Attachment 6 - Exhibit A to Resolution for ISMND — Manteca City Council, June 16, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

4.6.6.2 Long-Legged Myotis
The long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, this species is an SJMSCP-Covered Species. In addition, the WBWG has classified the longlegged myotis in California as “imperiled or are at high risk of imperilment” (WBWG 2025). It is common in the mountainous regions of California, occurring in the coastal ranges from Oregon to Mexico, the Sierra Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 552025-144
Nevada/Cascade ranges to Southern California, most of the Great Basin region, and in several Mojave Desert mountain ranges. This species is most common in woodland and forest communities above 4,000 feet, and is absent from the Central Valley and Colorado and Mojave low deserts. The long-legged myotis feeds primarily on moths, foraging at low heights (10 to 15 feet) over water, close to trees and cliffs, and in forest clearings. This bat roosts in rock crevices, buildings, trees, mines, and caves, with trees potentially being the most important. This species forms maternity colonies of hundreds of individuals, usually in trees or snags (Zeiner et al. 1990).

There are no CNDDB records of long-legged myotis occurring within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2025a), but the within the BSA provides marginally suitable day roosting habitat for this species. Long-legged myotis have low potential to occur within the BSA.

4.7 Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites
The BSA does not serve as a wildlife movement corridor nor are there any nursery sites within the BSA (CDFW 2025a).

4.8 Protected Trees/Oak Woodlands
No oak woodlands were observed within or in the vicinity of the BSA. Trees within the park within the BSA may be subject to the City of Manteca Code of Ordinance Title 12, Chapter 12.08 – Trees and Shrubs.

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Project is located within the Central Zone of the SJMSCP. The Project proponent has not determined if they would secure coverage under the SJMSCP. If the Project proponent secures coverage under the SJMSCP, potential impacts to SJMSCP-Covered Species would be less than significant with implementation of SJMSCP Preconstruction Surveys and the appropriate SJMSCP Incidental Take Minimization and Mitigation Measures. All Incidental Take Minimization and Mitigation Measures are provided in Appendix E.

Potential impacts to species that are only SJMSCP-Covered Species but have no State or Federal status (as listed in Section 1.3 of this BRA) would not be significant under CEQA and will not be discussed further.

The following sections specifically address questions raised by the Biological Resources section of the Environmental Checklist Form in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 562025-144

5.1 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(a) – Special-Status Species Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

5.1.1 Special-Status Plants
The areas that support natural vegetation within the BSA provide a limited amount of marginally suitable potential habitat for special-status plants, as identified in Section 4.6. In the low chance that a specialstatus plant occurs within or near the Project Area during construction, the Project could result in damage or loss of individual plants. Impacts to plants with CRPR 4 would not likely be significant under CEQA.

Impacts to special-status plants with CRPRs of 1 or 2 may be significant under CEQA. The following measures are recommended to ensure potential impacts to special-status plants are less than significant under CEQA:
 A special-status plant survey shall be conducted according to CDFW, CNPS, and USFWS protocols (CDFW 2018; CNPS 2001; USFWS 2000) prior to Project ground-disturbing or vegetationdisturbing activities within undeveloped areas. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist (as defined per agency protocols) throughout all potential habitat for special-status plants within the Project Area and a 15-foot buffer. The survey shall be timed according to the identifiable period for special-status plant species with potential to occur (typically the blooming period). To the extent feasible, known reference populations shall be visited prior to the survey to confirm target species are evident and identifiable at the time of the survey. If no special-status plants are found and the survey is still considered recent as per CDFW and USFWS protocols (CDFW 2018; USFWS 2000) at the time of Project implementation, no further measures pertaining to special-status plants are necessary. If a special-status plant is identified within or adjacent to the Project Area, the following shall apply:
• An impact assessment shall be made by a qualified biologist to determine whether Project-related activities would be significant such that they would have the potential to eliminate, substantially reduce the number of, or restrict the range of the special-status plant species, and/or conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting special-status plant species. If impacts are determined to be less than significant, no further measures are needed. • If potential impacts are determined to be significant, the following shall apply:
− A no-disturbance buffer shall be established around special-status plant populations to be avoided within or adjacent to the Project Area. The no-disturbance buffer shall include the extent of the avoided special-status plants (as determined by a qualified biologist during an appropriate time to identify the plants immediately preceding construction) plus a minimum 15-foot buffer. The avoidance area shall be clearly demarcated in the field and demarcation shall be maintained for the duration of Project construction. No Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 572025-144
vegetation-disturbing or ground-disturbing activities shall occur within the avoidance area.

5.1.2 Special-Status Wildlife

5.1.2.1 Northwestern Pond Turtle
The ditch within the BSA supports marginally suitable nesting habitat for the northwestern pond turtle.. In the low change that the species occurs within or near the Project Area during construction, the Project may result in injury or fatalities to northwestern pond turtle through vehicular traffic and other construction activity. The following measure is recommended to ensure potential impacts to northwestern pond turtle are less than significant under CEQA:
 A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction clearance survey within the Project Area within 48 hours prior to the initiation of Project activities. If there is a lapse in Project-related work of 14 days or longer, the survey must be repeated prior to resuming Project activities. If northwestern pond turtles are found within or near the Project Area during the survey or during Project implementation, they shall be allowed to move out of the Project Area on their own volition or relocated by a qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW and silt fencing shall be installed.

5.1.2.2 Nesting Birds (Including Raptors)
The BSA and its vicinity contains suitable nesting and/or wintering and foraging habitat for several special-status birds and other birds protected under the California Fish and Game Code and the MBTA.

Impacts to wintering and foraging habitat would not be considered significant under CEQA. If Projectrelated activities occur during the nesting season, the removal of active nests or disruption of nesting activities could lead to “take” of a protected bird, or an active nest with eggs or young, which would be considered a significant impact under CEQA. The following measures are recommended to ensure potential impacts to nesting birds are less than significant under CEQA:
 If construction is scheduled during the nesting season (typically February 1–August 31, and as early as January 1 for raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey within 14 days prior to the commencement of Project-related activities to identify active nests that could be impacted by construction. The survey shall be conducted within the Project Area and a 500-foot buffer for raptors and a 100-foot buffer for other birds, where accessible. If there is a lapse in Project-related work of 14 days or longer, the survey must be repeated prior to resuming Project activities. If active nests are found, a no-disturbance buffer shall be established around the nest. A qualified biologist shall establish a buffer distance. The buffer shall be maintained until the nestlings have fledged (e.g., are capable of flight and become independent of the nest), to be determined by a qualified biologist. The avoidance buffer can be removed and no further measures are necessary once the young have fledged or the nest is no longer occupied, as determined by a qualified biologist.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 582025-144

5.1.2.3 Burrowing Owl
The BSA provides marginally suitable habitat for burrowing owls. While the BSA is regularly maintained, the ditch borders and annual grassland support ground squirrels and burrows that could be used by burrowing owls. The following measure is recommended to ensure potential impacts to burrowing owls are less than significant under CEQA:
 A qualified biologist shall conduct a take avoidance preconstruction survey according to the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012). If active/occupied burrows are detected, a nodisturbance buffer shall be established around the burrow. The buffer distance shall be established in coordination with CDFW.

5.1.2.4 Swainson’s Hawk
Swainson’s hawk has potential to nest and forage within and near the BSA. The following measure is recommended to ensure potential impacts to Swainson’s hawks are less than significant under CEQA:
 If construction is scheduled during the Swainson’s hawk nesting season (March 1 to August 31), then, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for Swainson’s hawk nesting activity within a

0.5-mile distance surrounding the Project Area. The qualified biologist shall conduct surveys according to the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000) or, if proposing an alternate survey methodology, shall submit the proposed survey timing and methods to CDFW for review and written approval prior to the initiation of surveys. If there is a lapse in Project-related work of 14 days or longer, the survey must be repeated prior to resuming Project activities. If Swainson’s hawk nesting activity is observed during the survey, an avoidance buffer shall be established by a qualified biologist in consultation with CDFW. The avoidance buffer shall be maintained while the nest is active.

5.1.2.5 Western Red Bat
The trees within the BSA represent marginally suitable potential roosting habitat for western red bat. If occupied bat roosts are present, removal of the habitat feature could result in direct mortality or injury to roosting bats. It is unlikely that the BSA would provide maternity roosting habitat for western red bat.

However, in the low chance that a maternity roosting site is present within the BSA, removal during the maternity roosting season could result in the loss of the site and injury or mortality of pups that are not yet able to fly. Potential impacts to bat maternity roost sites would be considered significant under CEQA.

The following measures are recommended to ensure potential impacts to special-status bats and bat maternity roosts are less than significant under CEQA:
 Tree trimming/removal shall occur outside of the bat maternity season (April 15 through August 31), as feasible.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 592025-144

5.2 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(b) – Sensitive Natural Communities Would the Project:
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The Project would have no effect on sensitive natural communities because none are present within or near the BSA.

5.3 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(c) – Aquatic Resources
Would the Project:
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
ECORP conducted an aquatic resources assessment and mapped an SSJID irrigation ditch within the BSA.

The ditch appears to be ephemeral in nature (not a “relatively permanent” feature), and water releases are managed seasonally by SSJID. The ditch does not appear to meet the definition of Waters of the U.S. and may not subject to USACE jurisdiction due ephemeral flow and therefore lack of a continuous surface connection to a relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing body of water. In addition, the ditch does not appear to meet the definition of Waters of the State per Section II.2 and II.3.c of the Procedures (State Water Resources Control Board 2021), as the ditch is an artificial wetland resulting from human activity, excavated in uplands, subject to ongoing operation and maintenance, and is not a modification of a surface water of the State.

