low - effect habitat conservation plan · june 2017 . low - effect habitat conservation plan ....

June 2017

L O W - E F F E C T H A B I T A T C O N S E R V A T I O N P L A N

ISSUANCE OF AN INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 10(A)(1)(B)

OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

FOR THE

FEDERALLY LISTED AS THREATENED

COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER

( P O L I O P T I L A CA L I F O R N I CA CA L I F O R N I CA )

O L I N D A A L P H A L A N D F I L L P R O J E C T S

CI T Y O F B R E A , C O U N T Y O F O R A N G E , CA L I F O R N I A

June 2017

L O W - E F F E C T H A B I T A T C O N S E R V A T I O N P L A N

ISSUANCE OF AN INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 10(A)(1)(B)

OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

FOR THE

FEDERALLY LISTED AS THREATENED

COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER

( P O L I O P T I L A CA L I F O R N I CA CA L I F O R N I CA )

O L I N D A A L P H A L A N D F I L L P R O J E C T S

CI T Y O F B R E A , C O U N T Y O F O R A N G E , CA L I F O R N I A

Submitted to:

OC Waste & Recycling 300 North Flower Street, Suite 400

Santa Ana, California 92703

Prepared by:

LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200

Irvine, California 92614 (949) 553-0666

Project No. GEO1401D

P:\GEO1401D\HCP\Olinda LEHCP_20170615.docx «06/15/17» i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) has been prepared to support an application for an incidental take permit from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (United States Code Title 16, Section 1531 et seq.) to incidentally take the federally listed as threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; CAGN) at the Olinda Alpha Landfill in the City of Brea, County of Orange, California. The four proposed Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects (Projects) include installing trees to screen the Brea Power Plant, constructing a new desilting basin (Basin C), constructing a new winch concrete pad (Basin A), and performing a partial closure on the front slope of the landfill (Phase 1 Closure Area). The proposed Projects are not large discretionary developments but rather small projects that need to be completed to allow OC Waste & Recycling (herein referred to as “Applicant”) to continue to operate the landfill in compliance with various regulatory requirements, including those specified by the California Department of Resources Recovery and Recycling and the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Protocol surveys for CAGN completed by LSA Associates, Inc. in February 2016 identified one pair of CAGN and individual CAGN in two locations within the proposed impact areas. No other federally listed threatened or endangered species are known to occur on the Project sites. The proposed Projects would take place entirely on the 565-acre Olinda Alpha Landfill property located north of the intersection between Valencia Avenue and East Lambert Road in the City of Brea, County of Orange, California (Figure 1; all figures attached in Appendix A). The geographic areas under consideration for this HCP total approximately 12.56 acres and include portions of the front slope of the landfill and some of the slopes along the west side of the landfill. CAGN were detected at three locations within the survey areas during seven of the nine protocol surveys performed from October 12, 2015, through February 4, 2016 (see accompanying report; Appendix B). A total of 5.78 acres of coastal sage scrub (CSS) within the proposed impact areas are considered occupied habitat for the gnatcatcher. The remaining 6.78 acres within the proposed impact areas consist of 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may support CAGN foraging and/or dispersal as well as 3.93 acres of previously disturbed/developed lands (e.g., bare ground, paved areas). The Applicant proposes to mitigate impacts to occupied CAGN habitat through 11.56 acres of CSS habitat restoration and long-term management under a conservation easement, to be implemented by the Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority (Habitat Authority) and financed by the Applicant. The Habitat Authority’s Resource Management Plan provides assurances that the Puente Hills Preserve in southeastern Los Angeles County will be protected, managed, and monitored in perpetuity for the long-term conservation benefit of the CAGN present at the preserve. The Applicant will be entitled to rely on these management and monitoring assurances. The Applicant requests a permit for a 5-year duration commencing on the date of permit approval. This HCP has been prepared in consultation with the Service to fulfill the requirements of a Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit application for the proposed Projects. These mitigation measures should result in greater long-term conservation value for the CAGN.

P:\GEO1401D\HCP\Olinda LEHCP_20170615.docx «06/15/17» ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1

PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................................................. 1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................. 2

Federal Endangered Species Act .......................................................................................... 2 National Environmental Policy Act ...................................................................................... 3 National Historic Preservation Act ....................................................................................... 3

PERMIT APPLICANT/HOLDER ................................................................................................. 3 PERMIT DURATION ................................................................................................................... 3 PERMIT BOUNDARY.................................................................................................................. 3 SPECIES TO BE COVERED UNDER PERMIT .......................................................................... 4

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS/ACTIVITIES COVERED BY PERMIT ................................................. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING/BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................... 7

EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF PROJECT SITES ............................................. 7 Site Locations ....................................................................................................................... 7 Land Use ............................................................................................................................... 7 Topography and Soils ........................................................................................................... 7

COVERED SPECIES .................................................................................................................... 7 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and its Critical Habitat ....................................................... 7

POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS/TAKE ASSESSMENT ...................................................... 10 CONSERVATION STRATEGY ......................................................................................................... 12

BIOLOGICAL GOAL ................................................................................................................. 12 CONSERVATION MEASURES ................................................................................................ 12

Actions to Avoid and Minimize Impacts ............................................................................ 12 Actions to Mitigate Impacts ............................................................................................... 13

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................... 14 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING ................................................................ 14 CHANGED AND UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES ........................................................... 14

Changed Circumstances ..................................................................................................... 14 Unforeseen Circumstances ................................................................................................. 14

AMENDMENTS .......................................................................................................................... 15 Minor Amendments ............................................................................................................ 15 Major Amendments ............................................................................................................ 16

PERMIT RENEWAL OR EXTENSION ..................................................................................... 16 PERMIT TRANSFER .................................................................................................................. 16 PERMIT SUSPENSION .............................................................................................................. 17 OTHER MEASURES .................................................................................................................. 17

FUNDING ............................................................................................................................................ 18 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTIONS CONSIDERED ............................................... 19

No Action Alternative ........................................................................................................ 20 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 21

P:\GEO1401D\HCP\Olinda LEHCP_20170615.docx «06/15/17» iii

APPENDICES

A: FIGURES B: GNATCATCHER SURVEY REPORT C: HABITAT RESTORATION PLAN

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . J U N E 2 0 1 7

L O W - E F F E C T H A B I T A T C O N S E R V A T I O N P L A N O L I N D A A L P H A L A N D F I L L P R O J E C T S

C I T Y O F B R E A , C O U N T Y O F O R A N G E , C A L I F O R N I A

P:\GEO1401D\HCP\Olinda LEHCP_20170615.docx «06/15/17» 1

INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE AND NEED This Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) has been prepared to support an application for an incidental take permit from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) pursuant to Section 10(a)(l)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (United States Code Title 16, Section 1531 et seq.) to incidentally take the federally listed as threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; CAGN). Field surveys have indicated that the proposed sites for the Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects (Projects) support at least two CAGN individuals and at least one pair (LSA Associates, Inc. [LSA] 2016). No other federally listed threatened or endangered species are known to occur on the Project site. The four proposed Projects are required for regulatory compliance and safety and include the construction of a new desilting basin on the west side of the landfill (Basin C), the partial closure cap on the front slopes of the landfill (Phase 1 Closure Area), the installation of screening trees for the Brea Power Plant, and a new winch concrete pad for Basin A. The winch concrete pad project was proposed after protocol CAGN surveys were completed, and OC Waste & Recycling (herein referred to as “Applicant”) proposes to cover the project’s associated 0.08 acres of coastal sage scrub (CSS) impacts within this HCP. The geographic areas under consideration for this HCP total approximately 12.56 acres, of which 5.78 acres contain suitable occupied CSS habitat. The remaining 6.78 acres within the proposed impact areas consist of 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may support CAGN foraging and/or dispersal as well as 3.93 acres of previously disturbed/developed lands (e.g., bare ground, paved areas). The construction of Basin C would impact approximately 3.17 acres of occupied CSS. Phase 1 Closure would require the removal of 0.07 acres of low-quality CSS (approximately 50 percent cover). The installation of screening trees for the Brea Power Plant would impact approximately 2.46 acres of occupied CSS. The new winch concrete pad to be constructed on the edge of Basin A would impact approximately 0.08 acres of CSS. A total of 5.09 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat lie within the Project sites; of these 5.09 acres, 2.95 acres exist as CSS habitat within the proposed Basin C and new winch concrete pad areas. The remaining 2.14 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat within the Project sites consists of disturbed/developed areas (0.36 acre) and ruderal/nonnative grassland (1.78 acres) comprised of early successional nonnative grasses and herbaceous plant species that readily colonize ground that has been disturbed by natural or human causes. The proposed mitigation ratio is 2:1 for combined impacts to occupied CSS (5.78 acres); therefore, 11.56 acres of habitat mitigation is proposed for the conservation and protection of the CAGN. All 11.56 acres of proposed CSS habitat restoration are within designated CAGN Critical Habitat and currently exist as ruderal/nonnative grassland.1

1 The proposed 11.56-acre CSS restoration site is situated near known CAGN occupied CSS habitat as well as

other habitat types, including ruderal/nonnative grassland, that may support additional CAGN foraging and dispersal. The proposed restoration site is within designated open space land that is managed with the primary purpose of protecting biological diversity.





The Applicant is seeking a permit for incidental take of the CAGN in the course of otherwise lawful activities associated with construction of the four aforementioned Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects. Such authorization is necessary because activities associated with the construction of the Projects will remove occupied habitat and harm individual CAGN by altering essential behaviors (e.g., breeding, feeding, or sheltering). Two concurrently-planned landfill projects including (1) the relocation of two methane gas probes and (2) the transfer of stockpile material within the landfill are not anticipated to result in take (as defined by the federal Act) and were coordinated with the Service. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Federal Endangered Species Act The Act provides for the protection and conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants that have been federally listed as threatened or endangered. Activities otherwise prohibited by Section 9 of the Act and subject to the civil and criminal enforcement provisions of Section 11 of the Act may be authorized for federal entities, pursuant to the requirements of Section 7 of the Act, and for other persons, pursuant to Section 10 of the Act. Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Act states that no permit may be issued by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) authorizing any taking referred to in Section 10(a)(l)(B) unless the Applicant submits to the Secretary an HCP that specifies: 1. The impact that will likely result from such taking;

2. What steps the Applicant will take to minimize and mitigate such impacts and the funding that will be available to implement such steps;

3. What alternative actions to such taking the Applicant considered and the reasons why such alternatives are not being utilized; and

4. Such other measures that the Secretary may require as being necessary or appropriate for the purposes of the plan.

This HCP has been prepared in consultation with the Service to fulfill the requirements of Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Act as part of an application for a Section 10(a)(l)(B) incidental take permit being sought for the proposed Projects in the City of Brea, County of Orange, California. The Applicant is proposing that this plan be evaluated as a “low-effect” HCP. A low-effect HCP involves “(1) minor or negligible effects on federally listed, proposed, or candidate species and their habitats covered under the HCP; and (2) minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources” (Service and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 1996). In addition, “‘low-effect’ incidental take permits are those permits that, despite their authorization of some small level of incidental take, individually and cumulatively have a minor or negligible effect on species covered in the HCP” (Service and NOAA 1996).





National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to analyze the environmental effects of their actions (in this instance, the issuance of an incidental take permit) and include public participation in the planning and implementation of their actions. The NEPA compliance process helps federal agencies make informed decisions with respect to the environmental consequences of their actions and ensures that measures to protect, restore, and enhance the environment are included, as necessary, as a component of their actions. Compliance with NEPA is obtained through one of three methods: (1) preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (generally used for high-effect HCPs), (2) preparation of an Environmental Assessment (generally used for moderate-effect HCPs), or (3) a Categorical Exclusion (allowed for low-effect HCPs). Low-effect HCPs are categorically excluded under NEPA, as defined by United States Department of the Interior Manuals 516 Departmental Manual (DM) 2, Appendices 1 and 2, and 516 DM 6, Appendix 1. National Historic Preservation Act All federal agencies are required to examine the cultural impacts of their actions (e.g., the issuance of a permit). This may require consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office and appropriate American Indian tribes. The Service requests that all incidental take permit applicants submit a Request for Cultural Resources Compliance form. To complete compliance, the applicants may be required to contract for cultural resource surveys and possibly also for mitigation. PERMIT APPLICANT/HOLDER OC Waste & Recycling is the Applicant for the Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit. If a permit is issued by the Service, the Applicant will be the permit holder of the incidental take permit. PERMIT DURATION The proposed duration of the Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit for the proposed Projects is 5 years from the date of issuance by the Service. The permit duration will allow the Applicant to (1) prepare final planning and design of the Projects and (2) complete construction of the proposed components at the Project sites. PERMIT BOUNDARY The geographic areas addressed by this HCP include a total of 12.56 acres at four Project sites within the southwestern portion of the Olinda Alpha Landfill property (Figure 2) and 11.56 acres of land managed by the Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority (Habitat Authority) where habitat restoration and long-term management will occur. The Olinda Alpha Landfill is north of East Lambert Road at the end of Valencia Avenue in the City of Brea, County of Orange, California. The Project sites are approximately 8.15 miles from the mitigation site on lands managed by the Habitat Authority (Figure 3).





SPECIES TO BE COVERED UNDER PERMIT Incidental take coverage is requested for the following species: Species: Federal Status: Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Threatened





PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS/ACTIVITIES COVERED BY PERMIT

The four proposed Projects would involve impacts to approximately 12.56 acres of mostly undeveloped land within the Olinda Alpha Landfill property. Within the proposed impact areas, the Projects considered in this HCP would permanently remove 5.78 acres of CSS habitat and an additional 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland. The remaining 3.93 acres within the proposed impact areas have been previously disturbed and/or developed, and exist as pavement or compacted bare ground. Specific descriptions of the four Projects are listed below: • Basin C: A new desiltation basin would be constructed to provide additional water quality

control measures on the landfill, as required by the updated 2015 Industrial General Permit discharge limits. This project would impact approximately 3.17 acres of occupied CSS habitat and 2.43 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland through vegetation removal, grading, and the construction of the basin. This Project would take approximately 6 months to complete.

• Phase 1 Closure Area: A small area of CSS (0.07 acres) as well as 0.05 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland would be removed to finish the placement of cap material on the front slope of the landfill, as required by Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This project would involve vegetation removal and the placement of low-permeability cap material. This Project would take approximately 3 weeks to complete.

• Screening Tree Landscaping: The Applicant is required to install trees on the slopes below the Brea Power Plant to screen it from the residents of the City of Brea, as specified by the facility’s Mitigated Negative Declaration aesthetics mitigation measure. This would impact approximately 2.46 acres of occupied CSS as well as 0.37 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland and would involve vegetation clearing, preparing the site for planting, and installing irrigation and trees on site. This Project would take approximately 2 months to complete.

• Winch Concrete Pad – Basin A: A concrete pad needs to be poured on the south edge of Basin A to allow all-weather access to the winch area which is used to control sediment and meet discharge limits. A safety rail is also proposed to prevent operators and equipment from falling into the basin. California buckwheat was allowed to become established (with 50–60 percent cover) on top of the Basin A dam face, just west of the spillway. The Applicant proposes to remove 0.08 acres of CSS vegetation in this area and pour a concrete pad to allow for safe all-weather access to the winches during storm events. This Project would take approximately 2 weeks to complete.

Project activities would include vegetation clearing, grading, and constructing the aforementioned structures, fills, and landscaping. Covered activities for the Projects would include all construction activities related to site preparation (i.e., vegetation removal, grading, and/or compaction), basin and concrete pad construction, and site modifications including irrigation, screening tree landscaping, and placement of cap material in the Phase 1 Closure Area. The proposed Projects would likely displace all CAGN individuals due to the removal of their habitat, but would not impact adjacent areas. To mitigate impacts to 5.78 acres of occupied CSS habitat and





2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may support CAGN foraging and/or dispersal, 11.56 acres of CSS habitat restoration, monitored and managed in perpetuity under a conservation easement, will be implemented approximately 8.15 miles off site by the Habitat Authority and financed by the Applicant. The off-site areas are also adjacent to ruderal/nonnative grassland, which can provide foraging and/or dispersal opportunities.





ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING/BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF PROJECT SITES Site Locations All four Project sites are located on the southern half of the Olinda Alpha Landfill property (Assessor’s Identification Numbers 308-031-32, 308-051-01, 308-031-03, 308-031-22, 308-031-25, 308-021-12, and 308-031-03) at the end of Valencia Avenue in Section 5, Township 3 South, Range 9 West within the United States Geological Survey, Yorba Linda, California 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle. Approximate coordinates for the Project sites are: • Basin C: 33.937357, -117.845683;

• Phase 1 Closure Area: 33.934554, -117.840878;

• Screening Tree Landscaping: 33.933018, -117.841605; and

• Winch Concrete Pad – Basin A: 33.931143, -117.841843.

