Atwater City Council
May 13, 2024

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-40 Atwater Series. The Atwater series consists of very deep, well drained soils formed in granitic alluvium.

Delhi Series. The Delhi series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils. They formed in wind modified material weathered from granitic rock sources. Delhi soils are on floodplains, alluvial fans and terraces. Slopes are 0 to 15 percent.

Dello Series. The Dello series consists of very deep, very poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium from granitic rock sources. Dello soils are in small depressions and have slopes of 0 to 2 percent.

Dinuba Series. The Dinuba series consists of moderately well drained (minimal) Noncalcic Brown soils developed from moderately coarse textured dominantly granitic alluvium. They occur on nearly level to gently sloping alluvial fans and valley plains under grass-herb vegetation.

Greenfield Series. The Greenfield series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in moderately coarse and coarse textured alluvium derived from granitic and mixed rock sources. Greenfield soils are on alluvial fans and terraces and have slopes of 0 to 3 percent.

Hilmar loamy sands. The Hilmar series is a member of the sandy over loamy, mixed, active, calcareous, thermic family of Aeric Halaquepts. Typically, Hilmar soils have pale brown, mildly alkaline, loamy sand A horizons, very pale brown, very strongly alkaline, loamy sand upper C horizons over light gray and light olive gray, very strongly alkaline, stratified, silt loam lower C horizons.

San Joaquin loams. The San Joaquin series consists of moderately deep to a duripan, well and moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from mixed but dominantly granitic rock sources. They are on undulating low terraces with slopes of 0 to 9 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 15 inches and the mean annual temperature is about 61 degrees F.

Snelling sandy loams. The Snelling series consists of very deep, well drained soils formed in alluvium from predominantly granitic rock sources. They are typically on terraces and have slopes of 0 to 15 percent.

FAULTS AND SEISMICITY
Faults
A fault is a fracture in the crust of the earth. A fault trace is the line on the earth's surface defining the fault.

Displacement of the earth's crust along faults releases energy in the form of earthquakes and in some cases in fault creep. Most faults are the result of repeated displacements over a long period of time.

Surface rupture occurs when movement on a fault deep within the earth breaks through to the surface.

Surface ruptures have been known to extend up to 50 miles with displacements of an inch to 20 feet. Fault rupture almost always follows preexisting faults, which are zones of weakness. Rupture may occur suddenly during an earthquake or slowly in the form of fault creep. Sudden displacements are more damaging to structures because they are accompanied by shaking.

The State of California designates faults as active, potentially active, and inactive depending on how recent the movement that can be substantiated for a fault. Table 8.4-2 presents the California fault activity rating system.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-41 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 8.4-2: FAULT ACTIVITY RATING

FAULT ACTIVITY RATING GEOLOGIC PERIOD OF LAST RUPTURE TIME INTERVAL (YEARS) Active (A) Holocene Within last 11,000 years
Potentially Active (PA) Quaternary 11,000-1.6 Million Years Inactive (I) Pre-Quaternary Greater than 1.6 Million
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
The Fault Activity Map provided by the California Department of Conservation identified potential seismic sources within 100 kilometers (62 miles) of the planning area. The closest known faults classified as active by the California Geological Survey are the San Joaquin fault, located approximately 26 miles to the west.

The Great Valley thrust fault system is located approximately 27 miles to the southwest. Other faults that are located nearby include the O’Neill fault system, the Ortigalita fault zone and the Quien Sabe fault. Figure

8.4-3 provides a map of known area faults.

Seismicity
The amount of energy available to a fault is determined by considering the slip-rate of the fault, its area (fault length multiplied by down-dip width), maximum magnitude, and the rigidity of the displaced rocks.

These factors are combined to calculate the moment (energy) release on a fault. The total seismic energy release for a fault source is sometimes partitioned between two different recurrence models, the characteristic and truncated Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) magnitude-frequency distributions. These models incorporate our knowledge of the range of magnitudes and relative frequency of different magnitudes for a particular fault. The partition of moment and the weights for multiple models are given in the following summary.

Earthquakes are generally expressed in terms of intensity and magnitude. Intensity is based on the observed effects of ground shaking on people, buildings, and natural features. By comparison, magnitude is based on the amplitude of the earthquake waves recorded on instruments, which have a common calibration. The Richter scale, a logarithmic scale ranging from 0.1 to 9.0, with 9.0 being the strongest, measures the magnitude of an earthquake relative to ground shaking. Table 8.4-3 provides a description and a comparison of intensity and magnitude.

TABLE 8.4-3: RICHTER MAGNITUDES AND EFFECTS

MAGNITUDE EFFECTS
< 3.5 Typically not felt

3.5 – 5.4 Often felt but damage is rare

5.5 – < 6 Damage is slight for well-built buildings

6.1 – 6.9 Destructive potential over ±60 miles of occupied area

7.0 – 7.9 “Major Earthquake” with the ability to cause damage over larger areas ≥ 8 “Great Earthquake” can cause damage over several hundred miles SOURCE: ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS, 2011.

Table 8.4-4 below presents Modified Mercalli intensity effects at each level.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-42 TABLE 8.4-4: MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE FOR EARTHQUAKES

RICHTER

MAGNITUDE

MODIFIED

MERCALLI

EFFECTS OF INTENSITY

0.1 – 0.9 I Earthquake shaking not felt

1.0 – 2.9 II Shaking felt by those at rest.

3.0 – 3.9 III Felt by most people indoors, some can estimate duration of shaking.

4.0 – 4.5 IV Felt by most people indoors. Hanging objects rattle, wooden walls and frames creak.

4.6 – 4.9 V
Felt by everyone indoors, many can estimate duration of shaking. Standing autos rock. Crockery clashes, dishes rattle and glasses clink. Doors open, close and swing.

5.0 – 5.5 VI Felt by all who estimate duration of shaking. Sleepers awaken, liquids spill, objects are displaced, and weak materials crack.

5.6 – 6.4 VII People frightened and walls unsteady. Pictures and books thrown, dishes and glass are broken. Weak chimneys break. Plaster, loose bricks and parapets fall.

6.5 – 6.9 VIII Difficult to stand. Waves on ponds, cohesionless soils slump. Stucco and masonry walls fall. Chimneys, stacks, towers, and elevated tanks twist and fall.

7.0 – 7.4 IX General fright as people are thrown down, hard to drive. Trees broken, damage to foundations and frames. Reservoirs damaged, underground pipes broken.

7.5 – 7.9 X General panic. Ground cracks, masonry and frame buildings destroyed. Bridges destroyed, railroads bent slightly. Dams, dikes and embankments damaged.

8.0 – 8.4 XI Large landslides, water thrown, general destruction of buildings. Pipelines destroyed, railroads bent.

8.5 + XII Total nearby damage, rock masses displaced. Lines of sight/level distorted.

Objects thrown into air.

SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
The Significant United States Earthquake data published by the USGS in the National Atlas identifies earthquakes that caused deaths, property damage, and geologic effects or were felt by populations near the epicenter. No significant earthquakes are identified within the planning area; however, significant earthquakes are documented in the region. The following table presents the significant earthquakes in the region.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-43 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 8.4-5: SIGNIFICANT EARTHQUAKES IN THE REGION

MAGNITUDE INTENSITY LOCATION YEAR

6.0 VIII South Napa 2014

5.6 VI San Jose 2007

5.0 VII Napa 2000

6.9 IX Loma Prieta (San Andreas) 1989

5.4 N/A Santa Cruz County 1989

6.2 N/A Morgan Hill 1984

5.8, 5.8 VII Livermore 1980

5.7 N/A Coyote Lake 1979

5.7, 5.6 N/A Santa Rosa 1969

5.3, 4.2 N/A Daly City 1957

5.4 N/A Concord 1954

6.5 N/A Calaveras fault 1911

7.9 IX San Francisco 1906

6.8 N/A Mendocino 1898

6.2 N/A Mare Island 1898

6.3 N/A Calaveras fault 1893

6.2 VIII Winters 1892

6.4 N/A Vacaville 1892

6.8 VII Hayward 1868

6.5 VIII Santa Cruz Mountains 1865

6.8 N/A San Francisco Peninsula 1838
SOURCE: UNITED STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.

Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone
The California legislature passed the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act in 1972 to address seismic hazards associated with faults and to establish criteria for developments for areas with identified seismic hazard zones. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) evaluates faults with available geologic and seismologic data and determines if a fault should be zoned as active, potentially active, or inactive. If CGS determines a fault to be active, then it is typically incorporated into a Special Studies Zone in accordance with the AlquistPriolo Earthquake Hazard Act. Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones are usually one-quarter mile or less in width and require site-specific evaluation of fault location and require a structure setback if the fault is found traversing a project site. The planning area is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone. The nearest Alquist-Priolo fault zone, the San Joaquin fault zone and the Great Valley thrust fault system are located approximately 23 miles southwest of Atwater.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-44

SEISMIC HAZARDS
Seismic Ground Shaking
The potential for seismic ground shaking in California is expected. As a result of the foreseeable seismicity in California, the State requires special design considerations for all structural improvements in accordance with the seismic design provisions in the California Building Code. These seismic design provisions require enhanced structural integrity based on several risk parameters.

Fault Rupture
A fault rupture occurs when the surface of the earth breaks as a result of an earthquake, although this does not happen with all earthquakes. These ruptures generally occur in a weak area of an existing fault.

Ruptures can be sudden (i.e. earthquake) or slow (i.e. fault creep). The Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act requires active earthquake fault zones to be mapped and it provides special development considerations within these zones. Atwater does not have surface expression of active faults and fault rupture is not anticipated. Figure 8.4-3 shown regional faults in relation to Atwater.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction typically requires a significant sudden decrease of shearing resistance in cohesion-less soils and a sudden increase in water pressure, which is typically associated with an earthquake of high magnitude. The potential for liquefaction is highest when groundwater levels are high, and loose, fine, sandy soils occur at depths of less than 50 feet. Soil data from the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2023) suggests that the potential for liquefaction ranges from low to high within the planning area, given that many soils are high in sand.

Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading typically results when ground shaking moves soil toward an area where the soil integrity is weak or unsupported, and it typically occurs on the surface of a slope, although it does not occur strictly on steep slopes. Oftentimes, lateral spreading is directly associated with areas of liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction is moderate to high in many areas of the city, however because the planning area is essentially flat lateral spreading of soils has not been observed within the planning area.

Landslides
Landslides include rockfalls, deep slope failure, and shallow slope failure. Factors such as the geological conditions, drainage, slope, vegetation, and others directly affect the potential for landslides. One of the most common causes of landslides is construction activity that is associated with road building (i.e. cut and fill). The planning area is essentially flat; therefore, the potential for a landslide is generally low.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-45 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

NON-SEISMIC HAZARDS
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils can undergo significant volume change with changes in moisture content. They shrink and harden when dried and expand and soften when wet. If structures are underlain by expansive soils, it is important that foundation systems be capable of tolerating or resisting any potentially damaging soil movements. In addition, it is important to limit moisture changes in the surficial soils by using positive drainage away from buildings as well as limiting landscaping watering. Figure 8.4-4 provides a map of the shrink-swell potential of the soils within the planning area. As shown in Figure 8.4-4, the shrink-swell potential of the planning area is primarily low, except in the eastern portion of the planning area, where there exists some small areas of moderate and high shrink-swell potential.

Erosion
Erosion naturally occurs on the surface of the earth as surface materials (i.e. rock, soil, debris, etc.) is loosened, dissolved, or worn away, and transported from one place to another by gravity. Two common types of soil erosion include wind erosion and water erosion. The steepness of a slope is an important factor that affects soil erosion. Erosion potential in soils is influenced primarily by loose soil texture and steep slopes. Loose soil can be eroded by water or wind forces, whereas soils with high clay content are generally susceptible only to water erosion. The potential for erosion generally increases as a result of human activity, primarily through the development of facilities and impervious surfaces and the removal of vegetative cover.

Collapsible Soils
Collapsible soils undergo a rearrangement of their grains and a loss of cementation, resulting in substantial and rapid settlement under relatively low loads. Collapsible soils occur predominantly at the base of mountain ranges, where Holocene-age alluvial fan and wash sediments have been deposited during rapid run-off events. Soils prone to collapse are commonly associated with manmade fill, wind-laid sands and silts, and alluvial fan and mudflow sediments deposited during flash floods. During an earthquake, even slight settlement of fill materials can lead to a differentially settled structure and significant repair costs.

Differential settlement of structures typically occurs when heavily irrigated landscape areas are near a building foundation. Examples of common problems associated with collapsible soils include tilting floors, cracking or separation in structures, sagging floors, and nonfunctional windows and doors. Collapsible soils have not been identified in the planning area as an issue. However, in areas subject to potential liquefaction, the potential for liquefaction induced settlement is present.

Subsidence
Land subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of an area with little or no horizontal motion due to changes taking place underground. It is a natural process, although it can also occur (and is greatly accelerated) as a result of human activities. Common causes of land subsidence from human activity include: pumping water, oil, and gas from underground reservoirs; dissolution of limestone aquifers (sinkholes); collapse of underground mines; drainage of organic soils; and initial wetting of dry soils.

Subsidence has not been identified as an issue in the planning area.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-46 Naturally Occurring Asbestos
The term “asbestos” is used to describe a variety of fibrous minerals that, when airborne, can result in serious human health effects. Naturally occurring asbestos is commonly associated with ultramafic rocks and serpentinite. Ultramafic rocks, such as dunite, peridotite, and pyroxenite are igneous rocks comprised largely of iron-magnesium minerals. As they are intrusive in nature, these rocks often undergo metamorphosis, prior to their being exposed on the Earth’s surface. The metamorphic rock serpentinite is a common product of the alteration process. Naturally occurring asbestos is not identified within Merced County. There is no naturally occurring asbestos mapped within Atwater.

C R E S S E Y Q U A D W I N T O N Q U A D

A R E N A Q U A D A T W A T E R Q U A D
Figure 8.4-1. USGS Topographic Map
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater July 27, 2023 Sources: ArcGIS Online USGS Topo Map Service (the National Map); Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
USGS 7.5' Quadrangle

TURLOCK CRESSEY WINTON YOSEMITE
LAKE

STEVINSON ARENA ATWATER MERCED

SAN LUIS
RANCH USGS 7.5' Quad Index

TURNER RANCH SANDY MUSH EL NIDO

Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
AdA
AkA
GeA
AnB AnB
AgA
DfA
HhA
AdA
GfA
AnB
GfA
DcA
DeA AaA
AdA
AdA
AgB
AdA
DfB
HhA
AkA
AnA
AfA
AnB
AkA
W
AnB
AkA
AkA
AnA
AnB
AgB
SmA
AkA
AnA
AnB
AnB
AgA
AdA
AkA
DfA
AdA
AkA
AfA
GeA
DrA
AnA
GfA
AgA
GfA
AkA
AgB
AgA
DkA
AnA
DfA
W
AdA AkA
DkA
GeA
AfA
DpA
SmA AkA
DcA
AfA
DfA
SbA
AkA
AfA
AkA
AgA
AkA
DeA
AnB
HhA
AkA
FmA
AkA
AkA
AfB
AkA
AkA
DfA
AnB
AfA
AdA
DkA
AdA
DfA
DkA
DkA
AkA AkA
AkA
SnA
SmA
AgA
AnA
AkA
HgA AdA
AkA
AgB
SmA
AgA
AkA
AkA
GfA
AaA
AdA
AkA
AdA
AfA DkA
W
AaA
AaA
AgA
AgA AgA
GfA
AnA
AnA
AnA
AnA
W
W
AdA
AdA
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 8.4-2. Soil Types
Sources: NRCS Web Soil Survey (CA648) 9/1/2022; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
NRCS Soil Type
AaA - Alamo clay
AdA/AfA/AfB/AgA/AgB/Aka -
Atwater loamy sands
AnA/AnB - Atwater sands
DcA/DeA- Delhi loamy fine
sands
DfA/DfB - Delhi sands
DkA - Dello sand
DpA/DrA - Dinuba sandy loams
FmA - Typic Duraqualfs, strongly
saline-sodic
GeA/GfA - Greenfield sandy
loams
HgA/HhA - Hilmar loamy sands
SbA/SbB - San Joaquin loams
SmA/SnA- Snelling sandy loams
W - Water
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Agua Fria
Amsterdam
Athlone
Ballico
Barrett
Ben Hur
Benito
Berenda
Bonita
Bootjack
Borden
Bridgeport
Brito
Catheys
Valley
Ceres
Chemurgic
Clearing
House
Cortez
Cressey
Crows Landing
Daulton
Delhi
Denair
Fairmead
Firebaugh
Grayson
Gregg
Gustine
Hamburg Farms
Harp
Hatch
Hayward
Herndon
Hickman
Hills Ferry
Hilmar
Hopeton
Hughson
Indian Gulch
Ingomar
Irrigosa
Irwin
Jet
Keyes
Kismet
Knowles
La Vina
La Grange
Le Grand
Livingston
Los Banos
Madera
Mariposa
Montpelier
Mormon Bar
Newman
Notarb
Ohm
Oro Loma
Patterson
Plainsburg
Ripperdan
Santa Nella
Village
Santa
Rita
Park
Sharon
Sierra
Sky
Park
Atwater
Aurora
Bear Creek
Bear Valley
Briceburg
Chowchilla
Dairyland
Dos Palos
El Nido
Fergus
Hornitos
Lingard
Merced
Merced Falls
Midpines
Modesto
Oxalis
Ragby
Snelling
Solyo
Stevinson
Stomar
Storey
The Grove
Timba
Trent
Trigo
Turlock
Volta
Waterford
Westley
Winton
Sierra Vista
Banadelle
Ranchos
Madera
Ranchos
Riverdale
Park
Parksdale
140
49 145
132
165
233
59 33
140
33 132
140
140
33 165
59 99
152
99 152
5 M e r c e d C o u n t y
M a d e r a C o u n t y
S a n B e n i t o
C o u n t y
M a r i p o s a
C o u n t y
S t a n i s l a u s
C o u n t y
F r e s n o C o u n t y
S a n t a
C l a r a
C o u n t y
Figure 8.4-3. Earthquake Faults and Alquist-Priolo Zones Sources: USGS; CGS; ArcGIS Online World Hillshade Map Service; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 5 10
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater Planning Area
County Boundary
Alquist-Priolo Zones
USGS Quaternary Faults
Great Valley thrust
fault system
O'Neill fault system
Ortigalita fault zone
Quien Sabe fault
San Joaquin fault
Vernalis fault
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater August 25, 2023

Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 8.4-4. Shrink-Swell Potential of Soils
Sources: NRCS Web Soil Survey (CA648) 9/1/2022; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Shrink-Swell Potential of Soils*
Low
Moderate
High
Unrated
* Shrink-Swell Potential is based on a linear extensibility rating. Linear extensibility refers to the change in volume of an unconfined clod of soil as moisture content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. The volume change is reported as percent change for the whole soil.

A map unit is typically composed of one or more soil/rock components. Each of these components may have its own linear extensibility rating. For mapping purposes, these individual ratings are aggregated into a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. For each map unit, linear extensibility is actually recorded as three separate values: a low value, a high value, and a "representative" value.

The "representative" value indicates the expected value for the soil component. This map is based on the "representative" value of each aggregated map unit, using the Weighted Average Aggregation method where percent composition is the weighting factor.

Map units with a representative values of 0-3% linear extensibility are considered Low for shrink-swell potential. Ratings of 3-6% are considered moderate. Ratings of 6-9% are considered high, and ratings above 9% are very high. Some map units are not rated.

Please refer to the USDA/NRCS Web Soil Survey for more details. websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-51 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

8.5 MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES
This section describes mineral and energy resources in the planning area from both a qualitative and quantitative perspective. The results of this assessment may be used in planning and management decisions that may affect mineral and energy resources in the planning area.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
LOCAL
Merced County General Plan
Policy NR-3.4: New Development Compatibility (RDR)
Ensure that new development is compatible with existing and potential surface mining areas and operations as identified on the Mineral Resource Zone Maps prepared by the State Division of Mines and Geology and other mineral resource areas identified by the County. The County shall:
a) Require development applicants near identified mineral resources to prepare a statement that specifies why the County should permit the proposed land use and describe how the benefits of the proposed use would clearly outweigh the impacts that may limit the potential to extract mineral resources in that area.
b) Require new incompatible land uses adjacent to existing mining operations to provide a buffer between the development and adjacent mining operations adequate to mitigate significant impacts to mineral land uses. The buffer distance shall be based on an evaluation of noise, aesthetics, drainage, operation conditions, biological resources, topography, lighting, traffic, operating hours, and air quality.
c) Require written notification to be sent to mining operators and subject landowners of land use entitlement applications for potentially incompatible land uses in areas where mining operations are currently taking place.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-52

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Statewide Resources
In 2012, the California Geological Survey identified that approximately 4 billion tons of permitted aggregate reserves lie within the 31 aggregate study areas in California. These permitted aggregate reserves have been determined to be acceptable for commercial use, exist within properties owned or leased by aggregate producing companies, and have permits allowing mining of aggregate material. Sand, gravel, and crushed stones are construction materials that are collectively referred to as construction aggregate. These materials provide the bulk and strength to Portland cement concrete (PCC), asphaltic concrete (AC), plaster, and stucco. Other uses include road base, subbase, railroad ballast, and fill.

From 1981 to 2010, California consumed an average of about 180 million tons of construction aggregate (all grades) per year. (CGS, 2012)
Mineral Resource Classification
Pursuant to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA), the California State Mining and Geology Board oversees the Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) classification system. The MRZ system characterizes both the location and known/presumed economic value of underlying mineral resources. The mineral resource classification system uses four main MRZs based on the degree of available geologic information, the likelihood of significant mineral resource occurrence, and the known or inferred quantity of significant mineral resources. The four classifications are described in Table 8.5-1 below.

TABLE 8.5-1: MINERAL RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTIONS
MRZ-1 Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.

MRZ-2 Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence.

MRZ-3 Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated.

MRZ-4 Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ classification.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, ACCESSED AUGUST 2023 Local Resources
Figure 8.5-1: Mineral Resource Zones shows mineral resources within and near the planning area. The planning area contains areas that are designated as MRZ-3 and MRZ-4, which reflect “areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data”, and “areas where available geologic information is inadequate to assign to any other mineral resource zone category, respectively. Table 8.5-2 identifies significant mineral resources within the city, and planning area.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-53 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 8.5-2: MINERAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA

CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTIONS CITY LIMITS (AC) SPHERE OF

INFLUENCE (AC)
MRZ-3 Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated. 1,633.56 2,453.17
MRZ-4 Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ classification. 2,560.87 4,169.77 Totals 4,194.43 6,622.94
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, ACCESSED AUGUST 2023.

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 8.5-1. Mineral Resource Zones
Sources: California Geological Survey Special Report 252, Mineral Resource Zone Map for Concrete Aggregate in Merced County, 2021; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
MRZ-1*: Areas where available geologic information indicates that little likelihood exists for the presence of significant concrete aggregate resources MRZ-2*: Areas where geologic information indicates the presence of significant concrete aggregate resources
MRZ-3 cs*: Areas containing known or inferred concrete aggregate resources of undetermined mineral resource significance (crushed stone) MRZ-3 sg: Areas containing known or inferred concrete aggregate resources of undetermined mineral resource significance (sand and gravel) MRZ-4: Areas where available geologic information is inadequate to assign to any other mineral resource zone category
* This MRZ classification is not present within the mapped extent Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-55 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

8.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section provides an overview of hydrology and water quality within the planning area and the vicinity.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
City of Atwater General Plan
Goal CO-1. Support efforts to monitor and remediate existing groundwater contamination within the Planning Area.

Policy CO-1.1 Encourage responsible agencies to continue monitoring and remediation of contamination of the aquifer underneath the CAADC site.

Policy CO-1.2. Encourage the County of Merced to pursue remediation of groundwater contamination in the unincorporated portions of the Planning Area.

Goal CO-2. Prevent the creation of new groundwater contamination or the spread of contamination.

Policy CO-2.1. Work with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to protect, improve, and enhance groundwater quality in the region.

Atwater Municipal Code
Chapter 17.08.120 - Water conservation
It shall be the responsibility of the permittee to utilize devices such as automatic shut off valves, buckets, and hoses attached to a public water source with the intent of limiting water runoff and to conserve the overall use of water. Excessive runoff or water use may also be grounds for revocation of an issued permit.

Chapter 16.32.060 - Water facilities.

A. The subdivider shall provide adequately sized water distribution lines, valves, fire hydrants, water services, and related accessories, for water supply and fire protection to each lot in the subdivision. These facilities shall be in conformance with construction specifications and standards as approved by the City Council.

