Agenda, closed session, second session — City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority, March 25, 2025 (part 5 of 5)

The application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and is not anticipated to result in run-off to the Stanislaus River or waters that drain to the river. Therefore, no direct impacts to special-status fishes would occur, and indirect impacts would be insignificant or discountable. The project is not likely to have a substantial adverse effect on Chinook salmon - Central Valley fall / late fall-run Evolutionary Significant Unit or hardhead, and is not likely to adversely affect the Central Valley distinct population segment of steelhead.

STEELHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
The Stanislaus River is designated critical habitat for the Central Valley distinct population segment of steelhead (NOAA 2002; NOAA 2022). The physical and biological features that are essential for conservation of Central Valley steelhead that occur within the portion of the Stanislaus River adjacent to the project area are:
 Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival; and  Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks.

As discussed above, the project would not occur within the Stanislaus River and would therefore not have any direct effects on steelhead critical habitat or physical and biological features that are essential for conservation of the species. In addition, due to the distance from critical habitat, construction activities are not likely to result in vibration impacts, and through the use of water quality BMPs, contaminated runoff to critical habitat would be avoided to the extent that any effect would be discountable. In addition, the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and is not anticipated to result in run-off to the Stanislaus River or waters that drain to the river. Therefore, the project is not likely to adversely affect critical habitat for steelhead.

7.1.3 Western Pond Turtle
Western pond turtle is a CDFW species of special concern and a covered species under the SJMSCP. The construction of project features including WWTP improvements, pond modifications, storage tank, pump station, distribution pipelines, access routes, and staging areas will not occur within the Stanislaus River, its associated riparian vegetation, or waters that drain to the river. In addition, the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and is not anticipated to result in runoff to the Stanislaus River or waters that drain to the river. Therefore, the project would not result in adverse impacts to aquatic habitat for western pond turtle. However, due to the proximity of the project area to the Stanislaus River, portions of the project site (within 0.3 mile of the river) with uncompacted soils may be used as upland nesting habitat by western pond turtles. The construction of the project would not result in a reduction of upland habitat, because modifications to access roads would occur within the existing road footprint, and modifications to the WWTP and staging areas would occur within the footprint of the existing facility, which do not provide upland habitat. In addition, where the access road and pipeline work areas overlap with natural habitats, the disturbance would be temporary and restored to previously existing conditions after construction.

However, because the project site overlaps with upland habitat, the construction of the project could result in turtles being crushed by construction equipment. In addition, turtles could be trapped within the open trench during construction of the distribution pipelines, and western pond turtle nests could be destroyed.

To avoid potentially significant impacts on western pond turtle, the City may obtain approval from the San Joaquin County Council of Governments Habitat Technical Advisory Committee and Board of Directors for project coverage under the SJMSCP and will implement the following measures consistent with the avoidance and minimization Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 21
measures in the SJMSCP (SJCOG 2000). All mitigation listed below will be limited to construction within 0.3 miles of suitable aquatic habitat:
 A preconstruction survey for western pond turtle shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 48 hours of commencing work in aquatic habitat suitable for the species. If no pond turtles are observed, no further mitigation is necessary.
 During draining of the existing water storage ponds within the WWTP associated with construction of the project, a qualified biologist shall be present to monitor for presence of western pond turtles. If pond turtles are observed, a qualified biologist, with approval from CDFW, shall relocate pond turtles to the nearest area with suitable aquatic habitat that will not be disturbed by project-related construction activities (i.e., Stanislaus River).  If nesting areas for pond turtles are identified on the project site, a no-disturbance buffer area of 300 feet shall be established around the nesting site (which may be immediately adjacent to the river or extend up to 400 feet away from the river in uplands). These buffers shall be indicated by temporary fencing if construction has or will begin before nesting periods have ended. (The period from egg laying to emergence of hatchlings is normally April to November.)

7.1.4 Swainson’s Hawk
The project contains suitable foraging habitat and potential nesting trees for Swainson’s hawk, which is listed as threatened under CESA and covered under the SJMSCP. In addition, a Swainson’s hawk nest was documented just outside of the project area, along the railroad alignment in 2003 (CNDDB 2025b). The recycled water use area portions of the overall project area contain oaks in some locations that could be suitable nesting habitat for Swainson’s hawk; however, the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and using methods that are the same as existing conditions. Therefore, no impacts from operations of the project are anticipated. No tree removal is anticipated during project implementation and therefore, no direct impacts to Swainson’s hawk from project construction are likely to occur. However, potentially suitable nesting trees are located within 0.25 mile of the project area. If construction occurs between February 15 and September 15, construction noise and human disturbance from construction activities could result in nest abandonment, or loss of eggs and young.

To avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on Swainson’s hawk and white-tailed kite, the City may obtain approval from the San Joaquin County Council of Governments Habitat Technical Advisory Committee and Board of Directors for project coverage under the SJMSCP or consult with CDFW and obtain take authorization for Swainson’s hawk under CFGC Section 2081, and will implement the following measures consistent with the avoidance and minimization measures in the SJMSCP (SJCOG 2000):
 If project activity will commence between February 15 and September 15, a qualified biologist will be retained to conduct preconstruction surveys for active nests on and within 0.5 miles of the project site no more than 14 days and no less than 7 days before work begins.
 If an occupied Swainson’s hawk nest is identified during preconstruction surveys, a 0.25-mile no-disturbance buffer will be established. If an occupied Cooper’s hawk, osprey, or white-tailed kite nest is identified during preconstruction surveys, a no-disturbance buffer of at least 100 feet will be established around the nest. All project activities will be avoided within the buffer area until a qualified biologist confirms that the nest is no longer active or that the young have fully fledged.
 If a Swainson’s hawk nest tree becomes occupied during construction activities, then all construction activities shall remain a distance of two times the dripline of the tree, measured from the nest, and the nest shall be monitored by a qualified biologist. If construction activities cause the nesting bird to vocalize, make defensive flights at intruders, get up from a brooding position, or fly off the nest, then the no-disturbance buffer shall be increased until the agitated behavior ceases.

Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report 22 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project

7.1.5 Other Special-Status Bird Species
Yellow-breasted chat and burrowing owl are CDFW species of special concern, and tricolored blackbird is listed as threatened under CESA. All three species are covered species under the SJMSCP. Yellow-breasted chat may nest within the riparian habitat adjacent to the project area, which also may contain tricolored blackbird colonies.

Burrowing owls nest in burrows that have been constructed by ground squirrels and other similar human-created structures (e.g., unused pipe openings) that occur within barren areas or habitats with low growing vegetation.

Ground squirrel burrows were observed within the WWTP, access road, and pipeline work areas during the reconnaissance survey on May 17, 2022.

The recycled water use area portions of the overall project area are less than 25 feet from suitable riparian habitat in some locations; however, the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and using methods that are the same as existing conditions. Therefore, no impacts from operations of the project on these species are anticipated. The majority of construction activities would occur greater than 100 feet from suitable riparian habitat for yellow-breasted chat and no direct or indirect impacts to this species from these activities are anticipated. However, the improvements to the access road would occur within 100 feet of yellow-breasted chat habitat, and indirect impacts could result from this activity. Construction and staging activities would occur within 500 feet of potential tricolored blackbird habitat and indirect impacts from construction and staging activities within this distance to riparian habitat could result in disturbance of a nesting colony and loss of eggs and young. Similarly, construction activities may occur within 100 feet of burrowing owl burrows, which could result in the disturbance of nesting activities, or destruction of nests.

To avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on California horned lark, loggerhead shrike, yellow-breasted chat, and yellow warbler nests; burrowing owl burrows; black-crowned night heron, great blue heron, great egret, snowy egret and tricolored blackbird colonies, the City may obtain approval from San Joaquin County Council of Governments Habitat Technical Advisory Committee and Board of Directors for project coverage under the SJMSCP and will implement the following measures consistent with the avoidance and minimization measures in the SJMSCP (SJCOG 2000):
 A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for any project activity that would occur during the nesting bird season (February 1–August 31) within 500 feet of suitable nesting habitat for special-status birds, including shrubs, riparian vegetation, trees, and barren areas within the WWTP, access road, and pipeline alignment. The survey shall be conducted within 14 days before project activity begins.  If no black-crowned night heron, great blue heron, great egret, snowy egret, or tricolored blackbird colonies, or other special-status nesting birds are found, no further mitigation is required.  If active black-crowned night heron, great blue heron, great egret, snowy egret, or tricolored blackbird colonies are found, a qualified biologist shall establish a setback of 500 feet from colonial nesting areas for these species, which shall be established and maintained during the nesting season for the period encompassing nest building and continuing until fledglings leave nests. This setback applies whenever construction or other ground-disturbing activities must begin during the nesting season in the presence of nests that are known to be occupied. Setbacks shall be marked by brightly colored temporary fencing.  If active burrowing owl burrows or California horned lark, loggerhead shrike, song sparrow, yellow-breasted chat, or yellow warbler nests are found, a qualified biologist shall establish a setback of 500 feet from the California horned lark nest, 250 feet from the burrowing owl burrow, or 100 feet from the loggerhead shrike, yellow-breasted chat, or yellow warbler nest as applicable, during the nesting season (February 1–August 31) unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive means that the birds have not begun egg laying, or that juveniles from the occupied burrows or nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. For burrowing owls, once the fledglings are capable of independent survival the owls may be evicted using passive relocation as described in the California Department of Fish and Game’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012).

Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 23

7.1.6 Common Raptors and Other Common Nesting Birds
While common raptors and other nesting birds do not fit the criteria for special-status species, it is standard for public entities such as the City to consider project impacts to common raptors and other common nesting birds protected under CFGC Section 3503 and Section 3503.5 and under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Construction of the project could result in the disturbance or destruction of nests of common raptors and other nesting birds that may nest within the project site and may result in loss of eggs and young. The loss of nests could be a substantial adverse effect on the local populations of these species.

The City will implement the following measures to avoid impacts to common raptors and other common nesting birds.  A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for any project activity that would occur during the nesting bird season (February 1–August 31) within suitable nesting habitat for common raptors and other nesting birds, including shrubs, riparian vegetation, trees, and barren areas within the WWTP, access road, and pipeline alignment. The survey shall be conducted within 14 days before project activity begins.  If occupied nests are identified during the preconstruction survey, the qualified biologist shall determine and establish an appropriate no-disturbance buffer based on bird species; listing status; and other factors, including distance from construction activity, type and duration of construction, and whether the nest is within the line of sight of construction activity. The size of the buffer may be adjusted if the qualified biologist determines that such an adjustment would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. Project activities will be avoided within the buffer area until a qualified biologist confirms that the nest is no longer active or that the young have fully fledged.

