Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJurisdictional Delineation Report for the Baker Industrial Project Site_20240304 1940 E Deere Avenue, Suite 250 ● Santa Ana, California 92705 ● 949.837.0404 November 20, 2023 Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners 1505 Bridgeway, Suite 107 Sausalito, California 94965 SUBJECT: Jurisdictional Delineation of the Baker Industrial Project Site, an Approximately 124.60-Acre Site Located in Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Williams: This letter report summarizes our preliminary findings of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction for the above-referenced property.1 The Baker Industrial Project site (Project site) comprises approximately 124.60 acres in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside, California [Exhibit 1 – Regional Map] and is located within an un- sectioned portion of Township 5 South, Range 5 West, of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle map Lake Elsinore, California [Exhibit 2 – Vicinity Map]. The Project site is located southwest of Interstate-15, the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center and Temescal Creek/Collier Marsh. On February 9, 2021 and April 20 and July 29, 2022, regulatory specialists of Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) examined the Project site to determine the presence and limits of (1) Corps jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), (2) Regional Board jurisdiction pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and Section 13260 of the California Water Code (CWC), and (3) CDFW jurisdiction pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code. Enclosed are 475-scale maps [Exhibits 3A, 3B, 3C] that depict the areas of Corps, Regional Board and CDFW jurisdiction. Photographs to document the topography, vegetative communities, and general widths of each of the waters are provided as Exhibit 4. A wetland data sheet is attached as Appendix A. 1 This report presents our best effort at estimating the subject jurisdictional boundaries using the most up-to-date regulations and written policy and guidance from the regulatory agencies. Only the regulatory agencies can make a final determination of jurisdictional boundaries. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 2 Corps jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 2.33 acres, all which consists of federal wetlands. Regional Board jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 4.17 acres, of which 3.57 acres consist of State wetlands. Of this total, 2.33 acres, all of which consist of State wetlands, comprise Corps jurisdiction and the remaining 1.84 acres, of which 1.24 acres consist of State wetlands, represent Regional Board jurisdiction only. CDFW jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 3.66 acres, of which 2.99 acres consist of riparian habitat. I. METHODOLOGY Prior to beginning the field delineation, a color aerial photograph, a topographic base map of the property, the previously cited USGS topographic map, and a soils map were examined to determine the locations of potential areas of Corps, Regional Board, and CDFW jurisdiction. Suspected jurisdictional areas were field checked for evidence of stream activity and/or wetland vegetation, soils and hydrology. Where applicable, reference was made to the 2008 Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (OHWM Manual)2 to identify the width of Corps jurisdiction, and suspected federal wetland habitats on the site were evaluated using the methodology set forth in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual 3 (Wetland Manual) and the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Supplement (Arid West Supplement).4 Reference was also made to the 2019 State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Board Wetland Definition and Procedures) to identify suspected State wetland habitats.5 While in the field, the potential limits of jurisdiction were recorded with a sub-meter Trimble GPS device in conjunction with a color aerial photograph using visible landmarks. Other data were recorded onto wetland data sheets. 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States 3 Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 4 U.S. 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. 5 State Water Resources Control Board. 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 3 The National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS) has mapped the following soil types as occurring within the Project site: Altamont clay, 5 to 15 Percent Slopes (AaD) The Altamont series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from fine-grained sandstone and shale. These soils are on gently sloping to very steep uplands. Included with this soil in mapping are small areas of shallow, gravelly clay soils. Altamont Cobbly Clay, 8 to 35 Percent Slopes (AbF) The Altamont series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from fine-grained sandstone and shale. These soils are on gently sloping to very steep uplands. This soil has a profile similar to the series but some rounded water-worn cobble stones are on the surface throughout the profile. Arbuckle Loam, 2 to 8 Percent Slopes (AkC) The Arbuckle series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in alluvium from sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. Arbuckle soils are on low terraces, and have slopes of 0 to 75 percent. The profile of this series does not contain gravel in the surface area but has a subsoil of loam or clay loam. Escondido Fine Sandy Loam, 8 to 15 Percent Slopes, Eroded (EcD2) Escondido soils have dark brown slightly acid very fine sandy loam A horizons and neutral very fine sandy loam B2 horizons over hard metamorphic bedrock at depths of about 29 inches. This soil series occurs on gently rolling to hilly topography in foothills at elevations of 400 to 2,800 feet. Escondido soils are used for range, irrigated orchards, and non-irrigated grain, grain hay, and pasture. Garretson Very Fine Sandy Loam, 0 to 2 Percent Slopes (GaA) The Garretson series is a member of the fine-loamy, mixed, nonacid, thermic family of Typic Xerorthents. Typically, Garretson soils have brown and yellowish brown, slightly acid, gravelly very fine sandy loam and gravelly loam A horizons and yellowish brown, brown and grayish brown, slightly acid and neutral, gravelly loam C horizons. The profile of this soil is similar to the series but is grayish brown and is essentially free of gravel throughout. Small areas having a fine sandy loam surface layer are included in areas mapped as this soil. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 4 Garretson Very Fine Sandy Loam, 2 to 8 Percent Slopes (GaC) The Garretson series is a member of the fine-loamy, mixed, nonacid, thermic family of Typic Xerorthents. Typically, Garretson soils have brown and yellowish brown, slightly acid, gravelly very fine sandy loam and gravelly loam A horizons and yellowish brown, brown and grayish brown, slightly acid and neutral, gravelly loam C horizons. The profile of this soil is similar to the series but it is essentially free of gravel throughout. Included with this soil in mapping is a small area with line below a depth of 40 inches. Garretson Gravelly Very Fine Sandy Loam, 2 to 8 Percent Slopes (GdC) The Garretson series is a member of the fine-loamy, mixed, nonacid, thermic family of Typic Xerorthents. Typically, Garretson soils have brown and yellowish brown, slightly acid, gravelly very fine sandy loam and gravelly loam A horizons and yellowish brown, brown and grayish brown, slightly acid and neutral, gravelly loam C horizons. The profile of this soil contains gravel throughout. Included with this soil in mapping is a small area with line below a depth of 40 inches. Lodo Rocky Loam, 25 to 50 Percent Slopes, Eroded (LpF2) The Lodo series consists of shallow, somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in material weathered from hard shale and fine grained sandstone. Lodo soils are on uplands and have slopes of 5 to 75 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 20 inches and the mean annual air temperature is about 62 degrees F. Rough Broken Land (RuF) This soil consists if alluvial materials that are remnants of old alluvial fans and terraces. These fans and terraces have been dissected by drainages to such an extent that areas of recognizable soils cannot be mapped. Slopes range from 30 to 50 percent. Willows Silty Clay, Saline-Alkali (Wg) The Willows series consists of very deep, poorly to very poorly drained sodic soils formed in alluvium from mixed rock sources. Willows soils are in flood basins. Slope ranges from 0 to 2 percent. This nearly level to gently sloping soil is in basins and on edges of alluvial fans. It is moderately saline alkali. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 5 II. JURISDICTION A. Army Corps of Engineers Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Corps regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States. The term “waters of the United States” is defined in Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a) as: (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 (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 paragraphs (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. Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(b) exclude the following from being “waters of the United States” even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(2) through (5) above: (1) Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirements 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 Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 6 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. In the absence of wetlands, the limits of Corps jurisdiction in non-tidal waters, such as intermittent streams, extend to the OHWM which is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(c)(4) as: ...that line on the shore established by the fluctuation of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. “Adjacent” wetlands are defined by 33 CFR 328.3(c)(2) as having a “continuous surface connection” to other waters of the United States. 1. Wetland Definition Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act The term “wetlands” (a subset of “waters of the United States”) is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(c)(1) as “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.” In 1987 the Corps published the Wetland Manual to guide its field personnel in determining jurisdictional wetland boundaries. The methodology set forth in Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 7 the Wetland Manual and the Arid West Supplement generally require that, in order to be considered a wetland, the vegetation, soils, and hydrology of an area exhibit at least minimal hydric characteristics. While the Wetland Manual and Arid West Supplement provide great detail in methodology and allow for varying special conditions, a wetland should normally meet each of the following three criteria: • More than 50 percent of the dominant plant species at the site must be hydrophytic in nature as published in the most current national wetland plant list; • Soils must exhibit physical and/or chemical characteristics indicative of permanent or periodic saturation (e.g., a gleyed color, or mottles with a matrix of low chroma indicating a relatively consistent fluctuation between aerobic and anaerobic conditions); and • Whereas the Wetland Manual requires that hydrologic characteristics indicate that the ground is saturated to within 12 inches of the surface for at least five percent of the growing season during a normal rainfall year, the Arid West Supplement does not include a quantitative criteria with the exception for areas with “problematic hydrophytic vegetation”, which require a minimum of 14 days of ponding to be considered a wetland. 2. Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al. Pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, federal regulatory authority extends only to activities that affect interstate commerce. In the early 1980s the Corps interpreted the interstate commerce requirement in a manner that restricted Corps jurisdiction on isolated (intrastate) waters. On September 12, 1985, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asserted that Corps jurisdiction extended to isolated waters that are used or could be used by migratory birds or endangered species, and the definition of “waters of the United States” in Corps regulations was modified as quoted above from 33 CFR 328.3(a). On January 9, 2001, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling on Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al. (SWANCC). In this case the Court was asked whether use of an isolated, intrastate pond by migratory birds is a sufficient interstate commerce connection to bring the pond into federal jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The written opinion notes that the court’s previous support of the Corps’ expansion of jurisdiction beyond navigable waters (United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc.) was for a wetland that abutted a navigable water and that the court did not express any opinion on the Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 8 question of the authority of the Corps to regulate wetlands that are not adjacent to bodies of open water. The current opinion goes on to state: In order to rule for the respondents here, we would have to hold that the jurisdiction of the Corps extends to ponds that are not adjacent to open water. We conclude that the text of the statute will not allow this. Therefore, we believe that the court’s opinion goes beyond the migratory bird issue and says that no isolated, intrastate water is subject to the provisions of Section 404(a) of the Clean Water Act (regardless of any interstate commerce connection). However, the Corps and EPA have issued a joint memorandum which states that they are interpreting the ruling to address only the migratory bird issue and leaving the other interstate commerce clause nexuses intact. B. Regional Water Quality Control Board The State Water Resource Control Board and each of its nine Regional Boards regulate the discharge of waste (dredged or fill material) into waters of the United States 6 and waters of the State. Waters of the United States are defined above in Section II.A and waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code 13050[e]). Section 401 of the CWA requires certification for any federal permit or license authorizing impacts to waters of the U.S. (i.e., waters that are within federal jurisdiction), such as Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Safe Rivers and Harbors Act, to ensure that the impacts do not violate state water quality standards. When a project could impact waters outside of federal jurisdiction, the Regional Board has the authority under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act to issue Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to ensure that impacts do not violate state water quality standards. Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certifications, WDRs, and waivers of WDRs are also referred to as orders or permits. 6 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 Resources Control 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 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 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 Corps 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 federal Clean Water Act. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 9 1. State Wetland Definition The State Board Wetland Definition and Procedures define an area as wetland as follows: “An area is wetland if, under normal circumstances, (1) the area has continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate caused by groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both; (2) the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and (3) the area’s vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the area lacks vegetation.” The following wetlands are waters of the State: 1. Natural wetlands; 2. Wetlands created by modification of a surface water of the state;7 and 3. Artificial wetlands 8 that meet any of the following criteria: a. Approved by an agency as compensatory mitigation for impacts to other waters of the state, except where the approving agency explicitly identifies the mitigation as being of limited duration; b. Specifically identified in a water quality control plan as a wetland or other water of the state; c. Resulted from historic human activity, is not subject to ongoing operation and maintenance, and has become a relatively permanent part of the natural landscape; or d. Greater than or equal to one acre in size, unless the artificial wetland was constructed, and is currently used and maintained, primarily for one or more of the following purposes (i.e., the following artificial wetlands are not waters of the state unless they also satisfy the criteria set forth in 2, 3a, or 3b): i. Industrial or municipal wastewater treatment or disposal, ii. Settling of sediment, iii. Detention, retention, infiltration, or treatment of stormwater runoff and other pollutants or runoff subject to regulation under a municipal, construction, or industrial stormwater permitting program, iv. Treatment of surface waters, v. Agricultural crop irrigation or stock watering, vi. Fire suppression, vii. Industrial processing or cooling, 7 “Created by modification of a surface water of the state” means that the wetland that is being evaluated was created by modifying an area that was a surface water of the state at the time of such modification. It does not include a wetland that is created in a location where a water of the state had existed historically, but had already been completely eliminated at some time prior to the creation of the wetland. The wetland being evaluated does not become a water of the state due solely to a diversion of water from a different water of the state. 8 Artificial wetlands are wetlands that result from human activity. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 10 viii. Active surface mining – even if the site is managed for interim wetlands functions and values, ix. Log storage, x. Treatment, storage, or distribution of recycled water, or xi. Maximizing groundwater recharge (this does not include wetlands that have incidental groundwater recharge benefits); or xii. Fields flooded for rice growing.9 All artificial wetlands that are less than an acre in size and do not satisfy the criteria set forth in 2, 3.a, 3.b, or 3.c are not waters of the state. If an aquatic feature meets the wetland definition, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the wetland is not a water of the state. C. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Sections 1600-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, the 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. CDFW defines a stream (including creeks and rivers) as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.” CDFW's definition of “lake” includes “natural lakes or man- made reservoirs.” CDFW also defines a stream as “a body of water that flows, or has flowed, over a given course during the historic hydrologic regime, and where the width of its course can reasonably be identified by physical or biological indicators.” It is important to note that the Fish and Game Code defines wildlife to include “all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, invertebrates, reptiles, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which they depend for continued viability” (FGC Division 0.5, Chapter 1, section 89.5). Furthermore, Division 2, Chapter 5, Article 6, Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code does not limit jurisdiction to areas defined by specific flow events, seasonal changes in water flow, or presence/absence of vegetation types or communities. 9 Fields used for the cultivation of rice (including wild rice) that have not been abandoned due to five consecutive years of non-use for the cultivation of rice (including wild rice) that are determined to be a water of the state in accordance with these Procedures shall not have beneficial use designations applied to them through the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, except as otherwise required by federal law for fields that are considered to be waters of the United States. Further, agricultural inputs legally applied to fields used for the cultivation of rice (including wild rice) shall not constitute a discharge of waste to a water of the state. Agricultural inputs that migrate to a surface water or groundwater may be considered a discharge of waste and are subject to waste discharge requirements or waivers of such requirements pursuant to the Water Board’s authority to issue or waive waste discharge requirements or take other actions as applicable. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 11 III. RESULTS The overall Project site varies in topography from slightly hilly to flat, sloping from southwest to northeast. The onsite portion of the Project site consists of several small hills and ridges sloping from the southwest down to the existing dirt road of Baker Street, with the site being flatter on the northern end near the Baker Street/Pierce Street intersection. On the north/east side of Baker Street, the landscape is flat with a very gradual change in elevation to the northeast towards Alberhill Creek/Collier Marsh. Elevations at the Project site range from approximately 1,400 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) at the southwestern boundary to 1,250 feet AMSL at the northeastern limits. Portions of the Project site have been subject to ground disturbance due to dumping, disking, farming activities, and off-road vehicle use. Storm water flows in a general west to east/northeast direction, and depending on rainfall amounts, through the Project site towards Alberhill Creek. Alberhill Creek and its associated floodplain border the Project site to the east, with a portion of the Creek extending across the northeastern portion of the site. Vegetation associated with Alberhill Creek includes southern riparian scrub with alkali playa components in the immediate floodplain. During periods of high rainfall, the western portion of the Project site drains across Baker Street and contributes to a seasonal pond. The Project site also contains several earthen drainages concentrated in the development area that flow only in direct response to precipitation. These features drain in a general west to easterly/northeasterly direction and generally lose flow sign before reaching Alberhill Creek. Additional onsite features analyzed as part of the delineation include seasonally ponded areas, a maintained stock pond, and topographic features. The seasonally ponded areas are located on the east side of Baker Street and were completely dry during the field investigations. A. Corps Jurisdiction Corps jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 2.33 acres, all which consist of federal wetlands, and is limited to Alberhill Creek and its adjacent wetlands. Alberhill Creek is considered a perennial feature that includes open water, freshwater wetlands, and alkali components in the adjacent floodplain. Alberhill Creek and its adjacent wetlands are considered waters of the U.S. as defined under 33 CFR Part 328.3(a) and are subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. The Project site also contains six ephemeral drainage features (Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F), three seasonal ponds (Seasonal Ponds 1, 2, and 3), and a maintained stock pond that was excavated in the uplands for stock watering purposes. These features are not considered waters of the U.S. and are described further below. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 12 The boundaries of the waters of the U.S. are depicted on the enclosed maps. Site photographs are provided as Exhibit 4. Alberhill Creek Corps jurisdiction associated with Alberhill Creek totals 2.33 acres, all of which consist of federal wetlands. Alberhill Creek enters the Project site in the northeast corner and extends in a northwesterly direction for approximately 730 linear feet before exiting the site. Alberhill Creek conveys perennial flow and is tributary to Temescal Creek, which is tributary to the Santa Ana River, and eventually, the Pacific Ocean. As a feature with relatively permanent flow, Alberhill Creek is considered a waters of the U.S. as defined under (a)(3) of 33 CFR Part 328.3(a) and is therefore subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. In addition, the wetlands have a continuous surface connection to Alberhill Creek and are therefore