Hercules City Council
May 26, 2026

Wetland Delineation Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination
Wetland Delineation and Preliminary Jurisdiction
Waters Determination
Prepared For:

Hercules Hotel Development LLC
1365 Murchison Drive
Millbrae, CA 94030
Prepared By:
1361 B Street
Hayward, Ca 94541
www.GroundZoneES.com
(510) 582-4212
February 4, 2020

I declare that, to the best of my professional knowledge and belief, we have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess wetland delineation and preliminary jurisdictional waters determinations consistent with USACE, USFWS, Ca DFWS, and CA RWQCB standards.

I declare that this wetland delineation was prepared in accordance with the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual (1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) (2008), and consistent with Ground Zone Environmental Services, LLC (Ground Zone ) Scope of Work for Consultant Ser vices to Address California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Requir ements for the Hercules Complex Project (Ground Zone, November 11, 2019). Gr ound Zone does not warrant the accuracy or veracity of information obtained through third party sources.

Tony Jones, Wetland Ecologist
Senior Environmental Scientist,
Ground Zone Environmental
Services, LLC
Sam Brathwaite, PG, Chg, CEG
Principal, Ground Zone
Environmental Services, LLC
i

ii
Content
s

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 METHODS AND LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................ 2

3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION .............................................................................................................. 2

3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................. 2

3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................ 2

3.3 PHYSICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................................................... 5

3.4 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 7

3.5 PLANT COMMUNITIES ................................................................................................................................. 11

4.0 HISTORICAL LAND USE.......................................................................................................................... 13

4.1 HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS ............................................................................................................... 13

4.2 HISTORIC TOPOGRAPHICAL MAPS .............................................................................................................. 14

5.0 FIELD SURVEY .......................................................................................................................................... 14

6.0 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 15

6.1 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE US ......................................................................................................... 17

6.2 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .......................................................................... 20

7.0 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................... 22

8.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 24

9.0 LIMITATIONS............................................................................................................................................. 24

10.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 25 List of Figures
Figure 1 – Site Location
Figure 2 – Site Plan
Figure 3 – 2018 USGS Topo Map
Figure 4 – Soil Classification
Figure 5 – Vegetative Communities
Figure 6 – Delineated Wetlands
List of Tables
Table 1 – Summary of Historic Aerial Photograph Findings Table 2 – Summary of Historic Topographical Map Findings Table 3 – Areas of Potential Jurisdictional Waters
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Field Sheets and Plant Summary Table
Appendix B – EDR Geocheck Report
Appendix C – USGS Web Soil Survey
Appendix D – Watershed Atlas
Appendix E – Historic Aerial Photographs
Appendix F – Historic Topographical Maps

26 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a wetland delineation and a preliminary determination of jurisdiction for potentially regulated wetlands located along Highway 80 Northbound in the City of Hercules (Project or Site). The Project will construct a 100-unit 4-story hotel and s 6- story office building complex at the Site. The Site location is showed in Figure 1 and the Site plan is shown in Figure 2.

This report provides background and site-specific information pertaining to the wetlands and aquatic habitats occurring within the study area. In addition, this report presents the results of our field investigation, and includes a discussion of the existing plant communities, soils, hydrology, and permitting implications of the proposed pipeline construction project.

The largest area of native vegetation present along the Project Site consists of a freshwater marsh along an historic ephemeral creek tributary to Refugio Creek in a depressed area at the northern perimeter of the site. Small amounts of disturbed native habitats are also present.

The hydrology at the Project Site is influenced primarily by runoff from the hills along Refugio Valley watershed and by urban runoff from impervious roadway surfaces. A majority of the runoff from this portion of the Refugio Valley is conveyed via realigned open channels and buried culverts to an unnamed ephemeral tributary to Refugio Creek running through the northern portion of the Project area.

Based on this delineation, the study area encompasses a total of 28,805 square feet of wetlands falling under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and meeting the parameter definition of a wetland. In addition, the study area includes a total of 7,074 square feet of jurisdictional, waters of the United States (US). The study area also encompasses 31,019 square feet of riparian habitats that potentially fall under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB).

Page
2 of 26

2.0 METHODS AND LIMITATIONS
Wetland ecologist Tony Jones conducted a wetland delineation and a preliminary jurisdictional determination of the study area, during which time, he performed reconnaissance surveys in December and January 2019/2020, initially identifying potential wetlands. (He performed site- specific wetlands surveys on December 16 and December 26, 2019; January 1, and January 27, 2020. Based on the criteria used to define a wetland, Mr. Jones determined that the topography and the presence or absence of field indicators, (e.g., vegetation, hydrology, and soils), the limits of habitats meeting the three-parameter definition of a “wetland” were determined. The extent of potential wetlands located within the Project corridor was mapped in the field using 1" = 39' scale Google Earth satellite image of the site. Field sheets providing data on vegetation, soils, and hydrology were collected at 12 sample points throughout the study area and are presented in Appendix A.

The nomenclature used in this report conforms to that presented in Beidleman and Kozloff (2003) for plants, plant communities, and wetland communities. The wetland indicator status of plant species conforms to those provided in the State of California 2016 Wetland Plant List.

3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

3.1 Project Description
Hercules Hotel Development LLC plans to construct a 100-unit 4-story hotel and s 6-story office building complex at the Site. The Site location is showed in Figure 1 and the Site plan is shown in Figure 2.

3.2 Site Description
The subject property is located in the City of Hercules along the east side of Interstate Highway 80 (I-80) within the loop ramp to westbound Willow Avenue. The highway itself was constructed circa 1958 or during the window (1950-1958). Before this, the Property was part of open rolling hills with an intermittent channel/drainage swale, apparently the remnant of the historic tributary to Refugio Cree to the South.

Page
3 of 26
Figur
e 1. Site Layout

Figure 2. Site Plan

Page
5 of 26

3.3 Physical Setting
The subject Site is located in the northeasterly portion of the San Francisco Bay area near the City of Richmond on San Pablo Bay and in the city limits of Hercules in Contra Costa County, California. This Site encompasses the location of the Hercules Hotel Complex property that included approximately 8.5 acres of rolling hill and drainage ditch waterway terrain within the Refugio Creek Valley. This low-lying valley trends in a westerly-easterly direction and is in the proximity where Refugio Creek discharges its intermittent flows into the San Pablo Bay.

2.1.1 Topography
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) 2018 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map of Mare Island , Californi a is shown in Figure 3. The average elevation of the Project area is approximately 65 ft. above mean sea level (AMSL).

The regional drainage is moderately sloped from east to west with a topographic flow direction to the west, as indicated in the Project’s GeoCheck Report (Environmental Data Resources [EDR] 2019) (see Appendix B).

2.1.2 Regional Geology
The Site is located within the Refugio Creek Valley a land feature sloping easterly to westerly covered mostly by exposed Quaternary aged alluvium, estuarine sediments, and manmade artificial fill materials. Older Tertiary aged bedrock underlies these younger sediments and consists of sandstones and shale - both being low to intermediate grade metamorphic units.

Bedrock located to the north is composed of Briones Sandstone and Hercules Shale. These sandstones are mostly massive and indurated by heat, and therefore lacking significant fracturing. Shale consists of closely fractured siltstone and claystone with interbedded lenses of sandstone with local fracturing.

The bedrock underlying the valley is overlain by highly plastic silty clays mixed with varying amounts of organics and sand lenses. These materials represent a portion of the bay muds also exposed at the surface on tidal flats located to the north and are between 10 to 40 feet thick.

Across the Site materials exposed at the surface are composed of alluvium and manmade fill of unknown thickness. Alluvium consists mostly of fine-grained clay and silt with varying amounts of clayey sand and minor lenses of well sorted sands and gravels. At the surface these materials are soft or loose but become more compact and denser with increasing depth.

The Radius Map Report with GeoCheck (EDR 2019) also provided geologic information in the general area of the Project corridor, which was identified as a stratified sequence of the Cenozoic era, quaternary system and series.