7.1.7 Special-Status Bat Species
The project area contains suitable foraging habitat for the CDFW species of special-concern Townsend’s big-eared bat and western mastiff bat. However, roosting habitat for these species is not present in the project area. The project would not have any adverse effect on foraging by Townsend’s big-eared bat or western mastiff bat because operations would not result in a reduction of irrigation or agricultural production, and the new facilities would be placed within the existing WWTP.

Western red bat, a CDFW species of special-concern and SJMSCP covered species, not only may forage in the project area, but the large oaks and riparian trees within and adjacent to the project area may provide suitable roosting habitat for this species. The recycled water use area portions of the overall project area contain trees suitable for roosting western red bat in some locations; however, the application of recycled water would occur at agronomic rates and using methods that are the same as existing conditions. Therefore, no impacts from operations of the project are anticipated.

While no tree removal is anticipated, western red bats roost within the foliage of large trees and tree trimming could result in direct impacts, including injury or death. Indirect impacts from noise and vibration could also result in the loss of roosts, injury or death of western red bat if tree trimming, grading, trenching or other construction activities take place within 250 feet of suitable roosts during roosting season (March 1 through August 31).

To avoid and minimize impacts to special-status bat roosts, the City may obtain approval from San Joaquin County Council of Governments Habitat Technical Advisory Committee and Board of Directors for project coverage under the SJMSCP and will implement the following measures consistent with the avoidance and minimization measures in the SJMSCP (SJCOG 2000):
 Within 14 days prior to initiating work, a qualified bat biologist will inspect the portions of the project site where ground disturbance would occur (i.e., north access road, distribution pipeline alignment, WWTP) and adjacent areas (within 250 feet) for bat roosts (mature trees in the riparian woodland, and mixed oak woodland portions of the project site). Surveys will consist of a daytime pedestrian survey looking for evidence of bat use (e.g., guano) and/or an evening emergence survey to note the presence or absence of bats within potential roosts. If no bat roosts are found, then no further mitigation will be required.

Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report 24 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
 If evidence of bat use is observed, the number and species of bats using the roost will be determined. Acoustic bat detectors may be used to supplement survey efforts if needed to determine the species of roosting bats, but are not required.
 If an active western red bat maternity roost is detected, an avoidance buffer of 250 feet will be maintained from May 1 until young are flying (typically through August).  If roosts of western red bat are determined to be present within the project site and within 250 feet of construction, work may be performed within a 250-foot buffer of the roost outside of the breeding season (May 1 through August 31) when the daytime temperature is 50 degrees Fahrenheit or greater.

7.2 SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES
Valley oak woodland, Fremont cottonwood forest and box elder forest and woodland are the only sensitive natural communities in the project area (Figure 3). With the exception of small areas of valley oak woodland located within the proposed pipeline alignment and along the access road, these sensitive natural communities occur within the application area of the project and no impacts to these communities are anticipated from project operations. No conversion of the valley oak woodland is anticipated because no tree removal would occur during project construction; however, oaks may be trimmed along the access road. No additional measures to avoid impacts would be required.

7.3 POTENTIALLY JURISDICTIONAL AQUATIC RESOURCES
No potentially jurisdictional wetlands or other waters of the United States and/or state are located within 50 feet of the access road, pipeline alignment, or within the existing WWTP. Therefore, no measures to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters would be required.

Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 25
8 REFERENCES
Ascent Environmental. 2025. Aquatic Resources Delineation Report for the City of Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project. Prepared for the City of Riverbank. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012 (March). California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.
———. 2025. Natural Communities List. Available: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities.

Accessed: January 2025.

California Natural Diversity Database. 2025a. Vegetation - Great Valley Ecoregion Vegetation [ds 2632]. Available:
htts:// www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/bios/.www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/bios/. Accessed December 9, 2024. ———. 2025b. Results of electronic records search. Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed December 9, 2024.

California Native Plant Society. 2025. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9.5).

Available: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed December 9, 2024.

CDFW. See California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

CNDDB. See California Natural Diversity Database.

CNPS. See California Native Plant Society.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Available:
https://www.lrh.usace.army.mil/Portals/38/docs/USACE%2087%20Wetland%20Delineation%20Manual.pdf.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2002. “Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Seven Evolutionary Significant Units of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead in California.” Final Rule. Federal Register 70: 52488 – 52627.
________. 2022. Protected Resources APP. Critical Habitat Steelhead (California Central Valley DPS). Available:
https://www.webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7514c715b8594944a6e468d d25aaacc9. Accessed: May 12, 2022.

NOAA. See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

River Partners. 2007. VELB Habitat and Colonization of Remnant and Planted Elderberry along the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers. Prepared for US Bureau of Reclamation. May 10, 2007.

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

SJCOG. See San Joaquin Council of Governments.

USACE. See US Army Corps of Engineers.

USDA. See US Department of Agriculture.

US Department of Agriculture. 2022 (May 13). Natural Resources Conservation Service, Custom Soil Resource Report for the Eastern Stanislaus Area, California, and San Joaquin County, California.

Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Ascent Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report 26 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Framework for Assessing Impacts to the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Sacramento, CA.

USFWS. See US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Appendix A
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Information for Planning and
Consultation Official Species List
June 30, 2022
United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Phone: (916) 414-6600 Fax: (916) 414-6713
In Reply Refer To:

Project Code: 2022-0059435
Project Name: Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.

A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 06/30/2022 2
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.

If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.

The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-tobirds.php.

In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
06/30/2022
3 ▪
Attachment(s):

Official Species List
06/30/2022 1
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
(916) 414-6600
06/30/2022 2
Project Summary
Project Code: 2022-0059435
Event Code: None
Project Name: Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project Project Type: Irrigation
Project Description: The Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project would include upgrades to the existing City Wastewater Treatment Plant, including new secondary and tertiary treatment and disinfection facilities, construction of a recycled water storage tank, reconfiguration of existing percolation ponds to provide additional seasonal recycled water storage, and installation of a distribution system to initially serve nearby agricultural users.

Project Location:

Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@37.746375099999995,-120.9546855557328,14z Counties: San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties, California 06/30/2022 3

1. Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 8 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

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.

Reptiles

NAME STATUS
Giant Garter Snake Thamnophis gigas
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4482
Threatened
Amphibians

NAME STATUS
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
Population: U.S.A. (Central CA DPS)
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
Fishes

NAME STATUS
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321
Threatened
1 06/30/2022 4
Insects

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7850
Threatened
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2246
Endangered
Flowering Plants

NAME STATUS
Greene's Tuctoria Tuctoria greenei
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1573
Endangered
Critical habitats

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION.
06/30/2022
5 IPaC User Contact Information
Agency: Ascent Environmental Inc.

Name: Ted Thayer
Address: 1111 Broadway, Suite 600
City: Oakland
State: CA
Zip: 94607
Email [email protected]
Phone: 5109564908
Appendix B
Special-Status Species Tables
Ascent Special-Status Species Tables
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project B-1
Methods
The species tables in this appendix were developed through a review of relevant databases and other available information. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2025) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CNDDB 2025) were reviewed for specific information on documented observations of special-status species previously recorded in the project site and vicinity. A search of the CNDDB and CNPS was conducted for the following U.S. Geological Survey 7.5’ quadrangles surrounding the project area: Riverbank, Waterford, Oakdale, Escalon, Brush Lake, Ceres, Denair, Avena, and Salida. In addition, an official species list was received for the project from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database (Appendix A).

Table 1 Special-Status Botanical Species Known to Occur in the Project Region and their Potential for Occurrence in the Project Site
Species
Status1
Habitat and Blooming Period Potential for Occurrence2
Federal State CRPR
Heartscale
Atriplex cordulata var.
cordulata
1B.2 Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, meadows and seeps. Alkaline
flats and scalds in the Central Valley, sandy
soils. 10–902 feet in elevation. Blooms April–
October. Annual.

Not expected to occur: The project area
contains grassland habitat with alkaline soils
(USDA 2022) suitable for this species. The
project area is within the elevational range
of the species. However, the grassland
habitat in the project area is substantially
disturbed and dominated by non-native
species. In addition, the species has been
extirpated from San Joaquin and Stanislaus
Counties (CNPS 2025).

Subtle orache
Atriplex subtilis
1B.2 Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline soils.
66–328 feet in elevation. Blooms June–
September (October). Annual.

Not expected to occur: The project area
contains grassland habitat with alkaline soils
(USDA 2022), and project area is within the
elevational range of the species. However,
the grassland habitat in the project area is
substantially disturbed and dominated by
non-native species.

Beaked clarkia
Clarkia rostrata
1B.3 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill
grassland. North-facing slopes; sometimes
on sandstone. 197–3002 feet in elevation.

Blooms April–May. Annual.

Not expected to occur: A small portion of
the project area contains grassland habitat
with suitable for this species, and the
project area is slightly below the elevational
range of the species. However, the
grassland habitat in the project area is
substantially disturbed and dominated by
non-native species.

Legenere
Legenere limosa
1B.1 Vernal pools, wetland. In beds of vernal
pools. 3–2887 feet in elevation. Blooms
April–June. Annual.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

Colusa grass
Neostapfia colusana
T E 1B.1 Vernal pools, wetland. Usually in the
bottoms of large, or deep vernal pools;
adobe soils. 16–410 feet in elevation. Blooms
May–August. Annual.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

San Joaquin Valley Orcutt
grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
T E 1B.1 Vernal pools, wetland. 33–2477 feet in
elevation. Blooms April–September. Annual.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

Special-Status Species Tables Ascent
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report B-2 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
Species
Status1
Habitat and Blooming Period Potential for Occurrence2
Federal State CRPR
Prairie wedge grass
Sphenopholis obtusata
2B.2 Wetlands, wet meadows, and seeps within
cismontane woodlands,. Also open moist
sites, along rivers and springs, alkaline
desert seeps. 984–6562 feet in elevation.

Blooms April–July. Perennial.