Resource verification by USACE and RWQCB would be required to formally determine jurisdictional status of the drainage ditch under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act.

Direct impacts to the ditch would be defined as any grading, trenching, excavation, or placement of temporary or permanent fill within the aquatic resource. Indirect impacts may include inadvertent encroachments, changes in hydrology, and runoff and erosion from the Project Area.

The current Project design includes boring under the ditch and avoiding all impacts to the bed or bank of the ditch. Thus, no direct impacts to the ditch are expected. The following measures are recommended to ensure potential impacts to aquatic resources are less than significant under CEQA:
 An aquatic resources delineation shall be conducted for the Project Area in accordance with the most recent USACE and RWQCB guidance. The delineation shall be submitted to the USACE with a request for verification.
 The Project shall avoid all impacts within the bed or banks of aquatic resources. The Project Area boundary adjacent to aquatic resources shall be demarcated with high visibility construction fencing and silt fencing prior to construction. Fencing shall be inspected daily and maintained Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 602025-144
immediately if needed by construction personnel through the duration of construction. No Project-related work shall occur outside of the Project Area boundary.  The applicant shall prepare and implement an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to avoid and minimize sediment and erosion to aquatic resources within or adjacent to the Project Area boundary.

5.4 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(d) – Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites Would the Project:
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The BSA is not located within any movement corridors and is not expected to support nursery sites.

Therefore, the Project would have no effect on wildlife movement or nursery sites.

5.5 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(e) – Conflicts with Local Policies or Ordinances
Would the Project:
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The Proposed Project may potentially impact planted vegetation within public spaces owned by the City of Manteca. The following measure is recommended to ensure the Project does not conflict with the City of Manteca Code of Ordinance Title 12, Ch12.08 – Trees and Shrubs:
 The Project proponent shall consult with the City of Manteca prior to impacting vegetation in any public space, and shall secure City of Manteca approval for impacting such vegetation prior to construction, if needed.

5.6 CEQA Checklist Criteria IV(f) – Conflicts with Conservation Plans Would the Project:
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The Project would not conflict with any such plans. The Proposed Project is located within the Plan Area for the SJMSCP. If the Project proponent opts to participate in the SJMSCP, all required conditions of the SJMSCP would be implemented.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 612025-144

6.0 REFERENCES
Ashton, D. T., A. J. Lind, K. E. Schlick. 1997. Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata). Natural History.

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Redwood Sciences Laboratory. Arcata, California.

Baldwin, Bruce G. 2012, Centromadia parryi subsp. rudis, In Jepson eFlora Jepson Flora Project (eds.). https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/eflora_display.php?tid=80186. Accessed June 22, 2025.

Bechard, M. J., C. S. Houston, J. H. Saransola, and A. S. England. 2020. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.swahaw.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Beedy, E. C., W. J. Hamilton, III, R. J. Meese, D. A. Airola, W. S. Schackwitz, and P. Pyle. 2023. Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), Version 2.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald and B. K. Keeney, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.tribla.02.

Accessed February 12, 2025.

Bury, R. B., D. T. Ashton, H. H. Welsh Jr., D. A. Reese, and D. J. Germano. 2012. Synopsis of Biology. Pages 9-19 In Western Pond Turtle: Biology, Sampling Techniques, Inventory and Monitoring, Conservation, and Management Bury, R. B., H. H. Welsh Jr., D. J. Germano, and D. A. Ashton, editors. Northwest Fauna No. 7.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. March 7.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2025a. RareFind Natural Diversity Data Base Program.

Version 5. California Natural Diversity Database. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-andData. Accessed August 11, 2025. _____. 2025b. California Natural Community List. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program.

February 27. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities.

Accessed August 11, 2025.
_____. 2023. Palmate Salty Bird’s-Beak (Chloropyron palmatum). https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants/Endangered/Chloropyron-palmatum.

Accessed July 30, 2025.
_____. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. Sacramento.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2025a. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9-01 1.5). Sacramento. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed August 11, 2025. _____. 2025b. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. Sacramento. https://vegetation.cnps.org/.

Accessed August 11, 2025.
_____. 2001. CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines. https://cnps.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/03/cnps_survey_guidelines.pdf.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 622025-144
Cicero, C., P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Oak Titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.oaktit.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Cook, R. R. 1992. An inventory of the mammals of Caswell Memorial State Park. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Lodi, Final Rep., 30 pp.

Dunk, J. R. 2020. White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole and F. B.

Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.whtkit.01.

Accessed February 12, 2025.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1 Online Edition. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi. p. 143.

January.
https://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Portals/57/docs/regulatory/Website%20Organization/Corps%20 of%20Engineers%20Wetlands%20Delineation%20Manual%20(1987).pdf.

Estep, J. A. 1989. Biology, movements, and habitat relationships of the Swainson's hawk in the Central Valley of California, 1986-1987. California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section Report.

Flood, N. J., C. L. Schlueter, M. W. Reudink, P. Pyle, M. A. Patten, J. D. Rising, and P. L. Williams. 2020.

Bullock's Oriole (Icterus bullockii), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor).

Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.bulori.01.

Accessed February 12, 2025.

Holland, D. C. 1994. The Western Pond Turtle: Habitat and History. Final Report to the United States Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Environment, Fish, and Wildlife. Portland, Oregon.

Hughes, J. M. 2020. Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G.

Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.yebcuc.01.

Jennings, M. R. and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Final report to California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Branch. Rancho Cordova, California.

Jepson Flora Project (eds.) 2025. .Jepson eFlora. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.

Accessed August 11, 2025.

Koenig, W. D., M. D. Reynolds, and S. A. Airola. 2022. Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica nuttalli), Version 2.0. In Birds of the World (G. M. Kirwan and B. K. Keeney, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.yebmag.02. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 632025-144
Lowther, P. E., P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Nuttall's Woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.nutwoo.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Martin, J. W. and B. A. Carlson. 2020. Bell's Sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.belspa2.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2025a. National ESA Critical Habitat Mapper. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/map/national-esa-critical-habitat-mapper.

Accessed August 11, 2025.
_____. 2025b. NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper.
https://www.habitat.noaa.gov/apps/efhmapper/?page=page_4. Accessed August 11, 2025. _____. 2025c. National Climatic Data Center 2006-2020 Climate Normals for Stockton Metro AP, CA. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/. Accessed August 11, 2025.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2025. Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed August 11, 2025.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2024. Watershed Boundary Dataset. Data refreshed July 2024. https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer.

Accessed September 30, 2025.

Poulin, R. G., L. D. Todd, E. A. Haug, B. A. Millsap, and M. S. Martell. 2020. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.burowl.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Rosenfield, R. N., K. K. Madden, J. Bielefeldt, and O. E. Curtis. 2024. Cooper's Hawk (Astur cooperii), Version 1.1. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.coohaw.01.1. Accessed August 12, 2025.

San Joaquin Council of Governments. 2000. San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP). November 14.

Shanks, S. 2006. Species Summary for Lytta moesta (Moestan blister beetle). California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento. 2 pp.

Small, A. 1994. California Birds: Their Status and Distribution. Ibis Publishing Company. Vista, California. 342 pp.

State Water Resources Control Board. 2021. State Policy for Water Quality Control: State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Adopted April 2, 2019.

Revised April 6, 2021.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 642025-144
Stebbins, R. C. and S. M. McGinnis. 2012. Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California (revised edition). University of California Press. Berkeley.

Steenhof, K. 2024. Prairie Falcon (Falco mexicanus), Version 2.0. In Birds of the World (B. K. Keeney, Editor).

Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.prafal.02.

Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Recommended timing and methodology for Swainson's hawk nesting surveys in California's Central Valley.

Thomson R. C., Wright A., Shaffer H. B. 2016. California amphibian and reptile species of special concern.

University of California Press. Oakland.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2025a. Information for Planning and Consultation. USFWS Resource Report List. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed August 13, 2025. _____. 2025b. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/program/nationalwetlands-inventory/wetlands-mapper. Accessed October 27, 2025. _____. 2021. Birds of Conservation Concern 2021. USFWS, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/birds-of-conservationconcern-2021.pdf. _____. 2017. Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Sacramento, California. 28 pp. _____. 2005. Recovery plan for vernal pool ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon. Portland, Oregon.

December 15.
_____. 2000. Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate Plants. January.

U.S. Geological Survey. 1952 (photorevised 1980, map revised 1994). Manteca, California 7.5-Minute Quadrangle. United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Denver, Colorado.

Western Bat Working Group (WBWG). 2025. Western Bat Species Accounts. https://wbwg.org/speciesaccounts/. Accessed February 25, 2025.

Williams, D. F. 1993. Population censuses of riparian brush rabbits and riparian woodrats at Caswell Memorial State Park during January 1993. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Lodi.

Final Report. 15 pp.

Yosef, R. 2020. Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.logshr.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Biological Resources Assessment
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project 652025-144
Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White (eds). 1990. California’s Wildlife, Volume III, Mammals. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

Zika, P. F., A. L. Hipp, J. Mastrogiuseppe. 2015. Carex comosa, in Jepson Flora Project (eds.) Jepson eFlora, Revision 3, https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/eflora_display.php?tid=17339.

Accessed November 19, 2025.