Page
6 of 26
Figure 3 USGS Topographical Map

Page
7 of 26

3.4 Geology and Hydrogeology

3.4.1 Local Geology and Soils
The subsurface soils in the Project area generally consist of marine and non-marine continental sedimentary rocks. Pleistocene-Holocene-aged alluvium consists of unconsolidated and semi consolidated fine-grained sediments. The unconsolidated sediments consist of clays, silts, and sands, with a thickness ranging up to 1,000 feet or more. These sediments are semi-continuous throughout the Bay and are usually referred to as “Old Bay Mud.” Younger, fine-grained alluvial and estuarine deposits (Young Bay Mud) overlay the Old Bay Mud. The younger, fine-grained alluvium is typically a mixture of interbedded stiff clays, silts, gravel, and sands derived from the hills or deposited during the formation of the San Francisco Bay.

The Radius Map Report with GeoCheck (EDR 2019) (Appendix B) provided native soil composition information in the general area of the Project corridor, which was identified as Sehorn clay comprised of Class D very slow infiltrating soils with high water table; the soils are clay from 0-25 inches, silty clay from 25 to 35 inches, and unweathered bedrock at 38 inches.

The other major soil type identified was Clear Lake clay comprised of clay from 0 to 59 inches with very slow infiltration rates, high water table, and poorly drained. The last soil type identified is Tierra loam, also Class D and moderately well drained with loam from 0 to 25 inches, clay from 25 to 59 inches, and silty clay loam from 59 to 70 inches.

Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) accessed January 6, 2020 Web Soil Survey confirms soil type as Clear Lake clay with 0 to 15 percent slopes, covers 1.5 acres of the Site or

15.5 percent; and Sehorn clay with 15 to 30 percent slopes covering 8 acres of the Site or 84.5% of the site. (NRCS 2020). NRCS Web Soil Survey is provided in Appendix C.

Clear Lake Clay: The Clear Lake series consists of very deep, poorly drained soils that formed in fine textured alluvium derived from mixed rock sources. Clear Lake soils are in flood basins, flood plains and in swales of drainageways with low to very low permeability. The water table is at depths of 4 to 10 feet in the late summer and in some areas is very near the surface during wet months of winter. Some areas are artificially drained.

Sehorn Clay: The Sehorn series consists of moderately deep, well-drained soil on foothills.

These soils formed in residuum weathered from calcareous sandstone and shale. Slope ranges from 2 to 75 percent. See Figure 4 for Site soil classification.

Page
8 of 26
Fi
gure 4 Soil Classification

26 3.4.2 Surface and Groundwater Hydrology
Hydrology and hydrogeology located across and beneath the property is mainly a function of climatic fluctuations within the Refugio Creek watershed area and tidal fluctuations of the San Francisco Bay. The Project area is located within the San Pablo Creek-Frontal San Pablo Bay Estuaries watershed and the Pinole Creek-Frontal San Pablo Bay Estuaries subwatershed. The Site receives 19.36 inches of rain per year on average (Caltrans 2020).

The tributary to Refugio Creek provides significant seasonal flows to the main stem of Refugio creek, draining approximately 653 acres of the total 3,116-acre Refugio Creek watershed, or ~21%. Three figures are provided in Appendix D fand include the Contra Costa County Watershed Atlas showing the Refugio Creek watershed and the drainage through the Project site. The creek passing through the Project Site is a natural open channel, fed by an underground conveyance and discharging through an underground conveyance to the main stem of Refugio Creek.

Intermittent flows within the Refugio Creek channel located along the northerly side of the Refugio Valley are directed in a westerly direction from elevated terrain located to the east. Most of these waters are emptied into San Pablo Bay to the west of the Site but small portions do infiltrate into the subsurface thus adding to underlying ground water resources. During the winter season portions of surface water flows pond in low lying depressions, artificial surface dikes, drainage ditches, and channels through the valley. Past measurements of ground water depth and gradient indicate that its direction of flow generally follows the topography of the surrounding highland features and floor of the valley westerly (Geosolutions 2003).

Underlying bedrock appears to have both a low primary permeability and highly variable secondary permeability that is due mostly to fractures. Across the Site and within the valley area, ground water in the bedrock arrives mostly after infiltrating through overlying alluvium that has been placed by erosional processes. In elevated terrain located to the east of the site, ground water enters the subsurface through the mantle of regolith located across the ground surface.

Overall ground water migrate in a westerly direction towards and into the bay. Within limits of the Refugio Creek valley the ground water becomes increasingly brackish to saline from south to north and east to west with the highest concentration being near to the San Pablo Bay (Geosolutions 2003).

The East Bay Plain sub-basin is a northwest trending alluvial plain bounded on the north by the San Pablo Bay, on the east by Franciscan Basement rock, on the south by the Niles Cone Groundwater Basin, and on the west by the San Francisco Bay (DWR 2004). The East Bay Plain sub-basin extends beneath the San Francisco Bay to the west (DWR 2004).

The East Bay Plain sub-basin aquifer system consists of unconsolidated sediments from of Quaternary age (DWR 2004). Deposits include the early-Pleistocene Santa Clara Formation, the late-Pleistocene Alameda Formation, the early-Holocene Temescal Formation, and Artificial Fill (DWR 2004). The Santa Clara Formation consists of alluvial fan deposits inter-fingered with lake, swamp, river channel, and floodplain deposits (DWR 2004). The Alameda Formation includes a sequence of alluvial fan deposits bounded by mud deposits on the top and bottom of Page
10 of 26
the formation (DWR 2004). The Temescal Formation is an alluvial deposit consisting primarily of silts and clays with some gravel layers (DWR 2004). Artificial Fill is found mostly along the bay front and wetlands areas and is derived primarily from dredging, as well as quarrying, construction, demolition debris, and municipal waste (DWR 2004).

The depth to groundwater near the Project area ranges from approximately 3.75 ft to 10.2 ft below ground surface (bgs), and shallow groundwater flow direction is typically to the northwest (SWRCB 2018). Regional groundwater flows are estimated to be west-northwest toward the San Pablo Bay located approximately 1.5 miles west of the Project area. The Radius Map Report with GeoCheck (EDR 2019) identified no monitoring wells, federal USGS wells, public water supply wells, or state wells within 1 mile of the Project area.

It is important to note that groundwater flow direction can be influenced locally and regionally by the presence of local wetland features, surface topography, recharge and discharge areas, horizontal and vertical inconsistencies in the types and location of subsurface soils, and proximity to water pumping wells. Additionally, the depth and gradient of the Project area’s water table can change seasonally in response to variation in precipitation and recharge, and over time, in response to urban development such as stormwater controls, impervious surfaces, pumping wells, dewatering, seawater intrusion barrier projects near the coast, and other factors.

Page
11 of 26

3.5 Plant Communities
According to the Biological Assessment performed in January 2020, the Project Site includes a mosaic of several vegetation communities, including Non‐native Annual Grassland, Native Perennial Grassland, Willow Riparian Woodland, Emergent Wetland, and coyote brush scrub (Ground Zone 2020)(See Figure 5 below, excerpted from the Biological Assessment).

Non‐native Annual Grassland. As a result of disturbance and undocumented soil deposition activities on the site, much of the vegetative cover (observed December 16, 2019) contained areas of non‐native annual grassland with species including ripgut brome ( Bromus diandrus ), wild‐oat ( Avena fatua ), annual fescue ( Vulpia myuros ) intergrading with disturbed areas, dominated by other introduced weedy forbs such as black mustard (Brassica nigra), wild radish (Raphanus sativus ), and perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium ). During observations on December 16, 2019, these grasslands were seen to have been graded and seeded with what was assumed to be erosion control grass seed mix.