B. All water facilities required in this section shall be shown on improvement plans which are sufficient to show all of the proposed facilities to be constructed. Detailed quantity amounts shall be tabulated for construction items. Such improvement plans must be approved by the City Engineer in writing before work is commenced on such facilities.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-56 Chapter 3.22.120 - Reduction of pollutants in storm water.

Any person engaged in activities that may result in pollutants entering the storm water conveyance system shall, to the maximum extent practicable, undertake the measures set forth below to reduce the risk of non-storm water discharge and/or pollutant discharge.

A. Business-Related Activities.

1. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The enforcement official may require any business in the City engaged in activities that may result in pollutant discharges to develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan, which shall include an employee training program. An employee training program is a documented employee training program that may be required to be implemented by a business pursuant to a storm water pollution prevention plan, for the purpose of educating its employees on methods of reducing discharge of pollutants to the storm water conveyance system. Business activities that may require a storm water pollution prevention plan include, but are not limited to, maintenance, storage, manufacturing, assembly, equipment operations, vehicle loading or fueling, or cleanup procedures carried out partially or wholly out of doors.

2. Coordination with Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory. Any business requiring a hazardous materials release response and inventory plan, under Chapter 6.95 (commencing with Section 25500) of Division 20 of the California Health and Safety Code, shall include in that plan provisions for compliance with this chapter, including the provisions prohibiting non-storm water discharges and illegal discharges, and requiring the release of pollutants to be reduced to the maximum extent practicable.

3. Coordination with Hazardous Waste Generator Contingency Plan and Emergency Procedures. Any business requiring a hazardous waste generator contingency plan and emergency procedures, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66265.51 to 66265.56, shall include in that plan provisions for compliance with this chapter, including the provisions prohibiting non-storm water discharge and illegal discharges, and requiring the release of pollutants to be reduced to the maximum extent practicable.

B. Construction.

1. Any person performing construction activities in the City shall prevent pollutants from entering the storm water conveyance system and comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, ordinances or regulations, including but not limited to, the current California NPDES general permit for storm water discharges associated with construction activity (construction general permit) and the City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. All construction projects, regardless of size, having soil disturbance or activities exposed to storm water must, at a minimum, implement BMPs for erosion and sediment controls, soil stabilization, dewatering, source controls, pollution prevention measures, and prohibited discharges.

2. Any person subject to a construction activity NPDES storm water discharge permit shall comply with all provisions of such permit. Proof of compliance with said permit may be required in a form acceptable to the enforcement official prior to, or as a condition of, a subdivision map, site plan, building permit, grading permit, or development or improvement plan, upon inspection of the facility, during any enforcement proceeding or action, or for any other reasonable cause. Prior to issuance of a construction permit or approval of the proposed improvement plans, for projects subject to the State's current construction NPDES general permit, the WDID number and the SWPPP shall be submitted

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-57 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater to the City. For projects with less than an acre of soil disturbance or not subject to the construction general permit, an erosion and sediment control plan (ESCP) and the ESCP worksheet must be submitted to the City.

3. As required by its Phase II MS4 NPDES permit, the City will conduct storm water compliance inspections at applicable construction sites that have areas of soil disturbance exposed to storm water. The inspection will be conducted by a City inspector or agent working for the City who is a qualified SWPPP practitioner (QSP) or is supervised by a QSP. The inspection will evaluate the construction site's compliance to the City's storm water ordinances.

Inspections will be billed by the City to the project owner. The following is the risk rating system and inspection frequency the City will use, which is analogous to the risk rating used by the California construction general permit.
a. Projects not subject to the CGP or that have an erosivity waiver will have a pre-soil disturbance inspection and a project completion inspection. b. Projects that are Risk 1/LUP Type 1 or Risk 2/LUP Type 2 will have a pre-soil disturbance inspection, monthly inspections, and a project completion inspection. c. Projects that are Risk 3/LUP Type 3 will have a pre-soil disturbance inspection, bimonthly (twice per month) inspections, and a project completion inspection.

If a project has been issued two consecutive notices of violation or does not correct a previously issued notice of violation by the due date set by the inspector, the project's "threat to water quality" will be elevated by the City to the next highest category. This elevation of risk will not affect the risk rating for the construction general permit.

C. Development. The enforcement official may require controls as appropriate to minimize the longterm, post-construction activity discharge of storm water pollutants from new development(s) or modifications to existing development(s). Controls may include source control measures to prevent pollution of storm water, treatment controls designed to remove pollutants from storm water, low impact development measures, and/or hydro-modification measures to offset the difference between the pre and post-construction peak flow runoff rates and volumes. Proponents of all applicable development and redevelopment projects will be required to meet the requirements and design standards specified in the current State of California Phase II MS4 NPDES permit and as described in further detail in the City's Storm Water Design Standards Manual for New Development and Redevelopment.

At the earliest planning stages, project proponents shall assess and evaluate how site conditions, such as soils, vegetation, and flow paths will influence the placement of buildings and paved surfaces. The evaluation will be used to optimize the site layout to meet the goals of capturing and treating runoff. Each project proponent will submit a map of the project dividing the site into discrete drainage management areas to show in each how runoff will be managed using site design measures, source controls, treatment controls, and hydro-modification measures as defined by the current MS4 permit. All site design measures, source controls, treatment controls, and hydromodification measures must be selected, sized, and situated in accordance with the guidance provided in the current MS4 permit and the City's Storm Water Design Standards Manual for New Development and Redevelopment. Documentation of the site's post-construction storm water design measures must be submitted to the City's Planning Department for review and approval prior to the commencement of the project.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-58 Project proponents must sign an operation and maintenance agreement in which they legally bind themselves to maintain the installed post-construction design measures in an effective and good operational condition until the property ownership is transferred. A written operation and maintenance plan for the proposed storm water design measures is required to be submitted to and approved by the City with the signed agreement. The agreement will be recorded with the deed by the County Clerk making it transferrable to the new owner; or, when there are multiple property owners responsible for the maintenance of the control measures, the agreement will consist of a legally binding covenant between the City and the homeowners association or maintenance district. The owner or association responsible for the maintenance of the control measures may be required by the City to submit an annual self-certification that the storm water control measures are effective and are being maintained in accordance with the submitted and approved operation and maintenance plan.

D. Compliance with Industrial or Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.1.Any person subject to the State's current industrial NPDES general permit for storm water discharge shall comply with all provisions of such permit. Proof of compliance with said permit may be required in a form acceptable to the enforcement official upon inspection of the facility; during any enforcement proceeding or action; or for any other reasonable cause.2.Any person subject to the State's current construction NPDES general permit for storm water discharge shall comply with all provisions of such permit. Proof of compliance with said permit may be required in a form acceptable to the enforcement official prior to or as a condition of a subdivision map, site plan, building permit, and development or improvement plan; upon inspection of the facility; during any enforcement proceeding or action; or for any other reasonable cause.

E. Compliance with Best Management Practices. Every person or entity, including the above-listed categories, undertaking any activity or use of premises that may cause or contribute to storm water pollution or contamination or illicit discharges shall comply with best management practices (BMPs) consistent with the California Storm Water Quality Association (CASQA) Best Management Practice Handbooks or equivalent guidelines.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regional Hydrology
The City of Atwater is located within Merced County in the San Joaquin Valley of Central California. The City of Atwater is located approximately 8 miles northwest of Merced, 105 miles south of Sacramento, and 65 miles north of Fresno. The City of Atwater is in the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region and extracts its groundwater from the Merced Subbasin, Basin Number 5-22.04.

The San Joaquin River originates in the high-elevation Eastern Sierra Nevada Mountain range, flowing southwest to the San Joaquin Valley floor, before turning northwest to its confluence with the Sacramento River at the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta). The San Joaquin River has three major tributaries: the Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus rivers. The Cosumnes (a tributary to Mokelumne River), Mokelumne, and Calaveras rivers also flow into the San Joaquin River where the river joins the tidally influenced Delta (NOAA, 2023).

Climate
Atwater’s climate consists of dry, mild winters and hot summers. Up to 90 percent of the city’s annual precipitation occurs from November to April; therefore, rainfall during the summer is rare and very light.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-59 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Additionally, snow is also a very rare occurrence. More than 80 percent of days in Atwater are sunny except for during the winter (November-February). During the winter, there are fewer sunny days due to fog and short storm events.

Watersheds
A watershed is a region that is bound by a divide that drains to a common watercourse or body of water.

Watersheds serve an important biological function, oftentimes supporting an abundance of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife including special-status species and anadromous and native local fisheries. Watersheds provide conditions necessary for riparian habitat.

The State of California uses a hierarchical naming and numbering convention to define watershed areas for management purposes. This means that boundaries are defined according to size and topography, with multiple sub-watersheds within larger watersheds. Table 8.6-1 shows the primary watershed classification levels used by the State of California. The second column indicates the approximate size that a watershed area may be within a particular classification level, although variation in size is common.

TABLE 8.6-1. STATE OF CALIFORNIA WATERSHED HIERARCHY NAMING CONVENTION

WATERSHED LEVEL

APPROXIMATE SQUARE

MILES (ACRES) DESCRIPTION
Hydrologic Region
(HR)
12,735
(8,150,000)
Defined by large-scale topographic and geologic considerations. The State of California is divided into ten HRs.

Hydrologic Unit (HU) 672
(430,000)
Defined by surface drainage; may include a major river watershed, groundwater basin, or closed drainage, among others.

Hydrologic Area
(HA)
244
(156,000)
Major subdivisions of hydrologic units, such as by major tributaries, groundwater attributes, or stream components.

Hydrologic Sub-Area
(HSA)
195
(125,000)
A major segment of an HA with significant geographical
characteristics or hydrological homogeneity.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, 2012.

Hydrologic Region
Merced County is located in the San Joaquin River Hydrological Region. The San Joaquin River is the principal river of the region, and all other streams of the region are tributary to it. The Mokelumne River and its tributary the Cosumnes River originate in the central Sierra Nevada, along with the more southerly Stanislaus and Tuolumne rivers. The Merced River flows from the south central Sierra Nevada and enters the San Joaquin near the City of Newman. The Chowchilla and Fresno rivers also originate in the Sierra south of the Merced River and trend westward toward the San Joaquin River. Creeks originating in the Coast Range and draining eastward into the San Joaquin River include Del Puerto Creek, Orestimba Creek, and Panoche Creek. Del Puerto Creek enters the San Joaquin near the City of Patterson, and Orestimba Creek enters north of the City of Newman. During flood years, Panoche Creek may enter the San Joaquin River or the Fresno Slough near the town of Mendota. The Kings River is a stream of the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region, but in flood years it may contribute to the San Joaquin River, flowing northward through the James Bypass and Fresno Slough to enter near the City of Mendota. The Mud, Salt, Berrenda, and Ash Sloughs also add to the San Joaquin River, and numerous lesser streams and creeks also enter the system, originating in both the Sierra Nevada and the Coast Range. The entire San Joaquin River system drains northwesterly through the Delta to Suisun Bay (DWR 2013, pg. SJR-5).

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-60 Local Watersheds (Hydrologic Sub-Areas)
The City of Atwater is located within the Black Rascal Creek-Bear Creek, Canal Creek, City of Winton-Bear Creek watersheds, as shown in Figure 8.6-1.

Groundwater Basin
The Merced Subbasin contains three principal aquifers that are defined by their relationship to the Corcoran Clay aquitard, a laterally-extensive silt and clay layer that underlies approximately the western half of the subbasin and acts as a significant confining layer. The Above Corcoran Principal Aquifer includes all aquifer units that exist above the Corcoran Clay aquitard and generally contains moderate to large hydraulic conductivities and yields for domestic and irrigation uses.

The groundwater aquifer from which the City of Atwater obtains its water is not adjudicated. An adjudication consists of a groundwater basin in which all rights to water could be defined by a court. As a non-adjudicated basin, there are no defined legal pumping rights for the City and there are no legal constraints on groundwater pumping.

The Merced Subbasin is a high priority basin and is critically over drafted. The City of Atwater and other members of the Merced Irrigation-Urban Groundwater Sustainability Agency are in the process of implementing measures from the recently adopted GSP to sustainably manage the groundwater basin, including the allocation of the estimated sustainable yield of the basin to the GSAs.

The San Joaquin River Groundwater Basin is not adjudicated. Therefore, no limitations are placed on groundwater pumpage volumes. Portions of the San Joaquin River Groundwater Basin have been in a state of overdraft for many years, including the Merced Subbasin. The California Water Plan Update- Bulletin 160-98 estimated the average overdraft in the San Joaquin River Groundwater Basin to be 239,000 AF in 1995 (City of Atwater Urban Water Management Plan, 2020).

Groundwater supplies the domestic water needs of the City. The groundwater comes from the San JoaquinTulare Valley Storage Basin, an aquifer that serves the entire Central Valley. Static groundwater levels in the Atwater area are generally between 55 and 89 feet below ground level (Atwater General Plan, 2000).

Local Drainage
The City’s storm drainage system primarily consists of man-made irrigation canals that carry storm runoff and two drainage canals that provide drainage from the city. The canals transport stormwater from the city, and the stormwater eventually drains to the San Joaquin River. In addition, the system consists of catch basins that collect runoff water from the street, pump stations that are used to remove stormwater from sections of road that cannot be drained by gravity, pipes of various sizes, as well as a detention basin to prevent flooding (City of Atwater Urban Water Management Plan, 2020).

Stormwater Quality
Potential hazards to surface water quality include the following nonpoint pollution problems: high turbidity from sediment resulting from erosion of improperly graded construction projects, concentration of nitrates and dissolved solids from agriculture or surfacing septic tank failures, contaminated street and lawn runoff from urban areas, and warm water drainage discharges into cold water streams.

The most critical period for surface water quality is following a rainstorm which produces significant amounts of drainage runoff into streams at low flow, resulting in poor dilution of contaminates in the low flowing stream. Such conditions are most frequent during the fall at the beginning of the rainy season when

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-61 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater stream flows are near their lowest annual levels. Besides the greases, oils, pesticides, litter, and organic matter associated with such runoff, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and cadmium can cause considerable harm to aquatic organisms when introduced to streams in low flow conditions.

Urban stormwater runoff was managed as a non-point discharge (a source not readily identifiable) under the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, Section 208) until the mid-1980's.

However, since then, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency has continued to develop implementing rules which categorize urban runoff as a point source (an identifiable source) subject to National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Rules now affect medium and large urban areas, and further rulemaking is expected as programs are developed to meet requirements of Federal water pollution control laws.

Surface water pollution is also caused by erosion. Excessive and improperly managed grading, vegetation removal, quarrying, logging, and agricultural practices all lead to increased erosion of exposed earth and sedimentation of watercourses during rainy periods. In slower moving water bodies these same factors often cause a buildup of siltation, which ultimately reduces the capacity of the water system to percolate and recharge groundwater basins, as well as adversely affecting both aquatic resources and flood control efforts.
303(d) Impaired Water Bodies: Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.

According to the California Water Quality Control Monitoring Council, which is part of California Environmental Protection Agency, Natural Resources, there are many areas within Merced County which are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. However, there are no areas with the City of Atwater or the planning area that contain Section 303(d) water bodies.

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Livingston Canal
Bear Creek
Canal Creek
Figure 8.6-1. Watershed Map
Sources: USGS Watershed Boundary Dataset HUC-12; USGS National Hydrography Dataset; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Hydrography
Stream/River
Canal/Ditch
Watershed
Black Rascal Creek-Bear Creek
Canal Creek
City of Winton-Bear Creek
Deep Slough-Bear Creek
Lower Owens Creek Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-63 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

8.7 SCENIC RESOURCES
This section provides an overview of the visual character, scenic resources, views, and scenic highways that are encountered within the planning area and the regional vicinity.

KEY TERMS
Scenic Highway Corridor. The area outside of a highway right-of-way that is generally visible to persons traveling on the highway.

Scenic Highway/Scenic Route. A highway, road, drive, or street that, in addition to its transportation function, provides opportunities for the enjoyment of natural and human-made scenic resources and access or direct views to areas or scenes of exceptional beauty (including those of historic or cultural interest). The aesthetic values of scenic routes often are protected and enhanced by regulations governing the development of property or the placement of outdoor advertising. Until the mid-1980’s, General Plans in California were required to include a Scenic Highways Element.

View Corridor. A view corridor is a highway, road, trail, or other linear feature that offers travelers a vista of scenic areas within a city or county.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
LOCAL
City of Atwater General Plan
The following City of Atwater General Plan policies, which are intended to achieve visual and scenic quality in new developments, apply to the proposed project.

The City of Atwater aims to protect and beautify these streets with specific policies regulating signs, utility lines, land use, and other activities which would detract from the aesthetic value of these corridors. Also, the City encourages actions that enhance the scenic value of these corridors, such as landscaping, maintenance and architectural design.

Policy CO-10.1. Utilize landscaping and other features to enhance and beautify major streets and gateways into and through the City.

Policy CO-10.2. Avoid excessive signage and other features which could detract from the scenic quality of prominent circulation routes.

City of Atwater Municipal Code
Chapter 17.69.160 - Scenic corridors.

Freestanding signs erected along scenic corridors are subject to the following setback, landscaping, and design requirements:

A. No closer than ten feet to property line or 18 feet to curb face. Areas along Atwater Boulevard shall conform to established building setbacks.

B. Signs shall be of a monument style, mounted on a solid base, and not to exceed eight feet in height measured from the finished grade to the top of the sign.

C. The sign shall be placed in a landscaped area equipped with a seven-day automatic irrigation system.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-64 D. The design and construction materials of monument signs shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regional Scenic Resources
Visual resources are generally classified into two categories: scenic views and scenic resources. Scenic views are elements of the broader viewshed such as mountain ranges, valleys, waterways, and ridgelines. They are usually mid-ground or background elements of a viewshed that can be seen from a range of viewpoints, often along a roadway or other corridor. Scenic resources are specific features of a viewing area (or viewshed) such as trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings. They are specific features that act as the focal point of a viewshed and are usually foreground elements.

Aesthetically significant features occur in a diverse array of environments within the region, ranging in character from urban centers to rural agricultural lands to natural water bodies. Features of the built environment that may also have visual significance include individual or groups of structures that are distinctive due to their aesthetic, historical, social, or cultural significance or characteristics. Examples of the visually significant built environment may include bridges or overpasses, architecturally appealing buildings or groups of buildings, landscaped freeways, and a location where a historic event occurred.

Scenic Highways and Corridors
Scenic highways and corridors make major contributions to the quality of life enjoyed by the residents of a region. The development of community pride, the enhancement of property values, and the protection of aesthetically-pleasing open spaces reflecting a preference for the local lifestyle are all ways in which scenic corridors are valuable to residents.

Scenic highways and corridors can also strengthen the tourist industry. For many visitors, highway corridors will provide their only experience of the region. Enhancement and protection of these corridors ensures that the tourist experience continues to be a positive one and, consequently, provides support for the tourist-related activities of the region's economy.

Scenic Highways: A scenic highway is generally defined by Caltrans as a public highway that traverses an area of outstanding scenic quality, containing striking views, flora, geology, or other unique natural attributes. A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view.

There are no Designated Scenic Highways in Merced County according to the Caltrans Scenic Highway Mapping System. The nearest Designated Scenic Highway is California State Route 5 in Stanislaus County.

This is not visible from the City of Atwater.

Scenic Corridors: A scenic corridor is the view from the road that may include a distant panorama and/or the immediate roadside area. A scenic corridor encompasses the outstanding natural features and landscapes that are considered scenic. It is the visual quality of the man-made or natural environments within a scenic corridor that are responsible for its scenic value. Commonly, the physical limits of a scenic corridor are broken down into foreground views (zero to one quarter mile) and distant views (over one quarter mile). In addition to distinct foreground and distant views, the visual quality of a scenic corridor is defined by special features, which include:

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-65 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater • Focal points - prominent natural or man-made features which immediately catch the eye. • Transition areas - locations where the visual environment changes dramatically. • Gateways - locations which mark the entrance to a community or geographic area.

The City of Atwater General Plan designated the following as scenic corridors:
• Atwater Boulevard
• First Street
• Bellevue Road
• Shaffer Road
• Winton Way
• Broadway from Winton Way to First Street
• Buhach Road
• Third Street
• Part of Grove Avenue
• All entrances to the City

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-66

8.8 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
This section provides an overview of the agricultural crops in Merced County and the City of Atwater.

Information in this section is derived primarily from the California Important Farmlands Map (California Department of Conservation, 2023), the California Land Conservation (Williamson) Act Status Report (California Department of Conservation, 2023) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2023).

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
LOCAL
City of Atwater General Plan
The existing City of Atwater General Plan provides a policy framework for the preservation and conservation of agricultural resources.

Goal CO-4. Ensure the continued viability of agriculture in the area surrounding the City’s proposed Sphere of Influence.

Policy CO-4.1. Comply with all agricultural preservation policies and implementation programs developed jointly by the City and Merced County.

Implementation Program CO-4.a. Continue to work with the County of Merced to develop mutually acceptable policies and implementation programs designed to avoid and/or mitigate the conversion of Agricultural land outside of the City’s proposed Sphere of Influence.

City of Atwater Municipal Code-Chapter 17.10 Agricultural Districts

17.10.010 To preserve lands best suited for agricultural use from the premature encroachment of urban development, but to permit agricultural and recreational uses which may appropriately be located. To preserve in agricultural use land suited to eventual development in other uses, pending proper timing for the economical provision of utilities, major streets and other facilities, so that compact, orderly development will occur.

Central Valley Farmland Trust
The Central Valley Farmland Trust is a private, non-profit, regional land trust working in Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Merced Counties of California. The organization works to preserve farmland through the purchase of agricultural conservation easements from willing landowners.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Merced County Agriculture
Merced County occupies a central location in California’s vast agricultural heartland, the San Joaquin Valley.

The County’s Agricultural Commissioner’s most recently published Agricultural Report (2021) contains the following information relating to agriculture in the county.

The total acreage of crop land in Merced County is approximately 77,806.39. The gross value of agricultural production in Merced County for 2021 was $3,441,029,000. Table 8.8-1 lists the top commodities in Merced County in 2020 and 2021

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-67 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 8.8-1: SUMMARY COMPARISON OF CROP VALUES
PRODUCT TYPE 2021 VALUE IN DOLLARS 2020 VALUE IN DOLLARS Milk $1,093,632,000 $1,050,940,000
Almonds $485,858,000 $470,603,000
Sweet Potatoes $317,789,000 $269,895,000
Chickens $276,215,000 $318,522,000
Cattle & Calves $258,246,000 $262,187,000
Tomatoes $139,765,000 $145,056,000
Corn $128,919,000 $104,347,000
All Nursery Products $107,514,000 $75,109,000
Grapes (Wine) $80,090,000 $63,419,000
Pistachio $78,191,000 --
Misc. Fruit & Nut $77,675,000 --
Misc. Vegetables $77,425,000 $95,011,000
Eggs (Chicken) $69,404,000 $72,120,000
Hay (Alfalfa) $68,462,000 --
Cotton (PIMA) $61,517,000 $43,482,000
Silage (Other) $47,602,000 $32,264,000
Pollination $44,596,000 $31,542,000
Turkeys $28,129,000 $29,552,000
Total $3,441,029,000 $3,129,166,000
SOURCE: MERCED COUNTY AGRICULTURAL REPORT, 2020, 2021
Agricultural Capability
The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program identifies lands that have agriculture value and maintains a statewide map of these lands called the Important Farmlands Inventory (IFI). IFI classifies land based upon the productive capabilities of the land, rather than the mere presence of ideal soil conditions.

The suitability of soils for agricultural use is just one factor for determining the productive capabilities of land. Suitability is determined based on many characteristics, including fertility, slope, texture, drainage, depth, and salt content. A variety of classification systems have been devised by the state to categorize soil capabilities. The two most widely used systems are the Capability Classification System and the Storie Index.

The Capability Classification System classifies soils from Class I to Class VIII based on their ability to support agriculture with Class I being the highest quality soil. The Storie Index considers other factors such as slope and texture to arrive at a rating. The IFI is in part based upon both of these two classification systems.

Soil Capability Classification
The Soil Capability Classification System takes into consideration soil limitations, the risk of damage when soils are used, and the way in which soils respond to treatment. Capability classes range from Class 1 soils, which have few limitations for agriculture, to Class 8 soils that are unsuitable for agriculture. Generally, as the rating of the capability classification increases, yields and profits are more difficult to obtain. A general description of soil classifications, as defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is provided in Table 8.8-2 below.

