecommendingmitigationmeasuresfornewgrowthanddevelopment.
Airqualityisdeterminedprimarilybythetypeandamountofcontaminantsemittedintotheatmosphere,thesizeandtopographyoftheairbasin,anditsmeteorologicalconditions.Stateand
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐10
July 2013ICF 00237.13
federalcriteriapollutantemissionstandardshavebeenestablishedforsixpollutants:carbonmonoxide(CO),ozone(O3),particulatematter(PM)consistingofPMlessthanorequalto10microns(PM10)andPMlessthanorequalto2.5microns(PM2.5),nitrogendioxide(NO2),sulfurdioxide(SO2),andlead(Pb).WithintheSanJoaquinValleyAirBasin(Basin),theSJVAPCDisresponsibleforensuringthattheseemissionstandardsarenotviolated.
OnDecember15,2005,SJVAPCDadoptedRule9510,IndirectSourceReview.Thisrulefulfillsthedistrict’semissionreductioncommitmentsinthePM10andAttainmentPlansthroughemissionreductionsforconstructionanduseofdevelopmentprojectsthroughdesignfeaturesandonsitemeasures.InaletterfromtheSJVAPCDregardingthepreviouslyapprovedGalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionProject,theSJVAPCDindicatedthattheprojectwasnotsubjecttorule9510(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2011).BecausethisanalysisisasubsequentIS/MNDtotheoriginalexpansionproject,andtheproposedchangestotheapprovedprojectwouldnotchangetheproductionprocess,facilityuse,oroperations,Rule9510wouldalsonotapplytothisproposedproject.
Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
ExistingairqualityconditionsintheprojectareacanbecharacterizedintermsoftheambientairqualitystandardsthatthefederalgovernmentandCaliforniahaveestablishedforseveraldifferentpollutants.Forsomepollutants,separatestandardshavebeensetfordifferentmeasurementperiods.Moststandardshavebeensettoprotectpublichealthandwelfarewithanadequatemarginofsafety.Forsomepollutants,standardshavebeenbasedonothervalues(suchasprotectionofcrops,protectionofmaterials,oravoidanceofnuisanceconditions).Thenationalambientairqualitystandards(NAAQS)describeacceptableconditions,andwerefirstauthorizedbythefederalCleanAirActof1970.Airqualityisconsideredin“attainment”ifpollutantlevelsarecontinuouslybeloworequaltotheNAAQSandexceedthemnomorethanonceeachyear.TheCaliforniaAmbientAirQualityStandards(CAAQS),whichdescribeadverseconditions,wereauthorizedbytheStatelegislaturein1967.PollutionlevelsmustbebelowtheCAAQSbeforeabasincanattainthestandard.Californiastandardsaregenerallymorestringentthanthenationalstandards.ThepollutantsofgreatestconcernintheproposedprojectareaareCO;O3;andPM10andPM2.5,whichareinhalable.FederalandstateambientairqualitystandardsarepresentedinTable1.
Affected Environment
Theprimaryfactorsthatdetermineairqualityarethelocationsofsourcesofairpollutantsandtheamountofpollutantsemittedfromthosesources.Meteorologicalandtopographicalconditionsarealsoimportantfactors.Atmosphericconditionssuchaswindspeed,winddirection,andairtemperaturegradientsinteractwiththephysicalfeaturesofthelandscapetodeterminethemovementanddispersalofairpollutants.
Climate and Topography
Thearea’sclimateisconsidered“inlandMediterranean”andischaracterizedbywarm,drysummersandcoolwinters.Summerhightemperaturesoftenexceed100°F,averaginginthelow90sinthenorthernvalleyandhigh90sinthesouth.
AlthoughmarineairgenerallyflowsintothebasinfromtheSacramento–SanJoaquinRiverDelta,thesurroundingmountainrangesrestrictairmovementthroughandoutofthevalley.Windspeed
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐11
July 2013ICF 00237.13
anddirectioninfluencethedispersionandtransportationofozoneprecursors,PM10,PM2.5,andCO;themorewindflow,thelessaccumulationofthesepollutants.
TheverticaldispersionofairpollutantsintheSJVABislimitedbythepresenceofpersistenttemperatureinversion(warmairovercoolair).Becauseofdifferencesinairdensity,theairaboveandbelowtheinversiondoesnotmix.O3anditsprecursorswillmixandreacttoproducehigherconcentrationsunderaninversionandwilltrapdirectlyemittedpollutants,suchasCO.
Precipitationandfogtendtoreduceorlimitpollutantconcentrations.O3needssunlightforitsformation,andcloudsandfogblocktherequiredradiation.COisslightlywatersoluble,soprecipitationandfogtendtoreduceCOconcentrationsintheatmosphere.PM10issomewhat“washed”fromtheatmospherewithprecipitation.Annualprecipitationinthevalleydecreasesfromnorthtosouth,withabout20inchesinthenorth,10inchesinthemiddle,andlessthan6inchesinthesouthernpartofthevalley.
Criteria Pollutants
Airqualityisindicatedbyambientconcentrationsofthecriteriapollutants:O3,CO,NO2,SO2,Pb,PM10,andPM2.5.TheNAAQSandCAAQShavebeenestablishedforthesepollutants.O3,NO2,andPMaregenerallyconsideredtoberegionalpollutants,asthesepollutantsortheirprecursorsaffectairqualityonaregionalscale.PollutantssuchasCO,SO2,Pb,andPMareconsideredtobelocalpollutantsthattendtoaccumulateintheairinthesameregionwherethepollutantswereemitted.(Notethatparticulatematterisconsideredtobebothalocalandaregionalpollutant.)Intheprojectvicinity,O3,PM2.5,andPM10areconsideredpollutantsofconcern.Briefdescriptionsofthesepollutantsareprovidedbelow.Toxicaircontaminantsarealsodiscussedbelow,althoughnostateorfederalambientairqualitystandardsexistforthesepollutants.AcompletesummaryoftheCAAQSandNAAQSisprovidedinTable1.
Ozone
O3increasessusceptibilitytorespiratoryinfections,andisasevereeye,nose,andthroatirritant.Itisanoxidantthatcancauseextensivedamagetoplantsbyleafdiscolorationandcelldamage,andalsoattackssyntheticrubber,textiles,andothermaterials.O3isprimarilyasummerairpollutionproblem.Reactiveorganicgases(ROG)andoxidesofnitrogen(NOX)areO3precursorsmainlyemittedbymobilesources,suchaspassengervehicles,andstationarycombustionequipment.
Carbon Monoxide
COisapublichealthconcernbecauseitcombinesreadilywithhemoglobinandreducestheamountofoxygentransportedinthebloodstream.COcancausehealthproblemssuchasfatigue,headache,confusion,dizziness,andevendeath.MotorvehiclesarethedominantsourceofCOemissionsinmostareas.DataindicatethatlocalCOconcentrationsdonotapproachthestatestandards;however,COconcentrationsinthevicinityofcongestedintersectionsandfreewayswouldbeexpectedtobehigherthanthoserecordedatthemonitoringstation.COconcentrationsareexpectedtocontinuetodeclineintheSJVABbecauseofexistingcontrolsandprogramsandthecontinuedretirementofolder,higher‐pollutingvehicles.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐12
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Table 1. National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
CriteriaPollutant AverageTime CaliforniaStandards
NationalStandardsa
Primary Secondary
Ozone 1‐hour 0.09ppm None None
8–hour 0.070ppm 0.075ppm 0.075ppm
ParticulateMatter(PM10)
24‐hour 50g/m3 150g/m3 150g/m3
Annualmean 20g/m3 None None
FineParticulateMatter(PM2.5)
24‐hour None 35g/m3 35g/m3
Annualmean 12g/m3 15g/m3 15g/m3
CarbonMonoxide 8‐hour 9.0ppm 9ppm None
1‐hour 20ppm 35ppm None
NitrogenDioxide Annualmean 0.030ppm 0.053ppm 0.053ppm
1‐hour 0.18ppm 0.100ppm None
SulfurDioxide Annualmean None 0.030ppm None
24‐hour 0.04ppm 0.014ppm None
3‐hour None None 0.5ppm
1‐hour 0.25ppm 0.075ppm None
Lead 30‐dayAverage 1.5g/m3 None None
Calendarquarter None 1.5g/m3 1.5g/m3
3‐monthaverage None 0.15g/m3 0.15g/m3
Sulfates 24‐hour 25g/m3 None None
HydrogenSulfide 1‐hour 0.03ppm None None
VinylChloride 24‐hour 0.01ppm None None
Sources:CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2012.Notes:g/m3 = microgramspercubicmeterppm = partspermilliona Nationalstandardsaredividedintoprimaryandsecondarystandards.Primarystandardsareintendedtoprotectpublichealth,whereassecondarystandardsareintendedtoprotectpublicwelfareandtheenvironment.
Inhalable Particulates
Inhalableparticulates(PM10andPM2.5)candamagehumanhealthandretardplantgrowth.Particulatesalsoreducevisibilityandcorrodematerials.Healthconcernsassociatedwithsuspendedparticulatematterfocusonthoseparticlessmallenoughtoreachthelungswheninhaled.Particulateemissionsaregeneratedbyawidevarietyofsources,includingagriculturalactivities,industrialemissions,dustsuspendedbyvehicletrafficandconstructionequipment,andsecondaryaerosolsformedbyreactionsintheatmosphere.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxicaircontaminants(TACs)arepollutantswhichmaybeexpectedtoresultinanincreaseinmortalityorseriousillnessorwhichmayposeapresentorpotentialhazardtohumanhealth.Health
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐13
July 2013ICF 00237.13
effectsincludecancer,birthdefects,neurologicaldamage,damagetothebody’snaturaldefensesystem,anddiseasesthatleadtodeath.AlthoughAAQSexistforcriteriapollutants,nostandardsexistforTACs.ForTACsthatareknownorsuspectedcarcinogens,ARBhasconsistentlyfoundthattherearenolevelsorthresholdsbelowwhichexposureisrisk‐free.TheTACofmostconcernwithregardtotheproposedprojectisdieselexhaustparticulatematter.
Monitoring Data
Existingairqualityconditionsintheprojectareacanbecharacterizedintermsoftheambientairqualitystandardsthatthefederalandstategovernmentshaveestablishedforvariouspollutants(Table1)andbymonitoringdatacollectedintheregion.Monitoringdataconcentrationsaretypicallyexpressedintermsofpartspermillion(ppm)ormicrogramspercubicmeter(µg/m3).ThenearestairqualitymonitoringstationsinthevicinityoftheprojectareaaretheS‐CoffeeAvenueand2334MStreetmonitoringstations.TheS‐CoffeeAvenuestationmonitorsforO3,andthe2334MStreetstationmonitorsforPM10andPM2.5.NostationsmonitorforCOinMercedCounty.AirqualitymonitoringdatafromthesestationsaresummarizedinTable2.Thisdatarepresentsairqualitymonitoringdataforthelastthreeyears(2010–2012)forwhichcompletedataareavailable.
Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status
Areasareclassifiedaseitherattainmentornonattainmentbycomparingactualmonitoredairpollutantconcentrationstostateandfederalstandards.Ifapollutantconcentrationislowerthanthestateorfederalstandard,theareaisclassifiedasbeinginattainmentofthestandardforthatpollutant.Ifapollutantviolatesthestandard,theareaisconsideredanonattainmentarea.Ifdataareinsufficienttodeterminewhetherapollutantisviolatingthestandard,theareaisdesignatedunclassified.Areasthatwerepreviouslydesignatedasnonattainmentareasbuthavesubsequentlymetthestandardarecalledmaintenanceareas.
MercedCountyisclassifiedasbeinginseverenonattainmentfor1‐hourozoneandnonattainmentfor8‐hourozone,PM10,andPM2.5.TheStatehasclassifiedMercedCountyasbeinginattainmentforPb,NO2,SO2,andsulfates,andunclassifiedforCO,hydrogensulfide,andvisibility‐reducingparticles(CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2011a).
TheEPAhasclassifiedMercedCountyasbeinginnonattainmentfor8‐hourO3,PM2.5,andinattainmentforallotherpollutants(U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency2012).
Sensitive Receptors
Somepopulationgroups,suchaschildren,theelderly,andacutelyillandchronicallyillpersons,especiallythosewithcardio‐respiratorydiseases,areconsideredmoresensitivetoairpollutionthanothers.SJVAPCDgenerallydefinesasensitivereceptorasafacilitythathousesorattractschildren,theelderly,peoplewithillnesses,orotherswhoareespeciallysensitivetotheeffectsofairpollutants,andwherethereisareasonableexpectationofcontinuoushumanexposureaccordingtotheaveragingperiodfortheAAQS(e.g.,24‐hour,8‐hour,or1‐hour).Thenearestsensitivereceptorstotheexpansionsiteareresidenceslocatedapproximately2,000feetfromthesite.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐14
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Table 2. Annual Ambient Air Quality Data at Merced South Coffee Avenue and M Street Stations
PollutantStandards 2010 2011 2012Ozone—MercedSouthCoffeeAvenue Maximum1‐hourconcentration(ppm) 0.117 0.102 0.100 Maximum8‐hourconcentration(ppm)(StateStandard) 0.096 0.087 0.086Numberofdaysstandardexceededa CAAQS1‐hour(>0.09ppm) 7 2 2 CAAQS8‐hour(>0.09ppm) 31 41 25 NAAQS8‐hour(>0.08ppm) 14 19 9ParticulateMatter(PM10)b—MercedMStreet Nationalcmaximum24‐hourconcentration(g/m3) 93.4 73.9 89.4
Statedmaximum24‐hourconcentration(g/m3) 91.4 75.0 89.4
Nationalsecondhighestconcentration(g/m3) 53.4 70.4 60.4
Statesecondhighestconcentration(g/m3)e 53.8 73.0 60.6Numberofdaysstandardexceededa NAAQS24‐hour(>150g/m3)f 0.0 0.0 0.0 CAAQS24‐hour(>50g/m3)f 18.4 49.0 ‐
ParticulateMatter(PM2.5)b Nationalcmaximum24‐hourconcentration(g/m3) 46.9 43.5 48.4
Statedmaximum24‐hourconcentration(g/m3) 46.9 43.5 48.4
Nationalsecondhighestconcentration(g/m3) 39.1 38.5 41.8
Statesecondhighestconcentration(g/m3)e 39.1 38.5 41.8Numberofdaysstandardexceededa NAAQS24‐hour(>15g/m3)f 10.1 6.6 12.6 CAAQS24‐hour(>12g/m3)f ‐ ‐ ‐
NitrogenDioxide(CO) Statemaximum1‐hourconcentration(ppm) 0.050 0.051 ‐ Statesecond‐highest1‐hourconcentration(ppm) 0.045 0.046 ‐ Annualaverageconcentration(ppm) 0.007 0.007 ‐Numberofdaysstandardexceededa CAAQS1‐hour(0.18ppm) 0 0 0
Source:CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2013.Notes: CAAQS = Californiaambientairqualitystandards. NAAQS = nationalambientairqualitystandards. – = insufficientdataavailabletodeterminethevalue. ppm = partspermillion. g/m3 = microgramspercubicmeter.a Anexceedanceisnotnecessarilyaviolation.b Measurementsusuallyarecollectedevery6days.c Nationalstatisticsarebasedonstandardconditionsdata.Inaddition,nationalstatisticsarebasedonsamplersusingfederalreferenceorequivalentmethods.
d Statestatisticsarebasedonlocalconditionsdata,exceptintheSouthCoastAirBasin,forwhichstatisticsarebasedonstandardconditionsdata.Inaddition,StatestatisticsarebasedonCaliforniaapprovedsamplers.
e Statecriteriaforensuringthatdataaresufficientlycompleteforcalculatingvalidannualaveragesaremorestringentthanthenationalcriteria.
f Mathematicalestimateofhowmanydaysconcentrationswouldhavebeenmeasuredashigherthanthelevelofthestandardhadeachdaybeenmonitored.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐15
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Significance Criteria
SJVAPCD Thresholds
AppendixGintheCEQAGuidelinesstatesthatthesignificancecriteriaestablishedbytheapplicableairqualitymanagementorairpollutioncontroldistrictmaybereliedupontodeterminetheproject’slevelofimpact.
SJVAPCD’spublishedguidelines,GuideforAssessingandMitigatingAirQualityImpacts(Guide)(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2002),donotrequirethequantificationofconstructionemissions.Rather,itrequiresimplementationofeffectiveandcomprehensivefeasiblecontrolmeasurestoreducePM10emissions(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2002).SJVAPCDconsidersPM10emissionstobethepollutantofgreatestconcernwhenassessingconstruction‐relatedairqualityimpactsandhasdeterminedthatcompliancewithitsRegulationVIII,includingimplementationofallfeasiblecontrolmeasuresspecifiedintheGuide(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2002),constitutessufficientmitigationtoreduceconstruction‐relatedPM10emissionstoless‐than‐significantlevelsandminimizeadverseairqualityeffects.AllconstructionprojectsmustabidebyRegulationVIII.SincethepublicationoftheGuide,theDistricthasrevisedsomeoftherulescomprisingRegulationVIII.GuidancefromDistrictstaffindicatesthatimplementationofadustcontrolplanwouldsatisfyalloftherequirementsofSJVAPCDRegulationVIII(Siongpers.comm.).FurtherconsultationwithSJVAPCDstaffindicatesthat,thoughexplicitthresholdsforconstruction‐relatedemissionsofozoneprecursorsarenotenumeratedintheGuide,theSJVAPCDconsidersasignificantimpacttooccurwhenconstructionemissionsofROGorNOXexceed10tonsperyearorifPM10orPM2.5emissionsexceed15tonsperyear(Siongpers.comm.).
Accordingly,theSJVAPCD’sthresholdsofsignificanceusedinthisanalysis,asindicatedintheGuideandthroughconsultationwithSJVAPCDstaff,aresummarizedbelow.
Projectimplementationwouldproduceemissionsincreasesgreaterthan10tons/yearROG.
Projectimplementationwouldproduceemissionsincreasesgreaterthan10tons/yearNOX.
Projectimplementationwouldproduceemissionsincreasesgreaterthan15tons/yearPM10.
Projectimplementationwouldproduceemissionsincreasesgreaterthan15tons/yearPM2.5
TheproposedprojecttoconstructadditionalexpandedfacilitiesatGalloWinerywillresultinbothconstruction‐andoperations‐relatedemissions.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
Aprojectisdeemedinconsistentwithairqualityplansifitwouldresultinpopulationand/oremploymentgrowththatexceedsgrowthestimatesincludedintheapplicableairqualityplan,which,inturn,wouldgenerateemissionsnotaccountedforintheapplicableairqualityplanemissionsbudget.Therefore,proposedprojectsneedtobeevaluatedtodeterminewhethertheywouldgeneratepopulationandemploymentgrowthand,ifso,whetherthatgrowthwouldexceedthegrowthratesincludedintherelevantairplans.
AsdiscussedinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MNDfortheGalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansion,165to400employeesworkattheGalloWineryfacilityduringoff‐crushandcrush
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐16
July 2013ICF 00237.13
seasons,respectively.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldrequirehiring12additionalemployeesatthefacility,whichwouldcauseapproximately3–7%growthinemployment.ThisgrowthinemploymentwouldbeconsistentwiththecountywidegrowthmetricusedinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND,19%forthe“TotalNonfarm”category,fromtheMercedCountyGeneralPlan(MercedCounty1990).Consequently,emissionsassociatedwiththeadditionof12employeeswouldnotconflictwiththeSJVAPCD’s2007OzonePlan.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:b
ThepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisdeterminedthatemissionsassociatedwithconstructionandoperationalactivitywouldnotexceedtheSJVAPCDthresholdsaftermitigationandoffsets.TheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedexpansionoftheGallofacilitywouldresultinconstructionemissionsthatwerenotanalyzedinthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysis.EmissionsassociatedwiththeadditionalconstructionactivityweredeterminedusingstandardemissionfactorsandassumptionsfromCalEEModandEMFAC2011models.Emissionsassociatedwiththeadditionalvehicletripsthatwouldresultfromthehiringof12additionalemployeeswereestimatedusingtheCalEEModemissionsmodel.EmissionsfromtheconstructionandoperationalphaseswerecomparedseparatelytoSJVAPCDthresholdstoassesswhetherimpactsonairqualitywouldoccurasaresultoftheproposedproject.