Native Grassland. Portions of the Site have vegetative cover almost exclusively consisting of native creeping wild‐rye ( Leymus triticoides ), a rhizomatous species that spreads through expansion of the plants by its spreading roots. On the Project site, in most areas where wild‐rye was seen growing, there were no other plant species observed. Native creeping wild‐rye usually grows under moist soil conditions, and appeared to be located preferentially on the cooler north facing slopes of the site.

Coyote brush scrub. Coyote brush scrub habitat was dominated by Coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) with scattered Poison Oak ( Rhus diversiloba ). Since that time, most of the Coyote Brush habitat had been scraped clear of vegetation and planted with an erosion control seed mix.

Willow riparian woodland. An unnamed tributary to Refugio Creek flows through the northern portion of the Site from a culvert at the southeast portion of the site, exiting through a culvert that is piped to drain beneath I‐80 to the northwest. The stream channel supports a willow riparian plant community dominated by large willow trees, patches of mulefat ( Baccharis viminea), stinging nettle ( Urtica dioica ), watercress (Nasturtium officinale), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and teasel ( Dipsacus fullonum). Where deeper pools were present during observations in 2014, much of the water surface was covered in small floating plants including duckweed (Lemna sp.) and water fern (Azolla sp).

Emergent wetland (cattail marsh). Within the northern portion of the site, adjacent the unnamed tributary of Refugio Creek, elevations are low, forming a basin that includes open water (during years of higher rainfall) grading into freshwater cattail marsh wetlands dominated by non-native plants, including: narrow-leaf cattail (typha angustifolia) and wild teasel ( dipsacus fullonum) at the margins.

Page
12 of 26
Fi
gure 5 Vegetative Communities

Page
13 of 26

4.0 HISTORICAL LAND USE
This section provides a summary of historical land use associated with the Site. This section includes a review of historic directory listings, government agency files, as well as an EDR database report. A summary of findings for each source is presented below.

4.1 Historic Aerial Photographs
Historical Site uses can frequently be ascertained from a review of aerial photographs. Aerial photographs of the Project area and surrounding area were provided by EDR for the years 2016, 2012, 2009, 2005, 1998, 1993, 1982, 1974, 1968, 1963, 1958, 1950, 1946, and 1939, and are summarized below in Table 1. The EDR 2019 Aerial Photo Decade Package is included in Appendix E.

Table 1 – Summary of Historic Aerial Photograph Findings Photo Year Land Use description
1939 The Site and vicinity is generally undeveloped. The Site straddles Willow Road to the south and San Pablo Avenue is in place a few hundred yards to the west. The Site is open space grassy area rolling hills with an apparent depression with areas of higher order vegetation and ponding at the northeast perimeter.
1946 No change from 1939.
1950 No change from 1939.
1958 The depressional area to the northeast is now channelized across the Site with a culvert passing below the newly construction Highway 80 to the West. Highway 4 is also constructed to the North. Small buildings appear to the East and South of the Project Site at a distance of a quarter mile. No other development is apparent.
1963 No change from 1958.
1968 Few additional buildings are scattered throughout a quarter mile radius of the site. No other land use change is apparent.
1974 No major change from 1968.
1982 A major residential and commercial development appears to the South within a quarter mile and a major commercial transportation hub appears to the east. To the north within a quarter mile, a refining operation appears.
1993 Additional major residential and commercial developments appear in every direction around the Site within a quarter mile. Industrial uses to the North have expanded greatly. 1998 No major change from 1993.
2005 Commercial and industrial uses have expended in the North and residential and commercial uses have expended in the North, South, and Wes t.
2009 Large paved transportation use has appeared immediately to the East of the site. 2012 No major change from 2009.
2016 No change from 2009.

A revi
ew of the available historic aerial maps indicates that the Site has remained undeveloped since 1939. The Site vicinity has transformed dramatically from undeveloped minor arterial corridor, to fully developed, residential, commercial, and industrial uses along two major freeway corridors. The Site remains undeveloped with remnants of a waterway at the Northern perimeter, a tributary to Refugio Creek to the South.

Page
14 of 26

4.2 Historic Topographical Maps
A historical topographic map report was prepared by EDR and included a search of a collection of public and private topographic maps. Maps dated 1902, 1914, 1916, 1947/1948, 1949/1950, 1951/1952, 1959, 1968, 1980, 2012 were provided for review by EDR and summarized below.

Table 2 summarizes the findings of the historic topo map review. The EDR 2019 Historical Topographic Map Report is included as Appendix F.

Table 2 – Summary of Historic Topographical Map Findings Photo Year Land Use description
1902 The undeveloped Site located in the middle of Refugio Valley slightly elevated on rolling hills from the valley south limit, appears to drain north to northwest and straddle an intermittent tributary of Refugio Creek to the South and lies within a depressed area at the foot of a hill to the Northeast, aligning a roadway just North of the site. RR appears along at the southern perimeter of the site.
1914 Few changes from 1902. The roadway north of the Site no longer appears and the tributary is located a few hundred feet north of the site.
1916 No change from 1914.
1947, 1948 The Site appears to drain to an independent tributary to Refugio Cree across historic San Pablo Avenue to the West.
1949,1950 Independent tributary no longer depicted within Site limits 1951,1952 No change from 1950.
1959 The tributary has been rerouted to pass through the Site through its historic intermittent path.

Highways 80 and 4 have been constructed directly to the north and west of the site. Heavy commercial/industrial development appears a mile to the north and southwest of the site. 1968 No change from 1959.
1980 Additional residential and commercial development appears to east, south north, and west of the site.
2012 Development now surrounds the Project Site in all direction up to within 1/8 mile of site.

The
historic topographical maps indicate that the Project Site was has been undeveloped from 1902 through 2012 as open space hillside and depressed waterway (intermittent tributary to Refugio Creek) along the norther perimeter.

5.0 Field Survey
A Site surveys were conducted on December 16, 2019, December 26, 2019, January 1, 2020, and January 27, 2020. In general, the Site is characterized by open space land use and freeway corridor, as the Site is sandwiched between Willow Avenue to the south, Interstate 80 to the West, Highway 4 to the North and Interstate 80 offramp from North to East. The Site is comprised of natural and artificial fill hills and a relatively natural drainage depression from East to West fed by a 6 foot corrugated steel pipe at the eastern perimeter of the site, discharging to a 6 foot corrugated steel pipe at the northwestern perimeter of the Site which eventually discharges to Refugio Creek on the West side of Interstate 80. Evidence of fill from historic freeway construction and one concrete foundation from historic pile demolition. Also identified on Site are several drainage vents or wells recently installed apparently to help drain the site. An apparent freshwater wetland associated with the drainage tributary dominates the northern ¼ of Page
15 of 26
the Project area with woody canopy and wetland vegetation.

The field sheets and photographs data collected at the Site are presented in Appendix A.

6.0 RESULTS
Table 3 summarizes the areas delineated for potential jurisdictional waters. Figure 6 is a plots of these areas.

Table 3: Areas of Potential Jurisdictional Waters
Water Body Jurisdiction Area Delineated
(sqft)
Unnamed creek
(up to mean high
water mark)
Waters of the US; Waters of the
State; CA Fish and Wildlife
7,074
Cattail marsh
wetland
Waters of the US; Waters of the
State
28,805
Riparian Area Waters of the State 31.019
Pa
ge 16 of 26
F
igure 6 Delineated Wetlands

Page
17 of 26

6.1 Jurisdictional Waters of the US
Waters of the US include:
1) All waters that are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of tide;
2) All interstate waters, including interstate wetlands; 3) All other waters, such as interstate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, vernal pools, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, whose use, degradation, or destruction could affect interstate or foreign commerce;
4) Tributaries of the above;
5) Territorial seas; and
6) Wetlands adjacent to waters defined above.