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Results of Database Queries
Appendix B – Representative Photographs
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (September 10, 2025) Appendix D – Wildlife Species Observed (September 10, 2025) Appendix E – San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Preconstruction Survey Protocols

APPENDIX A
Results of Database Queries
Element Code Species Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
AAAAA01181 Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Threatened Threatened G3T3 S3 WL
AAABF02020 Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
Proposed
Threatened
None G2G3 S3S4 SSC
ABNJB05035 Branta hutchinsii leucopareia
cackling (=Aleutian Canada) goose
Delisted None G5T3 S3 WL
ABNKC06010 Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
None None G5 S3S4 FP
ABNKC19070 Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
None Threatened G5 S4
ABNKD06030 Falco columbarius
merlin
None None G5 S3S4 WL
ABNRB02022 Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1
ABNSB10010 Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
None Candidate
Endangered
G4 S2 SSC
ABPAT02011 Eremophila alpestris actia
California horned lark
None None G5T4Q S4 WL
ABPBR01030 Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
None None G4 S4 SSC
ABPBW01114 Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
Endangered Endangered G5T2 S3
ABPBXA3013 Melospiza melodia pop. 1
song sparrow ("Modesto" population)
None None G5T3?Q S3? SSC
ABPBXB0020 Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
None Threatened G1G2 S2 SSC
ABPBXB3010 Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus
yellow-headed blackbird
None None G5 S3 SSC
AFCAA01031 Acipenser medirostris pop. 1
green sturgeon - southern DPS
Threatened None G2T1 S1 SSC
AFCHA0209K Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 11
steelhead - Central Valley DPS
Threatened None G5T2Q S2 SSC
AFCHB01040 Hypomesus transpacificus
Delta smelt
Threatened Endangered G1 S1
AFCHB03040 Spirinchus thaleichthys pop. 2
longfin smelt - San Francisco Bay-Delta DPS
Endangered Threatened G5TNRQ S1
AFCJB25010 Mylopharodon conocephalus
hardhead
None None G3 S3 SSC
Query Criteria: Quad IS (Manteca (3712172) OR Avena (3712171) OR Peters (3712181) OR Lathrop (3712173) OR Stockton East (3712182) OR Stockton West (3712183) OR Salida (3712161) OR Vernalis (3712163) OR Ripon (3712162)) Report Printed on Wednesday, October 29, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated October, 4 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 4 Information Expires 4/4/2026
Selected Elements by Element Code
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Element Code Species Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
AMACC10010 Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
None None G4 S3 SSC
AMAEB01021 Sylvilagus bachmani riparius
riparian brush rabbit
Endangered Endangered GNRT2 S2
AMAFF08081 Neotoma fuscipes riparia
riparian (=San Joaquin Valley) woodrat
Endangered None G5T1 S1 SSC
ARACC01020 Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless lizard
None None G3 S2S3 SSC
ARADB36150 Thamnophis gigas
giant gartersnake
Threatened Threatened G2 S2
CTT61410CA Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest
Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest
None None G2 S2.1
CTT61420CA Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest
Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest
None None G2 S2.2
CTT61430CA Great Valley Valley Oak Riparian Forest
Great Valley Valley Oak Riparian Forest
None None G1 S1.1
CTT63440CA Elderberry Savanna
Elderberry Savanna
None None G2 S2.1
ICBRA03010 Branchinecta conservatio
Conservancy fairy shrimp
Endangered None G2 S2
ICBRA03030 Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
Threatened None G3 S3
ICBRA03150 Branchinecta mesovallensis
midvalley fairy shrimp
None None G2 S2S3
ICBRA06010 Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
None None G2G3 S2S3
ICBRA10010 Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
Endangered None G3 S3
IICOL48011 Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Threatened None G3T3 S3
IICOL49010 Anthicus sacramento
Sacramento anthicid beetle
None None G4 S4
IICOL4C020 Lytta moesta
moestan blister beetle
None None G2 S2
IIDIP05010 Rhaphiomidas trochilus
San Joaquin Valley giant flower-loving fly
None None G1 S1
IIHYM24252 Bombus occidentalis
western bumble bee
None Candidate
Endangered
G3 S1
IIHYM24260 Bombus pensylvanicus
American bumble bee
None None G3G4 S2
IIHYM24380 Bombus caliginosus
obscure bumble bee
None None G2G3 S1S2
Report Printed on Wednesday, October 29, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated October, 4 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 4 Information Expires 4/4/2026
Selected Elements by Element Code
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Element Code Species Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
IIHYM24480 Bombus crotchii
Crotch's bumble bee
None Candidate
Endangered
G2 S2
IMBIV19010 Gonidea angulata
western ridged mussel
None None G3 S2
PDAPI0Z0S0 Eryngium racemosum
Delta button-celery
None Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
PDAST1C011 Blepharizonia plumosa
big tarplant
None None G1G2 S1S2 1B.1
PDAST2E0U0 Cirsium crassicaule
slough thistle
None None G1 S1 1B.1
PDAST5L030 Lasthenia chrysantha
alkali-sink goldfields
None None G2 S2 1B.1
PDAST9F031 Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii
Wright's trichocoronis
None None G4T3 S1 2B.1
PDASTE8470 Symphyotrichum lentum
Suisun Marsh aster
None None G2 S2 1B.2
PDBRA2R010 Tropidocarpum capparideum
caper-fruited tropidocarpum
None None G1 S1 1B.1
PDCAB01010 Brasenia schreberi
watershield
None None G5 S3 2B.3
PDCHE040B0 Atriplex cordulata var. cordulata
heartscale
None None GNRT2 S2 1B.2
PDCHE041F3 Extriplex joaquinana
San Joaquin spearscale
None None G2 S2 1B.2
PDCHE042M0 Atriplex minuscula
lesser saltscale
None None G2 S2 1B.1
PDFAB0F8R1 Astragalus tener var. tener
alkali milk-vetch
None None G2T1 S1 1B.2
PDFAB250D2 Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii
Delta tule pea
None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
PDFAB400R5 Trifolium hydrophilum
saline clover
None None G2 S2 1B.2
PDMAL0H0R3 Hibiscus lasiocarpos var. occidentalis
woolly rose-mallow
None None G5T3 S3 1B.2
PDRAN0B1J0 Delphinium recurvatum
recurved larkspur
None None G2? S2 1B.2
PDSCR0J0J0 Chloropyron palmatum
palmate-bracted bird's-beak
Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
PMALI040Q0 Sagittaria sanfordii
Sanford's arrowhead
None None G3 S3 1B.2
PMPOA53110 Puccinellia simplex
California alkali grass
None None G2 S2 1B.2
Report Printed on Wednesday, October 29, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated October, 4 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 4 Information Expires 4/4/2026
Selected Elements by Element Code
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Element Code Species Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
PMPOA6N010 Tuctoria greenei
Greene's tuctoria
Endangered Rare G1 S1 1B.1
Record Count: 62
Report Printed on Wednesday, October 29, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated October, 4 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 4 Information Expires 4/4/2026
Selected Elements by Element Code
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Search Results
24 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: , 9-Quad include [3712172:3712171:3712181:3712173:3712183:3712182:3712161:3712163:3712162] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK
CA
RARE
PLANT
RANK
CA

ENDEMIC
DATE
ADDED
Astragalus tener
var. tener
alkali milkvetchFabaceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
Atriplex
cordulata var.
cordulata
heartscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb Apr-Oct None None GNRT2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1988- 01-01
Atriplex
coronata var.
coronata
crownscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb Mar-Oct None None G4T3 S3 4.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
Atriplex
minuscula
lesser
saltscale
Chenopodiaceae annual herb May-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1994- 01-01
Blepharizonia
plumosa
big tarplant Asteraceae annual herb Jul-Oct None None G1G2 S1S2 1B.1 Yes 1994- 01-01
Brasenia
schreberi
watershield Cabombaceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb (aquatic)
Jun-Sep None None G5 S3 2B.3 2010-
10-27
Centromadia
parryi ssp. rudis
Parry's rough
tarplant
Asteraceae annual herb May-Oct None None G3T3 S3 4.2 Yes 2007- 05-22
Chloropyron
palmatum
palmatebracted bird'sbeakOrobanchaceae annual herb
(hemiparasitic)
May-Oct FE CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01
Cirsium
crassicaule
slough thistle Asteraceae annual/perennial
herb
May-Aug None None G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01
Delphinium
recurvatum
recurved
larkspur
Ranunculaceae perennial herb Mar-Jun None None G2? S2 1B.2 Yes 1988- 01-01
Eryngium
racemosum
Delta buttonceleryApiaceae annual/perennial
herb
(May)JunOctNone CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
10/29/25, 3:37 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&qsl=9&quad=3712172:3712171:3712181:3712173:3712183:3712182:3712161:3712163:3712162:&el… 1/2 • CALIFORNIA SOCIETY ~ NATIVE PLANT
}
Extriplex
joaquinana
San Joaquin
spearscale
Chenopodiaceae annual herb Apr-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1988- 01-01
Hesperevax
caulescens
hogwallow
starfish
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G3 S3 4.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
Hibiscus
lasiocarpos var.
occidentalis
woolly rosemallowMalvaceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb (emergent)
Jun-Sep None None G5T3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Lasthenia
chrysantha
alkali-sink
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Feb-Apr None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 2019- 09-30
Lasthenia
ferrisiae
Ferris'
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Feb-May None None G3 S3 4.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
Lathyrus
jepsonii var.
jepsonii
Delta tule pea Fabaceae perennial herb MayJul(AugSep)None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1974- 01-01
Puccinellia
simplex
California
alkali grass
Poaceae annual herb Mar-May None None G2 S2 1B.2 2015-
10-15
Sagittaria
sanfordii
Sanford's
arrowhead
Alismataceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb (emergent)
MayOct(Nov)None None G3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1984-
01-01
Symphyotrichum
lentum
Suisun Marsh
aster
Asteraceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
(Apr)MayNovNone None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Trichocoronis
wrightii var.
wrightii
Wright's
trichocoronis
Asteraceae annual herb May-Sep None None G4T3 S1 2B.1 1988- 01-01
Trifolium
hydrophilum
saline clover Fabaceae annual herb Apr-Jun None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
Tropidocarpum
capparideum
caper-fruited
tropidocarpum
Brassicaceae annual herb Mar-Apr None None G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01
Tuctoria greenei Greene's
tuctoria
Poaceae annual herb MayJul(Sep)FE CR G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01
Showing 1 to 24 of 24 entries
Go to top
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2025. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5.1). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 29 October 2025].
10/29/25, 3:37 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&qsl=9&quad=3712172:3712171:3712181:3712173:3712183:3712182:3712161:3712163:3712162:&el… 2/2 IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
San Joaquin County, California
Local office
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 1/16 Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 2/16 Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.

Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional sitespecific and project-specific information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 1 2
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 3/16 The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:

Reptiles
Amphibians
Insects
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Northwestern Pond Turtle Actinemys marmorata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1111
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Proposed Threatened
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7850
Threatened

NAME STATUS
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 4/16 ---- -------
---- -------
---- -------
---- -------
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

There are no critical habitats at this location.

You are still required to determine if your project(s) may have effects on all above listed species.

Bald & Golden Eagles
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2246
Endangered
Bald and Golden Eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to Bald or Golden Eagles, or their nests, should follow appropriate regulations and implement required avoidance and minimization measures, as described in the various links on this page.

The data in this location indicates that no eagles have been observed in this area. This does not mean eagles are not present in your project area, especially if the area is difficult to survey. Please review the 'Steps to Take When No Results Are Returned' section of the Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles document to determine if your project is in a poorly surveyed area.

If it is, you may need to rely on other resources to determine if eagles may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys).

Additional information can be found using the following links:
2 1
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 5/16 ---- -------
Bald & Golden Eagles FAQs
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are an eagle (Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements may apply).

Proper interpretation and use of your eagle report
On the graphs provided, please look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical line) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal line). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort line or no data line (red horizontal) means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list and associated information help you know what to look for to confirm presence and helps guide you in knowing when to implement avoidance and minimization measures to eliminate or reduce potential impacts from your project activities or get the appropriate permits should presence be confirmed.

How do I know if eagles are breeding, wintering, or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating, or resident), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and view the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If an eagle on your IPaC migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it (indicated by yellow vertical bars on the phenology graph in your “IPaC PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY” at the top of your results list), there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

Interpreting the Probability of Presence Graphs
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservationmeasures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-goldeneagles-may-occur-project-action 8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 6/16 •
•
•
•
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated.

This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range.

If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

Migratory birds
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service).

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-goldeneagles-may-occur-project-action 1 8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 7/16 •
•
•
•
Measures for Proactively Minimizing Migratory Bird Impacts Your IPaC Migratory Bird list showcases birds of concern, including Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC), in your project location. This is not a comprehensive list of all birds found in your project area. However, you can help proactively minimize significant impacts to all birds at your project location by implementing the measures in the Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds document, and any other project-specific avoidance and minimization measures suggested at the link Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds for the birds of concern on your list below.

Ensure Your Migratory Bird List is Accurate and Complete If your project area is in a poorly surveyed area, your list may not be complete and you may need to rely on other resources to determine what species may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). Please review the Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles document, to help you properly interpret the report for your specified location, including determining if there is sufficient data to ensure your list is accurate.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

Review the FAQs
The FAQs below provide important additional information and resources.

NAME BREEDING SEASON
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 8/16 ---- -------
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8350
Breeds Apr 1 to Sep 15
Nuttall's Woodpecker Dryobates nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia graminea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5513
Breeds Mar 1 to Sep 5
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Yellow-billed Magpie Pica nuttalli
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9726
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 9/16 ---- -------
---- -------
---- -------
---- -------
---- -------
■
probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Belding's
Savannah
Sparrow

BCC - BCR
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 10/16 I + + I I I + + I I I I Bullock's Oriole

BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Common
Yellowthroat

BCC - BCR
Northern Harrier

BCC - BCR
Nuttall's
Woodpecker

BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Santa Barbara
Song Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Tricolored
Blackbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Yellow-billed
Magpie
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Migratory Bird FAQs
Tell me more about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Avoidance & Minimization Measures for Birds describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year-round. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is one of the most effective ways to minimize impacts. To see when birds are most likely to occur and breed in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary.

Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location, such as those listed under the Endangered Species Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and those species marked as “Vulnerable”. See the FAQ “What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?” for more information on the levels of concern covered in the IPaC migratory bird species list.
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 11/16 I I I l I I I f f f + f f f f f f f I I l I I I + I I + I I f I I I l I I I + f f f + f f + + + + + + I + + - +
+
+
I
+
f
+
f f

I I I I I
f f
+ t
I
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) with which your project intersects. These species have been identified as warranting special attention because they are BCC species in that area, an eagle (Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, and to verify survey effort when no results present, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

Why are subspecies showing up on my list?
Subspecies profiles are included on the list of species present in your project area because observations in the AKN for the species are being detected. If the species are present, that means that the subspecies may also be present. If a subspecies shows up on your list, you may need to rely on other resources to determine if that subspecies may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys).

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go to the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating, or resident), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and view the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your IPaC migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it (indicated by yellow vertical bars on the phenology graph in your “IPaC PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY” at the top of your results list), there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential 8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 12/16 -----------
susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).

Although it is important to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially BCC species. For more information on avoidance and minimization measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts, please see the FAQ “Tell me more about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds”.

Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Proper interpretation and use of your migratory bird report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical line) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal line). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list does not represent all birds present in your project area. It is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list and associated information help you know what to look for to confirm presence and helps guide implementation of avoidance and minimization measures to eliminate or reduce potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about avoidance and minimization measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds".

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated.

This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability 8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 13/16 of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range.

If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuge lands at this location.

Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 14/16 (NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.

This location overlaps the following wetlands:

NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.

Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.

These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
PEM1C
PEM1Cx
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website 8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 15/16 Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
8/13/25, 12:09 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/HHT7LOX63BFDJKOFBMNZ6UQSME/resources 16/16

APPENDIX B
Representative Photographs
Appendix B – Representative Photographs
2025-144 City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project
Photo 1. Representative Photo of the BSA Northern Alignment Adjacent to the Golf Course (September 10, 2025; facing west).

Photo 3. Representative Photo of the BSA Crossing the South San Joaquin Irrigation District Ditch
(September 10, 2025; facing west).

Photo 2. Representative Photo of the Annual Grassland Habitat in the Southern Portion of the BSA
(September 10, 2025; facing southeast).

Photo 4. Representative Photo of the BSA in the recently Disced Agricultural Field
(September 10, 2025; facing northwest).

ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ENVIRONMENTAL CO SULTA TS
Appendix B – Representative Photographs
2025-144 City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project
Photo 5. Representative Photo of the Annual Grassland Habitat in the Northern Portion of the BSA
(September 10, 2025; facing west).

Photo 7. Photo Showing Development Outside of the Eastern End of the BSA (September 10, 2025; facing north).

Photo 6. Representative Photo of Potential Nesting Trees in the Eastern Portion of the BSA (September 10, 2025; facing south).

Photo 8. Representative Photo of the Eastern End of the Alignment in the Eastern Portion of the BSA
(September 10, 2025; facing northeast).

ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ENVIRONMENTAL CO SULTA TS

APPENDIX C
Plant Species Observed (September 10, 2025)
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (September 10, 2025) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project C-1 DRAFT2025-144

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

ANACARDIACEAE SUMAC FAMILY
Schinus sp.* Peppertree

ARECACEAE PALM FAMILY
Washingtonia robusta* Mexican fan palm

ASTERACEAE SUNFLOWER FAMILY
Carduus pycnocephalus* Italian thistle
Centaurea solstitialis* Yellow star-thistle
Dittrichia graveolens* Stinkwort
Erigeron canadensis Canada horseweed
Helianthus annuus Common sunflower (cultivated)
Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed
Lactuca serriola* Prickly lettuce

BRASSICACEAE MUSTARD FAMILY
Nasturtium officinale Water cress

CHENOPODIACEAE GOOSEFOOT FAMILY
Chenopodium album* White goosefoot
Salsola tragus* Russian thistle

CYPERACEAE SEDGE FAMILY
Cyperus difformis* Variable flatsedge
Cyperus eragrostis Tall flatsedge
Cyperus esculentus Nutsedge

EUPHORBIACEAE SPURGE FAMILY
Euphorbia serpens Matted sandmat

FABACEAE LEGUME FAMILY
Medicago polymorpha* Bur clover
Medicago sativa* Alfalfa
Trifolium subterraneum* Subterranean clover

FAGACEAE OAK FAMILY
Quercus wislizeni Interior live oak

MALVACEAE MALLOW FAMILY
Malva parviflora* Cheeseweed
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (September 10, 2025) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project C-2 DRAFT2025-144

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

MORACEAE MULBERRY FAMILY
Ficus carica* Common fig (cultivated)

MYRTACEAE MYRTLE FAMILY
Eucalyptus sp.* Eucalyptus (cultivated)