Construction Emissions
Emissionsassociatedwithprojectconstructionwouldincludeexhaustandfugitivedustandresultfromenergyconsumptionandmobilesources.Constructionactivitiesassociatedwiththeproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldoccurin2014andbeinadditiontotheongoingconstructionactivitiesanalyzedinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND,whichwouldcontinueovera3‐5yearperiod.EmissionsresultingfromconstructionoftheproposedprojectareshowninTable3.
Table 3. Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Construction Activities by Phase (tons per year)
Constructionphase ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
SitePreparation 0.10 1.04 0.49 0.15 0.19
GradingandUtilities 0.14 1.39 0.67 0.51 0.24
TankConstruction 0.23 2.16 1.12 0.08 0.08
ProcessPiping 0.09 0.82 0.59 0.07 0.05
ConcretePaving 0.01 0.12 0.04 0.00 0.00
Total 0.57 5.53 2.91 0.81 0.56
SJVAPCDthreshold 10 10 NA 15 15
AsindicatedinTable3,constructionemissionsfromtheproposedprojectwouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholdsforROG,NOX,PM10,orPM2.5.Asdiscussedabove,thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisdeterminedthatemissionsassociatedwithconstructionactivitywouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholds.Further,whencombinedwiththepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisemissions,emissionsfromtheproposedprojectwouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholds.Althoughemissionsdonotexceedthresholds,theprojectwouldneedtocomplywithSJVAPCDRegulationVIIIasdiscussedabove.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureAIR‐1,fromthe2011IS/MNDwouldsatisfythisrequirement
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐17
July 2013ICF 00237.13
2011MitigationMeasureAIR‐1:Prepareandimplementadustcontrolplan.
Tocontrolthegenerationofconstruction‐relatedPM10emissions,theCountywillrequireconstructioncontractorstoprepareadustcontrolplanandsubmitittotheSJVAPCDatleast48hoursbeforeanyearthmovingorconstructionactivities.Aspreviouslyindicated,implementationofadustcontrolplanwouldsatisfytherequirementsofRegulationVIII(Siongpers.comm.).Potentialmeasuresthatmightbeincludedinthedustcontrolplancouldinclude,butarenotlimitedto,thefollowing.
Pre‐activity.
Pre‐watertheworksiteandphaseworktoreducetheamountofdisturbedsurfaceareaatanyonetime.
Activeoperations.
Applywatertodryareasduringleveling,grading,trenching,andearthmovingactivities.
Constructandmaintainwindbarriersandapplywaterordustsuppressantstothedisturbedsurfaceareas.
Inactiveoperations,includingafter‐workhours,weekends,andholidays.
Applywaterordustsuppressantsondisturbedsurfaceareastoformavisiblecrust,andrestrictvehicleaccesstomaintainthevisiblecrust.
Temporarystabilizationofareasthatremainunusedfor7ormoredays.
Restrictvehicularaccessandapplyandmaintainwaterordustsuppressantsonallun‐vegetatedareas.
Establishvegetationonallpreviouslydisturbedareas.
Applygravelandmaintainatallpreviouslydisturbedareas.
Pavepreviouslydisturbedareas.
Unpavedaccessandhaulroads,trafficandequipmentstorageareas.
Applywaterordustsuppressantstounpavedhaulandaccessroads.
Postaspeedlimitofnotmorethan15milesperhour,usingsignsateachentranceandagainevery500feet.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedtovehicletrafficandequipmentstorageareas.
Windevents.
Waterapplicationequipmentwillapplywatertocontrolfugitivedustduringwindevents,unlessunsafetodoso.
Outdoorconstructionactivitiesthatdisturbthesoilwillceasewhenevervisibledustemissionscannotbeeffectivelycontrolled.
Outdoorhandlingofbulkmaterials.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedwhenhandlingbulkmaterials.
Windbarrierswithlessthan50%porositywillbeinstalledandmaintained,andwaterordustsuppressantswillbeapplied.
Outdoorstorageofbulkmaterials.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedtostoragepiles.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐18
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Storagepileswillbecoveredwithtarps,plastic,orothersuitablematerialandanchoredinamannerthatpreventsthecoverfrombeingremovedbywindaction.
Windbarrierswithlessthan50%porositywillbeinstalledandmaintainedaroundthestoragepiles,andwaterordustsuppressantswillbeapplied.
Athree‐sidedstructurewithlessthan50%porositythatisatleastashighasthestoragepileswillbeused.
Onsitetransportingofbulkmaterials.
Vehiclespeedwillbelimitedontheworksite.
Allhaultruckswillbeloadedsuchthatthefreeboardisnotlessthan6incheswhentransportedacrossanypavedpublicaccessroad.
Asufficientamountofwaterwillbeappliedtothetopoftheloadtolimitvisibledustemissions.
Haultruckswillbecoveredwithatarporothersuitablecover.
Offsitetransportingofbulkmaterials.
Theinteriorofemptiedtruckcargocompartmentswillbecleanedorcoveredbeforeleavingthesite.
Spillageorlossofbulkmaterialsfromholesorotheropeningsinthecargocompartment’sfloor,sides,andtailgateswillbeprevented.
Outdoortransportusingachuteorconveyor:
Noopenchutesorconveyorswillbeused.
Chutesorconveyorswillbefullyenclosed.
Watersprayequipmentwillbeusedtosufficientlywetthematerials.
Transportedmaterialswillbewashedorscreenedtoremovefines(PM10orsmaller).
Operational Emissions
OperationalactivityassociatedwiththefacilityafterimplementationoftheproposedmodificationwouldbelargelyunchangedfromthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND.Theonlychangeinoperationalactivityistheadditionof12vehicletrips(roundtrips)perdayresultingfromthe12employeesthatwouldbehiredtosupporttheproposedrevisions.AsshowninTable4,emissionsresultingfromtheincreaseinemployeesareminoranddonotexceedtheSJVAPCDthresholdsforNOX,CO,PM10,andPM2.5.Asdiscussedabove,thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisdeterminedthatemissionsassociatedwithoperationalactivitywouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholdsaftermitigationandoffsets.Operationalemissionsfromtheproposedproject(vehicletripsassociatedwiththe12newemployees),whencombinedwiththeoperationalemissionsfromthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysis,wouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholds.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐19
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Table 4. Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions Associated with 12 Additional Employees
EmissionSource
EmissionsatFullProjectBuildout(2015)(TonsperYear)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
12NewEmployees 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0
SJVAPCDThreshold 10 10 NA 15 15
Note: 2015projectbuildoutisaconservativeassumption.Shouldbuildoutoccurlater,emissionswouldbelower.
BecauseconstructionandoperationemissionswouldnotexceedSJVAPCDthresholdsorsubstantiallycontributetoanexceedancefromthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND,thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:c
TheSJVAPCD’sCEQAGuidelinesindicatethataviolationoftheSJVAPCD’sconstructionoroperationalthresholdsofsignificancewouldresultinaproject‐levelandcumulativeimpact.Inaddition,theSJVAPCDhasdeterminedthatcompliancewiththedustcontrolrequirementsofSVAPCDRegulationVIIIissufficienttomitigatecumulativefugitivedustimpactstoaless‐thansignificantlevel(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2002).Asdiscussedabove,theproposedprojectwouldnotcreateasignificantairqualityimpactafterimplementationofMitigationMeasureAIR‐1.Nocumulativelyconsiderablenetincreaseofanycriteriapollutantwouldoccur,andthisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificantwithimplementationofMitigationMeasureAIR‐1.
Checklistitem:d
Theproposedprojectwouldinvolvetheuseofdiesel‐poweredconstructionequipment,resultingindieselexhaustduringconstructionactivities.In1998,ARBidentifieddieselexhaustasaTAC.Cancerhealthrisksassociatedwithexposurestodieselexhausttypicallyareassociatedwithchronicexposure,inwhicha70‐yearexposureperiodisoftenassumed.Althoughelevatedcancerratescanresultfromexposureperiodsoflessthan70years,acuteexposure(i.e.,exposureperiodsof2to3years)todieselexhausttypicallyisnotanticipatedtoresultinanincreasedhealthriskbecauseittypicallydoesnotresultintheexposureconcentrationsnecessarytoresultinahealthrisk.Healthimpactsassociatedwithexposuretodieselexhaustfromprojectconstructionarenotanticipatedtobesignificantbecauseconstructionactivitiesareexpectedtolastoveraperiodof2years,wellbelowthe70‐yearexposureperiodusedinhealthriskassessments,andthenearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedapproximately2,000feetfromtheexpansionsite.Consequently,theexposureperiodofdieselexhausttothenearestsensitivereceptorswouldnotresultinanelevatedcancerrisk.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:e
Theproposedprojectmaycauseincreasedtemporary,dieselexhaust‐relatedodors.However,anyodorswouldceaseafterconstructioniscompleted.Twelveadditionalemployeeswouldbehiredaspartoftheproposedproject,whichwouldresultinadditionalvehicletrips.However,lightdutyvehiclesarenottypicallyassociatedwithobjectionableodors.Proposedchangestothepreviouslyapprovedprojectwouldnotchangetheproductionprocess,facilityuse,oroperationsoftheprojectandarenotanticipatedtoresultinodorimpacts.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐20
July 2013ICF 00237.13
TheSJVAPCD’sGuideforAssessingandMitigatingAirQualityImpactsspecifiesthatasignificantodorimpactwouldresultifmorethanoneconfirmedodorcomplaintperyearisreceivedorthreeunconfirmedodorcomplaintsarereceivedperyearwhenaveragedovera3‐yearperiod(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2002).BecauseoftheSJVAPCD’sdiscretionaryapprovalpoweroverthepreviousGalloWineryexpansionanalysisthroughitsPermitsRequiredRule(Rule2010)andNewandModifiedStationarySourceReviewRule(Rule2201),theSJVAPCDpreparedaletterforthepreviouslyapprovedEastsideExpansionanalysisonSeptember2,2011thatindicatedthattherehavebeennocomplaintsreceivedagainstthefacilityandthatnosignificantodorimpactsareanticipatedtooccur.Becauseconstructionactivitiesfortheproposedprojectwouldbetemporary,andoperationalactivitiesfortheproposedprojectwouldnotchangefromthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysis,odorimpactswouldnotdiffersubstantiallyfromthepreviousIS/MND.Consequently,thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐21
July 2013ICF 00237.13
IV.BiologicalResources
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Haveasubstantialadverseeffect,eitherdirectlyorthroughhabitatmodifications,onanyspeciesidentifiedasacandidate,sensitive,orspecial‐statusspeciesinlocalorregionalplans,policies,orregulations,orbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGameorU.S.FishandWildlifeService?
b. Haveasubstantialadverseeffectonanyriparianhabitatorothersensitivenaturalcommunityidentifiedinlocalorregionalplans,policies,orregulations,orbytheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGameorU.S.FishandWildlifeService?
c. HaveasubstantialadverseeffectonfederallyprotectedwetlandsasdefinedbySection404oftheCleanWaterAct(including,butnotlimitedto,marshes,vernalpools,coastalwetlands,etc.)throughdirectremoval,filling,hydrologicalinterruption,orothermeans?
d. Interferesubstantiallywiththemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfishorwildlifespeciesorwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,orimpedetheuseofnativewildlifenurserysites?
e. Conflictwithanylocalpoliciesorordinancesprotectingbiologicalresources,suchasatreepreservationpolicyorordinance?
f. Conflictwiththeprovisionsofanadoptedhabitatconservationplan,naturalcommunityconservationplan,orotherapprovedlocal,regional,orstatehabitatconservationplan?
Affected Environment
Theaffectedenvironmentfortheprojectischangedbytheadditionof2acrestotheprojectsiteasdescribedinChapter2,ProjectDescription.Thediscussionofbiologicalresourcespresentonthe2acresandsurroundingareasandpotentialprojectimpactsontheseresourcesisbasedonthe2011EastsideExpansionIS/MNDandaJune18,2013sitevisit.
ICFreviewedthefollowingsourcestoidentifysensitivehabitatsandspecial‐statusplantandanimalspeciesthatareknowntooccurorwithpotentialtooccuratthe2‐acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteareaanditssurroundings.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐22
July 2013ICF 00237.13
ArecordssearchoftheCaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabasefortheTurlockandeightsurroundingU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)7.5‐minutequadrangles(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013).
AsearchoftheCaliforniaNativePlantSociety’s(CNPS)onlineInventoryofRareandEndangeredPlants(CaliforniaNativePlantSociety2013).
TheU.S.FishandWildlifeService(USFWS)listofendangered,threatened,andcandidatespeciesfortheTurlockUSGS7.5‐minutequadrangle(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2013).
BiologicalAssessmentfortheLivingstonWineryProposedExpansionProject(KjeldsonBiologicalConsulting,August2011)
E.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionInitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration(ICF2011).
Areconnaissance‐levelfieldsurveywasconductedbyICFbiologistAngelaAlcalaonJune18,2013.Existingsiteconditionswereusedtoidentifyhabitatthatcouldpotentiallysupportspecial‐statusspecies.Notreesarepresentwithinthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Nearbytreeswerescannedwithbinocularstolookforoccupiedraptornestsorraptoractivity.Aerialphotoswerereviewedtoassessthehabitatsurroundingthesiteandthepotentialforwildlifecorridorsfromadjoiningpropertiesontoorthroughthesite.PresenceofwetlandswasdeterminedusingtheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers’identificationmethods.
The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteiswithinanagriculturalfieldthatwasfallowatthetimeoftheJune18,2013sitevisitbuthashistoricallybeenusedforgrowingrowcropsandvineyard.Thesubstratehasahighsandcontentandvegetationcoverwithinthisareawasmoderate(approximately50%)anddominatedbyweedyplantspecies,predominantlyamaranth(Amaranthussp.)(Figure5).SurroundinglandusesincludetheexistingGallofacilityandparkingareatothewestandnorth,andvineyard,rowcrops,andfallowagriculturalfieldstothesouthandeast.
Nospecial‐statusspeciesorsensitiveresourceshavebeenpreviouslydocumentedonthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Neitherthe2acresnortheimmediatesurroundingscontainriparian,seasonalwetland,orvernalpoolhabitat.ThenearestaquaticresourceistheMercedRiver,locatedapproximately0.5miletothenorth.TheripariancorridoroftheMercedRiverisanimportantwildlifecorridorthroughtheregion.The2acresisnotlocatedwithinthecorridor,andprojectimplementationwouldnotresultinthedegradationofhabitatqualityinthecorridor.
TheJune18,2013fieldsurveydidnotlocateanyspecial‐statusspecies,includingactivebirdorraptornests,onthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.However,aSwainson’shawk(statethreatenedspecies)wasobservedsoaringoverandforagingadjacenttothesite.Numeroussmallmammalburrows(primarilygopherandmice/vole)wereobservedthroughoutthe2‐acresandraptorspecies,includingSwainson’shawk,arelikelytoforageonthesite.Theclosestpotentialnesttreesarelocatedmorethan0.25miletotheeast.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDidentifiedpotentiallysignificantimpactsrelatedtoremovalofnestingorbreedinghabitatsforSwainson’shawk,anddisturbanceofasinglenativevalleyoaklocated
Figure 5Representative Photographs of the 2-Acre Revision Site
Gra
phic
s …
007
02.1
1 (7
-11-
13)
Photo 1. Looking north from south end of site (June 18, 2013).
Photo 2. Looking west toward existing Gallo facility (June 18, 2013).
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐23
July 2013ICF 00237.13
adjacenttotheproperty.The2011reportconcludedthatthesepotentialimpactscouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevelwiththemitigationmeasuresincludedintheCEQAdocumentfortheproject.
Theproposedchangestotheapprovedprojectwouldresultintheremovalofapproximately2acresofexistingruderalhabitat.Historicintensiveagriculturalusesonthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitehavedisturbedthelandsuchthatnosensitivehabitats(i.e.,wetlands,riparian,oakwoodlands)orhabitatsthatcouldsupportspecial‐statusplantsremainonthesiteorinitsimmediatesurroundings.Somespecial‐statuswildlifespecieshaveadaptedtodisturbedhabitatswhensuitableconditionsforbreedingand/orforagingexist.Ifgroundsquirrelburrowsorotherundergroundrefugiaarepresent,ruderalandfallowagriculturallandsmayprovidebreedingandwinteringhabitatforburrowingowls,astatespeciesofspecialconcern,aswellasotherground‐nestingmigratorybirds.Ruderalhabitatsmayalsoprovideforagingareasforraptors,includingthestatelistedSwainson’shawk,ifasufficientpreybaseispresent.
AtthetimeoftheJune18,2013fieldsurvey,noburrowingowlsorpotentialwinteringornestingsites(i.e.,groundsquirrelburrows,debrispiles,orculverts)forburrowingowlswereobservedonoradjacenttothe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Ruderalhabitatonthesitecouldsupportothernestingmigratorybirds,althoughnoactivebirdnestswereobservedduringtheJune2013survey.Ifconstructionoftheproposedprojectoccursduringthenestingseasonformigratorybirds(generallyMarch1throughAugust31),grounddisturbance(includinggrading)couldresultinthedestructionofactivenestswitheggsoryoung.DestructionofanactivemigratorybirdnestorlossofeggsoryoungwouldviolatetheMigratoryBirdTreatyAct(MBTA).
BasedontheproximityoftheMercedRiverripariancorridorandlargetreesscatteredthroughoutthenearbyagriculturalsetting,Swainson’shawkscouldnestinthevicinityofthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Theclosestpotentialnesttreesaremorethan0.25milefromthesiteandbasedonexistingnoiseandequipmentdisturbancesassociatedwiththeadjacentGallofacility,constructionandoperationoftheproposedprojectarenotanticipatedtodisturbnestingSwainson’shawks.However,removalofsuitableSwainson’shawkforaginghabitatcouldaffectactivelynestingSwainson’shawksinthe(withina10‐mileradius)becauseforaginghabitatisalimitedresourceinthisarea.OneSwainson’shawkwasobservedforagingjustnorthofthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandtheclosestdocumentedSwainson’shawknestisapproximately2.1milessouthwestfromthesite(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013).Swainson’shawkisaprotectedspeciesundertheCaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct(CESA).ImpactsonthisspecieswouldbeinviolationofCESAandresultinpotentiallysignificantimpacts.
Theadditionoftheproposed2‐acrestotheprojectsite,andconstructionandoperationonthatsitewouldnotinvolvetheremovalordisturbanceofanytrees.However,itwouldreducepotentialground‐nestingbirdhabitatandSwainson’shawkforaginghabitatbyanadditional2‐acres.WithimplementationofthefollowingtwonewMitigationMeasures:BIO‐3andBIO‐4,potentialimpactsonnestingmigratorybirdsandforagingSwainson’shawkwouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3:Conductapreconstructionground‐nestingbirdsurveyandestablishno‐disturbancebuffers,ifnecessary.
Anestingbirdsurveywillbeconductedbyaqualifiedbiologistnomorethan15dayspriortocommencingconstructionworkduringthenestingseason(generallyMarch1toAugust31).Thesurveywillencompassthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandatleast200feet
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐24
July 2013ICF 00237.13
tothesouthandeastwithinundevelopedareasadjacenttothe2‐acres.Anadditionalsurveywillbeconductedpriortothestartofanewphaseorwheneverthereisabreakof15daysormoreduringthenestingseason.
Ifthepreconstructionsurveyindicatesthepresenceofmigratorybirdnestsinanyareasthatwouldbedirectlyaffectedbyvegetationremoval,constructionactivities,oranyotherground‐disturbingactivities,ano‐disturbancebufferwillbeestablishedbythebiologistaroundthenestingsite.Factorsdeterminingthebuffersizetypicallyincludethelevelofnoiseorconstructiondisturbance,lineofsightbetweenthenestandthedisturbance,ambientlevelsofnoiseandotherdisturbancesinthearea,andothertopographicalorartificialbarriers.Thesefactorswillbeanalyzedinordertomakeanappropriatedecisiononbufferdistances.Thedistance,extent,andnatureofthebufferswillbedeterminedbyaqualifiedwildlifebiologistcoordinatingwithanyapplicableregulatoryagencies(e.g.,CDFW,USFWS).