Based on the agencies' interpretation of the statute, implementing regulations and relevant caselaw, the following waters are protected by the Clean Water Act (CWA):

1. Traditional navigable waters

2. Interstate waters

3. Wetlands adjacent to either traditional navigable waters or interstate waters

4. Non-navigable tributaries to traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent, meaning they contain water at least seasonally

5. Wetlands that directly abut relatively permanent waters In addition, the following waters are protected by the CWA if a fact-specific analysis determines they have a "significant nexus" to a traditional navigable water or interstate water:
 Tributaries to traditional navigable waters or interstate waters  Wetlands adjacent to jurisdictional tributaries to traditional navigable waters or interstate waters
 Waters that fall under the "other waters" category of the regulations. The guidance divides these waters into two categories, those that are physically proximate to other jurisdictional waters and those that are not and discusses how each category should be evaluated.

The following aquatic areas are generally NOT protected by the CWA as waters of the US:
 Wet areas that are not tributaries or open waters and do not meet the agencies' regulatory definition of "wetlands"
 Waters excluded from coverage under the CWA by existing regulations  Waters that lack a "significant nexus" where one is required for a water to be protected by the CWA
 Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland should irrigation cease  Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating and/or diking dry land and used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing
 Artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools created by excavating and/or diking dry land
 Small ornamental waters created by excavating and/or diking dry land for primarily aesthetic reasons
 Water-filled depressions created incidental to construction activity  Groundwater drained through subsurface drainage systems and  Erosional features (gullies and rills), and swales and ditches that are not tributaries or wetlands
Based on the above definition of Waters of the US, the unnamed tributary to Refugio Creek is a Waters of the US.

Based on three field visits and review of historic aerial photographs and topographical maps, the creek does not appear to be tidally influenced or directly involved with interstate commerce; the creek is not and has never been navigable; it is not an interstate water; it is not a territorial sea; and because Refugio Creek to the south also does not qualify as any of the above, the unnamed tributary does not qualify as a tributary of a jurisdictional water by these parameters.

However, our analysis finds that the unnamed tributary to Refugio Creek and Refugio Creek, and the associated wetland, are “other waters.” Refugio Creek and its tributary at the Site are seasonal intermittent streams that appear in historic topo maps since the early 1900s. While the tributary that passes through the Site appears to have been artificially diverted to pass through the Project Site in 1956 when Interstate 80 and the Highway 4 offramp s were constructed just east of the Project site, the current path has been in place since 1956 and has continued to flow seasonally for nearly 64 years supporting native plants and state and federally protected wildlife at the site.

The tributary to Refugio Creek provides significant seasonal flows to the main stem of Refugio creek, draining approximately 653 acres of the total 3,116-acre Refugio Creek watershed, or ~21%. Appendix D show the Refugio Creek watershed and the drainage through the Project site.

Refugio Creek discharges to the Carquinez Strait and San Pablo Bay, both are navigable waters of the San Francisco Bay. As a first order tributary to the San Francisco Bay, Refugio Creek is a Waters of the US. As a principle tributary to Refugio Creek, the unnamed creek passing through the Project Site qualifies as “other waters.” And because the unnamed creek is a natural channel supporting federally protected wildlife at least seasonally, the creek also qualifies as “other waters.”
Wetlands and Other Waters of the US
Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (§404

of 26
Clean Water Act). Indicators of all three wetlands parameters (hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, wetlands hydrology) must be present, or would normally be present, for a significant portion of the growing season, for a Site to be classified as a jurisdictional wetland (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Wetlands generally include swamps, bogs, vernal pools, seeps, marshes, and similar areas. However, a formal wetland delineation following the federal method and a subsequent verification by a USACE representative is the only way to determine the extent of USACE jurisdiction over potential wetlands and waters. Following the submission of the completed preliminary wetland delineation map and report, formal USACE verification usually takes approximately 30 days.

HydrophyticVegetation
Hydrophytic vegetation includes those plant species that possess physiological features or reproductive adaptations that allow them to persist in soils that are subject to prolonged inundation and anaerobic soil conditions. Plant species are classified by their probability of being associated with wetlands or uplands. Obligate (OBL) species almost always (>99 percent of the time) occur in wetlands. Facultative Wetland (FACW) species occur in wetlands 67 to 99 percent of the time. Facultative (FAC) species have a probability of 33 to 66 percent occurrence in wetlands. Facultative Upland (FACU) and Obligate Upland (UPL) species occur in wetlands from one to 33 percent and less than one percent of the time, respectively.

For a sample point to meet this criterion, more than 50 percent of the dominant plant species in each of the strata must be considered OBL.

All plant species within the study area were identified and their corresponding wetland indicator status was recorded (See Appendix A for a summary of plant species identified). The wetland indicator status of each species was obtained from the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Region 0, California (Reed, 1988). Dominant plant species were determined using the “50/20 Rule.” Dominant wetland indicator species occurring within the freshwater marsh delineated at the Project Site include narrow-leaved cattail (OBL), wild teasel (FAC), marsh baccharis (FACW/OBL). arroyo willow (FACW), and water cress (OBL).

Dominant wetland plants were found to exist in Locations 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12.

Hydric Soils
Hydric soil s include non-draini ng organic soils , mineral soil s with a hig h water table, ponded soils, and flooded soils. Characteristic fiel d indicators of hydric soils include the presence of a histic epipedon, the presence of sulfidic material, the presence of a n aquic or peraquic moisture regime, reduci ng soil conditi ons, soil col or (including gleyed soil s or soils wit h a lo w matrix chroma, with or without bright mottles), iron or manganese concretions, and soils listed as hydric by the USDA.

Hydric soils were found to exist in Locations 1, 2, 3, and 5.

Wetland Hydrology
In order for the hydrology parameter to be met, a Site must be seasonally inundate d or saturated to within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least 12.5 percent of the growi ng season; areas

of 26

inundated or saturated to within 12 inches of the soil surface for 5 to 12.5 percent of the growing season may or may not meet the wetland hydrology parameter (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Site-specific considerations regarding hydrology were based on the topographic position of each sample point, the presence of surface or ground water, the presence of strong wetland indicator species, evidence of hydric soils, and the presence of water-borne sediment at the soil surface. The more low-lying areas adjacent to water bodies or creeks were frequently presumed to be inundated or saturated to within 12 inches of the soil surface. Based on the average frost- free period for the study area, which lasts from 275 to 330 days, a particular Site would need to be inundated or saturated to within 12 inches of the soil surface for 34 to 41 consecutive days during the growing season (i.e., 0.125 x 275; 0.125 x 330).

Wetland hydrology was found to exist in Locations 1, 2, 3, and 5.

All three USACE wetland parameters were found to exist for Locations 1, 2, 3, and 5. See Figure 6 for a map of waters of the US delineated at the Project site.

6.2 Jurisdictional Waters of the State of California
Waters of the State of California:

The Water Code defines “waters of the state” broadly to include “any surface water or groundwater including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” “Waters of the state” includes all “waters of the U.S.”
According to this definition of “waters of the state” the unnamed tributary to Refugio Creek passing through the Project site, the riparia corridor up to the ordinary high water mark, and the associated wetland vegetated area, are waters of the state (See Figure 6 for a map of waters of the state delineated at the Project site.

State Wetland Definition:

The Water Boards define an area as wetland as follows: An area is wetland if, under normal circumstances, (1) the area has continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate caused by groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both; (2) the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and (3) the area’s vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the area lacks vegetation.