Not expected to occur: No suitable wetland
habitat is located within the project area; in
addition, the project area is substantially
below the elevational range of the species.

Greene's tuctoria Tuctoria
greenei
E R 1B.1 Vernal pools, wetland. Vernal pools in open
grasslands. 82–4347 feet in elevation.

Blooms May–July (September). Annual.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

Notes: CRPR = California Rare Plant Rank; CNPS California Native Plant Society; ESA = Federal Endangered Species Act; CESA = California Endangered Species Act;
1 Legal Status Definitions
Federal: State:

E Endangered (legally protected by ESA) E Endangered (legally protected by CESA) T Threatened (legally protected by ESA) R Rare (legally protected by Native Plant Protection Act) California Rare Plant Ranks:
1B Plant species considered rare or endangered in California and elsewhere (protected under CEQA, but not legally protected under ESA or CESA)
2B Plant species considered rare or endangered in California but more common elsewhere (protected under CEQA, but not legally protected under ESA or CESA)
Threat Ranks

0.1-Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat)

0.2-Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat)

0.3-Not very threatened in California (less than 20% of occurrences threatened / low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known)
2 Potential for Occurrence Definitions
Not expected to occur: Species is unlikely to be present on the project site due to poor habitat quality, lack of suitable habitat features, or restricted current distribution of the species.

Could occur: Suitable habitat is available at the project site; however, there are little to no other indicators that the species might be present.

Known to occur: The species, or evidence of its presence, was observed at the project site during reconnaissance surveys, or was reported by others.

Sources: CNPS 2025; USDA 2022
Ascent Special-Status Species Tables
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project B-3
Table 2 Special-Status Wildlife Known to Occur in the Project Region and their Potential to Occur within or adjacent to the Project area
Species Listing Status1Habitat Potential for Occurrence2 Federal State
Invertebrates
Monarch butterfly -
California overwintering
population
Danaus plexippus
FC Closed-cone coniferous forest. Winter roost sites
extend along the coast from northern Mendocino
to Baja California, Mexico. Roosts located in windprotected tree groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and water sources nearby.

Not expected to occur: The project site is too
far from the coast to provide overwintering
habitat.

Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle Desmocerus
californicus dimorphus
FT Riparian scrub. Occurs only in the Central Valley of California, in association with blue elderberry
(Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea). Prefers to lay eggs
in elderberries 2-8 inches in diameter; some
preference shown for "stressed" elderberries.

Could occur: Riparian habitat associated with
the Stanislaus River is located directly
adjacent to the project area. Numerous
elderberry shrubs were observed during the
reconnaissance surveys located within 165
feet of the disturbance footprint, including
one shrub located within the disturbance
footprint in Jacob Myers Park. The species
was documented to occur historically along
the north bank of the Stanislaus River
adjacent to the WWTP (CNDDB 2025).

Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
FT Valley and foothill grassland, vernal pool, wetland.

Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley,
Central Coast mountains, and South Coast
mountains, in astatic rain-filled pools. Inhabit
small, clear-water sandstone-depression pools
and grassed swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow
depression pools.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

Vernal pool tadpole
shrimp
Lepidurus packardi
FE Valley and foothill grassland, vernal pool, wetland.

Inhabits vernal pools and swales in the
Sacramento Valley containing clear to highly
turbid water. Pools commonly found in grass
bottomed swales of unplowed grasslands. Some
pools are mud-bottomed and highly turbid.

Not expected to occur: No vernal pools are
located within or adjacent to the project
area.

Fish
Chinook salmon - Central
Valley fall / late fall-run
Evolutionary Significant
Unit Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha pop. 13
SSC Sacramento/San Joaquin flowing waters.

Populations spawning in the Sacramento and San
Joaquin rivers and their tributaries.

Could Occur: There are no aquatic features
within the project area suitable for Chinook
salmon; however, the species may be present
within the Stanislaus River directly adjacent
to the eastern application area.

Delta smelt
Hypomesus transpacificus
FT SE Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Seasonally in
Suisun Bay, Carquinez Strait and San Pablo Bay.

Seldom found at salinities > 10 ppt. Most often at
salinities < 2ppt.

Not expected to occur: There are no aquatic
features within the project area suitable for
hardhead. Stanislaus River is located outside
of the range of the species (USFWS 2025).

Hardhead
Mylopharodon
conocephalus
SSC Klamath/North coast flowing waters,
Sacramento/San Joaquin flowing waters. Low to
mid-elevation streams in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin drainage. Also present in the Russian
River. Clear, deep pools with sand-gravel-boulder
bottoms and slow water velocity. Not found where
exotic centrarchids predominate.

Could Occur: There are no aquatic features
within the project area suitable for hardhead;
however, the species may be present within
the Stanislaus River directly adjacent to the
eastern application area.

Special-Status Species Tables Ascent
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report B-4 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
Species Listing Status1Habitat Potential for Occurrence2 Federal State
Steelhead - Central Valley
DPS Oncorhynchus mykiss
irideus pop. 11
FT Aquatic. Sacramento/San Joaquin flowing waters.

Populations in the Sacramento and San Joaquin
rivers and their tributaries.

Could Occur: There are no aquatic features
within the project area suitable for steelhead;
however, the species may be present within
the Stanislaus River directly adjacent to the
eastern application area.

Amphibians and Reptiles
California tiger salamander
- central California DPS
Ambystoma californiense
pop. 1
FT ST Lives in vacant or mammal-occupied burrows
throughout most of the year; in grassland,
savanna, or open woodland habitats. Need
underground refuges, especially ground squirrel
burrows, and vernal pools or other seasonal water
sources for breeding.

Not Expected to Occur: There are several
historic occurrences within approximately 5
miles of the project area that are listed in the
CNDDB as extant (CNDDB 2025). Potentially
suitable aquatic habitat is located within 0.75
mile of the western access road, and within

0.5 mile of the proposed pipeline alignment;
however, the distance and lack of
connectivity between the potentially suitable
aquatic habitat near the project area and
recorded occurrences (CNDDB 2025) makes
it unlikely that these ponds are occupied by
California tiger salamander. Therefore, the
upland portions of the project area are not
likely to be suitable habitat.

Northern California legless
lizard
Anniella pulchra
SSC Chaparral. Coastal dunes. Coastal scrub. Sandy or
loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation. Soil
moisture is essential. They prefer soils with a high
moisture content.

Not Expected to Occur: The project area
does not contain chaparral, dune, or scrub
habitat suitable for this species.

Western pond turtle Emys
marmorata
SSC A thoroughly aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes,
rivers, streams and irrigation ditches, usually with
aquatic vegetation, below 6000 ft elevation. Needs
basking sites and suitable (sandy banks or grassy
open fields) upland habitat up to 0.5 km from
water for egg-laying.

Could Occur: Riparian vegetation adjacent to
the project area, as well as undisturbed
portions of the WWTP and application areas,
may be used by western pond turtle as
upland habitat. Unidentified turtles were
seen using the existing treatment ponds
during the site visit on May 17, 2022. Nearest
documented occurrence is approximately 7
miles from the project area (CNDDB 2025).

Giant gartersnake
Thamnophis gigas
FT ST Marsh and swamp, riparian scrub, wetland. Prefers freshwater marsh and low gradient streams. Has
adapted to drainage canals and irrigation ditches.

This is the most aquatic of the garter snakes in
California.

Not Expected to Occur: The project area is
outside the extent of the recovery units in
the recovery plan for the species and
therefore, the extent of suitable habitat for
the species (USFWS 2017; USFWS 2020).

Furthermore, there are no documented
occurrences within the project region
(CNDDB 2022).

Birds
Burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
SSC Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, Great Basin
grassland, Great Basin scrub, Mojavean desert
scrub, Sonoran desert scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland. Open, dry annual or perennial
grasslands, deserts and scrublands characterized
by low-growing vegetation. Subterranean nester,
dependent upon burrowing mammals, most
notably, the California ground squirrel.

Could Occur: The project area includes lowgrowing open grassland and open ruderal habitats containing ground squirrel burrows
that may provide suitable burrows for this
species.

Ascent Special-Status Species Tables
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project B-5
Species Listing Status1Habitat Potential for Occurrence2 Federal State
Swainson's hawk Buteo
swainsoni
ST Great Basin grassland, riparian forest, riparian
woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Breeds in
grasslands with scattered trees, juniper-sage flats,
riparian areas, savannahs, and agricultural or
ranch lands with groves or lines of trees. Requires
adjacent suitable foraging areas such as
grasslands, or alfalfa or grain fields supporting
rodent populations.

Known to Occur: Large riparian and other
trees within and adjacent to the project area
provide potential nesting habitat for this
species. Swainson’s hawks were observed
nesting in oak trees just north of the WWTP
along the railroad right of way in 2003
(CNDDB 2025).

Tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
SSC Freshwater marsh, marsh and swamp, swamp,
wetland. Highly colonial species, most numerous
in Central Valley and vicinity. Largely endemic to
California. Requires open water, protected nesting
substrate, and foraging area with insect prey
within a few kilometers of the colony.

Could occur: Riparian forest adjacent to the
project area is potentially suitable habitat for
this species; however, no nesting habitat is
present within the project area, and the
orchards within the project area are not likely
to support foraging tricolored blackbird.

Yellow-breasted chat
Icteria virens
SSC Riparian forest, riparian scrub, riparian woodland.

Summer resident; inhabits riparian thickets of
willow and other brushy tangles near
watercourses. Nests in low, dense riparian,
consisting of willow, blackberry, wild grape;
forages and nests within 10 feet of ground.

Could occur: Riparian forest adjacent to the
project area is potentially suitable nesting
habitat for this species.

Mammals
Townsend's big-eared bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
SSC Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, chenopod
scrub, Great Basin grassland, Great Basin scrub,
Joshua tree woodland, lower montane coniferous
forest, meadow & seep, Mojavean desert scrub,
riparian forest, riparian woodland, Sonoran desert
scrub. Throughout California in a wide variety of
habitats. Most common in mesic sites. Roosts in
the open, hanging from walls and ceilings.

Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to
human disturbance.

Could occur: The project area and adjacent
riparian corridor may provide foraging
habitat for this species, which has been
recorded to occur upstream along the
Stanislaus River near Knights Ferry (CNDDB
2025). However, the project area does not
likely support roosts for Townsends’ bigeared bat, because structures in the area that may provide suitable shelter are subject to
regular human disturbance.

