Madera City Council
December 3, 2025

SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
QK, Inc. (QK) has completed a Focused Air Quality Study (FAQS) for the City of Madera (City).

The proposed Project is located in unincorporated Madera County and within the City of Madera Sphere of Influence (SOI). The Project is generally bounded by Lake Street to the east, Ellis Street to the south, and Martin Street to the north, The proposed water tanks and other infrastructure will be located on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 038-030-031. The water tank site is proposed to connect via a pipeline that will be placed within City of Madera right-of-way (ROW). The pipeline route will follow ROW south along Lake Street, west along Ellis Street, and northwest along Sharon Boulevard. This pipeline will connect to an existing well site located at APN 013-280-001.

The Project will include construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents. The initial phase (Phase 1) includes the development of a water storage tank and a pipeline connection to an existing water well site. The initial phase of this project should be sufficient to meet drinking water demands and fire protection requirements through 2043. To meet future system demands, Phase 2 and Phase 3 improvements will be incorporated into the preliminary design for the Years 2044 and 2058, respectively.

The proposed Project’s construction would include the following criteria pollutant emissions: reactive organic gases (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and suspended particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Project operations would not generate air pollutant emissions over negligible amounts and were therefore not analyzed further in this analysis. Project construction activities would also generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Criteria and GHG emissions were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1.1.29 (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2024).

Based on the thresholds established by the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI, the emissions estimates prepared pursuant to this FAQS assessment do not exceed the SJVAPCD’s established emissions significance thresholds for all CEQA air quality contaminants, therefore, this Project would not pose a significant impact to the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and would have a less than significant air quality impact.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

SECTION 2 - INTRODUCTION

2.1 - Purpose
This FAQS was prepared pursuant to the SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI) (SJVAPCD 2015), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code 21000 to 21189) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 – 15387).

2.2 - General Project Description
The City of Madera (City) proposes the construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents. The initial phase (Phase 1) includes the development of a water storage tank and a pipeline connection to an existing water well site.

PHASE 1
Phase 1 includes the following major components:
• Water Storage Tank Site
o Install a 2.5 mg prestressed concrete water storage tank outfitted with inlet and outlet piping at opposite ends of the tank to promote thorough tank mixing, tank overflow and drain piping compliant with Division of Drinking Water (DDW) requirements, mechanical mixer to further promote reservoir mixing, two access manways at the exterior of the tank for operations and maintenance access at ground level, roof access hatch and interior ladder, intrusion alarms on access manways and roof access hatch, level monitoring equipment, and a water sampling station.
o A 3,500 gpm firm capacity booster pump station consisting of three 125 horsepower (hp) horizontal-split case booster pumps and associated equipment located on a concrete slab foundation. Space for a fourth identically sized pump will be provided for future expansion at a later phase. o New 30-inch drainage piping to convey tank overflow and drainage to the City-owned detention basin;
o Perforated leak detection pipeline at the perimeter of the tank; o Above ground reservoir control valve assembly, including inlet flow meter; o Cement masonry unit (CMU) chemical and electrical building with two separate rooms dedicated to housing electrical and chemical equipment. o Onsite hypochlorite generation, storage, and feed equipment. o Water quality analyzers and four chemical injection/analysis points. o Electrical distribution equipment, service transformer, variable frequency drives (VFD), and programmable logic controller (PLC).

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

o Standby generator sized for emergency operation all pumps and critical site equipment.
o Asphalt pavement across approximately half of tank site with crushed rock across the remaining half of the site where future installation of a second tank is anticipated.
o CMU wall at the North Lake Street frontage extending 75 feet along the north and south site limit.
o Perimeter fencing around the remainder of the site.
o Onsite fire hydrant, hose bibbs, and equipment washdown facilities. o Light fixtures with photocells and motion sensors in compliance with Title 24 requirements.
o Provisions for future installation of security cameras. • Water Distribution
o Approximately 13,200 linear feet (LF) of 24-inch transmission main will connect the tank site to the City-owned Well 38. The transmission main will cross below a joint-use irrigation and drainage canal approximately 300 feet west of Ellis Street. The canal crossing will be approximately 200 linear feet and be completed via trenchless bore and jack construction. • Phase 1 construction would take approximately 18 months to complete.

PHASE 2
Based on current projections, the initial phase of this project should be sufficient to meet drinking water demands and fire protection requirements through 2043. To meet future system demands, provisions for the following improvements have been incorporated to the preliminary design for the Year 2044 (Phase 2):
• Install an additional 2.5 mg prestressed concrete water storage tank that will be of similar dimensions, character, and configuration as the Phase 1 tank. Yard piping and valves will be installed under Phase 1 to facilitate construction of the future tank with both the Phase 1 tank and pump station remaining in service. • Increase the firm pumping capacity to 7,000 gpm from 3,500 gpm. The 2044 capacity will be accomplished by adding an identically sized pump and VFD to the Phase 1 pumping station. The Phase 1 pumping station will be developed to accommodate Phase 2 pump equipment.
• Phase 2 construction would take approximately 6 months to complete.

PHASE 3
To meet additional future system demands, provisions for the following improvements have been incorporated into the preliminary design for the Year 2058 (Phase 3):

Future demand analysis will be required to confirm actual capacity expansion requirements; however, it is anticipated that the firm pumping capacity will be increased to 9,500 gpm.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Additionally, at the time of Phase 3 development, the pump station and equipment will be over 30 years old and may require replacement of existing pumps and equipment. Future equipment replacement may increase discharge capacity and meet future demands without complete pump replacement. Since Phase 3 improvements are unknown and will likely consist of replacing existing equipment, analysis of emissions was not conducted as part of this analysis.

This assessment examines the projected gross impact to air quality posed by this Project to the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin to determine whether or not the Project remains below established air quality thresholds of significance. Figure 2-1 depicts the regional location and Figure 2-2 depicts an aerial view of the Project location and Figure 2-3 depicts the conceptual site plan.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Figure 2-1
Regional Location
D Project Location
0 Miles 100 0
Nh.tda
Na.ooal
S.cunt>I
....

Ensenada
AH
s,
so
City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Figure 2-2
Project Location
City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Figure 2-3
Facility Site Plan
a
City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

SECTION 3 - IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.1 - Significance Criteria
utilizes the CEQA and the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI to determine the significance thresholds for the proposed Project.

A potentially significant impact to air quality, as defined by the CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist Form (not included herein), would occur if the project caused one or more of the following to occur:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard;
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The SJVAPCD has established emission thresholds in their GAMAQI to determine whether a project would create any potential air quality impacts that would require further analysis in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The SJVAPCD air quality thresholds from GAMAQI are presented in Table 3-1 (SJVAPCD 2015).

Table 3-1
SJVAPCD CEQA Thresholds of Significance
Criteria
Pollutant
Significance Level
Construction
Emissions
Operational
Permitted Emissions
Operational
Non-Permitted Emissions
CO 100 tons/yr 100 tons/yr 100 tons/yr
NOx 10 tons/yr 10 tons/yr 10 tons/yr
ROG 10 tons/yr 10 tons/yr 10 tons/yr
SOx 27 tons/yr 27 tons/yr 27 tons/yr
PM10 15 tons/yr 15 tons/yr 15 tons/yr
PM2.5 15 tons/yr 15 tons/yr 15 tons/yr
Source: SJVAPCD 2015.

3.1.1 - THRESHOLD FOR AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines – Appendix G (Environmental Checklist) states that a project that would “violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation” would be considered to create significant impacts on air quality. Therefore, an ambient air quality analysis should determine whether the emissions from a project City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

would cause or contribute significantly to violations of the NAAQS or CAAQS when added to existing ambient concentrations.

Table 3-2
Federal and California Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time NAAQS CAAQS
Concentration
O3
8-hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)a 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
1-hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3)
CO
8-hour 9 ppm (10 µg/m3) 9 ppm (10 µg/m3)
1-hour 35 ppm (40 µg/m3) 20 ppm (23 µg/m3)
NO2
Annual Average 53 ppb (100 µg/m3) 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3)
1-Hour 100 ppb (188.68 µg/m3) 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3)
SO2
3-Hour 0.5 ppm (1,300 µg/m3)
24 Hour 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3) 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3)
1-Hour 75 ppb (196 µg/m3) 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3)
Particulate Matter
(PM10)
Annual Arithmetic
Mean 20 µg/m3
24-Hour 150 µg/m3 50 µg/m3
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
Annual Arithmetic
Mean 12 µg/m3 12 µg/m3
24-Hour 35 µg/m3
Sulfates 24-Hour 25 µg/m3
Pbd
Rolling Three-Month
Average 0.15 µg/m3
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m3
H2S 1-Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3)
Vinyl Chloride
(chloroethene) 24-Hour 0.010 ppm (26 µg/m3)
Visibility Reducing
particles
8 Hour (1000 to 1800
PST)
b
ppm = parts per
million
ppb = parts per billion
mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic
meter
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic
meter
Source: CARB 2024
a. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm
b. In 1989, CARB converted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standards and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are “extinction of 0.23 per kilometer” and “extinction of 0.07 per kilometer” for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

3.1.2 - THRESHOLDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
The SJVAPCD’s Guidelines state that a project result in a significant impact if it exceeds that District’s health risk notification thresholds presented in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3
Measures of Significance – Toxic Air Contaminants
Agency Level Description
Significance Thresholds Adopted for the Evaluation of Impacts Under CEQA

SJVAPCD
Carcinogens Maximally Exposed Individual risk equals or exceeds 20 in one million.

NonCarcinogens
Acute: Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1.0 for the
Maximally Exposed Individual.

Chronic: Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1.0 for
the Maximally Exposed Individual.

Source: SJVAPCD 2015

3.1.3 - GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE On December 17, 2009, SJVAPCD adopted Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA (SJVAPCD 2009); which outlined the SJVAPCD’s methodology for assessing a project’s significance for GHGs under CEQA. The following criteria was outlined in the document to determine whether a project could have a significant impact:
• Projects determined to be exempt from the requirements of CEQA would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions and would not require further environmental review, including analysis of project specific GHG emissions. Projects exempt under CEQA would be evaluated consistent with established rules and regulations governing project approval and would not be required to implement BPS.
• Projects complying with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program which avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions within the geographic area in which the project is located would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions. Such plans or programs must be specified in law or approved by the lead agency with jurisdiction over the affected resource and supported by a CEQA compliant environmental review document adopted by the lead agency. Projects complying with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program would not be required to implement BPS. • Projects implementing Best Performance Standards would not require quantification of project specific GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, such projects would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions.
• Projects not implementing Best Performance Standards would require quantification of project specific GHG emissions and demonstration that project specific GHG emissions City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

would be reduced or mitigated by at least 29%, compared to Business-as-Usual (BAU), including GHG emission reductions achieved since the 2002-2004 baseline period.

Projects achieving at least a 29% GHG emission reduction compared to BAU would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG. • Notwithstanding any of the above provisions, projects requiring preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for any other reason would require quantification of project specific GHG emissions. Projects implementing BPS or achieving at least a 29% GHG emission reduction compared to BAU would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG.

The County of Madera nor the City of Madera has developed specific thresholds for GHGs.

The SJVAPCD has developed thresholds to determine significance of a proposed project – either implement Best Performance Standards or achieve a 29% reduction from BAU (a specific numerical threshold). However, the SJVAPCD has established their BAU and baseline emissions based on the years 2002-2004 and 2020, respectively. Since the 2020 projected baseline has passed no new guidance has been approved for determining BAU and projected baseline for the next target year. Therefore, the 29% reduction from BAU cannot be applied to the subject Project in order to determine significance. Additionally, a Best Performance Standards threshold has not been established. For this Project, compliance with locally adopted climate plans will be used to determine level of significance for GHG. Therefore, the GHG analysis for this Project follows the suggestions from the Court’s ruling on the Newhall Ranch development project in order to determine significance using the project design features.

3.2 - Project Related Emissions
A cursory review of the Project emissions was conducted to demonstrate that it would not exceed established air quality emissions thresholds, pursuant to the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI.

3.2.1 - SHORT-TERM EMISSIONS
Short-term emissions are primarily from the construction of a project and would have temporary impacts on air quality.

CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions from construction worker vehicles and on-site construction equipment. CalEEMod default construction schedule and equipment was used to estimated Project emissions.

Adjustments to the CalEEMod default values were as follows:
• Land use lot acreage was adjusted to match the Project description; • Construction timeline, equipment and trips were adjusted to match the anticipated schedule; and
• The demolition Phase was removed.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Even though unmitigated emissions would be less than the air quality thresholds, the Project also must comply with required SJVAPCD’s mitigation measures to limit fugitive dust emissions. The following mitigation measures were applied in CalEEMod resulting in Mitigated emissions shown in Table 3-4:
• Water exposed area 3 times per day; and
• Reduce vehicle speed on unpaved roads.

Table 3-4 presents the Project’s short-term emissions and demonstrated that the Project’s construction activities would not exceed construction significance thresholds. Therefore, construction emissions were found to be less than significant, and no further evaluation is required. Emission calculations are available in Appendix A.

Table 3-4
Short-Term Project Emissions
Emissions Source Pollutant (tons/year)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2025 0.05 0.42 0.46 <0.005 0.06 0.04
2026 0.12 0.87 1.36 <0.005 0.07 0.04
2027 0.06 0.49 0.81 <0.005 0.04 0.03
Significance Threshold 25 25 NA 27 15 15
Is Threshold Exceeded After
Mitigation? No No No No No No
Source: QK 2025

3.2.2 - LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Long-term emissions are caused by operational mobile sources and area source emissions from the Project. The Project is the construction of a water tank and pump station and will not result in an increase of any operational emission sources above a negligible level.

Therefore, operational emissions were found to be less than significant, and no further evaluation is required.

3.2.3 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The Project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are primarily from construction equipment source activities and operational mobile and energy sources. Not all GHGs exhibit the same ability to induce climate change; as a result, GHG contributions are commonly quantified as carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) (see Appendix A). The proposed Project’s operational CO2e emissions were estimated using CalEEMod. These emissions are summarized in Table 3-5.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Table 3-5
Estimated Annual GHG Emissions (MT/Year)
Source CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total Construction Emissions 596 0.02 0.02 601
In the decade after SJVAPCD adopted their Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA, several new laws and executive orders were adopted that require additional reductions in years after 2020. For instance, Senate Bill 32 requires that GHG emissions be 40% less than 1990 levels by 2030.

More drastic still, Senate Bill 100 which was signed by the Governor recently requires 100% zero-carbon electricity by 2045. On the day SB 100 was signed into law, the Governor also signed Executive Order B-55-18 which commits California to total, economy-wide carbon neutrality by 2045. Clearly, the 2009 Guidance may be somewhat inadequate in producing a meaningful comparison by today’s standards which propose a grand vision that, if achieved, would fundamentally change how business is conducted and citizens live in the State. Thus, as discussed in the most recent updates to the Scoping Plan, objectives of the Scoping Plan affect all sectors of the economy and it no longer makes sense to evaluate GHG emissions on a project-level.

For these reasons, Project GHG emissions levels presented in Table 3-5 are primarily for disclosure purposes. The Project’s largest contributors to GHG emissions are from construction activities. Transportation fuels are, in effect, regulated by requiring providers and importers of fuel to participate in the GHG Cap-and-Trade Program and other Programs (e.g., low carbon fuel standard, renewable portfolio standard, etc.). Each sector-wide program exists within the framework of AB 32 and its descendant laws the purpose of which is to achieve GHG emissions reductions consistent with the AB 32 Scoping Plan.

The Project would generate GHGs from combustion of gasoline/diesel fuels, each of which is regulated near the top of the supply-chain. As such, each consumer in California (including those creating emissions of this Project) will have no choice but to purchase fuels produced in a way that is acceptable to the California market. Thus, Project GHG emissions will be consistent with the relevant plan (i.e., AB 32 Scoping Plan). The Project would meet its fair share of the cost to mitigate the cumulative impact of global climate change based on fuel purchases from the California market. Thus, consumers of transportation fuels are in effect regulated by higher level emissions restrictions on the producers of these sources.

Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact on applicable GHG reduction plans and the Project’s contribution to cumulative global climate change impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

3.3 - Potential Impacts on Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as locations where young children, chronically ill individuals, the elderly, or people who are more sensitive than the general population reside, such as schools, hospitals, nursing homes, and daycare centers. The nearest residential sensitive City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

receptor to the proposed Project are located adjacent to the north, south and east of the Project site.

The closest schools are James Monroe Elementary School and Nishimoto Elementary School located 0.30 miles south and west, respectively, of the Project site. The closest hospital is the Madera Hospital located 3.23 miles south and the closest assisted living facility is Madera Senior Center located 0.78 miles to the south. The nearest daycare facility is Mis Angelitos Migrant Head Start located 0.46 miles to the southwest of the Project.

Based on the predicted operational emissions and activity types, the proposed Project is not expected to affect any on-site or off-site sensitive receptors and is not expected to have any adverse impacts on any known sensitive receptor

3.4 - Potential Impacts to Visibility to Nearby Class 1 Areas Visibility impact analyses are intended for stationary sources of emissions which are subject to the PSD requirements in 40 CFR Part 60; they are not usually conducted for area sources.

Under the PSD program, all international parks, national wilderness areas and national memorial parks that exceed 5,000 acres, and of national parks that exceed 6,000 acres are designated as mandatory federal Class I areas which are provided visibility protection under the Clean Air Act. Because the Project’s PM10 emissions increases are predicted to be less than the PSD threshold levels, an impact at any Class 1 area or military/airspace operation within 100 kilometers of the Project is extremely unlikely. Therefore, based on the Project’s predicted less-than significant PM10 emissions, the Project would be expected to have a less than significant impact to visibility at any Class 1 area or military/airspace operation.

3.5 - Predicted Health Impacts
Projects are considered for potential health risks wherein a new or modified source of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) is proposed for a location near an existing residential area or other sensitive receptor when evaluating potential impacts related to HAPs.

The proposed Project would result in emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) during construction and would be located near existing residents; therefore, an assessment of the potential risk to the population attributable to emissions of hazardous air pollutants from the proposed Project is required.

To predict the potential health risk to the population attributable to emissions of HAPs from the proposed Project, ambient air concentrations were predicted with dispersion modeling to arrive at a conservative estimate of increased individual carcinogenic risk that might occur as a result of continuous exposure over the construction period for construction emissions.

Similarly, predicted concentrations were used to calculate non-cancer chronic and acute hazard indices, which are the ratio of expected exposure to acceptable exposure. The basis for evaluating potential health risks is the identification of sources with increased HAPs. HAP emissions from anticipated on-site construction activities were evaluated.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

Health risk is determined using the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP) software distributed by the CARB. HARP2 requires peak 1-hour emission rates and annualaveraged emission rates for all pollutants for each modeling source. The assumptions used to calculate the emission rates for the proposed Project are outlined below.

The most recent version of EPA’s AMS/EPA Regulatory Model – AERMOD (recompiled for the Lakes ISC-AERMOD View) was used to predict the dispersion of emissions from the proposed Project. The analysis employed all of the regulatory default AERMOD model keyword parameters, including elevated terrain options.

Diesel combustion emissions from diesel on-site construction equipment were modeled as an area source for on-site construction activity on the property. Diesel particulate matter was calculated using CalEEMod for on-site construction. A unit emission rate of one gram/second (g/sec) was input to AERMOD for each source.

A fenceline discrete receptor grid was placed around the Project site in order to evaluate residences and businesses within close proximity of the Project site. A three-tier grid was used with 25-meter fenceline spacing. The first tier extended 100 meters with 25-meter tier spacing, the second tier extended an additional 200 meters with 50 meter tier spacing and the third tier extended another 400 meters with a tier spacing of 100 meters. A total of 4,695 discrete off-site receptors were analyzed. Elevated terrain options were employed even though there is not complex terrain in the Project area. The 7.5-minute DEM terrain data for Kismet, CA and Madera, CA, were processed with AERMAP to identify elevations for the proposed Project.

SJVAPCD-provided AERMET processed meteorological datasets for the Madera monitoring station, calendar years 2018 through 2022 were input to AERMOD (SJVAPCD, 2025d). This was the most recent available dataset available at the time the modeling was conducted.

Rural dispersion parameters were used because the operation and the majority of the land surrounding the facility are considered “rural” under the Auer land use classification method (Auer, 1978).

Plot files generated by AERMOD were uploaded to the Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk Assessment Tool (ADMRT) program in the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program Version 2 (HARP2) (CARB, 2015). ADMRT post-processing was used to assess the potential for excess cancer risk and chronic and acute non-cancer effects using the most recent health effects data from the California EPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) using the OEHHA Derived Method. HARP2 site parameters were set for the mandatory minimum pathways of inhalation, homegrown gardens, soil ingestion, dermal, and mother’s milk. The non-inhalation pathways used a deposition rate of 0.02 m/s along with all other default parameters. Risk reports were generated using the derived OEHHA analysis method for carcinogenic risk and non-carcinogenic chronic and acute risk. Site parameters are included in the HARP2 output files. Total cancer risk was predicted for the inhalation pathway at each receptor. A hazard index was computed for chronic non-cancer health effects for each applicable endpoint and each receptor. A hazard index for acute non- City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

cancer health effects was not computed since DPM does not have a risk exposure level for acute risk.

SJVAPCD has set the level of significance for carcinogenic risk at twenty in one million, which is understood as the possibility of causing 20 additional cancer cases in a population of one million people. The level of significance for chronic non-cancer risk is a hazard index of 1.0.

All receptors were modeled with a 2-year exposure for construction activities.

The carcinogenic risk and the health hazard index (HI) for chronic non-cancer risk at the point of maximum impact (PMI) do not exceed the significance levels of twenty in one million (20 x 10-6) and 1.0, respectively for the proposed Project. The PMIs are identified by receptor location and risk and are provided inTable 3-6. The electronic AERMOD and HARP2 output files are provided in Appendix B.

Table 3-6
Potential Maximum Impacts Predicted by HARP
Cancer Risk Chronic Hazard
Index
Total Construction 11.42E-06 6.68E-03
SJVAPCD Threshold 20.0E-06 1.0
Exceedance? No No
Receptor # 4361 4361
UTM Easting (m) 762021.86 762021.86
UTM Northing (m) 4097727.45 4097727.45
Note: UTM = Universal Transverse Mercator
As shown above in Table 3-6, the maximum predicted cancer risk for the proposed Project is 11.42E-06. The maximum chronic non-cancer hazard index for the proposed Project is

6.68E-03. Since the PMI remained below the significance threshold for cancer and chronic risk, this Project would not have an adverse effect to any of the surrounding communities.

The potential health risk attributable to the proposed Project is determined to be less than significant based on the following conclusions:

1. Potential carcinogenic risk from the proposed Project is below the significance level of twenty in a million at each of the modeled receptors; and

2. The hazard index for the potential chronic non-cancer risk from the proposed Project is below the significance level of 1.0 at each of the modeled receptors.

3. The hazard index for the potential acute non-cancer risk was not calculated since there is no acute risk associated with DPM emission; therefore, the proposed Project is considered below the significance level.

Therefore, potential risk to the population attributable to emissions of HAPs from the proposed Project would be less than significant.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

3.6 - Odor Impacts and Mitigation
An evaluation is typically conducted for both of the following situations: 1) a potential source of objectionable odors is proposed for a location near existing sensitive receptors, and 2) sensitive receptors are proposed to be located near an existing source of objectionable odors.

The criteria for this evaluation are based on the Lead Agency’s determination of the proximity to one another of the proposed project and the sensitive receptors. A sensitive receptor is a location where human populations, especially children, senior citizens and sick persons, are present, and where there is a reasonable expectation of continuous human exposure to pollutants, according to the averaging period for ambient air quality standards, i.e. the 24-hour, 8-hour or 1-hour standards. Commercial and industrial sources are not considered sensitive receptors.

The proposed Project is not considered a source of objectionable odors or odorous compounds. Furthermore, there does not appear to be any significant source of objectionable odors in close proximity that may adversely impact the project site when it is in operation.

As such, the proposed project will not be a source of any odorous compounds nor will it likely be impacted by any odorous source.

3.7 - Impacts to Ambient Air Quality
An ambient air quality analysis, when required, determines if a proposed project has the potential to cause a violation of the ambient air quality standards or a substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality standard. As stated in the of GAMAQI (2015, p 96-97), SJVAPCD has developed screening levels for requiring an Ambient Air Quality Analysis (AAQA). The SJVAPCD recommends that an AAQA be performed for all criteria pollutants when emissions of any criteria pollutant resulting from project construction or operational activities exceed the 100 pounds per day screening level, after compliance with Rule 9510 requirements and implementation of all enforceable mitigation measures.

As demonstrated in Sections 3.2.1 Short Term Operational Emissions and 3.2.2 Long Term Operational Emissions, the Project’s potential increase to any criteria pollutant’s average daily emissions for construction and operational activities associated with this Project would not exceed 100 pounds per day. Therefore, an AAQA is not required for this Projectject.

3.8 - Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts were also evaluated; however, cumulative emissions were not quantified because no other tentative projects were found within a one-mile radius of the Proposed Project that provided enough project detail information to accurately estimate emissions. Owing to the inherently cumulative nature of air quality impacts, the threshold for whether a project would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact is currently based on whether the proposed Project would exceed established project-level thresholds. As such, a qualitative evaluation of the cumulative projects supports a finding that the Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

considerable because the proposed Project’s incremental emissions increase would be less than significant.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

SECTION 4 - CONCLUSIONS
Based on the criteria established by the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI, the proposed Project does not meet the minimum standards to require a full Air Quality Impact Analysis. Furthermore, the Project as proposed would not exceed the SJVAPCD’s criteria air pollutant emission levels and would generate less than significant air quality impacts.

City of Madera Water Tank and Pump Station Project – FAQS July 2025

SECTION 5 - REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2024. California Emissions Estimator Model tm (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.1.28
----------. 2016. “Air Toxic Hot Spots” Facility Prioritization Guidelines, Revised 2016. Final August 2016 http://www.capcoa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/CAPCOA%20Prioritization%20Guidelines%20- %20August%202016%20FINAL.pdf
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2015. Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP2) User Guide.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//toxics/harp/docs2/harp2admrtuserguide.p df.
--------. 2024. “Ambient Air Quality Standards.” July 22, 2024. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-
08/AAQS%20Table_ADA_FINAL_07222024.pdf
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2024. (Public Resources Code 21000 - 21189) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 – 15387).
---------. 2024. CEQA, Appendix G – Environmental Checklist Form, Final Text.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2020. Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL). November 13, 2020.
http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/GAMAQI-SPAL.PDF -----------. 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI). March 19, 2015. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf -----------. 2009. Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. December 17, 2009.
http://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/12-17-09/1%20CCAP%20- %20FINAL%20CEQA%20GHG%20Staff%20Report%20-%20Dec%2017%202009.pdf ----------. 2024. Air Monitoring Location Map. http://valleyair.org/aqinfo/air-monitoring.htm ----------. 2023. Meteorological Datasets for Madera 2018-2022. https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/air-dispersion-modeling/meteorologicaldata-zip-files/.