considered waters of the U.S. (i.e., adjacent wetlands) as defined under (a)(4) of 33 CFR Part 328.3(a). The portion of the low flow channel of Alberhill Creek within the Project site is approximately 14 feet in width and exhibited flowing water and ponding at the time of the field assessments. Alberhill Creek is dominated by southern willow scrub riparian habitat with an alkali playa component occurring in the abutting floodplain. A majority of the alkali playa component in the northeastern portion of the Project site exhibits at least some degree of soil disturbance and alterations to the hydrologic regime as evidenced by the presence tire tracks, road ruts, and unauthorized dumping. Dominant riparian/wetland vegetation associated with Alberhill Creek includes salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima), black willow (Salix gooddingii), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), and mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), with alkali bulrush (Bolboschoenus maritimus), common toad rush (Juncus bufonius), and cattail (Typha ssp.). Other common plants include common nettle (Urtica dioca), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), silverscale saltbush (Atriplex argentea), San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. notatior), western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), and annual rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis). The larger floodplain abutting the Creek exhibits sign of temporary inundation during the wet season as evidenced by the presence of surface soil cracks, salt crusts, ponding, and patchy Facultative (FAC) or wetter alkali-adapted species, including salt grass, alkali weed (Cressa truxillensis), goldfields (Lasenthia ssp.), San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. notatior), bush seepweed (Suaeda nigra), and small flowered ice plant (Mesembryanthemum Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 13 nodiflorum). Wetland indicators include strongly saline-alkaline soils, disturbed and/or bare areas indicative of alkali habitat, and the presence of wetland hydrology. A wetland data sheet is provided as Appendix A. Non-Jurisdictional Features The Project site contains six drainage features (Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F) that flow only in direct response to precipitation (e.g., rain). These features lack hydrophytic vegetation and were dry during the field assessments. Drainage features that are not relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water do not meet the definition of waters of the U.S. under 33 CFR Part 328.3(a) and are not subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. Additional features excluded from Corps jurisdiction include a stock pond and several seasonal ponds that occur in the central portion of the site. The stock pond is an artificial feature that was constructed in the uplands for stock watering and is not an impoundment of a jurisdictional water. This feature is considered an artificial pond as defined under 33 CFR Part 328.3(b)(5) and is not subject to Corps jurisdiction. The seasonal ponds located in the central portion of the site exhibit wetland characteristics (albeit problematic) but do not exhibit a continuous surface connection to Alberhill Creek or any other (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) waters as defined in 33 CFR Part 328.3(a). As a result, these features are not subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. The Project site also contains unmapped topographic features, including erosional areas and swales along the hillsides west of Baker Street. These features are characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow, and lack OHWM indicators. These features are considered (b)(8) features as defined under 33 CFR Part 328.3(b) and are not subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. B. Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdiction Regional Board jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 4.17 acres, of which 3.57 acres consist of State wetlands. Of this total, 2.33 acres, all of which consist of State wetlands, comprise Corps jurisdiction and the remaining 1.84 acres, of which 1.24 acres consist of State wetlands, represent Regional Board jurisdiction only. Regional Board jurisdiction at the Project site includes Alberhill Creek and its adjacent wetlands, six ephemeral drainage features (Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F), and three seasonal ponds (Seasonal Ponds 1, 2, and 3). As discussed above, Alberhill Creek is considered a perennial stream that includes adjacent wetlands. Since this feature is subject to Corps jurisdiction under Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 14 Section 404 of the CWA, it is also subject to Regional Board jurisdiction under Section 401 of the CWA. Drainages A-F are earthen drainages that convey surface water only in direct response to precipitation (i.e., rain). Since ephemeral features are not subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA, these features are also not subject to Regional Board jurisdiction under Section 401 of the CWA. However, since these features convey surface flow with the potential to support beneficial uses, they are considered to be waters of the State that would be regulated by the Regional Board pursuant to Section 13260 of the California Water Code (CWC)/the Porter- Cologne Act. There are also several features in the uplands that do not convey adequate flow sign or support any beneficial uses identified in the Regional Board Basin Plan. This includes a maintained stock pond and areas lacking a defined stream course. Areas lacking a defined stream course include unmapped topographic features such as swales, rills, and erosional areas that do not convey adequate flow sign or a discernable bed, bank, and channel. As these areas lack a discernable stream course, they are not considered waters of the State and would not be regulated under Section 13260 of the CWC. The stock pond was created for the purposes of agricultural crop irrigation and/or stock watering. Pursuant to the State Wetland Procedures, artificial wetlands such as stock ponds are not