Western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis californicus
SSC Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub,
valley and foothill grassland. Many open, semiarid to arid habitats, including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands,
and chaparral. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high
buildings, trees and tunnels.

Could occur: The project area and adjacent
riparian corridor may provide foraging
habitat for this species. There is a historical
record of the species approximately 5.5 miles
east of the project area, and more recent
occurrences upstream along the Stanislaus
River (CNDDB 2025). While there is no
roosting habitat within the project area, the
railroad bridge over the Stanislaus River near
the project area may support roosts of this
species.

Western red bat Lasiurus
blossevillii
SSC Cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous
forest, riparian forest, riparian woodland. Roosts
primarily in trees, 2-40 feet above ground, from
sea level up through mixed conifer forests. Prefers
habitat edges and mosaics with trees that are
protected from above and open below with open
areas for foraging.

Could Occur: Riparian trees adjacent to the
project area, as well as large oaks within the
application areas may provide roosting
habitat for this species.

Special-Status Species Tables Ascent
Biological Constraints and Preliminary Design Evaluation Report B-6 Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
Note: CNDDB = California Natural Diversity Database; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; ESU = Evolutionary Significant Unit; DPS= Distinct Population Segment
1 Legal Status Definitions
Federal:

FE Endangered (legally protected)
FC Candidate (no formal protection)
FT Threatened (legally protected)
State:

SSC Species of special concern (no formal protection)
SE Endangered (legally protected)
ST Threatened (legally protected
2 Potential for Occurrence Definitions
Not expected to occur: Species is unlikely to be present in the project area due to poor habitat quality, lack of suitable habitat features, or restricted current distribution of the species.

Could occur: Suitable habitat is available in the project area; however, there are little to no other indicators that the species might be present.

Known to occur: The species, or evidence of its presence, has been reported by others.

Source: CNDDB 2025; USFWS 2017; USFWS 2020; USFWS 2022.

REFERENCES
California Natural Diversity Database. 2025. Results of electronic records search. Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed December 9, 2024.

California Native Plant Society. 2025. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9.5).

Available: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed December 9, 2024.

CNDDB. See California Natural Diversity Database.

CNPS. See California Native Plant Society.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2022. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Custom Soil Resource Report for the Eastern Stanislaus Area, California, and San Joaquin County, California. May 13, 2022.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Final Recovery Plan for the Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas). Region 8. U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California. September 2017. ———. 2020. Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Sacramento, California. June 2020. ———. 2022. Species Profile for Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus). Available:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321. Accessed: May 2022.

USDA. See U.S. Department of Agriculture.

USFWS. See U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
20210199.01
FEBRUARY 2025

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION
Riverbank Regional Recycled
Water Project
PREPARED FOR:

City of Riverbank
Public Works Department
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION
Riverbank Regional Recycled
Water Project
Prepared for:

City of Riverbank
Public Works Department
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Contact:

Cody Bridgewater
Director of Public Works
209.869.7128
Prepared by:

Ascent Environmental
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Contact:

Kirsten Burrowes
Project Manager
916.732.3333
February 2025
20210199.01
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................................................................. II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................................... III 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 2 LOCATION AND CONTACTS ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3 REGULATORY SETTING ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Waters of the United States.......................................................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Waters of the State........................................................................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Rivers, Streams, and Lakes ............................................................................................................................................ 8 4 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 9 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

5.1 Landscape Setting............................................................................................................................................................ 9

5.2 Soils .....................................................................................................................................................................................10

5.3 Aquatic Resources .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 6 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Appendices
A Supporting Maps
B Soil Report
C Aquatic Resource Delineation Map
D Photographs
Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2 Project Location................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Tables
Table 1 Soil Map Units That Occur in the Study Area According to the Soil Survey of San Joaquin and Stanislaus County, California...............................................................................................................................10 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project ii Aquatic Resources Delineation Report

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CWA Clean Water Act
District Sacramento District of the US Army Corps of Engineers EPA US Environmental Protection Agency
FAC facultative
FACU facultative upland
FACW facultative wetland
LSAA Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
NI no indicator
NL not listed
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetland Inventory
NWPR Navigable Waters Protection Rule
OBL obligate
OHWM ordinary high water mark
RHA Rivers and Harbors Act
RRRWP Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
UPL obligate upland
USACE US Army Corps of Engineers
USGS US Geological Survey
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ascent Environmental conducted a delineation of aquatic resources within the 190.77-acre study area for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project (RRRWP or “project”) on May 17 and July 8, 2022, and December 9, 2024.

The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008) were used to investigate aquatic resources potentially subject to USACE jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) as well as state of California regulations under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (PorterCologne Act), State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Wetlands Procedures), and the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Section 1600. This report was prepared to support the request for a preliminary jurisdictional determination from the USACE Sacramento District (District) and conforms to the District’s Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (USACE 2016a) and Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the Pacific Division Regulatory Program Delineations (USACE 2016b). This report provides necessary background information to support the preparation of permit applications under federal and state regulations related to aquatic resources.

No potentially jurisdictional waters of the United States and/or state were delineated within the 190.77-acre study area. The study area is located at the City of Riverbank’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and on access roads north and west of the WWTP.

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project iv Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
This page is intentionally left blank.

Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 1
1 INTRODUCTION
Ascent conducted a delineation of aquatic resources under contract to the City of Riverbank (the City), for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project (RRRWP or “project”). The project would include upgrades to the existing City Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), including new secondary and tertiary treatment and disinfection facilities, construction of a recycled water storage tank, reconfiguration of existing percolation ponds to provide additional seasonal recycled water storage, and installation of a distribution system to serve nearby agricultural users. 2 LOCATION AND CONTACTS
The City of Riverbank is located on the south side of the Stanislaus River along State Highway 108 in Stanislaus County, 94 miles east of San Francisco, 75 miles south of Sacramento, 100 miles north of Fresno, and 108 miles west of Yosemite National Park. The City of Riverbank WWTP site is located on the north side of the Stanislaus River at 23865 Santa Fe Rd, Riverbank, CA (Figure 1). The project study area can be accessed via Henry Road. From Highway 99, take exit 237 for Jack Tone Road, turn left onto Jack Tone Road, and turn right onto River Road. At the traffic circle take the second exit onto East River Road, a slight right toward Santa Fe Road, then turn right onto Henry Road (follow into Riverbank WWTP). The study area is located within the US Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Riverbank and Escalon quadrangles within Sections 00, 22, and 23, Township 2 South, Range East (Figure 2). The approximate centroid of the study area is 37º 44′ 39.52″ North, 120º 57′ 00.43″ West.

Project Proponent Delineation Contact
Cody Bridgewater, Director of Public Works
City of Riverbank
Public Works Department
6707 3rd Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
[email protected]
Kirsten Burrowes or Joshua Boldt
Ascent Environmental, Inc.
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 9581
[email protected]
[email protected]
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 2 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2022.

Figure 1 Project Vicinity
Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 3
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure 2 Project Location
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 4 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
3 REGULATORY SETTING

3.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

3.1.1 Definitions
Many of the terms used throughout this report have specific meanings with respect to the delineation of waters of the United States (US) for the purpose of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), and for navigable waters of the US for the purpose of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA). These terms are defined below:

Waters of the United States: “Waters of the United States” is a threshold term in the CWA and establishes the geographic scope of federal jurisdiction under the Act. The CWA does not define “waters of the United States”; rather, it provides authority for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of the Army to define “waters of the United States” in regulations. Since the 1970s, EPA and the Department of the Army have defined “waters of the United States” by regulation. Beginning in 1985, various Supreme Court Decisions [United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc. (1985); Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2001); Rapanos v. United States (2006); Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (2023)] have addressed the definition of “waters of the United States.”
The definition of waters of the United States subject to federal jurisdiction and concomitant CWA permitting requirements is currently in flux due to EPA and USACE (collectively “Agencies”) interpretations of that term over the last several years. In 2015, the Agencies adopted a revised waters of the United States definition (the 2015 Clean Water Rule), which was repealed by the 2019 Repeal Rule. The 2019 Repeal Rule re-codified the regulatory text that existed prior to the 2015 Rule. The agencies replaced the 2019 Repeal Rule with the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR), which went into effect on June 22, 2020. An August 30, 2021, decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona vacated and remanded the 2020 NWPR. A “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’” rule was published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2023, and took effect on March 20, 2023.

However, the 2023 “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’” is not currently operative in certain states (27 in total) due to litigation. In light of preliminary court injunctions, the agencies are interpreting “waters of the Unites States” consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime in those 27 states. In the remaining 23 states, including California, the agencies are using the definition of “waters of the Unites States” under the final “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the Unites States’” that took effect on March 20, 2023 (as amended on August 29, 2023, as described below).

On May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court adjudicated a decision in the case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. In this decision, the court determined that CWA jurisdiction extends only to adjacent wetlands that have a continuous surface connection with waters of the United States - i.e., with a relatively permanent body of water (RPW) connected to traditional navigable waters, with no clear demarcation between the water and the wetland. On August 29, 2023, the EPA and USACE amended the 2023 “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’” to conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett. Accordingly, the potential jurisdictional status under the CWA of aquatic features delineated within the study area for this project are evaluated under this 2023 Revised Definition as amended by the Sackett decision.

Under the 2023 Revised Definition (as amended on August 29, 2023), the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR Section 120.2[a] and 33 CFR Section 328) currently defines waters of the United States as:
(a) Waters of the Unites States means:

1. Waters which are:
(i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas: or
Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 5
(iii) Interstate waters;

2. Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section;

3. Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water;

4. Wetlands adjacent to the following waters:
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters;

5. Intrastate lakes and ponds not identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section. (b) The following are not “waters of the United States” even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(2) through (5) of this section:

1. Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirement of the Clean Water Act;

2. Prior converted cropland designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change of use, which means that the area is no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior converted cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA;

3. Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;

4. Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased;

5. Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing;

6. Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons;

7. Waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and

8. Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow.

Wetlands: The EPA and USACE define wetlands as “Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” USACE wetlands must typically exhibit three parameters: (1) wetland hydrology, (2) hydrophytic vegetation, and 3) hydric soils, in order to meet the federal definition.  Wetland Hydrology: This term encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. These include both riverine and non-riverine hydrology indicators, such as observation of surface water or saturated soils; evidence of recent inundation; evidence of current or recent soil saturation; and evidence from other site conditions or data.