A Custom Soil Survey was completed for the planning area using the NRCS Web Soil Survey program. Table

8.8-3 identifies the soils and soil classifications found in the planning area. The NRCS Soils Map is provided on Figure 8.4-2.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-68 TABLE 8.8-2: SOIL CAPABILITY CLASSIFICATION

CLASS DEFINITION
1 Soils have slight limitations that restrict their use. 2 Soils have moderate limitations that restrict choice plants or that require moderate conservation practices. 3 Soils have severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants or that require special conservation practices, or both. 4 Soils have very severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants or that require very careful management, or both.
5 Soils are not likely to erode but have other limitations; impractical to remove that limits their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.
6 Soils have severe limitations that make them generally unsuited to cultivation and limit their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.
7 Soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.
8 Soils and landforms have limitations that preclude their use for commercial plans and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife habitat, water supply, or aesthetic purposes.

SOURCE: USDA SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE.

TABLE 8.8-3: SOIL CLASSIFICATION

NAME ACRES IN SOI PERCENT OF SOI
Alamo Clay, 0 to 1 percent 38.26 0.2%
Atwater loamy sand, deep hardpan, poorly drained 0 percent 465.01 2.6% Atwater loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent 2,112.34 11.8%
Atwater loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent 38.82 0.2%
Atwater loamy sand, deep over hardpan, 0 to 3 percent 3,737.46 20.9% Atwater loamy sand, deep over hardpan, 3 to 8 percent 71.32 0.4% Atwater loamy sand, imperfectly drained, 0 to 3 percent 255.97 1.4% Atwater sand, 0 to 3 percent 8,432.43 47.1%
Atwater sand, 3 to 8 percent 801.48 4.5%
DcA - Delhi loamy fine sand, silty substratum (0-3%) 80.38 0.4% DeA - Delhi loamy sand, silty substratum (0-3%) 46.67 0.3% Delhi sand, 0 to 3 percent 687.85 3.8%
Delhi sand, 3 to 8 percent 10.02 0.1%
DkA - Dello sand (0-1%) 61.20 0.3%
Dinuba sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent 7.99 0.0%
Dinuba sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent 315.60 1.8% Greenfield sandy loam, deep over hardpan, poorly drained, 0 to 1 percent 142.71 0.8% Greenfield sandy loam, deep over hardpan, 0 to 3 percent 208.87 1.2% HgA - Hilmar loamy sand (0-3%) 1.72 0.0%
HhA - Hilmar loamy sand, saline-alkali (0-3%) 75.79 0.4% San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3 percent 86.07 0.5%
San Joaquin loam, 3 to 8 percent 3.16 0.0%
Snelling sandy loam, imperfectly drained, 0 to 1 percent 127.76 0.7% SnA - Snelly sandy loam (0-3%) 39.38 0.2%
Typic Duraqualfs, strongly saline-sodic, 0 to 1 percent 2.08 0.0% Water 44.40 0.2%
Total 17,894.73 100.0%
* DEPICTS IRRIGATED VS NON IRRIGATED CAPABILITY RATING
SOURCE:NRCS CUSTOM WEB SOIL SURVEY, 2023.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-69 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Important Farmlands
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) is a farmland classification system administered by the California Department of Conservation. Important farmland maps are based on the Land Inventory and Monitoring criteria, which classify a land’s suitability for agricultural production based on both the physical and chemical characteristics of soils, and the actual land use. The system maps five categories of agricultural land, which include important farmlands (prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, and farmland of local importance) and grazing land, as well as three categories of nonagricultural land, which include urban and built-up land, other land, and water area.

The State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program and Merced County GIS data were used to illustrate the farmland characteristics for the planning area.

Farmlands in the planning area are identified in Table 8.8-4 and are shown on Figure 8.8-1. The farmland classifications for the site and surrounding area are described below.

TABLE 8.8-4: FARMLAND CLASSIFICATION

LAND CLASSIFICATION CITY SOI PLANNING
AREA

GRAND TOTAL
P- Prime Farmland 220.58 4,046.46 5,498.21 9,765.25
S- Farmland of Statewide Importance 0.58 753.66 641.38 1,395.62 L-Farmland of Local Importance 351.25 269.71 180.63 801.59 U-Unique Farmland -- 78.83 11.38 90.21
sAC- Semi-agricultural and Rural
Commercial Land

32.91 17.35 4.39 54.65
CI- Confined Animal Agriculture 0.08 208.22 40.58 248.88 G- Grazing Land 10.93 12.62 3.87 27.42
R-Rural Residential Land 0.01 230.83 293.02 523.86
D- Urban and Built-Up Land 3,382.10 969.90 359.04 4,711.05 V- Vacant or Disturbed Land 195.99 35.35 44.84 276.19
Grand Total 4,194.43 6,622.94 7,077.36 17,894.73
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION;NRCS CUSTOM WEB SOIL SURVEY, 2023.

Prime Farmland is farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Approximately 4,267.04 acres of Prime Farmland is located within the Panning Area.

Farmland of Statewide Importance is farmland with characteristics similar to those of prime farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

Approximately 754.24 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance is located within the Panning Area.

Unique Farmland is land which does not meet the criteria for Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, that has been used for the production of specific high economic value crops at some time during the two update cycles prior to the mapping date. It has the special combination of soil quality, location, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high quality and/or high yields of a specific crop when treated and managed according to current farming methods. Examples of such

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-70 crops may include oranges, olives, avocados, rice, grapes, and cut flowers. It does not include publicly owned lands for which there is an adopted policy preventing agricultural use. Approximately 78.83 acres of Unique Farmland is located within the Panning Area.

Farmland of Local Importance is land of importance to the local agricultural economy, as determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. Approximately 620.96 acres of Farmland of Local Importance is located within the Panning Area.

Urban and Built-up Land includes Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to

1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes. Approximately 4,352 acres of Urban and Built-Up Land is located within the Panning Area.

Rural Residential Land has a building density of less than 1 structure per 1.5 acres, but with at least one structure per 10 acres. Approximately 230.84acres of Rural Residential Land is located within the Panning Area.

Vacant or Disturbed Land consists of open field areas that do not qualify for an agricultural category, mineral and oil extraction areas, and rural freeway interchanges. Approximately 231.34 acres of Vacant or Disturbed Land is located within the Panning Area.

Semi-Agricultural and Rural Commercial Land includes farmsteads, agricultural storage and packing sheds, unpaved parking areas, composting facilities, equine facilities, firewood lots, and campgrounds.

Approximately 50.26 acres of Semi-Agricultural and Rural Commercial Land is located within the Panning Area.

Confided Animal Agriculture Land include dairies, feedlots, poultry facilities, and aquaculture (fish farms).

Grazing Land is land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. This category was developed in cooperation with the California Cattlemen's Association, University of California Cooperative Extension, and other groups interested in the extent of grazing activities.

Farmland Conversion in Merced County
Data from the Department of Conservation indicates that approximately 6,625 acres of Prime Farmland in the County was developed for other uses between 2016 and 2018. The types and acreages of farmland in 2016 and 2018 are shown below in Table 8.8-5.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-71 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 8.8-5: MERCED COUNTY FARMLANDS SUMMARY AND CHANGE BY LAND USE CATEGORY

LAND USE CATEGORY
2016-2018 ACREAGE CHANGES

TOTAL ACREAGE INVENTORIED

ACRES ACRES TOTAL NET

LOST GAINED ACREAGE

CHANGED

ACREAGE
CHANGED 2016 2018 (-) (+) Acres Percent Acres Percent
Prime Farmland 269,243 21.3% 263,722 20.8% 6,625 1,104 7,729 -5,521 Farmland of
Statewide Importance 154,208 12.2% 153,134 12.1% 3,122 2,048 5,170 -1,074 Unique Farmland 115,234 9.1% 114,430 9.0% 3,102 2,298 5,400 -804 Farmland of Local
Importance 61,668 4.9% 57,904 4.6% 16,400 12,636 29,036 -3,764

IMPORTANT

FARMLAND

SUBTOTAL
600,353 47.4% 589,190

46.6%
29,249 18,086 47,335 -11,163
Grazing Land 552,631 43.7% 557,711 44.1% 8,689 13,769 22,458 5,080

AGRICULTURAL LAND
SUBTOTAL 1,152,984 91.1% 1,146,901 90.6% 37,938 31,855 69,793 -6,083 Urban and Built-up
Land 40,340 3.2% 40,783 3.2% 1,322 1,765 3,087 443
Other Land 55,770 4.4% 61,434 4.9% 1,864 7,528 9,392 5,664 Water Area 16,532 1.3% 16,508 1.3% 105 81 186 -24

TOTAL AREA
INVENTORIED 1,265,626 100.0% 1,265,626 100.0% 41,229 41,229 82,458 0 SOURCE: CA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, LAND USE CONVERSION TABLE A-18, 2018.

Farmland Conservation
The Williamson Act authorizes each County to establish an agricultural preserve. Land that is within the agricultural preserve is eligible to be placed under a contract between the property owner and County that would restrict the use of the land to agriculture in exchange for a tax assessment that is based on the yearly production yield. The contracts have a 10-year term that is automatically renewed each year, unless the property owner requests a non-renewal or the contract is cancelled. If the contract is cancelled the property owner is assessed a fee of up to 12.5 percent of the property value.

Table 8.8-6 shows lands within the city and SOI that are under a Williamson Act contract and the status of the contract. Figure 8.8-2 shows Williamson Act Contracts within the city and planning area.

TABLE 8.8-6: SUMMARY OF WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACTS

CONTRACT LOCATION AND TYPE TOTAL ACRES
WA-Non-Prime 3.4
Total 3.4
FARMLAND MAPPING AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MERCED COUNTY, 2023.

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 8.8-1. Important Farmlands
Sources: California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, Merced County 2018; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Farmland Classification
Prime Farmland
Farmland of Statewide
Importance
Unique Farmland
Grazing Land
Farmland of Local
Importance
Confined Animal Agriculture
Nonagricultural or Natural
Vegetation
Vacant or Disturbed Land
Rural Residential Land
Semi-agricultural and Rural
Commercial Land
Urban and Built-Up Land Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
143-250-021
Nonprime
State-Reported Acres: 2.2
143-230-025
Nonprime
State-Reported Acres: 1.2
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 8.8-2. Williamson Act Lands
Sources: California Department of Conservation Farmland Williamson Act Program, 2022; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
PlanningArea_Winton
Sphere of Influence
Williamson Act Contract Lands Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 11, 2023

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-74

8.9 CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
These resources are defined as buildings, sites, structures, or objects that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or scientific importance. Preservation of the City of Atwater planning area’s cultural heritage should be considered when planning for the future of the region.

KEY TERMS
Archaeology. The study of historic or prehistoric peoples and their cultures by analysis of their artifacts and monuments.

Complex. A patterned grouping of similar artifact assemblages from two or more sites, presumed to represent an archaeological culture.

Ethnography. The study of contemporary human cultures.

Midden. A deposit marking a former habitation site and containing such materials as discarded artifacts, bone and shell fragments, food refuse, charcoal, ash, rock, human remains, structural remnants, and other cultural leavings.

Paleontology. The science of the forms of life existing in former geologic periods, as represented by their fossils.

REGULATORY SETTING
LOCAL
City of Atwater General Plan
The existing General Plan has no mention of archaeological and cultural resource policies.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Cultural resources are defined as buildings, sites, structures, or objects that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or scientific importance. Preservation of the city’s cultural heritage should be considered when planning for the future.

Prehistory
The Central Valley region was among the first in the state to attract intensive fieldwork, and research has continued to the present day. This has resulted in a substantial accumulation of data.

In the early decades of the 1900s, E.J. Dawson explored numerous sites near Stockton and Lodi, later collaborating with W.E. Schenck (Schenck and Dawson 1929). By 1933, the focus of work was directed to the Cosumnes locality, where survey and excavation studies were conducted by the Sacramento Junior College (Lillard and Purves 1936). Excavation data, in particular from the stratified Windmiller site (CA-Sac107), suggested two temporally distinct cultural traditions. Later work at other mounds by Sacramento Junior College and the University of California, Berkeley, enabled the investigators to identify a third cultural tradition, intermediate between the previously postulated Early and Late Horizons. The three-horizon sequence, based on discrete changes in ornamental artifacts and mortuary practices, as well as on observed differences in soils within sites (Lillard, Heizer and Fenenga 1939), was later refined by Beardsley (1954).

An expanded definition of artifacts diagnostic of each time period was developed, and its application

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-75 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater extended to parts of the central California coast. Traits held in common allow the application of this system within certain limits of time and space to other areas of prehistoric central California.

The Windmiller Culture (Early Horizon) is characterized by ventrally-extended burials (some dorsal extensions are known), with westerly orientation of heads; a high percentage of burials with grave goods; frequent presence of red ocher in graves; large projectile points, of which 60 percent are of materials other than obsidian; rectangular Haliotis beads; Olivella shell beads (types A1a and L); rare use of bone; some use of baked clay objects; and well-fashioned charmstones, usually perforated.

The Cosumnes Culture (Middle Horizon) displays considerable changes from the preceding cultural expression. The burial mode is predominately flexed, with variable cardinal orientation and some cremations present. There are a lower percentage of burials with grave goods, and ocher staining is common in graves. Olivella beads of types C1, F and G predominate, and there is abundant use of green Haliotis sp. rather than red Haliotis sp. Other characteristic artifacts include perforated and canid teeth; asymmetrical and "fishtail" charmstones, usually unperforated; cobble mortars and evidence of wooden mortars; extensive use of bone for tools and ornaments; large projectile points, with considerable use of rock other than obsidian; and use of baked clay.

Hotchkiss Culture (Late Horizon) -- The burial pattern retains the use of the flexed mode, and there is wide spread evidence of cremation, lesser use of red ocher, heavy sue of baked clay, Olivella beads of Types E and M, extensive use of Haliotis ornaments of many elaborate shapes and forms, shaped mortars and cylindrical pestles, bird-bone tubes with elaborate geometric designs, clam shell disc beads, small projectile points indicative of the introduction of the bow and arrow, flanged tubular pipes of steatite and schist, and use of magnesite (Moratto 1984:181-183). The characteristics noted are not all-inclusive, but cover the more important traits.

Schulz (1981), in an extensive examination of the central California evidence for the use of acorns, used the terms Early, Middle and Late Complexes, but the traits attributed to them remain generally the same. While it is not altogether clear, Schulz seemingly uses the term “Complex” to refer to the particular archeological entities (above called “Horizons”) as defined in this region. Ragir's (1972) cultures are the same as Schulz's complexes.

Bennyhoff and Hughes (1984) have presented alternative dating schemes for the Central California Archeological Sequence. The primary emphasis is a more elaborate division of the horizons to reflect what is seen as cultural/temporal changes within the three horizons and a compression of the temporal span.

There have been other chronologies proposed, including Fredrickson (1973), and since it is correlated with Bennyhoff's (1977) work, it does merit discussion. The particular archeological cultural entities Fredrickson has defined, based upon the work of Bennyhoff, are patterns, phases and aspects. Bennyhoff's (1977) work in the Plains Miwok area is the best definition of the Cosumnes District, which likely conforms to Fredrickson's pattern. Fredrickson also proposed periods of time associated heavily with economic modes, which provides a temporal term for comparing contemporary cultural entities. It corresponds with Willey and Phillips' (1958) earlier “tradition”, although it is tied more specifically to the archeological record in California.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-76 Ethnology
The City of Atwater’s General Plan planning area lies within the northern portion of the ethnographic territory of the Yokuts people. The Yokuts were members of the Penutian language family which held all of the Central Valley, San Francisco Bay Area, and the Pacific Coast from Marin County to near Point Sur. The Yokuts differed from other ethnographic groups in California as they had true tribal divisions with group names (Kroeber 1925; Latta 1949). Each tribe spoke a particular dialect, common to its members, but similar enough to other Yokuts that they were mutually intelligible (Kroeber 1925).

The Yokuts held portions of the San Joaquin Valley from the Tehachapi range in the south to Stockton in the north. On the north they were bordered by the Plains Miwok, and on the west by the Saclan or Bay Miwok and Costonoan peoples. Although neighbors were often from distinct language families, differences between the people appear to have been more influenced by environmental factors as opposed to linguistic affinities. Thus, the Plains Miwok were more similar to the nearby Yokuts than to foothill members of their own language group. Similarities in cultural inventory co-varied with distance from other groups and proximity to culturally diverse people. The material culture of the southern San Joaquin Yokuts was therefore more closely related to that of their non-Yokuts neighbors than to that of Delta members of their own language group.

Trade was well developed, with mutually beneficial interchange of needed or desired goods. Obsidian, rare in the San Joaquin Valley, was obtained by trade with Paiute and Shoshoni groups on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada, where numerous sources of this material are located, and to some extent from the Napa Valley to the north. Shell beads, obtained by the Yokuts from coastal people, and acorns, rare in the Great Basin, were among many items exported to the east by Yokuts traders (Davis 1961).

Economic subsistence was based on the acorn, with substantial dependency on gathering and processing of wild seeds and other vegetable foods. The rivers, streams, and sloughs that formed a maze within the valley provided abundant food resources such as fish, shellfish, and turtles. Game, wild fowl, and small mammals were trapped and hunted to provide protein augmentation of the diet. In general, the eastern portion of the San Joaquin Valley provided a lush environment of varied food resources, with the estimated large population centers reflecting this abundance (Cook 1955; Baumhoff 1963).

The 1833 malaria epidemic that decimated the Indians in the Central Valley played a major role in defining the post-Contact land use pattern of the Indians of the region, as well as impacting Euro-American economic development. The introduction of malaria to central California circa 1831 occurred as a result of expeditions of several fur brigades of the Hudson's Bay Company with infected individuals. The introduction of the disease led to the tremendous epidemic of 1833, resulting in the decimation of the Indian population of the region. An estimated three-quarter of the total Indian population of the region died from the disease in that year.

The Atwater area, north of the Merced River was occupied by the Northern Valley Yokuts, specifically the Coconoon tribelet. Settlements were oriented along the water ways, with their village sites normally placed adjacent to these features for their nearby water and food resources. House structures varied in size and shape (Latta 1949; Kroeber 1925), with most constructed from the readily available tules found in the extensive marshes of the low-lying valley areas. The housepit depressions for the structures ranged in diameter from 3 meters to 18 meters (Wallace 1978:470).

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-77 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Historic Period Background
Active exploration began to help control Indian riads on coastal settlements as well as to find suitable locations for missions for Indian conversion. There were several minor explorations, followed by a fullscale effort by Gabriel Morage with 26 men, leaving Mission San Juan Bautista in 1806, likely entering the valley by way of San Luis Creek in Merced County. The group proceeded across the San Joaquin River, and reached a slough that Morage named Las Mariposas for the number of butterflies they observed. The party travelled north and northwest, eventually reaching and naming the Merced River. Moraga again explored the Merced River’s lower course in 1808, and again in 1810. The mission fathers though the exploration was a failure since they failed to find suitable sites for an inland chain of missions.

The first American to pass though the San Joaquin Valley was Jedidiah Smith. He may not have travelled within the boundaries of Merce County. Following Smith were other adventurers, man of whom came to California to trap beaver. John C. Fremont, proceeded southward from Sutter’s Fort, passing through what is now Merced County, and reached the Merced River. The party built a raft and crossed the river near its junction with the San Joaquin River. Several days later, they stopped on the north bank of Bear Creek, five miles above the mouth of the creek.

The Atwater planning area does not lie on any portion of the 1840s Mexican land grants present in the County.

Atwater began as a station on the line of the Central Pacific, as they built their line south and east down the valley. The station was placed on the ranch of Marshall D. Atwater, a leading wheat farmer in the area.

Six years later, a town with the same name was established by the Merced Land and Fruit Company.

Atwater, John Mitchell and George Bloss, all made substantial contributions to the towns of Atwater and other cities in the Merced region. The Bloss home is the headquarters of the Atwater Historical Society, and is a house museum. The family endowed many other local Atwater institutions.

The Merced Army Air Field south of town was one of many small fields established in World War II for training flight personnel. It later became Castle Air Force Base, re-named for Frederick Castle, a Medal of Honor award winner after he was shot down in late 1944. In 1981, the Castle Air Museum opened next to the base. The base closed in 1995.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-78 Cultural Resources
There are 68 cultural resources have been identified within the planning area, according to files maintained by the Central California Information Center (CCIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). The 68 recorded cultural resources span both the prehistoric and historic periods, with one area with prehistoric period artifacts, and 67 historic period resources. The sites range from a collection of Native American artifacts to historic period commercial buildings and residences, irrigation ditches and systems, and the buildings of the former Castle Air Force Base (see Table 8.9-1).

TABLE 8.9-1: RECORDED RESOURCES WITHIN THE ATWATER GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PLANNING AREA PRIMARY # OTHER IDENTIFIER TYPE AGE
P-24-000086 Other - LG-16; Unknown Unknown
Resource Name - Hartley
Lateral Structure Historic
P-24-000088 Other - LG-18; Unknown Unknown
P-24-000090
Resource Name - Main
Ashe Lateral/Inverted
Siphon
Unknown Unknown
Structure Unknown Unknown
P-24-000092 Historic Unknown Unknown
P-24-000093 Other - LG-20; Unknown Unknown
P-24-000479 Resource Name - Canal
Creek Structure, Site Historic
P-24-000480 Other - DG-35; Unknown Unknown
P-24-000484 Resource Name - Atwater
Canal Unknown Unknown
P-24-000485 Structure, Site Unknown Unknown
P-24-000486 Historic Unknown Unknown
P-24-000491 Other - LG-21; Unknown Unknown
P-24-000492 Resource Name - Arena
Canal Structure Historic
P-24-000493
OHP Property Number -
PROP# 091891; Other -
DOE-24-94-0039-0000;
Unknown Unknown
P-24-000494 Resource Name - Building
618 Castle Air Force Base Building Historic
P-24-000526
OHP Property Number -
PROP# 091892; Other -
DOE-24-94-0040-0000;
Unknown Unknown
P-24-000552 Resource Name - Building
653 Castle Air Force Base Building Historic
P-24-000659
Resource Name - Castle
AFB Bldg 175, weapon
system training
Building Historic
P-24-000697
Resource Name - Yamato
Colony, SR 99; OHP PRN -
5334-0002-0000
Site Historic
P-24-001657 Resource Name - John
Anderson Property Other Historic

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-79 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater PRIMARY # OTHER IDENTIFIER TYPE AGE
P-24-001665 Resource Name - 11159
Peach Avenue Building Historic
P-24-001666 Resource Name - 5771
Arena Way Building Historic
P-24-001667 Resource Name - 10480
Liberty Road Building Historic
P-24-001668 Resource Name - 5732
Arena Way Building Historic
P-24-001669
Resource Name - 5610
Highway 99, Shady Nook
Hotel
Building Historic
P-24-001670 Resource Name - 5511 N.

Steinberg Road Building Historic
P-24-001671 Resource Name - 5171 N.

Central Ave. Building Historic
P-24-001672 Resource Name - 5071 N.

Central Ave. Building Historic
P-24-001673 Resource Name - 9258
Westside Blvd. Building Historic
P-24-001674 Resource Name - Farm on
Central Ave. at Hwy 99 Building Historic
P-24-001675 Resource Name - 5014
Highway 99 Building Historic
P-24-001682 Resource Name - Freitas
Dairy Building Unknown
P-24-001684 Resource Name - Atwater
Drain Structure, Site Historic
P-24-001783 Resource Name -
Henderson Lateral Structure Historic
P-24-001833 Resource Name -
Unnamed Canal #1 Structure Historic, Unknown
P-24-001834
Resource Name - Parcel
1; Resource Name - MR3-
7 Building,
Structure, Site Historic
P-24-001835
Resource Name - Parcel
2a; Resource Name -
MR3-8
Building,
Structure, Site Historic
P-24-001836 Resource Name - Parcel 3 Building,
Structure, Site Historic
P-24-001837 Resource Name - Parcel 6 Building,
Structure, Site Historic
P-24-001838
Resource Name - Parcel
8a; Resource Name -
MR3-4
Building,
Structure Historic
P-24-001839 Resource Name - Parcel
8b Building Historic
P-24-001840
Resource Name - Parcel
11; Resource Name -
MR3-1
Building,
Structure Historic

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-80 PRIMARY # OTHER IDENTIFIER TYPE AGE
P-24-001841 Resource Name - Parcel
14 Building,
Structure Historic
P-24-001842
Resource Name - Parcel
18; Resource Name -
MR3-10
Building,
Structure Historic
P-24-001843
Resource Name - Parcel
19; Resource Name -
MR3-9
Building,
Structure Historic
P-24-001844 Resource Name - Parcel
20 Building, Unknown
P-24-001845 Structure Historic Unknown
P-24-001846 Resource Name - Parcel
25 Building Historic
P-24-001847 Resource Name - Parcel
26 Building Historic
P-24-001862
Resource Name - Parcel
30; Resource Name -
MR3-6
Building,
Structure Historic
P-24-001881 Resource Name - Luthey
Isolates Other Prehistoric
P-24-001909
Resource Name -
Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad;
Resource Name -
Atchison, Topeka & Santa
Fe Railroad; OHP Property
Number - 130531; OHP
PRN - FHWA050324D
Structure Historic
P-24-002010
Resource Name - Merced
Irrigation District
(proposed historic
district)
District Historic
P-24-002011 Resource Name - MR3-5 Building Historic
P-24-002012 Resource Name - MR2-6 Building Historic
P-24-002013 Resource Name - MR3-3; Building Historic
P-24-002031 Resource Name - MR3-2 Building
P-24-002032 Resource Name - MR2-3 Building Historic
P-24-002033 Resource Name - MR2-4 Building Historic
P-24-002038 Resource Name - MR2-5 Building Historic
P-24-002039 Resource Name - MR3-15 Building Historic
P-24-002040 Resource Name - MR3-16 Building Historic
P-24-002049 Resource Name - MR3-17 Building Historic
P-24-002050
Resource Name - TMobile West LC
SC07705A/Castle LTE
Project; Other - Pacific
Gas and Electric
Structure Historic

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
8-81 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater PRIMARY # OTHER IDENTIFIER TYPE AGE
#013/089/Atwater-El
Capitan
P-24-002139 Resource Name - East
Ashe Lateral Structure Historic
P-24-002142 Resource Name - Bloss
Library Building Historic
P-24-002236
Resource Name - Atwater
Water Tank; T-Mobile
West LLC Candidate
SC90287M (Atwater)
Structure Historic
SOURCE: CENTRAL CALIFORNIA INFORMATION CENTER (CCIC) OF THE CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM (CHRIS) There are no properties or districts currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historic Places for Atwater General Plan Update planning area (www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com), except for the Bloss Mansion property located at 1020 Cedar Avenue, Atwater, CA.