Toavoiddisturbanceordestructionofanestingsite,noconstructionwilloccurwithintheno‐disturbancebufferuntilafterthebreedingseason,oruntilaqualifiedwildlifebiologistdeterminesthattheyounghavefledged.AreportsummarizingthesurveyresultswillbesubmittedtoMercedCountyandapplicableregulatoryagencies.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4:CompensateforlossofSwainson’shawkforaginghabitat
Theproposedprojectwillresultinthepermanentlossof2.0acresofsuitableSwainson’shawkforaginghabitat.Theclosestknownnestislocatedapproximately2.1milesfromthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.
TheMercedCountyPlanningDepartmenthasdevelopedastandardSwainson’shawkmitigationmeasurethat,whenimplemented,willmitigateforthelossofsuitableforaginghabitat.Compensationforthepermanentlossofforaginghabitatisbasedonthedistancefromthenearestnest,asprovidedinthetablebelow.DistancefromProjectBoundaryMitigationAcreageRatioa
Within1mile 1.00:1b
Between1and5miles 0.75:1a Ratiomeans[acresofmitigationland]to[acresofforaginghabitatimpacted].b Thisratioshallbe0.5:1iftheacquiredlandscanbeactivelymanagedforpreyproduction.
CompensationcanbeprovidedthroughfeetitleacquisitionorconservationeasementacquisitionofcomparableforaginghabitatwithimplementationofaCounty‐approvedhabitatmanagementplan.Alternatively,mitigationcreditsmaybepurchasedfromaCounty‐approvedmitigationbankforSwainson’shawkforaginghabitatinMercedCounty.AnoffsitehabitatmitigationplandescribingthemethodofcompensationmustbesubmittedtotheMercedCountyPlanningDepartmentwithin30daysofitsexecutionorpriortothestartofconstruction‐relatedactivities,whicheverisearlier.
Checklistitem:b,c,d
TheproposedchangesintheprojectwillnotresultinanimpactonpotentialwatersoftheU.S.orwatersofthestate(includingvernalpools),riparianvegetation,nativetrees,orothersensitivenaturalcommunitiesbecausetheseresourcesarenotpresentonoradjacenttothe2acresproposed
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐25
July 2013ICF 00237.13
tobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Habitatonthatareaalsodoesnotsupportestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridorsandthereforetheproposedprojectwillnotinterferesubstantiallywiththemovementofanynativeresidentormigratoryfishorwildlifespecies.Noimpactswouldoccurfromtheproposedproject.
Checklistitems:e,f
MercedCountyhasnotadoptedanylanduseregulationsprovidingforprotectionofspecificbiologicalresources,relyinginsteaduponauthorityprovidedthroughstateregulations.Theproposedprojectisnotcoveredunderanexistinghabitatconservationplanornaturalcommunityconservationplan,andthereforewouldnotconflictwithanypoliciesorplansprotectingbiologicalresources.Noimpactswouldoccurfromtheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐26
July 2013ICF 00237.13
V.CulturalResources
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. CauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricalresourceasdefinedinSection15064.5?
b. CauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresourcepursuanttoSection15064.5?
c. Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries?
Affected Environment
Thediscussionofculturalresourcesforthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandsurroundingareasandpotentialprojectimpactsontheseresourcesisbasedonthe2011EastsideExpansionIS/MNDandaJune18,2013sitevisit.
ICFreviewedthefollowingsourcestoidentifyculturalresourcesattheexpansionsiteanditssurroundings.
ArecordssearchoftheCaliforniaHistoricResourcesInformationSystematCaliforniaStateUniversity,Stanislaus,inTurlock.
ConsultationwiththeNativeAmericanHeritageCommission(NAHC)andlocalNativeAmericanrepresentatives.
TomOriger&Associates.2011.ACulturalResourcesSurveyfortheGalloWineryExpansionProject,18000RiverRoad,Livingston,MercedCounty,California(TomOriger&Associates2011).
E.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionInitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration(ICF2011).
Pre‐fieldresearchindicatedthatnopreviouslyrecordedculturalresourcesarelocatedintheprojectareaorwithinone‐halfmileoftheprojectarea.TheNAHCsearchofthesacredlandsfilefailedtoindicatethepresenceofanyresourcesofconcerntoNativeAmericans.
AfieldsurveywasconductedbyICFarchaeologistShahiraAshkaronJune18,2013.The2acreareaproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteiswithinanagriculturalfieldthatwasfallowatthetimeoftheJune18,2013sitevisitbuthashistoricallybeenusedforgrowingrowcropsandgrapes.Groundsurfacevisibilitywasgood,rangingfrom75%to90%.Theareawasheavilydisturbedbyagriculturalactivitiesovertheyears.Noculturalresourceswerenotedintheprojectareaduringthesurvey.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐27
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
Asdiscussedabove,norecordedsignificanthistoricalresourcesarelocatedintheprojectareaorontheexpansionsite.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpactontheimportanceofsuchresourcesasaresultofprojectconstructionoroperation.
Checklistitem:b
Theproposedprojectwouldbebuiltinthealready‐disturbedareaoftheexistingfacility,andasdiscussedpreviously,basedontheculturalresourcesurveyandassessmentitwasdeterminedthatnoknownculturalresourcesarelocatedontheexpansionsite.However,itispossiblethatsignificantburiedarchaeologicalmaterialsarepresentontheproposedexpansionsite.Ground‐disturbingactivitiesassociatedwithproject‐relatedconstructionmayresultindisturbanceordestructionoftheseresources.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofthefollowingmitigationmeasures,adoptedfortheprojectasapartofthepreviousIS/MND,wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
2011MitigationMeasureCR‐1:StopWorkifburiedculturaldepositsareencounteredduringconstructionactivities.
Ifburiedculturalresourcessuchaschippedorgroundstone,historicdebris,orbuildingfoundationsareinadvertentlydiscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities,workwillstopinthatareaandwithina100‐footradiusofthefinduntilaqualifiedarchaeologistcanassessthesignificanceofthefindand,ifnecessary,developaResponsePlan,withappropriatetreatmentmeasures,inconsultationwiththeCounty,theStateHistoricPreservationOfficer(SHPO),andotherappropriateagenciesandotherappropriateagencies.PreservationinplaceshallbethepreferredtreatmentmethodperCEQAGuidelinessec.15126.4(b)(avoidance,openspace,capping,easement).Datarecoveryofimportantinformationabouttheresource,research,orotheractionsdeterminedduringconsultation,isallowedifistheonlyfeasibletreatmentmethod.
Checklistitem:c
Noknownhumanremainsarepresentwithintheexpansionsite.However,itispossiblethatconstructionactivitieswouldresultinthediscoveryofhumanremains.Thispotentialimpactisconsideredsignificant.Theimpactwouldbereducedtoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyimplementationofMitigationMeasureCR‐2. Baseduponimplementationofthemitigationmeasuresadoptedin2011forthisproposedproject,noadditionalmitigationsarenecessary.
2011MitigationMeasureCR‐2:StopWorkifHumanRemainsAreEncounteredDuringConstructionActivities.
Ifhumanskeletalremainsareencountered,grounddisturbingactivitiesstopwithina100‐footradiusofthediscovery.TheCountycoronermustbecontactedimmediatelyandisrequiredtoexaminethediscoverywithin48hours.IftheCountyCoronerdeterminesthattheremainsareNativeAmerican,theCoronerisrequiredtocontacttheNativeAmericanHeritageCommission(NAHC)within24hours.Aqualifiedarchaeologist(QA)shouldalsobecontactedimmediately.TheCoronerisrequiredtonotifyandseekoutatreatmentrecommendationoftheNAHC‐designatedMostLikelyDescendant(MLD).
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐28
July 2013ICF 00237.13
IftheNAHCidentifiesanMLD,andtheMLDmakesarecommendation,andthelandowneracceptstherecommendation,thenground–disturbingactivitiesmayresumeaftertheQAverifiesandnoticestheCountythattherecommendationshavebeencompleted.
IftheNAHCisunabletoidentifytheMLDortheMLDmakesnorecommendation,orthelandownerrejectstherecommendation,andmediationperPRC5094.98(k)fails,thengrounddisturbingactivitiesmayresume,butonlyaftertheQAverifiesandnoticestheCountythatthelandownerhascompletelyreinterredthehumanremainsanditemsassociatedwithNativeAmericanburialswithappropriatedignityontheproperty,andensuresnofurtherdisturbanceofthesiteperPRC5097.98(e)bycountyrecording,openspacedesignationoraconservationeasement.
IfthecoronerdeterminesthatnoinvestigationofthecauseofdeathisrequiredandthatthehumanremainsarenotNativeAmerican,thenground–disturbingactivitiesmayresume,aftertheCoronerinformstheCountofMercedofsuchdetermination.Accordingtostatelaw,sixormorehumanburialsatonelocationconstituteacemeteryanddisturbanceofNativeAmericancemeteriesisafelony.Refs:PORCsecs.21083.2,5094.98,5097.5,5097.9;H&Ssec.7050.5,7052.
WithimplementationofMitigationMeasureCR‐2,impactswouldbelessthansignificant.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐29
July 2013ICF 00237.13
VI.GeologyandSoils
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseeffects,includingtheriskofloss,injury,ordeathinvolving:
1. Ruptureofaknownearthquakefault,asdelineatedonthemostrecentAlquist‐PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningMapissuedbytheStateGeologistfortheareaorbasedonothersubstantialevidenceofaknownfault?RefertoDivisionofMinesandGeologySpecialPublication42.
2. Strongseismicgroundshaking?
3. Seismic‐relatedgroundfailure,includingliquefaction?
4. Landslides?
b. Resultinsubstantialsoilerosionorthelossoftopsoil?
c. Belocatedonageologicunitorsoilthatisunstableorthatwouldbecomeunstableasaresultoftheprojectandpotentiallyresultinanonsiteoroffsitelandslide,lateralspreading,subsidence,liquefaction,orcollapse?
d. Belocatedonexpansivesoil,asdefinedinTable18‐1‐BoftheUniformBuildingCode(1994),creatingsubstantialriskstolifeorproperty?
e. Havesoilsincapableofadequatelysupportingtheuseofseptictanksoralternativewastewaterdisposalsystemsinareaswheresewersarenotavailableforthedisposalofwastewater?
f. Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicfeature?
Affected Environment
AReportGeotechnicalInvestigationbyBauerAssociatesinOctober2011(BauerAssociates2011)waspreparedforthe2011IS/MNDandwasupdatedin2013toincorporatetheproposed2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite(AppendixA).Theconditionofthesoilandstabilityofthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteisthesameasdescribedinthe2011IS/MNDfortherestoftheexpansionproject.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐30
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsongeologyandsoils,andnomitigationwasrequired.Theproposed2‐acremodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialadverseeffectsduetoruptureofaknownearthquakefaultbecauseitisnotlocatedonornearaknownfault.Theproposedmodificationalsowouldnotexposepeopleorstructurestopotentialadverseeffectsduetoseismic‐relatedlandslide,becauseitisnotinanareasubjecttolandslide.
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectcouldexposepeopleandstructurestopotentialadverseeffectsduetostrongseismicgroundshakingandseismic‐relatedsoildensification.However,allstructureswillbedesignedandbuilttocomplywithMercedCountybuildingstandards,andinaccordancewithrecommendationsintheproject‐specificgeotechnicalstudycompletedforthisproject.
Adherencetotheseguidelineswouldensurethattheimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:b
Undertheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject,anadditional2acreswillbedisturbed.Constructionactivitiessuchasexcavationandgradingcouldresultinlossoftopsoilthroughitsremovalandpossibleacceleratederosion.However,alltopsoilremovedduringconstructionwillbestockpiledandreusedonsite,aswiththepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject.Further,asdiscussedbelowundertheHydrologyandWaterQualitysection,temporaryconstruction‐relatedwaterqualityimpactswillbemitigatedbyadherencetotherequiredConstructionStormWaterPollutionPreventionPlan(CSWPPP),whichwilldescribeproceduresandbestmanagementpracticestocontrolacceleratederosionandsedimentation.Gallo’sWasteDischargeRequirements(WDRs)willalsoreducepossibleerosionresultingfromconstructionandsurfacerunoffduringprojectoperation.
Stockpilingexcavatedtopsoilandminimizingerosionwilloffsetlossesbutwillnotaddresslossofthesoilprofilewithintheadditional2acres.Lossoftheprofileofhigh‐qualitysoilwouldbesmallinrelationtotheamountofagriculturallandinthearea.Inaddition,theproposedexpansionisnotregardedasaconversionunderMercedCountyGeneralPlan,orWilliamsonActpolicies.
BecauseerosionwillbecontrolledwithaCSWPPPandbecauselossofhigh‐qualitytopsoilundertheprojectfootprintissmall,theimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:c,d
Liketherestofthepreviouslyapprovedprojectsite,soilsinthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitehavealowriskofliquefactionandpresentalowshrink‐swellhazard.
Soilsinthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitearethesameasthoseinthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionarea;theyarenon‐uniformlyintergraded,andtherelativedensityishighlyvariable.Loadsinducedbytheadditionalcooperagetankscouldcausesubstantialnon‐uniformsettlement,estimatedat4–8inchesover50years.Thesenon‐uniformweaksandscouldalsobesubjecttonon‐uniformdensificationasaresultofseismicgroundshaking.However,allstructureswillbedesignedandbuilttocomplywithMercedCountystandardsandinaccordancewith
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐31
July 2013ICF 00237.13
recommendationsintheproject‐specificgeotechnicalinvestigation.Adherencetothesestandardsandrecommendationswouldensurethatthisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:e,f
Humanwasteatthefacilityisdisposedofwithaseptictanksystem(MercedCountyLocalAgencyFormationCommission2007).SoilsattheGallofacilityhavelimitationsontheirsuitabilityforsepticsystems.Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionaccountedfor45newemployees.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldadd12newemployees,foratotalof57newemployees.Theincreaseddemandforsepticuseisnotexpectedtobesubstantialandexistingprocedurestohandlecollectionanddisposalofdomesticwastewaterwouldcontinuetobeimplemented.Additionally,allnewfacilitieswouldbeconstructedinaccordancewithMercedCountybuildingstandardsandtheproject‐specificgeotechnicalreport,whichwouldaddressminimizingthesusceptibilityofsoilstosepticfailure.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐32
July 2013ICF 00237.13
VII.GreenhouseGasEmissions
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Generategreenhousegasemissions,eitherdirectlyorindirectly,thatmayhaveasignificantimpactontheenvironment?
b. Conflictwithanapplicableplan,policy,orregulationadoptedforthepurposeofreducingtheemissionsofgreenhousegases?
Affected Environment
Thissectionprovidesananalysisofclimatechangeimpactsresultingfromtheproposedproject.Itdescribesgreenhousegas(GHG)emissionscommonlygenerated,discussesrecentGHGinventories,andsummarizesthecurrentregulatoryframeworkrelatedGHGemissionsandclimatechange.Environmentalimpactsrelatedtoclimatechange,aswellasmitigationmeasurestoreduceoreliminatepotentialimpactsarealsodiscussed.
Climate Change
ThephenomenonknownasthegreenhouseeffectkeepstheatmosphereneartheEarth’ssurfacewarmenoughforthesuccessfulhabitationofhumansandotherlifeforms.PresentintheEarth’sloweratmosphere,GHGsplayacriticalroleinmaintainingtheEarth’stemperature;GHGstrapsomeofthelong‐waveinfraredradiationemittedfromtheEarth’ssurfacethatwouldotherwiseescapetospace.
Visiblesunlightpassesthroughtheatmospherewithoutbeingabsorbed.Someofthesunlightstrikingtheearthisabsorbedandconvertedtoheat,whichwarmsthesurface.Thesurfaceemitsinfraredradiationtotheatmosphere,wheresomeofitisabsorbedbyGHGsandre‐emittedtowardthesurface;someoftheheatisnottrappedbyGHGsandescapesintospace.HumanactivitiesthatemitadditionalGHGstotheatmosphereincreasetheamountofinfraredradiationthatgetsabsorbedbeforeescapingintospace,thusenhancingthegreenhouseeffectandamplifyingthewarmingoftheearth(CenterforClimateandEnergySolutions2012).
IncreasesinfossilfuelcombustionanddeforestationhaveexponentiallyincreasedconcentrationsofGHGsintheatmospheresincetheIndustrialRevolution.RisingatmosphericconcentrationsofGHGsinexcessofnaturallevelsenhancethegreenhouseeffect,whichcontributestoglobalwarmingoftheEarth’sloweratmosphereandinduceslarge‐scalechangesinoceancirculationpatterns,precipitationpatterns,globalicecover,biologicaldistributions,andotherchangestotheEarthsystemthatarecollectivelyreferredtoasclimatechange.
TheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC)hasbeenestablishedbytheWorldMeteorologicalOrganizationandUnitedNationsEnvironmentProgrammetoassessscientific,technical,andsocioeconomicinformationrelevanttotheunderstandingofclimatechange,itspotentialimpacts,andoptionsforadaptationandmitigation.TheIPCCestimatesthattheaverageglobaltemperaturerisebetweentheyears2000and2100couldrangefrom1.1° Celsius,withno
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐33
July 2013ICF 00237.13
increaseinGHGemissionsaboveyear2000levels,to6.4° Celsius,withsubstantialincreaseinGHGemissions(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007a:97–115).LargeincreasesinglobaltemperaturescouldhavesubstantialadverseeffectsonthenaturalandhumanenvironmentsontheplanetandinCalifornia.
Principal Greenhouse Gases
TheprimaryGHGsgeneratedbythealternativeswouldbecarbondioxide(CO2),methane(CH4),andnitrousoxide(N2O).Eachofthesegasesisdiscussedindetailbelow.Notethatperfluorocarbons(PFCs)andhydrofluorocarbons(HFCs)arenotdiscussed,becausethesegasesareprimarilygeneratedbyindustrialprocesses,whicharenotanticipatedaspartoftheproject.
Tosimplifyreportingandanalysis,methodshavebeensetforthtodescribeemissionsofGHGsintermsofasinglegas.ThemostcommonlyacceptedmethodtocompareGHGemissionsistheglobalwarmingpotential(GWP)methodologydefinedintheIPCCreferencedocuments(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange1996,2001:241–280).TheIPCCdefinestheGWPofvariousGHGemissionsonanormalizedscalethatrecastsallGHGemissionsintermsofCO2equivalent(CO2e),whichcomparesthegasinquestiontothatofthesamemassofCO2(CO2hasaglobalwarmingpotentialof1bydefinition).
Table5liststheglobalwarmingpotentialofCO2,CH4,andN2O;theirlifetimes;andabundancesintheatmosphere.
Table 5. Lifetimes and Global Warming Potentials of Several Greenhouse Gases
GreenhouseGasesGlobalWarmingPotential(100years)
Lifetime(years)
2005AtmosphericAbundance
CO2(ppm) 1 50–200 379
CH4(ppb) 21 9–15 1,774
N2O(ppb) 310 120 319
Sources:IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange1996,2001:388–390.CH4 = methaneCO2 = carbondioxideN2O = nitrousoxideppm= partspermillionbyvolume.ppb = partsperbillionbyvolume.
Carbon Dioxide
CO2isthemostimportantanthropogenicGHGandaccountsformorethan75%ofallGHGemissionscausedbyhumans.TheprimarysourcesofanthropogenicCO2intheatmosphereincludetheburningoffossilfuels(includingmotorvehicles),gasflaring,cementproduction,andlandusechanges(e.g.,deforestation,oxidationofelementalcarbon).CO2canberemovedfromtheatmospherebyphotosyntheticorganisms(e.g.,plants).Itsatmosphericlifetimeof50–200yearsensuresthatatmosphericconcentrationsofCO2willremainelevatedfordecadesevenaftermitigationeffortstoreduceGHGconcentrationsarepromulgated(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007a).
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐34
July 2013ICF 00237.13
AtmosphericCO2hasincreasedfromapre‐industrialconcentrationof280ppmto379ppmin2005(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007b).