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 6 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
 Hydrophytic Vegetation: Hydrophytic vegetation is defined as plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present. Emphasis is placed on the assemblage of plant species that exert a controlling influence on the character of the plant community, rather than on a single indicator species, i.e., there must be a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation present in order to satisfy this wetland parameter.
 Wetland Indicator Status: This term refers to the probability that a plant will occur in a wetland or not.

Hydrophytic species include those with an indicator status of obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), or facultative (FAC), which corresponds to the species’ frequency of occurrence in wetlands. Indicator status categories are as follows:
 Obligate (OBL): almost always occurs in wetlands
 Facultative wetland (FACW): usually occurs in wetlands, sometimes may occur in uplands  Facultative (FAC): equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands  Facultative upland (FACU): usually occurs in uplands but may occasionally occur in wetlands  Obligate upland (UPL): almost never occurs in wetlands  No indicator (NI): no indicator assigned due to lack of information  Not listed (NL): species not listed in National Wetland Plant List (USACE 2020). Standard protocol states that a species with an NL designation should be considered UPL when the delineator completes the “Prevalence Index Worksheet” portion of the wetland delineation data form (USACE 2008).  Hydric Soil: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. Hydric soils are often characterized by redoximorphic features (such as redox concentrations, formerly known as mottles), which form by the reduction, translocation, and/or oxidation of iron and manganese oxides. Hydric soils may lack hydric indicators for a number of reasons. In such cases the same standard used to determine wetland hydrology when indicators are lacking can be used.

Typical Year: The term typical year means when precipitation and other climatic variables are within the normal periodic range (e.g., seasonally, annually) for the geographic area of the applicable aquatic resource based on a rolling thirty-year period. In the absence of or with limited availability of site-specific flow or surface water connection data, the agencies will generally use a web-based antecedent precipitation tool to determine if precipitation, drought and other climatic conditions from the period of interest (e.g., the past season or year) are “wet,” “normal,” or “dry” compared to precipitation patterns from the most recent 30-year record.

Other Waters of the United States: In this document, “other waters of the United States” refers to those aquatic resources that are regulated by the CWA but are not wetlands (33 CFR Section 328.4). The term “other waters of the United States” includes water bodies, such as lakes, rivers, and streams, that exhibit evidence of an OHWM (defined below) and are navigable or are hydrologically connected to a navigable water body (33 CFR Section 328.3[a]; 40 CFR Section 230.3[s]).

Navigable Waters of the United States: The Code of Federal Regulations (33 CFR Section 329.4) defines navigable waters of the United States as:
…those waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. A determination of navigability, once made, applies laterally over the entire surface of the waterbody, and is not extinguished by later actions or events which impede or destroy navigable capacity.

Traditional Navigable Waters: Traditional navigable waters (TNW) include all of the “navigable waters of the United States” as defined in 33 CFR Section 329.4 as well as by numerous decisions of the federal courts; those water bodies the USACE has determined are navigable waters of the United States pursuant to 33 CFR Section 329.14; plus all other waters that are navigable-in-fact. The definition of “navigable-in-fact” comes from a long line of court cases originating with Daniel Ball, 77 U.S. 557 (1870).

Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 7
Ordinary High Water Mark: OHWM is defined in 33 CFR Section 328.3[e] as “…that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter or debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area.” Adjacent: The term adjacent means having a continuous surface connection.

3.1.2 Clean Water Act
The CWA establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the US and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. "Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name with amendments in 1972. The CWA serves as the primary federal law protecting the quality of the nation’s surface waters, including lakes, rivers, and wetlands.

SECTION 404
CWA Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged and fill materials into waters of the US. Applicants must obtain a permit from the USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the US, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed activity. Waters of the US are under the jurisdiction of USACE and EPA.

Compliance with CWA Section 404 requires compliance with several other environmental protection laws and regulations. USACE cannot issue an individual permit or verify the use of a general nationwide permit until the requirements of the federal Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, among other federal regulations, have been met. In addition, USACE cannot issue or verify any permit until a water quality certification or a waiver of certification has been issued pursuant to CWA Section 401.

SECTION 401
Under CWA Section 401, applicants for a federal license or permit to conduct activities which may result in the discharge of a pollutant into waters of the US must obtain certification from the state in which the discharge would originate or, if appropriate, from the interstate water pollution control agency with jurisdiction over affected waters at the point where the discharge would originate. Therefore, all projects that require a federal license or federal permit, such as a CWA Section 404 permit, must also comply with CWA Section 401.

Section 401 of the CWA gives the state authority to grant, deny, or waive certification of proposed federally licensed or permitted activities resulting in discharge to waters of the US. The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) directly regulates multi-regional projects and supports the Section 401 certification and wetlands program statewide. The regional water quality control board (RWQCB) regulates activities pursuant to Section 401(a)(1) of the federal CWA, which specifies that certification from the state is required for any applicant requesting a federal license or permit to conduct any activity including but not limited to the construction or operation of facilities that may result in any discharge into navigable waters.

3.2 WATERS OF THE STATE
Most projects involving water bodies or drainages are regulated by the RWQCB, the principal state agency overseeing water quality of the state at the local/regional level. The survey area is located within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB. Where waters of the state overlap with waters of the US, pending verification from the USACE, those waters would be regulated under Section 401 of the CWA which is described in the Regulatory Framework in Section 3.1.

In the absence of waters of the US, waters may be regulated under the Porter-Cologne Act if project activities, discharges, or proposed activities or discharges could affect California's surface, coastal, or ground waters. The permit Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 8 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
submitted by the applicant and issued by RWQCB is either a Water Quality Certification in the presence of waters of the US or a Waste Discharge Requirement in the absence of waters of the US.

3.2.1 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The State Water Board and the RWQCBs (together “Boards”) are the principal state agencies with primary responsibility for the coordination and control of water quality. In the Porter-Cologne Act, the Legislature declared that the “state must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of the waters in the state from degradation…” (California Water Code section 13000).

The Porter-Cologne Act grants the Boards the authority to implement and enforce the water quality laws, regulations, policies and plans to protect the groundwater and surface waters of the state. Waters of the state determined to be jurisdictional would require, if impacted, waste discharge permitting and/or a CWA Section 401 certification (in the case of a required USACE permit under Section 404). The enforcement of the state's water quality requirements is not solely the purview of the Boards and their staff. For instance, per CFGC Section 5650 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has the authority to enforce certain water quality provisions in state law.

3.2.2 State Wetland Dredge and Fill Policy
The State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Wetland Procedures), as prepared by the State Water Board, went into effect on May 28, 2020. The Procedures consist of four major elements: 1) a wetland definition; 2) a framework for determining if a wetland feature is a water of the state; 3) wetland delineation procedures; and 4) procedures for the submittal, review, and approval of applications for Water Quality Certifications and Waste Discharge Requirements for dredge or fill activities. The Procedures include a definition for wetland waters of the state that include (1) all wetland waters of the U.S.;1 and (2) aquatic resources that meet both the soils and hydrology criteria for wetland waters of the U.S. but lack vegetation.2 The State Water Resources Control Board has adopted the following definition of wetlands:

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

3.3 RIVERS, STREAMS, AND LAKES

3.3.1 Fish and Game Code Section 1600
Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC, CDFW regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake which supports fish or wildlife.

A notification of a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) must be submitted to CDFW for “any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river lake or stream.” In addition, CDFW has authority under CFGC 1600 et seq. over wetland and riparian habitats associated with lakes and streams. The removal 1 Therefore, wetlands that meet the current definition, or any historic definition, of waters of the U.S. are waters of the state. In 2000, the State Water Board determined that all waters of the U.S. are also waters of the state by regulation, prior to any regulatory or judicial limitations on the federal definition of waters of the U.S. (California Code or Regulations title 23, section 3831(w).) This regulation has remained in effect despite subsequent changes to the federal definition. Therefore, waters of the state includes features that have been determined by the USEPA or the USACE to be “waters of the U.S.” in an approved jurisdictional determination; “waters of the U.S.” identified in an aquatic resource report verified by the USACE upon which a permitting decision was based; and features that are consistent with any current or historic final judicial interpretation of “waters of the U.S.” or any current or historic federal regulation defining “waters of the U.S.” under the Clean Water Act. 2 Less than 5 percent areal coverage at the peak of the growing season.

Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 9
or treatment of vegetation from the bed or banks of lake and stream features is considered a substantial change and is regulated under Section 1602. CDFW reviews proposed projects, and if necessary, submits to the applicant a proposal that includes measures to protect affected fish and wildlife resources during project implementation. The final proposal that is mutually agreed upon by CDFW and the project proponent is the LSAA. Such an agreement is not a permit, but rather a mutual accord between CDFW and a project proponent. Because CDFW includes under its regulatory authority streamside habitats that may not qualify as wetlands under the CWA definition, CDFW regulatory authority may be broader than USACE or RWQCB jurisdiction.

Under CFGC Section 1602 (Streambed Alteration Agreements), CDFW takes regulatory authority over the stream zone which is defined as top of bank or outside extent of riparian vegetation, whichever is the greatest. Within the stream zone, waters of the state of California are typically delineated to include the streambed to the top of the bank and adjacent areas that would meet any one of the three wetland parameters in the USACE definition (vegetation, hydrology, and/or soils). CDFW regulatory authority is not limited to navigable waters or tributaries to navigable waters; however, isolated wetlands and wetlands not associated with a streambed are not subject to CDFW regulatory authority. 4 METHODS
Before conducting the field delineation of the study area, an Ascent wetland ecologist reviewed color aerial imagery of the project area on Google Earth, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data (USFWS 2022), and the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) soil survey of Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties, California (NRCS 2022).

Field delineations were conducted on May 17 and July 8, 2022, and December 9, 2024, by Ascent wetland ecologists Joshua Boldt and Hannah Weinberger. As of July 11, 2022, average precipitation in the area was at 72 percent of normal for the water year to date at the Stockton Fire Station (#4) (NOAA 2022). No potentially jurisdictional features were found during this delineation field survey.

The USACE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008) were used to delineate wetlands that are potentially subject to USACE jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. The 1987 Manual and 2008 Arid West Supplement provide technical guidelines and methods for the three-parameter approach to determining the location and boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands. This approach requires that an area support positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to be considered a jurisdictional wetland.