considered waters of the State unless they also satisfy the criteria set forth in 2, 3a, or 3b of the Procedures. As the stock pond is less than one acre in size and was created for the purposes of stock watering, it meets the exclusion criteria identified in 3(d)(v) and is not subject to regulation under Section 13260 of the CWC. Table 1 below summarizes Regional Board jurisdictional waters at the Project site. A description of the Regional Board jurisdictional drainage features at the Project site is outlined below. The boundaries of Regional Board jurisdiction are depicted on the enclosed jurisdictional delineation map [Exhibit 3B]. Site photographs are provided as Exhibit 4. Table 1: Summary of Regional Board Jurisdiction Drainage Name Regional Board Non-Wetland Waters (acres) Regional Board Jurisdictional Wetlands (acres) Total Regional Board Jurisdiction (acres) Length (linear feet) Waters of the U.S./State Alberhill Creek 0 2.33 2.33 730 Waters of the State Only Drainage A 0.15 0 0.15 2,034 Drainage B 0.13 0 0.13 716 Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 15 Drainage C 0.03 0 0.03 638 Drainage D 0.07 0 0.07 899 Drainage E 0.02 0 0.02 280 Drainage F 0.20 0 0.20 1,480 Seasonal Pond 1 0 0.21 0.21 N/A Seasonal Pond 2 0 0.40 0.40 N/A Seasonal Pond 3 0 0.63 0.63 N/A Total* 0.60 3.57 4.17 6,777 Alberhill Creek Alberhill Creek is subject to both Corps and Regional Board jurisdiction under Sections 404 and 401 of the CWA and need not be analyzed separately under Section 13260 of the CWC. Drainages A-F Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F totals 0.60 acre, none of which consists of State wetlands. Vegetation associated with Drainages A-F include foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), red brome (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), rattail fescue (Festuca myuros), common Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus), cheeseweed (Marva parviflora), common fiddleneck (Amsinckia intermedia), stinknet (Oncosiphon piluliferum), annual mustard (Brassica ssp.), summer mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), and London rocket (Sisybrium irio). Areas adjacent to the upstream reaches of Drainages C and D include patches of California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), bush sunflower (Encelia californica), and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). Drainage A Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage A totals 0.15 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage A is an earthen ephemeral drainage that enters the Project site from the west and extends in a northeasterly direction for approximately 2,034 linear feet before its eventual confluence with Alberhill Creek. During high storm events, the middle reach of Drainage A east of Baker Street drains into one of three seasonal ponds (described separately below) before continuing its path northeasterly until its eventual confluence with Alberhill Creek. Drainage A extends up to six feet in width as evidenced by water marks, changes in soil characteristics, and bent vegetation. This feature was historically mapped as a blue-line stream; however, Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 16 development west of the site has affected the upstream watershed, resulting in degradation to onsite hydrology and faint stream flow indicators in the upstream reach averaging two feet in width. Drainage B Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage B totals 0.13 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage B is an isolated earthen ephemeral drainage that enters the Project site from the west along the edge of a dilapidated rural residence and extends in a northeasterly direction for approximately 716 linear feet towards Baker Street before dissipating as sheet flow. Drainage B conveys storm water flows and receives irrigation runoff from the adjacent rural residence. The drainage extends up to ten feet in width as evidenced by changes in soil characteristics and bent vegetation. Drainage C Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage C totals 0.03 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage C is an erosional ephemeral drainage that originates offsite from the adjacent hillsides and extends a northerly direction for approximately 638 linear feet towards Baker Street. Drainage C is an isolated feature averaging two feet in width as evidenced by changes in soil characteristics and eroded channel banks in the upstream reach. The drainage bottom contains cobbles and was completely dry during the field investigations. Drainage D Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage D totals 0.07 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage D is an erosional drainage that enters the Project site from the southwest, and meanders in a northeasterly direction for approximately 899 linear feet before exiting the parcel boundary at an existing rural residence. Drainage D ranges between two and six feet in width and contains eroded banks and cobbles. This feature conveys flow only in direct response to precipitation and was completely dry during the field investigations. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 17 Drainage E Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage E totals 0.02 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage E is an earthen ephemeral drainage that originates as run-off from Nichols Road. This feature extends easterly across the northern portion of the Project site for approximately 280 linear feet before dissipating as sheet flow. The drainage averages three feet in width, and depending on rainfall amounts, conveys a surficial connection to Alberhill Creek. This drainage lacks hydrophytic vegetation and was completely dry during the field investigations. Drainage F Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Drainage F totals 0.20 acre, none of which is State wetland. Drainage F is an ephemeral drainage that runs parallel to the north side of Nichols Road. This feature extends across the Project site in an easterly direction for approximately 1,480 linear feet before being conveyed through a pipe culvert and losing all sign of flow. Drainage F averages six