ONAGRACEAE EVENING PRIMROSE FAMILY
Ludwigia peploides* Floating water primrose

OXALIDACEAE OXALIS FAMILY
Oxalis corniculata* Creeping woodsorrel

PHYTOLACCACEAE POKEWEED FAMILY
Phytolacca americana* American pokeweed

PINACEAE PINE FAMILY
Pinus sp.* Pine (cultivated)

PLANTAGINACEAE PLANTAIN FAMILY
Plantago lanceolata* English plantain

PLATANACEAE PLANE-TREE FAMILY
Platanus occidentalis* American sycamore

POACEAE GRASS FAMILY
Avena sp.* Wild oat
Bromus diandrus* Ripgut brome
Bromus hordeaceus* Soft brome
Cynodon dactylon* Bermuda grass
Festuca myuros* Rat-tail fescue
Festuca perennis* Italian ryegrass
Glyceria declinata* Waxy mannagrass
Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum* Mediterranean barley
Panicum sp. Panic grass
Poa annua* Annual bluegrass
Sorghum halepense* Johnson grass

ROSACEAE ROSE FAMILY
Pyrus calleryana* Callery pear
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (September 10, 2025) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project C-3 DRAFT2025-144

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

SALICACEAE WILLOW FAMILY
Populus fremontii Fremont's cottonwood

SAPINDACEAE SOAPBERRY FAMILY
Acer sp.* Maple (cultivated)

SOLANACEAE NIGHTSHADE FAMILY
Datura stramonium* Jimson weed

TAXODIACEAE BALD CYPRESS FAMILY
Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood (cultivated)

TYPHACEAE CATTAIL FAMILY
Typha latifolia Broad-leaf cattail

ZYGOPHYLLACEAE CALTROP FAMILY
Tribulus terrestris* Puncture vine
Notes: * = non-native species

APPENDIX D
Wildlife Species Observed (September 10, 2025)
Appendix D – Wildlife Species Observed (September 10, 2025) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project
D-1 DRAFT
2025-144

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME
Amphibians
Pseudacris regilla Pacific chorus frog
Reptiles
Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard
Birds
Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron
Aphelocoma californica California Scrub-Jay
Sialia mexicana Western Bluebird
Haemorhous mexicanus House Finch
Spinus psaltria Lesser Goldfinch

APPENDIX E
San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Preconstruction Survey Protocols
November 14, 2000 5-18

5.2.2 PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEYS

5.2.2.1 Overview
There are four categories of preconstruction surveys necessary to the implementation of the SJMSCP:

A. Preconstruction surveys to verify vegetation types affected by the project and to determine if SJMSCP Covered Species are present and, if present, attaching Incidental Take Minimization Measures as conditions of project approval for individual projects (see Section

5.2.2.5 for survey methodologies and Section 5.2.2.4 for special provisions for conducting plant surveys). These preconstruction surveys shall be conducted in the field when a project is located on suitable habitat for one or more of the SJMSCP Covered Species; B. Preconstruction surveys conducted prior to (or, for some Incidental Take Minimization Measures, during) ground-disturbing activities to determine if SJMSCP Covered Species have been successfully relocated and/or to determine if other Incidental Take Minimization Measures have been implemented, as specified in the conditions of project approval; and C. Preconstruction surveys, conducted in compliance with current U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocols, to determine the presence or absence of Conservancy and/or longhorn fairy shrimp within vernal pools or other wetlands located southwest of I-580 in the Southwest Zone unless complete avoidance of vernal pools and/or wetlands is achieved in compliance with SJMSCP Section 5.5.9.

D. Preconstruction surveys conducted pursuant to the protocol established in Section 5.2.2.5(AC) for:
! Large-flowered fiddleneck southwest of the 900 foot contour line in the Southwest Zone southwest of I-580;
! Showy madia in the Southwest Zone;
! Hospital canyon larkspur in the Southwest Zone;
! Diamond-petaled poppy in the Southwest Zone;
! Greene's tuctoria in the Vernal Pool Zone;
! Succulent owl's clover in the Vernal Pool Zone;
! Legenere in the Vernal Pool Zone;
! Delta button celery in the Central Zone in S(Scrub) vegetation types; ! Sanford’s arrowhead in the Central Zone in W3, W4 and all I and R vegetation types; and
! Slough thistle in the Central and Central/Southwest Transition Zones in W4, R, R2, R3, R4 or R5 vegetation types–in particular where R touches or transitions to W.

November 14, 2000 5-19
The costs of conducting preconstruction surveys described in paragraphs A, B, and D, above, are calculated in the administrative costs for the SJMSCP and are included in funding estimates. The JPA shall conduct preconstruction surveys described in the paragraphs A, B, and D, above, at no additional cost to the Project Proponent. Preconstruction surveys required pursuant to paragraph C, above, are the responsibility of the Project Proponent.

5.2.2.2 Time Limits for Conducting JPA Preconstruction Surveys The JPA shall conduct preconstruction surveys to determine the necessity of establishing Incidental Take Minimization Measures as conditions of project approval, as described above in 5.2.2.1(A and D) within the following time periods commencing from the date of receipt of Advisory Agency Notices from the Plan Participants except as provided in Section 5.2.2.5(B):

A. For projects of 40 acres or less, surveys shall be conducted within 30 calendar days B. For projects of greater than 40 acres surveys shall be conducted within 60 calendar days, C. For projects requiring an environmental impact report, the time limits shall be extended to allow for surveys for SJMSCP Covered Plant Species during optimal blooming seasons.

The JPA shall conduct preconstruction surveys prior to ground-disturbing activities to determine if SJMSCP Covered Species have been successfully relocated and/or to determine if other Incidental Take Minimization Measures have been implemented as specified in the conditions of project approval, as described above in Section 5.2.2.1(B), within two working days from the date that the JPA receives written or oral notice that the Project Proponent is ready to begin Site Disturbances except as provided in Sections 5.2.2.4(D) and

5.2.2.5(D) and 5.2.2.5 (E). Extensions of these time limits may be granted with the approval of the Project Proponent.

While the time limits for responding to Advisory Agency Notices remain as described above, actual preconstruction survey time limits do not apply for the following:

A. For projects proposed within potential habitat for the following plant species: large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora); succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta) Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei), Delta button celery (Eryngium racemosum), Diamond-petaled California poppy (Escholzia rhombipetala), showy madia (Madia radiata), slough thistle (Cirsium crassicaule), legenere (Legenere limosa), Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius), and Sanford’s arrowhead (Sagittaria sandfordii). For these plant species, preconstruction surveys shall occur based on blooming periods for the plants and in accordance with the provisions of Section

5.2.2.5(B) unless otherwise approved pursuant to Section 5.2.2.5(C), unless full avoidance of all potential suitable habitat for the species occurs pursuant to Sections 5.5.9 (F) for narrowly distributed plant species or unless no kill/no Conversion of occupied habitat limits are lifted pursuant to Section 5.5.2.1; and
B. For projects proposed within potential habitat for the longhorn fairy shrimp and Conservancy fairy shrimp. Preconstruction surveys for these species shall be in accordance with current USFWS survey protocols unless full avoidance of all potential habitat for these species occurs pursuant to Section 5.5.9(B) or unless no kill/no Conversion of occupied November 14, 2000 5-20
habitat limits are lifted pursuant to Section 5.5.2.7.

5.2.2.3 Determining the Necessity for Site Visits as Part of Preconstruction Surveys To assist in its assessment of the necessity for Incidental Take Minimization Measures, the JPA shall consult the SJMSCP GIS Database or other sources (e.g., current reports from Permitting Agency field personnel; published results of field surveys conducted by, or on behalf of, Permitting Agencies or other local, state or federal agencies; the SJMSCP Biological Analysis; or other sources that provide information related to the location of SJMSCP Covered Species), if necessary, to determine the likelihood for disturbing an SJMSCP Covered Species or Natural Land area (in particular vernal pools or other wetlands) based on information indicating known species occupation sites, vegetation types present and the potential for the site to be occupied by a species given the vegetation types and species needs. If insufficient information exists to make a determination, the JPA shall conduct a preconstruction survey to assess the likelihood of the occurrence of an SJMSCP Covered Species or any Natural Lands located within the project area. It is anticipated that preconstruction surveys occurring on the project site will occur on the majority (perhaps up to 90%) of project sites. Preconstruction surveys at the project site will always occur when suitable habitat is present or potentially present for one or more of the SJMSCP Covered Species. The estimated 10% of projects which are unlikely to require a preconstruction survey include, for example, infill areas within well-developed urban centers with extensive ground disturbance and extensive paving.

5.2.2.4 Special Provisions for Conducting Preconstruction Surveys for Plants Since plants permanently occupy a given site (and therefore cannot easily be avoided by timing construction to avoid breeding seasons) and some plants may only be seasonally identified during sometimes brief blooming seasons, special provisions have been included in the SJMSCP for conducting pre-construction surveys for plants to ensure that Incidental Take Minimization Measures can be undertaken.

SJMSCP Covered Plant Species in San Joaquin County are located primarily on Natural Lands outside the boundaries of proposed development areas anticipated over the next 50 years as illustrated in the following maps located at the back of the SJMSCP:
! SJMSCP Planned Land Use Map - Illustrates boundaries of proposed development areas for the next 50 years.
! San Joaquin County Habitat Map Conservation and Open Space Plan Maps - Distribution of Existing Vegetation Habitat Types in San Joaquin County. Provides overview of the locations of Natural Lands, Natural Lands which are Wetlands, High and Low Habitat Value Agricultural Lands, and Urban Lands.
! San Joaquin County Habitat Map Conservation and Open Space Plan Maps - Species Occurrence. This map provides an overview of the distribution of SJMSCP Covered plants, birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates.