The soil survey of Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties, California (NRCS 2022) was consulted to identify soil units mapped in the study area by NRCS and these soils were cross referenced to The National Hydric Soils List (NRCS 2019) to determine if any of the mapped soil units are listed as hydric. 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS

5.1 LANDSCAPE SETTING
The study area, consisting of the WWTP, a pipeline corridor, and an access road, occurs across the Stanislaus River to the north of the City of Riverbank, and is surrounded by agriculture to the north, east, and west, and riparian woodland to the south. The WWTP site consists of developed and disturbed ground, treatment facilities including percolation-evaporation basins and aeration treatment ponds, and sparse vegetation in the southeast section including some oak trees. The access road in the northwestern section of the study area is a dirt road mostly devoid of vegetation except for some trees. One section of the access road is between two agricultural fields and the other section is between the WWTP and an agricultural field.

One of the distribution pipelines would be located on a dirt road in the northern section of the study area between two agricultural fields. This dirt road is also mostly devoid of vegetation except for some trees and shrubs. Distribution pipelines would also be located on the northern and western border of the WWTP. The pipeline on the northern border Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 10 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
would be between an agricultural field and some sparse trees and shrubs and the WWTP. The pipeline on the western border would be between the WWTP and train tracks. This area has sparse tree and shrub cover. The remaining distribution pipeline would be within Jacob Myers Park. The study area has limited natural habitat.

In the study area there is approximately 1.2 acres of valley oak woodland (Quercus lobata), 2.1 acres of California annual and perennial grassland, 14.7 acres of agriculture, 42.1 acres of urban, and 130.6 acres of water in the form of treatment ponds. Land cover in the study area is depicted in the land cover map in Appendix A (Figure A-1).

5.2 SOILS
Table 1 provides a list of the soil map units in the study area according to the Soil Survey of San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties (NRSC 2022), a brief description of each soil type, and the hydric status of the soil map unit according to the National Hydric Soils List (NRCS 2019). The locations of these soil units in the study area, as mapped by NRCS, are depicted on the soils map in Appendix A (Figure A-2). The Custom Soil Resource Report for the project area is included as Appendix B.

Table 1 Soil Map Units That Occur in the Study Area According to the Soil Survey of San Joaquin and Stanislaus County, California
Name Map Unit Soil Series Taxonomic Class Description Hydric? Merritt silty clay
loam, partially
drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes
197
Merritt (85%)
Fine-silty, mixed,
superactive, thermic
Fluvaquentic
Haploxerolls
Very deep, poorly drained soils formed in alluvium
derived from sedimentary rocks. These soils occur on
recent alluvial fans and floodplains. Slow runoff and
moderately slow permeability.

Yes
Minor
components 15% -
Minor components are Egbert (4%), Ryde (3%),
Unnamed, ponded (3%), Grangeville (3%), and Guard
(2%)
Yes1
Honcut sandy loam,
0 to 2 percent
slopes
175
Honcut (85%)
Coarse-loamy,
mixed, nonacid,
thermic Typic
Xerorthents
Very deep, well drained soils formed in alluvium derived from granite rock sources. These soils occur on
floodplains. Very low runoff and high permeability.

No
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Delhi (4%), Tinnin (4%), Chuloak (4%), and Veritas (3%). No Grangeville fine
sandy loam,
partially drained, 0
to 2 percent slopes
166
Grangeville(85%)
Coarse-loamy,
mixed, thermic
Fluvaquentic
Haploxerolls
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in
alluvium derived from granitic rock sources
These soils occur on floodplains. Very low runoff and high permeability.

No
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Unnamed (4%), Unnamed (3%), Egbert (2%), Merritt (2%), Dello (2%), and Columbia (2%). Yes2 Delhi loamy sand, 0
to 2 percent slopes,
MLRA 17
142
Delhi (85%)
Mixed, thermic
Typic
Xeropsamments
Very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils formed in alluvium derived from granite rock sources. These soils occur on alluvial fans, sand sheets, floodplains, and
dunes. Negligible runoff and high to very high
permeability.

No
Minor
components 15% - Minor components Tinnin (5%) Veritas (5%), and Honcut (5%) No Columbia fine
sandy loam,
channeled, partially
drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes,
frequently flooded
132
Columbia (85%)
Coarse-loamy,
mixed, nonacid,
thermic Aquic
Xerofluvents
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in
alluvium derived from mixed rock sources. These soils
occur in floodplains. High runoff and high permeability.

Yes
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Merritt (4%), Unnamed (4%), Dello(4%), and Unnamed (3%). Yes3 Ascent Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 11
Name Map Unit Soil Series Taxonomic Class Description Hydric? Columbia fine
sandy loam,
drained,
0-2 percent slopes,
MLRA 17
130
Columbia (85%)
Coarse-loamy,
mixed, superactive,
nonacid, thermic
Aeric Fluvaquents
Very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in
alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and
sedimentary rock. These soils occur in floodplains. Low runoff and moderately low permeability.

Yes
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Guard (3%), Grangeville (2%), Columbia (3%), Tokay (3%), and Unnamed (2%). Yes4 Tujunga loamy
sand,
0-2 percent slopes
259
Tujunga (85%)
Mixed, thermic
Typic
Xeropsamments
Very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils formed in alluvium derived from granitic rock sources. These soils occur in channels and flood plains. Negligible runoff and high to very high permeability.

No
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Honcut (4%), Veritas (3%), Columbia (2%), Egbert (2%), and Cogna (2%). Yes5 Veritas fine sandy
loam,
0-2 percent slopes
266
Veritas (85%)
Coarse-loamy,
mixed, thermic
Typic Haploxerolls
Deep, moderately well drained soils formed in alluvium
derived from mixed rock sources. These soils occur in fan skirts. Very low runoff and very low permeability.

No
Minor
components 15% -
Minor components are Grangeville (4%), Unnamed (4%),
Bisgani (2%), Unnamed (1%), Tinnin (1%), Madera (1%),
Jahant (1%), and Unnamed (1%).

Yes6
Pits, gravel 214
Pits (85%) - - No
Minor
components 15% - Minor components are Dumps (8%) and Xerorthents(7%). No Water W Water (100%) - - -
1 Minor components Egbert, Ryde, Unnamed, ponded and Guard of this map unit are hydric. 2 Minor components Egbert, Merritt, Dello, and Columbia of this map unit are hydric 3 Minor components Merritt and Dello of this map unit are hydric. 4 Minor components Guard, Columbia, Merritt, Dello, and Egbert of this map unit are hydric. 5 Minor component Columbia of this map unit is hydric.
6 Minor component Bisgani of this map unit is hydric.

Source: NRCS 2022, NRCS 2019.

5.3 AQUATIC RESOURCES
No potentially jurisdictional waters of the US and/or the state are present within the 190.77-acre study area. The wastewater treatment ponds at the WWTP site are not considered waters of the US or state. Waste treatment systems, including ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act, are not waters of the US and have been specifically excluded from the definition of “waters of the US” since 1979 (Appendix D; Photo Point #1).

Similarly, these features are artificial features constructed for and currently used primarily for the purpose of wastewater treatment. These types of features are not considered waters of the state. Irrigation runoff was observed on the north side of the proposed access road (Appendix D; Photo Point #2). The proposed access road crosses over a former agricultural ditch; however, this ditch is no longer operational and does not convey water (Appendix D; Photo Points #3-4). The ditch is no longer maintained and is dominated by ruderal, upland plant species and agricultural escapes such as walnut trees (Juglans sp.). No evidence of flowing water was observed in the ditch, and the ditch did not exhibit any indicators of an OHWM. The aquatic resources delineation maps are included as Appendix C. Representative photographs of the study area are included as Appendix D.

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project 12 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
6 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. US Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. Available:
https://www.poh.usace.army.mil/Portals/10/1987-Army-Corps-Wetlands-Delineation-Manual.pdf. Accessed May 16, 2022.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. National Hydric Soils List by State (California). Available:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html. Accessed: May 16, 2022. ———. 2022. Web Soil Survey of San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties, California. Available:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed: May 16, 2022.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2022. California Nevada River Forecast Center: Monthly Precipitation Summary Water Year 2022. Available: https://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/monthly_precip.php.

Accessed July 11, 2022.

NOAA. See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

NRCS. See Natural Resources Conservation Service.

USACE. See US Army Corps of Engineers.

US Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-28. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Available:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1046489.pdf. Accessed May 16, 2022. ———. 2016a. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports, with Template. January 2016. Available: http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/regulatory/jd/minimumstandards/Minimum_Standards_for_Delineation_with_Template-final.pdf. ———. 2016b. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program. February 10.

Available: http://www.spd.usace.army.mil/Portals/13/docs/regulatory/standards/MapStand020816.pdf. ———. 2020. The National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5. US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, NH. Available:
http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022. The National Wetlands Inventory: Wetlands Mapper. Available:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Accessed May 2022.