APPENDIX A

PROJECT EMISSION CALCULATIONS

Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
1 / 31
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Facility Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Facility Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated

3.11. Transmission Line (2026) - Unmitigated

3.13. Transmission Line (2027) - Unmitigated
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
2 / 31

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
3 / 31

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
4 / 31

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
5 / 31

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Madera Water Tanks
Construction Start Date 10/1/2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.90
Precipitation (days) 16.4
Location 36.989601617396445, -120.0568041111288
County Madera
City Unincorporated
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2563
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
User Defined
Industrial

1.00 User Defined Unit 10.7 800 27,319 — — —
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
6 / 31

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.20 1.03 7.16 10.3 0.02 0.27 0.34 0.61 0.25 0.08 0.33 — 2,372 2,372 0.08 0.07 1.78 2,397 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.97 2.50 21.8 22.4 0.05 0.94 2.22 3.17 0.87 0.95 1.82 — 5,638 5,638 0.22 0.08 0.05 5,664 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.79 0.67 4.79 7.47 0.02 0.18 0.25 0.39 0.17 0.11 0.22 — 1,852 1,852 0.07 0.05 0.51 1,870 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.14 0.12 0.87 1.36 < 0.005 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.03 0.02 0.04 — 307 307 0.01 0.01 0.08 310

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 1.20 1.03 7.16 10.3 0.02 0.27 0.34 0.61 0.25 0.08 0.33 — 2,372 2,372 0.08 0.07 1.78 2,397 -------------------
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
7 / 31
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.97 2.50 21.8 22.4 0.05 0.94 2.22 3.17 0.87 0.95 1.82 — 5,638 5,638 0.22 0.07 0.05 5,664 2026 1.18 1.00 7.21 11.7 0.03 0.27 0.34 0.61 0.25 0.08 0.33 — 3,312 3,312 0.12 0.08 0.05 3,339 2027 0.87 0.73 4.81 11.6 0.03 0.19 0.17 0.36 0.18 0.04 0.22 — 3,302 3,302 0.12 0.08 0.03 3,329 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.32 0.27 2.31 2.53 0.01 0.10 0.25 0.35 0.09 0.11 0.20 — 583 583 0.02 0.01 0.08 587 2026 0.79 0.67 4.79 7.47 0.02 0.18 0.21 0.39 0.17 0.05 0.22 — 1,852 1,852 0.07 0.05 0.51 1,870 2027 0.14 0.12 0.78 1.82 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.01 0.04 — 481 481 0.02 0.01 0.08 486 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.06 0.05 0.42 0.46 < 0.005 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.04 — 96.6 96.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 97.2 2026 0.14 0.12 0.87 1.36 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.04 — 307 307 0.01 0.01 0.08 310 2027 0.03 0.02 0.14 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 79.7 79.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 80.4

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.33 1.12 10.2 10.5 0.02 0.46 — 0.46 0.42 — 0.42 — 1,893 1,893 0.08 0.02 — 1,899 -------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
8 / 31
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 1.70 1.70 — 0.88 0.88 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.08 0.07 0.64 0.66 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 119 119 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 120 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.11 0.11 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.01 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 19.7 19.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.8 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 25.4 25.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.8 Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
9 / 31
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.19 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 159 159 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 166 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.66 1.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.68 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.0 10.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 10.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.27 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.66 1.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.73 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

2.91 2.45 21.6 21.9 0.05 0.94 — 0.94 0.87 — 0.87 — 5,415 5,415 0.22 0.04 — 5,434 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.12 2.12 — 0.92 0.92 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
10 / 31
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.16 0.13 1.18 1.20 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 297 297 0.01 < 0.005 — 298 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.12 0.12 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.02 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.3 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 63.6 63.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 64.6 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.19 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 159 159 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 166 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.60 3.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.66 Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
11 / 31
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.72 8.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.11 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.60 0.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.61 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.44 1.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.51 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Facility Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.99 0.83 7.09 8.59 0.02 0.29 — 0.29 0.27 — 0.27 — 1,781 1,781 0.07 0.01 — 1,787 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.06 0.05 0.43 0.52 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 108 108 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 108 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
12 / 31
Off-Roa 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.9 d
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.22 0.21 0.15 1.55 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 254 254 0.01 0.01 0.03 258 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.39 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 318 318 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 332 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.9 15.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 16.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.3 19.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 20.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.64 2.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.68 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.20 3.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.34 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Facility Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
------------------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
13 / 31
Off-Roa
Equipment

0.95 0.80 6.71 8.54 0.02 0.27 — 0.27 0.25 — 0.25 — 1,781 1,781 0.07 0.01 — 1,787 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.95 0.80 6.71 8.54 0.02 0.27 — 0.27 0.25 — 0.25 — 1,781 1,781 0.07 0.01 — 1,787 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.51 0.43 3.58 4.56 0.01 0.14 — 0.14 0.13 — 0.13 — 951 951 0.04 0.01 — 955 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.09 0.08 0.65 0.83 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 158 158 0.01 < 0.005 — 158 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.24 0.22 0.11 1.66 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 279 279 0.01 0.01 0.98 284 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.35 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 312 312 < 0.005 0.04 0.80 326 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
14 / 31
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.21 0.20 0.13 1.43 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 249 249 0.01 0.01 0.03 253 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.37 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 313 313 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 326 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 137 137 0.01 0.01 0.23 140 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.19 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 167 167 < 0.005 0.02 0.18 174 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 27.6 27.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 28.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.43 0.37 3.27 7.25 0.01 0.14 — 0.14 0.13 — 0.13 — 1,243 1,243 0.05 0.01 — 1,247 Paving 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
15 / 31
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.02 0.21 0.46 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 78.3 78.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.6 Paving 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.0 13.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.0 Paving < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.7 36.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 37.3 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 306 306 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 319 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.38 2.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.42 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.3 19.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 20.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
16 / 31
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.39 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.40 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.19 3.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.33 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Transmission Line (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.83 0.70 4.78 11.2 0.03 0.21 — 0.21 0.19 — 0.19 — 2,859 2,859 0.12 0.02 — 2,869 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.13 0.86 2.01 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 515 515 0.02 < 0.005 — 516 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.02 0.16 0.37 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 85.2 85.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 85.5 -------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
17 / 31
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 62.3 62.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 63.3 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.47 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 391 391 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 407 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.6 11.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.8 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 70.3 70.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.08 73.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.92 1.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.95 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.6 11.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 12.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Transmission Line (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
18 / 31
Off-Roa
Equipment

0.80 0.67 4.34 11.2 0.03 0.19 — 0.19 0.17 — 0.17 — 2,858 2,858 0.12 0.02 — 2,868 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.09 0.08 0.50 1.29 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 330 330 0.01 < 0.005 — 331 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.01 0.09 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 54.6 54.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 54.8 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 61.1 61.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 62.1 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.45 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 383 383 < 0.005 0.06 0.02 399 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.28 7.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.40 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.2 44.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 46.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
19 / 31
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.23 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.31 7.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.64 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
20 / 31
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
21 / 31
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/1/2025 10/31/2025 5.00 23.0 — Grading Grading 11/1/2025 11/30/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Facility Construction Building Construction 12/1/2025 9/30/2026 5.00 218 — Paving Paving 3/1/2027 3/31/2027 5.00 23.0 —
Transmission Line Trenching 10/1/2026 2/28/2027 5.00 107 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
22 / 31
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 150 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 300 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 150 0.37
Facility Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Facility Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Facility Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Facility Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 150 0.37
Facility Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 150 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 101 0.38
Transmission Line Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 300 0.38 Transmission Line Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 150 0.37
Transmission Line Bore/Drill Rigs Diesel Average 1.00 2.00 300 0.50 Transmission Line Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 120 0.38

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 5.00 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
23 / 31
Site Preparation Vendor 4.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 12.5 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 4.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Facility Construction — — — —
Facility Construction Worker 50.0 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Facility Construction Vendor 8.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Facility Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Facility Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 7.50 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 8.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Transmission Line — — — —
Transmission Line Worker 12.5 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Transmission Line Vendor 10.0 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Transmission Line Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Transmission Line Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
24 / 31
Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%
Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 25 mph 44% 44%

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 11.5 0.00 —
Grading — — 40.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
User Defined Industrial 1.50 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
25 / 31
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.2 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 1.15 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
26 / 31
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
27 / 31
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 80.0
AQ-PM 89.3
AQ-DPM 10.3
Drinking Water 72.3
Lead Risk Housing 40.7
Pesticides 80.3
Toxic Releases 55.8
Traffic 13.2
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 51.0
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
28 / 31
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 10.2
Impaired Water Bodies 51.2
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 90.3
Cardio-vascular 99.6
Low Birth Weights 52.5
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 83.0
Housing 62.8
Linguistic 43.9
Poverty 63.0
Unemployment 90.6

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 23.36712434
Employed 30.46323624
Median HI 42.02489414
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 29.93712306
High school enrollment 24.98395996
Preschool enrollment 14.88515334
Transportation —
Auto Access 37.4566919
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
29 / 31
Active commuting 2.515077634
Social —
2-parent households 42.44835108
Voting 42.37135891
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 92.05697421
Park access 8.122674195
Retail density 5.363788015
Supermarket access 14.14089568
Tree canopy 6.480174516
Housing —
Homeownership 65.25086616
Housing habitability 54.01000898
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 47.24752983 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 51.96971641
Uncrowded housing 22.40472219
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 31.56679071
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 5.4
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 40.3
Cognitively Disabled 14.5
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
30 / 31
Physically Disabled 57.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 6.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 7.3
Elderly 60.0
English Speaking 54.4
Foreign-born 33.3
Outdoor Workers 4.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
Impervious Surface Cover 92.8
Traffic Density 4.8
Traffic Access 0.0
Other Indices—
Hardship 73.2
Other Decision Support—
2016 Voting 25.3
Madera Water Tanks Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
31 / 31

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 78.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 23.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Estimates based on site layout
Construction: Construction Phases Estimated Schedule based on Phase 1 timeline of 18 months Construction: Off-Road Equipment Equipment listing based on defaults and similar projects Construction: Trips and VMT Worker trips based on defaults and project estimates Construction: Paving Estimated half the tank area will be paved with asphalt Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
1 / 21
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027) - Unmitigated

3.3. Facility Construction (2027) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
2 / 21

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
3 / 21

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
4 / 21

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Madera Water Tanks Phase 2
Construction Start Date 10/1/2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.90
Precipitation (days) 16.4
Location 36.989601617396445, -120.0568041111288
County Madera
City Unincorporated
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2563
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
User Defined
Industrial

1.00 User Defined Unit 1.50 0.00 0.00 — — —
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
5 / 21

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.82 0.70 5.76 7.84 0.02 0.22 0.24 0.45 0.20 0.06 0.26 — 2,029 2,029 0.07 0.06 1.25 2,052 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.27 0.23 1.94 2.63 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.15 0.07 0.02 0.09 — 684 684 0.02 0.02 0.18 691 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.05 0.04 0.35 0.48 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 — 113 113 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 114

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.82 0.70 5.76 7.84 0.02 0.22 0.24 0.45 0.20 0.06 0.26 — 2,029 2,029 0.07 0.06 1.25 2,052 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
6 / 21
2027 0.27 0.23 1.94 2.63 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.15 0.07 0.02 0.09 — 684 684 0.02 0.02 0.18 691 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2027 0.05 0.04 0.35 0.48 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 — 113 113 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 114

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.14 0.12 1.18 2.86 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 489 489 0.02 < 0.005 — 490 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 14.7 14.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.8 -------------------
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
7 / 21
Dust — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.44 2.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.45 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 41.0 41.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 41.7 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.17 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 153 153 < 0.005 0.02 0.36 160 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.14 1.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.16 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.61 4.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.82 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.19 0.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
8 / 21
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.76 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.80 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Facility Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.67 0.57 5.37 6.82 0.01 0.21 — 0.21 0.20 — 0.20 — 1,559 1,559 0.06 0.01 — 1,565 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.22 0.19 1.76 2.24 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.06 — 0.06 — 513 513 0.02 < 0.005 — 514 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.04 0.03 0.32 0.41 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 84.9 84.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 85.2 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
9 / 21
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 164 164 0.01 0.01 0.54 167 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.33 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 306 306 < 0.005 0.04 0.71 320 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 49.8 49.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 50.6 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 101 101 < 0.005 0.01 0.10 105 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.24 8.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.38 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.7 16.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 17.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
10 / 21
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
11 / 21
Sequest——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————

5. Activity Data
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
12 / 21

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/1/2027 4/15/2027 5.00 11.0 — Facility Construction Building Construction 4/16/2027 9/30/2027 5.00 120 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 71.0 0.37 Site Preparation Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 4.00 120 0.38 Site Preparation Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 4.00 100 0.20 Facility Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 367 0.29 Facility Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 4.00 82.0 0.20 Facility Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 1.00 150 0.37
Facility Construction Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 1.00 300 0.38 Facility Construction Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 1.00 250 0.40 Facility Construction Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 2.00 120 0.38 Facility Construction Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 4.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
13 / 21
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Facility Construction — — — —
Facility Construction Worker 30.0 7.10 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Facility Construction Vendor 8.00 12.8 HHDT,MHDT
Facility Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Facility Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%
Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 25 mph 44% 44%

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 0.00 0.00 —

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
14 / 21
Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
User Defined Industrial 1.50 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2027 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
15 / 21

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.2 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 1.15 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
16 / 21
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 80.0
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
17 / 21
AQ-PM 89.3
AQ-DPM 10.3
Drinking Water 72.3
Lead Risk Housing 40.7
Pesticides 80.3
Toxic Releases 55.8
Traffic 13.2
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 51.0
Groundwater 0.00
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 10.2
Impaired Water Bodies 51.2
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 90.3
Cardio-vascular 99.6
Low Birth Weights 52.5
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 83.0
Housing 62.8
Linguistic 43.9
Poverty 63.0
Unemployment 90.6

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
18 / 21
Above Poverty 23.36712434
Employed 30.46323624
Median HI 42.02489414
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 29.93712306
High school enrollment 24.98395996
Preschool enrollment 14.88515334
Transportation —
Auto Access 37.4566919
Active commuting 2.515077634
Social —
2-parent households 42.44835108
Voting 42.37135891
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 92.05697421
Park access 8.122674195
Retail density 5.363788015
Supermarket access 14.14089568
Tree canopy 6.480174516
Housing —
Homeownership 65.25086616
Housing habitability 54.01000898
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 47.24752983 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 51.96971641
Uncrowded housing 22.40472219
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 31.56679071
Arthritis 0.0
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
19 / 21
Asthma ER Admissions 5.4
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 40.3
Cognitively Disabled 14.5
Physically Disabled 57.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 6.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 7.3
Elderly 60.0
English Speaking 54.4
Foreign-born 33.3
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
20 / 21
Outdoor Workers 4.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 92.8
Traffic Density 4.8
Traffic Access 0.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 73.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 25.3

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 78.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 23.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Madera Water Tanks Phase 2 Detailed Report, 7/17/2025
21 / 21
Screen Justification
Land Use Estimates based on site layout
Construction: Construction Phases Estimated Schedule based on Phase 2 timeline of 6 months Construction: Off-Road Equipment Equipment listing based on defaults and similar projects Construction: Trips and VMT Worker trips based on defaults and project estimates Construction: Paving none

APPENDIX B

HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT MODELING FILES
not included in PDF

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

CITY OF MADERA

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK

PROJECT
JUNE 2025

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK

PROJECT
Prepared for:

Carollo Engineers, Inc.
1401 Fulton Street, Suite 802
Fresno, CA 93721
Contact Person: Justin Peterson
Consultant:
5080 California Avenue, Suite 220
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Contact: Jaymie Brauer
Phone: (661) 616-2600
June 2025
© Copyright by Quad Knopf, Inc.

Unauthorized use prohibited.

Project #180483
Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 1 - Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 - Species Considered in this Document.............................................................................................1-1

1.2 - Consultation to Date ..............................................................................................................................1-1

1.3 - Proposed Action ......................................................................................................................................1-2

1.3.1 - Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action..................................................................1-2

1.3.2 - Project Location.....................................................................................................................1-2

1.3.3 - Project Description...............................................................................................................1-2

1.3.4 - Work Period ............................................................................................................................1-2

1.3.5 - Construction............................................................................................................................1-2

1.3.6 - Interrelated and Interdependent Actions....................................................................1-2 There are no interrelated or interdependent actions associated with the proposed Action.......................................................................................................................................................1-2

1.3.7 - General Conservation Measures......................................................................................1-2 SECTION 2 - Regulatory Setting............................................................................................................. 2-5 SECTION 3 - Methods ................................................................................................................................ 3-9

3.1 - Definitions..................................................................................................................................................3-9

3.1.1 - Action Area ..............................................................................................................................3-9

3.1.2 - Biological Survey Area .....................................................................................................3-10

3.2 - Literature Review and Database Analysis.....................................................................................3-1

3.3 - Biological Field Surveys........................................................................................................................3-2

3.4 - Resource Agency Coordination and Professional Contacts....................................................3-2 SECTION 4 - Environmental Baseline .................................................................................................. 4-2

4.1 - Physical Characteristics........................................................................................................................4-2

4.1.1 - Topography .............................................................................................................................4-2

4.1.2 - Climate.......................................................................................................................................4-3

4.1.3 - Regional Land Use.................................................................................................................4-3

4.1.4 - Soils.............................................................................................................................................4-3

4.1.5 - Hydrology and Drainage Patterns ..................................................................................4-4

4.2 - Vegetation and Other Land Cover.....................................................................................................4-4

4.2.1 - Habitats Within the Action Area......................................................................................4-4

4.2.2 - Habitats Surrounding the Action Area..........................................................................4-1

4.3 - General Plant Observations.................................................................................................................4-1

4.4 - General Wildlife Observations ...........................................................................................................4-2

4.5 - Aquatic Resources and Fish Habitat................................................................................................4-2

4.6 - Designated Critical Habitat in the Action Area............................................................................4-2

4.6.1 - Critical Habitat .......................................................................................................................4-2 Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page ii

4.6.2 - Habitat Connectivity/Movement Corridors................................................................4-3 SECTION 5 - Species and Critical Habitat Considered .................................................................... 5-3

5.1 - Species within the Region....................................................................................................................5-3

5.1.1 - Federally Listed Species within the Region ................................................................5-4

5.1.2 - Additional State Listed Species within the Region...................................................5-5

5.2 - Discussion of Federally Listed Species with the Potential to Occur....................................5-6

5.3 - Discussion of State Listed Species with the Potential to Occur.............................................5-6 SECTION 6 - Effects Analysis .................................................................................................................. 6-1

6.1 - Project Effects on Affected Species ..................................................................................................6-1

6.1.1 - Effects on Federally and State Listed Plant Species.................................................6-1

6.1.2 - Effects on Federally and State Listed Wildlife Species ...........................................6-1

6.1.3 - Effects on Additional State Listed Wildlife Species..................................................6-1

6.1.4 - Nest Project Effects on Species ........................................................................................6-2

6.2 - Effects from Interrelated Actions .....................................................................................................6-2

6.3 - Cumulative Effects ..................................................................................................................................6-3 SECTION 7 - Conclusions and Determinations ................................................................................. 7-1

7.1 - Conclusions................................................................................................................................................7-1

7.2 - Determination ..........................................................................................................................................7-1 SECTION 8 - References ............................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 9 - List of Preparers .................................................................................................................... 1 Appendices
Appendix A – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service IPaC, California Department of Fish and Wildlife CNDDB, and California Native Plant Society Threatened and Endangered Species List
Appendix B – Special-Status Species Evaluation Table
Appendix C – Representative Photographs
Appendix D – Plants and Wildlife Species Observed On Site List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Regional Location Map..............................................................................................................1-3 Figure 1-2 Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................................1-1 Figure 1-3 Water Storage Site Plan............................................................................................................1-1 Figure 3-1 Biological Survey Area ..............................................................................................................3-1 Figure 4-1 NHD and NWI ...............................................................................................................................4-1 Figure 5-1 Swainson’s Hawk Observation ..............................................................................................5-1

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page iii
List of Tables
Table 5-1 Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plant and Wildlife Species Evaluated for Their.......................................................................................................................................................................5-4 Table 5-2 Additional State Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plant and Wildlife Species Evaluated for.......................................................................................................................................................5-5 Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page iv
List of Abbreviated Terms
APN Accessor’s Parcel Number
BA Biological Assessment
BSA Biological Study Area
Cal-IPC California Invasive Species Council
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
City City of Madera
CM Conservation Measure
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNPPA California Native Plant Protection Act
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CWA Clean Water Act
CWHR California Wildlife Habitat Relationships
EFH Essential Fisheries Habitat
FE Federal Endangered Species
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FP Fully Protected
FPT Federal Proposed Threatened
FT Federal Threatened Species
IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHD National Hydrology Dataset
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetland Inventory
ROW Right of Way
SCE California Candidate Endangered
SE California Endangered Species
SOI Sphere of Influence
SR California State Listed – Rare
SSC CDFW Species of Special Concern
ST California Threatened Species
USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Services
USGS United States Geological Services
WL CDFW Watch List
Biological Assessment Executive Summary

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this Biological Assessment is to provide technical information to review the proposed project in sufficient detail to determine to what extent the proposed project may potentially impact federally listed threatened, endangered, or proposed species. This Biological Assessment is prepared in accordance with 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 402, legal requirements found in Section 7 (a)(2) of the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA; 16 United States Code (USC) 1536(c)). For the purposes of this report, State listed species will also be analyzed for impacts by the proposed project. The document presents technical information upon which later decisions regarding project effects are developed.

The City of Madera (City; Applicant) proposes to develop a 3-acre property, (Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 038-030-031), located in Madera, California, with water tanks and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. The proposed water tank site is located in the City of Madera Sphere of Influence (SOI), generally bounded by Lake Street to the east, Ellis Street to the south, State Highway 99 to the west, and Martin Street to the north. The water tank site is proposed to be connected via a pipeline that will be placed within the City of Madera right-of-way (ROW).

The pipeline route will follow ROW south along Lake Street, west along Ellis Street, and northwest along Sharon Boulevard. This pipeline will connect to an existing well site located at APN 013-280-001.

For the purpose of this Biological Assessment the “Action Area” refers to the areas where temporary and permanent impacts due to Project Activities will occur. The Action Area refers to the water tank site and the pipeline route that will be placed within the City of Madera ROW. The Action Area are situated among urban development and nonnative grassland habitat.

The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) database, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) database were reviewed to assess whether occurrences of federally listed species or USFWS Critical Habitat Units have been documented within the Action Area and USGS nine-quadrangles surrounding the Project.

The Biological Survey Area (BSA) was assessed to evaluate the presence of federally protected plant and wildlife species and their habitat. The BSA includes the Action Area and a 500-foot survey buffer surrounding the Action Area. Habitat within the BSA include urban, and non-native annual grassland.

There were thirteen federally listed plant and wildlife identified in the CNDDB, CNPS, and IPaC database searches of the nine quadrangles surrounding the Project. There is no suitable habitat that could support federally listed and protected plant or wildlife species within the Action Area.

Biological Assessment Executive Summary

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 2
There are fifteen State listed wildlife species identified in the CNDDB, CNPS, and IPaC database searches of the nine quadrangles surround the Project, ten of which are also federally listed. None of the five identified additional State listed species were reported within the Action Area based on database records or during the site survey. There is no suitable habitat that could support State listed or protected wildlife or plant species within the Action Area, but the surrounding BSA may support the State listed Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni).

The Swainson’s hawk and other migratory nesting birds are identified as potentially occurring outside of the Action Area but within the BSA. Project activities could have direct impacts on these species, including direct mortality of individuals from vehicle strikes and modified behavior due to the increase in human activity during construction activities if they occur during the nesting season. Other direct impacts to individuals in the vicinity could result from poisoning due to ingestion of oil or antifreeze leaked from construction vehicles.

Indirect impacts include changes in soil moisture and chemistry inducing changes in the local plant community on which the prey base species relies. Implementation of conservation measures and species-specific avoidance and minimization measures would reduce impacts of the Project stressors to Swainson’s hawk, and other migratory nesting birds to a level that would be less than significant.

The Project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the Swainson’s hawk and no cumulative effects will occur if the recommended avoidance measures are implemented. The Action will result in no effect to wetlands or non-wetland waters.

Biological Assessment Introduction

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-1
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Biological Assessment (BA) is to review the Madera Water Storage Tank Project (Project) in sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed Action may affect any of the 4 federally listed plant species, 9 federally listed wildlife species, and 5 State listed wildlife species listed below. This BA is prepared in accordance with legal requirements set forth under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1536 (c)).

1.1 - Species Considered in this Document
Federally listed species considered in this document (Note species denoted with an asterisk (*) are also State listed as threatened, endangered, or sensitive species):
• Succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris succulenta) – Threatened* • San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis) – Threatened* • hairy Orcutt grass (Orcuttia pilosa) – Threatened*
• Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei) – Endangered*
• monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) – Proposed Threatened • valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) – Threatened
• vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) – Threatened • California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) – Threatened* • western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) – Proposed Threatened* • northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) - Proposed Threatened* • blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia sila) – Endangered* • Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis) – Endangered* • San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) – Endangered* Additional State listed species considered in this document:
• coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) – California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Species of Special Concern (SSC)
• tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) – Threatened • western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia ssp. hypugaea) – State Candidate • Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) – Threatened
• American badger (Taxidea taxus) – CDFW SSC

1.2 - Consultation to Date
There has been no consultation to date.

Biological Assessment Introduction

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-2

1.3 - Proposed Action

1.3.1 - PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
To meet the increasing and future water demands, the City of Madera proposes to construct a water supply and distribution facility to conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents.