Land Use All four Project sites are located within portions of the Olinda Alpha Landfill property. Nearby land uses include open space areas to the north and east (Firestone Scout Reservation and Chino Hills State Park, respectively), oil extraction wells to the immediate south, and residential and commercial development to the south and west, including the Cities of Brea and Yorba Linda and unincorporated Orange County. The landfill property is approximately 5 miles from the Puente Hills Preserve and lies partially within designated critical habitat areas of the CAGN. Topography and Soils The elevations of the Project sites range from 600 feet to 1,070 feet above mean sea level. According to the Soil Survey Geographic Database,1 the impact areas contain Cieneba sandy loam, Anaheim loam, Anaheim clay loam, Balcom clay loam, and Xerorthents loamy soils. COVERED SPECIES Coastal California Gnatcatcher and its Critical Habitat Status and Distribution. The CAGN is resident from southern Ventura County in southwestern California southward throughout the Baja California Peninsula. The northernmost subspecies

1 GeoCommunity. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database. Website: http://data.geocomm.com/

catalog/US/61069/group201.html, accessed April 2016.





(P. c. californicus) occurs in California, where it is fairly common in preferred habitats. However, its range overlaps closely with the most developed, and developing, lowland portions of coastal Southern California, having prompted its listing as a threatened species in 1993. At nearly 34°N, the Project sites are near the northern limit of the species’ range, and there are multiple records of the species in the vicinity of the landfill property. Approximately 197,303 acres (79,846 hectares) of habitat in San Diego, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties have been designated as Critical Habitat for the CAGN. The Project sites are adjacent to or within designated Critical Habitat for the CAGN within the Puente-Chino Hills Wildlife Corridor (Figure 4). A total of 5.09 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat in Unit 9 lies within the Project sites; of these 5.09 acres, 2.95 acres exist as CSS habitat within the proposed Basin C and new winch concrete pad areas. The remaining 2.14 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat within the Project sites consists of disturbed/developed areas (0.36 acre) and ruderal/nonnative grassland (1.78 acres). Unit 9 contains approximately 17,552 acres of designated gnatcatcher critical habitat. Life History. The CAGN is nonmigratory and is closely associated with CSS. Juveniles may disperse several miles and cross nonscrub habitats, but adults are generally sedentary. The CAGN feeds primarily on sessile rather than active small arthropods, especially leafhoppers (Homoptera), spiders (Araneae), beetles (Coleoptera), and true bugs (Hemiptera). The species is believed to be generally monogamous, and pair bonds are normally permanent. Pairs defend territories throughout the year, but territories tend to expand during the nonbreeding season. Clutch size is normally three or four, but occasionally is two or five. Nesting may extend from February through July, depending on the year, and as many as three broods may fledge. Occurrences on the Project Sites. The CAGN has been known to occur on the Olinda Alpha Landfill property since at least 2009 (LSA). A total of nine protocol CAGN surveys were conducted on the landfill property between October 12, 2015, and February 4, 2016 (LSA, Appendix B). CAGN was detected at three of the proposed impact locations during seven of the nine protocol surveys. The first CAGN observation (October 12, 2015) was of a single bird foraging along the western limits of the landfill. A second observation in this area was made on February 4, 2016, during the last survey. The CAGN was a male that was first observed a little north of this area and flew toward the location of the first sighting and then off the landfill property. The second location where CAGN was observed (October 26, 2015) is along the northern end of the site in low quality scrub; it was the only observation in this area. CAGN was detected at a third location on the slopes near the Brea Power Plant. CAGN was observed here during five of the nine surveys (November 23, December 7, and December 21, 2015; and January 22 and February 4, 2016). Three of the five observations were of a pair of CAGN, and the other two observations were of a single individual. As such, the protocol surveys concluded that at least four CAGN individuals are known to utilize portions of the Project sites. The quality of the scrub does vary throughout this area but most of the areas where CAGN was observed had 60 to 90 percent vegetation cover by native species. A map of known CAGN occurrences on the landfill property is provided in Figure 5. Site-specific CAGN occurrences and observed habitat conditions are listed below:





• Basin C: Single CAGN were observed in this area during two of the nine surveys (October 12, 2015, and February 4, 2016). The first CAGN observation was of a single bird foraging along the western limits of the landfill within the survey area. The second observation was of a male that was first observed a little north of this area and flew toward the location of the first sighting and then off the landfill property. This area is composed of ruderal/nonnative grassland vegetation with a few patches of lower-quality CSS and a few small patches of better-quality CSS, ranging in native vegetation cover from 20 to 80 percent.

• Phase 1 Closure Area: This area has low-quality CSS habitat with approximately 50 percent cover by native species; mostly brittlebush (Encelia farinosa) and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), which is short in stature. A single CAGN was observed foraging in the vicinity of this area on December 21, 2015, and January 22, 2016.

• Screening Tree Landscaping: CAGN were observed here during three of the nine surveys (November 23 and December 7, 2015; and February 4, 2016). A pair of CAGN was observed during two of the three observations. The other observation was of a single individual. A single CAGN was previously observed during a site visit on September 24, 2015, before the protocol surveys at the western end of this area, which has lower quality habitat. The eastern part of the slopes has the better-quality CSS, but still is not considered highly suitable habitat for CAGN because it comprises mostly brittle bush and California buckwheat that normally are not the prime habitat components for the CAGN.

• Winch Concrete Pad – Basin A: California buckwheat, with 50–60 percent cover, is present on this site (west of the spillway). This site was added to the list of proposed Projects after protocol surveys took place. The Applicant proposes to include this small area (0.08 acres) to be covered under this HCP due to CAGN records in the general Project vicinity.





POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS/TAKE ASSESSMENT

The proposed Projects would result in permanent, direct impacts to approximately 5.78 acres of CSS habitat considered to be occupied by the CAGN and 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may be used by CAGN for foraging and/or dispersal. Such impacts would occur as a result of vegetation removal, grading, and construction activities on the proposed Project sites. Up to two (2) known CAGN territories would be impacted by the proposed Projects, although neither territory would be entirely affected as additional CSS and other foraging/dispersal habitats currently exist adjacent to each proposed impact area. Such impacts to the CAGN would be categorized as a loss of habitat that the species uses for breeding, foraging, or sheltering, resulting in the incidental take of two (2) CAGN pairs located within the Project sites. In the absence of the proposed Projects, it is not expected that the CSS habitats would expand over time due to ongoing human disturbances associated with landfill operations. Minor disturbance of CAGN may occur during restoration activities at the offsite location, but this disturbance is not anticipated to rise to the level of take. A summary of proposed impacts broken down by vegetation type1 is presented in Table 1. Table 1: Summary of Proposed Impacts by Vegetation Type

Vegetation Type

Proposed Impact Area (Acres)

Basin C

Phase 1 Closure

Area

Screening Tree Landscaping

Winch Concrete Pad

- Basin A

Total (Acres)

Coastal Sage Scrub 3.17 0.07 2.46 0.08 5.78 Disturbed/Developed 2.96 0.14 0.82

3.93

Ruderal/Nonnative Grassland 2.43 0.05 0.37

2.85

Total (Acres) 8.57 0.25 3.66 0.08 12.56 A total of 5.09 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat in Unit 9 lies within the Project sites; of these 5.09 acres, 2.95 acres exist as CSS habitat and 1.78 acres exist as ruderal/nonnative grassland that may provide habitat for dispersal, foraging, and nesting. The 2.95 acres of CSS occur within the proposed Basin C and new winch concrete pad areas, while the 1.78 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland exists entirely within the proposed Basin C area. The remaining 0.34 acres of designated CAGN Critical Habitat within the Project sites consists of disturbed/developed areas. The proposed Projects will eliminate habitat onsite that contains the physical and biological features necessary for normal behavior, breeding, reproduction, nesting, dispersal, and foraging of CAGN. Unit 9 contains approximately 17,552 acres of CAGN critical habitat; thus, the impact to critical habitat represents less than 0.1 percent of Unit 9.

1 Vegetation classifications from Methods Used to Survey the Vegetation of Orange County Parks and Open

Space Areas and The Irvine Company Property, Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. February 10, 1993.





This HCP includes measures to mitigate impacts to the CAGN through 11.56 acres of CSS habitat restoration and long-term management to be implemented by the Habitat Authority and financed by the Applicant. All 11.56 acres of proposed CSS habitat restoration are within designated CAGN Critical Habitat in Unit 9 and currently exist as ruderal/nonnative grassland. Therefore, the implementation of this HCP is anticipated to increase the functionality of the critical habitat in Unit 9 with respect to its stated purpose of supporting a core population of CAGN and maintaining connectivity between significant CAGN populations and CSS habitat within the Orange County Central Coastal NCCP (Unit 6), the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Unit 10), and the Bonelli Regional Park population within East Los Angeles (Unit 12). With implementation of this HCP, impacts to the CAGN would be mitigated to the maximum extent practicable.





CONSERVATION STRATEGY

This HCP’s overall conservation strategy for the CAGN is to allow impacts to approximately 12.56 acres of land within the permit area, including 5.78 acres of scrub habitat and 6.78 acres of disturbed/developed land and ruderal/nonnative grassland with relatively low long-term conservation value (due to the proximity to ongoing disturbances and no current or long-term protection) at the Project sites, in exchange for 11.56 acres of CSS habitat restoration and long-term management to be implemented by the Habitat Authority and financed by the Applicant. The preservation and long-term management and monitoring of CSS within the Puente Hills Preserve would provide higher long-term conservation value for the CAGN compared to existing habitat on the Project sites. The Habitat Authority is dedicated to the acquisition, restoration, and management of open space in the Puente Hills Preserve for preservation of the land in perpetuity, with the primary purpose of protecting biological diversity. BIOLOGICAL GOAL The long-term goal of this HCP is to preserve, manage, and monitor CAGN habitat greater in area and superior in ecological function to that presently existing on the Project sites and to improve the potential for sustaining this habitat in the Puente Hills Preserve in perpetuity. The Project sites contain habitats that are largely disturbed and isolated, providing little long-term conservation value. In contrast, the nearly 4,000-acre Puente Hills Preserve provides habitat that is managed specifically for plant and animal species dependent upon these habitat types. The Habitat Authority’s Resource Management Plan (Habitat Authority 2007) has specific management requirements for the CAGN and an adaptive management component. The financial arrangement with the Habitat Authority will include an endowment for site-specific long-term management and third party oversight of a site-specific conservation easement (CE) for the proposed restoration site. CONSERVATION MEASURES Actions to Avoid and Minimize Impacts To ensure that no take occurs beyond the limits of the Approved Projects, the following measures will be implemented by the Applicant: 1. Prior to the initiation of work activities on the Project sites, grading limits will be clearly

delineated with flagging and/or temporary fencing and silt fencing, as necessary, to help guide work activities and avoid impacts to areas beyond the project boundaries;

2. The project sites will be kept as clean as possible to avoid attracting predators. All food-related trash will be placed in sealed bins or removed from the site regularly;

3. The staging areas for each project will be limited to developed or previously disturbed areas;





4. Prior to the initiation of work activities on the Project sites, a Service-approved biologist1 will conduct a brief training session for all Project personnel regarding the conservation measures and regulations described herein, as well as general information and methods that will help avoid and minimize disturbance to the CAGN in the vicinity of Project activities;

5. A Service-approved biologist will monitor grading of the site daily (or as determined necessary by the monitoring biologist) and provide a letter summarizing compliance with this HCP and the construction limits of the proposed Projects to the Service within 1 month of completion of grading; and

6. Vegetation clearing will take place outside of the bird nesting season (February 15 through August 31) to the fullest extent practicable. Clearing may only occur during this period once a Service-approved biologist has conducted at least 3 surveys of the impact areas for nesting birds, with each survey taking place 1 week apart and the last survey conducted within 24 hours prior to clearing. The qualified biologist will document compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and other applicable regulations that protect nesting birds. If an active bird nest is observed, a 300-foot buffer shall be established wherein no project activities will occur until the nest is no longer active. A reduced buffer may be established by the monitoring biologist if it is deemed appropriate and will not result in the alteration of nesting behaviors. To fulfill this measure, all Project activities that are deemed necessary to occur during the bird nesting season will be monitored by the qualified biologist, as well as any active nest detected in the vicinity of Project activities.

Actions to Mitigate Impacts To mitigate the Projects’ impacts to approximately 5.78 acres of CSS occupied by the CAGN and 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may support CAGN foraging and/or dispersal, including 2.95 acres of CSS and 1.78 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland within designated Critical Habitat, the Applicant will finance 11.56 acres of CSS habitat restoration and long-term management to be implemented by the Habitat Authority. All 11.56 acres of proposed CSS habitat restoration are within designated CAGN Critical Habitat and currently exist as ruderal/nonnative grassland. A Habitat Restoration Plan (HRP) will be completed by LSA and approved by the Habitat Authority and the Service prior to vegetation removal or grading on the Project sites. The specific location of the restoration area is being selected from land managed by the Habitat Authority (Figure 4), in accordance with the Habitat Authority’s Resource Management Plan (Habitat Authority 2007). Funding for the restoration project will include provisions for the long-term management of the restoration area by the Habitat Authority, as well as a Conservation Easement (CE) and endowment for monitoring the CE by an acceptable third party. The funding of the endowment for long-term management and monitoring of the CE will be determined using a methodology reviewed and approved by the Service.

1 A Service-approved biologist must be able to identify CAGN both visually and vocally and will be familiar

with the habitats that support these species. To receive such approval, the project biologist must submit his or her resume and references to the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office for review and approval at least 10 days prior to initiation of project-related activities.





PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING The Applicant will institute a monitoring and reporting program to ensure that this HCP is properly implemented. As part of that program, the Applicant will provide the Service with an HCP Compliance Report, on an annual basis for the life of the permit, describing the activities that have occurred pursuant to take authorizations and an assessment of the status of this HCP until the Projects have been completed. The information included in the annual reports will be used by the Service to evaluate the Applicant’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this HCP and the Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit. The annual HCP Compliance Report will include a monitoring report of any construction activities on site; the occurrence, if any, of changed or unforeseen circumstances; and the methods used to address such circumstances. The annual reports will be submitted to the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (CFWO) by December l (or the first business day after that date if it falls on a weekend or holiday). Following submittal of the HCP Compliance Report and once grading of the proposed Project sites is complete, no additional HCP Compliance Reports shall be required; however, the Habitat Authority will provide documentation on annual basis regarding the status of the 11.56-acre off-site CSS habitat restoration in accordance with the HRP. CHANGED AND UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES Changed Circumstances “Changed circumstances” are defined as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan that can reasonably be anticipated by plan developers and the Service and that can be planned for (e.g., the listing of a new species, or a fire or other natural catastrophic event in areas prone to such events). In the event of a new listing of one or more species not covered by this HCP during the life of the Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit or the designation of critical habitat for a listed species, the Service and the Applicant will identify actions that might cause jeopardy to, take of, or adverse modification of the designated critical habitat of such listed species, and the Applicant will avoid such actions in the implementation of Covered Activities until approval of an amendment to this HCP to address the newly listed species, or until such measures are no longer required. Unforeseen Circumstances “Unforeseen circumstances” are defined in the Department of the Interior’s Habitat Conservation Plan Assurances (“No Surprises”) Final Rule, issued February 23, 1998 (Federal Register Vol. 63, Page 8,869) as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan that could not reasonably have been anticipated by the plan developer or the Service at the time of the plan’s negotiation and development and that result in a substantial and





adverse change in the status of a covered species. Pursuant to the provisions of the No Surprises Rule, the Service may impose additional mitigation or other measures on the Applicant without consent only to the extent allowed by and in conformance with the No Surprises Rule currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 50, Part 17.22(b)(5). Pursuant to the No Surprises Rule at 50 CFR 17.22(b)(5)(iii)(C), the Service has the burden of demonstrating that unforeseen circumstances exist, using the best scientific and commercial data available. The findings must be clearly documented and based on reliable technical information regarding the status and habitat requirements of the CAGN. The Service will consider, but not be limited to, the following factors: • The size of the current range of the CAGN;

• The percentage of the CAGN range adversely affected by this HCP;

• The percentage of the CAGN range that has been conserved by this HCP;

• The ecological significance of that portion of the CAGN range affected by this HCP;

• The level of knowledge about the CAGN and the degree of specificity of the CAGN conservation program under this HCP; and

• Whether failure to adopt additional conservation measures would appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the CAGN in the wild.