USFWS. See US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Appendix A
Supporting Maps
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report A-1
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure A-1 Land Cover
Aquatic Resource Delineation Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project A-2 Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure A-2 Soils
Appendix B
Soil Report
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Eastern Stanislaus Area,
California; San Joaquin
County, California; and
Stanislaus County,
California, Northern Part
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
May 16, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................6 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 9 Soil Map..............................................................................................................10 Legend................................................................................................................11 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................13 Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................ 15 Eastern Stanislaus Area, California................................................................17 DeA—Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17..........................17 DeB—Delhi loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes...........................................18 DhA—Delhi sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17.................................... 19 DhB—Delhi sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes, MLRA 17.................................... 20 FoA—Foster very fine sandy loam, very porly drained, slightly salinealkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes.................................................................. 22 GfA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17..........23 GmA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.................25 GnA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes.......................................................................................26 GoA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, moderately saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes....................................................................................27 GsA—Greenfield sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.................................. 29 GvA—Greenfield sandy loam, deep over hardpan, 0 to 3 percent slopes..30 HbA—Hanford fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes............................... 31 HbmA—Hanford fine sandy loam, moderately deep over sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes.......................................................................................32 HdA—Hanford sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes......................................34 HdpA—Hanford sandy loam, moderately deep over silt, 0 to 1 percent slopes....................................................................................................35 HdsA—Hanford sandy loam, deep over silt, 0 to 1 percent slopes.............36 HfA—Hilmar loamy sand, 0 to 1 percent.....................................................37 MdA—Madera sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...................................... 39 MmA—Modesto clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.......................................40 Rr—Riverwash............................................................................................41 SaA—San Joaquin sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17..............42 TuA—Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes.......................................43 Tx—Terrace escarpments...........................................................................45 W—Water....................................................................................................45 WmC—Whitney sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes................................45 San Joaquin County, California.......................................................................47 127—Chuloak coarse sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...........................47 130—Columbia fine sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 17...............................................................................................48 131—Columbia fine sandy loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded.................................................................50 4 132—Columbia fine sandy loam, channeled, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded........................................................52 142—Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 17...........................53 144—Dello sand, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded..................................................................................................54 166—Grangeville fine sandy loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................................................................................................56 175—Honcut sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes.........................................57 197—Merritt silty clay loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......... 59 201—Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......................................................60 214—Pits, gravel.........................................................................................62 254—Timor loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes...........................................62 255—Tinnin loamy coarse sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes...............................64 259—Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......................................65 266—Veritas fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes..................................67 W—Water....................................................................................................68 Stanislaus County, California, Northern Part.................................................. 69 130—Columbia sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded..................................................................................................69 201—Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......................................................70 W—Water....................................................................................................72 References............................................................................................................73 Custom Soil Resource Report
5 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 6 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
7 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
8 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 9 10
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4177900 4178600 4179300 4180000 4180700 4181400 4182100 4177900 4178600 4179300 4180000 4180700 4181400 4182100 677000 677700 678400 679100 679800 680500 681200 681900 682600 683300 684000 677700 678400 679100 679800 680500 681200 681900 682600 683300 684000 37° 46' 12'' N
120° 59' 28'' W
37° 46' 12'' N
120° 54' 35'' W
37° 43' 42'' N
120° 59' 28'' W
37° 43' 42'' N
120° 54' 35'' W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 1500 3000 6000 9000
Feet
0 450 900 1800 2700
Meters
Map Scale: 1:32,700 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

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

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

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

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

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

Soil Survey Area: Eastern Stanislaus Area, California
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 10, 2021
Soil Survey Area: San Joaquin County, California
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 9, 2021
Soil Survey Area: Stanislaus County, California, Northern Part Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 9, 2021
Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries.

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 14, 2021—Feb 21, 2021
Custom Soil Resource Report
11 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI DeA Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 3
percent slopes, MLRA 17

7.7 0.2%
DeB Delhi loamy sand, 3 to 8
percent slopes

16.2 0.4%
DhA Delhi sand, 0 to 3 percent
slopes, MLRA 17

35.8 0.8%
DhB Delhi sand, 3 to 8 percent
slopes, MLRA 17
145.2 3.2%
FoA Foster very fine sandy loam,
very porly drained, slightly
saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent
slopes

26.8 0.6%
GfA Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0
to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17
121.2 2.7%
GmA Grangeville very fine sandy
loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
141.6 3.1%
GnA Grangeville very fine sandy
loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0
to 1 percent slopes
138.6 3.0%
GoA Grangeville very fine sandy
loam, moderately salinealkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes

30.8 0.7%
GsA Greenfield sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes

13.9 0.3%
GvA Greenfield sandy loam, deep
over hardpan, 0 to 3 percent
slopes

72.1 1.6%
HbA Hanford fine sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes

30.4 0.7%
HbmA Hanford fine sandy loam,
moderately deep over sand, 0
to 3 percent slopes

59.9 1.3%
HdA Hanford sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes
177.9 3.9%
HdpA Hanford sandy loam,
moderately deep over silt, 0
to 1 percent slopes

15.9 0.3%
HdsA Hanford sandy loam, deep over
silt, 0 to 1 percent slopes

18.5 0.4%
HfA Hilmar loamy sand, 0 to 1
percent

7.8 0.2%
MdA Madera sandy loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes

70.1 1.5%
MmA Modesto clay loam, 0 to 1
percent slopes

6.7 0.1%
Rr Riverwash 40.3 0.9%
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI SaA San Joaquin sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes, MLRA 17

0.0 0.0%
TuA Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 3
percent slopes
123.1 2.7%
Tx Terrace escarpments 87.5 1.9%
W Water 87.9 1.9%
WmC Whitney sandy loams, 8 to 15
percent slopes

2.6 0.1%
Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 1,478.7 32.4%
Totals for Area of Interest 4,570.1 100.0%
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 127 Chuloak coarse sandy loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes

88.5 1.9%
130 Columbia fine sandy loam,
drained, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, MLRA 17
152.4 3.3%
131 Columbia fine sandy loam,
partially drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes, occasionally
flooded
233.8 5.1%
132 Columbia fine sandy loam,
channeled, partially drained,
0 to 2 percent slopes,
frequently flooded
185.1 4.1%
142 Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes, MLRA 17
732.5 16.0%
144 Dello sand, partially drained, 0
to 2 percent slopes,
occasionally flooded

1.8 0.0%
166 Grangeville fine sandy loam,
partially drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes
132.4 2.9%
175 Honcut sandy loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes
650.4 14.2%
197 Merritt silty clay loam, partially
drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes
134.4 2.9%
201 Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes
135.8 3.0%
214 Pits, gravel 318.8 7.0%
254 Timor loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes

10.9 0.2%
255 Tinnin loamy coarse sand, 0 to
2 percent slopes

0.2 0.0%
259 Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 2
percent slopes

71.1 1.6%
266 Veritas fine sandy loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes

71.3 1.6%
W Water 132.3 2.9%
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 3,051.7 66.8%
Totals for Area of Interest 4,570.1 100.0%
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 130 Columbia sandy loam, drained,
0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely
flooded

36.2 0.8%
201 Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes

0.1 0.0%
W Water 3.0 0.1%
Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 39.2 0.9%
Totals for Area of Interest 4,570.1 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

Custom Soil Resource Report
15 The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
16 Eastern Stanislaus Area, California
DeA—Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2ss8r
Elevation: 30 to 430 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 310 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Dunes on fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Eolian deposits derived from sandy alluvium derived from granite Typical profile
A - 0 to 7 inches: loamy sand
C1 - 7 to 25 inches: loamy sand
C2 - 25 to 60 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Depressions on fan remnants
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 Hydric soil rating: No
Dello
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Depressions on fan remnants
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Hilmar
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
DeB—Delhi loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjb7
Elevation: 30 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 310 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Sand sheets
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Wind modified sandy alluvium derived from granite Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loamy sand
H2 - 10 to 60 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Custom Soil Resource Report
18 Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Hilmar
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
DhA—Delhi sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2ss8n
Elevation: 30 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 310 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Dunes on valleys
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Microfeatures of landform position: Hummocks
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across-slope shape: Convex, linear
Parent material: Wind modified sandy alluvium derived from granitoid Custom Soil Resource Report
19 Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: sand
C1 - 8 to 40 inches: sand
C2 - 40 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dello
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
DhB—Delhi sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes, MLRA 17
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2ss9x
Elevation: 30 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 310 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
20 Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Wind modified sandy alluvium derived from granite Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: sand
H2 - 12 to 44 inches: sand
H3 - 44 to 68 inches: loamy fine sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.3 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
21 FoA—Foster very fine sandy loam, very porly drained, slightly salinealkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjbz
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 275 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Foster and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Foster
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: very fine sandy loam
H2 - 10 to 40 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: loamy sand, silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Custom Soil Resource Report
22 Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Temple
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
GfA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vncx
Elevation: 30 to 1,760 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 25 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 12 to 79 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
23 Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 2 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 3.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, hydric
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, channeled
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
24 GmA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcd
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam
H2 - 7 to 40 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: loamy sand, silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
25 Minor Components
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Fans
Hydric soil rating: Yes
GnA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcf
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam
H2 - 7 to 40 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: loamy sand, silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Custom Soil Resource Report
26 Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Fans
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
GoA—Grangeville very fine sandy loam, moderately saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcg
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
27 Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam
H2 - 7 to 40 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: loamy sand, silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Fans
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Ecological site: R017XY907CA - Aridic Alkali Desert
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
28 GsA—Greenfield sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcj
Elevation: 100 to 3,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Greenfield and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Greenfield
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 21 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 21 to 42 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 42 to 60 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
29 Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Snelling
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
GvA—Greenfield sandy loam, deep over hardpan, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcl
Elevation: 100 to 3,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Greenfield and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Greenfield
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 21 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 21 to 40 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: cemented
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 38 to 54 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr)
Custom Soil Resource Report
30 Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY902CA - Duripan Vernal Pools
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Snelling
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
HbA—Hanford fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcn
Elevation: 150 to 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
31 H2 - 12 to 60 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
HbmA—Hanford fine sandy loam, moderately deep over sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjcp
Elevation: 150 to 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils: 85 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
32 Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 12 to 36 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 36 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
33 HdA—Hanford sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjct
Elevation: 150 to 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 12 to 60 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
34 Minor Components
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
HdpA—Hanford sandy loam, moderately deep over silt, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjd0
Elevation: 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 12 to 36 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 36 to 60 inches: silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Custom Soil Resource Report
35 Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
HdsA—Hanford sandy loam, deep over silt, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjd1
Elevation: 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Custom Soil Resource Report
36 Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 12 to 48 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 48 to 60 inches: silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.5 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
HfA—Hilmar loamy sand, 0 to 1 percent
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjd3
Elevation: 300 to 900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 230 to 300 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
37 Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Hilmar and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Hilmar
Setting
Landform: Fan skirts
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Wind modified sandy alluvium derived from granite over silty alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loamy sand
H2 - 7 to 21 inches: sand
H3 - 21 to 29 inches: sandy loam
H4 - 29 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam, silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Delhi
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
38 MdA—Madera sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjdz
Elevation: 20 to 250 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Madera and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Madera
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 9 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 9 to 19 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 19 to 30 inches: clay
H4 - 30 to 36 inches: indurated
H5 - 36 to 60 inches: coarse sandy loam, clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches; 20 to 40 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.3 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
39 Minor Components
Alamo
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
MmA—Modesto clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjf3
Elevation: 40 to 200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Modesto and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Modesto
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: clay loam
H2 - 12 to 35 inches: clay
H3 - 35 to 55 inches: sandy clay loam
H4 - 55 to 62 inches: silty clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Custom Soil Resource Report
40 Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Chualar
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dinuba
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Rr—Riverwash
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjgp
Elevation: 700 to 2,900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 180 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Riverwash: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Riverwash
Setting
Landform: Drainageways
Parent material: Gravelly alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: gravelly sand
H2 - 10 to 60 inches: gravelly sand, extremely gravelly sand Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Custom Soil Resource Report
41 Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
SaA—San Joaquin sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vncw
Elevation: 90 to 520 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 17 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 62 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
San joaquin and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of San Joaquin
Setting
Landform: Terraces, fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, tread Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 9 inches: sandy loam
Bt1 - 9 to 15 inches: sandy clay loam
2Bt2 - 15 to 21 inches: clay
2Bkqm - 21 to 37 inches: cemented material
2C - 37 to 79 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches; 19 to 25 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 8 to 12 inches
Custom Soil Resource Report
42 Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 4.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.1 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Snelling
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Terraces, fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, tread Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Alamo
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Terraces, fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, tread Microfeatures of landform position: Open depressions, open depressions Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY902CA - Duripan Vernal Pools
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, hydric
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Terraces, open depressions on fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, tread Microfeatures of landform position: Open depressions
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
TuA—Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjhj
Elevation: 10 to 2,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 25 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F
Custom Soil Resource Report
43 Frost-free period: 280 to 350 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Tujunga and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Tujunga
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Sandy alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loamy sand
H2 - 10 to 60 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.3 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Foster
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
44 Tx—Terrace escarpments
Map Unit Composition
Terrace escarpments: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Terrace Escarpments
Setting
Landform: Terraces
Parent material: Alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 0 to 60 inches to paralithic bedrock Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