Methane
CH4,themaincomponentofnaturalgas,isthesecondmostabundantGHGandhasaGWPof21(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange1996).SourcesofanthropogenicemissionsofCH4includegrowingrice,raisingcattle,usingnaturalgas,landfilloutgassing,andminingcoal(NationalOceanicandAtmosphericAdministration2010).CertainlandusesalsofunctionasbothasourceandsinkforCH4.Forexample,wetlandsareaterrestrialsourceofCH4,whereasundisturbed,aerobicsoilsactasaCH4sink(i.e.,theyremoveCH4fromtheatmosphere).
AtmosphericCH4hasincreasedfromapre‐industrialconcentrationof715ppbto1,774ppbin2005(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007b).
Nitrous Oxide
N2OisapowerfulGHG,withaGWPof310(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange1996).AnthropogenicsourcesofN2Oincludeagriculturalprocesses(e.g.,fertilizerapplication),nylonproduction,fossil‐fuelfiredpowerplants,nitricacidproduction,andvehicleemissions.N2Oalsoisusedinrocketengines,racecars,andasanaerosolspraypropellant.Naturalprocesses,suchasnitrificationanddenitrification,canalsoproduceN2O,whichcanbereleasedtotheatmospherebydiffusion.IntheUnitedStates(U.S.)morethan70%ofN2Oemissionsarerelatedtoagriculturalsoilmanagementpractices,particularlyfertilizerapplication.
N2Oconcentrationsintheatmospherehaveincreased18%frompre‐industriallevelsof270ppbto319ppbin2005(IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007b).
Regulatory Setting
AppendixGintheCEQAGuidelinesstatethatthesignificancecriteriaestablishedbytheapplicableairqualitymanagementorairpollutioncontroldistrictmaybereliedupontodeterminetheproject’slevelofimpactintermsofGHGemissions.TheSJVAPCDupdatedtheirCEQAguidelinestoincludeguidanceforevaluatingGHGsignificanceinDecember2009.
Climatechangehasonlyrecentlybeenwidelyrecognizedasanimminentthreattotheglobalclimate,economy,andpopulation.Thus,thenational,state,andlocalclimatechangeregulatorysettingiscomplexandevolving.Thefollowingsectionidentifieskeylegislation,executiveorders,andseminalcourtcasesrelevanttotheenvironmentalassessmentofprojectGHGemissions.
Federal
Environmental Protection Agency Endangerment and Cause and Contribute Findings (2009)
OnDecember7,2009,theEPAsignedtheEndangermentandCauseorContributeFindingsforGreenhouseGasesunderSection202(a)oftheCAA.UndertheEndangermentFinding,EPAfindsthatthecurrentandprojectedconcentrationsofthesixkeywell‐mixedGHGs—CO2,CH4,N2O,SF6,PFCs,andHFCs—intheatmospherethreatenthepublichealthandwelfareofcurrentandfuturegenerations.UndertheCauseorContributeFinding,EPAfindsthatthecombinedemissionsofthese
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐35
July 2013ICF 00237.13
well‐mixedGHGsfromnewmotorvehiclesandnewmotorvehicleenginescontributetotheGHGpollutionthatthreatenspublichealthandwelfare.
Thesefindingsdonotthemselvesimposeanyrequirementsonindustryorotherentities.However,thisactionisaprerequisitetofinalizingEPA’sproposednewcorporateaveragefueleconomystandardsforlight‐dutyvehicles,whichEPAproposedinajointproposalincludingtheDepartmentofTransportation’sproposedcorporateaveragefuel‐economystandards.
State
TheStateofCaliforniahasadoptedlegislation,andregulatoryagencieshaveenactedpolicies,addressingvariousaspectsofclimatechangeandGHGemissionsmitigation.Muchofthislegislationandpolicyactivityisnotdirectedatcitizensorjurisdictionsbutratherestablishesabroadframeworkforthestate’slong‐termGHGmitigationandclimatechangeadaptationprogram.Thefollowingkeylegislationisapplicabletotheproposedproject.
Executive Order S‐3‐05 (2005)
SignedbyGovernorArnoldSchwarzeneggeronJune1,2005,ExecutiveOrderS‐3‐05assertsthatCaliforniaisvulnerabletotheeffectsofclimatechange.Tocombatthisconcern,ExecutiveOrderS‐3‐05establishedthefollowingGHGemissionsreductiontargetsforstateagencies.
By2010,reduceGHGemissionsto2000levels.
By2020,reduceGHGemissionsto1990levels.
By2050,reduceGHGemissionsto80percentbelow1990levels.
Executiveordersarebindingonlyonstateagencies.Accordingly,EOS‐03‐05willguidestateagencies’effortstocontrolandregulateGHGemissionsbutwillhavenodirectbindingeffectonlocalgovernmentorprivateactions.TheSecretaryoftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyisrequiredtoreporttotheGovernorandstatelegislaturebiannuallyontheimpactsofglobalwarmingonCalifornia,mitigationandadaptationplans,andprogressmadetowardreducingGHGemissionstomeetthetargetsestablishedinthisexecutiveorder.
Assembly Bill 32—California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006)
AssemblyBill(AB)32setsthesameoverallyear2020GHGemissionsreductiongoalsasExecutiveOrderS‐3‐05,whilefurthermandatingthattheARBcreateaplanthatincludesmarketmechanismsandimplementrulestoachieve“real,quantifiable,cost‐effectivereductions”ofGHGs.AB32furtherdirectsstateagenciesandthenewlycreatedstateClimateActionTeamtoidentifydiscreteearlyactionGHGreductionmeasures.Theseactionswereadoptedinearly2010andrelatetotruckefficiency,portelectrification,tireinflation,andreductionofPFCs,propellants,andsulfurhexafluoride.
Climate Change Scoping Plan
TheARB’sClimateChangeScopingPlanpreparedpursuanttoAB32containsthemainstrategiesCaliforniawillusetoreduceGHGfrombusiness‐as‐usual(BAU)emissionsprojectedfor2020backto1990levels(CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2008).Aspartofthescopingplan,theARBandotheragenciesareundertakingregulatoryrulemaking,culminatinginruleadoptionbyJanuary1,2011,
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐36
July 2013ICF 00237.13
forreducingGHGemissionstoachievetheemissionscapby2020,althoughofficialadoptionhasnotyetoccurredatthetimeofthiswriting.
InMarch2011,aSanFranciscoSuperiorCourtenjoinedtheimplementationofARB’sScopingPlan,findingthealternativesanalysisandpublicreviewprocessviolatedbothCEQAandtheARB’scertifiedregulatoryprogram(AssociationofIrritatedResidents,etalv.CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.CaseNo.CPF‐09‐509562,March18,2011).Inresponsetothislitigation,theARBadoptedaFinalSupplementtotheAB32ScopingPlanFunctionalEquivalentDocumentonAugust24,2011.ARBstaffre‐evaluatedthestatewideGHGbaselineinlightoftheeconomicdownturnandupdatedtheprojected2020emissionsto507millionmetrictonsCO2e.Tworeductionmeasures(PavleyIandtheRenewablePortfolioStandard)notpreviouslyincludedinthe2008ScopingPlanbaselinewereincorporatedintotheupdatedbaseline.AccordingtotheFinalSupplement,themajorityofadditionalmeasuresintheClimateChangeScopingPlanhavebeenadoptedandarecurrentlyinplace(CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2011b).
Senate Bills 1078/107 and Executive Order S‐14‐08—Renewable Portfolio Standard (2008)
SBs1078and107,California’sRenewablePortfolioStandard(RPS),obligateinvestor‐ownedutilities(IOUs),energyserviceproviders(ESPs),andCommunityChoiceAggregations(CCAs)toprocureanadditional1%ofretailsalesperyearfromeligiblerenewablesourcesuntil20%isreached,nolaterthan2010.TheCPUCandCECarejointlyresponsibleforimplementingtheprogram.EOS‐14‐08setforthalongerrangetargetofprocuring33%ofretailsalesby2020.
State CEQA Guidelines
TheStateCEQAGuidelinesrequireleadagenciestodescribe,calculate,orestimatetheamountofGHGemissionsresultingfromaproject.Moreover,theguidelinesemphasizethenecessitytodeterminepotentialclimatechangeeffectsoftheprojectandproposemitigationasnecessary.Theguidelinesconfirmthediscretionofleadagenciestodetermineappropriatesignificancethresholds,butrequirethepreparationofanenvironmentalimpactreport(EIR)if“thereissubstantialevidencethatthepossibleeffectsofaparticularprojectarestillcumulativelyconsiderablenotwithstandingcompliancewithadoptedregulationsorrequirements”(Section15064.4).
California Cap‐and‐Trade (2011)
OnDecember16,2010,ARBapprovedmeasurestoenactaGHGcap‐and‐tradeprogramforthestateofCalifornia.TheARBadoptedCap‐and‐TradeonOctober20,2011.TheCaliforniaCap‐and‐Tradeprogramisamarket‐basedsystemwithanoverallemissionslimitforaffectedsectors.Theprogramwillregulateover85%ofCalifornia’semissionsandstaggerscompliancerequirementsaccordingtothefollowingschedule:1)electricitygenerationandlargeindustrialsources(2012);2)Fuelcombustionandtransportation(2015).Thefirstcomplianceyearwhencoveredsourceswillhavetoturninallowancesis2013(CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2011c).
Local
SJVAPCDhasadoptedGHGguidancetoassistleadagenciesindeterminingthelevelofsignificanceofoperational‐relatedGHGemissions,pursuanttoCEQA.SVJAPCD’sGHGguidanceisintendedtostreamlineCEQAreviewbypre‐quantifyingemissionsreductionsthatwouldbeachievedthrough
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐37
July 2013ICF 00237.13
theimplementationofbestperformancestandards(BPS).Projectsareconsideredtohavealess‐than‐significantcumulativeimpactonclimatechangeifanyofthefollowingconditionsaremet.1. ComplywithanapprovedGHGreductionplan.
2. Achieveascoreofatleast29usinganycombinationofapprovedoperationalBPS.Ascoreof29representsa29%reductioninGHGemissionsrelativetounmitigatedconditions(1point=1%).ThisgoalisconsistentwiththereductiontargetsestablishedbyAssemblyBill32.
3. ReduceoperationalGHGemissionsbyatleast29%overBAUconditions(demonstratedquantitatively).
SJVAPCDguidancerecommendsquantificationofGHGemissionsforallprojectsinwhichanEIRisrequired,regardlessofwhetherBPSachieveascoreof29(SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict2009).Theguidancedocumentdoesnotestablishanemissionsthresholdforconstruction‐relatedemissions
ThereiscurrentlynoadoptedGHGreductionplanforMercedCounty;therefore,option1fromtheSVJAPCDGHGguidance—complywithanapprovedGHGreductionplan—cannotbeusedtoevaluateprojectsignificance.Accordingly,anassessmentastowhethertheprojectcanachieveascoreof29throughtheimplementationofBPS(option2)orreduceoperationalGHGemissionsby29%relativetoBAUconditions(option3)isperformedinthisanalysis.
Significance Criteria
BasedontheCEQAGuidelinesAppendixG,animpactpertainingtoclimatechangeisconsideredsignificantifitwouldcauseeitherofthefollowing.
GenerateasignificantamountofGHGemissions,eitherdirectlyorindirectly.
Conflictwithanyapplicableplan,policy,orregulationadoptedforthepurposeofreducingGHGs.
Discussion
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatconstructionandoperationalGHGemissionsassociatedwiththeexpansionactivitieswouldbetemporaryandwouldnotresultinanydirectimpactsonclimatechange.
Checklistitem:a
ThepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisdeterminedthatconstructionandoperationalGHGemissionswouldnotresultinsignificantimpacts,asconstructionemissionswouldbetemporaryandoperationalemissionswouldbelessenedthroughmitigation.Implementationoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldresultinshort‐termconstructionemissionsofCO2,CH4,andN2Ofromtheuseofconstructionequipmentonsiteaswellfromon‐roadfuelcombustionfromemployeecommutes.
Construction Emissions
EmissionsassociatedwiththeadditionalconstructionactivityweredeterminedusingstandardemissionfactorsandassumptionsfromtheCalEEModandEMFAC2011models.Emissionsassociatedwiththeadditionalvehicletripsthatwouldresultfromhiring12additionalemployees
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐38
July 2013ICF 00237.13
wereestimatedusingtheCalEEModemissionsmodel.GHGsgeneratedfromelectricityuseduringconstructionwereestimatedusingemissionfactorsfromaPG&Epublicutilityreport(forCO2)andfromtheEPA’seGriddatabase(forCH4andN2O)(CaliforniaClimateActionRegistry2012,U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency2012).
Constructionactivitiesassociatedwiththeproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldoccurin2014andbeinadditiontotheconstructionactivitiesanalyzedinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND,whichwouldoccurovera3‐5yearperiod.ConstructionemissionsassociatedwiththeproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectareshowninTable6.
AsshowninTable6,constructionactivitiesassociatedwiththeproposedprojectwouldgenerate781.5metrictonsofCO2e.Asdiscussedabove,constructionGHGemissionsfromthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysiswouldbetemporaryandnotcauseanydirectimpactsonclimatechange.Similarly,theGHGemissionsgeneratedduringconstructionactivitiesoftheproposedprojectwouldbeconfinedtothedurationofconstructionactivities,andwouldnotresultinanysubstantiallymoresevereimpactsthanthoseassessedinthepreviousIS/MND,whichwerefoundtobelessthansignificantwithimplementationofthebestmanagementpractices(BMPs)containedinMitigationMeasureCC‐1,adoptedwiththeapprovaloftheprojectandthepreviousIS/MND.ThismitigationmeasurewouldalsoreduceGHGemissionsgeneratedduringconstructionoftheproposedmodificationsandreducetheimpacttolessthansignificant.
Table 6. Emissions of GHG from Construction Activities by Phase
Constructionphase MetricTonsCO2e
ProposedModification
SitePreparation 123.3
GradingandUtilities 164.7
TankConstruction 349.8
ProcessPiping 125.3
ConcretePaving 18.4
ConstructionElectricity 65.0
Total(ProposedModification) 781.5
2011MitigationMeasureCC‐1:ImplementbestmanagementpracticesforGHGemissions.
Theprojectapplicantshallimplement,totheextentfeasible,BMPsoutlinedbelow.
Alternative‐fueled(e.g.,biodiesel,electric)constructionvehicles/equipmentwillcompriseatleast15%ofthefleet.
Useatleast10%localbuildingmaterials.
Recycleatleast50%ofconstructionwasteordemolitionmaterials.
Operational Emissions
Asdiscussedabove,operationalemissionsfromthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysiswouldbereducedtoalessthansignificantlevelthroughmitigation.Theproposedprojectwouldinvolvehiring12additionalemployees,including6permanentand6seasonalemployees,atthefacility,whichwouldresultinGHGemissionsfromthevehiclesoftheseemployeesastheycommutetoand
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐39
July 2013ICF 00237.13
fromwork.AllotheroperationalactivitieswouldremainunchangedbetweentheproposedprojectandtheoperationalactivitiescoveredinthepreviouslyapprovedIS/MND.Asaresult,thenewoperationalGHGemissionsassociatedwiththeproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldconsistonlyofthenewemployeevehicleemissions.Theseemissionswouldrepresentasmallfractionoftheemissionsassociatedwiththepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalysisandwouldnotcontributeasubstantiallymoresevereimpact.Emissionsassociatedwiththe12additionalemployeesareshowninTable7.
Table 7. Emissions of GHG from Operational Activities
Constructionphase MetricTonsCO2e
ProposedModification
NewEmployeeCommuteEmissions 0.2
AsshowninTable7,emissionsfromthecommutetripsofthenewemployeeswouldbeminor,totalinglessthanaquarterofametrictonofCO2eandapproximately.01%oftheoperationalemissionsofthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionanalyzedinthe2011IS/MND.AlthoughallGHGemissionscontributetoclimatechange,theemployeecommuteandconstructionemissionsalonewouldnothaveasignificantimpactontheenvironmentthatissubstantiallymoreseverethandisclosedinthe2011IS/MND.Asdiscussedabove,implementationofMitigationMeasureCC‐1wouldreducetheimpactofconstructionemissions.Thisimpactislessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:b
TheStatehasadoptedseveralpoliciesandregulationsforthepurposeofreducingGHGemissions(discussedabove).ThemoststringentoftheseisAB32,whichdesignatesreductionofstatewideGHGemissionsto1990levelsby2020.Asdiscussedabove,additionalconstructionactivityassociatedwiththeproposedprojectwouldgenerateGHGemissionsinadditiontotheGHGemissionsthatwereanalyzedinthe2011IS/MND.TheseadditionalGHGemissionswouldstillbeataless‐than‐significantlevelwithimplementationofMitigationMeasureCC‐1.Thus,GHGemissionsgeneratedbytheproposedprojectwouldnotconflictwiththeStategoalslistedinAB32orinanyotherstatepoliciesadoptedtoreduceGHGemissions.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐40
July 2013ICF 00237.13
VIII.HazardsandHazardousMaterials
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Createasignificanthazardtothepublicortheenvironmentthroughtheroutinetransport,use,ordisposalofhazardousmaterials?
b. Createasignificanthazardtothepublicortheenvironmentthroughreasonablyforeseeableupsetandaccidentconditionsinvolvingthereleaseofhazardousmaterialsintotheenvironment?
c. Emithazardousemissionsorinvolvehandlinghazardousoracutelyhazardousmaterials,substances,orwastewithinone‐quartermileofanexistingorproposedschool?
d. BelocatedonasitethatisincludedonalistofhazardousmaterialssitescompiledpursuanttoGovernmentCodeSection65962.5and,asaresult,woulditcreateasignificanthazardtothepublicortheenvironment?
e. Belocatedwithinanairportlanduseplanareaor,wheresuchaplanhasnotbeenadopted,bewithintwomilesofapublicairportorpublicuseairport,andresultinasafetyhazardforpeopleresidingorworkingintheprojectarea?
f. Belocatedwithinthevicinityofaprivateairstripandresultinasafetyhazardforpeopleresidingorworkingintheprojectarea?
g. Impairimplementationoforphysicallyinterferewithanadoptedemergencyresponseplanoremergencyevacuationplan?
h. Exposepeopleorstructurestoasignificantriskofloss,injury,ordeathinvolvingwildlandfires,includingwherewildlandsareadjacenttourbanizedareasorwhereresidencesareintermixedwithwildlands?
Affected Environment
APhaseIEnvironmentalSiteAssessment(ESA)waspreparedbyBauerAssociatesforthe2011IS/MND.TheinformationinthisESAappliestothe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteaswellasthepreviouslyapprovedexpansion.AccordingtotherecordssearchintheESA,themainGalloWineryfacilityhadanammoniacoolantpipeleakin2007.Subsequenttotheleakandcleanupactivities,Galloinitiatedapreventivemaintenanceplanfortheinsulatedcoolantpipingtopreventfutureleaks.Aleakingundergroundstoragetank(LUST)associatedwiththecompostingoperation
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐41
July 2013ICF 00237.13
ontheexpansionsitetothewestofthemainwineryfacilitywasalsoidentified.TheLUSTcontinuestobeidentifiedasan“open”recordofhazardouscontamination;however,sitehistoryofthecontaminationisnotavailableandtherecordssearchdidnotincludeanyinformationrelatedtosoilorgroundwatercontamination.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheimpactfromtheroutinetransportofhazardousmaterialswouldbelessthansignificant,andnomitigationwasrequired.Likethepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,constructionactivitieswouldinvolveroutinetransport,use,anddisposalofpotentiallyhazardousmaterialssuchassolvents,paints,oils,grease,andcaulking.Suchtransport,use,anddisposalmustbecompliantwithapplicableregulationsasdescribedintheRegulatorySettingabove.Becausecompliancewithexistingregulationsismandatory,theproposedprojectisnotexpectedtocreateasignificanthazardtothepublicortheenvironmentthroughtheroutinetransport,use,ordisposalofhazardousmaterials.