The following wetlands are waters of the state:

1. Natural wetlands,

2. Wetlands created by modification of a surface water of the state, and

3. Artificial wetlands that meet any of the following criteria:
a) Approved by an agency as compensatory mitigation for impacts to other waters of the state, except where the approving agency explicitly identifies the mitigation as being of limited duration;
b) Specifically identified in a water quality control plan as a wetland or other water of the state;

26 c) Resulted from historic human activity, is not subject to ongoing operation and maintenance, and has become a relatively permanent part of the natural landscape; or d) Greater than or equal to one acre in size, unless the artificial wetland was constructed, and is currently used and maintained, primarily for one or more of the following purposes (i.e., the following artificial wetlands are not waters of the state unless they also satisfy the criteria set forth in 2, 3a, or 3b):
i. Industrial or municipal wastewater treatment or disposal, ii. ii. Settling of sediment,
iii. Detention, retention, infiltration, or treatment of stormwater runoff and other iv. pollutants or runoff subject to regulation under a municipal, construction, or industrial stormwater permitting program,
v. Treatment of surface waters,
vi. Agricultural crop irrigation or stock watering,
vii. Fire suppression,
viii. Industrial processing or cooling,
ix. Active surface mining – even if the Site is managed for interim wetlands functions and values,
x. Log storage,
xi. Treatment, storage, or distribution of recycled water, or xii. Maximizing groundwater recharge (this does not include wetlands that have incidental groundwater recharge benefits); or
xiii. Fields flooded for rice growing. 5 70
All artificial wetlands that are less than an acre in size and do not satisfy the criteria set forth in 2, 3.a, 3.b, or 3.c are not waters of the state. If an aquatic feature meets the wetland definition, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the wetland is not a water of the state.

Under the State’s definition of wetland, the freshwater marsh along the norther portion of the Project Site fits the definition of a wetland. Based on field surveys in December 2019 and January 2020, and on a review of historic aerial photography and topographical maps, the area has recurrent seasonal saturation in the upper substrate caused by groundwater and/or surface flow, the duration of this saturation extends throughout the winter and spring months, and the area delineated as state wetlands (See Figure 6) is dominated by hydrophytes or lacks vegetation.

Page
22 of 26

7.0 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS
In general, riparian areas, wetlands, waters of the US, and special-status species and communities are considered sensitive biological resources and typically fall under the jurisdiction of several regulatory agencies. Impacts to these habitats may require federal, state, and/or local permits or agreements. The permits required vary depending upon the location of the Project and the type and extent of impacts. However, prior to the issuance of any permit for actions that would result in impacts to wetlands, waters, or special-status species or communities, notification to each of the following agencies is appropriate:
 USACE
 San Francisco RWQCB
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
An overview of the jurisdiction, application requirements, and required permits for each of the above-listed agencies is provided below.

US Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 regulates activities that result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the US, including wetlands. The primary intent of the CWA is to authorize the EPA to regulate water quality through the restriction of pollution discharges. The USACE has the principal authority to regulate discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the US. However, EPA has oversight authority over the USACE and retains veto power over the USACE’s decision to issue permits.

Regional Water Quality Control Board
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and EPA 404(b)(1) Guidelines, an applicant for a federal permit to conduct any activity, which may result in discharge into navigable waters, must provide a certification from the RWQCB that such discharge will comply with the state water quality standards (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23, §§3830 et seq.). The RWQCB has a policy of no net-loss of wetlands in effect and typically requires mitigation for all impacts to wetlands before it will issue a water quality certification or waiver thereof.

Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Cal. Water Code §§13000-14920), the RWQCB is authorized to regulate the discharge of waste that could affect the quality of the state’s waters. “Waste” is broadly defined by the Porter-Cologne Act to include “sewage and any and all other waste substances, liquid, solid, gaseous, or radioactive, associated with human habitation, or of human or animal origin, or from any producing, manufacturing, or processing operation of whatever nature….” (Cal. Water Code §13050). Concentrated silt or sediment associated with human habitation and harmful to the aquatic environment is “waste” under this section. In addition, the California Attorney General has interpreted this definition to include extraction of sand, gravel, or other minerals from a streambed, because it may cause an increase in turbidity and silt in the waters of the stream downstream from the operations. Therefore, even if a Project does not require a federal permit (i.e., a Nationwide Permit from the USACE), it may require review and approval by the RWQCB.

When reviewing applications, the RWQCB focuses on ensuring that projects do not adversely affect the “beneficial uses” associated with waters of the state. Generally, the RWQCB defines beneficial uses to include all of the resources, services and qualities of aquatic ecosystems and underground aquifers that benefit the state of California. Numerous beneficial uses have been identified, including agricultural supply, wildlife habitat, recreation, groundwater recharge, and municipal and domestic water supply. In most cases, the RWQCB seeks to protect these beneficial uses by requiring the integration water quality control measures into projects that will result in discharge into waters of the State. For most construction projects, RWQCB requires the use of construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs). In many cases, proper use of BMPs, including detention ponds, grassy swales, sand filters, modified roof drains, and other features, will speed Project approval from the RWQCB. Development setbacks from creeks are also favored by the RWQCB, as they often lead to less creek-related impacts in the future. Proper integration of these and other features into Project design will greatly decrease the necessary negotiation with RWQCB and will speed the Project approval process.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife
The CDFW exercises jurisdiction over wetland and riparian resources associated with rivers, streams, and lakes under California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 to 1607. The CDFG has the authority to regulate work that will 1) divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow of the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake; 2) use materials from a streambed; or 3) result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or jurisdiction is usually bounded by the top-of-bank or the outermost edges of riparian vegetation.

Because the wetlands along the northern part of the Project Site are associated with a natural water course historically present with seasonal flows since 1965, and supports aquatic wildlife protected by the State Endangered Species Act, it is presumed to fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFG. If the Project plans to disturb this unnamed tributary to Refugio Creek, a Streambed Alteration Agreement will be required. We recommend that notification be submitted to CDFG as part of the permitting process.

of 26

8.0 FINDINGS and CONCLUSION
The study area supports wetlands and other waters of the United States that are presumed to fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE, pursuant to the Clean Water Act. In addition, the “non- wetland” riparian habitats not meeting the federal definition of a wetland may be regulated by the RWQCB, pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Act.

These conclusions must be regarded as preliminary, and as such, must be confirmed in consultation with each agency before commencing any work that would impact aquatic habitats on site.

9.0 LIMITATIONS
Information for this assessment was obtained from sources listed in the reference section of this report. This information, to the extent it was relied on to form our opinion, is assumed to be correct and complete. Ground Zone is not responsible for the quality or content of information from these sources.

Any opinions and/or recommendations presented apply to Site conditions existing at the time of performance of services. We are unable to report on, or accurately predict, generally unforeseeable events which may impact the Site following performance of services, whether occurring naturally or caused by external forces. Therefore, we cannot assume responsibility for such events or their impact. We also cannot assume responsibility for changes in environmental standards, practices, or regulations.

The information and opinions rendered in this report are exclusively for use by Hercules Hotel Development LLC. Ground Zone will not distribute or publish this report without consent except as required by law or court order. The information and opinions expressed in this report are given in response to a limited assignment and should be considered and implemented only in light of that assignment. The services provided by Ground Zone in completing this Project were consistent with the standard for the profession. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

Any party other than Hercules Hotel Development LLC. shall not use this report without receiving prior authorization from Ground Zone. Unauthorized use of this report will relieve Ground Zone of any liability resulting from its use.

Because Hercules Hotel Development LLC is the current and historic real property owner at the Site, inquiry into the terms of and conditions of the its real property ownership or chain of title is outside the scope of this wetland delineation report.

Page
25 of 26

10.0 REFERENCES
Biedleman and Kozloff (2003). Plants of the San Francisco Bay Region. University of California Press. 2003.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Environmental Analysis, Stormwater Unit, Water Quality Planning Tool (http://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx) (Access January 9, 2020).

California Department of Water Resources, (2004), 2017, Bulletin 118, online:

California Natural Communities List. (2019)
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. November 8, 2019.

Accessed January 29, 2020.

Contra Costa Clean Water Program 2020.
https://www.cccleanwater.org/userfiles/kcfinder/files/Refugio-Rodeo-and-Carquinez- Watersheds-cropped.jpg. Accessed: 2/2/2020.

Contra Costa Commu9nity Development Department (2003). Contra Costa County Watershed Atlas. November 2003.

Contra Costa County Assessor Recorder (2004)Assessor’s Parcel Map Book 406 Page 07 Contra Costa County, California. April 20, 2004.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 131 pp.