8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 8-82 Consultation
Letters were sent to: The Native American Heritage Commission; Mr. Robert Ledger, Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government; Fred Beihn, North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians; Mary Stalter, North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians; Timothy Perez, North Valley Yokuts Tribe; Katherine Perez, North Valley Yokuts Tribe; Michael Wynn, Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians; Sandra Chapman, Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation; Bob Pennell, Table Mountain Rancheria; Neil Peyron, Tule River Indian Tribe; Kenneth Woodrow, Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band; Valentin Lopez, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band. The Native American Heritage Commission responded with a letter dated November 3, 2023.

Paleontological Resources
Among the natural resources deserving conservation and preservation, and existing within the planning area, are the often-unseen records of past life buried in the sediments and rocks below the pavement, buildings, soils, and vegetation which now cover most of the area. Fossils constitute a non-renewable resource: Once lost or destroyed, the exact information they contained can never be reproduced.

Paleontology is the science that attempts to unravel the meaning of these fossils in terms of the organisms they represent, the ages and geographic distribution of those organisms, how they interacted in ancient ecosystems and responded to past climatic changes, and the changes through time of all of these aspects.

The sensitivity of a given area or body of sediment with respect to paleontological resources is a function of both the potential for the existence of fossils and the predicted significance of any fossils which may be found there. The primary consideration in the determination of paleontological sensitivity of a given area, body of sediment, or rock formation is its potential to include fossils. Information that can contribute to assessment of this potential includes: 1) direct observation of fossils within the project area; 2) the existence of known fossil localities or documented absence of fossils in the same geologic unit (e.g., “Formation” or one of its subunits); 3) descriptive nature of sedimentary deposits (such as size of included particles or clasts, color, and bedding type) in the area of interest compared with those of similar deposits known elsewhere to favor or disfavor inclusion of fossils; and 4) interpretation of sediment details and known geologic history of the sedimentary body of interest in terms of the ancient environments in which they were deposited, followed by assessment of the favorability of those environments for the preservation of fossils.

The most general paleontological information can be obtained from geologic maps, but geologic cross sections (slices of the layer cake to view the third dimension) must be reviewed for each area in question.

These usually accompany geologic maps or technical reports. Once it can be determined which formations may be present in the subsurface, the question of paleontological resources must be addressed. Even though a formation is known to contain fossils, they are not usually distributed uniformly throughout the many square miles the formation may cover. If the fossils were part of a bay environment when they died, perhaps a scattered layer of shells will be preserved over large areas. If on the other hand, a whale died in this bay, you might expect to find fossil whalebone only in one small area of less than a few hundred square feet. Other resources to be considered in the determination of paleontological potential are regional geologic reports, site records on file with paleontological repositories and site-specific field surveys.

Paleontologists consider all vertebrate fossils to be of significance. Fossils of other types are considered significant if they represent a new record, new species, an oldest occurring species, the most complete specimen of its kind, a rare species worldwide, or a species helpful in the dating of formations. However, even a previously designated low potential site may yield significant fossils.

City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-0

Chapter 9
Environmental Justice
This Chapter includes the following topics:

9.1 Environmental Justice- Background
and Overview

9.2 Environmental Justice Determinants in
Atwater
The Environmental Justice chapter addresses a wide range of topics related to the health and well-being of Atwater residents and workers. The negative effects of environmental degradation and pollution are well-documented and include severe impacts to human health and longevity, depending on the level of exposure.

Within the United States, certain communities have historically been disproportionately disadvantaged by environmental threats and the negative health impacts of environmental degradation.

Increased exposure to environmental pollutants, unsafe drinking water, and contaminated facilities/structures have contributed to poorer health outcomes for disadvantaged communities. The field of environmental justice is focused on addressing these disproportionate impacts and improving the wellness of all communities by bolstering community agency and promoting the fair treatment of all people.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-1 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
This chapter addresses environmental justice in the City of Atwater. The chapter provides an overview of existing environmental conditions for the general population in the planning area and describes components of the built environment that may impact human health disproportionately. This chapter discusses existing health, socioeconomic, and environmental indicators, as well as public facility access, food access, housing conditions, physical activity and fitness, and community engagement.

9.1 Environmental Justice- Background and Overview

9.2 Environmental Justice Determinants in Atwater

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-2

FINDINGS, ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
The following summarizes important topics relating to environmental justice within the City of Atwater:

Environmental Justice. The existing General Plan does not included an Environmental Justice Element or policies specific to environmental justice or disadvantaged communities.

Disadvantaged Communities. Based on a screening of existing census tracts within the City of Atwater, most census tracts defined by City Boundaries are considered CalEnviroScreendesignated “Disadvantaged Communities” (DACs).

Pollution Indicators There are many pollution indicators identified by CalEnviroScreen present within DAC tracts. The most common being: pesticide use, air quality and pm 2.5, and drinking water contaminants.

Air Quality. Elevated levels of particulate matter (primarily very small particulates or PM2.5 /PM10) and ground-level ozone are of most concern to regional air quality.

Food Deserts. The USDA Food Access Research Atlas identifies “Food deserts” within Atwater census tracts.

Age of housing stock. Many of the housing units in Atwater were developed during a housing construction boom following World War II and lasting into the 1980s.

Housing Conditions. In 2017, the City updated their Housing Element and included an updated review of housing conditions that focused on the condition of the roof, siding, windows, and doors.

About 44% of the assessed 5,409 housing units were found to be sound, defined as units in good condition with no signs of deferred maintenance. 32% of the housing units needed minor repairs and 23% of the housing units needed substantial repairs.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

9.1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW
The negative effects of environmental degradation and pollution are well-documented and include severe impacts to human health and longevity, depending on the level of exposure. Within the United States, certain communities have historically been disproportionately affected by environmental threats and the negative health impacts of environmental degradation. These communities include, but are not limited to, low-income communities, communities of color, communities comprising members of tribal nations, and immigrant communities. Increased exposure to environmental pollutants, unsafe drinking water, and contaminated facilities/structures have contributed to poorer health outcomes for these communities.

Structural inequalities that disadvantage certain individuals and groups, local and regional policies, zoning, code enforcement deficiencies, and lack of community engagement and advocacy are related to disproportionate environmental and social effects. The field of environmental justice is focused on addressing these disproportionate impacts and improving the wellness of all communities by bolstering community planning efforts, considering exposure to adverse environmental effects, increasing access to amenities and services, and promoting the fair treatment of all people regardless of their race, ethnicity, national origin, or income.

Environmental Justice practices across the United States have worked to improve the status of disadvantaged communities, through effective planning and policy decisions. Effective planning and policy decisions at the federal, state and local levels can help ensure that equal protection from environmental hazards is prioritized for all people.

DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
The term ‘Disadvantaged Community’ is a broad designation that may include any community that lacks appropriate resources or is confronted with any exceptional economic, health, or environmental burden.

In relation to environmental justice, disadvantaged communities are typically those communities that disproportionately face the burdens of environmental hazards. The Planning for Healthy Communities Act establishes a set criterion for identifying a Disadvantaged Community (DAC). The definition of a DAC for the purposes of the bill is as follows:
“An area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation.” (CalEPA)
Localities must make an environmental justice element of their General Plan when one or more disadvantaged communities is identified within their General Plan planning area. Using the CalEPA definition of a disadvantaged community, SB 1000 provides stakeholders with the CalEnviroScreen map to identify communities that are disproportionately disadvantaged by environmental hazards. The CalEnviroScreen map is a science-based tool developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment on behalf of CalEPA that uses existing environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to rank all census tracts in California with a CalEnivroScreen score. Based on this score, the map identifies where DACs are located within each city.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-4 SB 1000
Senate Bill 1000, also known as The Planning for Healthy Communities Act, is a comprehensive state legislation that requires California cities to include an Environmental Justice element or a set of environmental justice policies into their General Plans. The Bill was established as a state regulation on September 24, 2016, with the goal of improving the health of California cities and addressing pertinent issues of environmental justice related to community wellness. SB 1000 outlines strategies to promote the protection of sensitive land uses within the state, and simultaneously mandates that cities address the needs of disadvantaged communities. Through this bill, environmental justice is a mandated consideration in all city’s local land-use planning. SB 1000 was authored by Senator Connie Leyva and co-sponsored by the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) and the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ).

To aid city governments and planners in meeting the requirements of SB 1000, the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) and PlaceWorks Inc. collaborated to create a strategic toolkit. The SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit serves as a guide for key stakeholders by clarifying legislation requirements and providing tools, best practices, and resources to support these stakeholders as they begin to incorporate the law into local practice. To effectively meet the mandates of the bill, cities must formally identify disadvantaged communities (DACs) and work to reduce health risks specific to these communities by outlining methods and programs within their plan that address the needs of DACs. Each General Plan must address the following topics in order to meet the requirements of SB 1000:
• Pollution Exposure and Air Quality
• Public Facilities
• Food Access
• Safe and Sanitary Homes
• Physical Activity
• “Civil” or Community Engagement
• Improvement and Programs That Address the Needs of Disadvantaged Communities

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes key local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

Local General Plan Requirements - Senate Bill 1000
Senate Bill 1000, also known as The Planning for Healthy Communities Act, is a comprehensive state legislation that requires California cities to include an Environmental Justice element or a set of environmental justice policies into their General Plans.

Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) Requirements - Senate Bill 244 The Merced LAFCO must consider whether local communities that may be underserved by public services and/or may be considered economically disadvantaged should be included in annexation proposals that include land adjacent to such communities. Approved in 2011, SB 244 requires cities and counties to address the infrastructure needs of unincorporated disadvantaged communities in city and county general plans and LAFCo Municipal Service Reviews (MSRs) and annexation decisions. SB 244 defines an unincorporated disadvantaged community as a place that: contains 10 or more dwelling units in close proximity to one another; is either within a city SOI, is an island within a city boundary, or is geographically isolated and has existed for more than 50 years; and has a median household income that is 80 percent or

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-5 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater less than the statewide median household income. For cities and counties, SB 244 requires that before the due date for adoption of the next housing element after January 1, 2012, the general plan land use element must be updated to: identify unincorporated disadvantaged communities; analyze for each identified community the water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and structural fire protection needs; and identify financial funding alternatives for the extension of services to identified communities. For LAFCos, SB 244 generally prohibits approval of city annexations greater than 10 acres that are contiguous to a disadvantaged unincorporated community unless the city applies to annex the disadvantaged unincorporated community as well.

9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE DETERMINANTS IN ATWATER
The CalEnviroScreen 4.0 tool is a standard metric for determining the location and presence of designated disadvantaged communities within an area. Based on a screening of existing census tracts within the City of Atwater, there are designated Disadvantaged Communities within Atwater. As noted previously, there are seven primary environmental justice focus areas defined within The Planning for Healthy Communities Act (SB 1000) that must be used in addressing the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities:
• Pollution Exposure and Air Quality;
• Public Facilities;
• Food Access;
• Safe and Sanitary Homes;
• Physical Activity;
• Community Engagement; and
• Improvements and Programs
As shown in Figure 9.2-1, and Table 9.2-1, based on a screening of existing census tracts within the City of Atwater, most census tracts defined by City Boundaries are considered CalEnviroScreen-designated DACs (scores of 75 or higher). The southernmost portion of the City of Atwater, just south of SR-99 is not designated a Disadvantaged Community, this area has a CalEnviroScreen score of 58. Central Atwater, or Census Tract 6047000701 is the most affected as it has a CalEnviroScreen score of 93. As described previously, there are seven primary environmental justice focus areas defined within The Planning For Healthy Communities Act that must be used in addressing the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities (Pollution Exposure and Air Quality, Public Facilities, Food Access, Safe and Sanitary Homes, Physical Activity, Community Engagement, and Improvements and Programs). The existing conditions for these focus areas within the City of Atwater are assessed below.

TABLE 9.2-1: OVERALL CALENVIROSCREEN SCORE BY CENSUS TRACT (ATWATER) CENSUS
TRACTS 6047000702 6047000301 6047000801 6047000603 6047000602 6047000601 Indicator (%) 58 80 86 80 76 75
CENSUS
TRACTS 6047000802 6047000303 6047000902 6047000505 6047000503 6047000701 Indicator (%) 77 68 86 82 72 93
SOURCE: CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0

N Winton Way
Co Rd 37
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
Wallace Rd
Shaffer Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
W Bellevue Rd
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Almond Ave
Bellevue Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
99 140
Census Tract 6047000901
CES Score = 83
Census Tract
6047000702
CES Score = 58
Census Tract
6047000301
CES Score = 80
Census Tract
6047000801
CES Score = 86
Census Tract
6047000603
CES Score = 80
Census Tract
6047000602
CES Score = 76
Census Tract
6047000601
CES Score = 75
Census Tract
6047000802
CES Score = 77
Census Tract
6047000504
CES Score = 76
Census Tract
6047000303
CES Score = 68 Census Tract
6047002500
CES Score = 81
Census Tract
6047000902
CES Score = 86
Census Tract
6047000505
CES Score = 82
Census Tract
6047000503
CES Score = 72
Census Tract
6047000701
CES Score = 93
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 9.2-1. CalEnviroScreen Disadvantaged Communities Sources: OEHHA CalEnviroScreen 4.0; CalEPA SB535 Disadvantaged Communities (2022); Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (CES 4)
Overall Percentile
90 - 100
80 - 90
75 - 80
70 - 75
60 - 70
50 - 60
40 - 50
30 - 40
20 - 30
10 - 20
< 10
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Census Tract
Disadvantaged Communities*
Disadvantaged Community
(CES 4)
Disadvantaged Community
(CES 3)
* CalEPA formally designated four categories of disadvantaged communities:

1. Census tracts receiving the highest 25 percent of overall scores in CES 4

2. Census tracts previously identified in the top 25% in CES 3 (2017)

3. Census tracts with high amounts of pollution and low populations

4. Lands under the control of federally recognized Tribes Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater August 25, 2023

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-7 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

HEALTH & SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
To understand the existing health and socioeconomic conditions of each DAC in the city as a whole, Table

9.2-2 lists the percentiles for sensitive population and socioeconomic factor indicators in the planning area by census tract. The DAC census tracts within Atwater are shown with bold text boxes; other census tracts are also included for reference. The sensitive population indicators reflect the communities’ health and the socioeconomic factor indicators describe educational attainment, income level, employment, and housing conditions and burden. These indicators are presented below on Table 9.2-2. In combination with the environmental/pollution data included in Table 9.2-3: Pollution Burden by Pollution Indicator, the data forms the basis of the CES scores. For each indicator, scores of 75% or higher represent a high burden on the population.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-8 TABLE 9.2-2: POPULATION AND SOCIOECONOMIC FACTOR INDICATORS Indicator (%) CENSUS TRACTS
6047000702 6047000301 6047000801 6047000603 6047000602 6047000601 6047000802 6047000303 6047000902 6047000505 6047000503 6047000701

SENSITIVE POPULATION INDICATORS
Asthma 76 61 76 76 76 69 76 54 86 78 45 76
Low Birth Weight 30 17 79 38 56 16 54 6 46 38 25 67
Cardiovascular 91 92 91 90 91 83 91 80 94 87 43 91

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTOR INDICATORS
Education 56 94 75 65 79 83 74 93 74 89 83 84
Linguistic Isolation 39 83 53 41 61 76 69 43 61 79 80 53 Poverty 12 76 77 78 83 79 63 63 69 84 66 86
Unemployment 43 73 93 92 92 92 77 44 86 97 72 98
Housing Burden 8 30 29 32 73 28 6 18 38 33 34 47

TOTAL POPULATION

CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE PERCENTILE 48 71 85 73 88 71 74 49 81 83 54 88
High Burden: 75.0-100.0% Medium Burden: 25.0 - 74.9% Low Burden: 0.0 - 24.9%

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-9 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

POLLUTION EXPOSURE
The various forms and sources of air and water pollution and hazardous waste often disproportionately affect DACs. This is typically due to the existence and relative concentration of pollution-emitting sources within close proximity to the communities. Disproportionate exposure to pollutants is linked to variety of negative health impacts, including but not limited to, asthma, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and other potentially fatal conditions. Based on CES data, Table 9.2-3 lists the percentile of pollution burden for the thirteen CES pollution indicators by census tract.

As described previously and shown on Figure 9.2-1, based on a screening of existing census tracts within the City of Atwater, most census tracts defined by City Boundaries are considered CalEnviroScreendesignated DACs. The southernmost portion of the City of Atwater, just south of SR-99 is not designated a Disadvantaged Community, this area has a CalEnviroScreen score of 58. Central Atwater, or Census Tract 6047000701 is the most affected as it has a CalEnviroScreen score of 93. As shown below in Table 9.2-3 there are many pollution indicators present within DAC tracts with the most common being: pesticide use, air quality and pm 2.5, and drinking water contaminants.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-10 TABLE 9.2-3: ENVIRONMENTAL/ POLLUTION BURDEN BY POLLUTION INDICATORS Indicator (%) CENSUS TRACTS
6047000702 6047000301 6047000801 6047000603 6047000602 6047000601 6047000802 6047000303 6047000902 6047000505 6047000503 6047000701 Air Quality:

Ozone 74 75 74 74 74 75 73 75 73 74 74 74
Air Quality:

PM2.5 69 67 77 76 85 79 79 64 75 65 62 87
Air Quality:

Diesel PM 34 33 18 35 14 62 73 19 59 24 11 69
Pesticide Use 97 96 90 91 54 96 87 99 96 98 94 95
Tox Releases
from Facilities 16 65 15 17 17 18 16 20 12 20 15 17
Traffic Density 36 32 7 10 9 55 53 12 34 33 2 49
Drinking Water
Contaminants 94 98 98 98 96 95 96 99 72 84 79 96
Lead
Contaminants 10 42 30 37 87 68 26 76 40 69 74 98
Cleanup Sites 0 0 69 69 0 0 0 31 46 0 84 0
Groundwater
Threats 84 57 66 68 0 42 7 81 78 81 98 44
Hazardous
Waste 7 7 45 54 50 17 17 36 10 0 22 19
Impaired Water
Bodies 24 44 0 0 0 0 0 44 33 44 44 0
Solid Waste
Sites 76 53 85 59 36 0 91 67 77 36 97 67
TOTAL

POLLUTION
BURDEN
PERCENTILE 67 78 75 79 49 69 69 84 82 70 86 87
High Burden: 75.0-100.0% Medium Burden: 25.0 - 74.9% Low Burden: 0.0 - 24.9%

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-11 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

POLLUTION EXPOSURE FOCUS AREAS
As described previously, there are seven primary environmental justice focus areas defined within The Planning For Healthy Communities Act that must be used in addressing the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities (Pollution Exposure and Air Quality, Public Facilities, Food Access, Safe and Sanitary Homes, Physical Activity, Community Engagement, and Improvements and Programs). The existing conditions for these focus areas within the City of Atwater are discussed below.

Air Quality
As described in Chapter 8.0 (Conservation and Natural Resources) of this document, pollution potential in the Merced County area is relatively high due to the combination of air pollutant emissions sources, transport of pollutants into the area and meteorological conditions that are conducive to high levels of air pollution. Elevated levels of particulate matter (primarily very small particulates or PM2.5 /PM10) and groundlevel ozone are of most concern to regional air quality officials.

Table 9.2-4 depicts the State and national attainment status for Merced County. As evident in the table, Merced County has a State designation of Nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 and is either Unclassified or Attainment for all other criteria pollutants. In accordance with the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), areas of the state are designated as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified with respect to applicable standards dependent upon the status of pollutant concentrations. “Attainment” refers to instances where pollutant concentrations did not violate the applicable standard in that area. A “nonattainment” designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the applicable standard at least once, excluding those occasions when a violation was caused by an exceptional event, as defined in the criteria.

A detailed analysis of criteria pollutants within Merced County is available in Section 8.0 (Conservation and Natural Resource).

Table 9.2-4: State and National Attainment Status
Criteria Pollutants State Designations National Designations Ozone Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Unclassified Unclassified/Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Sulfates Attainment
Lead Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide Unclassified
Visibility Reducing Particles Unclassified
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD (AREA DESIGNATIONS MAPS / STATE AND NATIONAL), 2022.

HTTPS://WW2.ARB.CA.GOV/RESOURCES/DOCUMENTS/MAPS-STATE-AND-FEDERAL-AREA-DESIGNATIONS ACCESSED, AUGUST 16, 2023 Asthma Rates
Table 9.2-5 includes data from California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) administered by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research for asthma rates for the City of Atwater, Merced County and the state.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-12 Table 9.2-5 Asthma Rates (2020)
Region Ever Diagnosed with ASTHMA (1-
17) Ever Diagnosed With Asthma (18+)
City of Atwater 13.6% 23.5%
Merced County 11.0% 20.6%
California 12.3% 16.1%
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY. CHIS 2020 ASTHMA SOURCE FILE. LOS ANGELES, CA: UCLA CENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH.

HTTPS://ASKCHISNE.UCLA.EDU/ASK/_LAYOUTS/NE/DASHBOARD.ASPX#/ ACCESSED AUGUST 16, 2023 As shown in Table 9.2-5 above, 13.6 percent of Atwater residents aged 1-17 years old have been diagnosed with asthma at some point in their lives, this is higher than county and statewide rate. 23.5 percent of Atwater residents aged 18+ have been diagnosed with asthma at some point in their lives, this is higher than both the county rate of 20.6 percent and the statewide rate of 16.1 percent.

Water Quality
According to the State Water Resources Control Board, there are areas within Merced County that are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. This includes 177,449 acres listed as early as 1996 for Chlorpyrifos (Agriculture, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers), DDT (Agriculture), Diazinon (Agriculture, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers), Electrical Conductivity (Agriculture), Group A Pesticides (Agriculture), Mercury (Resource Extraction), and Unknown Toxicity (Source Unknown).

Drinking Water Quality Reporting
As described in detail in Chapter 5.0 (Utilities), the City's water supply primarily relies on groundwater from the Merced Subbasin. The City owns and operates eight groundwater wells. Wells 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21, are active and have a total current available pumping capacity of approximately 13,900 gallons per minute (gpm). Well 21 is intended to directly serve a federal prison. The total capacity without Well 21 is 12,200 gpm. The largest threat to the City’s drinking water is water quality.

All wells except Well 21 currently exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP). Treatment has been included at all wells that exceed MCL for TCP using granular active carbon. Well 15 also has had historic elevated levels of dibromochloropropane (DBCP). Treatment equipment for Well 15 was installed near the site to address these concerns. Well 13 was previously on standby due to elevated levels of ethylene dibromide (EDB) but is currently active and supplies water to the system on an as-needed basis. Well 20 historically had overheating problems during the summer and occasionally had to be shut down. It also previously had water quality problems, including elevated iron and manganese levels. Well 20 is currently being rehabilitated to include treatment equipment at the site and is projected to be active by the end of 2023. Additionally, the detection of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances known as PFAS at Well 16 and 18 through U.S. Air Force sampling. All active wells are disinfected with sodium hypochlorite for maintaining chlorine residual in the distribution system.