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotinvolveanincreaseinproduction.Noincreasesintheuseofhazardousmaterialsusedforproductionareanticipated.Incrementalincreasesofchemicalsusedforstorageandequipmentcleaningmayoccur.Themajorityofchemicalsareused,stored,andcontainedontheexistingwineryinvariouslocationsandaresubjecttoMercedCountyHealthDepartment,EnvironmentalHealthDivision(MCHD/EHD)requirements.ProceduresforhandlingallhazardousmaterialsarecontainedintheexistingandapprovedHazardousMaterialsBusinessPlan(HMBP),andallactivitiesaremonitoredbytheMCHD/EHD.Forthepreviouslyapprovedexpansion,GallowasrequiredtoupdateitsexistingHMBPtoincludetheexpandedwineproductionactivities.Becauseproductionwouldnotincreasewiththeproposedmodification,theHMBPdoesnotneedfurtherrevision.Therefore,impactsrelatedtotheroutinetransport,use,ordisposalofhazardousmaterialsduetoimplementingtheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:b
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhavealess‐than‐significantimpactrelatedtoaccidentalreleaseofhazardousmaterials.Asstatedabove,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproduction,andwouldnotincreasewineryproduction,andtheuseofsignificantamountsofhazardousmaterialsabovewhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MNDarenotanticipated.Furthermore,theexistingHMBPincludesanemergencyresponseplantorespondtoaccidentalreleasesofhazardousmaterials.Gallo’sexistingemergencyresponseplanincludesaninventoryofequipmentandfirstaidforpersonalprotection,evacuationprocedures,evacuationmap,spillcontrolanddecontaminationprocedures,andincidentreportingandrecordingrequirements.Additionally,GallowouldberequiredtocomplywithCal/OSHAandfederalstandardsforthestorageandhandlingoffuels,flammablematerials,andfireprevention.Withadherencetotheaboveplans,proceduresandregulations,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldhavealess‐than‐significantimpactrelatedtoaccidentalreleasesofhazardousmaterials.Nomitigationisrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐42
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Checklistitem:c
TheGalloWineryisinaruralagriculturalareaapproximately4.5milesfromLivingston,whichistheclosestcommunitywhereschoolsarelocated.Therearenoschoolswithin0.25mileofthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:d
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheGallowineryisnotlocatedonandisnotdesignatedasahazardoussite.Asdescribedabove,theESAandrecordssearchforthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectcoversthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.TherecordssearchidentifiedanammoniacoolantpipeleakattheGalloWineryfacilityinNovember2007.Subsequenttotheleakandcleanupactivities,Galloinitiatedapreventivemaintenanceplanfortheinsulatedcoolantpipingtopreventfutureleaks.TheregulatorydatabasesearchalsoidentifiedaLUSTassociatedwiththecompostingoperationontheexpansionsitetothewestofthemainwineryfacility.ThestatusoftheLUSTis“open,”althoughthereisnositehistoryavailable,andaffectedsoilorgroundwaterarenotidentified.ImplementationofsoilandgroundwatermonitoringrequirementscontainedinGallo’sexistingWDRswillensurethatpotentialimpactsrelatedtotheexistingLUSTarelessthansignificant.
Therecordssearchdidnotidentifyanyhazardousmaterialsonorneartheexpansionsite.Further,therecordssearchdidnotidentifyanyoffsitelocationsthathavebeenincludedinfederalorstatelists.Therefore,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotcreateasignificanthazardtothepublicortheenvironmentandtheimpactofimplementingtheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectisconsideredlessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:e,f
TheclosestpublicairportisTurlockMunicipalAirport,locatedapproximately10milesnortheastoftheexpansionsite,andtheclosestprivateairstripistheStevensonStrip,locatedapproximately4.5milessouthwestoftheexpansionsite.Duetothesedistancesfromtheexpansionsite,aircraftoverflightswouldnotposeasafetyhazardtopeopleworkingorresidingonthefacilityorwithinitsvicinity.Therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:g
Constructionandoperationoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotrequiretheclosureofanypublicorprivatestreetsorroadwaysandwouldnotimpedeaccessofemergencyvehiclestotheprojectoranysurroundingareas.AccordingtotheMercedCountyGeneralPlan,theCountyreviewsdevelopmentplansforsafecirculation(includingprovisionforaminimumoftwoaccesspointsforlargerdevelopments)priortoapprovalofallapplicablepermits.Thisensuresescapeandemergencyserviceoptionsformosthazards.Therearethreeexistingaccesspointstothewinery,whichwouldbemaintainedduringconstructionoftheproposedmodification.Gallo’sexistingemergencyresponseplanalsoincludesevacuationplansforanyemergencyeventresultingfromwineryoperationsthatisapprovedandcoordinatedwiththeCounty’sMCHD/EHDandCountyfireprotectionproviders.Asaresult,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotresultinasignificantimpactrelatedtoimplementationofanemergencyresponse/evacuationplan.Nomitigationisrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐43
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Checklistitem:h
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatimpactsrelatedtowildlandfiresandfirehazardsarelessthansignificantandnomitigationwasrequired.TheGallofacilityisnotlocatedinawildlandareaandisnotlocatedinanareazonedforsusceptibilitytofirerisk.Althoughtherearenowildlandsintheprojectarea,potentialrisksassociatedwithfirehazardsduetoconstructionactivitiesexist;constructioncontractorsarerequiredtocomplywithstateregulationsforuseofcombustiblesubstances.Productionwouldnotincreaseundertheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject.Thereforepotentialfirerisksresultingfromwineproductionactivitieswouldnotchangefromthe2011IS/MND.Therewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐44
July 2013ICF 00237.13
IX.HydrologyandWaterQuality
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Violateanywaterqualitystandardsorwastedischargerequirements?
b. Substantiallydepletegroundwatersuppliesorinterferesubstantiallywithgroundwaterrecharge,resultinginanetdeficitinaquifervolumeoraloweringofthelocalgroundwatertablelevel(e.g.,theproductionrateofpre‐existingnearbywellswoulddroptoalevelthatwouldnotsupportexistinglandusesorplannedusesforwhichpermitshavebeengranted)?
c. Substantiallyaltertheexistingdrainagepatternofthesiteorarea,includingthroughthealterationofthecourseofastreamorriver,inamannerthatwouldresultinsubstantialerosionorsiltationonsiteoroffsite?
d. Substantiallyaltertheexistingdrainagepatternofthesiteorarea,includingthroughthealterationofthecourseofastreamorriver,orsubstantiallyincreasetherateoramountofsurfacerunoffinamannerthatwouldresultinfloodingonsiteoroffsite?
e. Createorcontributerunoffwaterthatwouldexceedthecapacityofexistingorplannedstormwaterdrainagesystemsorprovidesubstantialadditionalsourcesofpollutedrunoff?
f. Otherwisesubstantiallydegradewaterquality?
g. Placehousingwithina100‐yearfloodhazardarea,asmappedonafederalFloodHazardBoundaryorFloodInsuranceRateMaporotherfloodhazarddelineationmap?
h. Placewithina100‐yearfloodhazardareastructuresthatwouldimpedeorredirectfloodflows?
i. Exposepeopleorstructurestoasignificantriskofloss,injury,ordeathinvolvingflooding,includingfloodingasaresultofthefailureofaleveeordam?
j. Contributetoinundationbyseiche,tsunami,ormudflow?
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐45
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Affected Environment
Surface Water
ThemajorsurfacewaterfeaturesnexttotheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectareirrigationlateralsandtheMercedRiver(seeFigure6).TheexpansionsitelieswithintheLowerMercedRiverWatershed.TheMercedRiverhasitsheadwatersinYosemiteNationalPark,locatedinthecentralSierraNevada.Theriverhasthreedams:theNewExchequerDam,theMcSwainDam,andtheCrocker‐HuffmanDam.Thesedamsareusedtosupplywatertonearbycommunitiesaswellasforgeneratingelectricity,recreation,andfloodcontrol.ThewaterqualityoftheMercedRiverinthehigherelevationsisgoodandclear,typicalofSierrasnowmelt.However,duetoagriculturalreturnflowsandpastminingactivities,thesectionoftheriverfromMcSwainReservoirtotheSanJoaquinRiverhasbeenplacedontheCleanWaterAct(CWA)Section303(d)listofimpairedwatersforchlorpyrifos,diazinon,Escherichiacoli(E.coli),groupApesticides,temperature,unknowntoxicsandmercury(StateWaterResourcesControlBoard2010).
Groundwater
TheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectislocatedintheSanJoaquinValleyGroundwaterBasin,MercedSubbasin(Basin#5‐22.04).TheMercedSubbasinisapproximately491,000acresor767squaremiles.Estimationsoftotalstoragecapacityofthesubbasinandtheamountofwaterinstorageasof1995werecalculatedusinganestimatedspecificyieldof9.0%andwaterlevelscollectedbyDWRCooperators.Accordingtothesecalculations,thetotalstoragecapacityofthesubbasinisestimatedtobe21,100,000acre‐feet(CaliforniaDepartmentofWaterResources2004).
Thegroundwaterqualityinthesubbasinischaracterizedbyacalcium‐magnesiumbicarbonateatthebasininterior,sodiumbicarbonatetothewest,andcalcium‐sodiumbicarbonatetothesouth.TotalDissolvedSolids(TDS)rangefrom100to3,600milligramsperliter(mg/L),withatypicalrangeof200to400mg/L.Inaddition,therearelocalizedimpairmentsofhighhardnessvalues,iron,nitrate,andchloride(DepartmentofWaterResources2004).
Flooding
Theprojectsiteislocatedoutsideofthe100‐yearfloodplainoftheMercedRiver.TheFederalEmergencyManagementAgency(FEMA)delineates100‐yearfloodplainsandpublishestheinformationonFloodInsuranceRateMaps(FIRMs).AccordingtotheFIRM(Panel#06047C0175G),theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectislocatedwithinZoneX,definedbyFEMAasanareadeterminedtobeoutsidethe0.2%annualchancefloodplain(FederalEmergencyManagementAgency2008)(Figure6).
Discussion
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsonelementsoftheCEQAchecklistrelatedtowaterquality,groundwaterrecharge,drainagepatterns,stormwaterrunoff,flooding,constructionwithinthe100‐yearfloodplain,orinundationbyseiche,tsunami,ormudflow.Nomitigationwasrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐46
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Checklistitem:a,b
Theexpandedwinemakingprocessunderthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectwouldrequireadditionalwateruseofapproximately90,000gallonsperday(gpd)duringoff‐crushseasonand270,000gpdduringcrushseason.WaterfortheexpansionwouldbesourcedfromexistingwaterwellslocatedontheGalloproperty.Theproposedmodificationtothepermitcallsforanadditional215cooperagetanks.However,theseadditionaltankswouldnotincreasetheplantcapacity,butratherserveaswinestorageduringtheoff‐season.
AGroundwaterPumpingImpactsEvaluationwascompletedbyBrunsingAssociatesinSeptember2011todetermineiftheexistingwellswouldhavesufficientcapacitytoservethewatersupplydemandofthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject.Thestudyincludedpumpingofgroundwaterfromexistingwellsatmaximumcapacityfora24hourperiodtoidentifytheradiusofinfluence(ROI),oraffectedareawhereadverseimpactonthegroundwatertablewouldbeexpected.ThepumptestresultsidentifiedthattheROIrangedfrom650to700feetaroundeachwellatthemaximumpumpingrate.Basedontheseresults,thestudyconcludedthatifexistingwellswerepumpedatthemaximumratetosupplytheamountofwaterrequiredforincreasedwineproduction,theassociatedROIwouldbelessthanthemaximumrangeobservedduringthepumptest.Inaddition,becauseoftheproject’sproximitytotheMercedRiver,thegroundwatertablerechargesmorequicklythaninotherareas.Forthesereasons,andbecausetheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreasewineproduction,itisnotanticipatedthattheproposedmodificationwouldsubstantiallyimpactthegroundwatertableorsubstantiallylowertheaquifer.Theprojectwouldalsonothaveanimpactonwaterqualityinthearea.Thisimpactisconsideredtobelessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:c,d
TheexistingdrainagepatternatthepreviouslyapprovedEastsideExpansionprojectsite,aswellasthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite,isfromnortheasttosouthwest,drainingtowardtheeast‐westportionofRiverRoadsouthofthewinery.StormwateriscollectedbytheexistingsystemofditchesalongRiverRoadandintheadjacentagriculturalfields.Runoffcollectedattheexistingwineryfacilityflowstoasumpandispumpedtotheexistingprocesswastewatermanagementsysteminaccordancewiththewinery’sWasteDischargeRequirements(WDR).
Surfacerunofffromthe2‐acreexpansionareaisprojectedtocontinuetoflowtothesouthwest.Asstatedinthe2011IS/MND,anewdrainageswalerunningalongtheeasternedgeofthewinerywouldbeplacedtointerceptrunoffanddirectitaroundthesoutheasterncornerofthefacilitywhereitwouldbedissipatedtosheetflowandreturnedtotheexistingdrainagepattern.CombinedstormwaterandprocesswastewatercollectedattheprocessingareasconstructedaspartofthepreviouslyapprovedEastsideExpansion(approximately18acres)wouldflowacrossconcreteandasphaltsurfacestonewdropinletsanddrainbygravitytonewandexistingsumps.Stormwaterwouldbepumpedfromthesumpstotheexistingprocesswastewatermanagementsystem,whereitwouldbetreatedandreleasedinaccordancewiththewinery’sWDRs.Theadditionofimpervioussurfaceassociatedwiththenewcooperagetanksisnotanticipatedtoalteranyexistingdrainagepatterns,includingthatoftheMercedRiver,becausealladditionalstormwaterflowwouldbecapturedandprocessedandthendischargedtolandasdescribedabove.The215newtankswoulduse2acresofland.Runoffwouldbehandledthesameaspreviouslydescribed.Thisimpactisthereforeconsideredlessthansignificant.
Riv
er R
d
Merced
Rive
r
ExistingFacilities
Grif
fith
Ave
Wei
r Ave
River Rd
River RdConnect to
(E) Sump
Connect to NewSD System
Collected StormwaterReturned to Sheet Flow
LWINEFacilities
Irrigation WaterStorage Pond
New Earth SwaleAround ProjectPerimeter
Sources: Bing Maps Aerial (2010)
0 600 1,200300Feet
LegendExpansion Site 2011
100-year Flood Zone
Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map Database(Federal Emergency Management Agency 2008)
Approximate limits of proposed development to discharge to existing adjacent runoff pattern
Approximate limits of proposeddevelopment with runoff diverted to PW ponds
Proposed Modifications 2013
New Storm Drain
Existing Process WastewaterCollection Tank
Figure 6Project Area Flood Zone and Proposed Drainage
Gra
phic
s …
007
02.1
1 (7
-22-
2013
)
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐47
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Checklistitem:e,f
Asdescribedinthe2011IS/MND,theexpandedwinemakingprocessforthepreviouslyapprovedEastsideExpansionwouldgenerateadditionaldischargewaterofapproximately90,000gpdduringoff‐crushseasonand270,000gpdduringcrushseason.ThewateriscurrentlytreatedandlandappliedpursuanttoGallo’sexistingWDRs.TheWDRpermitsdischargeofupto4.5milliongallonsdailyofprocesswater;currentvolumestotalabout3.2milliongallonsdaily.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproductionandisnotanticipatedtoincreaseprocesswaterorwatertreatmentmethods.Inaddition,uponcompletionoftheapprovedE.&J.GalloWinery(Gallo)LivingstonWaterInnovationandEnergyFacility(LWINEFacility),overallwastewaterdischargewillbereducedasawhole.
Asstatedinthe2011IS/MND,wastewatervolumeswouldbesignificantlyreducedthroughimplementationofthefollowingconservationmeasures.
Useofcentrifugestoreduceproductandsolidsinwastewater,whichreducesthevolumeandamountofalcoholandbiochemicaloxygendemand(BOD)inthewastewater.
MaximizetheuseofonsitedistillationtoreducethealcoholandBODinthewastewater.
Minimizecleaningwaterneededthroughrecyclingcleaningwaterforheatexchangersandtanks.
TheexistingWDRwouldcontinuetobefollowedandeffluentprocesswaterwouldcontinuetobemonitoredforwaterquality.Inaddition,soilandgroundwaterwouldalsocontinuetobetestedforconstituentsofconcern.Ifwaterqualitymonitoringdeterminesthattheprocesswastewaterbeingappliedtolandisaffectingsoilandultimatelygroundwaterquality,thentheapplicantisrequiredtoimplementprovisionsintheWDRtomitigatetheissue.Inaddition,temporaryconstruction‐relatedwaterqualityimpactswouldbemitigatedbyadheringtotheNPDESConstructionGeneralPermitandrequiredCSWPPP.
WithimplementationoftheWDR,itisanticipatedthattheadditionalprocesswaterwouldnotimpactwaterqualityandthisimpactisconsideredtobelessthansignificant.Additionaldiscussionofdrainageimpactsisdiscussedbelow.
Checklistitem:g,h,i
Asstatedabove,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectisnotlocatedwithinthe100‐yearfloodplainandthereforewouldnotimpedeorredirectfloodflows.Thisimpactisthereforeconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:j
Duetothelongdistanceofthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitefromtheoceanoralargelake,anditslocationonrelativelyflatground,theriskofexposingpeopleorstructurestoatsunami,seicheandmudflowisverylow.Therewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐48
July 2013ICF 00237.13
X.LandUseandPlanning
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Physicallydivideanestablishedcommunity?
b. Conflictwithanyapplicablelanduseplan,policy,orregulationofanagencywithjurisdictionovertheproject(including,butnotlimitedto,ageneralplan,specificplan,localcoastalprogram,orzoningordinance)adoptedforthepurposeofavoidingormitigatinganenvironmentaleffect?
c. Conflictwithanyapplicablehabitatconservationplanornaturalcommunityconservationplan?
Affected Environment
The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitearelocatedinaruralagriculturalsettingwithadjacentwineryoperationsandwineproductionuses.Theentire2011expansionsiteandthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteareunderaWilliamsonActcontract.Noresidentialusesorassociatedhousingunitsareonornearthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.ThenearestcommunityistheCityofLivingston,approximately4.5milesnortheastoftheprojectarea.
The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsitearelocatedinanunincorporatedareaofMercedCountyandisunderthejurisdictionoftheCounty’sGeneralPlanandzoningregulations.TheGeneralPlanLandUsedesignationfortheprojectsiteisAgricultural(MercedCounty1990).OtherlandusespermittedonlandsdesignatedasAgriculturalincludelivestockfacilities,wastewaterlagoons,andagriculturalcommercialfacilities.TheexistingwineryisconsideredanagriculturalcommercialfacilityandispermittedforoperationbytheCountyunderaConditionalUsePermit(CUP2714).
ZoningintheproposedprojectareaisGeneralAgricultural(A‐1)pertheCounty’szoningregulations.TheGeneralAgriculturaldesignationallowsagriculturalprocessingplantsandcrop,orchard,orvineyardproduction,andagriculturalmanufacturingandstorageuses(Chapter18.02.020).Asdiscussedabove,theGalloWineryisconsideredamanufacturingandstorageuseasdefinedbytheCountyzoningcode.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldresultinless‐than‐significantimpactsonlanduse,andnomitigationwasrequired.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectdoesnotincludeexpansionoffacilitiesintoadjacentareasofdifferentlanduses.ThenearestcommunityistheCityofLivingston,whichislocated4.5milesnortheastoftheprojectarea.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐49
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Therefore,constructionandimplementationoftheexpandedwineryfacilitywouldnotresultinthedivisionofacommunity,andtherewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:b
TheproposedmodificationwouldbeconsistentwiththecurrentagriculturallandusedesignationandwouldmeetallofthecriterialistedintheCountyGeneralPlanforitsproposedlanduses.Therefore,theproposedmodificationwouldnotconflictwithanyapplicablelanduseplan,policy,orregulation,andpotentialprojectimpactsareconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:c
Thereisnohabitatconservationplanornaturalcommunityconservationplanthatappliestothe2‐acrerevisionarea.Therefore,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotconflictwithanysuchplan,andtherewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐50
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XI.MineralResources
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Resultinthelossofavailabilityofaknownmineralresourcethatwouldbeofvaluetotheregionandtheresidentsofthestate?
b. Resultinthelossofavailabilityofalocallyimportantmineralresourcerecoverysitedelineatedonalocalgeneralplan,specificplan,orotherlanduseplan?