If the Service or the Applicant becomes aware of the existence of a potential unforeseen circumstance, each shall immediately notify the other of the existence of a potential unforeseen circumstance. Except where there is a substantial threat of imminent, significant, adverse impacts to the CAGN, the Service will provide the Applicant a 30-calendar-day notice of a proposed written finding of unforeseen circumstances prior to adopting the finding, during which time the Service will meet with the Applicant to discuss the proposed finding; provide the Applicant with an opportunity to submit information to rebut or propose amendments to the proposed finding; and consider any proposed changes to the conservation strategies for the Habitat Authority and this HCP’s operating conservation program. Notwithstanding the limits on conservation and mitigation measures identified above, the permit for this HCP may be revoked if the Service determines that continuation of the Covered Activities would be inconsistent with the criterion set forth in United States Code Title 16, Section 1539(a)(2)(B)(iv) (see also 50 CFR 17.22[b][8]). Nothing in this HCP shall preclude the Service or any federal, State, local, or tribal government agency, or a private entity, from taking additional actions at their own expense to protect or conserve the CAGN. The existence of unforeseen circumstances does not authorize the Service to violate any federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, regulations, or policies. AMENDMENTS Minor Amendments Any party may propose minor modifications to this HCP by providing notice to the other party. Such notice will include a statement of the reason for the proposed modification and an analysis of its environmental effects, including its effects on operations under the HCP and on covered species.





Minor amendments are permissible without amending the underlying Section 10 (a)(l)(B) permit, provided that the Service determines the changes do not (1) cause additional take of CAGN that was not analyzed in connection with the original HCP, (2) result in operations under the HCP that are significantly different from those analyzed in connection with the original HCP, or (3) have adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those analyzed in connection with the original HCP. Minor amendments to this HCP may include corrections of typographic, grammatical, and similar editing errors that do not change the intended meaning, or corrections to any maps or exhibits to fix errors in mapping or to reflect previously approved changes in the permit or HCP. All minor amendments proposed by the permit holder to this HCP will be submitted to the Service in writing. Major Amendments Amendments to the HCP that do not fit the definition of a minor amendment will be processed as formal amendments to the permit in accordance with all applicable legal requirements, including but not limited to the Act, NEPA, and the Service’s permit regulations, including provisions for public review and comment. PERMIT RENEWAL OR EXTENSION The permit may be renewed or extended with the approval of the Service. The request to renew or extend the permit must be submitted in writing by the permit holder and must reference the permit number, certify that all statements and information in the original application are still correct or include a list of changes, and provide specific information concerning what take has occurred under the existing permit and what portions of the Project are still to be completed. The request must be made to the Service’s CFWO at least 30 days prior to the permit’s expiration date. As long as the request is received within 30 days prior to the permit’s expiration date, the permit shall remain valid while the renewal or extension is being processed. The renewal or extension may be approved in writing by the CFWO Field Supervisor. Changes to the HCP that would qualify as a formal amendment will be handled in accordance with the “Amendments” Section of this HCP. PERMIT TRANSFER The permit may only be transferred consistent with 50 CFR 13.25, which requires that (1) the permit holder and proposed transferee apply for a permit transfer through the submission of an assumption agreement between the two parties; (2) the proposed transferee meets all the qualifications for holding a permit; (3) the transferee provides written assurances that it can meet the financial obligations and will implement the terms and conditions of the permit, including any outstanding mitigation requirements; and (4) the transferee provides any additional information the Service deems necessary. After the permit expires, any “take” within the permitted geographical boundaries would require reauthorization.





PERMIT SUSPENSION The Service may suspend or revoke its permit if the Applicant fails to implement the HCP in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit or if suspension or revocation is otherwise required by law. Suspension or revocation of the Section 10(a)(l)(B) permit, in whole or in part, by the Service shall be in accordance with 50 CFR 13.27–29, l7.32(b)(8). OTHER MEASURES Section 10(a)(2)(A)(iv) of the Act states that an HCP must specify other measures that the Service may require as being necessary or appropriate for the purposes of the plan. The Applicant has discussed the proposed elements of this HCP with the Service, and no such additional elements have been identified. Therefore, no additional required measures have been identified for the Projects by the Service.





FUNDING

The Applicant, OC Waste & Recycling, will pay for all costs associated with implementing this HCP. Prior to vegetation removal and/or grading, a receipt from the Habitat Authority will be provided to the CFWO demonstrating that the habitat compensation has been funded, including funding to conduct the proposed restoration and establishing an endowment for long-term management of the restoration site and monitoring of the CE. The Applicant commits to fully fund implementation of this HCP. In the event of material change in the financial position of the Applicant that is likely to impair its ability to fund this HCP, the Applicant will promptly notify the Service and meet with the Service to identify alternative means to carry out its obligations under this HCP. The Applicant acknowledges that failure to provide adequate funding and consequent failure to implement the terms of this HCP in full could result in temporary permit suspension or permit revocation. Funding the mitigation prior to Project-related impacts to CAGN habitat will ensure that the applicant has sufficient funding to implement the HCP.





ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTIONS CONSIDERED

The site plan for the proposed Projects, as described above, is the only site plan that is considered feasible to the Applicant. The feasibility is based on three main factors, including (1) site-specific regulatory requirements, (2) the ability to mitigate for potential impacts to the CAGN and its habitat to the fullest extent practicable, and (3) the geologic and topographic conditions of the landfill property. As such, the Phase 1 Closure Area, Screening Tree Landscaping and Winch Concrete Pad – Basin A Projects can meet Applicant needs and regulatory requirements only by being constructed in the proposed locations with the proposed design features. While the Basin C Project could potentially occur on other sites within the landfill property boundaries, it is neither economically feasible nor ecologically desirable to implement this project on another site due to habitat impacts and topography. Below is a description of the reasoning behind each project, the alternatives considered (if applicable), and why each proposed location and design is considered to be the most feasible. • Basin C. Industrial General Permit discharge limits were lowered in 2015. Meeting those new

limits requires significant Best Management Practices. Basin C is proposed to be constructed in order to control the levels of sediment in the discharge. Several locations were considered prior to deciding on the proposed location. The size of the basin will require impacts to native vegetation and adequate elevation change in order to function optimally, which substantially restricts the feasibility of other sites. The proposed placement on the west side of the landfill property was the only site that met these requirements while minimizing impacts to CSS habitat (3.17 acres).

• Phase 1 Closure Area. During Phase I closure construction, unanticipated waste was discovered beyond the assumed waste boundary in an area where CSS has become established. RCRA Subtitle D requires that all waste areas be capped with low-permeability material upon closure. Due to the presence of CSS habitat (0.07 acres), the area in question was not previously capped during Phase I and there are no alternatives to this project.

• Screening Tree Landscaping. The Applicant is required to install trees on the slopes below the Brea Power Plant to screen the plant from the residents of the City of Brea, as specified by the facility’s Mitigated Negative Declaration aesthetics mitigation measures. This would impact approximately 2.46 acres of occupied CSS, and there are no feasible alternatives to this project.

• Winch Concrete Pad – Basin A. The existing winches at Basin A control the skimmers and water discharge rates. The skimmers are raised before a storm and surface runoff is captured and detained in the basin until the maximum sediment is settled out in order to meet discharge limits. The skimmers are then lowered to discharge the basin when water quality goals are met. A concrete pad needs to be poured on the south edge of Basin A to allow all-weather access to the winch area. A safety rail is also required to prevent the winch operators and equipment from falling into the basin. A total of 0.08 acres of CSS in this area would be impacted by this project, and there are no feasible alternatives.





No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, no construction would occur and no application for incidental take would be processed. Because this alternative would result in no further construction on the Project sites, marginal CAGN habitat would continue to exist on the site; however, no additional CAGN conservation would be provided. Newly required water quality measures provided by the Basin C Project would not occur, the required cap of the frontal slope of the landfill would not be fulfilled by the Phase 1 Closure Area Project, the Applicant would not meet its obligation to screen the Brea Power Plant from the residents of the City of Brea, and all-weather access to the winch area at Basin A would not be provided. Thus, the No Action Alternative is not considered to be feasible and would result in various regulatory violations by the Applicant.





REFERENCES

GeoCommunity. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Spacial/Tabular. California, United States. Website: http://data.geocomm.com/catalog/US/61069/group201.html. Accessed April 2016.

Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1993. Methods used to survey the vegetation of Orange County parks

and open space areas and The Irvine Company property. February 10, 1993. (JSA 92-032.) Sacramento, CA. Prepared for County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, Environmental Planning Division, Santa Ana, CA.

LSA Associates, Inc. 2016. Coastal California Gnatcatcher Protocol Survey Results: October 12,

2015 to February 4, 2016, Olinda Landfill, County of Orange, California. Unpublished report prepared for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office.

Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority. 2007. Resource Management Plan. Website:

http://www.habitatauthority.org/resource-management-plan/. July. Accessed April 2016. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). 1996. Habitat Conservation Planning and Incidental Take Permit Processing Handbook. Washington, D.C. November 4. Website: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/laws/hcp_handbook.pdf. Accessed April 2016.

http://data.geocomm.com/catalog/US/61069/group201.html.%20Accessed%20April%202016




P:\GEO1401D\HCP\Olinda LEHCP_20170615.docx «06/15/17»

APPENDIX A

FIGURES

Landfill Property

LEGENDProject Location

SanBernardino

County

RiversideCounty

OrangeCounty

Los AngelesCounty

ÃÃ142

ÃÃ19

ÃÃ261

ÃÃ72

ÃÃ90

ÃÃ241

ÃÃ55

ÃÃ22

ÃÃ39

ÃÃ71

ÃÃ91

ÃÃ60

ÃÃ57§̈¦105

§̈¦15

ProjectLocation

§̈¦405

§̈¦210

§̈¦5

§̈¦605

§̈¦605

§̈¦10

SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Yorba Linda (1981), CAI:\GEO1401D\GIS\ProjectLocation_USGS.mxd (5/26/2016)

FIGURE 1

Olinda Alpha Landfill ProjectsProject Location

Project Vicinity

0 1000 2000FEET

Winch Pad - Basin ASee Inset Map A

Phase 1Cover Area

See InsetMap C

Basin CSee Inset

Map B

Screening TreeLandscaping

LEGENDLandfill LimitsProposed Impacts

CSS Coverage20%30%40%50%

60%70%80%90%

Disturbed/DevelopedRuderal/Nonnative Grassland

Inset Map C - Phase 1 Cover Area &Screening Tree Landscaping

Inset Map B - Basin C

Inset Map A - Winch Pad - Basin A

SOURCE: ESRI (2014); OCWR (2016); USFWS (2016)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\ProjectLocation_Details.mxd (4/17/2017)

FIGURE 2

Olinda Alpha Landfill ProjectsProject Site Details

0 375 750FEET

Service Layer Credits: Image courtesy ofLAR-IAC © 2017 Microsoft Corporation

SOURCE: Bing Maps (2014); Puente Hills Habitat Authority (2/2017)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\HRP_OffsiteMitigation_OlindaLandfill.mxd (3/2/2017)

FIGURE 3

Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects Off-Site CSS Restoration Area

LEGENDFuel Modification Zone

Proposed Restoration Area (19.86 acres Total)8.30-acre Restoration Site11.56-acre Restoration Site0 90 180

FEET

SOURCE: ESRI (2014); OCWR (2016); USFWS (2016)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\CAGN_CriticalHabitat.mxd (5/26/2016)

FIGURE 4

Olinda Alpha Landfill ProjectsCritical Habitat for the California Gnatcatcher

LEGENDLandfill LimitsCalifornia Gnatcatcher Critical Habitat

0 0.5 1MILES

GFGF GFGF

GFGF

GFGF

GFGF

GF

GF

GFGF

Winch Pad - Basin ASee Inset Map A

Phase 1Cover Area

See InsetMap C

Basin CSee Inset

Map B

Screening TreeLandscaping

LEGENDLandfill LimitsProposed Impacts

GF Coastal California Gnatcatcher Location


60%70%80%90%

Disturbed/DevelopedRuderal/Nonnative Grassland

GFGF GFGF

GF

GF

GFGF

Inset Map C - Phase 1 Cover Area &Screening Tree Landscaping

GF

GF

GF

GF

Inset Map B - Basin C

Inset Map A - Winch Pad - Basin A

SOURCE: ESRI (2014); OCWR (2016)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\CAGN_Locations.mxd (4/7/2017)

FIGURE 5

Olinda Alpha Landfill ProjectsKnown CAGN Occurances

0 375 750FEET





APPENDIX B

GNATCATCHER SURVEY REPORT

5/13/16 «P:\GEO1401B\2016-5-13 CAGN Report.docx»

P L A N N I N G | E N V I R O N M E N T A L S C I E N C E S | D E S I G N

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . 2 0 E X E C U T I V E P A R K , S U I T E 2 0 0 I R V I N E , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 6 1 4

9 4 9 . 5 5 3 . 0 6 6 6 T E L 9 4 9 . 5 5 3 . 8 0 7 6 F A X

B E R K E L E Y C A R L S B A D

F R E S N O P A L M S P R I N G S P T . R I C H M O N D

R I V E R S I D E R O C K L I N S A N L U I S O B I S P O

May 13, 2016 Stacey Love United States Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Field Office 2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008

Esther Burkett Nongame Wildlife Program California Department of Fish and Game 1812 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95811

Subject: Coastal California Gnatcatcher Protocol Survey Results: October 12, 2015 to February 4, 2016, Olinda Landfill, County of Orange, California

Dear Ms. Love and Ms. Burkett: This letter report documents the results of coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) protocol surveys conducted by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) for OC Waste & Recycling in the County of Orange, California. OC Waste & Recycling proposes to relocate an existing soil stockpile, install trees to screen the Brea Power Plant, construct a new basin (Basin C), and perform a partial closure on the front slope of the landfill (Figures 1 and 2; all figures attached). The study area totals approximately 165 acres and includes a large portion of the front slope of the landfill and some of the slopes along the top of the landfill. The surveys were performed in areas that have some existing coastal sage scrub (CSS) habitat that may be suitable for gnatcatchers. Coastal California gnatcatchers were detected at three locations within the survey areas during seven of the nine protocol surveys (Figure 2). SURVEY AREA Geographically, the survey areas are located at the end of Valencia Avenue in Section 5, Township 3 South, Range 9 West within the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Yorba Linda, California 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle (Figure 1). The survey areas are scattered across the front slope of the landfill and portions of the slopes along the top of the landfill, where there are patches of existing CSS vegetation. The survey areas range from 600 feet to 1,300 feet above mean sea level. Most of the vegetation within the proposed impact area is nonnative ruderal vegetation with areas of CSS in varying sizes and quality (Figure 2). The dominant species within the CSS patches is brittlebush (Encelia farinosa) and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). There are approximately 9.14 acres of CSS within the proposed impact areas, and approximately 18.60 acres of CSS were surveyed within and along the edges of the site on landfill property. Some of this CSS was planted for erosion control within the landfill. METHODS During each survey, LSA biologists walked slowly throughout the portions of the survey areas that support potential suitable habitat for California gnatcatchers. A recording of a coastal California gnatcatcher was played during each survey. A total of nine gnatcatcher surveys were conducted between October 12, 2015, and February 4, 2016 (see the table below for details). One survey was conducted around Brea Power Plant II on a day when the plant was not in operation. That survey was beneficial in that the noise that is typically produced by the power plant was absent that day. LSA biologists conformed to protocol techniques for all surveys.

5/13/16 «P:\GEO1401B\2016-5-13 CAGN Report.docx» 2

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C .