According to the City’s Urban Water Management Plan (March 2022), on April 20, 2018, the State Water Board, through its Division of Drinking Water, issued to the City of Atwater Compliance Order No. 03-11- 18R-014 for violation of CHSC, Section 116555(a)(1) and California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 64444 MCL-Organic Chemicals. Except for City Well 21, all City wells currently exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP).

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-13 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP) is a man-made chemical that was for many years contained in pesticide fumigants called nematicides, which farmers applied to soils to kill nematodes, a kind of tiny worm. TCP can pose a risk to public health and can contaminate drinking water.

To address these issues the City initiated the 1,2,3-TCP Remediation Project. The 1,2,3-TCP Remediation Project constructed a new groundwater treatment systems to remove TCP from the City’s drinking water to below the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 parts per trillion (ppt) (0.000005 mg/l), an amount mandated by the State.

Water Supply
The City is located within the San Joaquin River Hydrological Region, and extracts its groundwater from the Merced Subbasin, Basin Number 5-22.04. The Merced Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan was adopted by the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA in December 2019 and was revised in July 2022. The purpose of the Merced Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan is to bring the Merced Subbasin, a Department of Water Resources designated critically overdrafted basin into sustainable groundwater management by 2040. A detailed discussion of the Merced Subbasin is available in Section 8.0 (Conservation and Natural Resources).

The Merced Subbasin is considered a high-priority basin facing critical overdraft conditions. The City, along with other members of the Merced Irrigation-Urban Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MIUGSA), is actively implementing measures outlined in the recently adopted Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP).

These actions are aimed at achieving sustainable management of the groundwater basin, including the equitable allocation of the estimated sustainable yield among the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs). Portions of the San Joaquin River Groundwater Basin have been in a state of overdraft for many years, including the Merced Subbasin. The California Water Plan Update – Bulletin 160-98 estimated the average overdraft in the San Joaquin River Groundwater Basin to be 239,000 AF in 1995.

The historical volume of groundwater pumped by the City over the past five years, and the availability of the City’s water supplies in normal years are described and summarized in Chapter 5.0 (Utilities) of this Report.

Hazardous Materials
As descried in greater detail in Chapter 6.0 (Hazards and Safety) the following hazardous materials sites have been identified.
• Site Cleanup and Hazardous Facilities List (Envirostor) database. There are 17 locations listed within the vicinity of Atwater that are listed in the Envirostor database. One (1) site is listed as Certified / Land use Restriction only, one (1) site is listed as Certified / Operation & Maintenance - Land use Restriction, one (1) site is listed as active, one (1) site is listed as closed, three (3) sites are listed as inactive, and six (6) are listed with no further action required. Table 6.3-1 in Chapter 6.0 lists the Envirostor sites within the City of Atwater.
• GeoTracker. There are 23 locations identified with a City of Atwater address that are listed in the GeoTracker database for Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST). Twenty-one (21) of these locations have undergone LUST cleanup and the State has closed the cases. Two (2) sites remain open cases with one (1) being eligible for closure, and the other being an open site assessment.

Table 6.3-2 lists the location of open and closed cases for LUSTs in Atwater.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-14

PUBLIC FACILITIES
Access and availability of public facilities is an aspect of the built environment that may disproportionately limit the opportunities of DACs. If disadvantaged communities have unequal access to public facilities or if a city does not contain adequate facilities for public use, DACs may be limited in their ability to access necessary key resources. Adequate planning of parks, and transportation infrastructure can ensure that all communities within a city have equal access to resources. Limited access to resources as a result of inadequate public facilities can lead to reduced lifespan, poorer health outcomes, and diminished mental well-being.

As mentioned above, most census tracts within the boundaries of the City of Atwater are defined as CalEnviroScreen-designated DACS. This section serves to assess the adequacy of public facilities in the City of Atwater given the widespread presence of DACs across the City.

Figure 4.0-1 included in Chapter 4.0 (Community Services, Recreation, and Facilities) shows the locations of the public facilities within the planning area including the location fire stations, medical facilities, law enforcement stations, schools and parks.

Parks and Recreational Centers
Equitable access to public parks and recreational centers within a community is critical to the promotion of public health and well-being. Lack of recreational and open spaces may contribute to poor physical and mental health. Parks and public facilities provide opportunities for exercise, recreation, and community engagement that is necessary to bolster resident health.

Because a majority of the City of Atwater is designated as a Disadvantaged Community under the SB 1000 guidelines, the current distribution of park acreage per 1,000 residents for the entire City of Atwater is an appropriate indicator of park access. The current overall distribution of park acreage per 1,000 residents is

2.52. The California Statewide Park Program (Public Resources Code §5642) defines underserved communities as having a ratio of less than three (3.0) acres of parkland per 1,000 residents1 . According to
the California Department of Parks and Recreation’s Park Access Tool, 53% of residents in Atwater live in areas with less than 3 acres of parks or open space per 1,000 residents.

Additionally, the following findings were identified in Chapter 4.0 (Community Services, Recreation, and Facilities) of this Report:
• Parkland. The Existing General Plan Policy LU-23.1 Strives to maintain or exceed a minimum standard of 3.0 acres of public parkland per 1,000 population. The current distribution of park acreage per 1,000 residents is 2.52 acres. • Limited Access to Recreational Facilities. Many residents may not have direct or ease of access to recreational facilities and programs within the city, limiting their opportunities for use of existing recreational facilities.

An additional factor that determines the equitability and accessibility of parks and public facilities within an area is the distance between these public facilities and the home. If this distance to public facilities is perceived as “walkable”, residents may be more likely and willing to walk to those amenities. According to the California Department of Parks and Recreation’s Park Access Tool, 16% of residents of Atwater live

1 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION. SCORP 2021. AVAILABLE AT: HTTPS://WWW.PARKSFORCALIFORNIA.ORG/SCORP/2021

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-15 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater further than a half mile from a park. Generally, a distance of 1/4 mile is a commonly cited threshold for how far most people are willing to walk for neighborhood services, while many people are willing to walk up to 1/2 mile. Figure 9.2-2 shows areas within ¼-mile and ½ mile of a Park Area. As shown on Figure 9.2- 2 the majority of the Atwater City Limits with within ½ mile of a park area.

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 9.2-2. Park Buffer Map
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater February 28, 2024
Sources: Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area

LOCATION
Park
Golf Course
Area within 1/4-mile of a Park
Area within 1/2 mile of a Park

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-17 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

FOOD ACCESS
Ensuring adequate food access is challenging in many communities in California. Some communities within California cities have reduced access to adequate and/or healthy food. Often low-income areas may lack healthy food options or adequate supermarkets. An inability to access nutritious foods can lead to poor health outcomes in disadvantaged communities. Food-insecurity, or the uncertainty of having adequate food, is especially harmful for children and pregnant women who are most in need of nutrient-rich foods.

Communities that are most often impacted by food insecurity include low-income communities and communities of color.2
Food Access is a mandated environmental justice focus area under SB 1000. As mentioned, most census tracts within the boundaries of the City of Atwater are defined as CalEnviroScreen-designated DACs. This section serves to assess the existing conditions of food accessibility in the City of Atwater given the presence of DACs across the city.

Food Insecurity
Food insecurity is the uncertainty about the availability or adequacy of nutritional and safe foods. Based on the USDA available food security data and data from the 2021 American Community Survey, Feeding America estimates the number of food insecure people within a given county. These estimates are located in the Feed America Map the Meal Gap Report3
. Feeding America estimated that the number of food
insecure individuals in Merced County was 38,590, with a food insecurity rate of 13.8% for the year 2021.

The state local estimate for this same measure was 10.5%. Therefore, the measure rate of food insecurity within Merced County is higher than the rate of food insecurity within California as a whole.

Of the food insecure population within Merced County, 84% were from households which were below the Federal poverty threshold used for nutrition assistance programs and are therefore eligible for food assistance from the federal government. These residents who qualify for federal nutrition assistance programs can utilize assistance at any store that accepts WIC and SNAP purchases. At the local level, the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research and the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) reported that

14.8% of adults in the City of Atwater are food insecure due to low income. In comparison, the same measure for the state of California is 5.0%. Based on the data from both the CHIS and Feeding America, it is evident that the City of Atwater food insecurity rate is significantly above the average for cities in California.

Food Access
The USDA developed a Food Access Research Atlas that identifies “food deserts” in the United States at the census tract level. The 2008 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Bill defined a food desert as an “area in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly such an area composed of predominantly lower income neighborhoods and communities.” Based on this definition, the USDA data Figure 9.2-3 shows Low-income census tracts where a significant number or share of residents are more than 1/2 mile (urban) or 10 miles (rural) from the nearest supermarket. It should be noted many residents within these census tracts are within ½ mile of a supermarket, but the tract as a whole does contain areas that are also underserved. As shown in on Figure 9.2-3 the city is generally considered to have adequate food access in the central portions of the city. However, the central portion of Atwater and

2ELSHEIKH, E.; BARHOUM,N. (2013). STRUCTURAL RACIALIZATION AND FOOD INSECURITY IN THE UNITED STATES. PREPARED FOR THE U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE ON THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. ACCESSED AUGUST 23, 2023 3 FEEDING AMERICA MAP THE MEAL GAP (2021)AVAILABLE: HTTPS://MAP.FEEDINGAMERICA.ORG/COUNTY/2021/OVERALL/CALIFORNIA ACCESSED AUGUST 23, 2023

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-18 the southernmost portion of Atwater, south of SR-99 are the only areas of Atwater that are not designated food deserts per the USDA.

In addition to the proximity of grocery and food sources within an area, the types of food sources available are important for determining adequacy of food access. The USDA Food Research Atlas data shows that there were 68 grocery stores in Merced County as of 2016 and approximately 229 stores total in Merced County were SNAP authorized. In addition, the same data set shows that the County had 143 fast food restaurants.

Food 4 Less
Grocery Outlet
Save Mart
Walmart Supercenter
Target Grocery
Valley Foods
Supermarket
Sam's Food Supermarket
Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 9.2-3. Food Access Map
Sources: USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (FARA); Google Maps; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Low-income census tracts where a
significant number or share of residents
is more than 1/2 mile (urban) or 10 miles
(rural) from the nearest supermarket
Supermarket
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater August 25, 2023

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-20

SAFE AND SANITARY HOMES
The conditions of housing in a DACs may have negative impacts on the well-being of the community residents. Unsafe housing conditions can be a result of the age of the dwelling structure; which increases the likelihood of incorporation of dangerous materials like lead and asbestos, which can have significant negative health impacts.4 Disadvantaged communities often have a larger amount of older units within their housing stock and therefore, residents of these communities are more likely to be exposed to the harmful health impacts that are associated with older housing. Other factors that can contribute to unsafe housing conditions include improper regulation and overcrowding. Ensuring the safety and sanitation of housing stock within a community ensures that there are proper living conditions for all residents, including DACs.

Safe and Sanitary Homes is a mandated environmental justice focus area under SB 1000. As mentioned, most census tracts within the boundaries of the City of Atwater are defined as CalEnviroScreen-designated DACs. This section serves to assess the existing conditions of home safety and home sanitation in the City of Atwater given the presence of DACs across the city.

Age of Housing Stock
The age of a housing unit is a primary factor in the building conditions of the dwelling unit; therefore, the age of a community's housing stock is a good indicator of the condition of the housing stock. According to the City of Atwater 2014-2023 5th Cycle Housing Element5 , about 62% of the housing stock in Atwater is 30
years old or older with about 40% of the units over 40 years old. According to the CDC, a substantial amount of existing United States housing regulation and bans related to the use of toxic materials were developed in the 1970s; including regulations on the use of lead paint and asbestos.6 Additionally, older housing units are more likely to have structural and material damage. Many of the housing units in Atwater were developed during a housing construction boom following World War II and lasting into the 1980s.

Housing Conditions
In 2017, the City updated their Housing Element and included an updated review of housing conditions that focused on the condition of the roof, siding, windows, and doors. About 44% of the assessed 5,409 housing units were found to be sound, defined as units in good condition with no signs of deferred maintenance. 32% of the housing units needed minor repairs and 23% of the housing units needed substantial repairs.

Overcrowding
A housing unit is considered overcrowded if there is more than one person per room and severely overcrowded if there are more than 1.5 persons per room.

According to the Atwater Housing Element, approximately 5.5% of all homeowner-occupied housing units in Atwater are overcrowded and an additional 0.9% are severely overcrowded. Twice as many rental units are overcrowded with approximately 9.0% of rental units overcrowded and 1.8% severely overcrowded.

Renters under the age of 35 had the highest rates of overcrowding at 16.3%.

4 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE SB 1000 TOOLKIT 5 CITY OF ATWATER HOUSING ELEMENT (2017)AVAILABLE: HTTPS://WWW.ATWATER.ORG/CITY-OF-ATWATER-2014-2023-5TH-CYCLE-HOUSING-ELEMENT/ ACCESSED AUGUST 23, 2023 6 CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 2018. RETRIEVED FROM:

HTTPS://WWW.CDC.GOV/NCEH

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-21 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Housing Affordability
As what is typically the most expensive component of a household’s budget, housing cost (rent or mortgage, utilities, homeowner or renter insurance, and property taxes for homeowners only) is a preeminent factor in determining if the household is “cost burdened” or negatively impacted by its expenses. This consideration takes on even greater importance in California, a place where housing costs far exceed the national average.

A household is considered to be overpaying for housing (or cost burdened) if it spends more than 30% of its gross income on housing. Severe housing cost burden occurs when a household pays more than 50% of its income on housing. The prevalence of overpayment varies significantly by income, tenure, household type, and household size. In general, overpayment disproportionately affects lower income households;

63.8% of lower income households (0-80% of AMI) and 83.3% of extremely low income households (0-30% of AMI) - paid more than 30% of their income for housing.

As descried in the City’s current Housing Element the percentage of households paying more than 30 percent of income towards housing has increased significantly, by approximately 50 percent since 1990.

More renter households (53) percent than owner households (43) percent pay more than 30 percent of income for housing.

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
Health Indicators in Atwater
Residents of DACs are often more likely to have negative health outcomes. Increased physical activity levels are associated with a decreased risk for numerous health conditions and chronic illnesses. The built environment in DACs can often be limited by land-use planning and lack of investment, leaving less opportunities for formal and informal physical activity. Increasing the opportunity for physical activity within a community can work to positively impact the health of DACs.

Physical activity is a mandated environmental justice focus area under SB 1000. As mentioned, most census tracts within the boundaries of the City of Atwater are defined as CalEnviroScreen-designated Disadvantaged Communities (DACS). This section serves to assess the existing conditions of physical activity in the City of Atwater given the presence of DACs across the city.

Obesity and Overweight Trends
Lack of physical activity is a major risk factor for many diseases and causes of death, including heart disease, obesity, mental-health conditions, diabetes, stroke, and Alzheimer’s. The California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) is the nation's largest state health survey. A random-dial telephone survey conducted every two years on a wide range of health topics, CHIS data gives a detailed picture of the health and health care needs of California's large and diverse population. Adult obesity trends are shown in Table 9.2-6 and child and teen obesity trends are shown in Table 9.2-7.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-22 TABLE 9.2-6: OBESITY TRENDS – ADULTS (18+)
Year/ Region Obese (BMI 30.0 or higher)
2020/ Atwater 38.8%
2018/ Atwater 38.8%
2020/ Merced County 36.1%
2018/ Merced County 36.1%
2020/ California 28.2%
2018/ California 26.8%
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY. ASK CHIS NEIGHBORHOOD EDITION. LOS ANGELES, CA: UCLA CENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH.

AVAILABLE AT: HTTPS://ASKCHISNE.UCLA.EDU/ASK/_LAYOUTS/NE/DASHBOARD.ASPX#/ As shown in Table 9.2-6 above, obesity status in adults, or those with a body mass index (BMI) of 30.0 or higher, are higher in Atwater than in Merced County and the state when compared.

TABLE 9.2-7: OBESITY TRENDS- CHILDREN & TEENS (AGE 2-11; 12-17) Year/ Region Overweight Children (Age 2-11)
Weight ≥ 95th percentile)
Overweight Teens (Age 12-17)
BMI ≥ 85th percentile)
2020/ Atwater 14.8% 57.2%
2018/ Atwater 19.2% 43.7%
2020/ Merced County 15.4% 50.6%
2018/ Merced County 17.1% 36.7%
2020/ California 13.9% 31.2%
2018/ California 14.9% 33.4%
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY. ASK CHIS NEIGHBORHOOD EDITION. LOS ANGELES, CA: UCLA CENTER FOR HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH.

AVAILABLE AT: HTTPS://ASKCHISNE.UCLA.EDU/ASK/_LAYOUTS/NE/DASHBOARD.ASPX#/ As show in Table 9.2-7 above, the overweight status for teens was higher in Atwater than Merced County and state rates for the years 2018 and 2020.

Physical Fitness Testing
Another indicator of physical activity and fitness for children and teens is the California Department of Education’s Physical Fitness Testing (PFT) Program, which is administered by local school districts to all fifth, seventh, and ninth graders annually.7 The test assesses six major fitness areas, including aerobic capacity (cardiovascular endurance), body composition (percentage of body fat), abdominal strength and endurance, trunk strength and flexibility, upper body strength and endurance, and overall flexibility. The PFT Program provides a statewide snapshot of physical fitness. However, its data is collected at the local school district level by people who are not health professionals, and tests for each of the fitness areas are difficult to administer consistently. Consequently, its results are prone to some margin of error over time and from place to place.

California Physical Fitness Test PFT Results for the Atwater Elementary District, and statewide results for the 2018-19 academic year are shown in Table 9.2-8.

7 California Department of Education. Physical Fitness Testing Results, Accessed on August 23, 2023. Accessible at:
http://www.cde.ca.gov

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-23 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, PHYSICAL FITNESS TESTING RESULTS (2018-2019).

As shown in Table 9.2-8 above, the PFT results for 5th 7th and 9th graders in the Atwater Elementary District between 2018-2019 show that generally local children are at generally similar percentages as the statewide averages.

TABLE 9.2-8 STUDENT PHYSICAL FITNESS TESTING (PFT) RESULTS (2018-2019)

# of Physical Areas Meeting
the
Atwater Elementary District % within
Healthy Fitness Zone HFZ
Statewide % within Healthy Fitness
Zone HFZ
Gr. 5 Gr. 7 Gr. 9 Gr. 5 Gr. 7 Gr. 9
Aerobic Capacity 82.8% 56.9% N/A 60.2% 61.0% 60.0%
Body Composition 50.1% 54.1% N/A 58.7% 60.0% 62.2%
Abdominal Strength 86.9% 78.6% N/A 69.1% 77.1% 81.2%
Trunk Extension Strength 82.8% 74.3% N/A 83.8% 86.0% 89.3% Upper Body Strength 68.7% 76.0% N/A 60.8% 62.9% 68.5%
Flexibility 67.6% 78.6% N/A 70.4% 78.5% 83.1%

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-24 TABLE 9.2-9 HEALTH INDICATORS MERCED COUNTY (2020)
Indicator Merced County California
Diabetes Prevalence (Age-adjusted)8 14.9% 10.1%
Adult Heart Disease Prevalence9 6.3% 6.9%
Poor Mental Health10 17.9% 21.2%
Adult Obesity Prevalence (BMI > 30)11 36.1% 28.2%
Child Obesity Prevalence (BMI>30)12 50.6% 31.2%
SOURCE: ADAPTED FROM THE MERCED COUNTY 2022 COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT 13 As shown in Table 9.2-9, diabetes prevalence in Merced County is almost five percent higher than the state rate. Adult obesity prevalence is also significantly higher in Merced County than in the state overall. This is also seen in child obesity prevalence rates, in the year 2020 childhood obesity in Merced County was much higher than the statewide rate.

CIVIC AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
An important aspect of planning for environmental justice is the development of effective policies and programs that enable all residents to participate in local decision making. Disadvantaged communities can often be excluded from decision-making when officials and policies do not focus on involving these communities in a strategic manner. SB 1000 emphasizes that community engagement must be promoted in a local jurisdiction through the development of objectives and policies that seek to involve members of DACs specifically. By involving and engaging DACs in decision-making processes, policy-makers can effectively meet the needs of these community members. Disadvantaged communities often have culturally-specific needs that must be made a priority within local policy to ensure community success.

These needs are often distinct from those of the general population. The US EPA Environmental Justice Policy requires the “… meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” The establishment of appropriate opportunities for those who are low-income, minorities, and linguistically isolated to engage in local decision making will help ensure that environmental justice issues are identified and resolved. In addition, community programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities are critical to ensuring environmental justice is achieved for these communities within a city.

As mentioned, most census tracts within the City of Atwater are defined as CalEnviroScreen-designated DACs. This section serves to assess the levels of civic engagement and existing community programs in the City of Atwater given the presence of DACs across the city.

8 MERCED COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT. 2022 9 CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY, 2020 10 CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY, 2020 11 CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY, 2020 12 CALIFORNIA HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY, 2020 13 MERCED COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT. 2022 COMMUNITY AVAILABLE AT:

HTTPS://WWW.DIGNITYHEALTH.ORG/CONTENT/DAM/DIGNITY-HEALTH/PDFS/CHNA/2022-CHNA/MERCED-MERCY-MEDICAL-CENTER-CHNA-22.PDF

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
9-25 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Civic Engagement- Voter Registration
At the local level, there were 124,659 total registered voters in Merced County 15 days before the General Election in 2022 according to California Secretary of State data from 2022. According to the Merced County Registrar of Voters, voter turnout in Merced County for the 2022 General Election was at 44.8%14.

Language Access
Language is a critical signifier of a population’s likely participation in civic activities. Non-native English speakers, and especially those individuals with limited English fluency, are less likely to participate in civic activities. Translation services are critical to reaching and actively communicating with these individuals. In addition, the metric of households who speak languages other than English can help identify the cultural diversity of a community. Civic activities, and the venues where they take place, can be tailored to accommodate the cultural preferences of individual racial, ethnic, and religious groups.

As identified by U.S Census American Community Survey (ACS) 46.7% of Atwater Residents age 5+ spoke a Language Other than English Spoken at Home. Atwater and Merced County are “minority majority” areas.

The city and county ethnic profiles are dominated by large and increasing Latino populations. The city’s population was approximately 60 percent Latino in 2020, up from 53 percent in 2010, and the county was approximately 62 percent, an increase from 55 percent in 2010.

Educational Attainment
As descried in Chapter 1.0 (Land Use, Population, and Housing) of this report, Atwater and Merced County show lower level of educational achievement than California overall, with lower proportions of high school graduates and less than half the percentage of adults with bachelor’s degrees or higher. Nearly 30 percent of the city and county adults 25 or older have not completed high school, almost twice the statewide proportion. Improving educational outcomes for local students would likely provide more employment opportunities and an improved quality of life for those students as well as improving the city’s attractiveness to the types of businesses that prioritize the educational attainment of the local workforce.

Educational attainment is a strong signifier of a population’s likely participation in civic activities. Higher educational attainment generally correlates with increased civic participation. This is reflective of individuals with less educational attainment experiencing underemployment circumstances, such as working for less than a living wage and/or on a part-time basis. This may require individuals to seek out additional employment, reducing the time that they can commit to civic activities. In addition, individuals with lower educational attainment generally make less money. Those individuals who cannot afford to own or otherwise have limited access to an automobile, may be unable to attend civic events. This may also be reflective of individuals with less educational attainment lacking the sufficient literacy level and/or a formal education in civics and government to feel comfortable participating in civic matters.

14 California Secretary of State Voter Registration Statistics. Available at:
https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/voter-registration-statistics Accessed August 2023.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 9-26

IMPROVEMENTS AND PROGRAMS
A critical aspect of planning to achieve environmental justice is prioritizing projects and policies that directly benefit disadvantaged communities. It is often the case that disadvantaged communities are not considered in regard to public investment decisions and new public programs. When disadvantaged communities are overlooked for public programs and investments, the specific needs of these communities are not met and the conditions in which they live often worsen. To promote environmentally just planning, cities should incorporate programs and policies that are specific to the needs of DACs.

City of Atwater’s Existing Housing Element Programs
The City’s Housing Element is designed to provide the City with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent, and affordable housing within the community. A priority of both State and local governments, Government Code Section 65580 states the intent of creating housing elements:

The Housing Element has two main purposes:

1. To provide an assessment of both current and future housing needs and constraints to meeting those needs; and

2. To provide housing goals, policies, and programs that establish a strategy for attaining adequate housing for a range of people.