Environmental Data Resources (EDR) (2019a). Aerial Photo Decade Package (Inquiry 5897647.8 December 9, 2019).

Environmental Data Resources (EDR) (2019b). Historic Topographical Maps (Inquiry 5897647.4 December 9, 2019).

Environmental Data Resources (EDR) (2019c). Radius Map Report with Geocheck. Inquiry Number: 5897647.2s December 09, 2019
Environmental Laboratory (2008). Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) September 2008.

Environmental Laboratory, (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. January. 100 pp.

Hickman, J.C. (1993). The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 1400 pp.

Kirchner and Melvin (2016). State of California 2016 Wetland Plant List. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X.

Koenig, James B. Geologic Map of California (1963).

Munsell Color (2009). Munsell Soil-Color Charts. 2009.

Pa
ge 26 of 26
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey. (https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx). October 5, 2018. Accessed January 6, 2020.

State Water Resources Control Board (2019). State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Adopted April 2, 2019.

United States Army Corps of Engineers (2012). ZRIN 0710–ZA06. Publication of the Final National Wetland Plant List. Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 90 May 9, 2012.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). (1993). List of Hydric Soils in Contra Costa County, California. Natural Resource Conservation Service, Concord Field Office. July 26.

USGS US Topo 7.5-minute map for Mare Island, CA 2018 Published Date: 2018-09-05 Metadata Updated: 2019-07-26 Format: Geospatial PDF (35.33 MB), Extent: 7.5 x 7.5 minute.

Wetland Training Institute, Inc. (2011). Pocket Guide to Hydric Soil Field Indicators. ISBN 0- 9719427-8-1. www.water.ca.gov/pubs/groundwater/bulletin_118/basindescriptions/2-9.04.pdf.

Appendi
x A – Field Sheets and Plant Summary Table
Wetland Delineation Plant Survey
Location
Number
Scientific Plant
Name
Plant
Common
Name
Native or
Non-native
Indicator Status Photo
1 Elymus triticoides
(50%)
Creeping wild
rye native
UPL
Dipsacus fullonum
(20%)
Wild teasel
Non-native
FAC
Conium maculatum
(5%)
poison
hemlock Non-native

FACW/FAC
2 Dipsacus fullonum
(80%) Wild teasel Non-native FAC
Typha angustifolia
(5%)
Narrow-
leaved Cattail Non-native OBL
3 Typha angustifolia
(80%)
Narrow-
leaved Cattail Non-native
OBL
Dipsacus fullonum
(10%)
wild teasel
Non-native
FAC
Conium maculatum
(10%)
Poison
hemlock Non-native

FACW/FAC

4 Elymus triticoides
(50%)
Creeping wild
rye native
UPL
5 Baccharis glutinosa
(60%)
Marsh
Baccharis Native

FACW/OBL

6 Elymus triticoides
(15%)
Creeping wild
rye
native UPL
7 Raphanus sativus
(20%)
Wild radish Non-native UPL
Conium maculatum
(50%)
Poison
hemlock
Non-native FACW/FAC

8 Baccharis glutinosa
(80%)
Marsh Baccharis Native FACW/OBL
Salix lasiolepis
(85%)
Arroyo willow Native FACW
9 Elymus triticoides
(100%)
Creeping wild rye Native UPL

10 Conium maculatum
(40%)
Poison hemlock Non-native FACW/FAC
Dipsacus fullonum
(10%)
wild teasel Non-native FAC
11 Dipsacus fullonum
(30%)
wild teasel Non-native FAC
Cirsium vulgare
(60%)
Bull Thistle Non-native FACU

12 Conium maculatum
(20%)
poison hemlock Non-
native

FACW/FAC
Salix lasiolepis
(10%)
Arroyo willow Native FACW
Open
Water
Creek
Nasturtium
officinale
Water cress Native OBL
Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow Native FACW
Typha angustifolia
(80%)
Narrow-leaved
Cattail
Non-
native
OBL

Appe
ndix B – EDR Geocheck Report

FORM-LBC-LMI
® k c e h C o e G h t i w t r o p e R ™ p a M s u i d a R R D E e h T 6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Inquiry Number: 5897647.2s
December 09, 2019

SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 9
Orphan Summary 208
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1

GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5
Physical Setting Source Map A-11
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-13
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC5897647.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.

Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,

ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT.

Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5897647.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).

The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.

TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION

ADDRESS
HYW 80 EAST AND HYW 4 TO MARTINEZ
HERCULES, CA 94547

COORDINATES

38.0131740 - 38˚ 0’ 47.42’’Latitude (North):
122.2691080 - 122˚ 16’ 8.78’’Longitude (West):

Zone 10Universal Tranverse Mercator:
564160.9UTM X (Meters):
4207323.0UTM Y (Meters):
65 ft. above sea levelElevation:

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
5602140 MARE ISLAND, CATarget Property Map:
2012Version Date:
5602094 BENICIA, CANortheast Map:
2012Version Date:
5640608 BRIONES VALLEY, CASoutheast Map:
2012Version Date:
5640624 RICHMOND, CASouthwest Map:
2012Version Date:

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
20140608Portions of Photo from:

USDASource:

TC5897647.2s Page A-1
geologic strata.
of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics

2. Groundwater flow velocity.

1. Groundwater flow direction, and
Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components:
forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration.

EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in 2012Version Date:
5640624 RICHMOND, CASouthwest Map:
2012Version Date:
5640608 BRIONES VALLEY, CASoutheast Map:
2012Version Date:
5602094 BENICIA, CANortheast Map:
2012Version Date:
5602140 MARE ISLAND, CATarget Property Map:

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
65 ft. above sea levelElevation:
4207323.0UTM Y (Meters):
564160.9UTM X (Meters):

Zone 10Universal Tranverse Mercator:
122.269108 - 122˚ 16’ 8.79’’Longitude (West):

38.013174 - 38˚ 0’ 47.43’’Latitude (North):

TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES
HERCULES, CA 94547
HYW 80 EAST AND HYW 4 TO MARTINEZ

HERCULES HOTEL COMPLEX

TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM®
TC5897647.2s Page A-2
should be field verified.
on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES
Elevation (ft)Elevation (ft)
TP
TP
0 1/2 1 Miles
✩Target Property Elevation: 65 ft.

North South
West East
301
249
238
221
191
62 41
89 100
65 62
53 160
188
143
104
98 100
7985
91 80
43 62
39 50
37 87
65 41
44 63
91 124
94 81
81 148
General NNWGeneral Topographic Gradient:

TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY
should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to

TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers). sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-3
Not Reported

GENERAL DIRECTIONLOCATION

GROUNDWATER FLOWFROM TPMAP ID
hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table.
authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater

AQUIFLOW
®
Search Radius: 1.000 Mile.

Not found Status:

1.25 miles Search Radius:

Site-Specific Hydrogeological Data*:
* ©1996 Site−specific hydrogeological data gathered by CERCLIS Alerts, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. All rights reserved. All of the information and opinions presented are those of the cited EPA report(s), which were completed under a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) investigation. contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator

HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail MapMARE ISLAND

NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
NWI Electronic
Data CoverageNWI Quad at Target Property
FEMA FIRM Flood data06013C0232F
FEMA FIRM Flood data06013C0043G
Additional Panels in search area: FEMA Source Type
FEMA FIRM Flood data06013C0044G
Flood Plain Panel at Target Property
FEMA Source Type

FEMA FLOOD ZONE
and bodies of water).

Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist

HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-4
Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology

ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION
Stratified SequenceCategory:CenozoicEra:

TertiarySystem:

MioceneSeries:

TmCode: (decoded above as Era, System & Series)
at which contaminant migration may be occurring.

Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed

GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils. characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional

GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 53 2
1 3
4 0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles
TC5897647.2s Page A-6
Min:

Max: 7.3
Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clay
bedrock
unweathered38 inches35 inches 3
Min:

Max: 7.3
Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Claysilty clay35 inches25 inches 2
Min:

Max: 7.3
Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay25 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)

> 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min:
> 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:

HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:

Hydric Status: Not hydric
Well drainedSoil Drainage Class:
water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer.

Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group:
claySoil Surface Texture:

SEHORNSoil Component Name:

Soil Map ID: 1
in a landscape. The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service SSURGO data. for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil

DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY ®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-7

Moderately well drainedSoil Drainage Class:
water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer.

Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group:
loamSoil Surface Texture:

TIERRASoil Component Name:

Soil Map ID: 3
Min: 7.4
Max: 8.4
Min: 0.42
Max: 1.4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay59 inches29 inches 2
Min: 7.4
Max: 8.4
Min: 0.42
Max: 1.4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay29 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)

> 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min:
> 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:

HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:

Hydric Status: Partially hydric
Poorly drainedSoil Drainage Class:
water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer.

Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group:
claySoil Surface Texture:

CLEAR LAKESoil Component Name:

Soil Map ID: 2
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-8
> 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min:
> 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:

HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:

Hydric Status: Partially hydric
Moderately well drainedSoil Drainage Class:
water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer.

Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a highHydrologic Group:
claySoil Surface Texture:

CROPLEYSoil Component Name:

Soil Map ID: 4
Min: 7.9
Max: 8.4
Min: 1.4
Max: 4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Silty
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Claysilty clay loam70 inches59 inches 3
Min: 7.9
Max: 8.4
Min: 1.4
Max: 4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Silty
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay59 inches25 inches 2
Min: 7.9
Max: 8.4
Min: 1.4
Max: 4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Silty
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayloam25 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)
> 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min:
> 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:

HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:

Hydric Status: Not hydric
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-9
Max: Min:

Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay loam 9 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)

> 0 inchesDepth to Watertable Min:
> 0 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:

HighCorrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:

Hydric Status: Not hydric
Well drainedSoil Drainage Class:
movement of water, or soils with moderately fine or fine textures.

Class C - Slow infiltration rates. Soils with layers impeding downwardHydrologic Group:
clay loamSoil Surface Texture:

LOS OSOSSoil Component Name:

Soil Map ID: 5
Min: 6.6
Max: 8.4
Min: 0.42
Max: 1.4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay59 inches24 inches 2
Min: 6.6
Max: 8.4
Min: 0.42
Max: 1.4
50%), Lean Clay
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and

FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay24 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-10
Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location.

No PWS System Found

FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION

LOCATION

FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID
No Wells Found

FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION

LOCATION

FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID

1.000State Database
Nearest PWS within 1 mileFederal FRDS PWS

1.000Federal USGS

WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION
SEARCH DISTANCE (miles)DATABASE
opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells. professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental

LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS
Max: Min:

Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clay
bedrock
weathered35 inches31 inches 3
Max: Min:

Min: 0
Max: 1.4 Not reported
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.

Materials (more
Silt-Clayclay31 inches 9 inches 2
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
micro m/sec
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH)
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5897647.2s Page A-11
No Wells Found

STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION

LOCATION

FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 1 6 0
80 3 2 0
2 8 02 0 0
200
2 4 0
240
2 00
2 00
2 0 0
2 0 0
1 6 0
1 20
1 2 0
1 2 0
160
160
1 6 0
1 6 0
2 80
8 0
2 4 0
120
12 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
80 200
8 0
1 6 0
1 6 0
40 4 0 4 080
1 2 0
1 2 0
12 04 0 1 20
8 0
4 0
80 8 0
2 8 02402 0 0
20 0
120 200
1 6 0
160 2 0 0
2 0 0
32 02 8 01 6 0
160
2 40
2 0 0
2 8 0
2 8 0
2 4 0
240
2 4 01 2 0
120
80 8 0
40 40
4 0
4 0
4 0
40 4 0
40 40
40 4 0
40 8
8 0
80 80
80 80
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
8 0
80 8
0 8 0
80 1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
120
1 20
1 2
0 1 2 0
1 20
2 0 0
2 0 0 1 6 0
1 6 0
2 0 0
1 6 0 200
2 8 0
3 2 0
2 8 0
2 80
2 4 0
2 40
200
2 4 0
2 0 0 1
6 0
1 6 0
1 6 0
160
160
1 6 0 2 0 0
2 0 0
2 0 0
12 0 0
3 20 3 60
3 60
320
200
1 20
2 0 0
2 0 0
160
2 0 0
8 0
8 0
2 002 002 0 0
280
2 00
400
3 20
1 2 0
120
2 4 0
1 6 0
1 60
1 6 0
4 40
2 0 0
2 0 0
2 4 0
3 2 0 2 8 0
2 8 0
320
2 40
2 8 0
4 0 0 400
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 2 0
3 2 0
2 8 0 2 40
2 4 0
2 8 0
320
280
2 4 0
2 4 03 2 02 0
02 0 0 3 2 01
6 0 3 60 1 6 02 0 0200
2 00
360
2 80
2 0 0
2 00
2 4 0
2 8 0
2 8 0
2 40
2 0 0
280
280
4 0
40 4
0 0
4 00
3 2 0
3 20
4 80
5 2 0
2 00
20 0
00 5 6 0
5 2 0
4 8 0
5 20
200
5 2 0
5 6 0
5 2 0
5 2 0
480
4 8 0
4404 4 0
4404 4 0
4004004 0 0
4 0 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 2 0
3 2 0
32 0
80 8 0
8 0
2 8 0
2 80
2 8 0
1 20
120 160
0 1
60 2 4 0
2 4 0
3 2 01 60
2 0 0
2 4 02 8 0
2 8 0
3 20
605 080440
CA
TC5897647.2s Page A-13
Not ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedBasement 0%0%100%0.300 pCi/LLiving Area - 2nd Floor
0%0%100%1.000 pCi/LLiving Area - 1st Floor
% >20 pCi/L% 4-20 pCi/L% <4 pCi/LAverage ActivityArea
Number of sites tested: 1
Federal Area Radon Information for Zip Code: 94547
: Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L.
: Zone 2 indoor average level >= 2 pCi/L and <= 4 pCi/L.

Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L.

Federal EPA Radon Zone for CONTRA COSTA County: 2
0794547
______________________
> 4 pCi/LNum TestsZipcode
Radon Test Results
State Database: CA Radon

AREA RADON INFORMATION

GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS
RADON
®

TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
Source: United States Geologic Survey
EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data with consistent elevation units and projection.

Current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Source: U.S. Geological Survey

HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Flood Zone Data: This data was obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. It includes the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) which incorporates Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data and Q3 data from FEMA in areas not covered by NFHL.

Source: FEMA
Telephone: 877-336-2627
Date of Government Version: 2003, 2015
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002, 2005 and 2010 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

State Wetlands Data: Wetland Inventory
Source: Department of Fish and Wildlife
Telephone: 916-445-0411

HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
AQUIFLOW Information SystemR
Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table information.

GEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit
Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).

STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database
Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps.

SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database
Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Telephone: 800-672-5559
SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, mapping scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county natural resource planning and management.

TC5897647.2s Page PSGR-1

PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED

LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS

FEDERAL WATER WELLS
PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202-564-3750
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.

PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202-564-3750
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS).

USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS) This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater.

STATE RECORDS
Water Well Database
Source: Department of Water Resources
Telephone: 916-651-9648
California Drinking Water Quality Database
Source: Department of Public Health
Telephone: 916-324-2319
The database includes all drinking water compliance and special studies monitoring for the state of California since 1984. It consists of over 3,200,000 individual analyses along with well and water system information.

OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION
California Oil and Gas Well Locations
Source: Department of Conservation
Telephone: 916-323-1779
Oil and Gas well locations in the state.

California Earthquake Fault Lines
Source: California Division of Mines and Geology
The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California’s Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology.