These three maps illustrate that most SJMSCP Covered Plant Species, with few exceptions (e.g., Delta slough thistle, Delta button celery and vernal pool species), are located almost exclusively on Natural Lands located outside of proposed development boundaries.

Further, based upon development patterns over the past 30+ years and the fact that proposed development November 14, 2000 5-21
will occur primarily on highly disturbed and cultivated lands (Agricultural Habitat Lands) while most SJMSCP Covered Plant Species occur on Natural Lands, only minimal impacts are anticipated for most SJMSCP Covered Plant Species. In fact, there is a much higher likelihood that most SJMSCP Covered Plant Species will be protected than they will be subject to Incidental Take under the SJMSCP.

The following factors further support these conclusions:
! Southwest Zone. This area consists primarily of grasslands (Natural Lands). Virtually no development (except for some minor mineral resource development and urbanization concentrated along I-580--see the SJMSCP Proposed Land Use Map at the back of the SJMSCP) is proposed in this zone.

While nearly devoid of proposed development, the following SJMSCP Covered Plant Species are located almost exclusively in the Southwest Zone and the likelihood of protecting these species within SJMSCP Preserves established for the San Joaquin kit fox are much higher than the likelihood of disturbing these species through SJMSCP Permitted Activities:

Large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora), hospital canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius), showy madia (Madia radiata) and recurved larkspur (Delphinium recurvatum). Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener), brittlescale (Atriplex depressa), Mt. Hamilton coreopsis (Coreopsis hamiltonii), diamond-petaled California poppy (Eschscholzia rhombipetala), mad-dog skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora), Wright's trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii), and caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum) also have their potential habitat in the Southwest Zone, although no known occurrences of these species exist in this zone. Similarly, heartscale (Atriplex cordulata) was found historically in the Southwest Zone, but has no current records identifying occupied habitat in the County. These species would be protected in the same manner as the other four plant species known to occur in the Southwest Zone should they be discovered over the life of the Plan.

In addition, ensuring that no disturbance will occur to the most narrowly distributed of these species, the SJMSCP Permits prohibit kill of individuals and conversion of occupied habitat for the large-flowered fiddleneck, diamond-petaled California poppy, showy madia and Hospital canyon larkspur unless special findings have been made upon consultation with the Permitting Agencies in accordance with the criteria established in Section 5.5.2.1. Special provisions for pre-construction surveys to ensure identification of these species are included in Section 5.2.2.5(B).
! Primary Zone of the Delta. SJMSCP Covered Plant Species located in the Primary Zone of the Delta are well-documented due to extensive surveys undertaken in this zone by state and federal agencies often associated with the management of water resources in the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. In addition, the Delta Protection Act places strict limits on urban development and other SJMSCP Permitted Activities within the Primary Zone of the Delta. Therefore, SJMSCP Covered Plant Species in the Primary Zone of the Delta are both highly protected by state legislation and are easily located due to extensive study of this region and, as with the Southwest Zone, the likelihood of protecting SJMSCP Covered Plant Species within Preserves established for the California black rail and Valley elderberry longhorn beetle is much higher than the likelihood that SJMSCP Covered Plant species in the Primary Zone of the Delta will be subject to Incidental Take pursuant to the SJMSCP.

November 14, 2000 5-22
The following plants occur almost exclusively in the Primary Zone of the Delta: Suisun marsh aster (Aster lentus), California hibiscus (Hibiscus lasiocarpus), Delta tule pea (Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii), Mason's lilaeopsis (Lilaeopsis masonii), Delta mudwort (Limosella subulata) and Sanford's arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii).

As previously noted, to ensure that no disturbance will occur to narrowly distributed species, the SJMSCP Permits prohibit kill of individuals and conversion of occupied habitat for Sanford’s arrowhead unless special findings have been made upon consultation with the Permitting Agencies in accordance with the criteria established in Section 5.5.2.1. 5.5.2.1.

Special provisions for pre-construction surveys to ensure identification of this species are included in Section 5.2.2.5(B).
! Vernal Pool Zone. The Conversion of up to 5,000 acres of vernal pool grasslands to orchards and vineyards, permitted pursuant to a pending U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Federal Clean Water Act Section 404 permit, or equivalent (as described in SJMSCP Section

5.6), is the primary activity anticipated to impact SJMSCP Covered Plant Species associated with vernal pools. This 5,000 acres of vernal pool grasslands contains approximately 707 acres of vernal pools (actual wetted surface area). Of the SJMSCP Covered Plant Species associated with vernal pools, only three are known to occur in San Joaquin County:
succulent owl's clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta), Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop (Gratiola heterosepala), and legenere (Legnere limosa). The remaining plants have been proposed for coverage due to historical records of the species which are presumed extirpated within the County. The primary emphasis of the SJMSCP with respect to these presumed extirpated species is the potential reintroduction on an experimental basis as part of vernal pool creation efforts to be undertaken by the SJMSCP. These species are: Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei), Hoover's calycadenia (Calycadenia hooveri), bristly sedge (Carex comosa), and Red Bluff dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus). In addition, due to their rarity, special protocols are required pursuant to Section 5.2.2.5(B) for conducting preconstruction surveys for Greene's tuctoria, legenere and the succulent owl's clover to protect against inadvertent take (i.e., kill of individuals or conversions of occupied habitat) of these species if these species are more widely distributed in the County than anticipated. Therefore, the SJMSCP includes special provisions for locating populations of the rarest of the vernal pool plant species and provides a potential for reintroducing populations for several extirpated vernal pool species in San Joaquin County.

As previously noted, to ensure that no disturbance will occur to narrowly distributed species, the SJMSCP Permits prohibit kill of individuals and conversion of occupied habitat for succulent owl’s clover, Greene’s tuctoria, and legenere unless special findings have been made upon consultation with the Permitting Agencies in accordance with the criteria established in Section 5.5.2.1.
! Central Zone. Most SJMSCP Permitted Activities will occur within the Central Zone.

While the majority of the Central Zone is composed of cultivated lands (i.e., Agricultural rather than Natural Lands), some Natural Lands associated with riparian corridors exists in this zone. These riparian corridors are associated with two plant species: the slough thistle (Cirsium crassicaule), and the Delta button-celery (Eryngium racemosum). In addition, Sanford’s arrowhead is known to occur in this zone.

As previously noted, to ensure that no disturbance will occur to narrowly distributed species, November 14, 2000 5-23
the SJMSCP Permits prohibit kill of individuals and conversion of occupied habitat for Sanford’s arrowhead, slough thistle and Delta button celery unless special findings have been made upon consultation with the Permitting Agencies in accordance with the criteria established in Section 5.5.2.1. 5.5.2.1. Special provisions for pre-construction surveys to ensure identification of this species are included in Section 5.2.2.5(B). ! All SJMSCP Index Zones. Based upon development proposals considered by local jurisdictions over the past 25 years, SJMSCP Planners conclude that new non-agricultural developments occurring on Natural Lands (the most likely location for SJMSCP Covered Plant Species) are almost always large developments which require long (i.e., often one year) review processes and preparation of environmental impact reports. Therefore, planners conclude, given the distribution of the SJMSCP Covered Plant Species and Natural Lands in San Joaquin County, approximately 95% of the SJMSCP Permitted Activities which will involve SJMSCP Covered Plant species will involve an environmental review process providing ample time (i.e., at least one year) to conduct both preconstruction surveys during optimal blooming seasons for SJMSCP Covered Plants and to implement appropriate mitigation measures (e.g., seed collections). The exception to this generalization is the Conversion of vernal pool grasslands to orchards and vineyards which is not subject to an environmental review process undertaken by local jurisdictions, but is normally subject to a Section 404 permit review process instead (thereby extending the project review period by a period of time similar to that of an environmental review and allowing for additional survey time).
! All SJMSCP Index Zones. In addition to SJMSCP restrictions against kill and Conversion of occupied habitat for ten of the SJMSCP’s most narrowly distributed plant species (and, in fact true for all other non-plant SJMSCP Covered Species), two mechanisms are included in the SJMSCP to allow a reevaluation of the procedure for assessing impacts resulting from SJMSCP Permitted Activities (including impacts to SJMSCP Covered Plants) should development patterns within San Joaquin County shift from the patterns described above in paragraphs A-E change:

1. A requirement for permitting SJMSCP Covered Activities which are unmapped on the SJMSCP Planned Land Use Map as described in SJMSCP Section 3.4; and

2. A requirement for a Major Plan Amendment (Section 8.8.5) to change the urban boundaries as indicated on the SJMSCP Planned Land Use Map if that total changes to the boundaries exceed the 5,000 acre annexation allocation provided pursuant to Section 8.2.1(10).