Atwater has areas of special priority that focus the purpose of its Housing Element, such as the growing proportion of families with children, increasing rates of overcrowding, limited availability of rental housing (especially affordable rentals) and constraints to accommodating additional housing within existing city limits.

The Housing Element serves as an integrated part of the General Plan, but is updated more frequently, as required by State law, to ensure its relevancy and accuracy. The Housing Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on:
• Matching housing supply with need;
• Maximizing housing choice throughout the community; Assisting in the provision of affordable housing;
• Removing governmental and other constraints to housing investment; and • Promoting fair and equal housing opportunities.

Infrastructure Improvement Programs
To address issues associated with water contaminates the City initiated the 1,2,3-TCP Remediation Project.

The 1,2,3-TCP Remediation Project constructed a new groundwater treatment systems to remove TCP from the City’s drinking water to below the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 parts per trillion (ppt) (0.000005 mg/l), an amount mandated by the State.

City of Atwater

EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT (APPENDICES)
APRIL 2024

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – REGULATORY SETTING
APPENDIX B – REFERENCES
APPENDIX C – AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY TABLE

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-1 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

REGULATORY SETTING

1.0 LAND USE AND SOCIOECONOMICS
This section describes the federal, and state regulations pertaining to land use.

STATE
California General Plan Law
Government Code Section 65300 requires that each county and city adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning.” The General Plan is a comprehensive long-term plan for the physical development of the county or city and is considered a "blueprint" for development. The General Plan provides a statement of the community’s development, economic, circulation, and environmental goals and includes diagrams and text setting forth objectives, standards, policies, and programs. The General Plan must contain seven State-mandated elements: Land Use, Open Space, Conservation, Housing, Circulation, Noise, and Safety. It may also contain any other elements that the city or county wishes to include. The land use element designates the general location and intensity of designated land uses to accommodate housing, business, industry, open space, education, public buildings and grounds, recreation areas, and other land uses.

The 2017 General Plan Guidelines, established by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to assist local agencies in the preparation of their general plans, further describe the mandatory land use element as a guide to planners, the general public, and decision makers prescribing the ultimate pattern of development for the city. The General Plan Guidelines include resources, data, tools, and model policies to help cities and counties update their general plans.

California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was developed to protect the quality of the environment and the health and safety of persons from adverse environmental effects. Discretionary projects are required to be reviewed consistent with the requirements of CEQA to determine if there is potential for the project to cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. Depending on the type of project and its potential effects, technical traffic, noise, air quality, biological resources, and geotechnical reports may be needed. If potential adverse effects can be mitigated, a mitigated negative declaration is required. If potentially adverse effects cannot be mitigated, an environmental impact report is required. These documents have mandated content requirements and public review times. Preparation of CEQA documents can be costly and, despite maximum time limits set forth in the Public Resources Code, can extend the processing time of a project by a year or longer.

Subdivision Code
A subdivision is any division of land for the purpose of sale, lease or finance. The State of California Subdivision Map Act (Government Code § 66410) regulates subdivisions throughout the state. The goals of the Subdivision Map Act are as follows:
• To encourage orderly community development by providing for the regulation and control of the design and improvement of a subdivision with proper consideration of its relationship to adjoining areas.
• To ensure that areas within the subdivision that are dedicated for public purposes will be properly improved by the subdivider so that they will not become an undue burden on the community.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-2 • To protect the public and individual transferees from fraud and exploitation.

2.0 CIRCULATION
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to circulation.

STATE
SB 743 and Vehicle Miles Traveled
Historically, the transportation impacts associated with land development and transportation projects were evaluated based on a congestion-focused metric referred to as Level of Service (LOS), which is generally tied to the average delays that drivers experience. In 2013, Governor Brown signed SB 743, requiring amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for analyzing transportation impacts. Through this action, Public Resources Code Section 21099 (b)(1) directed the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to prepare updated State CEQA Guidelines for adoption by the Natural Resources Agency, including revised transportation significance criteria. PRC Section 21099 (b)(2) specifies that upon certification of the updated CEQA guidelines, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment.” The use of a new measure referred to as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in CEQA assessments became mandatory on July 1, 2020.

State of California Complete Streets Act
Assembly Bill (AB) 1358, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires any substantive revision of the circulation element of a city or county’s general plan to identify how they will safely accommodate the circulation of all users of the roadway including pedestrians, bicyclists, children, seniors, individuals with disabilities, and transit riders, as well as motorists.

Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1: Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System In 2001, Caltrans adopted Deputy Directive (DD) 64; a policy directive related to non-motorized travel throughout the state. In October 2008, DD 64 was strengthened to reflect changing priorities and challenges. DD 64-R1 states:

The Department views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.

The Department develops integrated multimodal projects in balance with community goals, plans, and values. Addressing the safety and mobility needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users in all projects, regardless of funding, is implicit in these objectives. Bicycle, pedestrian, and transit travel is facilitated by creating “complete streets” beginning early in system planning and continuing through project delivery and maintenance and operations. Developing a network of “complete streets” requires collaboration among all Department functional units and stakeholders to establish effective partnerships.

Providing safe mobility for all users, including motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit contributes to the Department's vision: "Improving Mobility across California." Successful long-term implementation of this policy is intended to result in more options for people to go from one place to another, less traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, more walkable

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater communities (with healthier, more active people), and fewer barriers for older adults, children, and people with disabilities.

Caltrans Director’s Policy 22 (DP-22), “Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions” Director’s Policy 22, a policy regarding the use of “Context Sensitive Solutions” on all state highways, was adopted by Caltrans in November of 2001. The policy reads:

The Department uses “Context Sensitive Solutions” as an approach to plan, design, construct, maintain, and operate its transportation system. These solutions use innovative and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic, and environmental values with transportation safety, maintenance, and performance goals.

Context sensitive solutions are reached through a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders.

The context of all projects and activities is a key factor in reaching decisions. It is considered for all State transportation and support facilities when defining, developing, and evaluating options. When considering the context, issues such as funding feasibility, maintenance feasibility, traffic demand, impact on alternate routes, impact on safety, and relevant laws, rules, and regulations must be addressed.

The policy recognizes that “in towns and cities across California, the State highway may be the only through street or may function as a local street,” that “these communities desire that their main street be an economic, social, and cultural asset as well as provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods,” and that “communities want transportation projects to provide opportunities for enhanced nonmotorized travel and visual quality.” The policy acknowledges that addressing these needs will ensure that transportation solutions meet more than just traffic and operational objectives.

Caltrans Transportation Impact Study Guide
Caltrans, as a responsible agency under CEQA, reviews topics in environmental documents pertaining to State highway facilities. With respect to transportation analyses, the agency historically referred to measures of effectiveness identified in the Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002). In response to SB 743, Caltrans’s Local Development-Intergovernmental Review (LD-IGR) team in 2016 shifted attention from LOS-based metrics to a focus on VMT, appropriate transportation demand measures (TDM), and determining how best to address multimodal operational issues.

Caltrans has not established formal VMT significance thresholds, though in May 2020 the VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) was released. The guide reiterates that automobile delay is no longer considered a significant impact on the environment within CEQA transportation analysis and that Caltrans will now focus on VMT. With respect to VMT significance thresholds, Caltrans refers to guidance provided in the 2018 OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, and also refers to OPR’s guidance on the types of projects that can be presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS There are no federal, state, or local regulations which pertain to economic and real estate conditions and trends.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-4

4.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES
STATE
Fire Protection and Emergency Response

CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8 Sections 1270 "Fire Prevention" and 6773 "Fire Protection and Fire Equipment" the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.

The State of California passed legislation authorizing the Office of Emergency Services (OES) to prepare a Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non-compliance with SEMS could result in the State withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE/EVACUATION PLANS
The State of California passed legislation authorizing the Office of Emergency Services (OES) to prepare a Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non-compliance with SEMS could result in the State withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.

CALIFORNIA FIRE PROTECTION CODE
The California Fire Code contains regulations relating to construction and maintenance of buildings and the use of premises. Topics addressed in the Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions to protect and assist first responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire safety requirements for new existing buildings and premises.

UNIFORM FIRE CODE
The Uniform Fire Code with the State of California Amendments contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises. The Fire Code contains specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety.

CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code. This includes regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-5 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater NFPA 1710
The NFPA 1710 Standards are applicable to urban areas and where staffing is comprised of career Firefighters. According to these guidelines, a career fire department needs to respond within six minutes, 90 percent of the time with a response time measured from the 911 call to the time of arrival of the first responder.

The standards are divided as follows:
• Dispatch time of one (1) minute or less for at least 90 percent of the alarms • Turnout time of one (1) minute or less for EMS calls (80 seconds for fire and special operations response)
• Fire response travel time of four (4) minutes or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire incident and eight (8) minutes or less travel time for the deployment of an initial full alarm assignment at a fire incident
• Eight (8) minutes or less travel time for the arrival of an advanced life support (ALS) (4 minutes or less if provided by the fire department
Parks and Recreation

QUIMBY ACT
The Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477) states that “the legislative body of a city or county may, by ordinance, require the dedication of land or impose a requirement of the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative or parcel map.” Requirements of the Quimby Act apply only to the acquisition of new parkland and do not apply to the physical development of new park facilities or associated operations and maintenance costs. The Quimby Act seeks to preserve open space needed to develop parkland and recreational facilities; however, the actual development of parks and other recreational facilities is subject to discretionary approval and is evaluated on a case-by-case basis with new residential development. The City has adopted park fees as allowed by the Quimby Act, as described in greater detail below.

Schools

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
The California Code of Regulations, Title 5 Education Code, governs all aspects of education within the State.

LEROY F. GREENE SCHOOL FACILITIES ACT OF 1998 (SB 50)
The “Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998,” also known as Senate Bill No. 50 or SB 50 (Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998), governs a school district’s authority to levy school impact fees. This comprehensive legislation, together with the $9.2 billion education bond act approved by the voters in November 1998 known as “Proposition 1A,” reformed methods of school construction financing in California. SB 50 instituted a new school facility program by which school districts can apply for State construction and modernization funds. It imposed limitations on the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities impacts as a condition of approving new development and provided the authority for school districts to levy fees at three different levels:
• Level I fees are the current statutory fees allowed under Education Code 17620. This code section provides the basic authority for school districts to levy a fee against residential and commercial

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-6 construction for the purpose of funding school construction or reconstruction of facilities. These fees vary by district for residential construction and commercial construction and are increased biannually.
• Level II fees are outlined in Government Code Section 65995.5, allowing school districts to impose a higher fee on residential construction if certain conditions are met. These conditions include having a substantial percentage of students on multi-track year-round scheduling, having an assumed debt equal to 15–30% of the district’s bonding capacity (percentage is based on revenue sources for repayment), having at least 20% of the district’s teaching stations housed in relocatable classrooms, and having placed a local bond on the ballot in the past four years which received at least 50% plus one of the votes cast. A Facility Needs Assessment must demonstrate the need for new school facilities for unhoused pupils is attributable to projected enrollment growth from the construction of new residential units over the next five years. • Level III fees are outlined in Government Code Section 65995.7. If State funding becomes unavailable, this code section authorizes a school district that has been approved to collect Level II fees to collect a higher fee on residential construction. This fee is equal to twice the amount of Level II fees. However, if a district eventually receives State funding, this excess fee may be reimbursed to the developers or subtracted from the amount of State funding.

THE KINDERGARTEN-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2002 (PROP 47) This act was approved by California voters in November 2002 and provides for a bond issue of $13.05 billion to fund necessary education facilities to relieve overcrowding and to repair older schools. Funds will be targeted at areas of greatest need and must be spent according to strict accountability measures. Funds will also be used to upgrade and build new classrooms in the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California in order to provide adequate higher education facilities to accommodate growing student enrollment.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The California Department of Education (CDE) School Facilities Planning Division (SFPD) prepared a School Site Selection and Approval Guide that provides criteria for locating appropriate school sites in the State of California. School site and size recommendations were changed by the CDE in 2000 to reflect various changes in educational conditions, such as lowering of class sizes and use of advanced technology. The expanded use of school buildings and grounds for community and agency joint use and concern for the safety of the students and staff members also influenced the modification of the CDE recommendations.

Specific recommendations for school size are provided in the School Site Analysis and Development Guide.

This document suggests a ratio of 1:2 between buildings and land. CDE is aware that in a number of cases, primarily in urban settings, smaller sites cannot accommodate this ratio. In such cases, the SFPD may approve an amount of acreage less than the recommended gross site size and building-to-ground ratio.

Certain health and safety requirements for school site selection are governed by State regulations and the policies of the SFPD relating to:
• Proximity to airports, high-voltage power transmission lines, railroads, and major roadways; • Presence of toxic and hazardous substances;
• Hazardous facilities and hazardous air emissions within one-quarter mile; • Proximity to high-pressure natural gas lines, propane storage facilities, gasoline lines, pressurized sewer lines, or high-pressure water pipelines;
• Noise;

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-7 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater • Results of geological studies or soil analyses; and
• Traffic and school bus safety issues.

5.0 UTILITIES
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to land use and socioeconomics.

FEDERAL
Water Supplies

CLEAN WATER ACT / NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMITS The Clean Water Act is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act as passed in 1974 and amended in 1986 and 1996. It is the Country’s primary law regulating drinking water quality and in implemented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set national health-based standards for drinking water and requires actions to protect drinking water and its sources.

Additionally, it provides for treatment, monitoring, sampling, analytical methods, reporting, and public information requirements. Implementation of the Act, in California, is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Public Health, Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management.

Drinking Water regulations are set forth in the CCR, Titles 7 and 22.

Wastewater

CLEAN WATER ACT / NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMITS The Clean Water Act is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.”
The Clean Water Act regulates discharges from “non-point source” and traditional “point source” facilities, such as municipal sewage plants and industrial facilities. Section 402 of the Act creates the NPDES regulatory program that makes it illegal to discharge pollutants from a point source to the waters of the United States without a permit. Point sources must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority (usually a state, sometimes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a tribe, or a territory). NPDES permits cover industrial and municipal discharges, discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, storm water associated with numerous kinds of industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than one acre, mining operations, and animal feedlots and aquaculture facilities above certain thresholds.

Permit requirements for treatment are expressed as end-of-pipe conditions. This set of numbers reflects levels of three key parameters: (1) biochemical oxygen demand, (2) total suspended solids, and (3) pH acid/base balance. These levels can be achieved by well-operated sewage plants employing "secondary"

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-8 treatment. Primary treatment involves screening and settling, while secondary treatment uses biological treatment in the form of "activated sludge."
All so-called "indirect" dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. An indirect discharger is one that sends its wastewater into a city sewer system, so it eventually goes to a sewage treatment plant.

Although not regulated under NPDES, "indirect" discharges are covered by another Clean Water Act program called pretreatment. "Indirect" dischargers send their wastewater into a city sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering surface water.

PORTER-COLOGNE WATER QUALITY CONTROL ACT
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is California’s statutory authority for the protection of water quality. Under the Porter-Cologne Act, the State is required to adopt policies, plans, and objectives that will protect the State’s waters for the use by and enjoyment of Californians. In California, the SWRCB has the authority and responsibility for establishing policy related to the State’s water quality. Regional authority is delegated by the SWRCB to a RWQCB. The Porter-Cologne Act authorizes the SWRCB and RWQCB to issue NPDES permits.

ASSEMBLY BILL 885 (AB 885)
AB 885 was passed by the California Legislature in September 2000, and mandates the establishment of statewide standards to regulate the placement and use of on-site wastewater treatment systems (OWTS).

The SWRCB has been charged with developing this critical set of uniform statewide standards for on-site sewage disposal systems that are required to be incorporated into all RWQCB Basin Plans in the near future.

For the past several years the SWRCB has been in the process of developing statewide regulations for onsite wastewater treatment systems per AB 885. The key aspects of the proposed regulations include:

Site Evaluation Practices. The proposed regulations will mandate more thorough and consistent soil and site evaluation practices for all new and repair/replacement OWTS for verification of soil depth and groundwater levels. Current practices focus primarily on attaining minimum horizontal setbacks and determination of groundwater separation, not on determination of soil texture, structure or depth.

Proposed definitions for soil (especially rock content and weathered bedrock) will require more thorough and extensive soil profile evaluations and stricter interpretations of suitability than under current practices.

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manuals. The proposed AB 885 regulations require the preparation of an O&M manual for all new and repair/replacement OWTS. This will require that the County adopt regulations or policies mandating the preparation and submission of an O&M manual for all new and repair/replacement OWTS. The County will also have responsibilities for reviewing and maintaining official copies of these documents.

Septic Tank Risers and Effluent Filters. Access risers to “near” grade and the use of effluent filters will be required under the proposed regulations. These requirements will apply to new standard systems as well as supplemental treatment systems, and for any tank replacements.

Supplemental Treatment Systems. The proposed regulations have minimum vertical separation requirements that will lead to increased use of supplemental treatment systems. Minimum vertical separation is the depth of continuous unsaturated, undisturbed earthen material between the bottom of the dispersal system and the top of the seasonal high groundwater level, impermeable strata, or bedrock.

Dispersal System Siting and Design Criteria. The proposed dispersal system siting and design requirements are generally consistent with and/or less restrictive than the current RWQCB Basin Plan. Many of the

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-9 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater requirements are structured to allow for more latitude in the use of supplemental treatment to overcome soil depth/suitability constraints for OWTS. Based on the soil definitions in the proposed regulations, there is likely to be an increased need to specify supplemental treatment systems and shallow dispersal designs (including mounds) for sites that may have been permitted for conventional trench designs under current practices.

Groundwater Quality and Septic Tank Monitoring. The proposed AB 885 regulations will mandate new groundwater sampling and septic tank inspections requirements for new and existing OWTS. The proposed regulations do not explicitly require the County to enforce this requirement or to collect and maintain any of the results from sampling that is performed. However, as the local agency responsible for implementing the regulations, at a minimum, the County would be obligated to provide some level of oversight for these activities, the details of which would likely have to be specified in the RWQCB MOU or the Conditional Waiver from the SWRCB.

Record Keeping. The proposed requirements specify only that system owners maintain copies of the Record Plan and the O&M Manual for the OWTS. The County, as the implementing authority will also be required to collect, review and maintain records of these same items.

COMMUNITY SYSTEMS REGULATION
The RWQCB has direct oversight and permitting responsibility for large-flow systems of greater than 2,500 GPD and community systems, unless the RWQCB chooses to waive that authority and delegate their oversight on a case-by-case basis.

INDIVIDUAL ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS
Regulation of individual on-site sewage disposal systems occurs at a variety of levels, including by the SWRCB, through the Central Valley RWQCB, and locally the Atwater Municipal Code, and by the County Environmental Health Department.

Counties typically regulate onsite septic systems via their Environmental Health and/or Building or Planning Departments. In Merced County, septic systems are regulated by the Merced County Department of Environmental Health. Local septic system ordinances often incorporate portions of the Uniform Plumbing Code and other specific requirements.

Stormwater and Drainage

CLEAN WATER ACT
The CWA, initially passed in 1972, regulates the discharge of pollutants into watersheds throughout the nation. The SWRCB is responsible for implementing the CWA and does so through issuing NPDES permits to cities and counties through regional water quality control boards. Federal regulations allow two permitting options for stormwater discharges (individual permits and general permits). The SWRCB elected to adopt a statewide general permit (Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ) for small MS4s covered under the CWA to efficiently regulate numerous stormwater discharges under a single permit. Permittees must comply with all requirements as specified under the general permit.

Permittees must meet the requirements in Provision D of the General Permit, which require the development and implementation of a Storm Water Management Plan with the goal of reducing the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. The Storm Water Management Plan must include the following six minimum control measures:

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-10 1) Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts 2) Public Involvement/Participation
3) Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
4) Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control
5) Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development 6) Redevelopment and Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations The CWA, and its implementing regulations, requires that certain industrial facilities, construction sites, and MS4 obtain coverage for their stormwater discharges under an NPDES permit, develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) and put measures in place to prevent discharges of pollutants in stormwater runoff.
303(d) Impaired Water Bodies: Section 303(d) of the federal CWA requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a TMDL. The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
The NFIP, born out of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is a voluntary program that aims to reduce future flood damage by adopting and enforcing floodplain management programs. The NFIP is comprised of three components: FIRMs; flood insurance; and floodplain management. The FEMA FIRMs identify flood plain hazard areas prone to flooding during major storm events. The FIRMs are used by insurance companies to set flood insurance rates and by local municipalities for implementing flood-control ordinances which govern new development. FEMA operates the NFIP.

Participants in the NFIP must satisfy certain mandated floodplain management criteria. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 has adopted as a desired level of protection, an expectation that developments should be protected from floodwater damage of the Intermediate Regional Flood (IRF). The IRF is defined as a flood that has an average frequency of occurrence on the order of once in 100 years, although such a flood may occur in any given year. Communities are occasionally audited by the California Department of Water Resources to insure the proper implementation of FEMA floodplain management regulations. The County and all of the incorporated cities within the county are participants in the NFIP.

STATE
Water Supplies

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
The Department of Health Services, Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management, oversees the Drinking Water Program. The Drinking Water Program regulates public water systems and certifies drinking water treatment and distribution operators. It provides support for small water systems and for improving their technical, managerial, and financial capacity. It provides subsidized funding for water system improvements under the State Revolving Fund (“SRF”) and Proposition 50 programs. The Drinking Water Program also oversees water recycling projects, permits water treatment devices, supports and promotes water system security, and oversees the Drinking Water Treatment and Research Fund for MTBE and other oxygenates.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-11 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
The Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) major responsibilities include preparing and updating the California Water Plan to guide development and management of the State's water resources, planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the State Water Resources Development System, regulating dams, providing flood protection, assisting in emergency management to safeguard life and property, educating the public, and serving local water needs by providing technical assistance. In addition, the DWR cooperates with local agencies on water resources investigations; supports watershed and river restoration programs; encourages water conservation; explores conjunctive use of ground and surface water; facilitates voluntary water transfers; and, when needed, operates a State drought water bank.

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, Chapter 15, Article 20 requires all public water systems to prepare a Consumer Confidence Report for distribution to its customers and to the Department of Health Services. The Consumer Confidence Report provides information regarding the quality of potable water provided by the water system. It includes information on the sources of the water, any detected contaminants in the water, the maximum contaminants levels set by regulation, violations and actions taken to correct them, and opportunities for public participation in decisions that may affect the quality of the water provided.

URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ACT
The Urban Water Management Planning Act has as its objectives the management of urban water demands and the efficient use of urban water. Under its provisions, every urban water supplier is required to prepare and adopt an urban water management plan. An “urban water supplier” is a public or private water supplier that provides water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually. The plan must identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier, quantify the projected water use for a period of 20 years, and describe the supplier’s water demand management measures. The urban water supplier should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Department of Water Resources must receive a copy of an adopted urban water management plan. Urban Water Management Plans within the Planning Area include the California.

SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT
The SGMA directs DWR to identify groundwater basins and subbasins that are in conditions of critical overdraft. This designation is determined based upon the presence of "undesirable impacts" such as seawater intrusion, land subsidence, groundwater depletion, and chronic lowering of groundwater levels.

WATER CONSERVATION PROJECTS ACT
California’s requirements for water conservation are codified in the Water Conservation Projects Act of 1985 (California Water Code Sections 11950 – 11954). Consistent with California Water Code Sections 11950 – 11954, the District has implemented various water conservation efforts, as well as WSCP that identifies actions that can be taken to respond to catastrophic interruption of water supply.

CALIFORNIA WATER CODE
Water Code Section 10910(f) states:

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-12 10910(f) If a water supply for a proposed project includes groundwater, the following additional information shall be included in the water supply assessment. 10910(f)(1) A review of any information contained in the urban water management plan relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project. 10910(f)(2) A description of any groundwater basin or basins from which the proposed project will be supplied. For those basins for which a court or the board has adjudicated the rights to pump groundwater, a copy of the order or decree adopted by the court or the board and a description of the amount of groundwater the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), has the legal right to pump under the order or decree. For basins that have not been adjudicated, information as to whether the department has identified the basin or basins as overdrafted or has projected that the basin will become overdrafted if present management conditions continue, in the most current bulletin of the department that characterizes the condition of the groundwater basin, and a detailed description by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), of the efforts being undertaken in the basin or basins to eliminate the long term overdraft condition. 10910(f)(3) A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater pumped by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), for the past five years from any groundwater basin from which the proposed project will be supplied. The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historical use records.

A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), from any basin from which the proposed project will be supplied.

The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historical use records.
10910(f)(4) An analysis of the sufficiency of the groundwater from the basin or basins from which the proposed project will be supplied to meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project.