Survey Conditions

Survey Date Time Weather Conditions Surveyor 1 October 12, 2015 0700–1100 Clear, 75.7°F, wind 3.7 mph EK 2 October 26, 2015 0700–1130 Clear, 72.7°F, wind 0 mph EK 3 November 9, 2015 0720–1115 Mostly cloudy, 61.5°F, wind 4.5 mph EK 4 November 23, 2015 0700–1130 Clear, 66.5°F, wind 1.1 mph EK 5 December 7, 2015 0730–1100 Mostly clear, 67.5°F, wind 1.4 mph EK 6 December 21, 2015 0730–1100 Mostly clear, 52.5°F, wind 2.1 mph EK 7 January 7, 2016 0700–1030 Clear, 48.7°F, 2.0 mph EK 8 January 22, 2016 0750–1215 Partly cloudy, cool, light wind RE, LR 9 February 4, 2016 0745–1145 Partly cloudy, cool-mild, light-moderate wind RE, LR

Surveyor: EK = Eric Krieg, RE = Richard Erickson, LR = Lonnie Rodriguez °F = degree Fahrenheit mph = miles per hour A presurvey notification letter dated September 25, 2015, was sent to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Permitted biologist Eric Krieg and Richard Erickson conducted a protocol survey every other week for a total of 9 surveys. Mr. Krieg and Mr. Erickson conducted surveys pursuant to LSA’s Federal Fish and Wildlife 10(a)(1)(A) Permit TE-777965 (March 22, 2013–March 21, 2017) and a CDFW attachment to Scientific Collecting Permit SC-000777 providing Conditions for Research on Listed Birds (November 29, 2012–January 31, 2017). Lonnie Rodriguez assisted on two of the surveys under the direct supervision of Mr. Erickson, to gain experience toward being permitted for protocol surveys. RESULTS California gnatcatchers were detected at three locations in the proposed survey area during seven of the nine focused gnatcatcher surveys (Figure 2). The first gnatcatcher observation (October 12, 2015) was of a single bird foraging along the western limits of the landfill within the survey area. A second observation in this area was made on February 4, 2016, during the last survey. The gnatcatcher was a male that was first observed a little north of this area and flew toward the location of the first sighting and then off the landfill property. This area is quite weedy with a few patches of low quality CSS and a few small patches of better quality CSS. The second location where a gnatcatcher was observed (October 26, 2015) is along the northern end of the site in low quality scrub; it was the only observation in this area. The third location gnatcatchers were detected was on the slopes near the Brea Power Plant. Gnatcatchers were observed here during five of the nine surveys (November 23, December 7, and December 21, 2015, and January 22 and February 4, 2016). Three of the five observations were of a pair of gnatcatchers, and the other two observations were of a single individual. Of the three areas with gnatcatchers, this area has the better quality CSS, but it still is not ideal for gnatcatchers as it comprises mostly brittle bush and California buckwheat that normally are not the prime habitat components for the gnatcatcher. The quality of the scrub does vary throughout this area but most of the areas where gnatcatchers were observed had 60 to 90 percent vegetation cover by native species. Most of the habitat within the survey areas is not considered prime habitat for the gnatcatcher. In the fall of 2008 there was a large fire (Freeway Complex Fire), which burned some of the existing vegetation on the landfill, including portions of the survey area. After the fire in 2008, it appears that at least a portion of

5/13/16 «P:\GEO1401B\2016-5-13 CAGN Report.docx» 3

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C .

the native habitat in the area is recovering and creating better CSS habitat for the gnatcatcher. Some of this CSS vegetation is on landfill property, though most of it is not. There is also some chaparral vegetation outside of the survey area that is starting to recover from the fire. Brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), a brood parasite of gnatcatchers and other passerines, was not observed during the surveys. A complete list of animals detected during the surveys is included in Appendix A. OC Waste & Recycling will work with both the USFWS and the CDFW to pursue any required permitting and propose compensatory mitigation that is acceptable to the agencies. The attached letter describes the proposed impacts to CSS and the approach OC Waste & Recycling proposes to mitigate for the impacts to unoccupied CSS and occupied CSS, with coordination and approval from the CDFW and the USFWS before any impacts occur. Please contact Eric Krieg at (949) 553-0666 if you have any questions about these survey results. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Eric Krieg Associate TE-777965-10 Attachments: Figure 1: Project Location Map Figure 2: Survey Area Map Appendix A: Animal Species Detected cc: John Powers, OC Waste & Recycling John Arnau, OC Waste & Recycling I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS SURVEY REPORT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS FULLY AND ACCURATELY REPRESENTS MY WORK:

SURVEYOR PERMIT NUMBER DATE TE-777965-10 May 13, 2016 Eric Krieg TE-777965-10 May 13, 2016 Richard Erickson TE-777965-10 May 13, 2016 Lonnie Rodriguez

Project Location

LEGENDProject Location

SanBernardino

County

RiversideCounty

OrangeCounty

Los AngelesCounty

ÃÃ142

ÃÃ19

ÃÃ261

ÃÃ72

ÃÃ90

ÃÃ241

ÃÃ55

ÃÃ22

ÃÃ39

ÃÃ71

ÃÃ91

ÃÃ60

ÃÃ57§̈¦105

§̈¦15

§̈¦405

§̈¦210

§̈¦5

§̈¦605

§̈¦605

§̈¦10

ProjectLocation

SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Yorba Linda (1981), CAI:\GEO1401B\GIS\ProjectLocation_USGS.mxd (5/5/2016)

FIGURE 1

Olinda Alpha LandfillCoastal California Gnatcatcher Survey

Project Location

Project Vicinity

0 1000 2000FEET

1 Gnatcatcher(10/12/15)

1 Gnatcatcherflew to this

area (2/4/16)

Burrowing Owl(12/7/16)


1 Gnatcatcher(Pre-Survey9/24/15)

1 Gnatcatcher(1/22/16)1 Gnatcatcher(1/22/16)


Gnatcatcher Pair(2/4/16)

Gnatcatcher Pair(12/7/15)

1 GnatcatcherMale (2/4/16)

GnatcatcherPair (10/26/15)

LEGENDLandfill LimitsSurvey AreaCalifornia GnatcatcherBurrowing Owl


60%70%80%90%

SOURCE: ESRI (2014); OCWR (2016)I:\GEO1401B\GIS\Bio_SurveyAreas.mxd (5/5/2016)

FIGURE 2

Olinda Alpha LandfillCoastal California Gnatcatcher Survey

Coastal Sage Scrub0 375 750FEET

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . M A Y 2 0 1 6

A P P E N D I X A C O A S T A L C A L I F O R N I A G N A T C A T C H E R P R O T O C O L S U R V E Y R E S U L T S

O L I N D A L A N D F I L L , C O U N T Y O F O R A N G E , C A L I F O R N I A

P:\GEO1401B\2016-5-13 CAGN Report.docx «05/13/16» A-1

APPENDIX A

ANIMAL SPECIES DETECTED

This is a list of the conspicuous aerial insects (i.e., damselflies, dragonflies, and butterflies), bony fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals noted in the study area by LSA biologists. Presence may be noted if a species is seen or heard, or identified by the presence of tracks, scat, or other signs. * Species not native to the study area LEPIDOPTERA BUTTERFLIES Pieridae Whites and Sulphurs Anthocharis sara Sara orangetip REPTILIA REPTILES Phrynosomatidae Phrynosomatid Lizards Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard AVES BIRDS Odontophoridae New World Quail Callipepla californica California quail Cathartidae New World Vultures Cathartes aura Turkey vulture Accipitridae Hawks, Kites, Eagles, and Allies Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Laridae Gulls, Terns, and Skimmers Larus californicus California gull Larus glaucescens Glaucous-winged gull Columbidae Pigeons and Doves * Columba livia Rock pigeon Zenaida macroura Mourning dove





Cuculidae Cuckoos, Roadrunners, and Anis Geococcyx californianus Greater roadrunner Strigidae Typical Owls Athene cunicularia Burrowing owl Apodidae Swifts Aeronautes saxatilis White-throated swift Trochilidae Hummingbirds Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Picidae Woodpeckers and Allies Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Falconidae Caracaras and Falcons Falco sparverius American kestrel Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird Corvidae Crows and Jays Aphelocoma californica Western scrub-jay Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Corvus corax Common raven Alaudidae Larks Eremophila alpestris Horned lark Aegithalidae Long-Tailed Tits and Bushtits Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit Troglodytidae Wrens Salpinctes obsoletus Rock wren Troglodytes aedon House wren Thryomanes bewickii Bewick’s wren Polioptilidae Gnatcatchers and Gnatwrens Polioptila caerulea Blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica Coastal California gnatcatcher Sylviidae Sylviid Warblers Chamaea fasciata Wrentit Turdidae Thrushes Catharus guttatus Hermit thrush





Mimidae Mockingbirds and Thrashers Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird Sturnidae Starlings * Sturnus vulgaris European starling Parulidae Wood Warblers Setophaga coronata Yellow-rumped warbler Emberizidae Emberizids Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Melozone crissalis California towhee Chondestes grammacus Lark sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow Melospiza melodia Song sparrow Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln’s sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow Icteridae Blackbirds Sturnella neglecta Western meadowlark Fringillidae Fringilline and Cardueline Finches and

Allies Haemorhous mexicanus House finch MAMMALIA MAMMALS Sciuridae Squirrels, Chipmunks, and Marmots Spermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel Geomyidae Pocket Gophers Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher Cricetidae Hamsters, Voles, Lemmings, and New

World Rats and Mice Neotoma macrotis Big-eared woodrat Leporidae Rabbits and Hares Sylvilagus audubonii Audubon’s cottontail Canidae Foxes, Wolves, and Allies Canis latrans Coyote Cervidae Deer, Elk, and Allies Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer





Taxonomy and nomenclature are based primarily on the following: Butterflies: North American Butterfly Association (2001, NABA Checklist and English Names of North American Butterflies, Second Edition, North American Butterfly Association, Morristown, New Jersey, 2003 update in American Butterflies 11: 24-27; see http://www.naba.org/pubs/checklst.html). Amphibians and Reptiles: Crother, B.I. ed. (2012, Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, Sixth Edition. Herpetological Circular 39; https://ssarherps.org/publications/north-american-checklist/) for species taxonomy and nomenclature; Stebbins, R.C., and S.M. McGinnis (2012, Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California, Revised Edition, University of California Press, Berkeley) for sequence and higher order taxonomy. Birds: American Ornithologists’ Union (1998, The A.O.U. Checklist of North American Birds, Seventh Edition, American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.; and supplements; see http://checklist.aou.org/taxa). Mammals: Wilson, D.E., and D.M. Reeder, eds. (2005, Mammal Species of the World, Third Edition, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland; see http://vertebrates.si.edu/msw/mswcfapp/msw/index.cfm).





APPENDIX C

HABITAT RESTORATION PLAN

August 2017

H A B I T A T R E S T O R A T I O N P L A N

OLINDA ALPHA LANDFILL PROJECTS

OFF-SITE COASTAL SAGE SCRUB RESTORATION

PUENTE HILLS PRESERVE

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

August 2017

H A B I T A T R E S T O R A T I O N P L A N

OLINDA ALPHA LANDFILL PROJECTS

OFF-SITE COASTAL SAGE SCRUB RESTORATION

PUENTE HILLS PRESERVE

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

Prepared for:

Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority 7702 Washington Avenue, Suite C

Whittier, California 90602 (562) 945-9003

Prepared by:

LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614-4731

(949) 553-0666

LSA Project No. GEO1401D

P:\GEO1401D\Restoration Plan\Habitat Restoration Plan_081117.docx «08/11/17» i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 SUPERVISION/RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................. 2

Restoration Ecologist ............................................................................................................ 3 Restoration Contractor .......................................................................................................... 3

SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................... 4 PROJECT SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................................ 4 INSPECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................... 6

Existing Vegetation .............................................................................................................. 6 Soil Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 6

SITE PREPARATION .......................................................................................................................... 7 Site Protection ...................................................................................................................... 7 Site Clearing ......................................................................................................................... 8 Temporary Irrigation System Installation ............................................................................. 8 Site Preparation Weed Control ............................................................................................. 9 Erosion Control .................................................................................................................. 13

MATERIALS ...................................................................................................................................... 14 Container Plants ................................................................................................................. 14 Seed .................................................................................................................................... 15 Endomycorrhizal Inoculum ................................................................................................ 16 Color-Coded Wire Pin Flags .............................................................................................. 17 Other Materials ................................................................................................................... 17

INSTALLATION METHODS ........................................................................................................... 17 Container Planting Method ................................................................................................. 17 Hydroseeding ...................................................................................................................... 18

MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................................................... 20 Irrigation ............................................................................................................................. 20 120-Day Establishment Period ........................................................................................... 21 Weed Control ..................................................................................................................... 21 Pest Control ........................................................................................................................ 24 Site Maintenance ................................................................................................................ 24 Pruning and Leaf Litter Removal ....................................................................................... 24 Fertilizer ............................................................................................................................. 24

REMEDIAL MEASURES .................................................................................................................. 24 Seeding and Plant Replacement ......................................................................................... 24

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ...................................................................................................... 25 MONITORING ................................................................................................................................... 26

Vegetation Sampling .......................................................................................................... 26 DOCUMENTATION ......................................................................................................................... 27

11.56-acre Restoration Site ................................................................................................. 27 8.30-acre Restoration Site ................................................................................................... 28

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 30

P:\GEO1401D\Restoration Plan\Habitat Restoration Plan_081117.docx «08/11/17» ii

TABLES

Table A: Overview of Compensatory Mitigation .................................................................................... 1 Table B: Coastal Sage Scrub Container Plants ..................................................................................... 14 Table C: Coastal Sage Scrub Hydroseed Mix ...................................................................................... 15 APPENDIX

A: FIGURES

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7

H A B I T A T R E S T O R A T I O N P L A N O L I N D A A L P H A L A N D F I L L P R O J E C T S O F F - S I T E C O A S T A L S A G E S C R U B R E S T O R A T I O N

P U E N T E H I L L S P R E S E R V E , C O U N T Y O F L O S A N G E L E S , C A L I F O R N I A

P:\GEO1401D\Restoration Plan\Habitat Restoration Plan_081117.docx «08/11/17» 1

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Habitat Restoration Plan (HRP) is to establish and describe guidelines for a Restoration Contractor to follow during the implementation of two coastal sage scrub (CSS) habitat restoration projects in the Puente Hills Preserve, County of Los Angeles, California. This off-site restoration is required as mitigation for impacts to CSS vegetation associated with (1) four proposed projects at the Olinda Alpha Landfill (landfill) in the City of Brea, California, which are covered under a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) prepared by LSA (LSA 2017) in consultation with and per the requirements of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and (2) various other projects at the landfill that are not covered under an HCP (for impacts to unoccupied CSS). This HRP is to be reviewed and approved by the Service prior to implementation of the HCP-required CSS restoration. The four proposed Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects covered under the HCP include installing trees to screen the Brea Power Plant, constructing a new desilting basin, pouring a new winch concrete pad, and performing a partial closure on the front slope of the landfill (Phase 1) in the City of Brea, County of Orange, California. In accordance with the HCP and to mitigate impacts to approximately 5.78 acres of CSS habitat considered occupied by the federally listed as threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; CAGN) as well as 2.85 acres of ruderal/nonnative grassland that may support CAGN foraging and/or dispersal, OC Waste & Recycling (OCWR) has financed 11.56 acres of off-site CSS habitat restoration to be carried out by a Service-approved Restoration Contractor and long-term management to be carried out by the Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority (Habitat Authority). Further information regarding these four landfill projects and their proposed impacts can be found in the project HCPs. The other landfill projects not associated with the HCP include moving an existing soil stockpile, relocating two methane gas migration probes, performing a partial closure on the front slope of the landfill (Phase 2), and other operational tasks performed in 2013 that resulted in impacts to unoccupied CSS habitat on the landfill property. Approximately 7.22 acres of impacts to CSS habitat are being mitigated at a 1:1 ratio per California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) recommendations. Approximately 0.54 acre of impacts to CSS habitat associated with the methane gas probe relocation project are being mitigated at a 2:1 ratio per agreement with the Service (Service 2016). In summary, to compensate for impacts to a total of approximately 7.76 acres of unoccupied CSS habitat on site, OC Waste & Recycling has financed 8.30 acres of off-site CSS habitat restoration and management to also be carried out by the Habitat Authority. An overview of all compensatory mitigation covered in this HRP is provided in Table A, below. Table A: Overview of Compensatory Mitigation

Landfill Impact CSS Impact Acreage Mitigation Ratio Resource Agency Restoration Acreage

Non-HCP Mitigation 7.22 1:1 CDFW 7.22 0.54 2:1 Service 1.08

HCP Mitigation 5.78 2:1 Service 11.56 Total 19.86

CSS = coastal sage scrub CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service = United States Fish and Wildlife Service HCP = Habitat Conservation Plan (LSA 2017)

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




The restoration area for both sets of landfill projects is located approximately 10 miles northwest of the Olinda Alpha Landfill in the Puente Hills Preserve (Figure 1, Project Location; all figures are provided in Appendix A). The overall goal of this HRP is to guide restoration work and provide specifications to assist with the successful establishment of CSS habitat for the conservation benefit of the CAGN and other native wildlife species that utilize such habitat. This HRP, prepared for and approved by the Habitat Authority, shall be used to guide the Restoration Contractor hired to install and maintain the restoration area. The following guidelines and specifications have been prepared in accordance with the Habitat Authority’s Resource Management Plan (RMP; LSA 2007), with specific attention given to the technical information contained in the Habitat Restoration Framework Plan (Appendix N of the RMP). As such, this HRP was prepared based on the tenets of Ecosystem Management, Adaptive Management, and the Ecological Successional Model. The Restoration Contractor is responsible for completing all work consistent with the goals and requirements set forth in this plan and the applicable portions of the HCP. Work activities will include delineating the restoration area, weed abatement, installing irrigation as deemed necessary to achieve performance standards, and planting and seeding the restoration site with native plant materials. Routine maintenance activities may include, but not be limited to, weed removal, herbivore exclusion, erosion control, seeding, and adjusting the irrigation, if necessary. SUPERVISION/RESPONSIBILITIES Successful implementation of the restoration program will require careful coordination between each of the parties involved with the restoration project (herein referred to as project). Each party is listed below with a brief description of their responsibilities:

Entity Responsibility OC Waste & Recycling Applicant for the Section 10(a)(l)(B) incidental take permit. Ultimately responsible for

the success of the HCP-associated restoration. Will finance restoration activities and long-term management to be implemented by the Habitat Authority.