Based on these factors, preconstruction surveys for SJMSCP Covered Plants within the various SJMSCP Index Zones shall
A. Be conducted pursuant to the protocols established in Section 5.2.2.5 (A-C) for largeflowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora); succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta) Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei), Delta button celery (Eryngium racemosum), Diamond-petaled California poppy (Escholzia rhombipetala), showy madia (Madia radiata), slough thistle (Cirsium crassicaule), legenere (Legenere limosa), Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius), and Sanford’s arrowhead November 14, 2000 5-24
(Sagittaria sandfordii). No kill and no Conversion of occupied habitat for these species is permitted pursuant to the SJMSCP unless the findings of Section 5.5.2.1 are made with the concurrence of the Permitting agencies; or
B. Be undertaken for SJMSCP Covered Plants excluded from the preceding paragraph (A) during the discretionary project's application review process to provide ample opportunities to identify plants during the blooming seasons. The presence of SJMSCP Covered Plant Species can be determined on a project site well in advance of project construction, (with nearly no risk of a new SJMSCP Covered Plant Species moving in before construction), through reviewing the SJMSCP GIS Database and other current information sources and, when necessary, by conducting pre-construction surveys. Through this process, the JPA shall conduct pre-construction surveys during appropriate blooming seasons in areas of known SJMSCP Covered Plant Species occurrences or if the area's characteristics are likely to support SJMSCP Covered Plant Species.

If SJMSCP Covered Plant Species are identified and will not be fully avoided pursuant to provisions in Section 5.5.9, then seed collection may be undertaken by the JPA if the TAC recommends that such salvage has a high likelihood of resulting in a conservation benefit for the species and construction schedules permit, well in advance of project construction. Seed collection or other identified mitigation measures may occur immediately after or even before project approval with the consent of the landowner.

If SJMSCP Covered Species are identified by preconstruction surveys or are strongly suspected to be present based on the vegetation or habitat types present or if a Natural Land type is present, the JPA shall identify, in writing to the Plan Participant, the Incidental Take Minimization Measures applicable to the project and attach these as conditions of project approval per the procedure described in 5.2.1. All SJMSCP Covered Species identified by the JPA shall be recorded on both California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and SJMSCP GIS Database forms, as needed.

When the JPA determines that an SJMSCP Covered Species does or may occur on a particular project site after completing the preceding process, the JPA will conduct a preconstruction survey prior to ground-disturbing activities to verify that the appropriate Incidental Take Minimization Measures have been implemented to protect individual SJMSCP Covered Species.

The following table shall be used to guide the timing of preconstruction surveys for SJMSCP Covered Plant Species when required as described in the preceding paragraphs. The blooming periods established in Table

5.2-1 represent the widest possible blooming season as compiled from: 1) California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California, February, 1994; 2) CEQA-Defined Or Endangered Plants Currently Known to Occur Along the Waterways of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, B. Baba, CDFG Region 2, 1994; and 3) A California Flora and Supplement by Philip A. Munz; University of California Press, 1973 combined edition. All survey periods may be modified pursuant to the provisions of 5.2.2.5(B)(ii) and 5.2.2.5(C) or, based on updated scientific information evaluated and approved by the JPA with the by the JPA with the concurrence of the Permitting Agencies' representatives on the TAC.

TABLE 5.2-1

SURVEY WINDOWS FOR SJMSCP COVERED PLANT SPECIES

SJMSCP COVERED PLANT SPECIES

BLOOMING

PERIOD/SURVEY PERIOD
November 14, 2000 5-25
Large flowered fiddle-neck (Amsinckia grandiflora) April-May Suisun Marsh Aster (Aster lentus) Late May through November Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener) March - June Heartscale (Atriplex cordulata) May - October
Brittlescale (Atriplex depressa) May - October
Hoover's calycadenia (Calycadenia hooverii) July - September Bristly sedge (Carex comosa) May - September
Succulent owl's clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta fmr. Orthocarpus succulentus)
April - May
Slough thistle (Cirisium crassicaule) May - August
Mt. Hamilton coreopsis (Coreopsis hamiltonii) March - May Hospital canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius) April - June Recurved larkspur (Delphinium recurvatum) March - May
Delta button celery/Delta coyote thistle (Eryngium racemosum) June - October Diamond-petaled poppy/Diamond-petaled California Poppy (Eschscholzia rhombipetala) March - June Bogg's lake hedge hyssop (Gratiola heterosepala) April - June California hibiscus (Hibiscus lasiocarpus) August-September Red Bluff dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus) March - May Delta tule pea (Lathyrus jeponsii var. jepsonii) May - September Legenere (Legenere limosa) May - June
Mason's lilaeopsis (Lilaeopsis masonii) April - October Delta mudwort (Limosella subulata) May - August
Showy madia (Madia radiata) March - May
Sanford's arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii) May - October Mad-dog skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora) May - September Wright's trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii) May - September Caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum) March - April Greene's tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei) May - July

5.2.2.5 Preconstruction Survey Methodologies
A. Preconstruction survey methodologies, for preconstruction surveys undertaken in compliance with Section 5.2.2.1(A, Band D) and 5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4, and addressing all SJMSCP Covered Species, except as provided in paragraph B, below, shall be of sufficient scope, duration, and November 14, 2000 5-26
intensity to determine the need (or lack of a need) for attaching Incidental Take Minimization Measures as conditions of project approval, obtain a gross determination of habitats present on the site, any species-specific information as may be readily obtained, and the relation of the site to surrounding land uses. Specific methodologies shall be formulated by the JPA with the concurrence of the Permitting Agencies' representatives on the JPA's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) within one year of issuance of the SJMSCP's associated state and federal permits. Methodologies shall be consistent with the SJMSCP’s budget for conducting preconstruction surveys. While qualified biologists shall routinely perform preconstruction surveys, methodologies should avoid approaches which may actually harm or harass individual species thereby requiring time-consuming acquisitions of Section 10(a)(1)(A) permits for those conducting surveys except as otherwise required in 5.2.2.5(F) for the riparian brush rabbit. Methodologies developed will include provisions for assuming the presence of certain SJMSCP Covered Species under circumstances where timing of preconstruction surveys to coincide with the presence of the SJMSCP Covered Species may be prohibitively expensive or result in project delays except as otherwise provided in 5.2.2.5 (B-G) for full avoidance species (large flowered fiddleneck, succulent owl’s clover, Greene’s tuctoria, Delta button celery, diamond petaled poppy, showy madia, slough thistle, legenere, Hospital Canyon larkspur, Sanford’s arrowhead, riparian brush rabbit, riparian woodrat, longhorn fairy shrimp, Conservancy fairy shrimp).

To ensure consistency over time, development of survey methodologies by the JPA and TAC as specified above shall include development of a standardized form to be used in conducting pre-construction surveys. While specific information to be collected is not designated by the Plan, the following data types are recommended:

1. Size of the project site;

2. Site configuration;

3. Adjacent land uses;

4. Habitat types present and acreages of each;

5. Presence of Covered Species on the site as determined by the SJMSCP GIS Database and preconstruction surveys;

6. Overall habitat quality;

7. Presence of exotic, non-native, or invasive vegetation;

8. Presence of roads and other disturbances on or adjacent to the project site;

9. Presence and distance to the nearest permanent Open Space;

10. Presence of any pest or predatory animals on the site; and

11. Any special habitat features on the site (e.g., wetlands, nest trees, dens or burrows, intermittent or perennial streams, unique plants etc.). The JPA and/or the relevant participating jurisdiction shall be informed of any Incidental Take Minimization needs identified, and such requirements shall be made a part of any development permits issued by November 14, 2000 5-27
that jurisdiction, as appropriate (see Section 5.2.1).

B. Preconstruction surveys for the large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora); succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta) Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei), Delta button celery (Eryngium racemosum), Diamond-petaled California poppy (Escholzia rhombipetala), showy madia (Madia radiata), slough thistle (Cirsium crassicaule), legenere (Legenere limosa), Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius), and Sanford’s arrowhead (Sagittaria sandfordii) conducted pursuant to Section 5.2.2.1(D) shall, in addition to the requirements in paragraph A,:
i. Be conducted in coordination with a site visit to one of the local reference populations of the species, if available (i.e., permission is required for entry onto private lands), to assess the appearance of the species, its preferred habitat, and if the population is blooming in the vicinity during preconstruction surveys. As of the Effective Date of the SJMSCP, reference sites exist in San Joaquin County for large-flowered fiddleneck (public and private land), diamond-petaled poppy (public land) and succulent owl's clover (public land), legenere and Sanford’s arrowhead. No known reference sites exist for Greene's tuctoria, Delta button celery, showy madia, slough thistle or Hospital Canyon larkspur in San Joaquin County as of the Effective Date of the SJMSCP. In the absence of reference sites, the JPA may rely upon species information provided orally either: 1) by species experts consulted from the TAC or, in the absence of such experts, species experts contacted outside of the TAC; or 2) By reports received from area biologists regarding the activities (i.e., blooming periods) of the nearest known locations of Greene's tuctoria, Delta button celery, showy madia, slough thistle or Hospital Canyon larkspur located outside of San Joaquin County. ii. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, surveys shall be conducted during the optimum blooming period for the species as indicated in Table 5.2-1. Up to three site visits will be undertaken to confirm that preconstruction surveys have been undertaken during the blooming period for this species. However, if preconstruction surveys are conducted at the same time as reference populations of this species are known to be blooming in the vicinity for populations inhabiting similar habitats with similar microclimates and the species is not found to be present on the proposed project site, then additional preconstruction survey visits are unnecessary. If approved by the JPA with the concurrence of the Permitting Agencies' representatives on the TAC, the timing of preconstruction surveys may be modified (i.e., the length of survey windows may be reduced) on a case-by-case based upon the TAC's assessment of the season's weather patterns (which may have affected blooming cycles) and the likelihood of species occurrences on a particular site given the specifics of the site's topography, existing land uses, aspect, slope, presence of competing vegetation, soils or other related factors which may have modified the blooming cycle for the species; iii. If found, the surveyors shall prepare a detailed map indicating the location of the species; describe and photograph (color prints with negatives or color slides) the surrounding habitat including photo reference points, if available; describe adjacent hydrological conditions which may be affecting the population, if applicable; describe the species phenology and microhabitat; record an estimate of the number of individuals of the species per unit area; identify areas of high, medium and low density of the species; provide an estimate the acres of occupied habitat; describe potential threats to the population; and prepare and submit a California Native Species Field Survey Form and submit the form(s) to the Natural Diversity Database.