A water assessment shall not be required to include the information required by this paragraph if the public water system determines, as part of the review required by paragraph (1), that the sufficiency of groundwater necessary to meet the initial and projected water demand associated with the project was addressed in the description and analysis required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 10631.

SENATE BILL 610
Senate Bill (SB) 610 was adopted in 2001 and reflected a growing awareness of the need to incorporate water supply and demand analysis at the earliest possible stage in the land use planning process. SB 610 amended the statutes of the Urban Water Management Planning Act, as well as the California Water Code Section 10910, et seq. The foundation document for compliance with SB 610 is the UWMP, which provides an important source of information for cities and counties as they update their general plans. Likewise, planning documents such as general plans and specific plans form the basis for the demand information contained in an UWMP, as well as a WSA required under SB 610.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-13 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater SENATE BILL (SB) 221
SB 221 adds Government Code Section 66455.3, requiring that the local water agency be sent a copy of any proposed residential subdivision of more than 500 dwelling units within five days of the subdivision application being accepted as complete for processing by the city or county. It also adds Government Code Section 66473.7, establishing detailed requirements for establishing whether a “sufficient water supply” exists to support any proposed residential subdivisions of more than 500 dwellings, including any such subdivision involving a development agreement. When approving a qualifying subdivision tentative map, the city or county must include a condition requiring availability of a sufficient water supply. The applicable public water system must provide proof of availability. If there is no public water system, the city or county must undertake the analysis described in Government Code Section 66473.7. The analysis must include consideration of effects on other users of water and groundwater.

ASSEMBLY BILL 901
AB 901 requires an urban water management plan to include information, to the extent practicable, relating to the quality of existing sources of water available to an urban water supplier over given time periods. AB 901 also requires information on the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability. The bill requires a plan to describe plans to supplement a water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, to the extent practicable. Additional findings and declarations relating to water quality are required.

Wastewater

CLEAN WATER ACT / NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMITS The Clean Water Act is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.”
The Clean Water Act regulates discharges from “non-point source” and traditional “point source” facilities, such as municipal sewage plants and industrial facilities. Section 402 of the Act creates the NPDES regulatory program that makes it illegal to discharge pollutants from a point source to the waters of the United States without a permit. Point sources must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority (usually a state, sometimes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a tribe, or a territory). NPDES permits cover industrial and municipal discharges, discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, storm water associated with numerous kinds of industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than one acre, mining operations, and animal feedlots and aquaculture facilities above certain thresholds.

Permit requirements for treatment are expressed as end-of-pipe conditions. This set of numbers reflects levels of three key parameters: (1) biochemical oxygen demand, (2) total suspended solids, and (3) pH acid/base balance. These levels can be achieved by well-operated sewage plants employing "secondary" treatment. Primary treatment involves screening and settling, while secondary treatment uses biological treatment in the form of "activated sludge."
All so-called "indirect" dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. An indirect discharger is one that sends its wastewater into a city sewer system, so it eventually goes to a sewage treatment plant.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-14 Although not regulated under NPDES, "indirect" discharges are covered by another Clean Water Act program called pretreatment. "Indirect" dischargers send their wastewater into a city sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering surface water.

Stormwater and Drainage

SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT
A three-bill legislative package, composed of AB 1739, SB 1168, and SB 1319, collectively known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into state law in 2014. SGMA requires local governments and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. Under SGMA, basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their sustainability plans.

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD (STATE WATER BOARD) STORM WATER STRATEGY The Storm Water Strategy is founded on the results of the Storm Water Strategic Initiative, which served to direct the State Water Board’s role in storm water resources management and evolve the Storm Water Program by a) developing guiding principles to serve as the foundation of the storm water program, b) identifying issues that support or inhibit the program from aligning with the guiding principles, and c) proposing and prioritizing projects that the Water Boards could implement to address those issues. The State Water Board staff created a strategy-based document called the Strategy to Optimize Management of Storm Water (STORMS). STORMS includes a program vision, missions, goals, objectives, projects, timelines, and consideration of the most effective integration of project outcomes into the Water Board’s Storm Water Program.

CALIFORNIA WATER CODE
The Federal CWA places the primary responsibility for the control of surface water pollution and for planning the development and use of water resources with the states, although this does establish certain guidelines for the states to follow in developing their programs and allows the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw control from states with inadequate implementation mechanisms.

California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Division 7 of the California Water Code) (Porter-Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and each of the RWQCBs power to protect water quality, and is the primary vehicle for implementation of California’s responsibilities under the Federal CWA. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and the RWQCBs authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges to surface and groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, or oil or petroleum product.

Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan (Basin Plan) for its region. The regional plans are to conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and established by the SWRCB in its State water policy. The Porter-Cologne Act also provides that a RWQCB may include within its regional plan water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-15 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Solid Waste
CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT (AB 939 AND SB 1322) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939 and SB 1322) requires every city and county in the state to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to its Solid Waste Management Plan that identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the mandatory state waste diversion goals of 25% by 1995 and 50% by 2000. The purpose of AB 939 and SB 1322 is to “reduce, recycle, and re-use solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible.” The term “integrated waste management” refers to the use of a variety of waste management practices to safely and effectively handle the municipal solid waste stream with the least adverse impact on human health and the environment. The Act has established a waste management hierarchy, as follows: Source Reduction; Recycling; Composting; Transformation; and Disposal.

CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD MODEL ORDINANCE Subsequent to the Integrated Waste Management Act, additional legislation was passed to assist local jurisdictions in accomplishing the goals of AB 939. The California Solid Waste Re-use and Recycling Access Act of 1991 (§42900-42911 of the Public Resources Code) directs the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to draft a “model ordinance” relating to adequate areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials in development projects. The model ordinance requires that any new development project, for which an application is submitted on or after September 1, 1994, include “adequate, accessible, and convenient areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials.” For subdivisions of single family detached homes, recycling areas are required to serve only the needs of the homes within that subdivision.

CALIFORNIA’S MANDATORY COMMERCIAL RECYCLING LAW (AB 341) Assembly Bill (AB) 341 directed CalRecycle to develop and adopt regulations for mandatory commercial recycling. CalRecycle initiated formal rulemaking with a 45-day comment period beginning Oct. 28, 2011.

The final regulation was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on May 7, 2012. The purpose of AB 341 is to reduce GHG emissions by diverting commercial solid waste to recycling efforts and to expand the opportunity for additional recycling services and recycling manufacturing facilities in California.

Beginning on July 1, 2012, businesses have been required to recycle, and each jurisdiction has implemented programs that include education, outreach, and monitoring. Jurisdictions were required to start reporting on their 2012 Electronic Annual Report (due Aug. 1, 2013) on their initial education, outreach, and monitoring efforts, and, if applicable, on any enforcement activities or exemptions implemented by the jurisdiction.

In addition to Mandatory Commercial Recycling, AB 341 sets a statewide goal for 75 percent disposal reduction by the year 2020. This is not written as a 75 percent diversion mandate for each jurisdiction. The 50 percent disposal reduction mandate still stands for cities, counties, and State agencies (including community colleges) under AB 939. CalRecycle continues to evaluate program implementation as it has in the past through the Annual Report review process for entities subject to either AB 939.

AB 341 (75 PERCENT SOLID WASTE DIVERSION)
AB 341 requires CalRecycle to issue a report to the Legislature that includes strategies and recommendations that would enable the state to divert 75 percent of the solid waste generated in the

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-16 state from disposal by January 1, 2020, requires businesses that meet specified thresholds in the bill to arrange for recycling services by January 1, 2012, and also streamlines various regulatory processes.

SB 1374 (CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MATERIALS DIVERSION) Senate Bill 1374 (SB 1374), Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements, requires that jurisdictions summarize their progress realized in diverting construction and demolition waste from the waste stream in their annual AB 939 reports. SB 1374 required the California Integrated Waste Management Board to adopt a model construction and demolition ordinance for voluntary implementation by local jurisdictions.

CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE (CALGREEN)
CALGreen requires the diversion of at least 50 percent of the construction waste generated during most new construction projects (CALGreen Sections 4.408 and 5.408) and some additions and alterations to nonresidential building projects.

6.0 HAZARDS AND SAFETY
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to land use and socioeconomics.

FEDERAL
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act (CERCLA) This act, commonly associated with the term “Superfund,” established:
• Regulations concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites • Liability of parties responsible for any releases of hazardous waste at these sites • Funding for cleanup when responsible parties cannot be identified Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
This act established EPA’s “cradle to grave” control (generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal) over hazardous materials and wastes. In California, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has RCRA authorization.

Clean Air Act
In according with the Clean Air Act, the EPA has established National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Exceeding the emissions standard for a given air pollutant may cause an increase in illnesses and/or fatalities.

Clean Water Act (CWA)
The CWA, which amended the WPCA of 1972, sets forth the Section 404 program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into Waters of the U.S. and the Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to regulate the discharge of pollutants into Waters of the U.S. The Section 401 Water Quality Certification program establishes a framework of water quality protection for activities requiring a variety of Federal permits and approvals (including CWA Section 404, CWA Section 402, FERC Hydropower and Section 10 Rivers and Harbors).

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-17 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Aviation Act of 1958
The Federal Aviation Act resulted in the creation of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA was charged with the creation and maintenance of a National Airspace System.

Federal Aviation Regulations (CFR, Title 14)
The Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) establish regulations related to aircraft, aeronautics, and inspections and permitting.

FY 2001 Appropriations Act
Title IV of the Appropriations Act required the identification of “Urban Wildland Interface Communities in the Vicinity of Federal Lands that are at High Risk from Wildfire” by the U.S. Departments of the Interior and Agriculture.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
FEMA operates the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Participants in the NFIP must satisfy certain mandated floodplain management criteria. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 has adopted as a desired level of protection, an expectation that developments should be protected from floodwater damage of the Intermediate Regional Flood (IRF). The IRF is defined as a flood that has an average frequency of occurrence on the order of once in 100 years, although such a flood may occur in any given year.

Communities are occasionally audited by the California Department of Water Resources to insure the proper implementation of FEMA floodplain management regulations.

Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899
One of the country’s first environmental laws, this Act established a regulatory program to address activities that could affect navigation in Waters of the United States.

Water Pollution Control Act of 1972
The Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) established a program to regulate activities that result in the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States
Clean Water Act of 1977
The CWA, which amended the WPCA of 1972, sets forth the §404 program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into Waters of the U.S. and the §402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to regulate the discharge of pollutants into Waters of the U.S. The §401 Water Quality Certification program establishes a framework of water quality protection for activities requiring a variety of Federal permits and approvals (including CWA §404, CWA §402, FERC Hydropower and §10 Rivers and Harbors).

Flood Control Act
The Flood Control Act (1917) established survey and cost estimate requirements for flood hazards in the Sacramento Valley. All levees and structures constructed per the Act were to be maintained locally but controlled federally. All rights of way necessary for the construction of flood control infrastructure were to be provided to the Federal government at no cost.

Federal involvement in the construction of flood control infrastructure, primarily dams and levees, became more pronounced upon passage of the Flood Control Act of 1936.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-18 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Per the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, the NFIP has three fundamental purposes:

Better indemnify individuals for flood losses through insurance; Reduce future flood damages through State and community floodplain management regulations; and Reduce Federal expenditures for disaster assistance and flood control.

While the Act provided for subsidized flood insurance for existing structures, the provision of flood insurance by FEMA became contingent on the adoption of floodplain regulations at the local level.

Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA)
The FDPA of 1973 was a response to the shortcomings of the NFIP, which were experienced during the flood season of 1972. The FDPA prohibited Federal assistance, including acquisition, construction, and financial assistance, within delineated floodplains in non-participating NFIP communities. Furthermore, all Federal agencies and/or federally insured and federally regulated lenders must require flood insurance for all acquisitions or developments in designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in communities that participate in the NFIP.

Improvements, construction, and developments within SFHAs are generally subject to the following standards:
• All new construction and substantial improvements of residential buildings must have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the base flood elevation (BFE). • All new construction and substantial improvements of non-residential buildings must either have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the BFE or dry-floodproofed to the BFE. • Buildings can be elevated to or above the BFE using fill, or they can be elevated on extended foundation walls or other enclosure walls, on piles, or on columns. • Extended foundation or other enclosure walls must be designed and constructed to withstand hydrostatic pressure and be constructed with flood-resistant materials and contain openings that will permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters. Any enclosed area below the BFE can only be used for the parking of vehicles, building access, or storage.

STATE
Assembly Bill 162
This bill requires a general plan’s land use element to identify and annually review those areas covered by the general plan that are subject to flooding as identified by flood plain mapping prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the Department of Water Resources (DWR). The bill also requires, upon the next revision of the housing element, on or after January 1, 2009, the conservation element of the general plan to identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitat, and land that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater recharge and stormwater management.

By imposing new duties on local public officials, the bill creates a State-mandated local program.

This bill also requires, upon the next revision of the housing element, on or after January 1, 2009, the safety element to identify, among other things, information regarding flood hazards and to establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives, based on specified information for the protection of the community from, among other things, the unreasonable risks of flooding.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-19 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Assembly Bill 70
This bill provides that a city or county may be required to contribute its fair and reasonable share of the property damage caused by a flood to the extent that it has increased the State’s exposure to liability for property damage by unreasonably approving, as defined, new development in a previously undeveloped area, as defined, that is protected by a State flood control project, unless the city or county meetsspecified requirements.

Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code §21001)
The Caltrans Division of Aeronautics bases the majority of its aviation policies on the Aeronautics Act.

Policies include permits and annual inspections for public airports and hospital heliports and recommendations for schools proposed within two miles of airport runways.

Airport Land Use Commission Law (Public Utilities Code §21670 et seq.) The law, passed in 1967, authorized the creation of Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) in California. Per the Public Utilities Code, the purpose of an ALUC is to protect public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimizes exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses (§21670). Furthermore, each ALUC must prepare an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Each ALUCP, which must be based on a twenty-year planning horizon, should focus on broadly defined noise and safety impacts.

California Health & Safety Code
Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code establishes Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) authority and sets forth hazardous waste and underground storage tank regulations. In addition, the division creates a State superfund framework that mirrors the Federal program.

Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code establishes California Air Resources Board (CARB) authority. The division designates CARB as the air pollution control agency per Federal regulations and charges the Board with meeting Clean Air Act requirements.

CA Government Code
The Senate and Assembly bills identified above have resulted in various changes and additions to the California Government Code. Key sections related to the above referenced bills are identified below.

SECTION 65302
Revised safety elements must include maps of any 200-year flood plains and levee protection zones within the Planning Area.

SECTION 65584.04
Any land having inadequate flood protection, as determined by FEMA or DWR, must be excluded from land identified as suitable for urban development within the planning area.

SECTION 8589.4
California Government Code §8589.4, commonly referred to as the Potential Flooding-Dam Inundation Act, requires owners of dams to prepare maps showing potential inundation areas in the event of dam failure.

A dam failure inundation zone is different from a flood hazard zone under the National Flood Insurance

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-20 Program (NFIP). NFIP flood zones are areas along streams or coasts where storm flooding is possible from a “100-year flood.” In contrast, a dam failure inundation zone is the area downstream from a dam that could be flooded in the event of dam failure due to an earthquake or other catastrophe. Dam failure inundation maps are reviewed and approved by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Sellers of real estate within inundation zones are required to disclose this information to prospective buyers.

SECTION 8589.5
Section 8589.5 of the California Government Code requires local jurisdictions to adopt emergency procedures for the evacuation of populated inundation areas identified by dam owners. The County MJHMP includes emergency procedures related to dam failure.

SECTION 8609
The State Central Valley Flood Protection Board, under Section 8609 of the Water Code, has the authority to designate floodways in the Central Valley. California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Waters, provide further details of the Board’s regulatory authority. Specifically, Title 23, Article 5, Section 107 regulates uses in Designated Floodways.

Food and Agriculture Code
Division 6 of the California Food and Agricultural Code (FAC) establishes pesticide application regulations.

The division establishes training standards for pilots conducting aerial applications as well as permitting and certification requirements.

Water Code
Division 7 of the California Water Code, commonly referred to as the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, created the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). In addition, water quality responsibilities are established for the SWRCB and RWQCBs.

California Code of Regulations
Title 3 of the CCR pertains to the application of pesticides and related chemicals. Parties applying regulated substances must continuously evaluate application equipment, the weather, the treated lands and all surrounding properties. Title 3 prohibits any application that would:
• Contaminate persons not involved in the application
• Damage non-target crops or animals or any other public or private property • Contaminate public or private property or create health hazards on said property Title 8 of the CCR establishes California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal OSHA) requirements related to public and worker protection. Topics addressed in Title 8 include materials exposure limits, equipment requirements, protective clothing, hazardous materials, and accident prevention. Construction safety and exposure standards for lead and asbestos are set forth in Title 8.

Title 14 of the CCR establishes minimum standards for solid waste handling and disposal.

Title 17 of the CCR establishes regulations relating to the use and disturbance of materials containing naturally occurring asbestos.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-21 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Title 22 of the CCR sets forth definitions of hazardous waste and special waste. The section also identifies hazardous waste criteria and establishes regulations pertaining to the storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste.

Title 26 of the CCR is a medley of State regulations pertaining to hazardous materials and waste that are presented in other regulatory sections. Title 26 mandates specific management criteria related to hazardous materials identification, packaging, and disposal. In addition, Title 26 establishes requirements for hazardous materials transport, containment, treatment, and disposal. Finally, staff training standards are set forth in Title 26.

Title 27 of the CCR sets forth a variety of regulations relating to the construction, operation and maintenance of the State’s landfills. The title establishes a landfill classification system and categories of waste. Each class of landfill is constructed to contain specific types of waste (household, inert, special, and hazardous).

California Government Code Section 65302
This section, which establishes standards for developing and updating General Plans, includes fire hazard assessment and Safety Element content requirements.

Assembly Bill 337
Per AB 337, local fire prevention authorities and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) are required to identify “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) in Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). Standards related to brush clearance and the use of fire resistant materials in fire hazard severity zones are also established.

California Public Resources Code
The State’s Fire Safe Regulations are set forth in Public Resources Code §4290, which include the establishment of State Responsibility Areas (SRA).

Public Resources Code §4291 sets forth defensible space requirements, which are applicable to anyone that …owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains a building or structure in, upon, or adjoining a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, brush-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable material (§4291(a)).

Uniform Fire Code
The Uniform Fire Code (UFC) establishes standards related to the design, construction, and maintenance of buildings. The standards set forth in the UFC range from designing for access by firefighters and equipment and minimum requirements for automatic sprinklers and fire hydrants to the appropriate storage and use of combustible materials.

CA Code of Regulations Title 8
In accordance with CCR, Title 8, §1270 and §6773 (Fire Prevention and Fire Protection and Fire Equipment), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal OSHA) establishes fire suppression service standards. The standards range from fire hose size requirements to the design of emergency access roads.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-22 CA Code of Regulations Title 14 (Natural Resources)
Division 1.5 (Department of Forestry and Fire Protection), Title 14 of the CCR establishes a variety of wildfire preparedness, prevention, and response regulations.

CA Code of Regulations Title 19 (Public Safety)
Title 19 of the CCR establishes a variety of emergency fire response, fire prevention, and construction and construction materials standards.

CA Code of Regulations Title 24 (CA Building Standards Code) The California Fire Code is set forth in Part 9 of the Building Standards Code. The CA Fire Code, which is preassembled with the International Fire Code by the ICC, contains fire-safety building standards referenced in other parts of Title 24.

CA Health and Safety Code and UBC Section 13000 et seq.

State fire regulations are set forth in §13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which is divided into “Fires and Fire Protection” and “Buildings Used by the Public.” The regulations provide for the enforcement of the UBC and mandate the abatement of fire hazards.

The code establishes broadly applicable regulations, such as standards for buildings and fire protection devices, in addition to regulations for specific land uses, such as childcare facilities and high-rise structures.

CA Health and Safety Code Division 11 (Explosives)
Division 11 of the Health and Safety Code establishes regulations related to a variety of explosive substances and devices, including high explosives and fireworks. Section 12000 et seq. establishes regulations related to explosives and explosive devices, including permitting, handling, storage, and transport (in quantities greater than 1,000 pounds).

CA Health and Safety Code Division 12.5 (Buildings Used by the Public) This Division establishes requirements for buildings used by the public, including essential services buildings, earthquake hazard mitigation technologies, school buildings, and postsecondary buildings.

CA Vehicle Code §31600 (Transportation of Explosives)
Establishes requirements related to the transportation of explosives in quantities greater than 1,000 pounds, including licensing and route identification.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-23 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

7.0 COMMUNITY NOISE
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to land use and socioeconomics.

FEDERAL
Federal Highway Administration
The FHWA has developed noise abatement criteria that are used for federally funded roadway projects or projects that require federal review. These criteria are discussed in detail in Title 23, Part 772 of the Federal Code of Regulations (23 CFR 772).

Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) noise standards are established at 24 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, Subpart B. These requirements contain standards for exterior noise levels along with policies for approving HUD-supported or assisted housing projects in high noise areas. In general, these requirements established the following three zones:
• 65 dBA LDN or less - an acceptable zone where all projects could be approved. • Exceeding 65 dBA LDN but not exceeding 75 dBA LDN - a normally unacceptable zone where mitigation measures would be required and each project would have to be individually evaluated for approval or denial. These measures must provide 5 dBA of attenuation above the attenuation provided by standard construction required in a 65 to 70 dBA LDN area and 10 dBA of attenuation in a 70 to 75 dBA LDN area.
• Exceeding 75 dBA LDN - an unacceptable zone in which projects would not, as a rule, be approved.

HUD’s regulations do not include interior noise standards. Rather, a goal of 45 dBA LDN is set forth and attenuation requirements are geared towards achieving that goal. HUD assumes that using standard construction techniques, any building will provide sufficient attenuation so that if the exterior level is 65 dBA LDN or less, the interior level will be 45 dBA LDN or less. Thus, structural attenuation is assumed at 20 dBA. However, HUD regulations were promulgated solely for residential development requiring government funding and are not related to the operation of schools or churches. These regulations do not apply directly to the Specific Plan, but would apply if subsequent residential projects sought federal funding.

The federal government regulates occupational noise exposure common in the workplace through the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) under the Environmental Protection Agency. Noise exposure of this type is dependent on work conditions and is addressed through a facility’s or construction contractor’s health and safety plan. With the exception of construction workers involved in facility construction, occupational noise is irrelevant to this study and is not addressed further in this document.

STATE
California Department of Transportation
Caltrans has adopted policy and guidelines relating to traffic noise as outlined in its Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (Caltrans, 2011). The noise abatement criteria specified in the protocol are the same as those specified by FHWA.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-24

8.0 CONSERVATION
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to conservation.

FEDERAL
Biological Resources

FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
The Federal Endangered Species Act, passed in 1973, defines an endangered species as any species or subspecies that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is defined as any species or subspecies that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

Once a species is listed it is fully protected from a “take” unless a take permit is issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. A take is defined as the harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting wildlife species or any attempt to engage in such conduct, including modification of its habitat (16 USC 1532, 50 CFR 17.3). Proposed endangered or threatened species are those species for which a proposed regulation, but not a final rule, has been published in the Federal Register.

MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT
To kill, posses, or trade a migratory bird, bird part, nest, or egg is a violation of the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (FMBTA: 16 U.S.C., §703, Supp. I, 1989), unless it is in accordance with the regulations that have been set forth by the Secretary of the Interior.

BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLE PROTECTION ACT
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC Section 668) protects these birds from direct take and prohibits the take or commerce of any part of these species. The USFWS administers the act, and reviews Federal agency actions that may affect these species.

CLEAN WATER ACT – SECTION 404
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) regulates all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. Discharges of fill material includes the placement of fill that is necessary for the construction of any structure, or impoundment requiring rock, sand, dirt, or other material for its construction; sitedevelopment fills for recreational, industrial, commercial, residential, and other uses; causeways or road fills; and fill for intake and outfall pipes and subaqueous utility lines [33 C.F.R. §323.2(f)].

Waters of the U.S. include lakes, rivers, streams, intermittent drainages, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, and wet meadows [33 C.F.R. §328.3(a)]. Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(b)]. Waters of the U.S. exhibit a defined bed and bank and ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The OHWM is defined by the USACE as “that line on shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(e)].

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-25 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater The USACE is the agency responsible for administering the permit process for activities that affect waters of the U.S. Executive Order 11990 is a Federal implementation policy, which is intended to result in no net loss of wetlands.