RADON
State Database: CA Radon
Source: Department of Public Health
Telephone: 916-210-8558
Radon Database for California
Area Radon Information
Source: USGS
Telephone: 703-356-4020
The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey.

The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions.

TC5897647.2s Page PSGR-2

PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
EPA Radon Zones
Source: EPA
Telephone: 703-356-4020
Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels.

OTHER
Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities Source: Federal Aviation Administration, 800-457-6656
Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration California Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines, prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California’s Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology.

STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2015 TomTom North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material.

TC5897647.2s Page PSGR-3

PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
Appe
ndix C – USGS Web Soil Survey
Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California
(Hercules Hotel Complex)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
1/6/2020

4207450 4207490 4207530 4207570 4207610 4207650
4207450 4207490 4207530 4207570 4207610 4207650
563960 564000 564040 564080 564120 564160 564200 564240 564280 564320 563960 564000 564040 564080 564120 564160 564200 564240 564280 564320 38° 0' 52'' N
122° 16' 17'' W
38° 0' 52'' N
122° 16' 1'' W
38° 0' 44'' N
122° 16' 17'' W
38° 0' 44'' N
122° 16' 1'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 25 50 100 150
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,700 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below
.

Soil Survey Area: Contra Costa County, California
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 17, 2019
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger
.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: May 1, 2019—May 31, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably dif
fers from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California
(Hercules Hotel Complex)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
1/6/2020

Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Cc Clear Lake clay, 0 to 15
percent slopes, MLRA 15

1.5 15.5%
SdE Sehorn clay, 15 to 30 percent
slopes

8.0 84.5%
Totals for Area of Interest 9.5 100.0%
Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California Hercules Hotel Complex Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
1/6/2020

Appe
ndix D – Watershed Atlas
Watershed Map
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hercules, California
Date: 02.02.2020
Designed: TJ
Drawn:

Checked:

DWG File:

No. Date Revision Approved Fig..

Project
100 Feet
N
Project Site
Channel Condition
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hercules, California
Date: 02.02.2020
Designed: TJ
Drawn:

Checked:

DWG File:

No. Date Revision Approved Fig..

Project
100 Feet
N
Project Site
Elevation Contours
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hercules, California
Date: 02.02.2020
Designed: TJ
Drawn:

Checked:

DWG File:

No. Date Revision Approved Fig..

Project
100 Feet
N
Project Site
Appe
ndix E – Historic Aerial Photographs
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Inquiry Number:

December 09, 2019
5897647.8
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
2016 1"=500' Flight Year: 2016 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=500' Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=500' Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2005 1"=500' Flight Year: 2005 USDA/NAIP
1998 1"=500' Flight Date: August 27, 1998 USDA
1993 1"=500' Acquisition Date: July 06, 1993 USGS/DOQQ
1982 1"=500' Flight Date: July 08, 1982 USDA
1974 1"=500' Flight Date: April 30, 1974 USGS
1968 1"=500' Flight Date: April 20, 1968 USGS
1963 1"=500' Flight Date: July 17, 1963 EDR Proprietary Aerial Viewpoint 1958 1"=500' Flight Date: July 25, 1958 USGS
1950 1"=500' Flight Date: May 18, 1950 USDA
1946 1"=500' Flight Date: September 06, 1946 USGS
1939 1"=500' Flight Date: August 02, 1939 USDA
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
12/09/19
Hercules Hotel Complex
Site Name:

Client Name:

Ground Zone
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
1361 B Street
Hercules, CA 94547
Hayward, CA 94540
EDR Inquiry #
5897647.8
Contact:

Sam Lea Brathwaite
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo per decade.

Search Results:

Year
Scale
Details
Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more information contact your EDR Account Executive.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.

Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
5897647
8 -
page
2 5897647.8
2016
= 500'
5897647.8
2012
= 500'
5897647.8
2009
= 500'
5897647.8
2005
= 500'
5897647.8
1998
= 500'
5897647.8
1993
= 500'
5897647.8
1982
= 500'
5897647.8
1974
= 500'
5897647.8
1968
= 500'
5897647.8
1963
= 500'
5897647.8
1958
= 500'
5897647.8
1950
= 500'
5897647.8
1946
= 500'
5897647.8
1939
= 500'
Appe
ndix F – Historic Topographical Maps
EDR Historical Topo Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
with QuadMatch™
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
December 09, 2019
5897647.4
EDR Historical Topo Map Report
EDR Inquiry #
Search Results:

P.O.#
Project:

Maps Provided:

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are
the property of their respective owners.
page-
Coordinates:

Latitude:

Longitude:

UTM Zone:

UTM X Meters:

UTM Y Meters:

E
levation:

Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:
2012
1980
1968
1959
1951, 1952
1949, 1950
1947, 1948
1916
1914
1902
12/09/19
Hercules Hotel Complex
Ground Zone
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
1361 B Street
Hercules, CA 94547
Hayward, CA 94540
5897647.4
Sam Lea Brathwaite
EDR Topographic Map Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by Ground Zone were identified for the years listed below. EDR’s Historical Topo Map Report is designed to assist professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topo Map Report includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the late 1800s.

NA

38.013174 38° 0' 47" North
235.A.01
-122.269108 -122° 16' 9" West
Zone 10 North
564159.31
4207528.73

65.18' above sea level
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.

Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 5897647
4 2
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
2012 Source Sheets
2012
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Richmond

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Briones Valley

7.5-minute, 24000
1980 Source Sheets
1980
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1959
1980
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1979
1980
Richmond

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1979
1968 Source Sheets
1968
Briones Valley

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Richmond

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1959 Source Sheets
1959
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1958
1959
Briones Valley

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1958
1959
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1958
1959
Richmond

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1958
5897647
4 3
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1951, 1952 Source Sheets
1951
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1952
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1949, 1950 Source Sheets
1949
Richmond

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1946
1949
Briones Valley

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1946
1949
Mare Island

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1950
Benicia

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1947, 1948 Source Sheets
1947

PORT CHICAGO
15-minute, 50000
1947

MARE ISLAND
15-minute, 50000
1948

CONCORD
15-minute, 50000
1948

SAN FRANCISCO
15-minute, 50000
1916 Source Sheets
1916
Mare Island
15-minute, 62500
5897647
4 4
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1914 Source Sheets
1914

MARE ISLAND
15-minute, 62500
1902 Source Sheets
1902
Napa
30-minute, 125000
5897647
4 5
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
2012
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 2012, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 2012, 7.5-minute
SE, Briones Valley, 2012, 7.5-minute
SW, Richmond, 2012, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 6
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1980
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1980, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 1980, 7.5-minute
SW, Richmond, 1980, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 7
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1968
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1968, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 1968, 7.5-minute
SE, Briones Valley, 1968, 7.5-minute
SW, Richmond, 1968, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 8
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1959
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1959, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 1959, 7.5-minute
SE, Briones Valley, 1959, 7.5-minute
SW, Richmond, 1959, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 9
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1951, 1952
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1951, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 1952, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 10
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1949, 1950
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1949, 7.5-minute
NE, Benicia, 1950, 7.5-minute
SE, Briones Valley, 1949, 7.5-minute
SW, Richmond, 1949, 7.5-minute
5897647
4 11
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1947, 1948
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, MARE ISLAND, 1947, 15-minute
NE, PORT CHICAGO, 1947, 15-minute
SE, CONCORD, 1948, 15-minute
SW, SAN FRANCISCO, 1948, 15-minute
5897647
4 12
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1916
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Mare Island, 1916, 15-minute
5897647
4 13
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1914
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, MARE ISLAND, 1914, 15-minute
5897647
4 14
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the
following map sheet(s).
-
EW

SW S SE

NW N NE
1902
0 Miles

0.25 0.5
1 1.5
Hercules Hotel Complex
Hyw 80 East and Hyw 4 To Martinez
Hercules, CA 94547
Ground Zone
TP, Napa, 1902, 30-minute
5897647
4 15