Affected Environment
TheMineralResourceZone(MRZ)MapforConcreteAggregateinMercedCounty(Clinkenbeard1999)indicatesthatthe2acreareaproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteislocatedinanMRZ‐1zone,meaningtherearenoresourcespresent.Theprojectsitehasbeenhistoricallyusedasagriculturallandandtherearenoexistingminingoperationsintheimmediatevicinityoftheprojectsite.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a,b
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhaveless‐than‐significantimpactsonmineralresources,andnomitigationwasrequired.Asdiscussedabove,the2acreareaproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteisnotcurrentlyusedformining,andthereisnomineralextractionrequiredforconstructionoroperationoftheprojectsuchthatmineralresourcesofregionalorstatewidevaluewouldbereduced.ThesiteisalsonotwithinamineralresourceareaasdefinedbytheMRZMap.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐51
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XII.Noise
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Exposepersonstoorgeneratenoiselevelsinexcessofstandardsestablishedinalocalgeneralplanornoiseordinanceorapplicablestandardsofotheragencies?
b. Exposepersonstoorgenerateexcessivegroundbornevibrationorgroundbornenoiselevels?
c. Resultinasubstantialpermanentincreaseinambientnoiselevelsintheprojectvicinityabovelevelsexistingwithouttheproject?
d. Resultinasubstantialtemporaryorperiodicincreaseinambientnoiselevelsintheprojectvicinityabovelevelsexistingwithouttheproject?
e. Belocatedwithinanairportlanduseplanarea,or,wheresuchaplanhasnotbeenadopted,withintwomilesofapublicairportorpublicuseairportandexposepeopleresidingorworkingintheprojectareatoexcessivenoiselevels?
f. Belocatedinthevicinityofaprivateairstripandexposepeopleresidingorworkingintheprojectareatoexcessivenoiselevels?
Affected Environment
AnEnvironmentalNoiseAssessmentreportwaspreparedbyJ.C.Brennan&Associates,Inc.forthe2011IS/MND(J.C.Brennan&Associates2011).Basedupontherelativelocationoftheapproved2011expansionsiteandthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite,thisreportisapplicabletothepresentstudy.
Noise Terminology
Noiseiscommonlydefinedasunwantedsoundthatannoysordisturbspeopleandpotentiallycausesanadversepsychologicalorphysiologicaleffectonhumanhealth.Becausenoiseisanenvironmentalpollutantthatcaninterferewithhumanactivities,evaluationofnoiseisnecessarywhenconsideringtheenvironmentalimpactsofaproposedproject.
Soundismechanicalenergy(vibration)transmittedbypressurewavesoveramediumsuchasairorwater.Soundischaracterizedbyvariousparametersthatincludetherateofoscillationofsoundwaves(frequency),thespeedofpropagation,andthepressurelevelorenergycontent(amplitude).Inparticular,thesoundpressurelevelisthemostcommondescriptorusedtocharacterizetheloudnessofanambient(existing)soundlevel.Althoughthedecibel(dB)scale,alogarithmicscale,is
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐52
July 2013ICF 00237.13
usedtoquantifysoundintensity,itdoesnotaccuratelydescribehowsoundintensityisperceivedbyhumanhearing.Thehumanearisnotequallysensitivetoallfrequenciesintheentirespectrum,sonoisemeasurementsareweightedmoreheavilyforfrequenciestowhichhumansaresensitiveinaprocesscalled“A‐weighting,”writtenas“dBA”andreferredtoas“A‐weighteddecibels“.
Ingeneral,humansoundperceptionissuchthatachangeinsoundlevelof1dBcannottypicallybeperceivedbythehumanear,achangeof3dBisjustnoticeable,achangeof5dBisclearlynoticeable,andachangeof10dBisperceivedasdoublingorhalvingthesoundlevel.
Differenttypesofmeasurementsareusedtocharacterizethetime‐varyingnatureofsound.Thesemeasurementsincludetheequivalentsoundlevel(Leq),theminimumandmaximumsoundlevels(LminandLmax),percentile‐exceededsoundlevels(suchasL10,L20),theday‐nightsoundlevel(Ldn),andthecommunitynoiseequivalentlevel(CNEL).LdnandCNELvaluesdifferbylessthan1dB.Asamatterofpractice,LdnandCNELvaluesareconsideredtobeequivalentandaretreatedassuchinthisassessment.
Existing Noise Receptors
Somelandusesareconsideredmoresensitivetoambientnoiselevelsthanothers.Landusesoftenassociatedwithsensitivereceptorsgenerallyincluderesidences,schools,libraries,andhospitals.
Sensitivityisafunctionofnoiseexposure(intermsofbothexposuredurationandinsulationfromnoise)andthetypesofactivitiesinvolved.Inthevicinityoftheexistingwinery,thelandusesareprimarilyagriculturalwithsomesinglefamilyresidences.Thenearestresidencesarelocatedover2,000feetfromtheexpansionsite(Figure7).
Onsite Noise Sources
Asstatedinthe2011IS/MND,existingnoisesourcesfromonsiteoperationsatGalloWineryincludeboilers,coolingtowers,grapepresses,rotaryscreens,electricmotorsforconveyorsystems,andonsitetrucktraffic.Theboilersandtowersarelocatedonthewestsideofthefacility.Currently,pressesandrotaryscreensarelocatedonboththewestandeastsidesofthefacility,andtrucktrafficoccursalongthenorthernperimeterofthefacility.Theprimarynoisefromboilersandcoolingtowersisconfinedtothewestandsouthwestsidesofthefacility,andthemajorityofexistingnoisefromthefacilityisshieldedontheeastsidebytheexistingfermentationtanks.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatnoiseimpactsforoffsitetrucktraffic,onsitetrucktraffic,newpressesandconveyors,andcoolingandrefrigerationsystemswouldbelessthansignificant.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproductionandthereforewouldnotrequireanyadditionaltrucktripsforgrapedelivery.Theproposedmodificationalsodoesnotinvolvenewpresses,conveyors,orcooling/refrigerationsystems.Thisimpactislessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:b
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatimpactsfromconstructionvibrationwouldbelessthansignificant,andnomitigationwasrequired.Constructionoftheproposedmodificationtothe
R-4R-1
R-3
R-2
Wie
r Ave
River Rd
Magnolia Ave
River Rd
Vinewood Ave
Gri
�th
Ave
Gri
�th
Ave
Figure 7Noise Sensitive Receptors
Gra
phic
s…00
265.
12 (
7-22
-201
3)
2,0001,0000
Feet
500 1,500 2,500
Legend
Residence
Expansion Site 2011
Proposed Modification 2013
Image: Google Inc. 2013. Google Earth Pro, Version 7.0. Mountain View, CA. Accessed: July 22, 2013.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐53
July 2013ICF 00237.13
approvedprojectcouldresultintemporaryincreasesinvibrationlevels.However,duetothedistancebetweentheconstructionareaandthenearestsensitivereceptor,itisexpectedthatconstruction‐relatedvibrationimpactswouldnotcauseanystructuraldamageorhumanannoyance.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:c
The2011IS/MNDstatedthatadditionalonsitenoiseassociatedwithtruckcirculation,grapedeliveries,coolingequipment,andequipmentoperationscouldresultinpermanentincreasesinambientnoiseinthesurroundingarea.Thiswasidentifiedasapotentiallysignificantimpact.MitigationMeasureNOI‐1,RepositionEvaporatorCondenserUnits,wouldreducethisimpacttolessthansignificant.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincludeadditionaltruckcirculation,grapedeliveries,coolingequipmentorotherfeaturesthatwouldcreatepermanentincreasesinambientnoise.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnoadditionalmitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:d
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatconstruction‐relatednoisewouldresultinaless‐than‐significantimpactandnomitigationwasrequired.Constructionoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldincludeproject‐generatednoisefromtrucksdeliveringconstructionequipmentandmaterialsanduseofheavydutyconstructionequipmentattheprojectsite.AsstatedinChapter2,ProjectDescription,constructionequipmentwouldincludebulldozers,backhoes,loaders,trenchers,concretetrucks,dumptrucks,vibratorycompactors,watertrucks,forklifts,andheavydeliverytrucks.Consequently,constructionoftheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldtemporarilyincreasenoiselevelsinthesurroundingarea.Forthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,J.C.Brennan&Associates,Inc.conductedconstructionnoisemodelingtopredictincreasesinnoiselevelsatthenearestresidentialpropertylinetotheeastoftheexpansionsite.Projectconstructionnoisewaspredictedtobeapproximately54dBAonanhourlybasis(Leq)uptoamaximum(Lmax)of59dBA.Thesenoiselevelsareexpectedtobesimilaratthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite,whichisadjacenttotheexpansionsite.ThesepredictednoiselevelswouldnotexceedtheCounty’snoisestandardsforconstructionnoise.Additionally,byadheringtotherequirementsoftheCounty’szoningcode,whichrequiresconstructiontobelimitedtothedaytimehoursbetween7:00a.m.and6:00p.m.,andcontinuingmufflingofallconstructionequipment(Ord.1586(part),1977),potentialimpactsresultingfromtemporaryincreasesinconstruction‐relatednoisewouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:e,f
TheclosestpublicairportisTurlockMunicipalAirport,locatedapproximately10milesnortheastoftheprojectsite,andtheclosestprivateairstripistheStevensonStrip,locatedapproximately4.5milessouthwestoftheprojectsite.Therewouldbenoimpactrelatedtoexposureofemployeestoexcessivenoisefromairportuses.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐54
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XIII.PopulationandHousing
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Inducesubstantialpopulationgrowthinanarea,eitherdirectly(e.g.,byproposingnewhomesandbusinesses)orindirectly(e.g.,throughextensionofroadsorotherinfrastructure)?
b. Displaceasubstantialnumberofexistinghousingunits,necessitatingtheconstructionofreplacementhousingelsewhere?
c. Displaceasubstantialnumberofpeople,necessitatingtheconstructionofreplacementhousingelsewhere?
Affected Environment
ThenearestcommunitytotheproposedprojectistheCityofLivingston,locatedapproximately4.5milestothenortheast.The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteispartofacommercialmanufacturingprojectanddoesnotincludeanyresidentialdevelopment.
Constructionofthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectwouldrequireapproximately10–60workersduringeachconstructionphaseoverthecourseofprojectconstructionandapproximately45permanentemployees(9duringtheregularseasonand36duringthecrushseason).Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldrequireapproximately5–25workersduringconstructionand,foroperations,anadditionalsixpermanentandsixseasonalemployees(sixduringtheoff‐seasonandanadditionalsixduringcrushseason).
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattherewouldbenoimpactonpopulationgrowthasaresultoftheexpansionproject,andnomitigationwasrequired.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectinvolvesrelocatingtheadministrationandprocessbuildingswithintheexistingsite,andaddinga2‐acreareatoholdcooperagetanks.Itdoesnotincludetheconstructionofanyresidentialunits.Constructionoftheprojectwouldresultinatemporaryincreaseinconstruction‐relatedjobopportunitiesinthelocalarea.However,itisrelativelyunlikelythatconstructionworkerswouldrelocatetheirplaceofresidenceasaconsequenceoftemporarilyworkingontheproject.Additionally,constructionworkerscanbeexpectedtobedrawnfromtheexistingconstructionlaborforceinthesurroundingcommunities.
Theprojectcouldresultinanindirectincreaseinpopulationthroughtheestablishmentofnewjobopportunitiesassociatedwiththeoverallwineryfacility.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldrequireanadditional12employees(sixpermanentandsixseasonal),whichresultsinatotalof15employeesduringtheoffseasonand42employeesduringthecrushseasonfortheentireproject.Crushseasonistypicallyonly3.5monthslong;employeesduringthistimeperiod
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐55
July 2013ICF 00237.13
wouldbetemporary,seasonalworkers.Itisanticipatedthattemporaryandpermanentemployeeswouldalreadyresidelocally,andsowouldbepartoftheexistinglocalpopulation.Alternatively,seasonalworkerswhodonotalreadyhaveexistinghousingarrangementscouldbemigrantworkersthatareaccommodatedintemporaryhousinganddonotgenerateademandforadditionalpermanenthousing.Theproposedprojectwouldthereforenotresultinsubstantialindirectpopulationgrowth.Additionally,theprojectdoesnotincludeanynewroadsoroffsiteinfrastructurethatwouldresultinindirectpopulationgrowth.Therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:b,c
The2acreareaproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteconsistsofvacantagriculturalland.Therearenoexistingresidentialhousingunitsonthesite.Oneresidenceislocatedapproximately2,000feetfromtheprojectboundary.Thisunitwouldnotbeaffectedbytheproject.Therefore,theprojectwouldnotdisplaceanyexistinghousingorresultinpeoplebeingdisplacedfromtheirhousing,andwouldnotrequiretheconstructionofreplacementhousingelsewhere.Therewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐56
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XIV.PublicServices
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Resultinsubstantialadversephysicalimpactsassociatedwiththeprovisionofneworphysicallyalteredgovernmentalfacilitiesoraneedforneworphysicallyalteredgovernmentalfacilities,theconstructionofwhichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentalimpacts,inordertomaintainacceptableserviceratios,responsetimes,orotherperformanceobjectivesforanyofthefollowingpublicservices:
Fireprotection?
Policeprotection?
Schools?
Parks?
Otherpublicfacilities?
Affected Environment
Fire Protection
TheMercedCountyFireDepartment(MCFD)isresponsibleforprovidingfiresuppressionservicesthroughoutthecounty.LivingstonFireStation96wouldprimarilyservetheprojectsiteintheeventthatfireprotectionservicesarerequested.LivingstonFireStation96islocatedat1490CStreet,whichisabout5milesnortheastoftheexpansionsite.TheMCFDhascontractedwiththeCaliforniaDepartmentofForestryandFireProtection(CALFIRE)toprovideadditionalfireprotectionservices.TheCountyFireCode(Section10.301(c))requiresallprojectstoprovideapprovedwatersuppliescapableofdeliveringadequatewaterflowforfireprotectiontoallpremisesuponwhichbuildingsorportionsofbuildingsareconstructed.AccordingtotheGeneralPlan,forlargerdevelopments,twoaccesspointsarerequiredtoensureescapeandemergencyserviceoptions.
Police Services
PoliceservicesfortheprojectareaareprovidedbytheMercedCountySheriff’sDepartment.TheneareststationtotheprojectsiteistheCFBludworth(North)SubStationon9481ShanksRoadinDelhi.
Schools
ResidentsintheprojectareaareservedbytheLivingstonUnionSchoolDistrict(LUSD)andtheMercedUnifiedHighSchoolDistrict(MUHSD).TheLUSDofferspre‐kindergartenthrougheighthgradeandiscomprisedoftwopreschools,threeelementaryschoolsandonemiddleschool.The
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐57
July 2013ICF 00237.13
MUHSDofferseighththroughtwelfthgradeandiscomprisedofeighthighschools.TheMUHSDservesthecommunitiesofAtwater,Livingston,Merced,andthesurroundingarea.
Parks
RefertoSectionXIV,Recreationforadiscussionofparkandrecreationalfacilities.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a
Fire protection
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionwouldnotcreateanadditionaldemandforfireprotection.TheMCFDhasestablishedrequirementsforonsitewaterstorageforfireprotectionandadequatefiredepartmentaccess.Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojecthasthreeaccesspointsthatcomplywithallapplicablefiresafetyregulations.Further,theCountyhasestablishedthatnewdevelopmentsshallpaytheirfairshareofcostsforfireprotectionfacilitiesandservices.AstheMCFDalreadyservestheexistingGalloWinery,thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectaswellasthe2‐acreexpansionwouldcomplywithapplicablefiresafetyregulations,andwouldpayfireimpactfees.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectisnotanticipatedtocreateanyadditionaldemandforfireprotection.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Police protection
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattherewouldbelessthansignificantimpactsonpoliceprotection.Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectrequiredanincreaseofninepermanentemployeesduringtheoff‐crushseasonand36seasonalemployeesduringthecrushseason.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldadd12additionalemployees(sixduringtheoff‐crushseasonandsixduringthecrushseason).Accordingtothe2011IS/MND,afterapreliminaryevaluationoftheprojectbytheSheriff’sDepartment,theDepartmentstatedtheywouldbeabletoprovideadequatelawenforcementtothecompletedfacility.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectandadditionalincreaseinemployeesisnotanticipatedtofurtherimpactlawenforcementatthesite.Withtheminimalincreaseinpoliceprotectionneedsandtheadequateavailabilityofexistingfacilitiesandserviceavailabletoservetheproject,impactsonpoliceprotectionwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Schools
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionwouldnotresultinasignificantincreaseinthenumberofstudentsattendinglocalschoolsandthereforewasconsideredlessthansignificant.Theproposedprojectdoesnotincludeanyresidentialdevelopment.Therefore,theprojectwouldhavenodirectimpactsrelatedtoincreasesinthenumberofstudentsattendingeitheroftheseschooldistricts.Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectwouldcreateapproximately45newjobs(9permanentand36seasonal).Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldadd12morejobs(6permanentand6seasonal).Itisanticipatedthatthemajorityofthenewjobswouldbefilledbyindividualscurrentlylivinginthecommunityand/orpeoplethatwouldcommutetothefacilityfromnearbyareaswithintheCounty.Additionally,asdiscussedinChapter2,ProjectDescription,constructionoftheprojectwouldrequireconstructionworkersthroughoutthefive
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐58
July 2013ICF 00237.13
phasesofprojectconstruction.Thiswouldbeatemporaryincreaseinworkersandtherewouldnotbeapermanentincreaseinpopulationintheprojectvicinityattendingschools.Therefore,theprojectwouldnotresultinacommensurateincreaseinthenumberofstudentsattendingtheLUSDorMUHSDschools.Impactswouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Parks
RefertoSectionXV,Recreation,foradiscussionofimpactsonparkandrecreationalfacilities.Thisimpactislessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Other Public Facilities
Theproposedprojectwouldnotaffectthedemandforanyotherpublicservices.Noimpactwouldoccur.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐59
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XV.Recreation
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Increasetheuseofexistingneighborhoodandregionalparksorotherrecreationalfacilitiessuchthatsubstantialphysicaldeteriorationofthefacilitywouldoccurorbeaccelerated?
b. Includerecreationalfacilitiesorrequiretheconstructionorexpansionofrecreationalfacilitiesthatmighthaveanadversephysicaleffectontheenvironment?
Affected Environment
ParksandrecreationservicesareprovidedbytheCounty’sParks&RecreationDepartment.Noparksorrecreationalfacilitiesarelocatedonthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.TheclosestrecreationfacilityisHagamanPark,locatedonthenorthsideofRiverRoad,approximately2milessouthwestoftheexpansionsite.TheCountyusesanacreage/populationratioforparkstodetermineparklandneedsinunincorporatedcommunities.
Discussion
Checklistitem:a,b
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheexpansionprojectwouldhavealess‐than‐significantimpactonrecreation,andnomitigationwasrequired.Openspaceandparksaretypicallyprovidedtoserveresidentialpopulations.Theprojectdoesnotproposeresidentialunits,andwouldthereforenotpermanentlyincreasedemandonparksthroughincreasedpopulation.Theprojectdoesnotincludetheconstructionorexpansionofanyrecreationalfacilities.ConstructionworkersmightusenearbyHagamanParkforlunchbreakorotherrecreationalpurposes.However,theincreaseinconstructionworkerswouldbetemporary,andnopermanentchangeintheuseofrecreationalfacilitiesislikelytoresultfromprojectimplementation.Therefore,theprojectwouldnotincreasetheuseofexistingparkandrecreationalfacilities,wouldnotresultinthesubstantialdeteriorationofexistingparks,andwouldnotrequiretheconstructionorexpansionofnewrecreationalfacilities.Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.Nomitigationisrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐60
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XVI.Transportation/Traffic
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransit?
b. Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways?
c. Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks?
d. Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipment)?
e. Resultininadequateemergencyaccess?
f. Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities?
Affected Environment
Theprojectsiteislocatedinaruralagriculturalareathatischaracterizedbyasystemofruralroads.ThenearesturbanizedareaistheCityofLivingston,approximately4.5milestotheeast.PrimaryregionalaccesstotheprojectareaisfromI‐5andSR99,bothnorth‐southfreeways.PrimarylocalaccesstotheGalloWineryisfromRiverRoad,atwo‐lanepavedroadthatrunsfromeasttowest.TheexistingfacilityisadjacenttoRiverRoadonthenorthandisgenerallylocatedbetweenWeirAvenueontheeastandGriffithAvenueonthewest.Threeaccesspointsleadintothefacility,allfromRiverRoad.ThemainemployeeandvisitoraccesstothesiteislocatedonaprivatedrivewayoffRiverRoad,withasecondprivateentrancefromRiverRoadtotheeasternpartofthefacility.TheprimarytruckentranceintothefacilityisfromGriffithAvenue.Bothoftheprivateentrancesalsoprovidesecondaryaccessintothefacilityfortrucks.TheGalloWineryisnotservedbyMerced
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐61
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Countybustransit.BothRiverRoadandGriffithAvenuearerelativelynarrow,two‐lanecountryroadsthatdonotincludeaccommodationsforbicyclesorpedestrians.