1.3.2 - PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed water tank site is located in the City of Madera Sphere of Influence (SOI) generally bounded by Lake Street to the east, Ellis Street to the south, and Martin Street to the north and State Highway 99 to the west (Figure 1-1). The Action Area will consist of the construction of a water storage tank, located on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 038-030- 031 and approximately 2.5-miles for a water pipeline (Figure 1-2 and Figure 1-3). The pipeline will be placed within City of Madera right-of-way (ROW) south along Lake Street, west along Ellis Street, and northwest along Sharon Boulevard. This pipeline will connect to an existing well site located at APN 013-280-001.

1.3.3 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project will include construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents. The initial phase (Phase 1) includes the development of a water storage tank and a pipeline connection to an existing water well site.

1.3.4 - WORK PERIOD
Construction of the water storage tank and pipeline would occur over a maximum of 24 months.

1.3.5 - CONSTRUCTION
It is anticipated that the following pieces of equipment would be used during construction activities:
• Roller
• Loaded trucks
• Excavator
• Generator
• Service truck
• Air compressor
Biological Assessment Introduction

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-3
Figure 1-1
Regional Location Map
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
HARNEY
6, Project Location
0 Miles 100 ( ~)
N"lhsAI'
FcrceBa•
.......

Nak>nal
So!CUl' lt\'
s,~
Ensenada
TI..
a
' l
rAH
,,
\
G
Biological Assessment Introduction

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-1
Figure 1-2
Vicinity Map
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-1
Figure 1-3
Water Storage Site Plan
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-2

1.3.6 - INTERRELATED AND INTERDEPENDENT ACTIONS
There are no interrelated or interdependent actions associated with the proposed Action.

1.3.7 - GENERAL CONSERVATION MEASURES
This section describes biological conservation measures (CM) that will be implemented as part of the Project to further avoid and minimize potential effects on federal and State listed and other special-status species. These include general conservation measures that will be incorporated into the Project design and specific conservation measures incorporated for the protection of federal and State listed, and other sensitive species (special-status) expected to occur adjacent to the Action Area. Implementation of these measures will further protect these species from potential indirect effects during the construction phase of the Project.

CM-BIO-1: Preconstruction surveys will be conducted prior to Project Activities to verify if special-status or sensitive species are present within 500 feet of the Project. The focal species shall include Swainson’s hawk and other migratory nesting birds.

CM-BIO-2: If construction activities occur between February 1 and September 15, predisturbance surveys for active raptor and migratory bird nests must be conducted no more than 10 days prior to the commencement of disturbance. Surveys shall follow USFWS and CDFW guidance and/or protocols, as applicable. If no active nests or nesting birds are identified, then Project construction activities may proceed, and no further mitigation measures for nesting birds are required. If active nest(s) are identified, the active nest(s) should be continuously surveyed for the first 24 hours after detection to establish a behavioral baseline prior to any construction-related activities.

Once construction commences, all nests shall be continuously monitored to detect any behavioral changes because of the Project (i.e., nest avoidance or abandonment). If behavioral changes are observed, the work causing that change shall cease until the applicant's qualified biologist consults with the CDFW and/or the USFWS and the qualified biologist used by the applicant implements the recommended measures. During such times as the qualified biological monitor is not on site while construction workers are on site, a minimum non-disturbance buffer of 250 feet shall be established around active nests and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around the nests of raptors until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, and any adult birds are no longer occupying the nest. Deviations from these no-disturbance buffers may be implemented if the qualified biologist concludes that work within the buffer area would not cause nest avoidance or abandonment (e.g., when the disturbance area would be concealed from a nest site by topography) provided that notification of this determination of a deviation in the nodisturbance buffer is provided by the qualified biologist no less than 15 days in advance to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the United States Fish and Wildlife.

Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-3
CM-BIO-3: When an active raptor nest is identified, and when construction activities occur within the avoidance buffer of the nest, a qualified biologist shall conduct a daily site visit to observe all construction-related activities and or activity near an active nest. If construction activities are not occurring within the avoidance buffer of a nest, these resources should be checked during a weekly site visit to observe activity. The qualified biologist should be familiar will all potential species and their sign (i.e., tracks, scat, etc.) that have the potential to occur within the proposed Action Area. The qualified biologist will prepare a daily datasheet to record all construction-related activities that occurred and activity at an active nest or den and document the progress of the project with photographs.

CM-BIO-4: If construction work occurs after August 30 and ends before March 1 (outside of the breeding season), impacts to the Swainson's hawk would be avoided. Surveys would not be required for work conducted during this part of the year, and no further mitigation for nest disturbance is required.

1. Protocol Surveys. For work that begins between March 1 and August 30, a qualified biologist with expertise in Swainson's hawk shall conduct protocol surveys of potential nesting habitat within 0.5 mile of any construction activities prior to initiation of such activities. The project applicant shall conduct a protocol-level survey in conformance with the "Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley," Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
(https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/survey-protocols#377281284-birds) (May 31, 2000) hereby incorporated by reference. This protocol prescribes minimum standards for survey equipment, mode of survey, angle and distance to tree, speed, visual and audible clues, distractions, notes and observations, and timing of surveys.

A written report with the pre-construction survey results must be provided to the Planning Department and CDFW within 30 days of the commencement of construction-related activities. The report shall include: the date of the report, authors and affiliations, contact information, introduction, methods, study location, including map, results, discussion, and literature cited.

If the required protocol surveys show there are no active Swainson's hawk nests within the 0.5-mile of construction activities, then no further mitigation for nest disturbance will be required. If protocol surveys show that there are no active Swainson's hawk nests within 10 miles of the site, then no further mitigation for foraging impacts will be required.

2. Nest Avoidance. If nesting Swainson's hawks are observed within 0.5-mile of the project site during the protocol surveys, the project applicant must implement CDFW pre-approved mitigation measures to avoid nest impacts during construction.

These measures include:

Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 1-4
a) All project-related activities with the potential to cause nest abandonment or forced fledging of young shall be avoided until the young have fledged. b) If disturbances, habitat conversions, or other project-related activities, that may cause nest abandonment or forced fledging, are necessary, within the nest protection buffer zone (0.5-mile), monitoring of the nest site by a qualified raptor biologist, funded by the project applicant, shall be required to determine if the nest is abandoned. If the nest is abandoned, but the nestlings are still alive, the project proponent is required to fund the recovery and hacking, that is the controlled release of captive reared young, of the nestling.
c) The project applicant shall be required to coordinate with CDFW to determine if project activities with the potential to cause disturbance to nesting Swainson's hawks within the 0.5-mile buffer may proceed with a reduced nest buffer and an approved biological monitor. CDFW may authorize a reduced nest buffer with the presence of a monitoring biologist during construction activities to ensure that the nest is not disturbed.

Routine disturbances such as agricultural activities, commuter traffic, and routine maintenance activities within 0.5-mile of an active nest are not prohibited.

CM-BIO-5. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, all construction personnel shall attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Training program developed by a qualified biologist. Any personnel associated with construction that did not attend the initial training shall be trained by the authorized biologist or authorized construction personnel prior to working within the Action Area. Any employee responsible for the operations and maintenance or decommissioning of Project facilities shall attend the Worker Environmental Awareness Training program prior to starting work on the Project. All on-site workers shall attend training on an annual basis. The Program shall be developed and presented by the Project qualified biologist(s) or designee approved by the qualified biologist(s). The program shall include information about the life histories of State or federally listed species with potential to occur on the Action area, their legal status, course of action should these species be encountered on-site, and avoidance and minimization measures to protect these species. The training shall include the following components:

1. Information about the life history and identification of federally listed plant and wildlife species, as well as other special-status plant and wildlife species that may be affected by project activities. The program shall present the legal protection status of each such species, the definition of “take” under the Federal Endangered Species Act and California Endangered Species Act, measures the Project proponent/operator shall implement to protect the species, reporting requirements, specific measures for workers to avoid take of special-status plant and wildlife species, and penalties for violation of Project permits or other Project-related environmental measures.

2. An acknowledgement form signed by each worker indicating that the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education program has been completed shall be kept on file at the construction site.

Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 2-5

3. A copy of the training transcript and/or training video, as well as a list of the names of all personnel who attended the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education program, and signed acknowledgement forms shall be submitted to the contractor’s construction manager or on-site superintendent.

4. A copy of the training transcript, training video or informational binder for specific procedures shall be kept available for all personnel to review and be familiar with, as necessary.

5. The construction crews and contractor(s) shall be responsible for preventing unauthorized impacts from Project activities to sensitive biological resources that are outside the areas defined as subject to impacts by Project permits. Unauthorized impacts may result in Project stoppage, and/or fines depending on the impact and coordination with the appropriate State or federal biological agency.

CM-BIO-6: Prior to the issuance of building permits, if irrigation water drainages cannot be avoided, specific impacts on the features shall be quantified by a water delineation. A Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 Water Quality Certification and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be obtained, or confirmation received from these agencies that regulatory permits are not required.

SECTION 2 - REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (USC, Title 16, Sections 1531 -1543) The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and subsequent amendments provide guidance for the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The FESA defines species as threatened or endangered and provides regulatory protection for listed species. The FESA provides a program for the conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species as well as the protection of designated critical habitat that USFWS determines is required for the survival and recovery of listed species.

Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited under the FESA. Although take of a listed species is prohibited, it is allowed when it is incidental to an otherwise legal activity. Section 9 prohibits take of listed species of fish, wildlife, and plants without special exemption. The definition of “harm” includes significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns related to breeding, feeding, or shelter. “Harass” is defined as actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species by disrupting normal behavioral patterns related to breeding, feeding, and shelter.

Section 7 of the FESA requires federal agencies, in consultation with and assistance from the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate, to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction of adverse modification of critical habitat for these species. The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) share responsibilities for administering the FESA. Regulations governing interagency Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 2-6
cooperation under Section 7 are found in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 50, Part 402. If an activity could result in "take" of a listed species as an incident of an otherwise lawful activity, then a biological opinion can be issued with an incidental take statement that exempts the activity from FESA's take prohibitions.

Section 10 provides a means whereby a nonfederal action with the potential to result in take of a listed species can be allowed under an incidental take permit. Application procedures are found at CFR Title 50, Sections 13 and 17 for species under the jurisdiction of USFWS and CFR, Title 50, Sections 217, 220, and 222 for species under the jurisdiction of NMFS. Section 10 would apply to the Project if take of a species (as defined in Section 9) were determined to occur.

Section 4(a)(3) and (b)(2) of the FESA requires the designation of critical habitat to the maximum extent possible and prudent based on the best available scientific data and after considering the economic impacts of any designations. Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the FESA: 1) areas within the geographic range of a species that are occupied by individuals of that species and contain the primary constituent elements (physical and biological features) essential to the conservation of the species, thus warranting special management consideration or protection; and 2) areas outside of the geographic range of a species at the time of listing but that are considered essential to the conservation of the species.

California Endangered Species Act (California Fish and Game Code Section 2050 et seq.) The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) establishes the policy of the State to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. The CESA mandates that State agencies should not approve Projects that would jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. For Projects that would result in take of a species listed under the CESA, a project proponent would need to obtain a take permit under Section 2081(b). Alternatively, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has the option of issuing a Consistency Determination (Section 2080.1) for projects that would affect a species listed under both the CESA and the FESA, as long as compliance with the FESA would satisfy the “fully mitigate” standard of CESA, and other applicable conditions.

California Native Plant Protection Act
The California Native Plant Protection Act (CNPPA) protects endangered and rare species, subspecies, and varieties of wild plants native to California. A “native plant” is defined as a plant growing in a wild, uncultivated state normally found native to the vegetation of California. The CNPPA affords the California Fish and Game Commission the authority to designate native plants as endangered or rare, and to require permits for collecting, transporting, or selling such plants.

Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 2-7
California Fully Protected Species
Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 of Fish and Game Code prohibit the “take” of any fully protected bird, mammal, reptile and amphibian, or fish species, respectively. Except as provided in Sections 2081.7 or 2835, fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the species for the protection of livestock.

California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) establishes the State policy to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA applies to actions directly undertaken, financed, or permitted by State, County, or local lead agencies.

The purpose of CEQA is to identify the significant effects on the environment from a project or other action and then to identify lower/no impact alternatives to a project and indicate the manner in which significant effects can be mitigated or avoided. The mechanism to ensure protection is the preparation and review of an environmental document that identifies the existing environmental conditions, describes a proposed action or project, assesses the types and significance of impacts on the environment, and identifies mitigation that would mitigate, reduce, or avoid impacts where feasible. If significant impacts cannot be mitigated, CEQA requires the lead agency to reject the project or make findings of fact and issue a statement of overriding considerations. Various responsible and trustee agencies provide review, comments, and input into the decision-making process. Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines identifies sensitive biological resources that must be addressed and fully analyzed, which include wetlands, sensitive natural communities, special-status plant and wildlife species, migratory corridors and nursery sites, and other biological resources of local, regional, State, and federal importance.

Clean Water Act, Sections 401 and 404
The Clean Water Act (CWA) is a federal law that protects the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by preventing pollutants, providing assistance for the improvement of wastewater treatment, and maintaining the integrity of wetlands. The Environmental Protection Agency defines the CWA as a law that "...establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters." The State of California regulates water quality related to discharge of fill material into waters of the State pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The local Regional Water Quality Control Board has jurisdiction over all those areas defined as jurisdictional under Section 404 of the CWA and regulates water quality for all waters of the State. The United States Army Corps of Engineers, under Section 404 of the CWA, regulates discharges of dredged or fill material in "waters of the United States." In addition to designated and traditional navigable waters, this term includes “waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 2-8
mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: (1) which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or (2) from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or (3) which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce.” Tributaries to “waters of the United States” and adjacent wetlands would also be included [33 California Federal Regulations (CFR) §328.3].

Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements
The CDFW is authorized under State Fish and Wildlife Code Sections 1600-1607 to develop mitigation measures and enter into a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements with applicants (both public and private) that propose a project that would divert or obstruct the natural flow of or change the bed, channel, or bank of any lake or stream in which there is a fish or wildlife resource. Through this agreement, the CDFW may impose conditions to limit and fully mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife resources.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), first enacted in 1918, is a series of treaties that the United States has with Great Britain (on behalf of Canada), Mexico, Japan, and the former Soviet Union that provide for international migratory bird protection. The MBTA currently includes several hundred species and includes all native birds. The MBTA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to regulate the taking of migratory birds. The act provides that it shall be unlawful, except as permitted by regulations, “to pursue, take, or kill any migratory bird, or any part, nest or egg of any such bird” (U.S. Code Title 16, Section 703). With only a few exceptions, all birds are included in this prohibition.

Executive Order 13112; Invasive Species
Executive Order 13112, February 3, 1999, established the National Invasive Species Council tasked with acting as an interdepartmental organization to centralize efforts across agencies and political boundaries toward addressing the impacts and ongoing threats of invasive species. Implementation of this Executive Order required, among other actions, limitation, or exclusion of federal funding for projects that may result in promoting the introduction or spread of invasive species (Executive Order 1999). Guidelines established by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) stipulate that FHWA funding will not be allocated for projects not in compliance with the Executive Order, and FHWA California Division will not authorize National Environmental Policy Act compliance in the absence of analysis of invasive species for such projects.

Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley The Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley (USFWS 1998) covers 34 species of plants and animals that occur in the San Joaquin Valley. The USFWS is responsible for the implementation of the recovery plan. Of the species covered, eleven species are Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 3-9
federal and/or State listed as endangered or threatened (six plants and five animals), and 23 species are candidate species or species of concern. The goal of this recovery plan is to delist the eleven endangered (of which one has been delisted) and threatened species and ensure the long-term conservation of 23 candidate species and species of special concern. An interim goal is to down-list the endangered species to threatened status.

City of Madera General Plan
CHAPTER 5: CONSERVATION ELEMENT
The Project is subject to the City of Madera General Plan (City of Madera 2009), which includes a Conservation Element chapter. This chapter provides guidance on the protection of natural resources such as water supply and quality, soils and agriculture, biology, air, climate change, energy and energy efficiency, and green building/ Low Impact Development.

The Action will implement measures such as those listed above (measures BIO-1 through BIO-3) to remain compliant with the General Plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Action would have no conflict related to any adopted local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.

Biology
Goal CON-7: Protection of special-status plant and animal species, including their habitats, in compliance with all applicable state, federal, and other laws and regulations.

Goal CON-8: A balance between the protection of special status plants and animals and the need to provide recreational opportunities and other needs.

Goal CON-9: Natural areas which are available to the public to help build knowledge and appreciation of these resources.

Goal CON-10: A revitalized Fresno River which serves as an amenity, a source of civic pride, and a catalyst for residential and commercial development.

SECTION 3 - METHODS

3.1 - Definitions

3.1.1 - ACTION AREA
The “Action Area” refers to the area where direct and indirect effects would occur. For this Project, the Action Area refers to the three-acre undeveloped parcel for the water storage tank and the 2.5-mile pipeline described in Section 1.3.3.

Biological Assessment

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 3-10

3.1.2 - BIOLOGICAL SURVEY AREA
The “Biological Survey Area” (BSA) includes the Action Area plus a 500-foot buffer surrounding the Action Area that is often required for surveys of sensitive species (Figure 3- 1).

Biological Assessment Methods

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 3-1
Figure 3-1
Biological Survey Area
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
Biological Assessment Methods

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 3-1

3.2 - Literature Review and Database Analysis
The following sources were reviewed for information on federally listed species, critical habitats, and to obtain environmental setting information in the vicinity of the proposed action:

Federally Listed Species or Critical Habitat Database Searches:
o USFWS’s Information for Planning and Consultation system (IPaC; USFWS, 2025a)
o CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW, 2025b) o California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS, 2025)
o USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS, 2025b)
o CDFW Biogeographic Information and Observation System (Bios; CDFW, 2025a) o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Habitat Mapper (NOAA, 2025)
Environmental Setting Database Searches:
o USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI; USFWS, 2025c) o U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD; USGS, 2025) o United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2025a and 2025b)
o Current and historical aerial imagery (Google LLC, 2025) Federal and State listed and special-status species lists were generated using the USFWS’ IPaC system, CDFW’s CNDDB, and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CDFW 2025a, CNPS 2025, USFWS 2025a). These lists are found in Appendix A.

For Environmental Setting Database searches the focus was on the Madera California USGS

7.5-minute quadrangle in which the Action Area is located, plus the surrounding eight quadrangles: Berenda, Kismet, Daulton, Gregg, Herndon, Biola, Gravelly Ford, and Bonita Ranch.

Much of the information in these databases is obtained opportunistically and is often focused on protected lands or on lands where development has been proposed. Neither database represents a comprehensive survey of special-status resources in the region. As such, the absence of recorded occurrences in these databases at any specific location does not preclude the possibility a special-status resource could be present. The NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Resources in California tool indicated the Action Area is within an Essential Fisheries Habitat (EFH).

The results of the database inquiries were reviewed to develop a list of special-status resources that may be present within the vicinity of the Action Area. This list was then evaluated against the existing conditions observed during the biological survey of the Action Area to determine which special-status resources have the potential to occur, and then the potential for impacts to those resources as a result of implementation of the proposed action.

These lists are found in Appendix B.

Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-2

3.3 - Biological Field Surveys
A biological survey was conducted by qualified QK Environmental Scientists Karissa Denney and Dyana Mitchell on May 25, 2025. This survey focused on characterizing vegetation associations and habitat conditions, inventorying plant and wildlife species and sign (e.g., scat, tracks, prey remains, burrows, nests, etc.), and analyzing the potential for special-status species to occur on and near the Action Area. Surveys consisted of a windshield survey along the ROW and pedestrian transects on the water storage tank parcel to provide 100 percent visual coverage of the entire Action Area and surrounding BSA. Vegetative communities present on the Project site were classified using the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) system (Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988), which categorizes communities according to the dominant species present. Plant species were identified using the nomenclature of the Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California of Higher Plants (Baldwin et al., 2012). All spatial data were recorded using Environmental Systems Research Institute Collector for ArcGIS software installed on an iPad. Site conditions were documented with representative photographs and included in Appendix C.

3.4 - Resource Agency Coordination and Professional Contacts Protected or special-status species lists were generated using the USFWS’ IPaC system, CDFW’s CNDDB, and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CDFW 2025b; CNPS 2025; USFWS 2025a). These lists are found in Appendix B.

SECTION 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
Environmental baseline refers to the condition of the listed species or its designated Critical Habitat in the Action Area without the consequences to the listed species or designated Critical Habitat caused by the Action. The environmental baseline includes the past and present impacts of all federal, State, or private actions and other human activities in the Action Area, the anticipated impacts of all proposed federal projects in the Action Area that have already undergone formal or early Section 7 consultation, and the impact of State or private actions that are contemporaneous with the consultation in process. The consequences to listed species or designated critical habitat from ongoing agency activities or existing agency facilities that are not within the agency’s discretion to modify are part of the environmental baseline (50 CFR §402.02).

4.1 - Physical Characteristics

4.1.1 - TOPOGRAPHY
The Action Area is located on the eastern floor of the San Joaquin Valley in Madera County.

The Action Area is relatively flat with little variation in topography and an elevation ranging from 263-283 feet above mean sea level.

Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-3

4.1.2 - CLIMATE
The Action Area has a Mediterranean climate, which consists of hot, dry summers and mild, wet winters. Average high temperatures range from 54.0°F in January to 98.2°F in July, with daily temperatures exceeding 100°F several days in the summer (WRCC 2025). Average low temperatures range from 35.9°F in January to 61.4°F in July. Precipitation occurs primarily as rain, most of which falls from November to April, with an average of 10.99 inches of rainfall per year. Precipitation may also occur as a dense fog during the winter, known as Tule fog. Rain rarely falls during the summer months.

4.1.3 - REGIONAL LAND USE
The Action Area is in a region dominated by urban development on the San Joaquin Valley floor. It is within the City of Madera and bordered in all directions by urban development and undeveloped land. Land use near the Action Area is a combination of residential, commercial development and undeveloped lots. Lands further from the Action Area support similar uses.

4.1.4 - SOILS
There are four soil types present within the BSA: Alamo, Cometa, Hanford, and San Joaquin (NRCS 2025).

The Alamo series consists of moderately deep to hardpan, poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium from mixed sources. Alamo soils occur in nearly level basins and drainageways on alluvial fan remnants and floodplains at elevations of 50 to 500 feet. They formed in fine textured alluvium mixed rock sources. The climate is dry subhumid with hot dry summers and cool moist winters. This soil is poorly drained, is ponded or with very slow runoff, and has very slow permeability. It is used mainly for pasture, but some areas are used for dryfarmed grains, or rice (Oryza sativa). Vegetation consists of annual grasses, forbs and weeds (NRCS 2025). The Cometa soil series consists of moderately deep, and moderately to well drained soils. These soils formed in alluvium derived from granitic rock sources. These soils occur on gently sloping, slightly dissected older stream terraces. They have very slow permeability and slow to medium runoff. This soil type is used for growing rice (Oryza sativa), vineyards, orchards, and dry-farmed grain. Vegetation consisting of annual grasses, forbs, and weedy species grow in uncultivated areas of this soil type. This soil is considered hydric (NRCS 2025).

The Hanford series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in moderately coarse textured alluvium dominantly from granite (NRCS 2025). Hanford soils are on stream bottoms, floodplains and alluvial fans and have slopes of 2 to 9 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 12 inches and the mean annual air temperature is about 63 °F. The Hanford soils are on stream bottoms, floodplains and alluvial fans at elevations of 150 to 3,500 feet. The soils formed in deep, moderately coarse textured alluvium dominantly from granite and other quartz bearing rocks of similar texture. Hanford soils are used for growing a wide range of fruits, vegetables, and general farm crops. They are also used for urban Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-4
development and dairies. Vegetation in uncultivated areas is mainly annual grasses and associated herbaceous plants. This soil is considered nonhydric (NRCS 2025).

The San Joaquin series consists of well and moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from mixed but dominantly granitic rock sources and is moderately deep to a duripan (NRCS 2025). This soil type occurs on undulating low terraces with slopes of 0 to 9 percent. San Joaquin soils are on hummocky, nearly level to undulating terraces at elevations of about 20 to 500 feet. Some areas have been leveled. They formed in alluvium from mixed but mainly granitic rock sources. The climate is dry with hot dry summers and cool moist and foggy winters. Well and moderately well drained. Some areas are subject to rare or occasional flooding. It is used for cropland and livestock grazing (NRCS 2025).

4.1.5 - HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE PATTERNS
The NHD and NWI datasets (USGS, 2025; USFWS 2025c) show one historical water feature that intersects the BSA west of Road 26 (Figure 4-1). The NHD identified the feature as a canal ditch. NWI identified the feature as a riverine feature (R4SBCx and R5UBFx). This canal ditch is operated by the Madera Irrigation District and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) has an easement along the canal ditch. If the Action does not impact the canal ditch an encroachment permit would be required. If the project disturbs the bed or bank of the canal by open cutting rather than jack and bore, permits will be required. At this time, the Action will not impact any hydrology or drainage patterns.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) dataset shows the Action Area to be in an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA 2025).

4.2 - Vegetation and Other Land Cover
Vegetation communities found within BSA were characterized during the survey. Vegetation communities were characterized based on the CWHR Habitat Classification Scheme (Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988). A full list of plant and wildlife species observed during the survey is provided in Appendix D.

4.2.1 - HABITATS WITHIN THE ACTION AREA
Habitat within the Action Area is classified as Annual Grassland and Urban. The three-acre Action Area consists of a previously tilled, undeveloped parcel surrounded by residential development and undeveloped pastures/non-native grassland. Historical satellite imagery shows that this lot has been regularly disturbed by tilling or disking since as early as 1998 (Google 2025). The BSA was dominated by nonnative grasses and forbs which did not contain native habitat.