Habitat Authority Responsible for the implementation of the restoration program. Will hire a Restoration Contractor and designate a Restoration Ecologist.

Restoration Ecologist Will oversee the installation and maintenance of the restoration area. Will be experienced in the restoration and monitoring of CSS habitats.

Restoration Contractor Implements Habitat Restoration Plan. Under the direction of the Restoration Ecologist, will install and maintain the restoration area according to the guidelines and specifications contained herein.

Service Pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), will issue conditions for project implementation for the HCP-associated restoration work. OC Waste & Recycling will be responsible for satisfying all conditions of the agreement.

CSS = coastal sage scrub ESA = Endangered Species Act Habitat Authority = Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority HCP = Habitat Conservation Plan Service = United States Fish and Wildlife Service

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




Restoration Ecologist The Habitat Authority will retain aqualified Restoration Ecologist to work under the direction of the Habitat Authority and will be responsible for actively monitoring the restoration area according to the guidelines set forth in this plan. The designated Restoration Ecologist shall be familiar with all aspects of habitat restoration. Duties will include overseeing and directing all aspects of work performed by the Restoration Contractor. In addition, the Restoration Ecologist will have the responsibility of documenting and reporting the progress of the restored plant community to the Habitat Authority and OCWR, as well as making recommendations to achieve the goals specified herein. The Restoration Ecologist may also prescribe remedial measures, if necessary. Restoration Contractor The Habitat Authority will retain a qualified Restoration Contractor to install and maintain the restoration area in order to achieve the performance standards specified herein within 5 years following the initiation of maintenance. If these performance standards are not met within that time frame, any maintenance, supplemental seeding, or other remedial measures necessary to achieve the performance standards shall continue until compliance is achieved. Any such measures beyond the 5-year period due to negligence shall be conducted at the Restoration Contractor’s cost and at no additional cost to the Habitat Authority/OCWR, including the costs for additional monitoring by the Restoration Ecologist. Both during and after the initial 5-year period, the Restoration Contractor shall be responsible for compensation for any additional time required of the Restoration Ecologist as a result of negligent work of the HRP, reasonably avoidable problems associated with executing the work specified herein, or unnecessary efforts (e.g., repeated missed appointments). Qualifications and Responsibilities of the Restoration Contractor. The Restoration Contractor responsible for implementing this plan shall have successfully completed (with Service acceptance) a minimum of three restoration projects (installation and maintenance) involving establishment of the same native plant community (CSS) in an area comparable in size to this project (19.86 acres total). The Restoration Contractor shall provide at least one English-speaking person who is experienced with all aspects of habitat restoration and thoroughly familiar with all aspects of the project, including equipment and materials being utilized or installed and the best methods for their installation and application. This person shall be present at all times during the execution of this work and shall direct and supervise all work performed as specified herein. The job foreman shall be on site as needed to ensure crews are aware of the maintenance tasks to be conducted in the appropriate timeframe and under any environmental restrictions. In addition, all workers present shall be familiar with and able to identify native and nonnative plants, as well as the CAGN. The Restoration Ecologist shall provide contractor education on plant species and CAGN identification, if necessary. All prospective Restoration Contractors shall provide qualifications of the foreman and crew leader, who must meet the above experience criteria, and are subject to approval if positions are replaced. Contractors who do not meet these qualifications will be disqualified from the bidding process.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




SCOPE OF WORK The Restoration Contractor shall furnish the labor and materials to execute this work as indicated below, and as necessary to complete the contract. This includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Site preparation, as specified herein.

• Installation of a temporary aboveground irrigation system and removal of this irrigation system once all performance standards have been met.

• Installation of 4,834 container plants (supplied by the Restoration Contractor) on 11.56 acres, as indicated below, and guarantee of 90 percent survival during the 120-day establishment period.

• Hydroseed 514.42 pounds of CSS seed mix (supplied by the Habitat Authority) and incorporate mycorrhizal fungi inoculum on 11.56 acres following container plant installation.

• Installation of 3,472 container plants (supplied by the Restoration Contractor) on 8.30 acres, as indicated below, and guarantee of 90 percent survival during the 120-day establishment period.

• Hydroseed 369.35 pounds of CSS seed mix (supplied by the Habitat Authority) and incorporate mycorrhizal fungi inoculum on 8.30 acres following container plant installation.

• Conduct maintenance on the site until the performance standards are achieved.

• Incorporate Adaptive Management techniques as specified by the Restoration Ecologist.

PROJECT SCHEDULE The restoration site boundaries depicted on Figure 2 were field-verified by LSA and the Habitat Authority on February 23, 2017. Third-party activity adjacent to the site includes Southern California Edison utility poles and lines and a 200-foot fuel modification zone for the residences located on Skyline Drive. Any necessary changes in the proposed restoration site boundaries depicted on Figure 2 will be approved by the Habitat Authority and the Service prior to the commencement of restoration activities on the site (e.g., native seed collection may commence prior to final site delineation). Prior to commencement of restoration activities, OCWR will hire at its expense a qualified assessor to perform a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (in accordance with the requirements and conditions set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E1527-13 entitled, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (Phase 1)) on all 19.86 acres to be restored. The Habitat Authority shall be entitled to receive without charge a copy of any Phase 1 that is prepared. In the event that the Phase 1 results in a recommendation of a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (Phase 2), then: any Phase 2 or subsequent investigation or assessment, and any remediation of hazardous materials located on the site (whether pursuant to a Phase 1, Phase 2, or other investigation or assessment), will occur as a responsibility of and at the expense of the present and/or former property owners or operators (within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §9601(20)); OCWR shall not be legally liable or financially responsible for remediation of such hazardous substances or for the cost of any investigation or assessment beyond a Phase 1; and OCWR and the Habitat Authority will jointly use their best efforts to select an alternative restoration site as soon as possible, but not before the Habitat Authority is afforded a reasonable opportunity to timely remediate the site at its expense.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




Initiation of restoration efforts shall begin once all plans have been finalized and approved, and adequate resources have been allocated to complete the work according to specifications. Currently, the Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects covered by the HCP are scheduled to be initiated in 2017. The HCP dictates that this HRP must be approved by both the Habitat Authority and the Service prior to vegetation removal or grading on the landfill Project sites. The first phases of restoration site preparation should involve clearing the site of weeds, the installation of temporary irrigation, and at least a 1-year cycle of grow-kill weed abatement. These phases will take place while seed collection occurs. If enough seed is not collected within 1 year to seed the site, then 1 additional year of site grow-kill will be conducted while seed collection and nursery plant propagation occurs. Site preparation will be started before the growing season and will provide for the control of nonnative weeds within the site until the site is installed. The goal is to have all plant and seed installation occur between October 1 and January 31 to take advantage of the rainy season. The restoration area will be regularly maintained and monitored, and documentation of progress will be prepared by the Restoration Ecologist and presented to the Habitat Authority and Service through annual reports. The schedule for restoration is provided below as a sequence to follow when the restoration area is available for preparation and installation. Depending on the project schedule or environmental conditions, this schedule is subject to change.

I. Site preparation will commence at least 1 year prior to container plant installation and hydroseeding. A temporary aboveground irrigation system should be installed at this time to induce nonnative weed growth. These nonnative weeds will be actively removed before they drop seed throughout the yearlong grow-kill cycle.

II. Pin flags to mark container plant locations will be placed, the planting holes will be augured or dug, and the container plants will be installed after site preparation and prior to seeding. This will take 3 to 4 weeks.

III. Seeding (hydroseeding) shall occur immediately following the installation of container plants. This should take approximately 1 to 2 weeks. Optimally, the seeding should be completed by the end of November to take advantage of natural rainfall. Depending on weather conditions, seeding may be appropriate later in the season.

IV. Following the completion of planting, the Restoration Contractor must guarantee 90 percent survival of the container plants during the 120-day establishment period for the entire restoration area (both the 11.56-acre and 8.30-acre sites).

V. Maintenance will start immediately following the completion of installation and will continue until the performance standards are met. Maintenance activities will be performed monthly to quarterly, depending on the amount of weeds on site, per the Restoration Maintenance section of this plan and directions from the Restoration Ecologist.

VI. Annual reports will be submitted by the Restoration Ecologist to the Service, CDFW and the Habitat Authority in December of each year, until the performance standards are achieved.

INSPECTIONS Inspections by the Restoration Ecologist shall be conducted to accurately determine whether all work is completed in compliance with these specifications. Inspection by the Restoration Ecologist shall be required for each phase of work listed below. In addition, the Restoration Ecologist shall inspect the

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




restoration area more frequently, if necessary, to ensure that the area is continuously in compliance throughout the establishment and maintenance periods. Inspections will take place, minimally, at the following times: • During site boundary delineation • During the installation of erosion control measures • Following the installation of the irrigation system • During the marking of container plant locations • Following the augering of container plant holes (prior to planting) • During container plant installation • Following the final container plant installation • During hydroseeding • At the end of the 120-day establishment period EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Existing Vegetation The restoration site boundaries depicted on Figure 2 were field-verified by LSA and the Habitat Authority on February 23, 2017. All 19.86 acres to be restored were selected from areas previously identified as having a medium-to-high restoration priority (RMP, LSA 2007). As such, the selected restoration area is characterized as disturbed annual grassland habitat and contains nearly 100 percent cover by nonnative species including shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), black mustard (Brassica nigra), Russian-thistle (Salsola tragus), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), annual brome grasses (Bromus spp.), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), horehound (Marrubium vulgare), lamb’s quarters (Chenopodium album), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and dwarf nettle (Urtica urens), among others.

Existing CSS habitats surrounding the restoration site boundaries were surveyed for native species composition and structure to determine the appropriate restoration plant and seed palettes for each area to be restored. The plant and seed palettes (Tables A and B; see Materials) were selected based on the native species encountered during the February 2017 site visit and general site suitability for CSS. Soil Conditions Soils within the restoration site boundaries were mapped and tested during the preparation of the RMP prior to 2007 and belong to the San Andreas – San Benito and Altamont – Diablo Soil Associations. These soils are generally well drained and range from sandy loam to clay. Slopes within the restoration site boundaries are gentle and mostly south- and west-facing. All soils within the restoration site boundaries have good structure and appear suitable for CSS restoration.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




SITE PREPARATION Site Protection The restoration area (including both the 11.56-acre and 8.30-acre sites) is located within the Puente Hills Preserve and is considered to have a medium to high restoration priority (RMP; LSA 2007). The restoration area is also adjacent to popular hiking and biking trails (Figure 2, Project Detail). As such, the site boundaries shall be clearly delineated as specified by the Habitat Authority. This will include marking the site boundaries and areas adjacent to active trails with metal T-bar posts at 30-foot (ft) intervals with bright yellow nylon rope attached at a height of approximately 4 ft to dissuade people from entering and further disturbing the restoration area. All-weather and graffiti-protected signage visible from all access points with the contact information of the Habitat Authority and park rangers will be included at the boundaries of the restoration area, as shown below:

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




All signage shall use the following dimensions and materials: • Sign size: 24 x 24 inches

• Sign coating: graffiti coating

• Post: use two 2.5-inch diameter metal posts per sign

Site Clearing Following the notice to proceed, the restoration area must be prepared for container plant installation and hydroseeding. Initial site clearing will be done outside of the bird breeding season (February 15–August 31). This includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Removal of all debris and litter. All materials must be legally disposed of off-site.

• Removal of all nonnative vegetation. All materials must be legally disposed of off-site.

• The Site Preparation must be approved by the Restoration Ecologist prior to commencement of subsequent phases of restoration.

The vast majority (greater than 95 percent) of the restoration area is devoid of native vegetation. Thus, all areas within the restoration site boundaries will require full restoration, including aggressive weed abatement, hydroseeding, container plants, and maintenance for at least 5 years to meet the Performance Standards. The restoration area shall be maintained free of trash, microtrash, and debris. Temporary Irrigation System Installation A temporary overhead irrigation system shall be used as necessary for (1) grow-kill treatments, (2) to establish container plants, (3) to establish seed mixes, and (4) to supplement annual rainfall during the establishment period. The irrigation system will have the following design: • A mainline with lateral lines will be installed with gate-valves to separately manage the areas, as

necessary, depending on site soils and landforms.

• Lateral lines shall be laid out along the contour of slopes so that the top of the slope can be managed separately from the lower slope.

• Sprinkler heads shall be sized to accommodate the infiltration rate of the soil and landscape position. The size of the sprinkler heads and application rate will be determined after infiltration is evaluated in each area.

• The system shall be laid out so that the wetted area from each sprinkler head has no more than a 2 to 3 ft overlap with adjacent sprinklers. The final layout design will depend on the system water pressure and the size of the sprinkler heads (based on the infiltration rate of the soil).

• All sprinkler stems shall be fitted with on/off ball valves to allow for hose connections and hand watering of container plants at installation and during establishment, as necessary. These valves will also allow particular areas to be shut off, as necessary.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




• Operation of the system will require management by a person with demonstrated previous experience irrigating native vegetation.

Under no circumstances will the irrigation system be operated with any type of automatic timer. The system will be run manually and only when at least one Restoration Contractor crew person is on site. If drought conditions persist and water supply is restricted by local or state regulations, grow-kill cycles will rely on natural rainfall to promote germination of weed species. Success of the grow-kill cycles will be evaluated by the Restoration Contractor and the Restoration Ecologist to determine the need for additional cycles. The grow-kill period may be extended until effective weed control is accomplished since natural rainfall-driven grow-kill programs may require more cycles to equal the control of an irrigated grow-kill program. If annual rainfall is significantly below average, then additional grow-and-kill cycles extending into the next season may be necessary. The grow-kill period may also be extended to provide enough time for native seed collection and nursery plant propagation. Site Preparation Weed Control The restoration area is currently dominated by nonnative annual grasses and weeds, including Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), annual brome grasses (Bromus spp.), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), black mustard (Brassica nigra), horehound (Marrubium vulgare), lamb’s quarters (Chenopodium album), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and dwarf nettle (Urtica urens), among others. The key component of Site Preparation is that all nonnative weeds on site shall be aggressively eradicated prior to the installation of any native plant container and seed material. At least three grow-kill events are specified for the restoration area after initial clearing and installation of a temporary irrigation system to initiate weed growth after each weeding event. This will prepare the area for the native seed mix because it will expose and reduce the existing nonnative seed bank. This process is also expected to reduce the cost of restoration activities, as the nonnative seed bank will be reduced, which will reduce the level of weeding required during native plant establishment. All weeds growing before planting shall be removed, and all resulting debris shall be legally disposed of off-site. In addition to on-site weeding, all highly invasive weeds such as tree tobacco, castor bean (Ricinus communis), black mustard, milk thistle, Italian thistle, shortpod mustard, fennel, and artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus) within a 50 ft wide “buffer” strip adjacent to the restoration area shall be removed (except for areas that area extremely steep and hazardous to reach). Highly invasive weeds shall be treated with herbicide (see Herbicide Treatment Guidelines). However, all weeds within 3 ft of any native species shall be removed by hand, unless otherwise specified by the Restoration Ecologist. The Restoration Contractor shall consult with the Restoration Ecologist regarding all actions pertaining to weed eradication. The Restoration Ecologist shall inspect the restoration area prior to seeding to ensure they are free of weeds. The timing for site preparation shall be scheduled to target optimal weed control, and weed removal shall be completed prior to the nonnative vegetation setting seed. Weed control methods shall include herbicide application and/or mechanical mowing/cutting. Following weed control and prior to seeding; weed thatch will be evaluated and removed, as necessary, to facilitate seed/soil contact.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




The main methods for control of invasive species will be physical control methods such as mowing or hand-pulling and chemical methods such as foliar application of herbicides and the stump cut herbicide application method. The following sections describe the control methods recommended for the mitigation area. Several native species occur within and surrounding the mitigation areas. Careful weeding needs to be done in areas with native species present to reduce any damage to the native species. Areas with native species will be marked in the field by the Restoration Ecologist or Habitat Authority ecologist prior to site preparation activities. Weed Control Methods. Physical methods of weed control that are recommended in this mitigation plan to use for site preparation are mechanical methods such as mowing and/or weed whipping and herbicide. Additionally, pulling by hand or with tools can be used to treat isolated individuals of exotic species and in areas adjacent to native vegetation. • Mowing/Weed Whipping: Repeated mowing or weed whipping treatments prior to seeding is in

general the most efficient and least disruptive site preparation method to use in areas dominated by annual grasses and mustards. Mowing can be accomplished by machine on gentler terrain, or by hand-operated mowers on steeper terrain. Weed whipping can be accomplished with a gas operated weed whip fitted with a brush blade, or similar implement. Fire prevention measures must be taken to avoid accidental fires from sparks and machinery operation. These measures include restricting mowing/weed whipping to before 10 a.m., avoiding using bladed equipment in rocky areas, parking vehicles away from dry vegetation, and other measures that may be required during the dry season. Raking and removal of the weed biomass after mowing is recommended prior to seeding to ensure good seed-to-soil contact. As with mowing, raking can be accomplished by machines on gentler terrain, or by hand on steeper areas.