feet in width as evidenced by bent vegetation and changes in soil characteristics. This feature conveys runoff from the adjacent hillsides Nichols Road and was completely dry during the field investigations. Seasonal Ponds 1-3 The central portion of the Project site east of Baker Street contains three areas that pond seasonally. These areas are referenced herein as Seasonal Ponds 1, 2, and 3 and are described below. Seasonal Pond 1 Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Seasonal Pond 1 totals 0.21 acre, all of which consists of State wetlands. Pond 1 is an isolated seasonal pond that contains a strong alkaline component and supports FAC or wetter dominant species, including salt grass, Coulter’s goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri), vernal barley (Hordeum intercedens), and San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. notatior). This feature meets State wetland indicators including surface soil cracks, wetland vegetation, and moderately to very strongly alkaline soils. Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 18 Seasonal Pond 2 Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Seasonal Pond 2 totals 0.40 acre, all of which consists of State wetlands. Pond 2 is an isolated seasonal pond that exhibits strong alkaline components. This feature was generally bare during the field assessment, but meets the State wetland definition due to landscape position and proximity to Alberhill Creek, temporal shifts in vegetation, the presence of surface soil cracks, and seasonally ponded soils. Seasonal Pond 3 Regional Board jurisdiction associated with Seasonal Pond 3 totals 0.63 acre, all of which consists of State wetlands. Seasonal Pond 3 is supported by surface water and Drainage A flows, and occurs in-line with Drainage A. This area ponds during the wet season and supports Coulter’s goldfields, vernal barley, and bare areas during most years. This feature is considered a State wetland due to the presence of surface soil cracks, vegetation that is dominated by hydrophytes and/or is lacking, and contains seasonally ponded soils. C. CDFW Jurisdiction CDFW jurisdiction at the site totals approximately 3.66 acres, of which 2.99 acres consist of riparian habitat. CDFW jurisdiction at the Project site includes Alberhill Creek, six ephemeral drainages (Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F) and a seasonal pond (Seasonal Pond 3) that is associated with a stream course. Drainages A-F are earthen drainages that convey surface water only in direct response to precipitation (i.e., rain). These features exhibit stream flow indictors that include changes in soil characteristics, drainage patterns, bent vegetation, and/or defined channel banks. Seasonal Pond 3 is an in-line feature that occurs on the east side of Baker Street and is associated with Drainage A. As these features exhibit biological and physical indictors of a stream course and/or contain habitat associated with a discernable stream course, they are subject to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. There are also several unmapped features in the uplands where the width of its course cannot reasonably be identified by physical or biological indicators. Areas lacking a defined stream course include topographic features including swales, rills, and erosional areas that do not exhibit obvious flow sign or biological indicators indicative of a channel. Such features are not Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 19 considered rivers, streams, or lakes. Areas lacking a discernable stream course are not subject to regulation by the CDFW under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Additional features excluded from CDFW jurisdiction include a stock pond on the west side of Baker Street and two seasonal ponds (Seasonal Ponds 1 and 2) that occur on the east side of Baker Street. The stock pond is an artificial feature that was constructed in the uplands for purposes of agricultural crop irrigation and/or stock watering and is not associated with any river, stream, or lake. Seasonal Ponds 1 and 2 contain aquatic resources but are not associated with a river, stream, or lake. As a result, these features are not subject to CDFW jurisdiction under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Table 2 below summarizes CDFW jurisdictional waters at the Project site. A description of the CDFW jurisdictional drainage features at the Project site is outlined below. The boundaries of CDFW jurisdiction are depicted on the enclosed jurisdictional delineation map [Exhibit 3C]. Site photographs are provided as Exhibit 4. Table 2: Summary of CDFW Jurisdiction Drainage Name CDFW Non- Riparian Stream (acres) CDFW Riparian Stream (acres) Total CDFW Jurisdiction (acres) Length (linear feet) Alberhill Creek 0 2.36 2.36 730 Drainage A 0.18 0 0.18 2,304 Drainage B 0.13 0 0.13 716 Drainage C 0.03 0 0.03 638 Drainage D 0.09 0 0.09 899 Drainage E 0.04 0 0.04 280 Drainage F 0.20 0 0.20 1,480 Seasonal Pond 3 0 0.63 0.63 N/A Total 0.67 2.99 3.66 6,777 Alberhill Creek CDFW jurisdiction associated with Alberhill Creek totals 2.36 acres, all of which consist riparian stream. Alberhill Creek is blue-line drainage that enters the Project from the northeast and extends across the site in a northwesterly direction for approximately 730 linear feet before exiting the site. Alberhill Creek conveys perennial flows and is tributary to Temescal Creek and eventually, the Pacific Ocean. The portion of the low flow channel in the Project site is approximately 14 feet in width and exhibited flowing water and ponding at the time of the field assessment. Alberhill Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 20 Creek is dominated by southern willow scrub riparian habitat with a disturbed alkali playa component occurring in the abutting floodplain. As depicted in Exhibit 3C, a small amount of riparian habitat associated with Alberhill Creek overhangs the portion of Nichols Road within the offsite area. A majority of the alkali playa component in the northeastern portion of the site exhibits at least some degree of soil disturbance and alterations to the hydrologic regime as evidenced by the presence tire tracks, road ruts, and