Annual Grassland
Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988) describe Annual Grassland as composed primarily of annual plant species many of which occur as understory plants in valley oak woodland and other Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-5
habitats. It is dominated by introduced annual grasses that include wild oats, soft chess, Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-1
Figure 4-1
NHD and NWI
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
• 265ft Avenue 17 Avenue 17
0 -0
C
0 u
Boles St
0 or Rd
co"'
Aviation Dr
0 0
-0
C
0 u
PEM,1Cx
National Wetlands Inventory
- Freshwater Emergent Wetland
- Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
- Freshwater Pond
- Riverine
National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Flowline
Canal Ditch
Stream River - Intermitte nt
c::::J Biological Survey Area (BSA, 500-Foot Survey Buffer) Walden Ave
Rexford Dr
0 .,
-0
0 "'
0 0
., ,. 288ft ~
Pickford Dr
Temple Dr
Tanforan Dr
Pied Piper Ln
Avenue 17 1 /2
-0
"' 0
~

0..
uj Eddy W'e-~
Martin t
- - - - - -- - ._n,-:a _,~ - - - ••
Adell St
C
1i
0 W Adell St
·~
0 0
C
0 ~
W Cleveland Ave
• 282ft
E Adell St
>-
i
C
.,
.,
Adell St
0 z Ashlan Way
~
0 z
E Cleveland Ave
E Rush St
• 289ft
Martin St
z
Adell St
Clark St
z
z
PE"k-1,1cx
Avenue 1 7
• 302ft
E Ellis St
Carmen Ave
Adanac Way
PJ;!§Cx
PE~ Fx
Wrenwood Way
Mission St
lagun
E Cleveland Ave
Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-1
ripgut brome, red brome, wild barley, and foxtail fescue. Many wildlife species use Annual Grasslands for foraging, but some require special habitat features such as cliffs, caves, ponds, or habitats with woody plants for breeding, resting, and escape cover. Species associated with this community include western fence lizard, common garter snake, western rattlesnake, burrowing owl, short-eared owl, horned lark, and western meadowlark, blacktailed jackrabbit, California ground squirrel, Botta's pocket gopher, western harvest mouse, California vole, badger, coyote, and the San Joaquin kit fox. This habitat also provides important foraging habitat for the turkey vulture, northern harrier, American kestrel, blackshouldered kite, and prairie falcon. Annual Grassland habitat occurs mostly on flat plains to gently rolling foothills. Common soil orders include Entisols and Alfisols. This habitat occurs in various sized patches throughout the state.

Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988) describe Urban as a developed habitat with five types of vegetative structure including tree grove, street strip, shade tree/lawn, lawn, and shrub cover. Common in city parks, green belts, and cemeteries, tree groves vary in height, tree spacing, crown shape, and understory conditions, depending on species planted and landscape design. Street tree strips show variation in spacing of trees, depending upon species and design considerations, and are typically planted in grass. Shade trees/lawns are typical of residential areas and reminiscent of natural savannas. Lawns are structurally the most uniform vegetative units of the Urban habitat and shrub cover, including hedges, is more limited in distribution. Species composition in Urban habitats varies with planting design and climate and monoculture is commonly observed in tree groves and street tree strips. Three urban categories relevant to wildlife are distinguished: downtown, urban residential, and suburbia. Downtown has the lowest diversity comprised of over 90 percent avian density and biomass including rock dove, European starling, and house sparrow.

Wildlife that utilize urban residential scrub jay, mockingbird, house finch, raccoon, opossum, striped skunk, and California slender salamander. Wrentits, bushtits, plain titmouse, chestnut-backed chickadee, California quail, black-tailed deer, ringtail, black-tailed jackrabbit, gopher snake and western fence lizard typically occur in suburban areas. Urban habitat is the result of modifying pre-settlement vegetation and introducing new species.

They are not limited to any particular physical setting and occur throughout California.

4.2.2 - HABITATS SURROUNDING THE ACTION AREA
The Action Area is surrounded by urban development and non-native annual grassland habitat. The urban habitat includes paved roads, residential homes, businesses, and undeveloped lots. The BSA is comprised of approximately 30% urban and 70% non-native annual grassland habitat.

4.3 - General Plant Observations
The BSA consists predominantly of residences with various urban setting and ruderal plants such as ornamental trees, plants, and grass lawns. These species include non-native grasses such as wild oat (Avena fatua), and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus) and forbs such as curly dock (Rumex crispus), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), red-stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), sorrel (Rumex acetosa), short-pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), and Jimson Biological Assessment Environmental Baseline

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 4-2
weed (Datura wrightii). Within the BSA numerous ornamental trees were present on private residential development.

There were no special-status plants, or habitat capable of supporting special-status plants observed. A list of plants observed during the field survey is provided in Table D-1 of Appendix D.

California Invasive Species Council (Cal-IPC) created a ranking system for plants that threaten California’s natural areas. Seven invasive species that are ranked by Cal-IPC were identified within the Action Area: eucalyptus tree (Eucalyptus globulus), red-stem filaree, short-pod mustard, curly dock (Rumex crispus), wild oat, ripgut brome, and Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus).

4.4 - General Wildlife Observations
Wildlife species present within the BSA were recorded during the field survey (Appendix C, Table C-2). Species present within the BSA were typical for urban habitat and nonnative grassland included European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), white crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), common crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and various domesticated livestock.

The BSA is heavily disturbed by urban development. Several small mammal burrows were found within the BSA likely belonging to California ground squirrel (Otostermophilus beecheyi) and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). No raptor, passerine, or ground nests were identified but the BSA contains suitable habitat for nesting bird species.

4.5 - Aquatic Resources and Fish Habitat
A query of the NOAA database indicated that the proposed Action is within a geographic area that is under the jurisdiction of NOAA. The Action is within an EFH for Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) within the Fresno River – Below Hidden Watershed (NOAA 2025). The Action Area does not contain any aquatic features and therefore could not support any native populations of marine, freshwater, or anadromous fish species.

4.6 - Designated Critical Habitat in the Action Area

4.6.1 - CRITICAL HABITAT
The Action Area is not within any USFWS-designated critical habitat. The nearest Critical Habitat is approximately 5-miles east of the Action Area and supports San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, hairy Orcutt grass, and vernal pool fairy shrimp.

Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-3

4.6.2 - HABITAT CONNECTIVITY/MOVEMENT CORRIDORS
Habitat Connectivity Wildlife movement corridors, also referred to as dispersal corridors or landscape linkages are generally defined as linear features along which animals can travel from one habitat or resource area to another. Wildlife movement corridors can be large tracts of land connecting regionally important habitats that support wildlife, such as stopover habitat that supports migrating birds or large contiguous natural habitats that support animals with very large home ranges. They can also be small-scale movement corridors, such as riparian zones that provide connectivity and cover to support movement at a local scale (CDFW 2025a).

The Action Area is not within any designated wildlife linkage or movement corridors (CDFW, 2025a).

SECTION 5 - SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT CONSIDERED

5.1 - Species within the Region
Federal agencies regulate special-status species and other sensitive biological resources and require an assessment of their presence or potential for presence to be on-site for consultation under the FESA. Assessments for the potential occurrence of special-status species are based upon known ranges, habitat preferences of the species, species occurrence records from the CNDDB and CNPS, species occurrence records from other sites in the vicinity of the survey area, previous reports relevant to the proposed Action Area, and the results of surveys of the proposed Action Area. State listed species with potential to occur on-site were also evaluated in anticipation for consultation under the CESA.

The potential for each of these species to occur in the study area was evaluated according to the following criteria:
• No. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable to meet the needs of the species (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime).
• Yes. Conditions on the site may, in some way, support a portion of the species ecology (foraging, reproduction, movement/migration). Surveys were conducted for the species, but negative results do not exclude the potential for a species to occur. • Present. Species was observed on the site or has been recorded (e.g., CNDDB, other reports) on the site recently (within the last 5 years).

More details about the habitat requirements and rationale for the potential for species to occur is presented in Appendix D. Natural history information for these species, a discussion of distribution and threats, and an evaluation of the presence of the species within the action area are provided below.

Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-4

5.1.1 - FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES WITHIN THE REGION
Based on available database searches there were thirteen federally listed species evaluated for potential to occur within the Action Area (Table 5-1).

Table 5-1
Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plant and Wildlife Species Evaluated for Their Potential to Occur within the Action Area

Scientific Name Status
Federal/State

CRPR/CDFW
General Location/ Habitat
Requirements
Potential to
Occur
Plants
Castilleja campestris
succulenta
succulent owl'sclover
FT/SE
1B.2/-
vernal pool No
Orcuttia inaequalis
San Joaquin Valley
Orcutt grass
FT/SE
1B.1/-
vernal pool No
Orcuttia Pilosa
hairy Orcutt grass
FE/SE
1B.1/-
vernal pool No
Tuctoria greenei
Greene's tuctoria
FE/SR
1B.1/-
small or shallow vernal pools No
Wildlife
Danaus Plexippus
monarch butterflyoverwintering
population
FPT/-
-/-
fields, meadows, weedy areas, marshes, and
roadsides
No
Desmocerus
californicus
dimorphus
valley elderberry
longhorn beetle
FT/-
-/-
Riparian areas and within elderberry
shrubs
No
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy
shrimp
FT/-
-/-
vernal pool No
Ambystoma
californiense
California tiger
salamander
FT/ST
-/WL
Breeding: ephemeral pools or artificial
ponds
Upland habitat: valley and foothill
grassland, oak woodlands, and
uncommonly riparian
No
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
FPT/-
-/SSC
Breeding: vernal pools
Non-breeding habitat: grasslands, coastal
scrub, woodlands, chaparral, sandy washes,
lowland river floodplains, alkali flats,
foothills, and mountains
No
Actinemys
marmorata
Northwestern pond
turtle
FPT/-
-/SSC
ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, creeks,
marshes, and irrigation ditches
No
Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-5
Scientific Name Status
Federal/State

CRPR/CDFW
General Location/ Habitat
Requirements
Potential to
Occur
Gambelia sila
blunt-nosed leopard
lizard
FE/SE
-/FP
Open, dry scrub habitats No
Dipodomys
nitratoides exilis
Fresno kangaroo rat
FE/SE
-/-
open dry scrub and grassland habitats No
Vulpes macrotis
mutica
San Joaquin kit fox
FE/ST
-/-
Grasslands, shrublands, fallow fields, dry
grain fields, urban areas.

No
Federal Status:

FE - Federal Endangered Species
FPT - Federal Proposed Threatened
FT - Federal Threatened Species
California Status
SCE - California Candidate Endangered
SR - California State Listed - Rare
SE - California Endangered Species
ST - California Threatened Species
CDFW Status
SSC - CDFW Species of Special Concern
WL - CDFW Watch List

5.1.2 - ADDITIONAL STATE LISTED SPECIES WITHIN THE REGION There were five State listed species evaluated for potential to occur within the Action Area (Figure 5-2). Note the eight State listed species that also have a federal listing were omitted from Table 5-2 as they are addressed as part of the federally listed species analyses. These ten species include the succulent’s owl clover, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, hairy Orcutt grass, Greene’s tuctoria, California tiger salamander, western spadefoot, northwestern pond turtle, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, Fresno kangaroo rat, and San Joaquin kit fox.

Table 5-2
Additional State Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plant and Wildlife Species Evaluated for Their Potential to Occur within the Action Area
Scientific Name State Status

CRPR/CDFW
General Location/ Habitat
Requirements
Potential to
Occur
Wildlife
Phrynosoma
blainvillii
coast horned lizard
-/-
-/SSC
Loose soils in grasslands, forests,
woodlands, and open chaparral
No
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
-/ST
-/SSC
Wetland and agricultural habitat No
Athene cunicularia
western burrowing
owl
-/SC
-/SSC
Grasslands, shrublands, fallow fields, dry
grain fields,
No
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
-/ST
-/-
Occurs in open country habitats such as
deserts, grasslands, or agriculture areas
Present
Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-6
Scientific Name State Status

CRPR/CDFW
General Location/ Habitat
Requirements
Potential to
Occur
containing scattered large trees or small
groves
Taxidea taxus
American badger
-/-
-/SSC
Grasslands, forest glades, meadows,
marshes, brushy areas, deserts, mountain
meadows, prairie and sandy loam soil
habitats.

No
California Status
SCE - California Candidate Endangered
SR - California State Listed - Rare
SE - California Endangered Species
ST - California Threatened Species
CDFW Status
SSC - CDFW Species of Special Concern
WL - CDFW Watch List

5.2 - Discussion of Federally Listed Species with the Potential to Occur No federally listed plant or wildlife species were observed during the site survey or would occur on or near the BSA. No vernal pool habitat exists for the occurrence of succulent’s owl clover, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, hairy Orcutt grass, Greene’s tuctoria, vernal pool fairy shrimp, California tiger salamander, or western spadefoot. No open dry scrub land habitat exists within the BSA suitable for blunt-nosed leopard lizard or Fresno kangaroo rat. No suitable denning habitat for San Joaquin kit fox is present within the BSA. Habitat within the BSA is poor quality and does not support an adequate prey base for the San Joaquin kit fox.

No riparian habitat with valley elderberry shrubs is present within the BSA that could support the valley elderberry longhorn beetle. No riparian habitat is present within the BSA that could provide over wintering habitat for the monarch butterfly. No ponds, lakes, streams, or creeks are present that could provide suitable habitat for the northwestern pond turtle. No direct or indirect effects are expected to occur for any federally listed species.

No nesting migratory birds were present in the BSA. However, there is potential for migratory birds to nest within the BSA in ornamental trees in nearby residential properties and the nonnative grassland in undeveloped lots throughout the BSA. If the Project occurs during nesting bird season (February 1 to September 15), and the conservation measures described in Section 1.3.7 are followed, no direct or indirect effects to nesting migratory birds are expected.

5.3 - Discussion of State Listed Species with the Potential to Occur Swainson’s Hawk
Buteo swainsoni
Status: State Threatened
Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-7

NATURAL HISTORY
Swainson’s hawks occur in grassland, desert, and agricultural landscapes throughout the Central Valley and Antelope Valley (Bechard et al. 2010; Zeiner et al. 1988). Some hawks may be resident, especially in the southern portion of their range, while others may migrate between winter and breeding habitats. They prefer larger isolated trees or small woodlots for nesting, usually with grassland or dryland grain fields nearby for foraging and have been known to nest in large eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus sp.) along heavily traveled freeway corridors. Swainson’s hawks forage in grassland, open scrub, pasture, and dryland grain agricultural habitats, primarily for rodents. Swainson’s hawks exhibit moderate to high nest site fidelity for successful nest sites.

DISTRIBUTION AND THREATS
Within California, nesting Swainson’s Hawks are located primarily in the Central Valley and in the Great Basin of northeastern California from Butte Valley east to Nevada, south-central Modoc County, and eastern Lassen County (Bloom 1980). In addition, Swainson’s Hawks also occur in the Shasta and Owens valleys, and the Mojave Desert (Bloom 1980).

The primary threat to Swainson’s hawk is loss of native foraging and breeding grounds due to habitat conversion (CDFW 2016). Other threats include climate change, drought, infrastructure placement, wind turbine strikes, nest tree trimming, vehicle collisions, disease, pesticide poisoning, and electrocution (CDFW 2016).

SPECIES OCCURRENCE IN ACTION AREA
There are four CNDDB records within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest CNDDB record (EONDX 103593) is approximately 2.5-miles southwest of the BSA and is presumed extant.

SURVEY RESULTS
One adult Swainson’s hawk was observed during the survey, but no nest was located in the vicinity (Figure 5-1). The individual did not display any nest building behaviors, most likely the individual was foraging in the vicinity. Suitable nesting habitat is present within 0.5- miles of the BSA, specifically in areas with large trees. Open non-native grasslands are present within the BSA and could provide foraging opportunities for the species. Several California ground squirrel burrows were identified within the Action Area and could provide an adequate prey base to support the species. One other raptor species, red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), was observed during the survey.

Biological Assessment Species and Critical Habitat Considered

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 5-1
Figure 5-1
Swainson’s Hawk Observation
Madera Water Storage Tank Project
Madera, Madera County California
Biological Assessment Effects Analysis

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 6-1
SECTION 6 - EFFECTS ANALYSIS

6.1 - Project Effects on Affected Species
Effects of the Action are all consequences to listed species or critical habitat that are caused by the Project, including consequences of other activities that are caused by the Project. A consequence is caused by the Project if it would not occur but for the Project and it is reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR §402.17). Effects of the Action may occur later in time and may include consequences occurring outside the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR §402.02). The effect of the Action is the consequence (behavioral, physical, or physiological) of a response to the plant or animal.

The conclusion that activities are reasonably certain to occur must be based on clear and substantial information, using the best scientific and commercial data available. Factors to consider whether an activity caused by the Project is reasonably certain to occur include but are not limited to: past experiences with similar activities that have resulted from actions that are similar in scope, nature, and magnitude to the Project; existing plans for the activities; any remaining economic, administrative, and legal requirements necessary for the activity to go forward.

Considerations for determining a consequence to the species or critical habitat is not caused by the Project include, but are not limited to: the consequence is so remote in time from the Project that it is not reasonably certain to occur, or the consequence is so geographically remote from the immediate area involved in the Project that it is not reasonably certain to occur, or the consequence is only reached through a lengthy causal chain that involves so many steps as to make the consequence not reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR §402.17).

6.1.1 - EFFECTS ON FEDERALLY AND STATE LISTED PLANT SPECIES No direct or indirect effects to federally or State listed plant species are anticipated due to no suitable habitat present within the Action Area for those species to occur.

6.1.2 - EFFECTS ON FEDERALLY AND STATE LISTED WILDLIFE SPECIES No direct or indirect effects to federally or State listed wildlife species are anticipated due to no suitable habitat present within the Action Area for those species to occur.

6.1.3 - EFFECTS ON ADDITIONAL STATE LISTED WILDLIFE SPECIES SWAINSON’S HAWK
Direct Impacts
Direct mortality or injury to Swainson’s hawk individuals and/or populations may result from:

Biological Assessment Effects Analysis

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 6-2
• Increased noise, vibration, dust, and human activity
• Application of pesticides toxic to the species and/or its prey Direct impacts to individuals could occur within the Action Area during construction activities that create noise, vibration, human activity, and dust. These impacts could result in behavior modification, or direct mortality from vehicle strikes. The exposure from these stressors during construction will only be slightly greater than existing stressor levels within the Action Area. The Action Area is located along established roadways and is surrounded by land used for urban purposes, so traffic volumes and disturbances similar to construction activity already occur. These impacts may also have direct impacts on individuals if construction activities occur near an active nest or in foraging habitat during nesting season (February 1 to September 15) by altering the normal behaviors of nesting adults, resulting in harm or death to eggs or nestlings. Increased noise and vibration from construction could also cause avoidance of the Action Area. Tree removal is not anticipated, and so no long-term loss of nesting habitat will occur.

The intensity of the exposure to these specific impacts within the Action Area is anticipated to be low because nesting Swainson’s hawk has not been observed on or near the Action Area and there is a low likelihood of a Swainson’s hawk inhabiting the site or even visiting the site for prolonged periods during construction activities.

Indirect Effects
Because the action is occurring on heavily disturbed land and no impact to previously undisturbed areas will occur, no indirect effects are anticipated.

6.1.4 - NEST PROJECT EFFECTS ON SPECIES
SWAINSON’S HAWK
The Project may affect but not likely to adversely affect Swainson’s hawk. Swainson’s hawk are not commonly associated with heavily disturbed lands or urban habitats, and nearly all of the habitat surrounding the Action Area is used for urban purposes. One adult Swainson’s hawk was observed foraging over the BSA during the survey, but no nest was observed in the vicinity. The BSA contains limited suitable nesting and foraging habitat.

Given the low likelihood of the species’ presence, and the implementation of the conservation measures CM-BIO-1 through CM-BIO-5 by the proposed Action, it is anticipated that net effects on Swainson’s hawk to be negligible.

6.2 - Effects from Interrelated Actions
The proposed Action is not related to or dependent on any other current or proposed action.

There would be no effects from interrelated actions.

Biological Assessment Effects Analysis

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 6-3

6.3 - Cumulative Effects
There are no known future State, tribal, local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action area. No cumulative effects are anticipated.

Biological Assessment Conclusions and
Determinations

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 7-1
SECTION 7 - CONCLUSIONS AND DETERMINATIONS

7.1 - Conclusions
The Project/Action includes the construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the increasing and future water demands. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents.

No federally listed plant species or federally listed wildlife species were present within the Action Area. The Action Area does not provide suitable habitat for any of the federally listed plant or wildlife species. Therefore, no plant or wildlife species were analyzed because they were not found to be present and are not expected to occur in the Action Area.

In anticipation of consultation under the CESA, additional species with a State or CDFW listings were also identified as historically occurring within the nine quadrangles surrounding the Action Area. This included five additional State listed wildlife species. The BSA was determined to be potentially suitable for one of these species, the Swainson’s hawk.

This species was analyzed to determine effects from the proposed Project. The remaining species were not analyzed because they were not found to be present and are not expected to occur in the Action Area.

Conservation measures are incorporated into the Project to address the potential presence of Swainson’s hawk and other migratory nesting birds.

7.2 - Determination
No Affect
A No Affect determination was made for succulent owl’s clover, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, hairy Orcutt grass, Greene’s tuctoria, monarch butterfly, valley elderberry longhorn beetle, vernal pool fairy shrimp, California tiger salamander, western spadefoot, northwestern pond turtle, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, Fresno kangaroo rat, and San Joaquin kit fox. No consultation is required for these species or for critical habitat. A No Affect determination was also made for the State or CDFW listed coast horned lizard, tricolored blackbird, western burrowing owl, and American badger.

No USFWS Designated Critical Habitat was identified to occur within the Action Area or BSA for any of these species and the Project actions will have No Affect to Critical Habitat of federally listed species.

If Project activities occur outside of the nesting season for migratory birds (February 1 through September 15), a No Affect determination was made for migratory birds. If Project activities occur within the nesting bird season, a No Affect determination will be made for migratory bird nests if the CM-BIO-1 and CM-BIO-2 measures are implemented.

Biological Assessment Conclusions and
Determinations

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 7-2
The Action would have No Effect on Essential Fish Habitat as the Action will not be impacting any NOAA jurisdictional areas.

May Affect Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Implementation of the conservation measures, CM-BIO-1 through CM-BIO-5, incorporated into the Action coupled with the low likelihood that State listed Swainson’s hawk, would occur on site results in a determination that the Project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect this species.

Biological Assessment References

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 9-1
SECTION 8 - REFERENCES
Baldwin, B.G. (Ed.), D.H. Goldman (Ed.), D. J. Keil (Ed.), R. Patterson (Ed.), T. J. Rosatti (Ed.), D. H. Wilken (Ed.). 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition, Thoroughly Revised and Expanded. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.

Bechard, M. J., C. S. Houston, J. H. Saransola, A. S. England, 2010. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni), version 2.0. The Birds of North America (A.F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doiorg/10.2173/bna.265 Bloom, P. 1980. The status of the Swainson's hawk in California, 1979. Federal aid in wildlife restoration, Project W-54-R-12, Nongame Wildl. Invest. Job Final Report 11-8.0. 24 pp.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2014. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System, Version 9.0. California Interagency Wildlife Task Group.

Sacramento, CA.
____.2016. Five Year Status Review for Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). California Department of Fish and Wildlife. April 11, 2016.
____. 2025a. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Accessed August 2025, via www.wildlife.ca.gov/data/BIOS.
____. 2025b. California Natural Diversity Database. Commercial version dated June 2024.

Accessed May 2025, via https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx.

California Native Plant Society. 2025. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. V9-01 1.5.

Accessed May 202, via www.rareplants.cnps.org.

City of Madera. 2009. City of Madera General Plan, Ch. 5, pp. 106, Accessed May 2025, via https://www.madera.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/City-of-Madera-GP-12-04-

20.PDF
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2025. FEMA flood map service center. City of Madera. https://msc.fema.gov.

Google LLC. 2025. Google Earth Pro.

Mayer, K. E., and W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr. 1988. A guide to wildlife habitat of California. State of California, Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA 166pp.

With online updates at: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Wildlife Habitats.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2025. NMFS Resources in California.

California Species List Tools. Available at:
https://archive.fisheries.noaa.gov/wcr/maps_data /california_species_list_tools.html Biological Assessment References

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 9-2
U.S. Geological Survey. 2025. National Hydrography Dataset. Accessed January 2025, via https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2025a. Lists of Hydric Soils. National Cooperative Soil Survey, U.S. Dept of Agriculture. Accessed January 2025, via: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/. ____ 2025b. Web Soil Survey. Soil Survey Area: Fresno County, California. Soil Survey Data:

Version 11, September 12, 2018. Accessed May 2025, via
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1973. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.).
____ 1998. Recovery plan for upland species of the San Joaquin Valley, California. Region 1, Portland, OR. 319 pp.
____ 2025a. Information for Planning and Consultation online project planning tool.

Available at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.
____ 2025b. Critical Habitat Portal. Available at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html. ____ 2025c. National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands (NWI) Mapper. Accessed January 2025, via https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2025. Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries, NOAA Cooperative Station Madera, California (045233). https://wrcc.dri.edu Zeiner, D., W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., and K.E. Mayer (May 1988). California’s Wildlife.

California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationship System, Volumes I, II, & III. California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Biological Assessment List of Preparers

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page 9-1
SECTION 9 - LIST OF PREPARERS
Primary Authors
• Karissa Denney, Senior Associate Environmental Scientist • Dyana Mitchell, Senior Environmental Scientist
Technical Review
• Dave Dayton, Principal Environmental Scientist
Graphics
• Karissa Denney, Senior Associate Environmental Scientist Biological Survey
• Dyana Mitchell, Senior Environmental Scientist
• Karissa Denney, Senior Associate Environmental Scientist Biological Assessment List of Preparers

APPENDIX A

IPAC, CNDDB, AND CNPS SPECIES LISTS

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK PROJECT,

MADERA, MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Biological Assessment Appendix B

APPENDIX B

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES EVALUATION TABLE

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK PROJECT

MADERA, MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Plants
Castilleja campestris
succulenta
succulent owl'sclover
FT/SE
1B.2/-
This is an annual hemi parasitic herb that blooms sometimes as early as March, but typically blooms from April to May. It occurs vernal pools, swales and some seasonal wetlands, often on acidic soils. It occurs at elevations from approximately 165 to 2,460 feet and is documented primarily on the eastern Central Valley floor and foothills from Fresno County north. It is threatened by urban and agricultural development, flood control, grazing, and trampling.

No
No Effect. There are four CNDDB
records within 10 miles of the BSA. The
closest CNDDB record (EONDX 54536) is
approximately 8.0-miles southwest of
the BSA and is presumed extant. The
survey was conducted outside the
optimal bloom period, June to August,
but no suitable habitat is present within
the BSA.

Orcuttia inaequalis
San Joaquin Valley
Orcutt grass
FT/SE
1B.1/-
This is an annual herb endemic to California that blooms from April to September. It occurs in vernal pools at elevations from approximately 32 to 2,500 feet. It is documented primarily on the eastern Central Valley floor and foothills from Visalia north and is seriously threatened by agricultural, development, overgrazing, channelization, and non-native plants.