CLEAN WATER ACT – SECTION 401
Section 401 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1341) requires an applicant who is seeking a 404 permit to first obtain a water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. To obtain the water quality certification, the Regional Water Quality Control Board must indicate that the proposed fill would be consistent with the standards set forth by the State.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACT - SECTION 4(F)
Section 4(f) has been part of Federal law since 1966. It was enacted as Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation (DOT) Act of 1966 and set forth in Title 49 United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1653(f). In January 1983, as part of an overall recodification of the DOT Act, Section 4(f) was amended and codified in 49 U.S.C. Section 303. This law established policy on Lands, Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges, and Historic Sites as follows:

It is the policy of the United States Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites. The Secretary of Transportation shall cooperate and consult with the Secretaries of the Interior, Housing and Urban Development, and Agriculture, and with the States, in developing transportation plans and programs that include measures to maintain or enhance the natural beauty of lands crossed by transportation activities or facilities. The Secretary of Transportation may approve a transportation program or project (other than any project for a park road or parkway under section 204 of title 23) requiring the use of publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, State, or local significance, or land of a historic site of national, State, or local significance (as determined by the Federal, State, or local officials having jurisdiction over the park, area, refuge, or site) only if: a) There is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that land; and b) The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from the use.

RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT OF 1899
The Rivers and Harbors Act prohibits the obstruction or alteration of any navigable water of the United States. The Act requires authorization from the USACE for any excavation or deposition of materials into these waters or for any work that could affect the course, location, condition, or capacity of rivers or harbors.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases

CLEAN AIR ACT
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) was first signed into law in 1970. In 1977, and again in 1990, the law was substantially amended. The FCAA is the foundation for a national air pollution control effort, and it is composed of the following basic elements: NAAQS for criteria air pollutants, hazardous air pollutant standards, state attainment plans, motor vehicle emissions standards, stationary source emissions standards and permits, acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection, and enforcement provisions.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-26 The U.S. EPA (EPA) is responsible for administering the FCAA. The FCAA requires the EPA to set NAAQS for several problem air pollutants based on human health and welfare criteria. Two types of NAAQS were established: primary standards, which protect public health, and secondary standards, which protect the public welfare from non-health-related adverse effects such as visibility reduction.

The law recognizes the importance for each state to locally carry out the requirements of the FCAA, as special consideration of local industries, geography, housing patterns, etc. are needed to have full comprehension of the local pollution control problems. As a result, the EPA requires each state to develop a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that explains how each state will implement the FCAA within their jurisdiction. A SIP is a collection of rules and regulations that a particular state will implement to control air quality within their jurisdiction. CARB is the state agency that is responsible for preparing the California SIP.

ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 sought to ensure that all vehicles sold in the United States would meet certain fuel economy goals. Through this Act, Congress established the first fuel economy standards for on-road motor vehicles in the U.S. Pursuant to the Act, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, which is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and for revising existing standards.

Since 1990, the fuel economy standard for new passenger cars has been 27.5 mpg. Since 1996, the fuel economy standard for new light trucks (gross vehicle weight of 8,500 pounds or less) has been 20.7 mpg.

Heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles and trucks over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight) are not currently subject to fuel economy standards. Compliance with federal fuel economy standards is determined on the basis of each manufacturer’s average fuel economy for the portion of its vehicles produced for sale in the U.S. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, which is administered by the EPA, was created to determine vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with the fuel economy standards. The EPA calculates a CAFE value for each manufacturer based on city and highway fuel economy test results and vehicle sales.

Based on the information generated under the CAFE program, the USDOT is authorized to assess penalties for noncompliance.

ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 1992 (EPACT)
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) was passed to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign petroleum and improve air quality. EPAct includes several parts intended to build an inventory of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in large, centrally fueled fleets in metropolitan areas. EPAct requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase a percentage of light duty AFVs capable of running on alternative fuels each year. In addition, financial incentives are included in EPAct. Federal tax deductions will be allowed for businesses and individuals to cover the incremental cost of AFVs. States are also required by the act to consider a variety of incentive programs to help promote AFVs.

ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was signed into law on August 8, 2005. Generally, the act provides for renewed and expanded tax credits for electricity generated by qualified energy sources, such as landfill gas; provides bond financing, tax incentives, grants, and loan guarantees for a clean renewable energy and rural community electrification; and establishes a federal purchase requirement for renewable energy.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-27 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT (ISTEA) ISTEA (49 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) promoted the development of intermodal transportation systems to maximize mobility as well as address national and local interests in air quality and energy. ISTEA contained factors that metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), such as SACOG, were to address in developing transportation plans and programs, including some energy-related factors. To meet the ISTEA requirements, MPOs adopted explicit policies defining the social, economic, energy, and environmental values that were to guide transportation decisions in that metropolitan area. The planning process was then to address these policies. Another requirement was to consider the consistency of transportation planning with federal, state, and local energy goals. Through this requirement, energy consumption was expected to become a criterion, along with cost and other values that determine the best transportation solution.

MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY (MAP-21)
MAP-21, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (P.L. 112-141), was signed into law on July 6, 2012. Funding surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years (FY) 2013 and 2014, MAP-21 is the first long-term highway authorization enacted since 2005. MAP-21 creates a streamlined, performance-based, and multimodal program to address the many challenges facing the U.S. transportation system. These challenges include improving safety, maintaining infrastructure condition, reducing traffic congestion, improving efficiency of the system and freight movement, protecting the environment, and reducing delays in project delivery.

FEDERAL CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY
According to the EPA, “the United States government has established a comprehensive policy to address climate change” that includes slowing the growth of emissions; strengthening science, technology, and institutions; and enhancing international cooperation. To implement this policy, “the Federal government is using voluntary and incentive-based programs to reduce emissions and has established programs to promote climate technology and science.” The EPA administers multiple programs that encourage voluntary GHG reductions, including “ENERGY STAR”, “Climate Leaders”, and Methane Voluntary Programs.

However, as of this writing, there are no adopted federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws directly regulating GHG emissions.

MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING RULE
On September 22, 2009, the U.S. EPA issued a final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emissions sources in the United States. In general, this national reporting requirement was designed to provide the U.S. EPA with accurate and timely GHG emissions data from facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 per year. This publicly available data allow the reporters to track their own emissions, compare them to similar facilities, and aid in identifying cost effective opportunities to reduce emissions in the future. Reporting is at the facility level, except that certain suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial greenhouse gases along with vehicle and engine manufacturers will report at the corporate level. An estimated 85% of the total U.S. GHG emissions, from approximately 10,000 facilities, are covered by this final rule.

TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES
One particular aspect of the SIP development process is the consideration of potential control measures as a part of making progress towards clean air goals. While most SIP control measures are aimed at reducing emissions from stationary sources, some are typically also created to address mobile or transportation

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-28 sources. These are known as transportation control measures (TCMs). TCM strategies are designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled and trips, or vehicle idling and associated air pollution. These goals are achieved by developing attractive and convenient alternatives to single-occupant vehicle use. Examples of TCMs include ridesharing programs, transportation infrastructure improvements such as adding bicycle and carpool lanes, and expansion of public transit.

FEDERAL HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT PROGRAM
Title III of the FCAA requires the EPA to promulgate national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs). The NESHAP may differ for major sources than for area sources of HAPs (major sources are defined as stationary sources with potential to emit more than 10 tons per year [TPY] of any HAP or more than 25 TPY of any combination of HAPs; all other sources are considered area sources). The emissions standards are to be promulgated in two phases. In the first phase (1992–2000), the EPA developed technology-based emission standards designed to produce the maximum emission reduction achievable. These standards are generally referred to as requiring maximum available control technology (MACT). These Federal rules are also commonly referred to as MACT standards, because they reflect the Maximum Achievable Control Technology. For area sources, the standards may be different, based on generally available control technology. In the second phase (2001–2008), the EPA is required to promulgate health risk–based emissions standards were deemed necessary to address risks remaining after implementation of the technology-based NESHAP standards. The FCAAA required the EPA to promulgate vehicle or fuel standards containing reasonable requirements that control toxic emissions, at a minimum to benzene and formaldehyde. Performance criteria were established to limit mobile-source emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene. In addition, §219 required the use of reformulated gasoline in selected U.S. cities (those with the most severe ozone nonattainment conditions) to further reduce mobile-source emissions.

Geology, Soils and Seismicity

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION ACT
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 USC 7701, et seq.) requires the establishment and maintenance of an earthquake hazards reduction program by the Federal government.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12699
Signed in January 1990, this executive order of the President implements provisions of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act for “federal, federally assisted or federally regulated new building construction” and requires the development and implementation of seismic safety programs by Federal agencies.

INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE
The purpose of the International Building Code is to provide minimum standards to preserve the public peace, health, and safety by regulating the design, construction, quality of materials, certain equipment, location, grading, use, occupancy, and maintenance of all buildings and structures. The International Building Code standards address foundation design, shear wall strength, and other structurally related conditions.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-29 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Hydrology and Water Quality

CLEAN WATER ACT (CWA)
The CWA, initially passed in 1972, regulates the discharge of pollutants into watersheds throughout the nation. The SWRCB is responsible for implementing the CWA and does so through issuing NPDES permits to cities and counties through regional water quality control boards. Federal regulations allow two permitting options for stormwater discharges (individual permits and general permits). The SWRCB elected to adopt a statewide general permit (Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ) for small MS4s covered under the CWA to efficiently regulate numerous stormwater discharges under a single permit. Permittees must comply with all requirements as specified under the general permit.

Permittees must meet the requirements in Provision D of the General Permit, which require the development and implementation of a Storm Water Management Plan with the goal of reducing the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. The Storm Water Management Plan must include the following six minimum control measures:
1) Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts 2) Public Involvement/Participation
3) Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
4) Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control
5) Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development 6) Redevelopment and Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations The CWA, and its implementing regulations, requires that certain industrial facilities, construction sites, and MS4 obtain coverage for their stormwater discharges under an NPDES permit, develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) and put measures in place to prevent discharges of pollutants in stormwater runoff.
303(d) Impaired Water Bodies: Section 303(d) of the federal CWA requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a TMDL. The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
The NFIP, born out of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is a voluntary program that aims to reduce future flood damage by adopting and enforcing floodplain management programs. The NFIP is comprised of three components: FIRMs; flood insurance; and floodplain management. The FEMA FIRMs identify flood plain hazard areas prone to flooding during major storm events. The FIRMs are used by insurance companies to set flood insurance rates and by local municipalities for implementing flood-control ordinances which govern new development. FEMA operates the NFIP.

Participants in the NFIP must satisfy certain mandated floodplain management criteria. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 has adopted as a desired level of protection, an expectation that developments should be protected from floodwater damage of the Intermediate Regional Flood (IRF). The IRF is defined as a flood that has an average frequency of occurrence on the order of once in 100 years, although such a flood may occur in any given year. Communities are occasionally audited by the California Department of

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-30 Water Resources to insure the proper implementation of FEMA floodplain management regulations. The County and all of the incorporated cities within the county are participants in the NFIP.

Agricultural Resources

FARMLAND PROTECTION POLICY ACT
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) is intended to minimize the extent to which federal programs contribute to the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. It ensures that, to the extent practicable, federal programs are compatible with state and local units of government as well as private programs and policies to protect farmland. Projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to nonagricultural use and are completed by a federal agency or with assistance from a federal agency. For the purpose of the FPPA, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and land of statewide or local importance. Farmland subject to FPPA requirements does not have to be currently used for crop production. In fact, the land can be forest land, pastureland, cropland, or other land but does not include water bodies or land developed for urban land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, or industrial uses).

The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) administers the Farmland Protection Program. NRCS uses a land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system to establish a farmland conversion impact rating score on proposed sites of federally funded and assisted projects. This score is used as an indicator for the project sponsor to consider alternative sites if the potential adverse impacts on the farmland exceed the recommended allowable level. The assessment is completed on form AD-1006, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating. The sponsoring agency completes the site assessment portion of the AD-1006, which assesses non-soil related criteria such as the potential for impact on the local agricultural economy if the land is converted to non-farm use and compatibility with existing agricultural use.

Cultural and Historic Resources

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
Most regulations at the Federal level stem from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and historic preservation legislation such as the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended. NHPA established guidelines to "preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and to maintain, wherever possible, an environment that supports diversity and a variety of individual choice." The NHPA includes regulations specifically for Federal land-holding agencies, but also includes regulations (Section 106) which pertain to all projects that are funded, permitted, or approved by any Federal agency and which have the potential to affect cultural resources. All projects that are subject to NEPA are also subject to compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA and NEPA requirements concerning cultural resources. Provisions of NHPA establish a National Register of Historic Places (The National Register) maintained by the National Park Service, the Advisory Councils on Historic Preservation, State Historic Preservation Offices, and grants-in-aid programs.

AMERICAN INDIAN RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT AND NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES AND REPATRIATION ACT The American Indian Religious Freedom Act recognizes that Native American religious practices, sacred sites, and sacred objects have not been properly protected under other statutes. It establishes as national policy that traditional practices and beliefs, sites (including right of access), and the use of sacred objects shall be protected and preserved. Additionally, Native American remains are protected by the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act of 1990.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-31 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

OTHER FEDERAL LEGISLATION
Historic preservation legislation was initiated by the Antiquities Act of 1966, which aimed to protect important historic and archaeological sites. It established a system of permits for conducting archaeological studies on Federal land, as well as setting penalties for noncompliance. This permit process controls the disturbance of archaeological sites on Federal land. New permits are currently issued under the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979. The purpose of ARPA is to enhance preservation and protection of archaeological resources on public and Native American lands. The Historic Sites Act of 1935 declared that it is national policy to “Preserve for public use historic sites, buildings, and objects of national significance.”
STATE
Biological Resources
FISH AND GAME CODE §2050-2097 - CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) protects certain plant and animal species when they are of special ecological, educational, historical, recreational, aesthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the State. CESA established that it is State policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance endangered species and their habitats.

CESA was expanded upon the original Native Plant Protection Act and enhanced legal protection for plants.

To be consistent with Federal regulations, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. It converted all "rare" animals into the Act as threatened species, but did not do so for rare plants.

Thus, there are three listing categories for plants in California: rare, threatened, and endangered. Under State law, plant and animal species may be formally designated by official listing by the California Fish and Game Commission.

FISH AND GAME CODE §1900-1913 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT PROTECTION ACT In 1977, the State Legislature passed the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) in recognition of rare and endangered plants of the State. The intent of the law was to preserve, protect, and enhance endangered plants. The NPPA gave the California Fish and Game Commission the power to designate native plants as endangered or rare, and to require permits for collecting, transporting, or selling such plants. The NPPA includes provisions that prohibit the taking of plants designated as "rare" from the wild, and a salvage mandate for landowners, which requires notification of the CDFW 10 days in advance of approving a building site.

FISH AND GAME CODE §3503, 3503.5, 3800 - PREDATORY BIRDS Under the California Fish and Game Code, all predatory birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes in California, generally called “raptors,” are protected. The law indicates that it is unlawful to take, posses, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird unless it is in accordance with the code. Any activity that would cause a nest to be abandoned or cause a reduction or loss in a reproductive effort is considered a take. This generally includes construction activities.

FISH AND GAME CODE §1601-1603 – STREAMBED ALTERATION
Under the California Fish and Game Code, CDFW has jurisdiction over any proposed activities that would divert or obstruct the natural flow or change the bed, channel, or bank of any lake or stream. Private landowners or project proponents must obtain a “Streambed Alteration Agreement” from CDFW prior to

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-32 any alteration of a lake bed, stream channel, or their banks. Through this agreement, the CDFW may impose conditions to limit and fully mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife resources. These agreements are usually initiated through the local CDFW warden and will specify timing and construction conditions, including any mitigation necessary to protect fish and wildlife from impacts of the work.

PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE § 21000 - CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) identifies that a species that is not listed on the Federal or State endangered species list may be considered rare or endangered if the species meets certain criteria.

Under CEQA public agencies must determine if a project would adversely affect a species that is not protected by FESA or CESA. Species that are not listed under FESA or CESA, but are otherwise eligible for listing (i.e., candidate or proposed) may be protected by the local government until the opportunity to list the species arises for the responsible agency.

Species that may be considered for review are included on a list of “Species of Special Concern,” developed by the CDFW. Additionally, the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) maintains a list of plant species native to California that have low numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. List 1A contains plants that are believed to be extinct. List 1B contains plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. List 2 contains plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more numerous elsewhere. List 3 contains plants where additional information is needed.

List 4 contains plants with a limited distribution.

PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE § 21083.4 - OAK WOODLANDS CONSERVATION In 2004, the California legislature enacted SB 1334, which added oak woodland conservation regulations to the Public Resources Code. This new law requires a county to determine whether a project, within its jurisdiction, may result in a conversion of oak woodlands that will have a significant effect on the environment. If a county determines that there may be a significant effect to oak woodlands, the county must require oak woodland mitigation alternatives to mitigate the significant effect of the conversion of oak woodlands. Such mitigation alternatives include: conservation through the use of conservation easements; planting and maintaining an appropriate number of replacement trees; contribution of funds to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund for the purpose of purchasing oak woodlands conservation easements; and/or other mitigation measures developed by the county.

CALIFORNIA OAK WOODLAND CONSERVATION ACT
The California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 242, known as the California Oak Woodland Conservation Act, in 2001 as a result of widespread changes in land use patterns across the landscape that were fragmenting oak woodland character over extensive areas. The Act created the California Oak Woodland Conservation Program within the Wildlife Conservation Board. The legislation provides funding and incentives to ensure the future viability of California’s oak woodland resources by maintaining large scale land holdings or smaller multiple holdings that are not divided into fragmented, nonfunctioning biological units. The Act acknowledged that the conservation of oak woodlands enhances the natural scenic beauty for residents and visitors, increases real property values, promotes ecological balance, provides habitat for over 300 wildlife species, moderates temperature extremes, reduces soil erosion, sustains water quality, and aids with nutrient cycling, all of which affect and improve the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the State.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-33 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

CALIFORNIA WETLANDS CONSERVATION POLICY
In August 1993, the Governor announced the "California Wetlands Conservation Policy.” The goals of the policy are to establish a framework and strategy that will:
• Ensure no overall net loss and to achieve a long-term net gain in the quantity, quality, and permanence of wetland acreage and values in California in a manner that fosters creativity, stewardship, and respect for private property.
• Reduce procedural complexity in the administration of State and Federal wetland conservation programs.
• Encourage partnerships to make landowner incentive programs and cooperative planning efforts the primary focus of wetland conservation and restoration.

The Governor also signed Executive Order W-59-93, which incorporates the goals and objectives contained in the new policy and directs the Resources Agency to establish an Interagency Task Force to direct and coordinate administration and implementation of the policy.

NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLANNING ACT
The Natural Community Conservation Planning Act provides long-term protection of species and habitats through regional, multi-species planning before the special measures of the CESA become necessary.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases

CARB MOBILE-SOURCE REGULATION
The State of California is responsible for controlling emissions from the operation of motor vehicles in the state. Rather than mandating the use of specific technology or the reliance on a specific fuel, the CARB’s motor vehicle standards specify the allowable grams of pollution per mile driven. In other words, the regulations focus on the reductions needed rather than on the manner in which they are achieved. Towards this end, the CARB has adopted regulations which required auto manufacturers to phase in less polluting vehicles.

CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was first signed into law in 1988. The CCAA provides a comprehensive framework for air quality planning and regulation, and spells out, in statute, the state’s air quality goals, planning and regulatory strategies, and performance. CARB is the agency responsible for administering the CCAA. CARB established ambient air quality standards pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code (CH&SC) [§39606(b)], which are similar to the federal standards. T

AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
NAAQS are determined by the EPA. The standards include both primary and secondary ambient air quality standards. Primary standards are established with a safety margin. Secondary standards are more stringent than primary standards and are intended to protect public health and welfare. States have the ability to set standards that are more stringent than the federal standards. As such, California established more stringent ambient air quality standards.

Federal and state ambient air quality standards have been established for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, PM10, and lead. In addition, California has created standards for pollutants

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report A-34 that are not covered by federal standards. The state and federal primary standards for major pollutants are shown in Table 5.3-1.

TANNER AIR TOXICS ACT
California regulates TACs primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (AB 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). The Tanner Act sets forth a formal procedure for ARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before ARB can designate a substance as a TAC. To date, ARB has identified more than 21 TACs and has adopted EPA’s list of HAPs as TACs. Most recently, diesel PM was added to the ARB list of TACs. Once a TAC is identified, ARB then adopts an Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for sources that emit that particular TAC. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate BACT to minimize emissions.

The AB 2588 requires that existing facilities that emit toxic substances above a specified level prepare a toxic-emission inventory, prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant, notify the public of significant risk levels, and prepare and implement risk reduction measures. ARB has adopted diesel exhaust control measures and more stringent emission standards for various on-road mobile sources of emissions, including transit buses and off-road diesel equipment (e.g., tractors, generators). In February 2000, ARB adopted a new public-transit bus-fleet rule and emission standards for new urban buses. These rules and standards provide for (1) more stringent emission standards for some new urban bus engines, beginning with 2002 model year engines; (2) zero-emission bus demonstration and purchase requirements applicable to transit agencies; and (3) reporting requirements under which transit agencies must demonstrate compliance with the urban transit bus fleet rule. Upcoming milestones include the low-sulfur diesel-fuel requirement, and tighter emission standards for heavy-duty diesel trucks (2007) and off-road diesel equipment (2011) nationwide.

TRANSPORT OF POLLUTANTS
The California Clean Air Act, Section 39610 (a), directs the CARB to “identify each district in which transported air pollutants from upwind areas outside the district cause or contribute to a violation of the ozone standard and to identify the district of origin of transported pollutants.” The information regarding the transport of air pollutants from one basin to another was to be quantified to assist interrelated basins in the preparation of plans for the attainment of State ambient air quality standards. Numerous studies conducted by the CARB have identified air basins that are impacted by pollutants transported from other air basins (as of 1993). Among the air basins affected by air pollution transport from the SFBAAB are the North Central Coast Air Basin, the Mountain Counties Air Basin, the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, and the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. The SFBAAB was also identified as an area impacted by the transport of air pollutants from the Sacramento region.

ASSEMBLY BILL 1493
In 2002, the Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1493 (“Pavley Bill”) (Stats. 2002, ch. 200), which directed CARB to develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks beginning with model year 2009. (See Health and Safety Code Section 43018.5.) In September 2004, pursuant to this directive, CARB approved regulations to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. These regulations created what are commonly known as the “Pavley standards.” In September 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the Pavley standards to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles through the 2016 model year. These

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
A-35 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater regulations created what are commonly known as the “Pavley II standards.” (See California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 1900, 1961, and 1961.1 et seq.) In 2012, CARB adopted an Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) program aimed at reducing both smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions for vehicles model years 2017-2025. This historic program, developed in coordination with the USEPA and NHTSA, combined the control of smog-causing (criteria) pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated set of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025. The regulations focus on substantially increasing the number of plug-in hybrid cars and zero-emission vehicles in the vehicle fleet and on making fuels such as electricity and hydrogen readily available for these vehicle technologies. The components of the ACC program are the Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV) regulations that reduce criteria pollutants and GHG emissions from light- and medium-duty vehicles, and the Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulation, which requires manufacturers to produce an increasing number of pure ZEVs (meaning battery electric and fuel cell electric vehicles), with provisions to also produce plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018 through 2025 model years. (See California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 1900, 1961, 1961.1, 1961.2, 1961.3, 1965, 1968.2, 1968.5, 1976, 1978, 2037, 2038, 2062, 2112, 2139, 2140, 2145, 2147, 2235, and 2317 et seq.)
It is expected that the Pavley regulations will reduce GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles by about 34 percent below 2016 levels by 2025, all while improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.

ASSEMBLY BILL 1007
AB 1007, (Pavley, Chapter 371, Statutes of 2005) directed the CEC to prepare a plan to increase the use of alternative fuels in California. As a result, the CEC prepared the State Alternative Fuels Plan in consultation with the state, federal, and local agencies. The plan presents strategies and actions California must take to increase the use of alternative non-petroleum fuels in a manner that minimizes costs to California and maximizes the economic benefits of in-state production. The Plan assessed various alternative fuels and developed fuel portfolios to meet California’s goals to reduce petroleum consumption, increase alternative fuels use, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and increase in-state production of biofuels without causing a significant degradation of public health and environmental quality.

ASSEMBLY BILL 32 (GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT)
In 2006, the California State Legislature enacted the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Health & Safety Code Section 38500 et seq.), also known as Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (Stats. 2006, ch. 488). AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and a cap on statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 required that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. This reduction was accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that was phased in starting in 2012. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources.

SENATE BILL 32
SB 32 (Stats. 2016, ch. 249) added Section 38566 to the Health and Safety Code. It provides that “[i]n adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by [Division 25.5 of the Health and Safety Code], [CARB] shall ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” In other words, SB 32 requires