• Hand/Mechanical Pulling: Isolated individuals of select invasive species can be pulled by hand or with a tool such as the Weed Wrench™. Pulling of weeds is one of the least disruptive methods of site preparation, but is not an efficient method of weed control in a dense stand of invasive species. The pulling method should be reserved for controlling isolated individuals, in areas that are not accessible by equipment, or when native species are present. When pulling the weed species, as much of the root as possible should be removed, especially the weed species with a long tap root such as mustard and tree tobacco.

• Herbicide Control Methods: Herbicide treatment is specified mainly for high priority invasive weed species that may resprout from taproots or rhizomes. Limited use of selected herbicides is specified when no other effective alternative is available to remove and control the high priority invasive exotic species. For efficient control of exotic invasive species, these weeds must be controlled before they produce viable seed. It should be remembered most herbicides are not selective for weeds only; in other words, herbicides must be applied with the least harmful effect to nontarget native species. No pre-emergent herbicides may be used on the site.

Only herbicides registered for use in wildlands should be considered for judicious use within the mitigation area. Herbicides that are registered for use in California for natural areas are recommended for particular weed species at specific rates noted on the labels. The recommended herbicides registered for use in California that are proposed by this mitigation plan to be used in the mitigation

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




area are glyphosate, a nonspecific herbicide registered for use on almost all weed species, and triclopyr (e.g., Garlon 4®) is recommended for the treatment of Eucalyptus resprouts. Only United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved, systemic herbicides, such as glyphosate (e.g., Aquamaster) should be used when applying herbicides within 100 ft of a natural watercourse or body of water.

The following types of applications are recommended for each herbicide: • Glyphosate (e.g., Round-up or Aquamaster) concentrations shall be used according to the type of

application required as per the product label for foliar spray application and cut stump treatment.

• Triclopyr (e.g., Garlon 4®) will be specified for foliar spray applications at application rates recommended on the label.

The Restoration Contractor or subcontractor selected for weed control projects must have a pest control business license, which requires that at least one individual employed by the business be in possession of a qualified applicator’s license. All licenses must be issued by the State of California, and currently be registered in Los Angeles County. If a qualified applicator is not present during the herbicide treatment, all applicators must have undergone documented herbicide application training. Personnel must wear all protective clothing required by law and follow all label directions and precautions. All re-entry times specified on an herbicide label shall be observed and posted. Herbicide preparation shall be allowed only in approved staging areas more than 100 ft from a stream course or body of water. A brightly colored dye is recommended in all herbicide applications to aid the applicator in achieving good coverage of the target species. The material shall be a nontoxic material such as Blazon, Turfmark, or equivalent. The dye shall be mixed with the herbicide at no more than half the rate specified on the label. Herbicide treatment shall be conducted only when weather conditions are conducive to effective uptake of the herbicide by the target species (e.g., sunny, dry with ambient temperatures 65 degrees Fahrenheit) and when plants are at the specified growth stage. Wind conditions should be 5 miles per hour or less to minimize herbicide drift. Treated plants or stumps shall not be disturbed until the applied herbicide has had time to take effect per the manufacturer’s instructions. Foliar Spray Treatment. The foliar spray treatment involves applying a select herbicide at a specified concentration directly to the exposed foliage of the invasive species. In order for the foliar spray treatment to be effective, the exposed foliage needs a thorough coating of herbicide. The foliar spray treatment is typically best used on smaller plants to ensure adequate coverage of the herbicide. The disadvantage of the foliar spray treatment is that damage to desirable species in the localized spray area may occur, especially if a nonselective herbicide like glyphosate is used. Additionally, the foliar application method is ineffective on invasive plants with thick waxy cuticles. Stump Cut Treatment. The stump cut treatment method is a process of cutting the stump of an invasive species flat at about 8 to 10 inches in height then treating the exposed cambium of the cut

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




stump with a select herbicide at a specified concentration. A phased treatment is recommended for the treatment of invasive species in this restoration plan. • Phase 1: The plants shall be cleanly cut, horizontally, close to the ground (using a saw, rotary

brush cutter, or similar tool). All the cut vegetation shall be removed from the project area the same day it is cut and disposed of legally off site.

• Phase 2: The stumps or stems shall be recut, cleared of sawdust, and immediately painted with 100 percent Round-up Pro/Rodeo within 2 minutes of cutting before the cut surface begins to congeal to ensure penetration of the herbicide. Plants should be checked 1 month after application to determine the success of the herbicide treatment. Any regrowth from the treated stumps should be treated with the foliar herbicide application in the same fall season or as regrowth appears in the next growing season.

The advantage of the stump cut treatment is the low quantity of herbicides required to treat the invasive species and the localized application of the herbicides reduces the likelihood of herbicide contact with nontarget (i.e., native) species during application.

Species-Specific Control Treatments. The following guidelines for weed control treatments shall be followed for each specified weed species: • Black mustard (Brassica nigra): All individuals of black mustard will be removed from the

mitigation site. Treatment of black mustard should consist of mowing as close to the ground as possible to limit resprouting. Repeated treatments will be used for the control of mustard during the site preparation phase.

Isolated individuals of mustard can be pulled by hand or with a Weed Wrench™. As much of the tap root as possible should be removed to prevent regrowth. Individual plants can also be cut below the root crown with a pick or shovel. Treatment of black mustard should occur prior to the development of seed pods.

• Milk Thistle (Silybum marianum) and Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare): All individuals of bull and milk thistle should be removed from the mitigation site. Treatment of larger individuals of bull and milk thistle should consist of hand-pulling, cutting, or mowing. When hand-pulling as much of the tap root as possible should be removed to prevent regrowth. When cutting bull or milk thistle, the stems should be cut at least 1 to 2 inches below the ground. Mowing of bull and milk thistle should occur after individuals have bolted but prior to flowering.

• Castor Bean (Ricinus communis): All individuals of castor bean should be removed from the mitigation area. Seedling plants can be removed using the foliar spray treatment method. Seedlings should be sprayed during active growth in the spring. Foliar spray shall be with Round-up Pro at the prescribed minimum 2 percent solution.

For larger individuals of castor bean, the stump treatment should be used. The plants should be treated in early fall when still actively growing. A phased treatment, as described above is recommended.

• Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.): All individuals of this species should be removed from the mitigation area (except those preserved for any raptor nest). Seedling and sapling plants can be

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




removed by hand pulling or using a Weed Wrench™. Resprouts of the stump-cut Eucalyptus trees in the mitigation area shall be checked and controlled for at least 3 years and possibly longer. A foliar application or stump cut of the resprout are both recommended control methods. The resprouts of the Eucalyptus stumps should be treated when they reach a height of 3 to 5 ft. Treatment of the resprouts with a foliar application consists of spraying the resprouts with 2 percent triclopyr or glyphosate. The stump cut treatment consists of cutting the resprout at the base and treating the cut stump using the phased treatment method as described above.

• Non-native grasses: All individuals of nonnative grasses should be removed from the mitigation site. Treatment of nonnative grasses should consist of mowing as close to the ground as possible to ensure the removal of the bolting crown of the plant. Mowing should be done in the springtime when the grass is actively growing but before seeds reach maturity. Repeated mowing treatments should be used for the control of nonnative grasses during the site preparation phase.

• Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum): All individuals of poison hemlock should be removed from the mitigation area. For larger individuals, the stump treatment method should be used. The plants should be treated in spring when actively growing. A phased treatment method is recommended as described above. Plants should be checked a month after herbicide application to determine the success of the treatment. Any regrowth from the treated stumps should be treated with the foliar herbicide application in the same season or as regrowth appears in the next growing season.

Poison hemlock can also be hand-pulled or cut. When hand-pulling, as much of the root as possible should be removed to prevent regrowth. When cutting poison hemlock, the stems should be cut below the root crown and the upper portion removed. Care should be taken when handling poison hemlock since it is toxic to the skin and respiratory system. Protective gear (e.g., gloves and mask) should be worn when removing poison hemlock.

• Russian thistle (Salsola tragus): All individuals of this species should be removed from the mitigation area. Young plants can be removed by hand pulling or cutting just below ground level. For larger individuals, a foliar application of glyphosate can be used for treatment. Treatment with a foliar application would consist of spraying the mature individuals with 2 percent glyphosate.

• Tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca): All individuals of this species should be removed from the mitigation area. For larger individuals, the stump treatment method should be used. The plants should be treated in spring when actively growing. A phased treatment method is recommended as described above. Plants should be checked a month after herbicide application to determine the success of the treatment. Any regrowth from the treated stumps should be treated with the foliar herbicide application in the same season or as regrowth appears in the next growing season.

Erosion Control In order to prevent unnecessary competition with the native plant community to be established, no nonnative grasses shall be seeded or planted as erosion control measures prior to the restoration of native vegetation. In the case of heavy rainfall conditions, nonvegetative erosion control measures (e.g., silt fence, sandbags, rice straw wattles, and jute netting) are to be used on steep slopes between the completion of the site preparation and the installation of the planned native plant community.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




The Restoration Contractor shall be responsible for all erosion control required during the entire term of the contract. Erosion control shall include, but not be limited to: (1) continuation of nonvegetative erosion control, as necessary; and (2) repair of damaged plants, rutting, and washouts. Because the Restoration Contractor is responsible for the success of the restored plant community, it is to the Restoration Contractor’s advantage to use as many preventative erosion control measures as necessary to prevent erosion damage. This will include slowing the velocity and dispersing concentrated water from entering and exiting the restoration site. Any and all erosion control measures must be approved by the Restoration Ecologist and the Habitat Authority prior to installation. MATERIALS The Restoration Contractor shall supply all of the required container plants, as specified below. Plants shall be obtained from a Habitat Authority-approved native plant nursery. The Habitat Authority shall provide all of the required seed, as specified below. Container Plants

The Restoration Contractor shall supply the container plants listed in Table B, which will be installed in the restoration area and maintained at a 90 percent survival rate throughout the 120-day establishment period. Container plants will be contract grown by a native plant nursery with at least 5 years of experience growing native plants from the target vegetation communities of the project area. The order shall be placed so that the plants have a well-developed root system and are conditioned prior to planting in Fall/Winter. Arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum will be purchased and incorporated with the greenhouse mix according to the label at the time of transplantation to containers. Table B: Coastal Sage Scrub Container Plants

Scientific Name Common Name Container Size

Plant Spacing4

No. per Acre

11.56-Acre Total

8.30-Acre Total

Artemisia californica California sagebrush D-40 4’ 60 694 498 Baccharis pilularis1 coyote bush D-40 5’ 3 35 25 Encelia californica California encelia D-40 4’ 60 694 498 Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat 1-gallon 4’ 75 867 623 Heteromeles arbutifolia2 Toyon D-40 20’ 2 23 17 Isocoma menziesii var. vernonioides coastal goldenbush D-40 4’ 55 636

457

Leymus condensatus2 giant wild-rye D-40 5’ 30 347 249 Opuntia littoralis3 coast prickly pear 1-gallon 4’ 75 867 623 Rhus integrifolia lemonade berry D-40 15’ 15 173 125 Salvia apiana white sage D-40 5’ 10 116 83 Salvia luecophylla purple sage D-40 5’ 30 347 249 Sambucus mexicana2 Mexican elderberry D-40 15' 3 35 25

Total 418 4,834 3,472 1 Coyote bush shall be planted mainly in drainage areas. 2 Toyon, giant wild rye, and elderberry trees shall be planted mainly on north and northeast facing slopes and in drainage areas. 3 Cactus species shall be planted mainly on southerly facing slopes. 4 Spacing = Feet on-center distance from other container planted shrub/tree species.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




To the extent possible, all plant material shall be obtained from native plant communities growing within the Puente Hills Preserve. The Habitat Authority will contract with a company to collect seed for this project, including seed to be used for plant propagation. For those species that function as erosion control or do not exist in large enough quantities within the Puente Hills Preserve, it will be necessary to either (a) use seed stock from a seed collector/supplier that can be verified as collected within Los Angeles or Orange Counties and of similar microclimate regime, or (b) extend the collection area on a species-by-species basis. Plant container stock seed collection shall be as close as possible to the Puente Hills Preserve to maintain genetic integrity in nearby open space areas (e.g., Chino Hills State Park and Peter F. Schabarum Regional Park) or other appropriate inland areas in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. All plant substitution decisions or alternative genetic sources shall be approved by the Habitat Authority, the Restoration Ecologist, and the Service. The Restoration Contractor and the Restoration Ecologist will inspect all container plants during the growing stage and upon delivery for planting to verify the plants are the correct species and quantities, are free of weeds, pests, and disease, and showing signs of healthy growth. All plants shall be healthy and in good condition, with a good root-to-shoot ratio (approximately 2:1). The roots shall be young roots that fill the container and no excessive roots should be wrapped around the sides of the container. Any plants that, in the opinion of the Restoration Ecologist, are incapable of surviving for 120 days following proper installation techniques will be returned to the nursery to be either replaced or regrown for installation during the following growing season. Upon receipt, the container plants shall be stored in such a way that natural elements (i.e., dryness, heat, flooding, frost, or excessive wind) will not hinder growth or kill the plants prior to installation. All container plants shall be installed within 3 days following acceptable delivery. Seed The Habitat Authority shall provide all seed listed in Table C by contracting with a company to collect seed for this project. The species to be included were selected based on those species found within the immediate area. See details under Container Plants for acceptable locations for source material. All seed substitution decisions or alternative genetic sources shall be approved by the Habitat Authority, the Restoration Ecologist, and the Service.

Table C: Coastal Sage Scrub Hydroseed Mix

Scientific Name Common Name Target

Minimum Purity/Germ1,2

Pounds per Acre

11.56-Acre Pounds Required


Acmispon glaber deerweed 95/80 6.0 69.36 49.80 Artemisia californica California sagebrush 15/60 2.5 28.9 20.75 Deinandra fasciculata3 fascicled tarweed 20/80 1.5 17.34 12.45 Encelia californica California encelia 40/60 3.0 34.68 24.90 Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat 50/20 3.0 34.68 24.90 Eriophyllum confertiflorum golden yarrow 30/70 1.5 17.34 12.45 Pseudognaphalium californicum California everlasting 5/40 0.5 5.78 4.15

Isocoma menziesii var. vernonioides coastal goldenbush 40/30 0.7 8.09 5.81

Lepidium nitidum3 shining peppergrass 90/50 0.5 5.78 4.15

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




Table C: Coastal Sage Scrub Hydroseed Mix

Scientific Name Common Name Target

Minimum Purity/Germ1,2

Pounds per Acre



Lupinus bicolor3 miniature lupine 98/85 3.0 34.68 24.9 Lupinus succulentus3 arroyo lupine 98/85 1.0 11.56 8.30 Melica imperfecta melic grass 80/60 1.0 11.56 8.30 Nassella lepida4 foothill needle grass 90/60 2.5 28.9 20.75 Nassella pulchra4 purple needle grass 70/60 2.5 28.9 20.75 Phacelia distans common phacelia 98/80 0.5 5.78 4.15 Phacelia ramosissima3 branching phacelia 95/80 0.2 2.31 1.66 Plantago insularis3 Wooly plantain 98/75 7.0 80.92 58.10 Salvia apiana white sage 70/30 1.0 11.56 8.30 Salvia leucophylla purple sage 70/50 0.5 5.78 4.15 Solanum douglasii3 Douglas’ nightshade 90/20 0.1 1.16 0.83 Vulpia microstachys3 small fescue 90/80 6.0 69.36 49.80

Total 44.5 514.42 369.35 1 General guidelines for minimum germination used to determine bulk rates. 2 Bulk seed rate may be adjusted depending on results of tests for germination. 3 Erosion control and nurse crop species. 4 Seed of Nassella spp. shall be de-awned.