No
No Effect. There are three CNDDB
records within 10 miles of the BSA. The
closest CNDDB record (EONDX 22381) is
approximately 3.0-miles northeast of
the BSA and is extirpated. The survey
was conducted during the optimal
bloom period, April to September, but
no suitable habitat is present within the
BSA.

Orcuttia Pilosa
hairy Orcutt grass
FE/SE
1B.1/-
This is an annual herb endemic to California that blooms from May to September. It often occurs in acidic and saline-alkaline soils in vernal pools at elevations from approximately 150 to 655 feet. It is only known from a few locations on the Central Valley floor and lower foothills in Madera, Merced, and Stanislaus counties, and the very northern portion of the valley in Butte, Glenn, and Tehama counties. It is seriously threatened by agriculture, urbanization, overgrazing, non-native plants, and trampling.

No
No Effect. There are eight CNDDB
records within 10 miles of the BSA. The
closest CNDDB record (EONDX 22325) is
approximately 2.6-miles east of the BSA
and is extirpated. The survey was
conducted during the optimal bloom
period, May to September, but no
suitable habitat is present within the
BSA.

Tuctoria greenei
Greene’s tuctoria
FE/SR
1B.1/-
This is an annual herb endemic to California that blooms from May to July and sometimes as late as September. It occurs in small or shallow vernal pools, primarily on Anita clay and Tuscan loam soils. It occurs at elevations from approximately 100 to 3,510 feet and is documented on the Central Valley floor and surrounding foothills, but many occurrences are presumed extirpated. It is threatened by agriculture, urbanization, overgrazing, and habitat fragmentation and loss.

No
No Effect. There is one CNDDB record
within 10 miles of the BSA. The CNDDB
record (EONDX 22357) is approximately

4.0-miles northeast of the BSA and is
possibly extirpated. The survey was
conducted during the optimal bloom
period, May to July, but no suitable
habitat is present within the BSA.

Invertebrates
Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Danaus plexippus
monarch butterflyoverwintering
population
FPT/-
-/-
This butterfly species occurs in various open habitats including fields, meadows, weedy areas, marshes, and roadsides. Adults make massive migrations from August to October, flying thousands of miles south to hibernate along the California coast and in central Mexico. Eggs are laid and larvae feed on plants in the milkweed family, primarily Asclepias sp., but also other genera including Calotropis, Cynanchum, Gonolobus, and Sarcostemma. Adult butterflies typically live from two to six weeks, but overwintering individuals may live as long as nine months. Overwintering migratory adults will roost in large colonies in forested sites in California and Mexico, which must provide protection from the elements and assist with thermoregulation.

No
No Effect. There are no CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. Suitable
habitat that could support
overwintering populations was not
present during the survey. No
milkweed plants were present that
could support larvae individuals.

Desmocerus
californicus dimorphus
valley elderberry
longhorn beetle
FT/-
-/-
This beetle species is closely associated with elderberry shrubs (Sambucus sp.) for food and reproduction. This species usually occur along rivers and streams and eggs are laid on the bark of elderberry shrubs and larvae hatch and burrow into the stems. Adults eat elderberry leaves and flowers. Stem diameter must be a minimum of one inch and exit holes in stems are the most common methods for identification. This species ranges from southern Shasta County to Fresno County.

No
No Effect. There are no CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. No suitable
habitat, elderberry shrubs, that are
closely associated with this species
were identified during the survey.

Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy
shrimp
FT/-
-/-
This species occurs in a variety of vernal pool habitats that range from small, clear sandstone rock pools to large, turbid, alkaline, grassland valley floor pools. It occurs more commonly in pools less than 0.05 acre, typically as part of larger vernal pool complexes. Adults are active from early December to early May. Pools must hold water for at least 18 days, the minimum to complete the life cycle if temperatures are optimal. Eggs are laid in spring and persist through dry season as cysts. The current California distribution includes the Central Valley and coast ranges. This species is threatened by habitat loss, degradation, fragmentation, and interference with vernal pool hydrology.

No
No Effect. There are 22 CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 108404) is
approximately 0.5-miles northeast of
the BSA and is presumed extant. This
record is from 2017 when two adults
were observed in two pools. No
suitable habitat, vernal pools, were
identified during the survey that could
support the species.

Amphibians
Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Ambystoma
californiense
California tiger
salamander central
California DPS
FT/ST
-/WL
This stocky salamander spends the majority of its life aestivating in upland habitat in abandoned small mammal burrows, such as those of ground squirrels. After a sufficient winter rain event, adults emerge to breed in ephemeral pools or artificial ponds, which must remain inundated for at least 12 weeks for reproductive success. Young hatch as larvae with external gills and feed on benthic invertebrates and smaller tadpoles; adults feed on a variety of terrestrial invertebrates, small fish, and small mammals. Upland habitat typically consists of valley and foothill grasslands but can also include oak woodlands and uncommonly riparian habitats. The species is found in the Central Valley and Central Coast at elevations up to 3,200 feet.

Threatened by habitat loss, predation by larger amphibians and fish, and hybridization with other tiger salamander species.

No
No Effect. There are 32 CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 120426) is
approximately 0.7-miles northeast of
the BSA and is presumed extant. This
record is from 2018 when an adult was
found under debris during demolition
activities. No suitable habitat, vernal
pools, were identified during the survey
that could support the species.

Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
FPT/-
-/SSC
This species relies on vernal pools for breeding where predators cannot become established. It occurs in open areas with sand or gravelly soils in a variety of habitats: grasslands, coastal scrub, woodlands, chaparral, sandy washes, lowland river floodplains, alkali flats, foothills, and mountains. This species is endemic to California and northern Baja California with a distribution from Redding south throughout Central Valley and foothills, throughout the South Coast mountain range into coastal southern California to Transverse mountains and Peninsular mountains. This species occurs at elevations ranging from sea level to 4,500 feet.

No
No Effect. There are 34 CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 120426) is
approximately 0.5-miles northeast of
the BSA and is presumed extant. This
record is from 2019 when 24 larvae
were captured and released in March
2019. No suitable habitat, vernal pools,
were identified during the survey that
could support the species.

Reptiles
Actinemys marmorata
northwestern pond
turtle
FPT/-
-/SSC
This species is highly aquatic and diurnally active. It is found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches with vegetation and rocky or muddy bottoms in a wide variety of habitats. It needs basking areas near water (logs, rocks, vegetation mats, banks). This species may enter brackish water and even seawater and it digs a nest on land near water. It ranges from north of the San Francisco Bay area south, including the Central Valley.

No
No Effect. There are no CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. No suitable
habitat, ponds, lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, or marshes were identified
during the survey. The unnamed ditch
that crosses the Action Area west of
Road 26, consists of fast flowing
currents and no basking habitat that
could support the species.

Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Gambelia sila
blunt-nosed leopard
lizard
FE/SE
-/FP
This large lizard occurs in semiarid habitats within the southern Central Valley, Cuyama Valley, and Panoche Valley, at elevations between 100 and 2,400 feet. Preferred habitats are typically flat, sparsely vegetated grasslands with large open areas with scattered shrubs for cover, and sandy washes. The species spends most of the year underground in abandoned small mammal burrows, with adults surfacing in the spring and early summer to breed and feed. Young hatch in July and August, and both adults and young recede to refugia between August and November. Individuals feed primarily on grasshoppers and smaller lizards. The species is threatened mainly by habitat loss and fragmentation.

No
No Effect. There are 7 CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 27810) is
approximately 5.0-miles southwest of
the BSA and is possibly extirpated. No
suitable habitat, sparsely vegetated
grassland with large open areas and
scatted shrubs, were identified during
the survey that could support the
species.

Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
-/-
-/SSC
This cryptic lizard prefers sandy, loose soils in grasslands, forests, woodlands, and open chaparral. Individuals are often found along sandy washes and dirt roads with scattered shrubs for cover. This species feeds almost exclusively on ants. It is found in coastal California from Baja California north to the Bay Area, southeastern desert regions, southern Central Valley flats and foothills and the surrounding mountains on drier, warmer slopes, at elevations up to 8,000 feet. The species is threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation and the spread of invasive ant species displacing native prey.

No
No Effect. There are no CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. No suitable
habitat, sandy, loose soils within
grasslands, forests, woodlands, or
chaparral, were identified during the
survey.

Birds
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
-/ST
-/SSC
This species is a year-round resident that is a colonial breeder. It occurs in freshwater, emergent wetlands with tall, dense cattails or tule, but also thickets of willow, blackberry, wild rose, and tall herbs. Breeding colonies consist of a minimum of approximately 50 pairs. This species forages for mostly insects and spiders and less often seeds and cultivated grains in pastures, grain fields, cropland, and similar habitats near breeding areas.

No
No Effect. There is one CNDDB record
within 10 miles of the BSA. The CNDDB
record (EONDX 103497) is
approximately 7.0-miles northeast of
the BSA and is presumed extant. No
suitable habitat, freshwater emergent
wetlands, were identified during the
survey that could support the species.

Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Athene cunicularia ssp.
hypugaea
western burrowing owl
-/SC
-/SSC
This species occupies a variety of open, semi-arid to arid habitats throughout Central and Southern California, including desert regions. It prefers open habitats with few shrubs or trees and low-growing vegetation. It is most active around sunrise and sunset and utilizes burrows constructed by mammals year-round for shelter and nesting. This species is well documented in urban areas where patches of undeveloped areas are present (e.g., canals, airports, drainage basins), and in areas of dense agricultural development, particularly where canals provide burrow habitat. It forages primarily for rodents and insects within several miles of its burrow, usually in open grassy habitats if available. It has been observed hunting bats and insects around parking lot lights. Threats to this species include development resulting in habitat loss/fragmentation.

No
No Effect. There are 2 CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 62876) is
approximately 0.5-miles west of the
BSA and is possibly extirpated. No
suitable habitat, open habitat with
minimal shrubs and trees, are present
within the BSA. The BSA is highly
disturbed with residential and
commercial development.

Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
-/ST
-/-
This species occurs in grassland, desert and agricultural landscapes in the Central Valley and Antelope Valley. These hawks may be resident or migrant, and nest and breed in stands with few trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and oak savannah habitats. This species has also been observed nesting and breeding in large eucalyptus trees along freeways and in trees over rural residences surrounded by agriculture. Nests are a platform of sticks, bark, and fresh leaves at or near the top of trees. This species breeds from late March to late August. It forages in grassland, open scrub, and grain fields, primarily for rodents.

Nesting -Yes
Foraging - Yes
May Affect Not Likely to Adversely
Affect. There are four CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. The closest
CNDDB record (EONDX 103593) is
approximately 2.5-miles southwest of
the BSA and is presumed extant. One
adult Swainson’s hawk was observed
during the survey, but no nest was in
vicinity. The individual did not display
any nest building behaviors, so it most
likely was foraging in the vicinity.

Suitable nesting habitat is present
within 0.5-miles of the BSA, specifically
in areas with large trees. Open nonnative grasslands are present within the BSA and could provide foraging
opportunities for the species.

Mammals
Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Dipodomys nitratoides
exilis
Fresno kangaroo rat
FE/SE
-/-
This is a subspecies of the San Joaquin kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides) that occurs on bare alkaline clay-based soils typically within alkali desert scrub and open grassland. Historically, this species occurred on the valley floor in Kings, Fresno, Madera, and Merced counties, but may be extirpated within most of the historical range. This species is nocturnal that excavates burrows for temperature regulation, litter-rearing, shelter, and escape from predators typically with tunnels approximately 12 to 15 inches below ground.

It eats seeds of annual forbs and grasses. It is threatened by predation and disease.

No
No Effect. There is one CNDDB record
within 10 miles of the BSA. The CNDDB
record (EONDX 65483) is approximately

7.0-miles southwest of the BSA and is
presumed extant. No suitable habitat,
bare alkaline clay-based soils within
alkali desert scrub and open grassland,
were identified during the survey that
could support the species.

Taxidea taxus
American badger
-/-
-/SSC
This species occurs mostly in open, drier stages of shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with friable soils. It feeds mostly on fossorial rodents. It digs burrows for cover and reproduction and can dig a new den each night.

Litters are typically born in March and April. This species can be somewhat tolerant of human activities but generally avoids cultivated agricultural habitats.

No
No Effect. There are two CNDDB record
within 10 miles of the BSA. The CNDDB
record (EONDX 56660) is approximately

7.5-miles northeast of the BSA and is
presumed extant. No suitable habitat,
open, drier stages of shrub, forest, and
herbaceous habitats, with friable soils,
were identified during the survey that
could support the species.

Vulpes macrotis
mutica
San Joaquin kit fox
FE/ST
-/-
This fox species is endemic to the Central Valley and primarily occurs in arid to semi-arid grasslands, open shrublands, savannahs, and grazed lands with loose-textured soils within the San Joaquin Valley, Carrizo Plain, Salinas Valley, Cuyama Valley, and other small valleys in western foothills.

Intensively-maintained agricultural areas are typically avoided. It is highly adaptable and documented in urban developed areas. It uses burrows yearround for shelter, escape from predators, and rearing young and it will use man-made structures, such as pipes, for denning. Kit fox feed primarily on small mammals, but will also consume birds, reptiles, insects, and scavenge for human food. It is threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, vehicle strikes, and disease such as the current mange outbreak in urban population in Bakersfield and in nearby natural areas.

No
No Effect. There are no CNDDB records
within 10 miles of the BSA. No suitable
habitat, arid to semi-arid grasslands,
open shrublands, savannahs, and
grazed lands with loose-textured soils
were identified during the survey.

Sources:

Unites States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2025. Federal Endangered and Threatened Species List.

California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). May 2025. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Sacramento. CA
Biological Assessment Appendix B

Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal/
State

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements Potential
to Occur Determination
Abbreviations:

Federal Status:

FE - Federal Endangered Species
FPT - Federal Proposed Threatened
FT - Federal Threatened Species
California Status
SCE - California Candidate Endangered
SR - California State Listed - Rare
SE - California Endangered Species
ST - California Threatened Species
CDFW Status
SSC - CDFW Species of Special Concern
WL - CDFW Watch List

Biological Assessment Appendix C

APPENDIX C

REPRESENTATIVE SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK PROJECT

MADERA, MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Biological Assessment Appendix C

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page C-1
Photograph 1: Existing well site at APN 013-280-001. The pipeline will connect to this facility.

GPS Coordinates: 36.992732, -120.095043, facing west.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Photograph 2: Pipeline will be placed south of the existing facility through the non-native grassland.

GPS Coordinates: 36.992360, -120.095096, facing south.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Biological Assessment Appendix C

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page C-2
Photograph 3: Representative view of the pipeline placement within the City of Madera ROW.

GPS Coordinates: 36.987189, -120.088888, facing north.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Photograph 4: Representative view of the pipeline placement within the City of Madera ROW.

GPS Coordinates: 36.986997, -120.081358, facing east.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Biological Assessment Appendix C

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page C-3
Photograph 5: Representative view of the pipeline placement within the City of Madera ROW.

GPS Coordinates: 36.987007, -120.059725, facing east.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Photograph 6: View of the canal ditch that the Action Area will be crossing.

GPS Coordinates: 36.986951, -120.075433, facing east.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Biological Assessment Appendix C

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page C-4
Photograph 7: Representative view of the tank location at APN 038-030-031.

GPS Coordinates: 36.989103, -120.056354, facing northwest.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Photograph 8: Representative view of the tank location at APN 038-030-031.

GPS Coordinates: 36.989725, -120.057048, facing south.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Biological Assessment Appendix C

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page C-5
Photograph 9: Representative view of the tank location at APN 038-030-031.

GPS Coordinates: 36.989047, -120.056881, facing northeast.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Photograph 10: Representative view of the tank location at APN 038-030-031.

GPS Coordinates: 36.989047, -120.056881, facing west.

Photograph taken by Karissa Denney on May 25, 2025.

Biological Assessment Appendix D

APPENDIX D

PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED ON SITE

MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK PROJECT

MADERA, MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Biological Assessment Appendix D

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page E-1
Table D-1
Plant Species Observed within the Biological Survey Area.

Madera Water Storage Tank Project, Madera, Madera County, California Scientific Name Common Name Status
Trees
ornamental trees
Eucalyptus globulus Eucalyptus tree Cal-IPC: Limited
Prunus amygdalus almond tree Non-Native
Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm tree Native
Herbs
ornamental plants
Amsinckia menziesii var.
intermedia
common fiddleneck Native
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed Non-Native
Datura stramonium Jimson weed Non-Native
Erodium cicutarium red-stem filaree Cal-IPC: Limited
Hirschfeldia incana short-pod mustard Cal-IPC: Moderate Rumex acetosa sorrel Non-Native
Rumex crispus curly dock Cal-IPC: Limited
Rumex pulcher fiddle dock Non-Native
Grasses
Avena fatua wild oat Cal-IPC: Moderate
Bromus diandrus ripgut brome Cal-IPC: Moderate
Schismus barbatus Mediterranean grass Cal-IPC: Limited
*Cal-IPC = California Invasive Plant Council.

Rating system: High = several ecological impacts; Moderate = substantial but not severe ecological impacts; Limited = minor ecological impacts or not enough information to justify higher score.

Biological Assessment Appendix D

Madera Water Storage Tank Project June 2025
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Page E-2
Table D-2
Wildlife Species Observed within the Biological Survey Area.

Madera Water Storage Tank Project, Madera, Madera County, California Scientific Name Common Name Native or
Introduced
Reptiles
Thamnophis sirtalis garter snake Native
Birds
Aimophila ruficeps Rufus crowned sparrow Native
Aphelocoma californica western scrub jay Native
Branta canadensis Canadian goose Native
Bubulcus ibis Cattle egret Native
Buteo jamaicensis red-tailed hawk Native
Buteo swainsoni Swainson’s hawk Native
Cathartes aura turkey vulture Native
Columba livia domestica homing pigeon Native
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Native
Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer’s blackbird Native
Gallus gallus domesticus domestic chicken Native
Haemorhous mexicanus house finch Native
Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird Native
Passer domesticus house sparrow Native
Petrochelidon pyrrhonota cliff swallow Native
Sturnus vulgaris European starling Non-Native
Tyrannus verticalis western kingbird Native
Zenaida macroura mourning dove Native
Zonotrichia leucophrys white crowned sparrow Native
Mammals
Bos taurus domestic cow Native
Canis lupus familiaris domestic dog Native
Equus ferus caballus domestic horse Native
Felis catus domestic cat Native
Otospermophilus beecheyi* California ground squirrel Native Ovis aries domestic sheep Native
Thomomys bottae* Botta’s pocket gopher Native

1518 West Taft Avenue
Orange, CA 92865
Office (714) 974-8300
Field Offices
Riverside • Morro Bay • Sacramento

cogstone.com
Toll free 888-333-3212
Federal Certifications WOSB, EDWOSB, SDB
State Certifications DBE, WBE, UDBE

CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR

THE CITY OF MADERA WATER STORAGE TANK,

PUMP STATION AND TRANSMISSION MAIN

PROJECT, CITY OF MADERA, MADERA COUNTY,

CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

Jaymie Brauer, Quad Knopf, Inc
P.O. Box 3699, Visalia, California, 93278
Authors:

Alison Bryson-Deveraux, M.A.

Shannon Lopez, M.A.

Principal Investigator:

Alison Bryson-Deveraux, M.A.

Date
June 2025
Cogstone Project Number: 6219
Type of Study: Cultural Resources Assessment
Sites: P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H; M.I.D. Canal Bridge (41C0132) USGS Quadrangle: Madera 7.5’ (1982)
Area: 50.28
Key Words: Positive Results; Madera Canal; Yokut Territory; Madera County cogstone

PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY- HISTORY
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS......................................................................................................................................V INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................1 PURPOSE OF STUDY...........................................................................................................................................1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................1 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS................................................................................................................................1 PROJECT PERSONNEL ......................................................................................................................................5 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT...........................................................................................................................6 FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS...........................................................................................................6 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT................................................................................................................6 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES .............................................................................................................6 NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION ACT ..........................................................................6 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT................................................................................................................7 ANTIQUITIES ACT...................................................................................................................................................7 STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.................................................................................................................7 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT...........................................................................................................7 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ..............................................................................................................................8 PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE.....................................................................................................................................8 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES................................................................................................9 NATIVE AMERICAN HUMAN REMAINS ....................................................................................................................10 CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, TITLE 14, SECTION 4307 .............................................................................10 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................................11 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .........................................................................................................................11 PREHISTORIC SETTING..................................................................................................................................11 PALEOINDIAN AND LOWER ARCHAIC PERIODS (13,500 CAL BP – 7,500 CAL BP)...................................................11 MIDDLE ARCHAIC PERIOD (7,500 CAL BP– 2,500 CAL BP)...................................................................................12 UPPER ARCHAIC PERIOD (2,500 CAL BP – 850 CAL BP).......................................................................................13 EMERGENT/LATE PREHISTORIC PERIOD (850 CAL BP – HISTORIC CONTACT)........................................................13 ETHNOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................................................14 TRIBAL TERRITORY...............................................................................................................................................14 LINGUISTICS ........................................................................................................................................................14 VILLAGE STRUCTURE AND HABITATION.................................................................................................................15 FOOD AND RESOURCE USEAGE ............................................................................................................................15 HISTORIC SETTING..........................................................................................................................................16 SPANISH PERIOD (1769-1822).............................................................................................................................16 MEXICAN PERIOD (1822-1847)............................................................................................................................17 AMERICAN PERIOD (1848-PRESENT).....................................................................................................................17 MADERA COUNTY ................................................................................................................................................18 CITY OF MADERA.................................................................................................................................................19 PROJECT AREA HISTORY ......................................................................................................................................19 SOURCES CONSULTED.........................................................................................................................................20 CALIFORNIA HISTORIC RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM.........................................................20 MADERA CANAL; MADERA IRRIGATION DISTRICT (M.I.D.); (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H)..............................20 OTHER SOURCES ..............................................................................................................................................24 ADDITIONAL STUDIES ....................................................................................................................................25 NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION ........................................................................................................25 SURVEY.....................................................................................................................................................................26 METHODS............................................................................................................................................................26 City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone iii
RESULTS ..............................................................................................................................................................26 P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H, SEGMENT OF MADERA CANAL, LATERAL 24.2 .....................................................29 M.I.D. CANAL BRIDGE (41C0132).......................................................................................................................29 BUILT ENVIRONMENT EVALUATION .............................................................................................................31 P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H (SEGMENT OF MID CANAL, LATERAL 24.2)..........................................................31 M.I.D. CANAL BRIDGE (41C0132).......................................................................................................................32 STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...........................................................................................................34 RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................................................................34 REFERENCES CITED.............................................................................................................................................35 APPENDIX A. QUALIFICATIONS........................................................................................................................41 APPENDIX B. RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS...................................................................................................46 APPENDIX C. NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION...................................................................................50 APPENDIX D. DPR 523 FORMS ............................................................................................................................52 City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone iv

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. PROJECT VICINITY MAP ..............................................................................................................................2 FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................3 FIGURE 3. APE MAP......................................................................................................................................................4 FIGURE 4. TRIBAL BOUNDARY MAP............................................................................................................................16 FIGURE 5. SHARON BOULEVARD AT PAVED ROAD TERMINUS, FACING NORTHWEST...............................................27 FIGURE 6. SOUTHSIDE EASEMENT OF ELLIS STREET BETWEEN OWENS STREET AND SONORA STREET, ...............28 FACING SOUTHEAST. ...................................................................................................................................................28 FIGURE 7. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WELL FIELD ALONG NORTH LAKE STREET, FACING SOUTHWEST. .................28 FIGURE 8. NORTHERN TERMINUS OF SHARON BOULEVARD, FACING SOUTHWEST..................................................29 FIGURE 9. SOUTHERN SIDE OF CANAL FROM ACCESS ROAD, FACING NORTHWEST..................................................30 FIGURE 10. VIEW OF NORTHERN SIDE OF M.I.D CANAL BRIDGE (41C0132). FACING SOUTHWEST.......................30

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. ADDITIONAL SOURCES CONSULTED...........................................................................................................24 TABLE 2. BLM SEARCH RESULTS..............................................................................................................................24 TABLE B1. PREVIOUS STUDIES WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS OF THE APE ..............................................................47 TABLE B2. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS OF THE APE .............49 City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone v

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
This cultural resources assessment report was conducted to determine the potential impacts to cultural resources within the Water Storage Tank, Pump Station and Transmission Main Project (Project), City of Madera (City), Madera County, California. The City is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A portion of the Project crosses Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) land and thus the BOR is the lead agency for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

The Project Area of Potential Effects (APE) is located within the City of Madera from the north terminus of Sharon Boulevard to the crossing at Ellis Street, east along Ellis Street to North Lake Street, and along North Lake Street to a tank location site along the western side of North Lake Street. Additional work is planned along the existing Madera Canal which transects Ellis Street west of Road 26. Specifically, the Project is located within Sections 10, 11 and 12 of Range 17 East, Township 11 South and Section 7, Range 18 East, Township 11 South of the 1982 Madera

7.5’ USGS Topographic Map.

The Project proposes construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents. The initial phase of the Project (Phase 1) includes a 2.5 MG prestressed concrete water storage tank, a 3,500 gallon per minute (gpm) firm capacity booster pump station, a 13,200 linear foot (LF) 24- inch transmission main from City-owned Well 38 to the tank site, and tank site improvements.

Based on current projections, the initial phase of this Project should be sufficient to meet drinking water demands and fire protection requirements through 2043.

Cogstone requested a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield which included the entire proposed APE as well as a one-mile radius.

Results of the record search were received on May 12, 2025 and indicated that 11 previous studies have been completed within the APE while an additional 21 studies have been completed previously within a one-mile radius of the APE.

One cultural resource, Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) has been previously recorded within the APE. An additional resource, Madera Irrigation District (M.I.D.) Canal Bridge (41C0132), was identified in the California Historic Bridge Inventory. Outside of the APE a total of seven cultural resources have been previously documented within the one-mile search radius from the APE.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone vi
A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on April 29, 2025. On April 30, 2025, the NAHC responded that the SLF search was completed with negative results, and provided contact information for 13 Native American tribal organizations and individuals that may have more information about the Project area.

On May 14, 2025, Cogstone archaeologist Alison Bryson-Deveraux completed an intensive pedestrian survey of the APE. The APE consists of approximately 50 acres of a mostly hardscaped urban area with open segments of undeveloped land, mainly within easements and directly adjacent to existing roadways. No archaeological resources were noted during survey.