November 14, 2000 5-28
C. For all SJMSCP Covered Plants, if approved by the JPA with the concurrence of the Permitting Agencies' representatives on the TAC, the timing of preconstruction surveys for SJMSCP Covered Plants may be modified (i.e., the length of survey windows may be reduced) on a case-by-case based upon the TAC's assessment of the season's weather patterns (which may have affected blooming cycles) and the likelihood of species occurrences on a particular site given the specifics of the site's topography, existing land uses, aspect, slope, presence of competing vegetation, soils or other related factors which may have modified the blooming cycle for the species.

D. As required in Section 5.2.4.25, preconstruction surveys for the San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted two calendar weeks to thirty calendar days prior to commencement of ground disturbance for projects located within the Southwest Zone or Southwest/Central Transition Zone. Surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists. When surveys identify potential dens (potential dens are defined as burrows at least four inches in diameter which open up within two feet), potential den entrances shall be dusted for three calendar days to register track of any San Joaquin kit fox present.

E. Preconstruction surveys for the longhorn fairy shrimp and Conservancy fairy shrimp (potentially occurring within the Southwest Zone) shall be conducted in compliance with USFWS published survey protocols in effect at the time of the surveys.

F. Preconstruction surveys for the riparian brush rabbit shall be conducted in compliance with Survey Methods for Riparian Brush Rabbits (D.F. Williams, P.A. Kelly-San Joaquin Endangered Species Recovery Program) until and unless the USFWS publishes revised survey protocols. These preconstruction surveys require a special 10(a)(1)(A) permit for the individuals undertaking the surveys.

G. For all SJMSCP Covered Species, preconstruction surveys may be waived based upon a review by the TAC and concurrence by the Permitting Agencies if all potential suitable habitat for SJMSCP Covered Species will be fully avoided pursuant to Section 5.5.9.

H. For projects that impact vernal pool grasslands, preconstruction surveys shall collect information, as described in Section 5.9.4.12 that will be used to evaluate future adjustments of the vernal pool caps (e.g., total acreage of permitted Conversion permitted by the Take permits, annual limits on Conversion of vernal pool grasslands). Specifically, these surveys shall incorporate items from Section 5.9.4.12 (A)(1-6) in preconstruction survey protocols.

5.2.3 INCIDENTAL TAKE MINIMIZATION - OVERVIEW OF PROCESS Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act and Section 2081(b) of the California Endangered Species Act allows the Incidental Take of Covered Species only if Incidental Take Minimization Measures are adopted to minimize the impacts to Covered Species and impacts to Covered Species are mitigated. The following addresses Incidental Take Minimization Measures for all SJMSCP Covered Species. SJMSCP Section 5.5 describes additional measures which may be undertaken in lieu of SJMSCP compensation requirements and in addition to these Incidental Take Minimization Measures. These additional measures have an objective of entirely eliminating impacts of Take to SJMSCP Covered Species (i.e., “full avoidance”).

5.2.3.1 Incidental Take Minimization Strategy and Expectations for All SJMSCP Covered Species The success of the SJMSCP in minimizing impacts to SJMSCP Covered Species, through the implementation Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

APPENDIX C
Energy Consumption Analysis for the City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project, ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2025.

Central Trunk Sewer Project
2025-144
Energy Consumption Analysis
Construction Off-Road Fuel Consumption
Phase Name Off-Road Equipment Quantity Usage (hrs) Horsepower (hp) Load Factor Fuel Consumption
Rate (gallon/hr)1
Total
Hours
Number of
Days
Total Fuel Consumption
(gallon)
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8 33 0.73 1.39 8 20 222.4 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1 367 0.4 7.62 1 20 152.4 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 84 0.37 1.79 16 20 573.9 Site Preparation Graders 1 8 148 0.41 3.15 8 20 503.9
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 84 0.37 1.79 8 20 286.9 Pipe Installation Cranes 1 4 367 0.29 5.52 4 100 2,209.5 Pipe Installation Forklifts 2 6 82 0.2 0.95 12 100 1,135.5 Pipe Installation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 84 0.37 1.79 16 100 2,869.3 Pipe Installation Generator Sets 1 8 14 0.74 0.60 8 100 478.2 Pipe Installation Welders 3 8 46 0.45 1.19 24 100 2,866.5 Paving Cement and Morter Mixers 4 6 10 0.56 0.32 24 20 155.1 Paving Pavers 1 7 81 0.42 1.96 7 20 274.8
Paving Rollers 1 7 36 0.38 0.79 7 20 110.5
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 84 0.37 1.79 7 20 251.1 12,090

1. Fuel Consumption Rate = Horsepower x Load Factor x Fuel Consumption Factor Fuel Consumption Factor: Brake Specific Fuel Capacity is converted from diesel lb/hp-hr to diesel gallon/hp-hr Environmental Protection Agency, 2021. Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Compression-Ignition Engines in MOVES3.0.2 Source: Refer to CalEEMod outputs for assumptions used in this analysis as well as equipment usage.

Total Construction Off-Road Fuel (Diesel) Consumption (gallon) Notes:

Pepper Development Project
2024-179.01
Energy Consumption Analysis
Construction On-Road Fuel Consumption
Phase Name Phase Length # of Trips Worker Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day)
Total Fuel Consumption
(gallon)
Demolition 20.0 10.0 11.9 2,380.0 112.4
Site Preparation 20.0 5.0 11.9 1,190.0 56.2
Pipe Installation 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Paving 20.0 17.5 11.9 4,165.0 196.7

0.0 365
Phase Phase Length # of Trips Vendor Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day)
Total Fuel Consumption
(gallon)
Demolition 20 0 0 0 0.0
Site Preparation 20 0 0 0 0.0
Pipe Installation 100 0 0 0 0.0
Paving 20 0 0 0 0.0

0.0 0
Phase Phase Length # of Trips Hauling Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day)
Total Fuel Consumption
(gallon)
Demolition 20 11 20 4320 30,621.6
Site Preparation 20 6 20 2460 17,437.3
Pipe Installation 100 0 0 0 0.0
Paving 20 0 0 0 0.0

0.0 48,059
48,059
12,090
Worker Trips
Hauling Trips

7.088330736
Notes:

1. Countywide fuel consumption rates, on-road construction equipment diesel fuel consumption, and on-road fuel consumption are from CARB's EMFAC2025 (v2.0.0).

2. Countywide off-road fuel consumption is from CARB's OFFROAD2021 (v1.1.1) Emissions Inventory.

Hauling Trips Total (Diesel)
Worker Trips Total (Gasoline)

21.16993544

7.088330736
Vendor Trips Total (Diesel)
Vendor Trips
Construction Off-Road Diesel Consumption
Construction On-Road Diesel Consumption
Source: Refer to CalEEMod outputs for assumptions used in this analysis.

Total Construction Gasoline Consumption (gallon) Total Construction Diesel Consumption (gallon) 365 60,149
Percentage Increase Countywide

0.0413%
Countywide Gasoline Consumption (2024) Countywide Diesel Consumption (2024) 226,846,428 145,732,975
Gasoline Consumption1

0.0002%
Diesel Consumption1,2
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

APPENDIX D
Noise Analysis for the City of Manteca Central Trunk Sewer Project, ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2025
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/14/2025
Case Description: Manteca Central Truck
Description Affected Land Use
Demolition Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 965 0
Dozer No 40 81.7 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Results
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Concrete Saw 63.9 56.9
Dozer 56 52
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Total 63.9 60.7
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Report date: 7/14/2025
Case Description: Manteca Central Trunk
Description Affected Land Use
Site Preparation Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Grader No 40 85 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Results
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Grader 59.3 55.3
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Total 59.3 57.8
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/14/2025
Case Description: Manteca Central Trunk
Description Affected Land Use
Pipe Installation Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Crane No 16 80.6 965 0
Front End Loader No 40 79.1 965 0
Front End Loader No 40 79.1 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Generator No 50 80.6 965 0
Welder / Torch No 40 74 965 0
Welder / Torch No 40 74 965 0
Welder / Torch No 40 74 965 0
Results
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Crane 54.8 46.9
Front End Loader 53.4 49.4
Front End Loader 53.4 49.4
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Generator 54.9 51.9
Welder / Torch 48.3 44.3
Welder / Torch 48.3 44.3
Welder / Torch 48.3 44.3
Total 58.3 60
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/14/2025
Case Description: Manteca Central Trunk
Description Affected Land Use
Paving Residential
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 965 0
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 965 0
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 965 0
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 965 0
Paver No 50 77.2 965 0
Roller No 20 80 965 0
Tractor No 40 84 965 0
Results
Calculated (dBA)
Equipment *Lmax Leq
Concrete Mixer Truck 53.1 49.1
Concrete Mixer Truck 53.1 49.1
Concrete Mixer Truck 53.1 49.1
Concrete Mixer Truck 53.1 49.1
Paver 51.5 48.5
Roller 54.3 47.3
Tractor 58.3 54.3
Total 58.3 58.6
*Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1

Manteca City CouncilJune 16, 2026

Manteca City Council
June 16, 2026