WmC—Whitney sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hjj0
Elevation: 200 to 500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Custom Soil Resource Report
45 Map Unit Composition
Whitney and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Whitney
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Riser
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: sandy loam
H2 - 7 to 31 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 31 to 35 inches: weathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rocklin
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Montpellier
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
46 San Joaquin County, California
127—Chuloak coarse sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhrv
Elevation: 70 to 100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 260 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Chuloak and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Chuloak
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 19 inches: coarse sandy loam
Bt - 19 to 44 inches: sandy clay loam
C1 - 44 to 55 inches: fine sandy loam
C2 - 55 to 64 inches: loamy coarse sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Delhi
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
47 Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Manteca
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tinnin
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
130—Columbia fine sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2xld1
Elevation: 10 to 130 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 19 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 62 degrees F
Frost-free period: 318 to 328 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Columbia and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Columbia
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 4 inches: fine sandy loam
A - 4 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C1 - 12 to 21 inches: silt loam
C2 - 21 to 26 inches: fine sandy loam
C3 - 26 to 34 inches: silt loam
C4 - 34 to 40 inches: loamy fine sand
C5 - 40 to 48 inches: fine sandy loam
C6 - 48 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
48 Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low (0.01 to

0.14 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: RareNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 1.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R016XA002CA - Freshwater, Stratified, Fluventic Sites (PROVISIONAL)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Guard
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Rims
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Cogna
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R018XI999CA - Miscellaneous - Cannot Be Correlated Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia, fine-textured overwash
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Merritt
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
49 Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Dello
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains on sloughs
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R016XA001CA - Tidally-Influenced, Freshwater Sites (PROVISIONAL)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Egbert
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R016XA001CA - Tidally-Influenced, Freshwater Sites (PROVISIONAL)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
131—Columbia fine sandy loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhrz
Elevation: 10 to 100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 230 to 340 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Columbia and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Columbia
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Custom Soil Resource Report
50 Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 12 to 60 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Merritt
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Dello
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, buried substratum
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, sand surface layer
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
51 132—Columbia fine sandy loam, channeled, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhs0
Elevation: 10 to 60 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 230 to 340 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season
Map Unit Composition
Columbia and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Columbia
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 12 to 60 inches: stratified sand to silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding: FrequentNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.1 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
52 Minor Components
Merritt
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, sand surface layer
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dello
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, buried substratum
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
142—Delhi loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 17
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2ss9g
Elevation: 30 to 150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 60 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 225 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, sand sheets, flood plains, dunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
Ap1 - 0 to 3 inches: loamy sand
Ap2 - 3 to 8 inches: loamy sand
A - 8 to 16 inches: loamy sand
Custom Soil Resource Report
53 C1 - 16 to 26 inches: loamy sand
C2 - 26 to 44 inches: sand
C3 - 44 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Tinnin
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Honcut
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
144—Dello sand, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhsd
Elevation: 0 to 30 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Dello and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
54 Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dello
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 20 inches: sand
C - 20 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 36 to 48 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Fluaquents
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Columbia
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, stratified substratum
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
55 166—Grangeville fine sandy loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hht3
Elevation: 10 to 50 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 20 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 20 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to silt loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 48 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
56 Minor Components
Unnamed, throughout
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, altered soils
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Dello
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Columbia
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Merritt
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Egbert
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
175—Honcut sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhtd
Elevation: 30 to 120 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Honcut and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Honcut
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Custom Soil Resource Report
57 Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 21 inches: sandy loam
C - 21 to 60 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Delhi
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tinnin
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Chuloak
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
58 197—Merritt silty clay loam, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhv3
Elevation: 0 to 50 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Merritt and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Merritt
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 17 inches: silty clay loam
B - 17 to 49 inches: silt loam
C - 49 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 48 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
59 Minor Components
Egbert
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Ryde
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, ponded
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Guard
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Rims
Hydric soil rating: Yes
201—Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhv7
Elevation: 50 to 70 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nord and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Nord
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed rock sources Custom Soil Resource Report
60 Typical profile
A - 0 to 25 inches: loam
C - 25 to 60 inches: stratified sandy loam to loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Merritt
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes
Delhi
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Honcut
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, gravelly throughout
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, slightly brittle substratum
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
61 214—Pits, gravel
Map Unit Composition
Pits: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Pits
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 8s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Dumps
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Xerorthents
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
254—Timor loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhwy
Elevation: 20 to 40 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Timor and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Timor
Setting
Landform: Fan skirts
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Custom Soil Resource Report
62 Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 14 inches: loamy sand
Bk - 14 to 56 inches: loamy sand
2Bkqm - 56 to 60 inches: cemented
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 60 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.5 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY902CA - Duripan Vernal Pools
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Bisgani
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, hardpan above 40 inches
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tinnin
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, mod fine text above hardpan
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
63 255—Tinnin loamy coarse sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhwz
Elevation: 20 to 70 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Tinnin and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Tinnin
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 28 inches: loamy coarse sand
C1 - 28 to 53 inches: loamy coarse sand
C2 - 53 to 75 inches: loamy coarse sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
64 Minor Components
Delhi
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Honcut
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Manteca
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, med tex substratum
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Timor
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
259—Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhx3
Elevation: 40 to 70 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Tujunga and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Tujunga
Setting
Landform: Channels, flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Custom Soil Resource Report
65 Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 22 inches: loamy sand
C - 22 to 67 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: RareNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.4 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Honcut
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Tokay
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, gravelly & coarse textured
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
66 266—Veritas fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hhxb
Elevation: 20 to 80 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Veritas and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Veritas
Setting
Landform: Fan skirts
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed rock sources Typical profile
A - 0 to 15 inches: fine sandy loam
Bk - 15 to 54 inches: fine sandy loam
2Bqm - 54 to 70 inches: cemented
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 60 inches to duripan Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 3 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY902CA - Duripan Vernal Pools
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
67 Minor Components
Grangeville
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, mod fine textured surface
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Bisgani
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, w/ mod fine texture above hardpan
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Madera
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Jahant
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed, w/ hardpan above 40 inches
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tinnin
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report
68 Stanislaus County, California, Northern Part
130—Columbia sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1j3cc
Elevation: 40 to 150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 230 to 250 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Columbia, rarely flooded, and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Columbia, Rarely Flooded
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Coarse-loamy alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 13 inches: sandy loam
C - 13 to 60 inches: stratified sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: NoneRare
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.1 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Honcut, fine sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Custom Soil Resource Report
69 Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia, occasionally flooded
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Cogna, rarely flooded
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia, frequently flooded
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Cogna, overwashed
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Hydric soil rating: No
Mine dredge tailings
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Riverwash
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
201—Nord loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1j3cs
Elevation: 100 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 230 to 250 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nord, loam, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Nord, Loam
Setting
Landform: Fan skirts
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Custom Soil Resource Report
70 Parent material: Coarse-loamy alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 25 inches: loam
C - 25 to 50 inches: loam
Ck - 50 to 60 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: NoneRare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 4 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Honcut, gravelly sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Delhi, loamy sand
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Sand sheets
Hydric soil rating: No
Columbia, sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Chuloak, sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Hydric soil rating: No
Veritas, fine sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
71 W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report
72 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 73 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
74 Appendix C
Aquatic Resource Delineation Map
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-1
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-1 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-3
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-2 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-5
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-3 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-7
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-4 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-9
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-5 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report C-11
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure C-6 Aquatic Resources Delineation
Appendix D
Photographs
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report D-1
Source: Ascent Environmental.

Storage Ponds. Photograph taken facing southeast. Photo Point #1.

Source: Ascent Environmental.

Storage Ponds. Photograph taken facing southwest. Photo Point #1.

Aquatic Resources Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project D-2 Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Source: Ascent Environmental.

Irrigation Runoff. Photograph taken facing southeast. Photo Point #2.

Source: Ascent Environmental.

Remnant Ditch. Photograph taken facing southwest. Photo Point #3.

Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report D-3
Source: Ascent Environmental.

Remnant Ditch along access road. Photo taken facing southeast. Photo Point #3.

Aquatic Resources Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project D-4 Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Source: Ascent Environmental.

Remnant Ditch along access road. Photo taken facing northwest. Photo Point #4
Ascent Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project City of Riverbank Aquatic Resource Delineation Report D-5
Source: Ascent Environmental.

Remnant Ditch along access road. Photo taken facing northwest. Photo Point #4.

Aquatic Resources Report Ascent
City of Riverbank Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project D-6 Aquatic Resource Delineation Report
This page is intentionally left blank.

City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing AuthorityMarch 25, 2025

City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority
March 25, 2025