A segment of the historic in age Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) and M.I.D.

Canal Bridge (41C0132) are located within the APE. California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms were updated for these resources and they were evaluated for historic significance. Due to a lack of historic significance, these resources are recommended not eligible for listing at the national, state, or local level.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 1

INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE OF STUDY
This cultural resources assessment report was conducted to determine the potential impacts to cultural resources within the Water Storage Tank, Pump Station and Transmission Main Project (Project), City of Madera (City), Madera County, California (Figure 1). The City is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A portion of the Project crosses Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) land and thus the BOR is the lead agency for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Project Area of Potential Effect (APE) is located within the City of Madera from the north terminus of Sharon Boulevard to the crossing at Ellis Street, east along Ellis Street to North Lake Street, and along North Lake Street to a tank location site along the western side of North Lake Street. Additional work is planned along the existing Madera Canal which transects Ellis Street west of Road 26.

Specifically, the Project is located within Sections 10, 11 and 12 of Range 17 East, Township 11 South and Section 7, Range 18 East, Township 11 South of the 1982 Madera 7.5’ USGS Topographic Map (Figure 2).

The Project proposes construction of water supply and distribution facilities to meet the demand conditions identified by hydraulic model demands and projections. Provisions for future facility expansion to meet Year 2044 and Year 2058 will be incorporated into the design documents. The initial phase of the Project (Phase 1) includes a 2.5 MG prestressed concrete water storage tank, a 3,500 gallon per minute (gpm) firm capacity booster pump station, a 13,200 linear foot (LF) 24- inch transmission main from City-owned Well 38 to the tank site, and tank site improvements.

Based on current projections, the initial phase of this Project should be sufficient to meet drinking water demands and fire protection requirements through 2043.

AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS
The APE was established as 50.28 acres and includes all potential direct and indirect effects to cultural resources that may result from the proposed Project (Figure 3). The width of the APE ranges from a minimum of 66 feet (20 meters) to a maximum of 1,549 feet (472 meters). The length of the APE is 13,458 feet (4,102 meters). The vertical APE is the maximum depth of any Project related ground disturbing work. The depth of ground disturbance is anticipated not to exceed 20 feet (6.09 meters) for boring work under the canal.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 2
Figure 1. Project vicinity map
Avenue 26
C,
N
-0
..
0 IX
...

N
-0
.,
0 IX SunntAve
Avenue 13
Avenue 21
N
"' N
Project Location
/
Madera
"' N

CALIFORNIA
..,
M
-0
..
0 IX
----------oaa==Avenu-. t2 =----~-~ ----'-===,
!
Avenue 7
,
Service Layer Credil:1: Sources: Esri, HE Re Garmin, USGS, lntermap, INCREMENT P, NRC.n, Elri Japan, HETI, Esrl in ■ (Hong Kong) Key
II 11 APE
Kilometers
0 5
Miles
0 2.5
Avenue 7
Biola
• >
<
.,,
M
W Shah Ava
• <
~ ,.
.., I Kore■, Esrl (Thailand], NGCC, (cl OpenStreet4 contributors, and the OIS ~ er ~C>fflD) nity _

MADERA TANKS
8 10 City of Madera
Madera County, CA
5 1:250,000 @ '

G,STONE
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 3
Figure 2. Project location
,,,- 0
0 ~
~
..
ct
Q
..
~
~ . Well
• I
• Service Layer Credits: Copyrignt:O 2013 N
Key
!i I! APE
D USGS 7.5' Quadrangle
~ , .. 0 .,
.. .. ..,
• 6
II'.
~
0 0
0 .. .,
'3; • I ~ ,. .
.. .

I'· II'.

L
Kilometers

0.5 Miles

0.25 -. . . -
'°~o
Well$

0.5 USGS Quadrangle(s): Kismet and Madera
Township 11S Range17E, Sections 1 o, 11 , 12
Township 11 S Rangel BE, Sections 7
y
1 . .... " " ..
. ... =-.
18'
'17
z&~
~.
. .
. : '. . : . •i -! • 0 !
0 1:24 ,000

MADERA TANKS
City of Madera
Madera County, CA
7 • •
I
.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 4
Figure 3. APE map
Key
Kilometers 8 !i I! APE City of Madera

0.5 Madera County, CA 0
Miles
0 0.25 0.5 1:16,500 ®G,STONE_ ,
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 5

PROJECT PERSONNEL
Cogstone Resource Management (Cogstone) conducted the cultural resources survey and authored this report. Resumes of key personnel are provided in Appendix A. • Molly Valasik served as Principal Archaeologist and provided overall QA/QC for the Project. Ms. Valasik has an M.A. in Anthropology from Kent State University in Ohio and 16 years of experience in California archaeology.
• Alison Bryson-Deveraux served as the Principal Investigator for Archaeology and coauthored this report. Ms. Bryson-Deveraux holds an M.A. in Historic Preservation from Prescott College and a B.A. in Anthropology (concentration in Archaeology) from the University of California (UC), Santa Barbara. She has 21 years of experience in California archaeology.
• Shannon Lopez co-authored this report and conducted the historic evaluation. Ms. Lopez holds an M.A. in History (with an emphasis in architectural history) from California State University (CSU), Fullerton. She has more than seven years of experience in the field of history and architectural history.
• Logan Freeberg made the Geographic Information System (GIS) maps in this report. Mr.

Freeberg holds a B.A. in Anthropology from UC Santa Barbara and a GIS certification from CSU Fullerton. He has over 20 years of experience in California archaeology.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 6

REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT

FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is the primary federal law governing the preservation of cultural resources in the United States. The law establishes a national preservation program and a system of procedural protections which encourage the identification and protection of cultural resources of national, state, Tribal, and local significance. A primary component of this act, the Section 106 Review Process requires that federal agencies take into consideration actions that could adversely affect historic properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
The NRHP is the nation's official list of buildings, structures, objects, sites, and districts worthy of preservation because of their significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register recognizes resources of local, state, and national significance that have been documented and evaluated according to uniform standards and criteria.

Authorized under the NHPA, the National Register is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect historic and archeological resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service (NPS), which is part of the United States Department of the Interior.

To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a resource must meet at least one of the following criteria:

A. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
B. Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.

NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION ACT
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) intends to ensure the protection and rightful disposition of Native American ancestral remains and cultural items located on federal or Native American lands and in the federal government’s possession or control. The implementing regulations provide detailed definitions of what is regulated under Section 2 and 43 CFR Part 10 of the act. When there is activity affecting or likely to affect City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 7
Native American ancestral remains or cultural items on federal or tribal lands, a NAGPRA Plan of Action (POA) must be developed to describe the procedures for the treatment and disposition of ancestral remains, funerary objects, objects of cultural patrimony, and/or sacred objects that may be inadvertently identified during planned excavations.

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) directs federal agencies to use all practicable means to "preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage…” (42 U.S.C. §4321.102.6.4). If the presence of a significant environmental resource is identified during the scoping process, federal agencies and the agents must take the resource into consideration when evaluating the effects of the project. Consideration of paleontological resources may be required under NEPA when a project is proposed for development on federal land, or land under federal jurisdiction. The level of consideration depends upon the federal agency involved.

ANTIQUITIES ACT
The Antiquities Act states, in part: That “any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court” (16 U.S.C. §433.1).

Although there is no specific mention of natural or paleontological resources in the act itself, or in the act's uniform rules and regulations [Title 43 Part 3, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)], “objects of antiquity” has been interpreted to include fossils by NPS, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the United States Forest Service (USFS), and other federal agencies.

STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
CEQA states that it is the state’s policy “that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed project and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” CEQA declares that it is state policy to: “take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with...historic environmental qualities.” It further states that public or private projects City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 8
financed or approved by the state are subject to environmental review by the state. All such projects, unless entitled to an exemption, may proceed only after this requirement has been satisfied. CEQA requires detailed studies that analyze the environmental effects of a proposed project. In the event that a project is determined to have a potential significant environmental effect, the act requires that alternative plans and mitigation measures be considered.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
A tribal cultural resource is defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

As of 2015, CEQA established that “[a] project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (Public Resources Code, § 21084.2).

To help determine whether a project may have such an effect, the lead agency must consult with any California Native American tribe that requests consultation and is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project. If a lead agency determines that a project may cause a substantial adverse change to tribal cultural resources, the lead agency must consider measures to mitigate that impact. Public Resources Code §20184.3 (b)(2) provides examples of mitigation measures that lead agencies may consider to avoid or minimize impacts to tribal cultural resources.

PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
Section 5097.5: No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands (lands under state, county, city, district or public authority jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction of a public corporation), except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this section, “public lands” City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 9
means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.

CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
The CRHR is a listing of all properties considered to be significant historical resources in the state. The California Register includes all properties listed or determined eligible for listing in the National Register, including properties evaluated under Section 106 as well as State Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and above. The California Register statute specifically provides that historical resources must be considered under CEQA if they are listed, determined eligible for listing in the California Register by the State Historical Resources Commission, or are resources that meet the California Register criteria. Other resources, such as resources listed in local registers of historic resources or in local surveys, may be listed if they are determined by the State Historic Resources Commission to be significant in accordance with the criteria and procedures to be adopted by the Commission and are nominated; their listing in the California Register is not automatic.

Resources eligible for listing include buildings, sites, structures, objects, or historic districts that retain historical integrity and are historically significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; 3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or 4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

In addition to having significance, resources must have integrity for the period of significance which is the date or span of time within which significant events transpired or significant individuals made their important contributions. Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity as evidenced by the survival of characteristics or historic fabric that existed during the resource’s period of significance.

Alterations to a resource or changes in its use over time may have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. Simply, resources must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the California Register, if, under Criterion 4, it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 10

NATIVE AMERICAN HUMAN REMAINS
Sites that may contain human remains important to Native Americans must be identified and treated in a sensitive manner, consistent with state law (i.e., Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and Public Resources Code §5097.98), as reviewed below:

In the event that human remains are encountered during project development and in accordance with the Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, the County Coroner must be notified if potentially human bone is discovered. The Coroner will then determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by phone within 24 hours, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The NAHC will then designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) with respect to the human remains. The MLD then has the opportunity to recommend to the property owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods.

CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, TITLE 14, SECTION 4307
This section states that “No person shall remove, injure, deface or destroy any object of paleontological, archeological or historical interest or value.” City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 11

BACKGROUND

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The APE lies along the eastern side of the Central Valley near the western slope of the Sierra Nevada mountain range, approximately 17 miles northwest of Fresno and 30 miles southeast of Merced. The climate is Mediterranean, which is characterized by hot, dry summers often in the 90s, and mild, wet winters. Fog is also common in the winter due to a natural low-pressure system over the valley. Average annual precipitation for the area 12.23 inches (Felton 1965; USCD 2025).

Native flora near and within the APE includes California buckeye (Aesculus californica), Rainbow iris (Iris hartwegii), Orcutt's Brome (Bromus orcuttianus), Common tule (Scirpus acutus), Spikerush (Eleocharis spp.), Silver lupine (Lupinus albifrons), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica) and Sacred datura (Datura wright). Native fauna includes mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris regilla), pond slider (Trachemys scripta) Northern Pacific rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus ssp. oreganus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), Western tanager (Piranga ludoviciana), Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), Gambel's deer mouse (Peromyscus gambelii), and coyote (Canis latrans; iNaturalist 2025).

PREHISTORIC SETTING
PALEOINDIAN AND LOWER ARCHAIC PERIODS (13,500 CAL BP – 7,500 CAL BP) Few archaeological sites that predate 5,000 years ago have been discovered in the Central California/Central Valley region. Near the end of the Pleistocene (approximately 11,000 cal BP) and during the early Middle Holocene (approximately 7,500 cal BP), there were periods of climate change and associated alluvial deposition throughout the central California lowlands (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Geo-archaeological studies (e.g., Meyer and Rosenthal 2008; Rosenthal and Meyer 2004a, 2004b; White 2003) have verified that large segments of the Late Pleistocene landscape were removed or buried by periodic episodes of deposition or erosion during the Middle Holocene. These studies confirm estimates advanced by Moratto (1984) that Paleoindian and Lower Archaic sites were buried during the last 5,000 to 6,000 years by deposits of Holocene alluvium up to 10 meters thick along the lower stretches of the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River drainage systems.

Archaeological evidence for the Paleoindian Period is scant and is comprised primarily of fluted projectile points, which are morphologically similar to the well-dated Clovis points found elsewhere in North America (Rosenthal et al. 2007; Dillon 2002). In the Central Valley, fluted points have been identified at only three archaeological localities, and in each case, the points City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 12
were recovered from remnant features of the Pleistocene landscape. The three localities are the Woolfsen Mound (CA-MER-215) in Merced County, Tracey Lake in San Joaquin County, and the Tulare Lake basin in Kings County.

The Lower Archaic Period is also mainly represented by isolated finds, such as at the Tulare Lake basin in the southern San Joaquin Valley (Rosenthal et al. 2007). As a consequence of the natural alluvial deposition processes, only one site on the valley floor has produced cultural material dating to this period. Located in Kern County on the ancient shoreline of Buena Vista Lake, stratified cultural deposits at CA-KER-116 yielded stone tools (stemmed projectile point and crescents) and the remains of birds, fish and shellfish but no plant remains or milling tools.

At two Lower Archaic Period sites in the foothills of Calaveras County (Skyrocket CA-CAL629/630; LaJeunesse and Pryor 1996) and eastern Contra Costa County (CA-CCO-637; Meyer and Rosenthal 1998), abundant handstones and milling slabs have been recovered.

MIDDLE ARCHAIC PERIOD (7,500 CAL BP– 2,500 CAL BP)
Middle Archaic Period archaeological sites are more common in the foothills, particularly in buried contexts between circa 6,000 and 4,000 cal BP, and are relatively scarce on the valley floor due to burial by natural processes (Rosenthal et al. 2007). The change in climate and rising sea levels at the start of the Middle Holocene led to the development of the extensive marshland known as the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Atwater and Belknap 1980; Goman and Wells 2000). The archaeological record indicates groups followed a seasonal foraging strategy and exploited a wide range of natural resources, including a variety of large and small mammals, fish, waterfowl, and plant resources (Fredrickson 1973; Heizer 1949; Moratto 1984; Ragir 1972).

It is also likely that groups occupied higher elevations in the summer and shifted to lower elevations during the winters (Moratto1984), and that residential stability along river corridors within the Central Valley increased during this period (Rosenthal et al. 2007).

Faunal remains recovered from Middle Archaic sites include tule elk, deer, pronghorn, and rabbits, while fish remains include salmon, sturgeon, and smaller freshwater fishes. Seeds or acorns formed an important part of the diet during this period (Moratto 1984; Rosenthal et al. 2007). The remains of acorns and pine nuts have been recovered from foothill sites in Calaveras (CA-CAL-629/630 and CA-CAL-789) and Fresno (CAL-FRE-61) counties, and milling implements found at sites include grinding slabs (metates) and handstones (manos), as well as mortars and pestles.

Projectile points common in Middle Archaic sites are classified within the Sierra Contracting Stem and Houx Contracting Stem series (Justice 2002). Spears, angling hooks, composite bone hooks, and baked clay artifacts that may have been used as net or line sinkers represent the variety of fishing implements found at sites dating to this period. Other baked clay items include pipes and discoids, as well as cooking stones. Impressions of twined basketry, bone tools, shell City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 13
beads, and ground and polished charmstones have also been recovered. A variety of grave goods accompanied burials in cemetery areas, which were separate from habitation areas.

The presence during the Middle Archaic of an established trade network is indicated by a variety of exotic cultural materials, including obsidian tools, quartz crystals, and Olivella shell beads.

Obsidian sources during this period included quarries in the eastern Sierra, Cascades, and North Coast Ranges (Rosenthal et al. 2007).

UPPER ARCHAIC PERIOD (2,500 CAL BP – 850 CAL BP)
The Upper Archaic Period is better understood than any of the preceding periods (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Technology is more specialized during this period, with innovations and new types of bone tools, Olivella shell beads, Haliotis ornaments, charmstones, and ceremonial blades. An abundance of grinding tools (mortars and pestles) and plant remains, accompanied by a decrease in slab milling stones and handstones, indicates a shift to a greater reliance on acorns as a dietary staple during the Upper Archaic Period (Fredrickson 1974; Moratto 1984; Wohlgemuth 2004; Rosenthal et al. 2007). Archaeologists generally agree that milling slabs and handstones may have been used primarily for grinding wild grass grains and seeds, while mortars and pestles are better suited to crushing and grinding acorns (Moratto 1984).

A wide variety of natural resources were exploited during this period. Subsistence strategies varied regionally, focusing on seasonally available resources suited for harvesting in bulk, such as salmon, shellfish, deer, rabbits, and acorns (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Numerous large shell mounds dating to this period are located near fresh or salt water and indicate exploitation of a variety of aquatic resources was relatively intensive. The accumulations of cultural debris and habitation features, such as rock-lined ovens, house floors, burials, hearths and fire-cracked rock, reflect long-term residential occupation (Bouey 1995).

In the western margins of the San Joaquin Valley, discrete cemeteries date to the Upper Archaic Period at sites in Contra Costa and Merced counties (CA-CCO-696, CA-MER-3, CA-MER 94) (Meyer and Rosenthal 1998; Olsen and Payen 1969; Pritchard 1970). In the southern San Joaquin Valley, sedentary villages on the shores of Buena Vista Lake were occupied year-round (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Trade in marine shell beads and obsidian, among other items, continued to be important. Established obsidian trade routes brought this valuable tool stone from the North Coast Ranges and the east side of the Sierra Nevada Range to the Central Valley.

EMERGENT/LATE PREHISTORIC PERIOD (850 CAL BP – HISTORIC CONTACT) The archaeological record in the Central Valley for the Emergent or Late Prehistoric Period documents an increase in the diversity and number of artifacts and in the number of archaeological sites (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Along with an increase in sedentism and population that led to the development of social stratification, with an elaborate ceremonial and social organization, a number of cultural innovations shaped the Emergent Period. These include the City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 14
introduction of the bow and arrow and more diverse fishing equipment (bone fish hooks, harpoons, and gorge hooks). Diagnostic projectile points include the Gunther barbed series in the early part of the period, the unique Stockton serrated developed in the Delta region, Desert-side notched later in the period, and Cottonwood series in the Tulare and Buena Vista basins.

Fishing, hunting, and gathering plant foods continue as the foci of subsistence practices, including intensive harvesting of acorns and an increased emphasis on fishing (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Hopper mortars and shaped mortars and pestles, as well as bone awls used for producing coiled baskets, are also common components of the artifact assemblages. Locally made Cosumnes Brownware has been recovered from some sites in the lower Sacramento Valley, while pottery in the Tulare basin was obtained through trade. Baked clay balls, which were probably used for cooking in the absence of stone, remain common.

Cultural items associated with ceremonials and rituals include flanged tubular pipes and baked clay effigies representing humans and animals, among others. Clamshell disk beads were used as a form of currency and accompanied the development of extensive exchange networks. Mortuary practices included flexed burials, the cremation of high-status individuals, and pre-interment burning of offerings in grave pits (Fredrickson 1973; Moratto 1984). House floors or other structural remains have been discovered at sites in the valley and foothills, including sites in Calaveras, Kern, Merced, and Sacramento counties (e.g., CA-CAL-1180/H, CA-KER-39, CAMER-3, CA-MER-113, CA-SAC-29, CA-SAC-267; Rosenthal et al. 2007). Overall, the cultural patterns known from historic period Native American groups inhabiting the Central Valley are reflected in the subsistence and land use patterns practiced during the Emergent Period (Rosenthal et al. 2007).

ETHNOGRAPHY

TRIBAL TERRITORY
Historically, the Yokuts people collectively inhabited the San Joaquin Valley as well as the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, from the Calaveras River southward to the Kern River (Figure 4; Kroeber 1925). Ethnographers and linguists have traditionally divided Yokuts into three geographic groups, based on linguistic similarities and differences: Northern Valley, Southern Valley, and Foothill. The Northern Valley Yokuts tribes’ territory extended southward from the Calaveras River to the upper San Joaquin River and from the crest of the Coast (Diablo) Range east to the Sierra Nevada foothills (Kroeber 1925).

LINGUISTICS
The traditional region of Yokut languages spread across the southern half of the Central Valley and into the Sierra foothills. Kroeber (1925) lists up to 40 separate regional Yokut languages with an approximate total of 18,000 speakers prior to European contact, while Wallace (1978) estimates the population density for Northern Valley Yokuts alone at 25,000 to 31,000 precontact. In 1852, representatives of only three of the remaining Northern Valley Yokuts tribes City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 15
(including the Heuchi) were present to sign statewide treaties (Wallace 1978). Currently, there are fewer than a dozen speakers of Wikchamni Yokuts, half a dozen Chaynimni Yokuts speakers, less than two dozen speakers of Yawelmani Yokuts and only a few speakers of Chukchansi Yokuts (Berkeley 2025).

VILLAGE STRUCTURE AND HABITATION
The Northern Valley Yokuts grouping consisted of 11 or more tribes, each containing 300 or so people (Wallace 1978). Most members lived within a single settlement that often had the same name as the political unit. These were generally established on low rises along the major watercourses. The eastern side of the San Joaquin River was more heavily populated than the land to the west of the river, due to greater water availability. Yokut villages generally contained at least three types of structures – oval single-family dwellings made of tule, ceremonial chambers, and sweathouses (Wallace 1978).

FOOD AND RESOURCE USEAGE
The fundamental economy of the Yokuts was subsistence fishing, hunting, and collecting plant foods. Acorns, collected in the fall and then stored in granaries, were a staple food (Wallace 1978). During the fall and spring runs, salmon was a dietary mainstay. Wildfowl, such as geese and ducks, were also an important staple. Additional dietary plant parts included seeds, berries and tule roots. Large game included deer, elk, antelope, and black bears.

A wide variety of tools, implements, and enclosures were used by the Northern Valley Yokuts to gather, collect, and process food resources (Kroeber 1925; Latta 1977; Wallace 1978). These included bow and arrows, nets, traps, slings, and blinds for hunting land mammals and birds; and harpoons, hooks, and nets, as well as tule rafts. Sharpened digging sticks and woven tools (seed beaters, burden baskets, and carrying nets) would have been used to collect plant resources and a variety of implements (stone mortars and pestles, bedrock and portable mortars, stone knives, and bone tools) used for processing resources. The Northern Valley Yokuts traded with neighboring groups for bows and arrows, baskets, shell ornaments and beads, obsidian, and mussels and abalone (Wallace 1978).

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 16
Figure 4. Tribal boundary map

HISTORIC SETTING
SPANISH PERIOD (1769-1822)
The earliest European explorations of California occurred in 1542, when Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo and his party landed near Point Loma near San Diego. Cabrillo had been tasked by the Spanish monarch with exploration of the western United States interior. Interaction with the native population was initiated, but intensive exploration and colonization of California by Spain did not occur until the 1700s.

In 1769, the Spanish developed plans to build three towns and four presidios (forts) along the California coastline stretching from San Diego northward to Monterey. The town sites, --
Project Location
I
\
\
\
\
orthern
Valley
Yokuts
Ohlone \ /
/
\ ./
\ ·"
Service Layer Cr dits: Sources: Esri, usyef. NOAA
~
II 11 APE
I_ = Tribal Boundary
0 0
Kilometers
20 Miles
20 \
40 '
I
I
Southern
Valley
Yokuts
8 40 1 :1,250,000
Foothill
Yokuts
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\

MADERA TANKS
City of Madera
Madera County, CA
@G,STONE
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 17
established between 1777 and 1797, included present-day Los Angeles, San Jose, and a small town near Santa Cruz named Branciforte. The presidios were established at San Diego, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and San Francisco. Under Spain, the borderlands were colonized as defenses against the intrusion of the English, French, Dutch, and Russians, with the Manila trade an important item for protection in California. They were held by two typical institutions: the mission and the presidio (Bolton 1913, 1921, 1930 as cited in Aviña 1976).

Mission San Diego Alcalá was founded in 1769, the first of 21 Franciscan missions built along the coast on the El Camino Real between San Diego and Sonoma. The goals of the missions were tri-fold: they established a Spanish presence on the west coast, provided a way to Christianize native peoples, and served to exploit native population as laborers. The mission system severely disrupted socio-political structure of the native population, especially those living in close proximity (Loumala 1978:595).

Arrival of the Franciscan missionaries during the Spanish period resulted in far-reaching alterations in Native American lifeways. These shifts included high mortality rates and social changes due to the introduction of European diseases and customs (e.g., European farming methods; Dobyns 1983; Walker and Hudson 1989). Due to the high mortality rates, many Native American villages were abandoned, with inhabitants fleeing to the missions because “As the Native Americans watched the Europeans remain healthy during the epidemics, they began to view disease as a form of divine punishment for human transgressions” (Dobyns 1983) and “Believing that the Christian God held a power greater than their own, the Natives willingly joined the Spanish missions” (Rushing 1995:15).

The native population decreased because of a series of epidemics, and their traditional lifestyle was severely altered as neophytes were converted to Christianity and forced to work for the mission.

MEXICAN PERIOD (1822-1847)
After Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1821, the Mission lands were secularized under the Secularization Act of 1833, but much of the land was transferred to political appointees. A series of large land grants that transferred Mission properties to private ownership were awarded by the Governors of California—Juan B. Alvarado, Manuel Micheltorena and Pío Pico—between 1840 and 1846 (Cowan 1977; Ohles 1997). Ranches and farms were established throughout the San Diego region during this period.

AMERICAN PERIOD (1848-PRESENT)
The Mexican-American war followed on the heels of the Bear Flag Revolt of June 1846 (Ohles 1997). General Andrés Pico and John C. Frémont signed the Articles of Capitulation in December 1847, and with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in February 1848, hostilities ended and Mexico relinquished California to the United States. Under the treaty, City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 18
Mexico ceded the lands of present-day California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas to the United States for $15 million (Fogelson 1993:10). Within two years following the treaty, California applied for admission as a state.