ThemajorityoftraffictoandfromtheGalloWineryistrucktrafficforgrapedeliveryandoffsiteshippingofbulkwineandpomace.Existingdailytruckroundtripsareapproximatedas95and470duringtheoff‐crushandcrushseasons,respectively.Thepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectresultedinanincreaseofapproximately10and65truckroundtripsduringtheoff‐crushandcrushseasons,respectively.Thecrushseasontypicallylasts3.5months.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotresultinthegenerationofanyadditionalproducts,includingnoadditionalwineorpomace,andthereforenoadditionaltrucktripsforthosepurposes.
Discussion
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatimpactsontransportation/trafficwouldbelessthansignificant,andnomitigationwasrequired.
Checklistitem:a,b
Primarytraffictoandfromthesiteduringconstructionwouldbetrucksforequipmentandmaterialsdeliveriesandconstructionworkers.Construction‐relatedtrafficwouldbetemporaryanditisexpectedthatmostconstructionequipmentwouldremainonsiteforthedurationofactivitiesundereachphase,therebyminimizingvehiculartripstoandfromtheprojectareaandtheexistingfacility.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotchangethenumberofoperationaltrucktripsbecausetherewouldbenoincreaseintheamountofproduction.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldrequire12additionalemployees(sixpermanentandsixseasonal),sotheamountofworkertripstotheprojectsitewouldbeincreasedbyamaximumof12roundtrips,foratotalfortheapprovedexpansionplustheproposedmodificationof57roundtripsduringcrushseason.Thisisaslightincrease.Neitherconstruction‐noroperations‐relatedtrafficwouldresultinsubstantialchangestotheexistingcirculationsystemorresultincongestiononlocalroadways,becausetheoverallincreasesintrafficwouldbelargelytemporaryandareconsideredminimal.Thereforethisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
AnalysisofexistingandproposedparkinglotcapacityforMM11‐018inthe2011IS/MNDfoundthatsufficientparkingforexistingandfutureemployeeswouldbeavailableonsite.Noadditionalparkingisneededtoaccommodatetheslightincreaseinstaffing.
Checklistitem:c
Theprojectsiteisnotlocatedwithinanairportlanduseplanorwithinthevicinityofapublicuseairportorprivateairstrip.TurlockMunicipalAirport,theclosestpublicairporttotheprojectarea,islocatedapproximately10milestothenortheastatadistancewheretheprojectwouldnotimpactairtrafficpatterns.Noimpactwouldoccur.
Checklistitem:d
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectdoesnotincludeconstructionorexpansionofnewroadsandwouldnotintroduceincompatibleuses,astheywouldremainagricultural.However,aportionofRiverRoadhassufferedsignificantdegradationasaresultofheavytruckuse.The2011
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐62
July 2013ICF 00237.13
IS/MNDstatedthatthisportionofRiverRoadcouldbeworsenedwiththeincreasedprojectrelated‐trucktraffic.Asaresultofthispotentialimpact,Gallofundedreconstructionofthisroadasrequiredasmitigationforapprovalofthe2011IS/MND.TherepairstoRiverRoadhavebeencompletedbyMercedCountyinadvanceofthe2013crushseason.Thisimpactwouldthereforebelessthansignificant.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotaddsubstantialincreasestotraffic,andwouldnotchangethisagreement.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:e
Likethepreviouslyapprovedexpansionproject,emergencyaccesstothefacilityisviaRiverRoadandwouldremainunchanged.Trafficassociatedwithbothprojectconstructionandoperationisnotexpectedtorequireroadclosuresorotherwiseinterruptaccesstothefacility.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:f
Asdescribedabove,theGalloWineryisnotlocatedwithintheCounty’sbustransitservicearea,andbothRiverRoadandGriffithAvenuearetwo‐laneruralroadsthatdonotincludeaccommodationsforbicyclesorpedestrians.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpact.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐63
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XVII.UtilitiesandServiceSystems
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
Wouldtheproject:
a. ExceedwastewatertreatmentrequirementsoftheapplicableRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard?
b. Requireorresultintheconstructionofnewwaterorwastewatertreatmentfacilitiesorexpansionofexistingfacilities,theconstructionofwhichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentaleffects?
c. Requireorresultintheconstructionofnewstormwaterdrainagefacilitiesorexpansionofexistingfacilities,theconstructionofwhichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentaleffects?
d. Havesufficientwatersuppliesavailabletoservetheprojectfromexistingentitlementsandresources,orwouldneworexpandedentitlementsbeneeded?
e. Resultinadeterminationbythewastewatertreatmentproviderthatservesormayservetheprojectthatithasadequatecapacitytoservetheproject’sprojecteddemandinadditiontotheprovider’sexistingcommitments?
f. Beservedbyalandfillwithsufficientpermittedcapacitytoaccommodatetheproject’ssolidwastedisposalneeds?
g. Complywithfederal,state,andlocalstatutesandregulationsrelatedtosolidwaste?
Affected Environment
WaterforthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectwouldbesourcedfromexistingwaterwellslocatedontheGalloproperty.Theexistingwellsaresufficienttoservetheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectarea,andnonewwaterwellsareproposed.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotchangetheamountofproductionandnodischargewaterinadditiontowhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MNDisanticipated.
SolidwasteservicesandfacilitiesandoperationsinMercedCountyaregovernedbytheMercedCountyAssociationofGovernments(MCAG).Modesto/WintonDisposalinAtwaterprovidessolidwastecollection,recycling,transportation,anddisposalservicestotheprojectsite.TheprojectareaisservedbytheHighway59DisposalSiteinMerced.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproduction,andadditionalsolidwasteabovewhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MNDisnotanticipated.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐64
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Discussion
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatimpactsonutilitiesandservicesystemswouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationmeasureswererequired.
Checklistitem:a
Asstatedabove,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotchangetheamountofproduction.Wastewaterwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MND,andnoadditionaldischargewaterisanticipated.Inaddition,uponcompletionoftheapprovedE.&J.GalloWinery(Gallo)LivingstonWaterInnovationandEnergyFacility(LWINEFacility),overallwastewaterdischargewillbereducedasawhole.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:b
The2011IS/MNDstatedthattheincreaseinwateruseandwastewatergenerationwouldbeminimalandwouldnotrequireorresultintheconstructionofnewwaterorwastewatertreatmentfacilitiesorexpansionofexistingfacilities.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotgeneratewastewaterinexcessofwhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MND.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:c
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldslightlyincreasetheamountofimpervioussurfacecreatedbytheoverallproject.However,asproject‐relatedstormwaterrunoffwouldbecollected,storedandappliedonsite,therewouldnotbeneedforexpansionorconstructionofnewstormwaterdrainagefacilities.Thisimpactisconsideredlessthansignificant.
Checklistitem:d
Watersupplyforthepreviouslyapprovedexpansionprojectisprovidedbyexistingonsitewells.The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatexistingwatersupplycapacityissufficientandwouldnotrequireconstructionofnewfacilities.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreasewateruse,becauseproductionwouldnotchange.Nootherwaterresourcesorentitlementswouldbeusedorbesignificantlyaffectedasaresultoftheproject.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Checklistitem:e
The2011IS/MNDconcludedthattheincreaseinproject‐relatedwastewaterdemandwouldbeminimalandwouldnotrequireconstructionofnewtreatmentfacilities.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproductionandthereforeisnotanticipatedtocreatewastewaterinadditiontowhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MND.Therefore,therewouldbenoimpact.
Checklistitem:f,g
Asdescribedabove,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotincreaseproduction,andadditionalsolidwasteabovewhatwasanalyzedinthe2011IS/MNDisnotanticipated.The2011IS/MNDconcludedthatthepreviouslyapprovedEastsideExpansionwouldnotconflictwithanyfederal,state,orlocalstatutesrelatedtosolidwaste.Thiswouldalsobetrue
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐65
July 2013ICF 00237.13
fortheproposedmodificationtotheapprovedproject,asadditionalsolidwasteisnotanticipated.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationisrequired.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐66
July 2013ICF 00237.13
XVIII.MandatoryFindingsofSignificance
PotentiallySignificantImpact
Less‐than‐SignificantwithMitigationIncorporated
Less‐than‐SignificantImpact
NoImpact
a. Doestheprojecthavethepotentialtodegradethequalityoftheenvironment,substantiallyreducethehabitatofafishorwildlifespecies,causeafishorwildlifepopulationtodropbelowself‐sustaininglevels,threatentoeliminateaplantoranimalcommunity,substantiallyreducethenumberorrestricttherangeofarareorendangeredplantoranimal,oreliminateimportantexamplesofthemajorperiodsofCaliforniahistoryorprehistory?
b. Doestheprojecthaveimpactsthatareindividuallylimitedbutcumulativelyconsiderable?(“Cumulativelyconsiderable”meansthattheincrementaleffectsofaprojectareconsiderablewhenviewedinconnectionwiththeeffectsofpastprojects,theeffectsofothercurrentprojects,andtheeffectsofprobablefutureprojects.)
c. Doestheprojecthaveenvironmentaleffectsthatwillcausesubstantialadverseeffectsonhumanbeings,eitherdirectlyorindirectly?
Checklistitem:a,b,c
Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotdegradethequalityoftheenvironmentsuchthatprotectedbiologicalspeciesandhabitatorsignificantculturalresourceswouldbeeliminated.Theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldexpandtheexistingwineryproductionfacilitysiteby2acres,andwouldnotrequireexpansionofoffsitevineyardsorfacilities.Furthermore,implementationoftheprojectwouldnotchangetheexistingruralagriculturalsettingoragriculturalusesinwaysthatcouldcontributetocumulativelossofprimefarmlandsandCountylandsinagriculturalpreserve.Potentialhumanhealthrisksassociatedwithairquality,geologichazards,floodhazards,firehazards,hazardouswastes,ornoiseimpactswouldbeeitherlessthansignificantormitigatedtoalessthansignificantlevel.Therewouldnotbeanysubstantialadverseeffectsrelatedtoinadequateprovisionofemergencyresponseorotherpublicservicesasaresultofprojectimplementation.Therefore,theproposedmodificationtotheapprovedprojectwouldnotresultinsubstantialadverseeffectsonthehumanenvironment.
2011MitigationMeasureAIR‐1:Prepareandimplementadustcontrolplan.
(New)MitigationMeasureBIO‐3:Conductapreconstructionground‐nestingbirdsurveyandestablishno‐disturbancebuffers,ifnecessary.
(New)MitigationMeasureBIO‐4:CompensateforlossofSwainson’shawkforaginghabitat
2011MitigationMeasureCR‐1:Implementplantoaddressdiscoveryofunanticipatedburiedculturalorpaleontologicalresources.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐67
July 2013ICF 00237.13
2011MitigationMeasureCR‐2:Implementplantoaddressdiscoveryofhumanremains.
2011MitigationMeasureCC‐1:ImplementbestmanagementpracticesforGHGemissions.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐68
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Applicants Agreement to Mitigation
2011MitigationMeasureAIR‐1:Prepareandimplementadustcontrolplan.
Tocontrolthegenerationofconstruction‐relatedPM10emissions,theCountywillrequireconstructioncontractorstoprepareadustcontrolplanandsubmitittotheSJVAPCDatleast48hoursbeforeanyearthmovingorconstructionactivities.Aspreviouslyindicated,implementationofadustcontrolplanwouldsatisfytherequirementsofRegulationVIII(Siongpers.comm.).Potentialmeasuresthatmightbeincludedinthedustcontrolplancouldinclude,butarenotlimitedto,thefollowing.
Pre‐activity.
Pre‐watertheworksiteandphaseworktoreducetheamountofdisturbedsurfaceareaatanyonetime.
Activeoperations.
Applywatertodryareasduringleveling,grading,trenching,andearthmovingactivities.
Constructandmaintainwindbarriersandapplywaterordustsuppressantstothedisturbedsurfaceareas.
Inactiveoperations,includingafter‐workhours,weekends,andholidays.
Applywaterordustsuppressantsondisturbedsurfaceareastoformavisiblecrust,andrestrictvehicleaccesstomaintainthevisiblecrust.
Temporarystabilizationofareasthatremainunusedfor7ormoredays.
Restrictvehicularaccessandapplyandmaintainwaterordustsuppressantsonallun‐vegetatedareas.
Establishvegetationonallpreviouslydisturbedareas.
Applygravelandmaintainatallpreviouslydisturbedareas.
Pavepreviouslydisturbedareas.
Unpavedaccessandhaulroads,trafficandequipmentstorageareas.
Applywaterordustsuppressantstounpavedhaulandaccessroads.
Postaspeedlimitofnotmorethan15milesperhour,usingsignsateachentranceandagainevery500feet.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedtovehicletrafficandequipmentstorageareas.
Windevents.
Waterapplicationequipmentwillapplywatertocontrolfugitivedustduringwindevents,unlessunsafetodoso.
Outdoorconstructionactivitiesthatdisturbthesoilwillceasewhenevervisibledustemissionscannotbeeffectivelycontrolled.
Outdoorhandlingofbulkmaterials.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedwhenhandlingbulkmaterials.
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐69
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Windbarrierswithlessthan50%porositywillbeinstalledandmaintained,andwaterordustsuppressantswillbeapplied.
Outdoorstorageofbulkmaterials.
Waterordustsuppressantswillbeappliedtostoragepiles.
Storagepileswillbecoveredwithtarps,plastic,orothersuitablematerialandanchoredinamannerthatpreventsthecoverfrombeingremovedbywindaction.
Windbarrierswithlessthan50%porositywillbeinstalledandmaintainedaroundthestoragepiles,andwaterordustsuppressantswillbeapplied.
Athree‐sidedstructurewithlessthan50%porositythatisatleastashighasthestoragepileswillbeused.
Onsitetransportingofbulkmaterials.
Vehiclespeedwillbelimitedontheworksite.
Allhaultruckswillbeloadedsuchthatthefreeboardisnotlessthan6incheswhentransportedacrossanypavedpublicaccessroad.
Asufficientamountofwaterwillbeappliedtothetopoftheloadtolimitvisibledustemissions.
Haultruckswillbecoveredwithatarporothersuitablecover.
Offsitetransportingofbulkmaterials.
Theinteriorofemptiedtruckcargocompartmentswillbecleanedorcoveredbeforeleavingthesite.
Spillageorlossofbulkmaterialsfromholesorotheropeningsinthecargocompartment’sfloor,sides,andtailgateswillbeprevented.
Outdoortransportusingachuteorconveyor:
Noopenchutesorconveyorswillbeused.
Chutesorconveyorswillbefullyenclosed.
Watersprayequipmentwillbeusedtosufficientlywetthematerials.
Transportedmaterialswillbewashedorscreenedtoremovefines(PM10orsmaller).
MitigationMeasureBIO‐3:Conductapreconstructionground‐nestingbirdsurveyandestablishno‐disturbancebuffers,ifnecessary.
Anestingbirdsurveywillbeconductedbyaqualifiedbiologistnomorethan15dayspriortocommencingconstructionworkduringthenestingseason(generallyMarch1toAugust31).Thesurveywillencompassthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteandatleast200feettothesouthandeastwithinundevelopedareasadjacenttothe2‐acres.Anadditionalsurveywillbeconductedpriortothestartofanewphaseorwheneverthereisabreakof15daysormoreduringthenestingseason.
Ifthepreconstructionsurveyindicatesthepresenceofmigratorybirdnestsinanyareasthatwouldbedirectlyaffectedbyvegetationremoval,constructionactivities,oranyotherground‐disturbingactivities,ano‐disturbancebufferwillbeestablishedbythebiologistaroundthenestingsite.Factorsdeterminingthebuffersizetypicallyincludethelevelofnoiseorconstructiondisturbance,lineofsightbetweenthenestandthedisturbance,ambientlevelsof
Merced County Environmental Checklist
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
3‐70
July 2013ICF 00237.13
noiseandotherdisturbancesinthearea,andothertopographicalorartificialbarriers.Thesefactorswillbeanalyzedinordertomakeanappropriatedecisiononbufferdistances.Thedistance,extent,andnatureofthebufferswillbedeterminedbyaqualifiedwildlifebiologistcoordinatingwithanyapplicableregulatoryagencies(e.g.,CDFW,USFWS).
Toavoiddisturbanceordestructionofanestingsite,noconstructionwilloccurwithintheno‐disturbancebufferuntilafterthebreedingseason,oruntilaqualifiedwildlifebiologistdeterminesthattheyounghavefledged.AreportsummarizingthesurveyresultswillbesubmittedtoMercedCountyandapplicableregulatoryagencies.
MitigationMeasureBIO‐4:CompensateforlossofSwainson’shawkforaginghabitat
Theproposedprojectwillresultinthepermanentlossof2.0acresofsuitableSwainson’shawkforaginghabitat.Theclosestknownnestislocatedapproximately2.1milesfromthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.
TheMercedCountyPlanningDepartmenthasdevelopedastandardSwainson’shawkmitigationmeasurethat,whenimplemented,willmitigateforthelossofsuitableforaginghabitat.Compensationforthepermanentlossofforaginghabitatisbasedonthedistancefromthenearestnest,asprovidedinthetablebelow.DistancefromProjectBoundaryMitigationAcreageRatioa
Within1mile 1.00:1b
Between1and5miles 0.75:1a Ratiomeans[acresofmitigationland]to[acresofforaginghabitatimpacted].b Thisratioshallbe0.5:1iftheacquiredlandscanbeactivelymanagedforpreyproduction.
CompensationcanbeprovidedthroughfeetitleacquisitionorconservationeasementacquisitionofcomparableforaginghabitatwithimplementationofaCounty‐approvedhabitatmanagementplan.Alternatively,mitigationcreditsmaybepurchasedfromaCounty‐approvedmitigationbankforSwainson’shawkforaginghabitatinMercedCounty.AnoffsitehabitatmitigationplandescribingthemethodofcompensationmustbesubmittedtotheMercedCountyPlanningDepartmentwithin30daysofitsexecutionorpriortothestartofconstruction‐relatedactivities,whicheverisearlier.
2011MitigationMeasureCR‐1:StopWorkifburiedculturaldepositsareencounteredduringconstructionactivities.
Ifburiedculturalresourcessuchaschippedorgroundstone,historicdebris,orbuildingfoundationsareinadvertentlydiscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities,workwillstopinthatareaandwithina100‐footradiusofthefinduntilaqualifiedarchaeologistcanassessthesignificanceofthefindand,ifnecessary,developaResponsePlan,withappropriatetreatmentmeasures,inconsultationwiththeCounty,theStateHistoricPreservationOfficer(SHPO),andotherappropriateagenciesandotherappropriateagencies.PreservationinplaceshallbethepreferredtreatmentmethodperCEQAGuidelinessec.15126.4(b)(avoidance,openspace,capping,easement).Datarecoveryofimportantinformationabouttheresource,research,orotheractionsdeterminedduringconsultation,isallowedifistheonlyfeasibletreatmentmethod.
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
4‐1
July 2013ICF 00237.13
Chapter 4 References Cited
Printed References BauerAssociates.2011.ReportGeotechnicalInvestigation:E.&J.GalloWinery,GalloLivingston
EastsideExpansion,18000W.RiverRoad,Livingston,California.PreparedforSummitEngineering,Inc.October7.
J.C.Brennan&Associates.Inc.2011.EnvironmentalNoiseAssessment,E.&J.GalloWineryExpansion,MercedCounty,California.October18.(Job#2011‐162.)Auburn,CA.Preparedfor:ICFInternational,SanFrancisco,CA.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard2008.ClimateChangeScopingPlan.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf>.Accessed:July12,2013.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.2011a.AreaDesignationsMaps/StateandNational.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm>.Accessed:June25,2013.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.2011b.StatusofScopingPlanRecommendedMeasures.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/status_of_scoping_plan_measures.pdf>.Accessed:July12,2013.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.2011c.CaliforniaCap‐and‐TradeProgramResolution10‐42.December16,2010.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/capandtrade/draft%20resolution.pdf>.Accessed:July12,2013.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.2012.AmbientAirQualityStandards.LastRevised:June7,2012.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf>.Accessed:June25,2013.
CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.2013.AirQualityDataStatistics.Available:<http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php>.Accessed:June25,2013.
CaliforniaDepartmentofConservation.2010.MercedCountyImportantFarmland2010;Sheet1of2.Available:<ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/fmmp/2010/merced2010.shp>.Accessed:July10,2013.
CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife.2013.CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase,RareFind4.TurlockandeightsurroundingU.S.GeologicalSurvey7.5‐minutequadrangles.Available:<http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp>.Accessed:June18,2013.
CaliforniaDepartmentofWaterResources.2004.California’sGroundwaterBulletin,Bulletin118.MercedSubbasin.Available:<http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/groundwater/bulletin_118/basindescriptions/5‐22.04.pdf>.Accessed:October18,2011.
Merced County References Cited
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
4‐2
July 2013ICF 00237.13
CaliforniaNativePlantSociety.2013.InventoryofRareandEndangeredPlants(onlineedition,v7‐12feb).Lastrevised:June13,2013.Available:<http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi‐bin/inv/inventory.cgi>.Accessed:June18,2013.
CenterforClimateandEnergySolutions.2012.TheGreenhouseEffect.Available:<http://www.c2es.org/facts‐figures/basics/greenhouse‐effect>.Accessed:July12,2013.
Clinkenbeard,J.P.1999.MineralLandClassificationofMercedCounty,California.CaliforniaDepartmentofConservation,DivisionofMinesandGeology.(OFR99‐08.)63pp.
FederalEmergencyManagementAgency.2008.FloodInsuranceRateMap(FIRM).Available:http://map1.msc.fema.gov/idms/IntraView.cgi?ROT=0&O_X=7200&O_Y=5754&O_ZM=0.077324&O_SX=1113&O_SY=710&O_DPI=400&O_TH=54340598&O_EN=54346161&O_PG=1&O_MP=1&CT=0&DI=0&WD=14400&HT=10346&JX=1592&JY=770&MPT=0&MPS=0&ACT=0&KEY=54340198&ITEM=1&PICK_VIEW_CENTER.x=578&PICK_VIEW_CENTER.y=660&R1=VIN.Accessed:10‐18‐2011.
ICFInternational.2011.InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclarationfortheE.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionProject.November2011.
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange1996.1995:ScienceofClimateChange.(SecondAssessmentReport).Cambridge,U.K.:CambridgeUniversityPress.
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange.2001.AtmosphericChemistryandGreenhouseGases.InClimateChange2001:WorkingGroupI:TheScientificBasis.Available:<http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/pdf/TAR‐04.PDF>.Accessed:July12,2013.
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange.2007a.Introduction.InB.Metz,O.R.Davidson,P.R.Bosch,R.Dave,L.A.Meyer,(eds.),ContributionofWorkingGroupIIItotheFourthAssessmentReportoftheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange,2007.Cambridge,U.K.andNewYork,NY,USA:CambridgeUniversityPress.Available:<http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment‐report/ar4/wg3/ar4‐wg3‐chapter1.pdf>.Accessed:July12,2013.
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange2007b.ClimateChange2007:ThePhysicalScienceBasis.ContributionofWorkingGroupItotheFourthAssessmentReportoftheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange.Solomon,S.,D.Qin,M.Manning,Z.Chen,M.Marquis,K.B.Averyt,M.TignorandH.L.Miller(eds.).Available:<http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4‐wg1.htm>.Accessed:July12,2013.
KjeldsenBiologicalConsulting.2011.BiologicalAssessmentfortheLivingstonWineryProposedExpansion,18000W.RiverRoad,LivingstonCA.APN#047‐130‐034(and030).August.
MercedCountyLocalAgencyFormationCommission.2007.WaterandSewerServiceProvidersMunicipalServiceReview.CountyofMerced.FinalReport.PreparedbyEconomic&PlanningSystems,Inc.ApprovedbyLAFCOMay24.Available:<http://www.lafcomerced.org/pages/pdfs/MSR/urban_sewer_and_water_district_final_msr_report.pdf>Accessed:October12,2011.
MercedCounty.1990.Year2000GeneralPlan.Safety.AdoptedDecember4,1990.Available:<http://www.co.merced.ca.us/documents/Planning_and_Community_Development/General_Plan/Complete%20Document.PDF>.Accessed:June25,2013.
Merced County References Cited
Subsequent Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationE. & J. Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Modification
4‐3
July 2013ICF 00237.13
NationalOceanicandAtmosphericAdministration.2010.GreenhouseGases:FrequentlyAskedQuestions.Available:<http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html>.Accessed:July12,2013.
SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict.2002.GuideforAssessingandMitigatingAirQualityImpacts.MobileSource/CEQAPage22‐26.SectionofthePlanningDivisionoftheSanJoaquinValleyUnifiedAirPollutionControlDistrict.Fresno,CA.January2002.
SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict.2009.GuidanceforValleyLand‐UseAgenciesinAddressingGHGEmissionsImpactsforNewProjectsUnderCEQA.December17,2009.Available:<http://www.valleyair.org/programs/CCAP/12‐17‐09/3%20CCAP%20‐%20FINAL%20LU%20Guidance%20‐%20Dec%2017%202009.pdf>.Accessed:July12,2013.
SanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict.2011.InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration–E.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansion.December1,2011.LetterfromDavidWarner,DirectorofPermitServicesatSJVAPCD,toJamesHolland,CountyofMerced.
StateWaterResourcesControlBoard.2010.CWASection303(d)ListofWaterQualityLimitedSegments,CentralValleyRegion.Available:http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/Vtmdl/docs/303dlists2006/epa/r5_06_303d_reqtmdls.pdf.Accessed:July10,2013.
TomOriger&Associates.2011.ACulturalResourcesSurveyfortheGalloWineryExpansionProject,18000RiverRoad,Livingston,MercedCounty,California,July22.PreparedbyEileenBarrow,SantaRosa,CA.PreparedforKjeldsenBiologicalConsulting,SantaRosa,CA.
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.2012.GreenbookforNonattainmentPollutants.LastRevised:December14,2012.Available:<http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/>.Accessed:June25,2013.
U.S.FishandWildlifeService.2013.ListofEndangeredandThreatenedSpeciesthatMayOccurintheTurlockUSGS7.5‐MinuteQuadrangle.Lastrevised:September18,2011.Available:<http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists‐form.cfm>.Accessed:June18,2013.
Personal Communications Rubins,Demae.ProjectManager,SummitEngineering.EmailtoSallyZeff,ICFInternational.July9,
2013.
Siong,Patia.AirQualityPlanner,SanJoaquinValleyUnifiedAirPollutionControlDistrict.May23,2011—emailtoShannonHatcher,ICF,regardingconstructionthresholds.
Appendix A Bauer and Associates Geotechnical Consultation
Appendix B Biological Resources Field Report
Memorandum
Date: July24,2013
To: JamesHollandMercedCounty2222MStreetMerced,CA95340
From: AngelaAlcalaSeniorBiologist
Subject: Biological Survey Results for the E & J Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Major Modification No. MM13‐009
ThismemorandumsummarizestheresultsofaJune18,2013biologicalresourcessurveyofthe2‐acreparcellocatedeastoftheexistingGalloLivingstonWinerythatwillaccommodatetheexpansionoftheprocessingfacility.
Project Location and Description TheE.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryislocatedinMercedCountyapproximately4.5milessouthwestoftheCityofLivingston(Figure1).Theexistingareaofactivewineryoperationsisapproximately81acres.Itislocatedapproximately8mileswestofStateRoute(SR)99andisaccessedfromRiverRoad,whichbordersthewineryonthesouthandeast.Theproposedprojectareaisa2‐acreparcellocatedimmediatelyeastoftheexistingfacility(Figure1).Theadditional2acresarelocatedinafallowareaontheeastperimeterofthepreviouslyapprovedprojectsite,nearRiverRoad.
Theproposedmodificationinvolvesanadditional2‐acreareaforcooperagetankstosupportthepreviouslyapprovedLivingstonEastsideExpansion.Theproposedmodificationdoesnotchangetheproductioncapacityofthefacility.Itallowsforlongeronsitestoragetoaccommodatetheongoingshifttohigher‐qualitywinesmadeatthefacility.Approximately50dual‐purposecooperagetanks,withthecapabilitytobothfermentwhitegrapejuiceduringharvestandserveaswinestorageduringtheoff‐season,wouldbeinstalledwithinthis2‐acrearea.Thenewtankswillbeapproximately45feettallandlooksimilartotheexistingtanks.
ConstructionstagingwouldoccuradjacenttothepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsiteonGalloproperty;staginglocationswouldvarybyphasedependingonwhatisbeingconstructed.Soilstockpileswouldbelocatedonthedesignatedstagingareas.
Biological Survey Results for the E & J Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Major Modification No. MM13‐009 July 24, 2013 Page 2 of 3
Prefield Review Priortoconductingthefieldsurvey,ICFreviewedthefollowingsourcesofinformationtoidentifysensitivehabitatsandspecial‐statusplantandanimalspeciesthatareknowntooccurorwithpotentialtooccuronthe2‐acreexpansionarea.
ArecordssearchoftheCaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabasefortheTurlockandeightsurroundingU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)7.5‐minutequadrangles(CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife2013).
AsearchoftheCaliforniaNativePlantSociety’s(CNPS)onlineInventoryofRareandEndangeredPlants(CaliforniaNativePlantSociety2013).
TheU.S.FishandWildlifeService(USFWS)listofendangered,threatened,andcandidatespeciesfortheTurlockUSGS7.5‐minutequadrangle(U.S.FishandWildlifeService2013).
BiologicalAssessmentfortheLivingstonWineryProposedExpansionProject(KjeldsonBiologicalConsulting,August2011)
E.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionInitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration(ICF2011).
Aerialphotosofthe2‐acreexpansionareaandsurroundingareas.
Survey Methods Areconnaissance‐levelfieldsurveywasconductedbyICFbiologistAngelaAlcalaonJune18,2013.Ms.AlcalawasaccompaniedbyICFArchaeologistShahiraAshkarandE&JGalloWineryPrincipalEngineerKeithBader.Existingsiteconditionswereusedtoidentifyhabitatthatcouldpotentiallysupportspecial‐statusspecies.Notreeswerepresentonthe2acresitesonearbytreeswerescannedwithbinocularstolookforoccupiedraptornestsorraptoractivity.Aerialphotoswerereviewedtoassessthehabitatsurroundingthesiteandthepotentialforwildlifecorridorsfromadjoiningpropertiesontoorthroughthesite.PresenceofwetlandswasdeterminedusingtheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers’identificationmethods.
Survey Results The2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsiteiswithinanagriculturalfieldthatwasfallowatthetimeoftheJune18,2013sitevisitbuthashistoricallybeenusedforgrowingrowcropsandvineyard.Thesubstratehasahighsandcontentandvegetationcoverwithinthisareawasmoderate(approximately50%)anddominatedbyweedyplantspecies,predominantlyamaranth(Amaranthussp.).SurroundinglandusesincludetheexistingGallofacilityandparkingareatothewestandnorth,andvineyard,rowcrops,andfallowagriculturalfieldstothesouthandeast.
Biological Survey Results for the E & J Gallo Winery Eastside Use Permit Major Modification No. MM13‐009 July 24, 2013 Page 3 of 3
Nospecial‐statusspeciesorsensitiveresourceshavebeenpreviouslydocumentedonthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.Neitherthe2acresnortheimmediatesurroundingscontainriparian,seasonalwetland,orvernalpoolhabitat.ThenearestaquaticresourceistheMercedRiver,locatedapproximately0.5miletothenorth.
TheJune18,2013fieldsurveydidnotlocateanyspecial‐statusspecies,includingactivebirdorraptornests,onthe2acresproposedtobeaddedtotheprojectsite.However,aSwainson’shawk(statethreatenedspecies)wasobservedsoaringoverandforagingadjacenttothesite.Numeroussmallmammalburrows(primarilygopherandmice/vole)wereobservedthroughoutthe2‐acresandraptorspecies,includingSwainson’shawk,arelikelytoforageonthesite.TheclosestpotentialnesttreesforSwainson’shawkarelocatedmorethan0.25miletotheeast.The2‐acreareadoesprovidenestingopportunitiesforgroundnestingmigratorybirdsincludingkilldeer,mourningdove,westernmeadowlark,amongothers.
Recommendations Preconstructionground‐nestingbirdsurveysarerecommendedpriortogrounddisturbance(includingstagingandinitialsitegrading)thatoccursduringthebreedingseason(generallyMarch1toAugust31)toavoidviolationoftheMigratoryBirdTreatyActandCaliforniaFishandGameCode.AlthoughnoimpactstoSwainson’shawknestsareanticipatedsincetheclosestpotentialnestsitesaremorethan0.25milefromthe2‐acreexpansionarea,removalofforaginghabitatcouldaffectthelocalpopulationduetocumulativehabitatlossintheregionandlimitedavailabilityofforaginghabitatintheareasurroundingtheprojectsite.CompensatorymitigationforthelossofSwainson’shawkforaginghabitatisrecommended.
K I N G S
C O U N T Y
T U L A R E C O U N T Y
F R E S N O C O U N T Y
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY
MERCED
COUNTY
99
4
4
424
26
49
49
65
49
84
88
88
12
99
99
33
33
25
33
99
99
99
32
45
70
20
20
65
180
120
120
120
162
132
152
156
152
165
140
140
43
33
41
5
5
5
80
80
5
5
205
580
580
680
5
101
50
395
1
Fresno
San Francisco
Monterey
San José
Sacramento
Marysville
Stockton
Vacaville
Davis
ChicoOrland
Merced
Tracy
Lodi
Woodland
Auburn
Modesto
Turlock
Livingston
River Rd
Gri�
th Av
e
Mer
ced A
ve
Oak St
Gri�
th Av
e
Howa
rd Rd
River Rd
Merced River
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
3,000 4,000
Project Location
Figure 1Project Location
Gra
phic
s …
002
37.1
3 00
3 (0
5-13
) SS
Expansion Site
NOT TO SCALE
Appendix C Cultural Resources Field Report
Memorandum
Date: July24,2013
To: JamesHollandMercedCounty2222MStreetMerced,CA95340
Cc:
From: ShahiraAshkar,MA,RPAArchaeologist
Subject: Archaeological Inventory for the Gallo Livingston Winery Eastside Expansion
Thismemorandumdocumentsthepedestrianinventoryofthe2‐acreparcellocatedeastoftheGalloLivingstonWinerythatwillaccommodatetheexpansionoftheprocessingfacility.
Project Location and Description TheE.&J.GalloLivingstonWineryislocatedinMercedCountyapproximately4.5milessouthwestoftheCityofLivingston(Figure1).Theexistingareaofactivewineryoperationsisapproximately81acres.Itislocatedapproximately8mileswestofStateRoute(SR)99andisaccessedfromRiverRoad,whichbordersthewineryonthesouthandeast.Theproposedprojectareaisa2‐acreparcellocatedimmediatelyeastoftheexistingfacility(Figure1).
Theproposedmodificationinvolvesanadditional2‐acreareaforcooperagetankstosupportthepreviouslyapprovedLivingstonEastsideExpansion.Theproposedmodificationdoesnotchangetheproductioncapacityofthefacility.Itallowsforlongeronsitestoragetoaccommodatetheongoingshifttohigher‐qualitywinesmadeatthefacility.Approximately50dual‐purposecooperagetanks,withthecapabilitytobothfermentwhitegrapejuiceduringharvestandserveaswinestorageduringtheoff‐season,wouldbeinstalledwithinthis2‐acrearea.Thenewtankswillbeapproximately45feettallandlooksimilartotheexistingtanks.
Theadditional2acresarelocatedinafallowareaontheeastperimeteroftheapprovedprojectsite,nearRiverRoad.
Archaeological Inventory, Gallo Livingston July 24, 2013 Page 2 of 3
Construction Equipment and Staging
Typicalconstructionequipmentthatwouldbeusedincludesthefollowing.
Backhoe
Compactor
ConcreteMixerTruck
ConcretePumpTruck
DumpTruck,Standard
EmployeeVehicle
Generators
HydraulicExcavator,Small
MotorGrader
FlatbedTruck
TractorTrailer
SkidSteerLoader
Telehandler
Trencher,Chain
VibratoryCompactor
WaterTruck
WheeledDozer
WheeledScraper
TruckCrane
BoxTruck
ConstructionstagingwouldoccuradjacenttothepreviouslyapprovedexpansionsiteonGalloproperty;staginglocationswouldvarybyphasedependingonwhatisbeingconstructed.Soilstockpileswouldbelocatedonthedesignatedstagingareas.
Prefield Research ICFcontactedtheNativeAmericanHeritageCommissiononMay30,2013witharequestforasearchoftheirsacredlandsdatabaseandalistoflocalNativeAmericancontacts.TheNAHCrespondedonJune24,2013indicatingthatthesearchofthesacredlandsdatabasewasnegative.LettersweresenttotheNativeAmericancontactsonJune25,2013.Noresponsehasbeenreceivedtodate.ICFsentarecordssearchrequesttotheCentralCaliforniaInformationCenter(CCIC)onJune2,2013.CCICrespondedonJune20,2013indicatingthatnopreviouslyrecordedsitesorpreviousstudiesarelocatedwithintheGalloLivingstonWineryEastsideExpansionstudyarea.
Pedestrian Inventory ICFarchaeologist,ShahiraAshkarconductedapedestrianinventoryofthe2‐acreparcelonJune18,2013.Theparcelisprimarilywithinanagriculturalfieldthatwasfallowatthetimeofthepedestriansurvey.Thefieldhashistoricallybeenusedforgrowingrowcropsandgrapes.Thewesternmostsegmentoftheparcelislocatedbehindafenceandisagradeddirtroad.
Thedirtroadwasnotsubjecttosurvey,buttheremainderoftheparcelwasexaminedusingsystematicnorth‐southtransectsspacesapproximately10metersapart.Areasofrodentdisturbancewerecloselyexaminedforevidenceofburiedmaterials.Groundsurfacevisibilitywas
Archaeological Inventory, Gallo Livingston July 24, 2013 Page 3 of 3
good,rangingfrom75to90percent.Theareahasbeenheavilydisturbedbyagriculturalactivitiesovertheyears,thoughitisnowpartiallycoveredwithvegetation.Noculturalresourceswerelocatedasaresultofthissurvey.
Recommendations Thoughnoculturalresourceswerelocatedintheareaasaresultoftheprefieldresearchorthepedestrianinventory,itisalwayspossiblethatburiedculturalresourcesarepresentwithintheprojectarea.ShouldtheseresourcesbesignificantasdefinedinSection15064.6,disturbanceordestructionofthemwouldbeasignificantimpact.Therefore,itisrecommendedthatshouldanyculturalresourcesbelocatedduringconstruction,aqualifiedarchaeologistbecontactedtoassessthefindandrecommendfurtheractionifnecessary.
K I N G S
C O U N T Y
T U L A R E C O U N T Y
F R E S N O C O U N T Y
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY
MERCED
COUNTY
99
4
4
424
26
49
49
65
49
84
88
88
12
99
99
33
33
25
33
99
99
99
32
45
70
20
20
65
180
120
120
120
162
132
152
156
152
165
140
140
43
33
41
5
5
5
80
80
5
5
205
580
580
680
5
101
50
395
1
Fresno
San Francisco
Monterey
San José
Sacramento
Marysville
Stockton
Vacaville
Davis
ChicoOrland
Merced
Tracy
Lodi
Woodland
Auburn
Modesto
Turlock
Livingston
River Rd
Gri�
th Av
e
Mer
ced A
ve
Oak St
Gri�
th Av
e
Howa
rd Rd
River Rd
Merced River
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
3,000 4,000
Project Location
Figure 1Project Location
Gra
phic
s …
002
37.1
3 00
3 (0
5-13
) SS
Expansion Site
NOT TO SCALE