unauthorized dumping. Since the playa is both adjacent to, and hydrologically connected to, Alberhill Creek, it is subject to CDFW jurisdiction under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Dominant riparian vegetation associated with Alberhill Creek includes salt cedar, black willow, arroyo willow, and, with alkali bulrush, common toad rush, and cattail. Other common plants include common nettle, shortpod mustard, silverscale saltbush, western ragweed, saltgrass, and annual rabbitsfoot grass. The larger floodplain abutting the creek exhibits sign of temporary inundation during the wet season as evidenced by the presence of surface soil cracks, salt crusts, ponding, and patchy alkali-adapted species, including salt grass, alkali weed, San Jacinto Valley crownscale, goldfields, bush seepweed, and small flowered ice plant. These areas contain riparian alkali playa habitat associated with Alberhill Creek and have the potential to support aquatic resources. Drainages A-F CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F totals 0.67 acre, none of which is riparian. Vegetation associated with Drainages A, B, C, D, E, and F includes foxtail barley, soft chess, ripgut brome, red brome, rattail fescue, common Mediterranean grass, cheeseweed, common fiddleneck, stinknet, annual mustard, summer mustard, goldenbush, and London rocket. Drainage A CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage A totals 0.18 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage A is an earthen ephemeral drainage that enters the Project site from the west and extends in a northeasterly direction for approximately 2,304 linear feet before its eventual confluence with Alberhill Creek. During high storm events, the middle reach of Drainage A east of Baker Street drains into one of three seasonal ponds (described separately below) before continuing its path northeasterly until it’s eventual confluence with Alberhill Creek. Drainage A extends up to six feet in width as evidenced by water marks, changes in soil characteristics, and bent vegetation. This feature was historically mapped as a blue-line stream; however, Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 21 development west of the site has affected the upstream watershed, resulting in degradation to onsite hydrology and faint stream flow indicators in the upstream reach averaging two feet in width. Drainage B CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage B totals 0.13 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage B is an isolated earthen ephemeral drainage that enters the Project site from the west along the edge of a dilapidated rural residence and extends in a northeasterly direction for approximately 716 linear feet towards Baker Street. Drainage B conveys storm water flows and receives irrigation runoff from the adjacent rural residence. The drainage extends up to ten feet in width as evidenced by changes in soil characteristics and bent vegetation. Drainage C CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage C totals 0.03 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage C is an erosional ephemeral drainage that originates offsite from the adjacent hillsides and extends a northerly direction for approximately 638 linear feet towards Baker Street before dissipating onsite. Drainage C is an isolated features averaging two feet in width as evidenced by changes in soil characteristics and eroded channel banks in the upstream reach. The drainage bottom contains cobbles and was completely dry during the field investigations. Drainage D CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage D totals 0.09 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage D is an erosional drainage that enters the Project site from the southwest, and meanders in a northeasterly direction for approximately 899 linear feet before exiting the parcel boundary at an existing rural residence. Drainage D ranges between two and six feet in width and contains eroded banks and cobbles. This feature conveys flow only in direct response to precipitation and was completely dry during the field investigations. Drainage E CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage E totals 0.04 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage E is an earthen ephemeral drainage that originates as run-off from Nichols Road. This feature extends easterly across the northern portion of the Project site for approximately 280 Glen Williams Ecosystem Investment Partners November 20, 2023 Page 22 linear feet before dissipating as sheet flow. The drainage averages three feet in width, and depending on rainfall amounts, conveys a surficial connection to Alberhill Creek. This drainage lacks riparian vegetation and was completely dry during the field investigations. Drainage F CDFW jurisdiction associated with Drainage F totals 0.20 acre, none of which is riparian. Drainage F is an ephemeral drainage that runs parallel to the north side of Nichols Road. This feature extends in an easterly direction within the Project site for approximately 1,480 linear feet before being conveyed through a pipe culvert and losing all sign of flow. Drainage F averages six feet in width as evidenced by bent vegetation and changes in soil characteristics. This feature conveys runoff from the adjacent hillsides Nichols Road and was completely dry during the field investigations. Seasonal Pond 3 CDFW jurisdiction associated with Seasonal Pond 3 totals 0.63 acre, all of which riparian. Seasonal Pond 3 is supported by surface water and Drainage A flows, and occurs in-line with Drainage A. This area ponds during the wet season and supports Coulter’s goldfields, vernal barley, and bare areas during most years. This feature contains surface soil cracks, vegetation that is dominated by hydrophytes and/or is lacking, and contains seasonally ponded soils. As this feature is associated with a discernable stream course (Drainage A), it is subject to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. If you have any questions, please contact Lesley Lokovic-Gamber at (949) 340-3968. Sincerely, GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES, INC. Lesley Lokovic-Gamber Senior Regulatory Specialist p:1514-05a.jd