MADERA COUNTY
Madera County was organized from a part of Fresno County in 1853 and lies in the geographical center of the state. It was named after the Spanish word for “wood” or “timber.” Beginning with the 1850s Gold Rush, timber has been an important economic resource for the County and for today’s City of Madera. The County’s first sawmill was constructed in the foothill mining district near present-day Oakhurst. Placer mining camps developed along the upper Fresno and San Joaquin rivers and on Coarsegold Creek at Coarsegold (also known as Texas Flat). Other camps in this district were named Fresno Flats (today’s Oakhurst), Grub Gulch, Fine Gold, and Temperance Flat. Fresno Flats also housed one of several trading posts operated by Major James D. Savage in the southern Mother Lode during the Gold Rush era. By the late 1870s, a stage road that passed through Fresno Flats and Coarsegold had been constructed from Madera to Yosemite Valley (Hoover et al. 2002).

After the Southern Pacific line of the Central Pacific Railroad was completed through the County in 1872, the ability to transport lumber long distances further fueled the regional economy. To meet the demand for lumber by the states east of the Sierra Nevada, and to facilitate the transportation of cut trees to the railroad, a 63-mile flume was constructed at a cost of a half million dollars. Completed in 1874, the town of Madera was settled and grew around the lower end of the flume near the railroad stop and the Fresno River (Hoover et al. 2002). The town was incorporated in 1907 and has been the county seat since it was officially laid out by the California Lumber Company in 1876.

The first agricultural settlement in the County was founded approximately nine miles from Chowchilla at Borden (originally Alabama Settlement) in 1858/1859 by settlers from Alabama (Hoover et al. 2002). Many of the miners that migrated south from the Columbia-Sonora goldfields in the 1850s and 1860s also settled on the valley floor and farmed or raised livestock.

Established in the 1870s, the agricultural settlements of Berenda and Fairmead were also located along the railroad line. Named after “berrendo,” the Spanish word for antelope, the settlement of Berendo changed its name to Berenda in 1919 (Durham 1998). Agriculture continues to play a significant role in the regional economy, although agricultural and grazing land in the Madera area is being converted to other uses.

In 1893, the Madera County official broke away from Fresno County. Between 1984 and 2006, over 1,300 acres of agricultural and grazing land per year was converted in Madera County to mainly rural residential and commercial uses (City of Madera 2009).

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 19

CITY OF MADERA
The City of Medera originated as a lumber mill town, the site laid out by the California Lumber Company. Founded in 1876, its name originated from the Spanish word for “wood.” The town grew quickly with 25 buildings (including a saloon and multiple residences) constructed by 1877, with the home of a Mr. Jason also used as a hotel. That same year, the first schoolhouse was constructed by residents on two acres of land (Coate 2005).

By 1878, the California Lumber Company declared bankruptcy and the Madera Logging operation was transferred to the San Jose Bank. Ownership then moved to Return Roberts who incorporated a new lumber company called Madera Flume and Trading Company. In 1881, a fire destroyed Madera’s lumberyard. Further disaster struck when the nationwide economic depression of 1890 nearly ruined the Madera Flume and Trading Company. In 1899, the Madera Sugar Pine Lumber Company assumed control of the Madera Flume and Trading Company’s assets (Coate 2005).

Madera’s economy boomed resulting in a substantial population growth of 1,500 by 1891. In 1893, voters banded together to pass a resolution to divide Fresno County and create Madera County. The town of Madera was designated as the county seat. In 1907, Madera residents voted for incorporation which passed and was approved on March 27, 1907. Great change came to the city with the onset of the Great Depression in the 1930s which destroyed the lumber market and the backbone of Madera’s economy. To fill the gap, residents pivoted to a diversified agrarian economy.

Wine grape production flourished and by 1985 Madera was designated an American Viticulture Area. By 2005 the city’s population was 45,000. As seen throughout the rest of the county, between 1984 and 2006 grazing and agricultural land in Madera was gradually replaced with residential and commercial development (City of Madera and PMC 2009).

PROJECT AREA HISTORY
The earliest known USGS topographic map of the APE shows what is now Road 26 and North D Street present by 1922 (Madera, 1:31,680, 1922). By 1946, an unimproved portion of Ellis Street is present which runs between what is now Krohn Street to the west and Merced Street to the east (Madera, 1:62,500, 1946). A 1957 USDA aerial photograph shows the M.I.D. canal, Lateral 24.2 (also known as 24.2 Canal) in its current location and configuration. A bridge is visible on Ellis Street which intersects with the canal (NETROnline 1957). By this time, only a handful of residences are visible which face the APE.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 20

SOURCES CONSULTED

CALIFORNIA HISTORIC RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM
Cogstone requested a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield which included the entire proposed APE as well as a one-mile radius.

Results of the record search were received on May 12, 2025 and indicated that 11 previous studies have been completed within the APE while an additional 21 studies have been completed previously within a one-mile radius of the APE (Table B1; Appendix B).

One cultural resource, Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) has been previously recorded within the APE (Table B2; Appendix B). An additional resource, Madera Irrigation District (M.I.D.) Outside of the APE a total of seven cultural resources have been previously documented within the one-mile search radius from the APE (Table B2; Appendix B). These consist of two cultural resources within a quarter-mile of the APE, two cultural resources within a quarter- to half-mile of the APE, and three cultural resources with a half-mile to one mile of the APE. A summary of the Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) is provided below.

MADERA CANAL; MADERA IRRIGATION DISTRICT (M.I.D.); (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) Numerous segments of Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) have been recorded and evaluated for potential historic significance since 2000. A 500-foot-long segment of Lateral 24.2 (24.2 Canal) was documented in 2016 by Garcia and Associates but was not evaluated for historic significance (Garcia and Associates 2016).
2000 Hattersley-Drayton
The earliest known documentation of the canal was in 2000 by Karana Hattersley-Drayton of Caltrans. A segment of the Madera Canal (#8, Lateral 32.2) was described as approximately 15 miles long. This segment of the canal is called Lateral 32.2 as it begins at a turnout on the Madera Canal which is approximately 32.2 miles from the Friant Dam. It is one of four turn-outs along the Madera Canal. Constructed in ca. 1953 as an open ditch, Lateral 32.2 crosses under State Route 99 near the town of Fairmead. In 1972 a portion pipe was installed which the expansion of the highway [assumed to be Highway 99). The width of the segment is between 10- 12 feet at water level and 20 feet at the top of the low berms. Surrounding areas were described and rural farmland with orchards.

The Fairmead Colonies were established in 1912 and were comprised of numerous family farms.

However, due to a lack of a developed water conveyance system and a severe drop in the region’s water table by the 1940s, the Fairmead Colonies struggled. In 1950, the Madera Irrigation District contracted with the Bureau of Reclamation to dig laterals in the Fairmead area City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 21
which connected with the Madera Canal. The construction of Lateral 32.2 saved the struggling farmers of the Fairmead Colonies. Lateral 32.2 was recommended as qualifying as a historical resource under CEQA (Hattersley-Drayton 2000).
2000 Hattersley-Drayton
In 2000, Karana Hattersley-Drayton of Caltrans documented Lateral 32.2-9.9 which diverts water from Lateral 32.2 via the 9.9 Headworks located south of Fairmead and east of Road 20.

Lateral 32.2-9.9 is six feet wide, unlined, and seven miles long. It was built in stages between 1953-1954 by Bureau of Reclamation. Lateral 32.2-9.9 was recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR under Criteria A/1 (Hattersley-Drayton 2000). 2005 Applied EarthWorks, Inc.

In 2005, Applied EarthWorks, Inc. documented a segment of Madera Canal and Lateral 6.2.

These segments of the canal were not evaluated for historic significance. (Applied Earthworks 2005)
2005 Roark, Jones & Stokes
In 2005, Gabriel Roark of Jones & Stokes documented “Main No. 1 Canal”. This canal was originally built in 1870 and was used for local irrigation purposes, transporting water from the Fresno River to Cottonwood Creek. In 1949, M.I.D. purchased the canal as an addition to the Madera Canal. While Main No. 1 Canal is historically significant for its association with early irrigation and agricultural development, decades of regular maintenance and redesign by MID and the Madera Canal & Irrigation Company (MC&IC) has resulted in the resource’s loss of integrity. Therefore Main No. 1 Canal is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP. 2009 JRP Historical Consulting, LLC.

In 2009, Joseph Freeman and Rebecca Flores of JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, documented three segments of the Madera Canal located within agricultural and ranch areas. This segment is located north of the City of Fresno near State Route 41. The site form prepared by Freeman and Flores states the segment recorded was originally documented in 1995 by “Hatoff” (this site form cannot be located at present). The segment of canal revisited by Freeman and Flores is described with steep earthen berms which rise above concrete sidewalls. The berms are level with the surrounding terrain. According to Freeman and Flores, the Madera Canal extends 37 miles north from Friant Dam. These three segments were not evaluated for potential historic significance as part of the 2009 site form. (JRP Historical Consulting, LLC 2009) 2013 Culturescape
In 2013, five irrigation gate valves located along the Fresno River Big Main Canal were documented by Mark Kile of Culturescape. They are described as non-unique and ubiquitous City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 22
throughout the canal system located at distribution points of the canal. These features were not evaluated for historic significance (Kile 2013a).
2013 Culturescape
In 2013, Mark Kile of Culturescape documented the locations of 20 irrigation gate valves distributed along the Madera Canal system. These features were not evaluated for historic significance (Kile 2013b).
2014 ESA
In 2014, R. Scott Baxter from ESA documented a 60-foot segment of the MID Big Main Canal near the northeast semi-rural area of the town of Madera. This segment, built ca. 1922, is described as an earthen, V-shaped canal with a flat bottom. Baxter recommended the MID Big Main Canal as historically significant for the canal’s association with early corporate irrigation efforts and agricultural development in Madera County. However, following decades of alterations and maintenance, this segment of the MID Big Main Canal no longer possesses sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance. Therefore, this segment of the canal is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP. (ESA 2014) 2016 Garcia and Associates
In 2016, Brandon Patterson of Garcia and Associates documented a 500-foot-long segment of the Madera Canal, Lateral 24.2, near Avenue 16 and Road 22 in Madera County. The canal segment is described as V-shaped, mechanically excavated to six feet deep, with the base loosely bedded by cobble and gravel. Additional components include a pre-cast, concrete box culvert and outlet, likely constructed after the 1950s. The setting of this segment of the canal is rural agricultural lands. This segment of the canal was not evaluated for historic significance (Garcia and Associates 2016).
2016 Applied EarthWorks Inc.

In 2016, Kaite Asselin of Applied EarthWorks, Inc., documented multiple segments of laterals that are extensions of MID Lateral 6.2. These laterals were built between 1947 and 1963. Lateral

6.2 is an earthen canal with earthen berms raised three feet above surface level. These segments of the canals were not evaluated for historic significance (Applied EarthWorks Inc. 2016). 2016 HDR EOC, Inc.

In 2016, a 100-foot section of the Madera Canal was documented by HDR EOC, Inc. The canal is described as earthen-lined, 20 feet wide and nine feet deep. This segment of canal was completed in 1947 and is largely unaltered with the exception of canal maintenance. This resource was recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion A/1 for its relation to the Central Valley Project (CVP) which was a major federal undertaking resulting in the expansion of agriculture in the Central Valley. This resource was also recommended City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 23
eligible for listing under Criterion C/3 for its engineering significance as part of a unique irrigation system (HDR EOC, Inc. 2016).
2016 Culturescape
In 2016, M. C. Kile of Culturescape documented a 6,500-foot segment of the MID’s Lateral

24.2-17.0. This irrigation canal is part of the MID expansion completed ca. 1950 and underwent major modifications up until 1965. At the time of its documentation in 2016, it was described as 15 feet wide and six feet deep. This segment of Lateral 24.2-17.0 was given the status code: 6Z (Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation; Kile 2016a). 2016 Culturescape
In 2016, Mark Kile of Culturescape documented a total of 14 control points for the MID constructed sometime between 1935 and 1963. This site form has conflicting recommendations of eligibility. It has a status code of 6Z (Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation), however the Dry Creek Diversion Dam (Abbeys Hole) is recommended eligible for listing under Criterion A and Criterion B (Kile 2016b). 2016 ESA
In 2016, Katherine Anderson of ESA documented three segments of the MID Lateral 6.2 Canal:

MID Lateral 6.2 (1,500-foot segment), distributary canal MID Lateral 6.2-9.2 (1,500-foot segment), and distributary canal MID Lateral 6.2-13.4 (2,500-foot segment). The MID Lateral

6.2 and its distributary canals is one of many canals constructed in support of the Madera Canal and were built well after the Madera Canal’s initial construction. (Anderson 2016) MID Lateral 6.2 is an earthen trapezoidal canal, 40 feet wide at its top, 20 feet deep, and 20 feet wide at the base. MID Lateral 6.2-9.2 is an earthen distributary canal organized with an asymmetrical trapezoidal/U-shape. It is 20 feet wide at its top, eight feet deep, and 10 feet wide at its base. The unlined walls have steep sloping sides. MID Lateral 6.2-13.4 is also an earthen distributary canal with a trapezoidal shape. It is 20 feet wide at its top, three feet deep, and four feet wide at its base.

Anderson states the segments of the MID Lateral 6.2 are not considered unique in its association with the Madera Canal, nor are they associated with the lives of important individuals, nor are they considered significant in their design or form.
2018 Applied EarthWorks
In 2018, Ward Stanley documented a 61-foot-long segment of MID Lateral 6.2. Construction of this canal was completed by 1955 as part of the Central Valley Project. No associated resources were observed. This segment of canal was not re-evaluated for historic significance (Applied EarthWorks 2018).

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 24

OTHER SOURCES
In addition to the SSJVIC records search, a variety of sources were consulted in May 2025 to obtain information regarding the cultural context of the Project vicinity (Tables 1 and 2). Sources included the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). Specific information about the APE, obtained from historic-era maps and aerial photographs, is presented in the APE History section.

Table 1. Additional Sources Consulted
Source Results
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Negative
Historic USGS Topographic Maps See APE History section
Historic US Department of Agriculture Aerial
Photographs
See APE History section
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Negative Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) Positive; OTIS ID-521423: “24.2 CANAL” (Status Code: 6Y).

California Historical Landmarks (CHL) Negative
California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI) Negative Caltrans Historic Bridge Inventory (2016) Positive; M.I.D. Canal (Object ID: 32545, Bridge No. 41C0132). Built in 1975. Historic Significance
Code: 4. Historical Significance not determined.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) General Land
Office Records
Positive; See Table 2.

Local Registers (Historical Societies/Archives) Negative Lateral 24.2 is listed in the Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) as “24.2 CANAL” under the California Office of Historic Preservation’s internal numbering system OTIS ID 521423 (see Table 1). 24.2 CANAL is not associated with a Primary number within the BERD however, the resource is assigned the Status Code 6Y (Determined ineligible for listing in the National Register through a consensus determination of a federal agency and the State Historic Preservation Officer).

Table 2. BLM Search Results
Name Accession No. Issue Date Authority Twn, Rng, Sec
John O. Earl AGS-0292-017
AGS-0292-018
AGS-0292-019
CACAAA 115797
CACAAA 115799
AGS-0292-020
AGS-0292-022
AGS-0292-023
5/15/1869 State Grant-Agri College
State Grant-Agri College
State Grant-Agri College
Scrip or Nature of Scrip
Scrip or Nature of Scrip
State Grant-Agri College
State Grant-Agri College
State Grant-Agri College
T: 11S, R:17E, Sec:11
T: 11S, R:17E, Sec:11
T: 11S, R:17E, Sec:11
T: 11S, R:17E, Sec:11
T: 11S, R:17E, Sec:11
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 25
Name Accession No. Issue Date Authority Twn, Rng, Sec
CACAAA 115800
CACAAA 115802
CACAAA 115803
Scrip or Nature of Scrip
Scrip or Nature of Scrip
Scrip or Nature of Scrip
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
T:11S, R:17E, Sec:12
Isaac Friedlander AGS-0299-273
AGS-0299-275
7/20/1869 State Grant-Agri College
State Grant-Agri College
T:11S, R:18E, Sec: 7
T:11S, R:18E, Sec: 7
John O. Earl
Possibly John O. Earl (year of birth unknown) who was one of the original 49ers and one of the original trustees of the Lick Estate (James Lick was the richest man in California when he died in 1876). Mr. Earl died in 1900 at his residence at 1015 Morton Street, Alameda, California (The Daily Encinal 1900).

Isaac Friedlander
Possibly Isaac Friedlander (ca. 1823-1878), known as the “Wheat King of California,” however there is a lack of information that can confirm this connection.

ADDITIONAL STUDIES
Madera Irrigation District Water Supply Enhancement Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (2009)
Cogstone reviewed a 2009 Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation. The report was prepared as part of a Water Supply Enhancement Project (WSEP) located on the property known as Madera Ranch, west of the city of Madera. A historic resource evaluation for Lateral 24.2 (referred to in the report as ‘24.2 Canal’) is included in this study which states:
“P-20-2399, the Main No. 1 Canal, the Main No. 2 Canal, the 24.2 Canal, and the Section 8 Canal, were evaluated previously under the NRHP’s significance criteria.

None of these resources were found to be eligible under the NRHP’s significance criteria… and SHPO concurred with these determinations on August 31, 2009” (U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation 2011).

NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on April 29, 2025. On April 30, 2025, the NAHC responded that the SLF search was completed with negative results, and provided contact information for 13 Native American tribal organizations and individuals that may have more information about the Project area. The response from the NAHC can be found in Appendix C.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 26
SURVEY

METHODS
The survey stage is important in a Project’s environmental assessment phase to verify the exact location of each identified cultural resource, the condition or integrity of the resource, and the proximity of the resource to areas of cultural resources sensitivity. All undeveloped ground surface areas within the ground disturbance portion of the Project area were examined for artifacts (e.g., flaked stone tools, tool-making debris, stone milling tools or fire-affected rock), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil depressions and features indicative of the former presence of structures or buildings (e.g., postholes, foundations), or historic-era debris (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics). Existing ground disturbances (e.g., cutbanks, ditches, animal burrows, etc.) were visually inspected. Photographs of the Project area, including ground surface visibility and items of interest, were taken with a digital camera.

The built environment resources survey identified and verified the location of all structures and buildings within the Project area aged 45 years or older. Once identified, historic built environment resources were examined to ascertain if they are recommended eligible for listing as a historical resource at the local, state, or national level and if the original integrity of the resource remains intact. The seven aspects of integrity which are considered as part of a determination of eligibility include: location, design, setting, materials, feeling, workmanship, and association.

RESULTS
On May 14, 2025, Cogstone archaeologist Alison Bryson-Deveraux completed an intensive pedestrian survey of all areas of undeveloped and open space within the APE (approximately 25 percent). The APE consists of 50.28 acres of developed urban land, mainly roadways, sidewalks and easements (Figures 5 through 8). The proposed well field along North Lake Street was not surveyed due to extreme vegetation growth as well as fencing around the perimeter.

Soils within the APE consisted of Cometa sandy loam, a moderately deep, moderately well drained soil formed in alluvium from granitic rock sources. Areas of visibility included graded easements and undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadways, and within areas of bioturbation.

Visibility was 100 percent in unvegetated areas or in areas which had been recently mowed or tilled, and 10 to 15 percent in densely vegetated areas. Vegetation noted within the APE included native and non-native species such as field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), wild oat (Avena fatua), and curlycup gumweed (Grindelia squarrosa).

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 27
A segment of the Madera Canal (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) and the historic in age bridge along Ellis Street, M.I.D. Canal Bridge (41C0132) were photographed and documented on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms (Appendix D). While portions of the Madera Canal have been previously documented and evaluated for historic significance, this small section within the APE was documented on a new set of DPR 523 forms as an update for P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H.

Figure 5. Sharon Boulevard at paved road terminus, facing northwest.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 28
Figure 6. Southside easement of Ellis Street between Owens Street and Sonora Street, facing southeast.

Figure 7. Southeast corner of well field along North Lake Street, facing southwest.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 29
Figure 8. Northern terminus of Sharon Boulevard, facing southwest.

P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H, SEGMENT OF MADERA CANAL, LATERAL 24.2 This segment of the Maderia Canal’s Lateral 24.2 is earthen lined and intersects with the M.I.D.

Canal Bridge (41C0132) on Ellis Street. Lateral 24.2 transports water from Dry Creek to the north. The flow of Dry Creek into the canal is controlled by Diversion Dam (Figure 9).

M.I.D. CANAL BRIDGE (41C0132)
Built in 1975, this concrete beam bridge is located on Ellis Street and crosses over the Madera Canal. The bridge is simple in its design with concrete wing walls, girder, asphalted deck, and galvanized steel guardrails (Figure 10).

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 30
Figure 9. Southern side of canal from access road, facing northwest.

Figure 10. View of northern side of M.I.D Canal Bridge (41C0132). Facing southwest.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 31

BUILT ENVIRONMENT EVALUATION
To be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) a resource must:

A/1. be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history;
B/2. be associated with the lives of significant persons of the past; C/3. embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity those components may lack individual distinction; or
D/4. yielded or may likely yield information important in history or prehistory.

In addition to having significance using the above criteria, resources must have “integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association” to the period of significance (OHP 2011). The period of significance is the date or span of time within which significant events transpired, or significant individuals made their important contributions.

Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity as evidenced by the survival of characteristics or historic fabric that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Alterations to a resource or changes in its use over time may have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. Simply, resources must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance.

P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H (SEGMENT OF MID CANAL, LATERAL 24.2) Theme: Irrigation
Property Type: Canal
Period of Significance: Ca. 1954-1957
Criteria A/1
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history?
Lateral 24.2 was built in the mid-1950s as an agricultural irrigation canal transporting water south from Dry Creek. A review of USDA aerials of the City of Madera and the census designated place Madera Acres shows that in 1957, two years after the construction of Lateral

24.2, multiple large parcels of land are graded. However, these parcels were developed into residential neighborhoods in the late 1960s and 1970s. As an irrigation canal, Lateral 24.2 would City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 32
not be associated with providing water to these homes nor support their construction. This section of canal is not associated with any significant contributions to local agricultural or residential development. Therefore, due to a lack of significance, this segment of Lateral 24.2 is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion A or the CRHR under Criterion 1.

Criteria B/2
Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons of the past? This segment of the MID canal, Lateral 24.2, is not known to be associated with the lives of people considered significant to history. Therefore, this segment of the canal is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion B or the CRHR under Criterion 2.

Criteria C/3
Does this resource embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity those components may lack individual distinction? This segment of the M.I.D. canal, Lateral 24.2, is an unremarkable example of an earthen lined canal. It is a small part of a secondary system which supports the main M.I.D. canal. It is not an exemplary representation of a type, method of construction, nor does it represent the work of a master nor possess high artistic value. Therefore, this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C and the CRHR under Criterion 3.

Criteria D/4
Has this resource yielded or may likely yield information important in history or prehistory?
Criterion 4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This resource does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Therefore, this segment of Lateral 24.2 is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4.

M.I.D. CANAL BRIDGE (41C0132)
Theme: Transportation
Property Type: Bridge
Period of Significance: 1975
Criteria A/1
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history?
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 33
This bridge, built in 1975, is a typical concrete beam bridge which is used for local pedestrian and vehicle transportation access over the man made Madera Canal. A review of a 1957 USDA aerial photograph shows a bridge present in the location of the current M.I.D. Canal Bridge.

Therefore, it is assumed that the current bridge is a replacement for the original. This bridge is not associated with any events considered significant to history and therefore, recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion A or the CRHR under Criterion 1.

Criteria B/2
Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons of the past? No information can be located which connects this bridge with the lives of individuals considered significant to history. Therefore this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion B or the CRHR under Criterion 2.

Criteria C/3
Does this resource embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity those components may lack individual distinction? This bridge is an unremarkable and common representation of a small concrete beam bridge. It is not an exemplary representation of a style, period, method of construction, nor does it represent the work of a master nor does it possess high artistic value. Therefore, this bridge is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3.

Criteria D/4
Has this resource yielded or may likely yield information important in history or prehistory?
Criterion 4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This resource does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Therefore, this bridge is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 34

STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The APE is assessed to have a low sensitivity for buried pre-contact and historic-age archaeological resources based on the negative records search results, negative SLF search results, and negative survey results.

A segment of the Madera Canal, Lateral 24.2 (P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H) and the M.I.D.

Canal Bridge (41C0132) are present within the APE. Both resources were documented on two sets of DPR 523 forms and evaluated for historic significance. Due to a lack of historic significance, these resources are recommended not eligible for listing at the national, state, or local level.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the lack of pre-contact cultural resources, negative SLF search, negative pedestrian survey, and lack of historic significance for the segment of the Madera Canal and associated bridge, no additional work is recommended at this time.

In the event of an unanticipated discovery, all work must be suspended within 50 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist evaluates it. In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered during project development, all work must cease near the find immediately.

In accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, the County Coroner must be notified if potentially human bone is discovered. The Coroner will then determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by phone within 24 hours, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The NAHC will then designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) with respect to the human remains. The MLD then has the opportunity to recommend to the property owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods. Work may not resume in the vicinity of the find until all requirements of the health and safety code have been met.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 35

REFERENCES CITED
Anderson, Katherine
2016 “MID Lateral 6.2 Segments”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Katherine Anderson. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Applied EarthWorks
2005 “Madera Canal and Lateral 6.2”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Applied EarthWorks. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.
2016 “Madera Irrigation District (MID)”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Katie Asselin. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.
2018 “Madera Irrigation District Lateral 6.2”. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Ward Stanley. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Atwater, Brian F., and David F. Belknap
1980 Tidal–Wetland Deposits of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California. In Quaternary Depositional Environments of the Pacific Coast. Pacific Coast Paleogeography Symposium 4, edited by M.E. Field, R.G. Douglas, A.H. Bouma, J.C. Ingle, and I.P.

Colburn, pp. 89–103. The Pacific Section of the Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Los Angeles.

Aviña, Rose Hollenbaugh
1976 Spanish and Mexican Land Grants in California. Arno Press, New York.

Bouey, P.D.
1995 Final Report on the Archaeological Analysis of CA-SAC-43, Cultural Resources Mitigation for the Sacramento Urban Area Levee Reconstruction Project, Sacramento County, California. Prepared by Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. On file, North Central Information Center.

City of Madera
2009 City of Madera General Plan. Chapter 8: Land Use Element. Prepared by the City of Madera and PMC.

City of Madera and PMC
2009 City of Madera California General Plan. Adopted October 7, 2009 by the Madera City Council. Resolution 09-243. Available at https://www.madera.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2016/04/City-of-Madera-GP-08-03-10-w-HE-Revised.pdf, accessed May 14, 2025.

Coate, William
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 36
2005 Images of America: Madera. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston.