Seed will be tested for percent purity, percent germination, and the number of live seeds per pound. Testing costs will be included in the seed costs per pound and will be the responsibility of the seed supplier. Results of the seed tests will be made available to the Restoration Ecologist prior to seed delivery. The seed company will certify seed collection locations. The Restoration Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining seed from the seed supplier. Seed tags indicating the Pure Live Seed (PLS) and Bulk rate must be attached to each bag of seed and provided to the Restoration Ecologist. Upon receipt, the seed must be stored in a manner that ensures its viability until it is sown. All seed must be sown within 48 hours of being delivered. Soil Amendments. A fertilizer packet (10 grams weight) shall be added at the bottom of each planting hole prior to planting container plants. Each packet shall contain nitrogen, available phosphoric acid, and soluble potash plus minor nutrients. The nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium shall be coated with a polyurethane coating to provide 15.69 percent coated slow-release nitrogen, 5.09 percent coated slow-release available phosphate, and 6.8 percent slowly available soluble potash. Bio Paks® meeting these specifications are available from Reforestation Technologies, Inc. Endomycorrhizal Inoculum Prior to installation, the Restoration Contractor shall provide arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum. The inoculum shall contain a minimum of 3,600,000 propagules per acre, and consist of spores, mycelia, and mycorrhizal root fragments in a solid carrier suitable for handling by hydroseeding or dry seeding equipment. The carrier shall be the material in which the inoculum was originally produced, and may include organic materials, vermiculite, perlite, calcined clay, or other approved materials consistent

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




with mechanical application and with good plant growth. This inoculum shall carry a supplier’s guarantee of number of propagules per unit weight or volume of bulk material. Commercially available Glomus intraradices is recommended because this is an ubiquitous species and will not impede the development of other native Arbuscular mycorrhizal species. During storage, transport, and application, the inoculum must be kept at temperatures lower than 90 degrees Fahrenheit. Inoculum must be applied within 1 hour of being added to the hydroseed tank and must be applied at the same time as, or before, the seed. Color-Coded Wire Pin Flags

Color-coded wire pin flags shall be provided by the Restoration Contractor for marking container plant locations. Each species shall have a different color (or combination of colors). All of the pin flags shall be counted and separated by species prior to coordination with the Restoration Ecologist in the field. Other Materials All other materials not specifically described herein, but required to complete this project, shall be furnished by the Restoration Contractor and are subject to the approval of the Restoration Ecologist. INSTALLATION METHODS Container Planting Method Following site preparation, planting locations of container plants shall be marked under the instruction and supervision of the Restoration Ecologist. Plantings shall be spaced in natural-looking patterns to replicate the character of the adjacent CSS communities with consideration of the microclimatic requirements for each species. The locations of all container plants must be marked by the Restoration Contractor with a wire pin flag prior to the augering of planting holes. The layout will be conducted under the supervision of the Restoration Ecologist. Plant material installation will be done outside of the bird breeding season (February 15–August 31). All container plants shall be planted in accordance with the following specifications (Figure 3, Container Planting Detail): • All planting holes shall be hand augered or dug (however, no wheel-mounted augers shall be

permitted), have vertical sides with roughened surfaces, and be 1.5 times the diameter and twice the depth of the plant’s container.

• After excavation and before planting, the planting holes shall be filled approximately one-quarter full with water, backfilled with thoroughly broken-up native topsoil, and then completely filled with water to avoid soil settling after installation. Holes shall be allowed to drain thoroughly between fillings to reduce settling.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




• Any roots wrapped around the sides of the containers shall be pulled free from the root balls. The sides of the root balls shall be scarified to promote new root development.

• Roots shall be adequately protected at all times from the sun and/or drying winds.

• The specified fertilizer packet shall be added to each planting hole just prior to planting.

• Plants shall be planted with the roots untangled and laid out in the planting holes to promote good root growth and prevent the plants from becoming rootbound.

• Plants shall be set in the thoroughly drained planting holes so that the crowns of the root balls are 0.5 inch above finish grade when backfilled with soil. Under no circumstances should the plant crown be buried. The crowns of the plants shall not be depressed.

• A watering basin 24 inches in diameter shall be created around each plant. The soil inside and outside of the basin shall be at the same level. The berm shall be created above grade. The basin shall not be a depression in the soil.

Each plant shall be individually watered at the time of planting with sufficient water to reach the lower roots. Special care must be taken to prevent the soil from washing away from the roots and the root crown from being buried in soil. In addition, special care should be taken to avoid excess watering and the formation of erosion rills along slopes. If drought conditions persist and water supply is restricted by local or State regulations, container plants will be planted in large groups and irrigation will be applied by micro sprinklers or low precipitation rate rotary nozzles on risers. Another option is to hydroseed only following the two-step method as specified in this HRP and allow the seeded areas to rely on natural rainfall for establishment. The seed mix will be revised if the selected option warrants any changes in species composition and/or quantity. Protective Caging. After planting, vegetation will not be protected with caging. If, however, herbivores become a problem, then plants in the affected area should be caged. Material for caging will consist of plastic screen mesh, galvanized steel hardware cloth, or an equivalent material with grid dimensions that will allow pollinators to pass through. Caging for each plant will extend at least 3 inches into the soil and 1 ft above the plant tip to allow sufficient height for at least 2 years of growth. The upper edges of the cage will be folded over each other, creating an “envelope” around the plant. The Restoration Ecologist will approve the installation and removal of the cages. Hydroseeding A seed mix (Table C) will be applied to each restoration area immediately following the installation of container plants. Care will be taken to avoid applying hydroseed on the container stock. The standard hydroseeding technique shall be employed; however, a two-stage application shall be used. A 100-percent long-strand wood fiber mulch (e.g., Conwed Fiber 1000) will be used to protect against erosion until the vegetation is established. Subject to the approval of the Restoration Ecologist, an equivalent product may be substituted for Conwed Fiber. Preventive measures must be taken to

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




avoid damage to container plants and any other existing native vegetation on site (i.e., spraying and covering plants with mulch or breaking stems with hoses). The application procedure is as follows: • First Application:

○ 500 pounds per acre (lbs/acre) of 100 percent long-strand wood fiber mulch (no tackifier)

○ Specified seed

○ Specified arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum at 3,600,000 propagules per acre

• Second Application:

○ 2,000 lbs/acre of 100-percent long-strand wood fiber mulch (no tackifier)

○ 160 lbs/acre of Ecology Control “M” binder

At the time of hydroseeding, all hydroseed mixing shall be performed in a clean tank never used to apply herbicides (thoroughly rinsed a minimum of three times in the presence of the Restoration Ecologist) with a built-in continuous agitation and recirculation system of sufficient operating capacity to produce a homogeneous slurry and a discharge system that will apply the slurry to the designated areas at a continuous and uniform rate. The slurry preparation shall take place at the project site and shall begin by adding water to the tank when the engine is at one-half throttle. Good recirculation shall be established when the water level has reached the height of the agitator shaft; at this time, seed shall be added. The long-strand wood fiber shall be added when the tank is at least 30 percent filled with water. The Restoration Contractor shall commence spraying once the tank is full. Once the seed and arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum are added to the mixing tank, application of the mixture must be made within 1 hour. If the temperature will exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the second step must be applied within 3 hours of the application of the first step. The Restoration Contractor shall spray designated areas with the slurry in a sweeping motion and in an arched stream until a uniform coat is achieved, with no slumping or shadowing, and the material is spread at the required rate per acre. The hydroseed slurry should float down from above as opposed to in a direct stream. During hydroseed application, all container plants must be protected from damage (including, but not limited to, mulch coating, direct spray, and dragging hose). The tanks must be emptied completely during each stage of hydroseeding. Excessive mulch coating on container plants must be removed. The Restoration Contractor shall be backcharged $50 per individual plant lost due to intentional or unintentional damage caused by hydroseeding activity, and shall be required to replace each lost plant at the discretion of the Restoration Ecologist. Any slurry mixture that has not been applied by the Restoration Contractor within 1 hour after mixing shall be rejected and replaced at the Restoration Contractor’s expense. In addition, all costs incurred for repair or replacement of bare, sparse, or damaged areas shall be the sole responsibility of the Restoration Contractor. Following application, all activity on the mulch layer must be kept to a minimum.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




MAINTENANCE The Restoration Contractor is responsible for the maintenance of the restoration area, in accordance with the following specifications, until the performance standards are achieved. The establishment maintenance period is generally 5 years duration with the most intense maintenance in the first and second year, and only seasonal weeding activities decreasing from the third through fifth year. Normal maintenance will include weeding, adjustments to the irrigation system, as necessary, replacement hand seeding in areas of more than 200 square feet where target seed germination failed after one good season of rainfall, and disease control, if necessary. Reseeded areas must achieve an equivalent native species cover as the surrounding restored habitat by the end of the 5-year maintenance/monitoring period based on performance monitoring. The amount of maintenance each year will depend on weather conditions and how well the site develops. Irrigation Established CSS vegetation does not require irrigation under normal conditions. However, all container plants will be irrigated immediately after planting and irrigation continued on an as-needed basis until the plants are established and sufficient cover of native vegetation has been reached. Irrigation may also be required for successful seed germination. The Restoration Contractor shall install an above-ground temporary irrigation system with a point-of-connection and water meter specified by the Habitat Authority (see Site Preparation). The Restoration Contractor shall be responsible for the regular inspection and maintenance of the system throughout the restoration area. The irrigation system and watering schedule must be approved by the Restoration Ecologist before the irrigation system is used. The Restoration Contractor shall be present on the site during all watering activities. The irrigation system will be manually controlled rather than automatically controlled to prevent unintended erosion. All water used for irrigation shall be free of impurities, excess chlorine, and salts. Temporary irrigation will be used during the first two seasons following planting and seeding to extend the rainy season and establish the shrubs, as necessary. The timing of irrigation events will depend on evapotranspiration between irrigation events and soil moisture. Initially, the soil will be kept moist to germinate the hydroseed. Once the seeds begin to germinate, deeper irrigation will be implemented to force the developing roots to grow down. The following management scheme is anticipated as a guideline for water management of native trees and shrubs: • Irrigate soil to full field capacity to the desired depth (approximately 18 inches after planting; and

18–24 inches during plant establishment).

• Once seedlings germinate, allow soil to dry down to approximately 50-60 percent of field capacity in the top 6-12 inches before the next irrigation cycle. Depth of soil saturation between irrigation events will depend on development of container plants.

Infrequent deep irrigations should be used for applying the water to the container plants as opposed to frequent shallow irrigations. Deep irrigations will promote deep root systems while shallow infrequent irrigations will promote shallow root systems. Deep root systems will provide healthier and more sustainable plants while plants with shallow root systems are more susceptible to drought, disturbance, and erosion. Wetting of the full root zone and drying of the soil between irrigation events is essential to

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




the maintenance of the plants and the promotion of a deep root zone that will support moisture and rooting depth directly. Irrigation amounts are expected to be highest during the first growing season, tapering off gradually until no supplemental water is necessary. Irrigation will continue until the Restoration Ecologist determines that it is no longer necessary. When the irrigation system is no longer necessary, all of the aboveground components of the irrigation system will be removed. If drought conditions persist and water supply is restricted by local or State regulations and the restoration area is seeded only, supplemental irrigation could be cutoff and plant material would rely on natural rainfall for establishment. 120-Day Establishment Period During the 120 days after the installation is complete, the installed CSS plant community must be maintained regularly to ensure its successful establishment. The Restoration Contractor is expected to make weekly visits to the site to maintain the plant material as well as weed and irrigate as needed. At the end of the 120-day establishment period, a thorough inspection of the restoration area shall be conducted by the Restoration Contractor and Restoration Ecologist, and a list of those plants that are alive and healthy shall be submitted to the Restoration Ecologist. All dead or missing container plants will be replaced in order to achieve the 90 percent survival rate required through the establishment period. The species and planting locations of the replacement container plants shall be determined by the Restoration Ecologist. It may be to the Restoration Contractor’s advantage to install more than the required plants to more efficiently achieve this standard. Weed Control In order to help establish the developing CSS community, the Restoration Contractor shall remove all nonnative weeds to reduce the amount of competition for natural resources, including water, nutrients, and sun light. The amount of weeding required will be determined by the amount of weed seed germination, weather conditions, and the Restoration Contractor’s diligence in removing the weeds and reducing the nonnative seed bank. The Restoration Contractor shall be required to keep the percent cover by weeds below 20 percent at all times throughout each quarter. It is crucial that the Restoration Contractor is able to distinguish between native and nonnative plants early in their growth stages (i.e., seedlings) so that weeds are removed as soon as possible and native plants are able to establish on site. The Restoration Ecologist shall be consulted immediately if there is any uncertainty regarding plant species identification. Timing. Timing of weed control is critical for effectiveness. Most of the exotic species will begin to germinate with late fall rains and begin to flower in early to mid-spring. Therefore, the majority of the weed control effort will be required during winter through early summer. Some species will continue to grow into the summer. No exotic species should be allowed to go to flower or seed, and it is recommended that weedy species not be allowed to exceed 5 inches in height at any time. Should any weedy species go to seed, all seed heads should be removed and legally disposed of off-site within 24 hours of removal. It is easiest and most cost-effective to actively control weeds to this standard during the first 2 years of planting. This gives the native species an advantage by reducing the

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




competition for resources. The reduction of the seed source during the first year will cause a reduction in weed-control requirements over the life of the project. If optimal weed-growth conditions prevail at any time during the maintenance period, the level of effort for weed control will need to be increased. The restoration contract will include provisions for penalties against the Restoration Contractor to discourage noncompliance with these specifications and to prevent negligence. The Habitat Authority may levy these penalties against the Restoration Contractor if the site is in violation of this standard at any time during the maintenance period. Penalties will be financial and will vary in severity according to the severity of damage caused by noncompliance. Methods of Removal. With the exception of those weed species that cannot be eradicated through manual removals (e.g., artichoke thistle, or Bermuda grass), all weeds present shall be removed by hand-pulling or using hand tools; no herbicide shall be permitted without expressed written authorization from the Restoration Ecologist (see Herbicide Treatment Guidelines). No weed whipping or string-line trimmers shall be permitted within the restoration area without express written authorization from the Restoration Ecologist. Special care must be taken to prevent damage to native plants during the maintenance period. All native plants intentionally or unintentionally damaged by the Restoration Contractor shall be replaced at the Contractor’s expense, in the form of container plants during the next growing season. The Restoration Contractor shall consult with the Restoration Ecologist regarding the activities pertaining to weed eradication. All nonnative vegetative debris accumulated as a result of weed-removal activities shall be legally disposed of off site. Targeted weed species include, but are not limited to, the following: • Acacia (Acacia spp.)

• Artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus)

• Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata)

• Bermuda buttercup (Oxalis pes-caprae)

• Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon)

• Blue periwinkle (Vinca major)

• Bur-clover (Medicago spp.)

• Castor bean (Ricinus communis)

• Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.)

• False purple brome (Brachypodium distachyon)

• Filaree (Erodium spp.)

• Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum)

• French broom (Genista monspessulana)

• Garland chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum coronarium)

• German ivy (Delairea odorata)

• Giant reed (Arundo donax)

• Gorse (Ulex europaea)

• Hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis)

• Ice plant (Mesembryanthemum spp.)

• Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus)

• Mustard (Hirschfeldia incana and Brassica spp.)

• Myoporum (Myoporum spp.)

• Nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus)

• Nonnative brome grasses (Bromus spp.)

• Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana)

• Pepper tree (Schinus spp.)

• Perennial peppergrass (Lapidium latifolium)

• Poison hemlock (Conium maculatum)

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




• Radish (Raphanus sativus)

• Russian-thistle (Salsola tragus)

• Salt cedar (Tamarix spp.)

• Scarlet pimpernel (Anagallis arvensis)

• Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius)

• Spanish sunflower (Pulicaria paludosa)

• Sticky eupatorium (Ageratina adenophora)

• Sweet alyssum (Lobularia maritima)

• Sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare)

• Sweet-clover (Melilotus spp.)

• Tocalote (Centaurea melitensis)

• Tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca)

• Wild oats (Avena spp.)

• Yellow star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis)

Herbicide Treatment Guidelines. In order to apply an unrestricted herbicide (e.g., Round-up Pro or Aquamaster), the Restoration Contractor must have a Pest Control Business License, which requires that at least one individual employed by the Restoration Contractor be in possession of a Qualified Applicator’s License (QAL). If a qualified applicator is not present during treatment, all applicators must have undergone documented herbicide application training. All licenses must be issued by the State of California, be registered in the County of Los Angeles, and be of current status. Only EPA-approved, glyphosate base, systemic herbicides (e.g., Round-up Pro or Aquamaster) may be used, and Aquamaster must be used when applying herbicides within 100 ft of a natural water course or body of water. No pre-emergent herbicides may be used. The following herbicide concentrations shall be used, according to type of application required: • Foliar Spray Application: a minimum of a 3 percent solution

• Foliar Wick Application: a 33 percent solution

• Stump Treatment: a 100 percent solution

A brightly-colored dye shall be used in all applications. The material shall be a nontoxic, water soluble, liquid material such as “Blazon” by Milliken Chemicals, or an equivalent. The dye shall be mixed with the herbicide at no more than one-half the rate specified on the label (one-quarter the rate will usually suffice). At all times, herbicides shall be applied according to the product label. Spraying shall be conducted only when (1) the weather conditions are conducive to effective uptake of the herbicide by the targeted species (e.g., sunny, dry, and when plants are actively growing) and when (2) wind conditions are such that herbicide drift is nonexistent (5 miles per hour or less). During herbicide application, protection for nontargeted species (e.g., native vegetation) is required. At no time shall herbicides be used to control weeds within planting basins. Any nontarget species lost due to intentional or unintentional application of herbicide shall be replaced by the Restoration Contractor at his/her expense during the following planting season, at the direction of the Restoration Ecologist, and may be subject to liquidated damages of up to $100 per plant.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




Pest Control Insect and herbivore damage control shall be the responsibility of the Restoration Contractor, using only those methods approved by the Restoration Ecologist and the Habitat Authority. In addition, the Restoration Contractor shall treat any insect infestation as necessary to protect the health and establishment of the plant community, per the recommendation of the Restoration Ecologist. Site Maintenance All planted and seeded areas shall be kept neat, clean, and free of all nonvegetative debris and trash (including vegetative debris accumulated during weeding activities, which shall be removed as specified). Pruning and Leaf Litter Removal No pruning or leaf litter removal shall take place within the restoration area since the goal is to create a naturally occurring habitat. Therefore, all dead branches shall be left on the native shrubs and trees, and all leaf litter and fallen branches shall be left in place and not cleared away from the plantings. Fertilizer The Restoration Contractor shall not use chemical fertilizer on the restoration area during the maintenance period, unless directed by the Restoration Ecologist. REMEDIAL MEASURES The purpose of the remedial measures is to remedy unsuccessful restoration efforts, as indicated by nonnative species or bare ground. Remedial measures, as identified in the monitoring report, include weed eradication, replacement of dead or diseased container plantings, and/or reseeding in areas as necessary to meet the performance standards described below. The fencing placed around the mitigation area should be repaired immediately after any damage has occurred. Any signs that may have become damaged or are missing should also be replaced immediately. Seeding and Plant Replacement Target values for absolute cover of the CSS vegetation, including early successional species, are as follows: at least 20 percent cover after Year 1, 30 percent cover in Year 2, and 50 percent cover in Year 3. Maintenance is expected to be minimal after Year 3. Vegetation cover targets for CSS species should increase over Years 4 and 5 to reach 75 percent or greater. Actual cover values reached in each growing season will depend mainly on weather conditions (seasonal rainfall and temperature) during the establishment period. Areas of significant erosion shall be repaired and re-seeded in the first fall season after damage. Re-seeding will occur in areas if coverage is less than 20 percent of native

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




species over any contiguous area of 200 square feet after Year 1, or as recommended by the Restoration Ecologist. Reseeded areas must achieve an equivalent native species cover as the surrounding restored habitat by the end of the five-year maintenance/monitoring period based on performance monitoring. Survival rates of the installed container plants within the first growing season should be at least 90 percent. Plants shall be replaced if survivorship falls below 90 percent in the first season. Replacements will be planted as previously specified and maintained for one growing season, as necessary. As the restoration area develops, it is impractical to implement direct counts of all the container plants. Replacement planting after the first season shall only be specified if the visual estimate indicates substantial mortality and the function of these species has not been replaced by seed germination and/or natural recruitment. Such actions will be taken immediately upon the identification of problems, and will be implemented as often as necessary to meet the performance standards. Implementation and costs associated with all remedial measures required to meet the Performance Standards are the responsibility of the Restoration Contractor. Adaptive Management Measures, such as different irrigation methods or schedules, may be implemented in the event drought conditions persist and if water supply is restricted by local or State regulations. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The goal of the habitat restoration projects described herein is to replicate the existing distribution patterns and relative proportions of key CSS species in existing high quality CAGN habitat within the Puente Hills Preserve. Performance standards apply to all 19.86 acres being restored. Establishment of habitat will be considered successful when all of the following criteria are achieved: • A 90 percent survival rate of installed container plants is required through the 120-day

establishment period. This criterion will be ensured by additional planting by the Restoration Contractor if deemed necessary by the Restoration Ecologist.

• A minimum of 75 percent absolute cover by CSS components will be present on the entire restoration site by the end of the 5-year maintenance and monitoring program.

• Evidence that the site is sustainable by showing signs of regeneration (progeny and new growth), nutrient cycling, healthy plants, low mortality rate, resistance to weeds (minimal weed maintenance during the previous year), and lack of significant erosion. 1

• No more than 15 percent absolute cover by nonnative vegetation will be present on the entire restoration site by the end of the 5-year maintenance and monitoring program.

• No highly invasive nonnative species2 can be present within the restoration area at the end of the 5-year maintenance and monitoring program.

1 Erosion will be considered to be significant if any portion of the installed native plant community is being compromised

(e.g., reduced vegetative cover) by the formation of new rills or gullies and/or the deposition of topsoil. The formation of such features will be monitored and corrected, if necessary, by installing erosion control (e.g., straw wattles and silt fencing) during the 5-year maintenance and monitoring period.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




• Irrigation must be discontinued at least 2 years prior to successful performance evaluation. Service approval cannot be sought unless irrigation has been discontinued for at least 2 years.

• The site does not require significant maintenance during the last 2 years of the establishment period, as documented by the Restoration Ecologist’s annual monitoring report.

OCWR may request Service approval of the restoration site once the above performance standards have been met or if the site is in substantial compliance with the above performance standards, although there will be no expectation or obligation of Service approval if the standards are not met. MONITORING In order to accurately determine whether the restoration area is in compliance with these specifications, during the 120-day establishment period, the area will be evaluated weekly for the first month following installation and every 2 weeks in months two, three, and four. During the 5-year maintenance period, monitoring will be conducted monthly for the first 2 years and quarterly for the remaining 3 years. The post installation monitoring program will be as follows: • Monitoring for survival, appearance, function, wildlife usage, and general compliance will be

completed weekly to monthly to quarterly depending on the stage of development.

• In the spring of each year, a survey will be conducted and data collected on survival, percent cover, appearance, and function of the plant community. Quantitative monitoring should consist of randomly determined transects over the mitigation area. The number of samples necessary will be evaluated to ensure statistical confidence based on variation over the site.

• As part of the site inspections and annual surveys, the Restoration Ecologist will record general ecological observations and make maintenance recommendations.

• Photo-documentation at permanent points will be established and be taken prior to, during restoration, and on an annual basis.

The individual who monitors the site shall be an experienced Restoration Ecologist qualified to assess the performance of the restoration effort and to recommend corrective measures, if needed. Vegetation Sampling Vegetation sampling in the CSS mitigation area will use the point intercept method to measure vegetation cover. This method is best suited to measure scrub vegetation and will provide the most efficient and reliable method for estimating cover and species composition throughout the mitigation site. 2 Highly invasive nonnative plant species are those that are presented on the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC)

California Invasive Plant Inventory Database (Website: http://www.cal-ipc.org/paf/) for the Southwest region and have a High or Moderate rating or an Invasiveness Grade of A or B.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




The locations of transects will be determined randomly within the mitigation area using a numbered grid system. At each randomly selected site, a 25-meter point intercept transect will be performed. A 25-meter tape will be stretched taut at the randomly selected locations and all plant species that touch the transect tape, including the vertical plane under and above the tape, will be recorded at 1-meter intervals starting at 0 and ending at 25 meters (26 total data points per transect). Data to be recorded will include the species and the developmental stage of the plant(s) (seedling, juvenile, or adult) at each transect point. Seedlings will be identified for shrubs and subshrubs and will be determined as being small in size, having a nonwoody base, and usually the result of germination during the same year as the transect reading. Juveniles and adults will be identified as definitely woody at the base of the stem, with adults in flower and/or producing seed. Data tables will be prepared for each transect and will organize plant species by layers (groundcover/herbaceous layer and shrub layer) under the following categories: Native Perennials, Native Annuals, and Nonnative Species. Bare ground will be recorded for areas with no vegetative cover and litter will be recorded for areas with no live vegetative cover and in areas with dead vegetative matter covering the ground. Data on the height of the shrubs will also be recorded for all woody shrubs along each transect. Vegetation sampling results will be reported in absolute and relative cover and will include a table of combined transect data. Frequency data will be reported as the percent of transects in which a species is reported to occur. Height data will be reported as the average height of the shrub species. Species diversity will be a measure of the number of species encountered in each transect compared to the list of species installed in the restoration site.

Additionally, the entire mitigation area will be surveyed and a list will be prepared of all plant species observed. This species list will be reported in the annual report in addition to the transect data. DOCUMENTATION Separate documentation requirements for each of the two restoration projects are discussed in the following subsections. While there are different reporting requirements for the two CSS restoration projects, documentation for both projects may be submitted under a single cover. 11.56-acre Restoration Site Field memorandums will be prepared for each maintenance site visit by the Restoration Ecologist. Approximately 120 days following installation, the Restoration Ecologist will prepare a 120-day Plant Establishment Period (120-day PEP) Installation and Monitoring report that describes the installation and the details on the project’s consistency with these specifications as well as its progress during the 120-day PEP. The 120-day PEP report will also document the situations where it was necessary to deviate from the HRP (e.g., the availability of collected native seed, rescheduling due to weather conditions, remedial actions taken, and installation of additional signs or protective measures). In December of each full establishment year, a formal report will be prepared and submitted by the Restoration Ecologist to the Habitat Authority for review. A final report will be submitted to the Service and the Habitat Authority. The report will include (1) a summary of the site inspections; (2) an evaluation of appearance and development of the habitat; (3) results of qualitative and quantitative

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




monitoring; (4) photo documentation at specified locations; and (5) conclusions regarding the success or failure of the site as restored native habitat, including specific evidence supporting the conclusions and recommended action items prepared by the Restoration Ecologist. The report will also include how the site is progressing toward meeting the performance standards (i.e., site trends), as well as site protection status. When the 5-year monitoring period is completed for the restoration site, or when the Restoration Ecologist, OCWR, and Habitat Authority believes the site has satisfied the success criteria, a final monitoring report will be submitted. The final report will be supplied to the Habitat Authority and the Service with a cover letter serving as a Notice of Completion and requesting approval from the Service. Following receipt of the final monitoring report, the agencies will have a 60-day period in which to evaluate the reports and on-site conditions to confirm that the required performance criteria have been met. The agencies may request a site visit, or may base their decision solely on the submitted reports. If an objection to termination of the maintenance and monitoring period is raised by an agency, the agency must state the reasons for its objection and arguments for not terminating the program. If such an objection is clearly stated and conforms to the success criteria within this plan, additional monitoring and/or augmentation to the planting may be required at that time. It is, therefore, critical that the agencies review annual reports on a timely basis and provide comments throughout the maintenance and monitoring program so that any noted project deficiencies can be addressed prior to the expected end of the program. Once the concurrence is made that the restoration site has met performance standards, agency confirmation should be provided in writing to OCWR and further supplied to the Habitat Authority notifying them that they have now entered the long-term monitoring phase of the Project. 8.30-acre Restoration Site There are no formal documentation or agency-approval requirements for this restoration site. However, to document completion of compensatory obligations, the Restoration Ecologist will prepare the following reports and will submit them to the Habitat Authority for review, and to the Service and the CDFW for informational purposes. 1. Approximately 120 days following installation, the Restoration Ecologist will prepare and submit

an as-built report that describes the installation of the native plant community and details the project’s consistency with the specifications contained herein as well as the plant community’s progress during the 120-day establishment period.

2. In December of each full establishment year, the Restoration Ecologist will prepare and submit an annual report describing the status of the installed plant community. The report will include (1) a summary of the site inspections; (2) an evaluation of appearance and development of the habitat; (3) results of transects for percent cover; (4) photo documentation at specified locations; and (5) conclusions regarding the success or failure of the site as restored native habitat, including specific evidence supporting the conclusions and recommended action items prepared by the Restoration Ecologist.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




When the 5-year monitoring period is completed for the restoration site, or when the Restoration Ecologist and Habitat Authority believes the site has satisfied the success criteria, a final monitoring report will be submitted to the Service, the CDFW and the Habitat Authority to document the completion of compensatory obligations. The final report will be copied to the Habitat Authority and will include a cover letter serving as a Notice of Completion.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7




REFERENCES LSA. 2017. Draft Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the issuance of an incidental take

permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act for the federally listed as threatened coastal California gnatcatcher. Olinda Alpha Landfill Projects Brea, Orange County, California. Prepared for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office. April.

–––––. 2007. Resource Management Plan (RMP) Appendixes. Appendix N: Habitat Restoration

Framework Plan. Prepared for the Puente Hills Habitat Preservation Authority. July. Website: http://www.habitatauthority.org/resource-management-plan/, accessed December 5, 2016.

United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2016. Technical Assistance Letter Regarding the

Olinda Landfill Probe Access Roads Project, City of Brea, Orange County, California. [FWS-OR-08B0097-16CPA0312]. Addressed to Eric Krieg of LSA and signed by Jonathan Snyder of the Service. July.

L S A A U G U S T 2 0 1 7



P:\GEO1401D\Restoration Plan\Habitat Restoration Plan_081117.docx (08/11/17)

APPENDIX A

FIGURES

Service Layer Credits: © 2017 HERE © AND© 2017 Microsoft Corporation

SOURCE: Bing Maps (2014); OCWR (2016)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\HRP_ProjectLocation.mxd (3/2/2017)

FIGURE 1

Olinda Alpha Landfill ProjectsOff-Site CSS Restoration

Project Location0 1 2MILES

LEGENDProposed Restoration Area (19.86 acres)Olinda Alpha LandfillPuente Hills Preserve

Service Layer Credits: Image courtesy ofLAR-IAC © 2017 Microsoft Corporation

SOURCE: Bing Maps (2014); Puente Hills Habitat Authority (2/2017)I:\GEO1401D\GIS\HRP_OffsiteMitigation_OlindaLandfill.mxd (6/20/2017)

FIGURE 2


Project Detail

LEGENDFuel Modification ZoneSCE Easement

Proposed Restoration Area (19.86 acres Total)8.30-acre Restoration Site11.56-acre Restoration Site

0 90 180FEET

I:\GEO1401D\G\Container_Planting_Generic.cdr (5/13/2016)

FIGURE 3

Container Planting Detail


��

��

��

��

��

��

� � ��

��

� � ��

��

� � ��

��

��

��!

��!

� ��

� ��

�"�"�� # ��

��$# � ��

�"�"�� # ��

��$# � ��

�� %��

�� %��

PLANTING DETAIL SLOPE PLANTING DETAIL

low - effect habitat conservation plan · june 2017 . low - effect habitat conservation plan ....

Documents