Cowan, Robert G.
1977 Ranchos of California: A List of Spanish Concessions, 1775-1882 and Mexican Grants, 1822-1846. Historical Society of Southern California.

Daily Encinal, The
1900 Passing of John O. Earl. The Daily Encinal (Alameda, California). Published Friday, January 12, 1900. Page 1. Available at https://www.newspapers.com/image/695442596/, accessed May 15, 2025.

Dillon, Brian D.
2002 California PalaeoIndians: Lack of Evidence, or Evidence of a Lack? In Essays in California Archaeology: A Memorial to Franklin Fenenga, edited by William J. Wallace and Francis A. Riddell, pp. 110–128. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 60. Berkeley.

Dobyns, Henry F.
1983 Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in Eastern North America. University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Durham, David L.
1998 California’s Geographic Names: A Gazetteer of Historic and Modern Names of the State.

Clovis: Word Dancer Press.

ESA
2014 “MID Big Main Canal”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: R. Scott Baxter. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Felton, E.L.
1965 California’s Many Climates. Pacific Books, Palo Alto.

Fogelson, R.M.
1993 The Fragmented Metropolis: Los Angeles, 1850-1930. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Fredrickson, David A.
1973 Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis. 1974 Cultural Diversity in Early California: A View from the North Coast Ranges. Journal of Anthropology 1(1) 41-53.

Garcia and Associates
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 37
2016 “Madera Canal, Lateral 24.2 Segment (GANDA-MAD-01)”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Brandon Patterson. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Goman, Michelle, and Lisa Wells
2000 Trends in River Flow Affecting the Northeastern Reach of the San Francisco Bay Estuary over the Past 7000 Years. Quaternary Research 54:206–217.

Hattersley-Drayton, Karana
2000 “#8, Lateral 32.2 (Madera Canal)”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Karana Hattersley-Dayton, Caltrans. Copy on file at:

Southern San Joaquin Valley.

HDR EOC, Inc.
2016 “CA-MAD-2649H”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: M. Connolly. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Heizer, Robert F.
1949 The Archaeology of Central California, I: The Early Horizon. University of California Anthropological Records 12(1):1–83. Berkeley.

Hoover, Mildred B., Hero E. Rensch, Ethel G. Rensch, and William N. Abeloe 2002 Historic Spots in California. 5th Edition. Revised by Douglas E. Kyle. Stanford University Press, California.
iNaturalist
2025 Madera County. Available from https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=1286, accessed May 7, 2025
JRP Historical Consulting, LLC)
2009 “Madera Canal (UPDATE)”. P-20-002308. Department of Parks and Recreation.

Prepared by: Mark Kile of Culturescape. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley Justice, Noel D.
2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Kile, Mark
2013a “Fresno River Big Main Canal”. P-20-002308. Department of Parks and Recreation.

Prepared by: Mark Kile of Culturescape. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley. 2013b “Madera Irrigation District”. P-20-002308. Department of Parks and Recreation.

Prepared by: Mark Kile of Culturescape. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 38
2016a “Madera Irrigation District”. P-20-002308. Department of Parks and Recreation.

Prepared by: Mark Kile of Culturescape. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley. 2016b “Madera Irrigation District”. P-20-002308. Department of Parks and Recreation.

Prepared by: Mark Kile of Culturescape. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Kroeber, Alfred L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Reprinted 1976 by Dover Publications, Inc., New York.

LaJeunesse, Roger M., and John M. Pryor
1996 Skyrocket Appendices. Report on file, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fresno.

Latta, Frank F.
1977 Handbook of Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz.

Luomala, Katherine
1978 Tipai and Ipai. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 592–609. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Meyer, Jack, and Jeffery S. Rosenthal
1998 An Archaeological Investigation of Artifacts and Human Remains from CA-CCO-637, Los Vaqueros Project Alignment, Contra Costa County, California. Report prepared by Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University Academic Foundation, Rohnert Park, California.

Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, San Diego.

NETROnline
1957 Historic Aerials. Available at https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer, accessed May 27, 2025.

Office of Historic Preservation
2011 “California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6 California Register and National Register: A Comparison (for purposes of determining eligibility for the California Register)”. Office of Historic Preservation Department of Parks and Recreation. Available at:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/technical%20assistance%20bulletin%206%202 011%20update.pdf. Accessed: May 10, 2024.

Ohles, W. V.
1997 Mission San Miguel Property and Padres. Word Dancer Press, Sanger, California.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 39
Olsen, W. H., and L. A. Payen
1969 Archaeology of the Grayson Site, Merced County, California. Archaeological Reports 12.

California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.

Pritchard, William E.
1970 Archaeology of the Menjoulet Site, Merced County, California. California Department of Parks and Recreation.

Ragir, Sonia
1972 The Early Horizon in Central California Prehistory. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 15. University of California, Berkeley.

Roark, Gabriel and Jones & Stokes
2005 “Main No. 1 Canal”. P-20-002308. State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation. Prepared by: Gabriel Roark and Jones & Stokes. Copy on file at: Southern San Joaquin Valley.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., and Jack Meyer
2004a Landscape Evolution and the Archaeological Record: A Geoarchaeological Study of the Southern Santa Clara Valley and Surrounding Region. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication No. 14. University of California, Davis. 2004b Cultural Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 10, Rural Conventional Highways. In Geoarchaeological Study, Vol 3., Landscape Evolution and the Archaeological Record of Central California. Report prepared by Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., Gregory G. White, and Mark Q. Sutton 2007 The Central Valley: A View from the Catbird’s Seat. In California Prehistory:

Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 147–163. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.

Rushing, Heather R.
1995 “In Sickness or In Health: European-Native American Contact and Disease.” Unpublished manuscript, Directed Individual Study Seminar, Department of Anthropology, Summer II Term, Mississippi State University.

Walker, Phillip L. and Travis Hudson
1989 Chumash Healing: Changing Health and Medical Practices in an American Indian Society. Malki Museum Press, Banning, California.

Wallace, William J.
1978 Northern Valley Yokuts. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 40
White, Gregory G.
2003 Population Ecology of the Prehistoric Colusa Reach. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis.

Wohlgemuth, E.
2004 The Course of Plant Food Intensification in Native Central California. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

United States Climate Data (USCD)
2025 Climate Madera – California. Available from
https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/madera/california/united-states/usca0657, accessed May 6, 2025
University of California, Berkeley (Berkeley)
n.d. California Language Archive: Northern Valley Yokuts. Accessed December 16, 2023. https://cla.berkeley.edu/languages/plains-miwok.html
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation
2011 Reclamation Managing Water in the West. Madera Irrigation District Water Supply enhancement Project. Final Environmental Impact Statement. EIS-06-127. Copy available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_ waterfix/exhibits/docs/STCDA%20et%20al/scda_47.pdf.

USGS Topographic Map
1922 Madera. [map]. U.S. Geological Survey. 1:31680. Topographic Quadrangle Map.

Madera, CA. 1922. Available at https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/topomapexplorer, accessed May 15, 2025.
1946 Madera. [map]. U.S. Geological Survey. 1:62,500. Topographic Quadrangle Map.

Madera, CA. 1954. Available at https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/topomapexplorer, accessed May 15, 2025.

City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 41
APPENDIX A. QUALIFICATIONS
Cogstone 42

MOLLY VALASIK
Principal Archaeologist

EDUCATION
2009 M.A., Anthropology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 2006 B.A., Anthropology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

SUMMARY QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Valasik serves as Cogstone’s CEO and CFO and helps guide the vision and direction of Cogstone. She has been with the company since 2009 and has helped transition Cogstone from sole ownership to multiple owners with an active board of directors. Ms. Valasik is a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA #989162) with more than 15 years of experience. She is a skilled professional who is well-versed in the compliance procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and regularly prepares cultural resources assessment reports for a variety of federal, state, and local agencies throughout California. Ms. Valasik has managed projects in the water, transportation, energy, development, and federal sectors. She meets the qualifications required by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. She is accepted as a Principal Investigator for prehistoric archaeology by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and is listed as a Principal Investigator on Cogstone’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Cultural Resource Use Permit.

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Antioch Housing Element Update, City of Antioch, Contra Costa County, CA. The purpose of this study was to review and summarize available information regarding known archaeological and historical resources within the boundaries of the City of Antioch to support an update to the city’s General Plan. The project involved the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the city’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update in compliance with CEQA. Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and prepared a Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Technical Report. The report mapped all prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and historic built environment resources within the city. The City of Antioch was the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. Project Manager. 2022
East Arques Avenue Project, City of Sunnyvale, Santa Clara County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural resources during the project, which consisted of replacing a 313,485-square foot, six building, industrial complex with 455,500 square feet of warehouse/advanced manufacturing space and 38,000 square feet of office space. Expected maximum depth of ground disturbance was six feet for grading and up to 15 feet for project utilities trenching. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources records search which identified a multi-component archaeological site within the project area.

Cogstone’s services also included a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC and an intensive pedestrian survey.

Additionally, four of the six buildings within the project area were evaluated on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms and were recommended as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Cogstone prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment Report. The City of Sunnyvale was the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. Project Manager. 2022
Portola Housing Element Project, City of Portola Valley, San Mateo County, CA. The project involved the preparation of a programmatic Initial Study (IS) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the City of Portola Valley’s Housing Element and Safety Element Updates that will be added to the General Plan. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment which consisted of cultural and paleontological resources records searches, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, and a review of the 1998 Portola Valley City Historic Resources Inventory. Cogstone recommended that the city conduct a new historic inventory that starts with the potential housings sites and is expanded in scope to include archaeological sites and developed three mitigation measures to guide future development. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. Project Manager. 2022
co~tone

PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY - HI STORY
Cogstone 43

ALISON BRYSON-DEVERAUX
Principal Investigator for Archaeology

EDUCATION
2017 M.A., Historic Preservation, Prescott College
2007 B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara

SUMMARY QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Bryson-Deveraux is an archaeologist with over 20 years of experience throughout the state of California. Her field expertise includes pedestrian surveys, excavation, site compilation, and mitigation monitoring. Ms. BrysonDeveraux has led a variety of projects at Cogstone in the water, development, and public works sectors. Prior to her role as Principal Investigator at Cogstone, she served as Lead Archaeologist for seven years on local oil field remediation projects which included repatriation. Ms. Bryson-Deveraux specializes in the prehistory and history of California. She meets the qualifications required by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation and is listed as a Field Director on Cogstone’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Cultural Resource Use Permit.

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Highway 35 Cultural Study, Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve, San Mateo County, CA. Cogstone conducted cultural resources and historic built environment assessments to determine the potential impacts to cultural and historic built environment resources from the proposed improvement and expansion on the existing North Ridge parking area to the west, construction of a multi-use trail crossing from the North Ridge Parking lot across Highway 35, and construction of a spur trail connecting the Highway 35 multi-use trail crossing with the proposed Ridge Trail Extension. Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), consultations with local historical societies, and an intensive pedestrian survey. No archaeological resources were identified during the survey. One historic resource, a 1940s era house, was photographed and documented on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms. A Cultural Resource Assessment Report and a Historic Resource Evaluation Report were prepared. This project was part of Cogstone’s on-call contract with Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Prime. Task Manager and Principal Investigator for Archaeology. 2022-2023 Calabazas Creek Rehabilitation Project, Santa Clara Valley Water District, City of Cupertino, Santa Clara County, CA. Cogstone is conducting archaeological monitoring to support the repairs and rehabilitation work along Calabazas Creek between Miller Avenue and Bollinger Road in the City of Cupertino. The Santa Clara Valley Water District will repair and stabilize the damaged creek bank sections along portions of Calabazas Creek to their as-build or natural condition to reduce the risk of flooding to homes, businesses, and schools and to improve the environment along the creek. The work involves removing sediment buildup, managing vegetation, clearing trash and debris, and stabilizing banks that have eroded during high water flows. Cogstone will prepare a Cultural Resources Monitoring Compliance Report at the conclusion of ground disturbing activities for the project. Sub to Granite Construction. Principal Investigator for Archaeology. 2022-2023 Pius Estate Winery, San Luis Obispo County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources resulting from the project.

The 29.5-acre project area was previously developed with an existing winery, tasting room, outbuildings, and a barn. Improvements included construction of a subterranean barrel and tank room with wine storage, and a twostory above-grade structural addition. Cogstone’s services included cultural and paleontological resources records searches, background research, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, and an intensive pedestrian survey.

Cogstone prepared a Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment Report to document the results of the assessment. San Luis Obispo County was the lead agency for this project under CEQA. Sub to Private Developer.

Principal Investigator for Archaeology. 2023
co~tone

PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY - HI STORY
Cogstone 44

SHANNON LOPEZ
Architectural Historian

EDUCATION
2018 M.A., History (with an emphasis in architecture), California State University, Fullerton 2012 B.A., History, Minor in Asian-Pacific Studies, California State University, Dominguez Hills

SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Lopez is a qualified architectural historian with over seven years of experience who meets or exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural History. Her experience includes architectural history research and surveys with photo documentation and recording of built environment resources for local and federal projects. She has extensive knowledge with Native American consultation, consultation with local and state historical societies, and in the analysis of primary and secondary sources. Ms. Lopez is acknowledged as an approved Architectural Historian by Caltrans and is listed as a Principal Investigator on Cogstone’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Permit for Archaeological Investigations. She is accepted as a Principal Investigator for Architectural History and History by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Fire Station 81 Project, City of Antioch, Contra Costa County, CA. Cogstone conducted a historical resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to historic resources resulting from the proposed remodeling of the former historic in age police station building for fire station expansion. The property is connected to the fire station via a common hallway. Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, background research, and consultation with local historical societies. Cogstone’s Architectural Historian reviewed photographs of the interior and exterior of the two buildings, records provided by the City of Antioch about the building site and history, recorded the police station building on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms, and evaluated it for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. A Historic Built Environment Assessment report was prepared that documented the findings and recommended mitigation measures for the project. Contra Costa County was the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Sub to ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.

Architectural Historian. 2024-2025
East County Service Center Project, City of Brentwood, Contra Costa County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural resources during construction of 56,000 to 71,000 square feet of new office space. The project also included outdoor public spaces, 224-284 surface parking spaces for employees and visitors, and sufficient electric vehicle (EV) Charging Stations to accommodate visitors and all county fleet vehicles stationed at the facility. Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), background research, and preparation of a Cultural Resources Memo report. The City of Brentwood was the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc. Architectural Historian. 2024 Eight Mile Dam Replacement Project, Stockton East Water District, San Joaquin County, CA. Cogstone conducted a historic built environment assessment to determine the potential impacts to historic resources resulting from the project. The Stockton East Water District (SEWD) in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) proposed to replace the existing structurally deficient dam with a new dam structure which has automated flow control to ensure safe operation of the dam and minimize water waste. The project involved removal of the existing dam structure and included installation of a new concrete foundation within the Calaveras River to be designed to hold the automated gate and walkway for the new dam. Cogstone conducted a built environment survey, recorded the historic dam on DPR 523 forms, and evaluated the resource for NRHP and CRHR eligibility. A Historic Built Environment Assessment Report was prepared to document the findings of the study. SEWD was the lead agency under CEQA and BOR acted as the lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Sub to Dokken Engineering. Architectural Historian. 2024 co~tone

PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY - HI STORY
Cogstone 45

LOGAN FREEBERG
GIS Manager

EDUCATION
2018 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Certificate, California State University, Fullerton 2003 B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara

SUMMARY QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Freeberg has over 20 years of experience in cultural resource management and has extensive experience in field surveying, data recovery, monitoring, and excavation of archaeological and paleontological resources associated with land development projects in the private and public sectors. He has conducted all phases of archaeological work, including fieldwork, laboratory analysis, research, and reporting. Mr. Freeberg also has a strong grounding in conventional field and laboratory methods and is skilled in the use of ArcGIS and prepares maps for Cogstone’s deliverables. He has experience with Native American consultation in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Assembly Bill (AB) 52, and Senate Bill (SB) 18.

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Antioch Housing Element Update, City of Antioch, Contra Costa County, CA. The purpose of this study was to review and summarize available information regarding known archaeological and historical resources within the boundaries of the City of Antioch to support an update to the city’s General Plan. The project involved the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the city’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and prepared a Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Technical Report. The report mapped all prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and historic built environment resources within the city. The City of Antioch was the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. 2022 East Arques Avenue Project, City of Sunnyvale, Santa Clara County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural resources during the project, which consisted of replacing a 313,485-square foot, six building, industrial complex with 455,500 square feet of warehouse/advanced manufacturing space and 38,000 square feet of office space. Expected maximum depth of ground disturbance was six feet for grading and up to 15 feet for project utilities trenching. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources records search which identified a multi-component archaeological site within the project area.

Cogstone’s services also included a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and an intensive pedestrian survey. Additionally, four of the six buildings within the project area were evaluated on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms and were recommended as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Cogstone prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment Report. The City of Sunnyvale was the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. 2022 Portola Housing Element Project, City of Portola Valley, San Mateo County, CA. The project involved the preparation of a programmatic Initial Study (IS) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the City of Portola Valley’s Housing Element and Safety Element Updates that will be added to the General Plan. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment which consisted of cultural and paleontological resources records searches, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, and a review of the 1998 Portola Valley City Historic Resources Inventory. Cogstone recommended that the city conduct a new historic inventory that starts with the potential housings sites and is expanded in scope to include archaeological sites and developed three mitigation measures to guide future development. Sub to Urban Planning Partners, Inc. 2022 co~tone

PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY - HI STORY
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 46
APPENDIX B. RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 47
Table B1. Previous Studies within a one-mile radius of the APE Report
No.
(MA-)
Author(s) Title Year
Distance
(miles)
from APE
00018 Wadell, Robert P.
and Voight,
William G.

Draft Environmental Assessment Expanded Initial Study,
Madera Municipal Airport Runway Extension
1996 0-0.25
00018 Becker, Eric S. Removal Action Workplan, Madera Municipal Airport, Madera, California
1995 0.5-1
00018 Voight, William G. Madera Municipal Airport Runway Extension Project, Biological Assessment
1996 0.5-1
00019 Jensen, Peter M. Negative Archaeological Survey Report for Proposed Fresno-Tracy Fiberoptics Data Transmission Line.

CALTRANS' Rights-of-Way at Six State Highway
Crossings
1996 0.5-1
00035 Jensen, Sean M. Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Tracy to Fresno Longhaul Fiberoptics Data Transmission Line, Portions of Fresno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin
Counties, California
1996 Within
00083 Hatoff, Brian,
Voss, Barb,
Waechter, Sharon,
Wee, Stephen, and
Benté, Vance
Cultural Resources Inventory Report for the Proposed
Mojave Northward Expansion Project
1995 Within
00142 Binning, Jeanne
Day
Negative Archaeological Survey Report Installation of
Traffic Surveillance Stations along Interstate 5, State Route 41, and State Route 99 in Madera and Fresno
Counties
1999 0.5-1
00215 Crist, Michael K. Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Ogo Apartment Site Madera County
1981 0.25-0.5
00309 Napton, L. Kyle Cultural Resources Investigations of the Ellis Street/Avenue 16 Project, Madera County, California
1994 Within
00344 Ptomey, Kathy An Archaeological Assessment of the Madera Irrigation District Storm Drain Project, Madera County, California 1990 0.5-1
00739 Nelson, Wendy J. Cultural Resources Survey for the Level (3) Communications Long Haul Fiber Optics Project: Segment
WS04: Sacramento to Bakersfield
2000 0.5-1
00929 Pastron, Allen G.
and Brown, R.

Keith
Historical and Cultural Resource Assessment Proposed
Telecommunications Facility Hwy 99/Cleveland, Site No.

CV-751-01: 15786 North Gateway Drive, Madera County,
California
2001 0.25-0.5
00932 Derr, Eleanor H.
and Brown, R.

Keith
Historical and Cultural Resource Assessment Proposed
Telecommunications Facility Hwy 99/Cleveland, Site No.

CV-751-04: 25327 Avenue 16, Madera County, California
2001 0.25-0.5
01001 Windmiller, Ric Madera Town Center: Archaeological Resources Inventory, Madera, Madera County, California
2005 0.25-0.5
01002 Windmiller, Ric CAT 17 Archaeological Resources Inventory, Madera, Madera County, California
2006 Within
01026 Arrington, Cindy,
Bass, Bryon,
Brown, Joan,
Corey, Chris, and
Hunt, Kevin
Cultural Resources Final Report of Monitoring and
Findings for the Qwest Network Construction Project,
State of California
2006 Within
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 48
Report
No.
(MA-)
Author(s) Title Year
Distance
(miles)
from APE
01026 SWCA
Environmental
Consultants
Qwest Fiber Optic Project Cultural Resources Protocols 2000 Within 01029 Gordon, Beth A. New Tower Submission Packet, FCC Form 620, for East Madera, FAT-075B
2005 0.5-1
01030 Metzler, Valerie A.
and Gordon, Beth
A.

New Tower Submission Packet, FCC Form 620, for Road
26 and Ellis, FRSNCAMD058
2005 0-0.25
01033 Hatoff, Brian W. Cellular Communications Tower Site - Clark Street, Country Club Drive, Madera County, Madera, California.

URS Project No. 36301056.01056
2005 0.5-1
01048 Wills, Carrie D. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Commons at Madera Fair Project, Madera, Madera County, California
2006 0.5-1
01101 Roper, C. Kristina A Cultural Resources Survey for the Kennedy-Schnoor Canal Undergrounding and Linear Park, City of Madera,
California
2007 0.25-0.5
01129 Goetter, Karin Historic Property Survey Report for the Lake Street Reconstruction Project, Madera, Madera County,
California (Expenditure Authorization 06-965100)
2008 Within
01129 Goetter, Karin Archaeological survey Report for the Lake Street Reconstruction Project
2008 Within
01129 Goetter, Karin Historical Resources Evaluation Report for the Lake Street Reconstruction Project
2008 Within
01201 Meyer, Jack,
Young, D. Craig,
and Rosenthal,
Jeffrey
Volume I: A Geoarchaeological Overview and Assessment
of Caltrans Districts 6 and 9 - Cultural Resources
Inventory of Caltrans District 6/9 Rural Conventional
Highways - EA 06-0A7408 TEA Grant
2010 Within
01201 Meyer, Jack,
Young, D. Craig,
and Rosenthal,
Jeffrey S.

Volume II: Appendices A Geoarchaeological Overview
and Assessment of Caltrans District 6 and 9 - Cultural
Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 6/9 Rural
Conventional Highways - EA 06-0A7408 TEA Grant
2010 Within
01203 Kile, Mark C. Cultural Resource Inventory for Madera ID Water Conservation 13-MPRO-11 MID Job #27-13-2, Madera
County, California
2014 0.5-1
01217 Miller, Michelle Archaeological Survey Report for the Madera 99 Widening Project 06-MAD-99 Madera County, California
2014 0-0.25
01221 Strother, Eric,
Schultz, Erica,
Fies, Robin,
Steinkamp,
Matthew, and
Kruger, Frank
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company's Gas Line 118A Corrosion Inspection
Dig Project, City of Madera, Madera County, California
2014 0.5-1
01286 Unknown Merced to Fresno Project Section Addendum Historic Architectural Survey Report (HASR) and Finding of No
Adverse Effect for the Construction Package 1 North
Extension Re-Exam
2017 0.5-1
01290 Sikes, Nancy E.,
Stapleton, Dylan,
and Arrington,
Cindy J.

Cultural Resources Inventory and Effects Assessment for the Madera Municipal Airport Stormwater Drain
Improvements Projects, City of Madera, Madera County,
California
2018 0.5-1
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 49
Table B2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within a one-mile radius of the APE Primary
No. (P20-)
Trinomial
No. (CAMAD-)
Resource
Type
Resource
Description
Year
Recorded
Distance
(miles)
From
APE

NRHP/CRHR
Status
002308 002649H Historic Built
Environment
Water conveyance
system; Dams;
Canal/aqueduct
1992; 2005;
2009; 2013;
2014; 2016;
2018
Within
002662 Historic Built
Environment
Roads/trails/railroad
grades; Other 2009; 2016 0.5-1
002802 Historic Built
Environment
Single family
property 2008 0-0.25
002803 Historic Built
Environment
Single family
property 2008 0.5-1
002804 Historic Built
Environment
Educational
building 2008 0-0.25
002805 Historic Built
Environment
Single family
property 2008 0.25-0.5
003068 Prehistoric
Archaeological
Site
Lithic scatter
2014

0.5-1
003240 002896H Historic Built
Environment
Engineering
structure 2020 0.25-0.5
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 50
APPENDIX C. NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
City of Madera Water Storage Tank, Pump Station, and Transmission Main Project Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Cogstone 51

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Buffy Mc Quillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nom/aki

SECRETARY
sara Dutschke
Miwok

P,)RLIAMENTARIAN
wayne Nelson
Luisefio

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Oh}one-Costanoan

C O MMISSIONER
Slanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay
COMMtsSIONfR
Reid Milanovich
Cahui//a

COMMISSIONER
Bennae Calac
Pauma-Yuima Band of
!.uisefio Jndiom
COMMlSSIONfR
V~cant
ACTING EXECUTrvE

SECRETARY
SlEVEN QUINN

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
suite 100
W&st Sacramento,
california 95691
1916) 373-3710
nahc@nahc .ca.g ov
NA H C .ca.gov
SJ ATE Cf CAI I FOR NIA Gavin Newsom

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
April 30, 2025
Cogstone Resource Management
Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Madera Tanks Project, Madera County
To Whom It May Concern:

Gov:emor
As requested, a r.ecord search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File fSLF) was completed based on information submitted for the above referenced project. lhe results were negative. Please note that tribe~ dd not always record their sacred sites in the SLF, nor are they required to do so. As such, a SLF search is not a substitute for consultation with all tribes that are tradition_ally and culturally affiliated with a project's geographic area.

Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse Impact within the proposed project area. Please contact all of those listed; if they cannot supply information, they may recommend others with specific knowledge. If within two weeks of notification, a response has not been received, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information was received.

If you receive notification of a change of'address or phone number from a tribe, please notify the NAHC so that we can assure that our lists contain current information.

In addition to engaging in tribal consultation, you should consult the appropriate regional Caliornia Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) archoeological lnformotion Center to determine whether it has information regarding the presence of r.ecorded archaeological sites within the project area.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: Pricilla.T orres-Fuentes@nahc .ca.gov.

Sincerely,
Pricilla Torres-Fuentes
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment