HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT - NOVEMBER 30, 2006BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
' AGENDA REPORT -November 30, 2006
Baldwin Contracting
Applicant: Company (Rene
Vercruyssen, representative).
Owner: Pacific Realty
File #: MIN 96-03
General Plan: Orchard and Field Crops
Lease"Area: 627 acres
Project Site: 235 acres
Parcel Size: Mined Area: 193 acres
Equipment Area: -40 -acres
Topsoil Stockpile: 2 acres
Supervisor 1
District:
Zoning: A-40 (Agricultural, 407acre
Pete Calarco
parcel)'
Planners:
Assistant Director
Dan Breedon, AICP
Principal Planner
APN: 039-530-019 & 020 'Attachments:
�1
}
A:
Reclamation Plan
Discussion
Resolution Certifying EIR
IS:
Exhibit 1 — Findings of Fact
Exhibit 2 — Mitigation
Monitoring Plan
Resolution Approving Mining
Use Permit, Reclamation
Plan, Financial Assurance
C:
Exhibit 1 - Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Exhibit 2 — Conditions of
Approval
Public Works Nov. 20 2006
D:
Memo regarding revised
road condition
Draft EIR, Final EIR fi
Separate
including updated response
Transmittal
to the Williamson Act issue
and Reclamation Plan
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 n Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 1 of 13■
Adopt resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report as consistent
with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
including the Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
Adopt resolution approving the Mining Permit 96-03.including the reclamation
plan, financial assurance cost estimate and a statement of overriding
considerations
SUMMARY
The Mining Use Permit and the Reclamation Plan pertain to a 193 -acre long-term
off -channel mining operation to extract high quality construction aggregate over a
20-30 year period on the M & T Ranch property. The applicant has been in
process since 1996. In 2005, the applicant filed an immediate cancellation
request from the Williamson Act contract for a portion of the property.
This staff report and the attachments contain the information necessary to
consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report under the
California Environmental QualityAct and consider approving the project. Project
approval can only occur after the Final Environmental Impact Report is certified.
Certification does not constitute approval or -endorsement of the project. The
Final Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgment of the
County.
The Final Environmental Impact Report identifies impacts from the project,
mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to less than significant and lists those
impacts that cannot be reduced to Tess than significant. , There are two
environmental impact categories that cannot be reduced to a level of less than
significant:. Air Quality and Traffic.
After certification of the Final EIR, the Planning Commission can consider action .
on the project. The project is. a mining permit and a reclamation plan with a
financial assurance estimate. The mining permit is the authorization to mine and
the reclamation plan is the plan for preparing the site for the intended end use
after mining ceases for each phase. If the County chooses to approve the
project, then it must make certain findings that there is a .public benefit that
outweighs the impacts and therefore the Air Quality and Traffic impacts are
considered acceptable. These findings are called the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
This application has been processed under a number of state and local codes
including but not limited to the Butte County Code, the state Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act, the California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act) and the
California Environmental Quality Act.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 2 of 13■
CEQA BACKGROUND
This item has been scheduled before the Planning Commission to consider
certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report as consistent with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and to take action on the project. The first
part of this discussion will focus on the CEQA process. The second will discuss
the project with a lead in to the findings. The reason for this is that the
Commission must first consider certifying the EIR before it can consider
approving the project. Each of these actions requires certain findings.
The EIR process typically begins with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) circulated
through the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) from their State
Clearinghouse (SCH). A Notice of Preparation is used as review process after
the initial study to determine the impacts and issues that resource agencies
would like addressed in the EIR in order to adequately analyze the project.
The lead agency compiles those written responses it has received from agencies
and prepares the scope of study for the EIR. In the case of Butte County, staff
then begins the consultant selection process to prepare the EIR. CEQA requires
that the EIR reflect the independent judgment of the lead agency. The local
guidelines require that the County select the consultant and prepare a contract
for reimbursement of the applicant to the County for the costs associated with
preparation of the EIR.
County staff works closely with selected consultant in preparing the Draft EIR for
circulation and review. Again, the County sends copies of the Draft EIR through
the State .Clearinghouse with a Notice of Completion (NOC) and to local
agencies for. review. Additionally, a public notice is circulated and a hearing to
receive comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR- is conducted by the Planning
Commission.
The public and agency comments. are compiled for inclusion in what will be the
Final EIR. The Final EIR contains the draft, comments on the draft and proposed
responses to those comments. The EIR is not complete, however, until the lead
agency determines that the Final EIR is consistent with, CEQA with the
certification. Only after certification, may the agency consider approval of the
project.
An EIR includes a discussion of the project, discussion of impacts, the level of
significance.of the impact, mitigation measures and the level of significance after
the mitigation measure. There are times when a mitigation measure cannot
reduce an impact to a level of less than significant. The phrase, significant and
unavoidable is used to describe such an impact. If the lead agency chooses to
approve a project with significant unavoidable impacts, it must include a
statement of overriding consideration. This is discussed further in the following
sections.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 3 of 13 ■
THE M & T CEQA PROCESS
The applicant filed the mining permit and reclamation plan application in 1996
under case number MIN 96-03. As lead agency under CEQA, the County
prepared an Initial Study and identified potentially significant environmental
impacts that could result from the proposed project. On February 28, 1997, Butte
County distributed a Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR to the State
Clearinghouse, Responsible Agencies, and the public. The County retained the
services of a consultant firm to prepare the EIR under the standard. county
contract process.
The Draft EIR was circulated for public review from May 12, 1998 to July 2, 1998.
A public hearing on the Draft EIR was held by the Butte County Planning
Commission on June 11, 1998. Extensive comment was received. The Planning
Commission continued the proposed . project off agenda for further, staff
evaluation. Staff decided to update.and recirculate certain sections of the Draft
EIR (including the Traffic, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Noise sections) in.
order to update technical data. In addition, Staff required the completion of a
pedestrian level archaeological survey at the Project site. Staff then decided to
recirculate the entire Draft EIR to ensure consistency and accuracy between the
new and old sections, and to maximize the opportunity for public comment on the
Project and the Draft EIR. The County hired a new consultant, Resource Design
Inc., to prepare the revised Draft EIR. The particular modifications to the original
May 1998 Draft EIR are outlined on page 1-3 of the revised Draft EIR.
On September 30, 2002, the County filed a Notice of Completion for the revised
Draft EIR with the State of California Clearinghouse and circulated it for a. 45 -day
public review/comment period commencing. October 12, 2002 through November
25, 2002. These comments are responded to within the Final EIR Response to
Comments document.- On October 24, 2002, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing in Oroville to receive public_ comment on the Project. Public notice
of this meeting was provided by the County. These. comments are also
responded to within the Final EIR Response to Comments document.
In October 2003, the County released a Final EIR, consisting of the revised Draft
EIR and a Response to Comments Document,, to the public. The County
provided notice of the availability of the Final EIR to agencies, organizations, and
the public. On October 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a hearing to
solicit public comment on the Final EIR. The Planning Commission held
additional hearings to solicit public comment on the Project on January 22, 2004,
March 11, 2004, April 8, 2004, and August 26, 2004.
A comment from the Department of Conservation was received during this
process, regarding the proposed project's Williamson Act compatibility and
reclamation plan contents. Addressing the Williamson Act issue was, in a large
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 4 of 13■
part, the reason for the more than two-year time period when the Final EIR was
last presented to -the Planning Commission. Baldwin responded to this issue by
applying for immediate cancellation from the Williamson Act contract for a portion
of the property. This issue is discussed further in the next section. Additionally,
revisions to the reclamation plan were prepared for further review by the Office of
Mine Reclamation, another division of the Department of Conservation. A phone
conversation on November 16 between County staff and the Department of
Conservation/Office of Mine Reclamation staff confirmed that the reclamation
plan issues had been addressed.
An updated response has been prepared that discusses the Williamson Act
issue. This. has been, inserted into the Final EIR for the Planning Commission's
consideration to certify the Final EIR.
One of the purposes of an EIR under CEQA is to outline all of the impacts,
mitigations and the level 'of impact after mitigation. As discussed in the previous
section, there can be circumstances where impacts remain significant even after
all feasible mitigation measures are applied. These are called significant
unavoidable impacts. The. Final EIR determined there would be significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts in the following areas: Air Quality and
Traffic.
CEQA allows for project approval with the adoption of overriding considerations
for projects with significant and unavoidable impacts. If the specific economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidableadverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects
may be considered "acceptable." In order to approve a .statement of overriding
considerations, the Planning Commission must state in writing the specific
reasons to support its action based, on the Final EIR and/or other information in
the record. The statement of overriding considerations must be supported by
substantial evidence' in the record. Given the shortage of a local supply of
aggregate, the property's status as a significant mineral resource (i.e., MRZ-2a),
and other considerations, staff recommends the Planning. Commission adopt the
attached Statement of Overriding Considerations. These are outlined further in
the attached resolution of approval including the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
THE PROJECT
The project is a request for a Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan for an
aggregate mining operation on a 235 -acre portion of. the M&T Chico Ranch,
approximately 1.5 acres east of the Sacramento River and 5 miles southwest of.
the City of Chico.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■.
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report. ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 5 of 13 ■
Due to a comment from the Department of Conservation regarding incompatibility
with the Williamson Act, the project also includes a request for immediate
cancellation from the Williamson Act contract. Consideration of the immediate
cancellation is not under the authority of the Planning Commission as delegated
the Board of Supervisors. It is important to discuss in the Final EIR for the
purposes of the Board's decision on immediate cancellation consistent with the
requirements of CEQA.
The project is located in the A-40 (Agricultural'— 40 -acre minimum parcel size)
zone and. is designated OFC (Orchard and Field Crops) by the Butte County
General Plan. The proposed use is a conditionally permitted use in the A-40
zone (Section 24-90 (c) (5) of Butte County Code).
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) is the state mining law that
regulates mining activities. SMARA identifies three requirements prior to
conducting mining activities: 1) Authorization/permit ,to mine; 2) An approved
reclamation plan; and 3) A financial assurance mechanism. Attachment A gives
a detailed discussion of the applicable requirements for the reclamation plan.
The applicant proposes to mine up to 250,000 cubic yards of aggregate material
annually in phases over a 20 — 30 year period for a total removal of 5.5 million
cubic yards over the life of the mine. At the conclusion of mining operations, the
end use of the property will be reclaimed to open space/wildlife habitat uses.
Surface mining and reclamation will be required to meet the requirements of
Article II of Chapter II of Butte County Code (Surface Mining and Reclamation)
and Public Resources Code Section 2710 et seq. (California Surface. Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975 as amended.
Baldwin proposes to mine identified deposits of sand and gravel, and
subsequently process the extracted materials onsite into high quality aggregate
for road and building construction. The California State Geologist has
designated the Project site as MRZ 2a (area where significant mineral resources
are present). Land included in MRZ-2a is important because it contains known
economic mineral deposits (e.g., construction aggregates). Total Project reserves
are estimated at over 5.5 million yards. Improvements on the site would include
an aggregate processing facility (rock crusher, screen, and aggregate washer),
office, scales, diesel fuel storage tank, settling ponds, drainage system, and an
improved road crossing over Little Chico Creek.
The project consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation. The
mining would take place on 193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over a 20 to 30—year
period. Reclamation would occur incrementally and would consist of the creation
of open -water wetland wildlife habitat and agricultural uses. The aggregate
would be processed (washed and screened) on a 40 -acre area at the site. The
project is located on a portion of the M&T Chico Ranch approximately 1.5 miles
east of the Sacramento River and approximately 5 -miles southwest of the City of
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 6 of 13■
Chico in -an area north of and adjacent to Ord Ferry Road, east of and partially
adjacent to River Road. Access to the site would be provided by River Road:
The project is located . on County Assessor's Parcel numbers 039-530-019 and
039=530-020.
The Project site is located on a large ranch, surrounded by other agricultural
uses. The site is approximately 1.5 miles south of the Chico Wastewater Plant.
The Project site has been infrequently farmed for many years, sometimes
grazed, other times. fallowed. The site is unleveled and unirrigated. The site
topography is rolling, unleveled agricultural land dissected by stream channels
and , swales. Little Chico Creek is the primary drainage feature on-site, flowing
along the northern edge of the proposed mine site, and along the western edge
of the proposed plant site. A total of six houses are located along River Road to
the west of the Project site, and along Old Ferry Road to the south of the Project
site. The closest house is located 300 feet west of the project site.
As mentioned previously in this report, staff had a conversation on November 16,
2006 with the Department of Conservation, Office of Mine Reclamation (OMR)
staff regarding the changes to the reclamation plan that were made in response
to OMR's comments. OMR staff indicated that their -comments had been
addressed in the current version of the reclamation plan.
As mentioned in the previous section, the Department of Conservation had
indicated that the project was not compatible with the Williamson Act. There
were a few options for the applicant in response to the Department of
Conservation's position on compatibility with the Williamson Act: challenge the
Department of Conservation, file for cancellation of a portion of .the Williamson
Act lands or withdraw the project. Baldwin decided to file for immediate
cancellation from the Williamson Act contract. The chronology below shows the
process relative to the Williamson Act issue.
On April 22; 1996 Baldwin Contracting Company and the owner of the
M&T Chico Ranch, Pacific Realty Associates, L.P.-executed a lease for a
portion of the property on the M&T Chico Ranch.
On August 30, .1996 Baldwin filed a use permit and reclamation plan
application.
In 2000, the State Mining.and Geology Board (SMGB) approved a petition
by KRC Holdings, Inc., and ordered the Department of Mines and Geology
(DMG) to assess and classify mineral resources on the M&T Chico Ranch,
including the land to be cancelled.
In September 2002 the County ,released the Draft EIR and received the
November 18, 2002 comments from the Department of Conservation
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division. ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006.■ Page 7 of 13■
(DOC) stating that the proposed mining project was incompatible with the
Williamson Act.
On October 11, 2005 Pac Trust filed a Notice of Partial Nonrenewal for the
106 acres to be cancelled and voluntarily submitted a Petition of Partial
Cancellation.
On November 28, 2005 DOC commented on the applicant's Petition for
Partial Cancellation and concurred that the "consistency" findings required
for cancellation could be met.
February 21, 2006 the Butte County Land Conservation Act (Williamson
Act) Committee (also known as the LCA Committee) met and the
applicant was directed to work with staff to research and provide additional
support for the cancellation findings.
April 18, 2006 the LCA Committee met again on this continued item and
made the recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for denial of the
tentative contract cancellation, with the Committee unanimously agreeing
that Findings 1-4 could be met, and the majority unable to support Finding
5.
While it is not the role of the Planning Commission to take action on the
cancellation request, it is a required component of CEQA review. An additional
response has been prepared for inclusion in the response to comment section of
the final EIR. This response discusses the applicant's decision to file an
immediate cancellation request and the review required for that cancellation.
Under the requirements of Butte County, Williamson Act immediate cancellations
are reviewed by the Land Conservation Act Committee (LCA) serving in an
advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors. Immediate cancellations are
consideration by the Board after the LCA review. Consideration of immediate
cancellation is a discretionary action by the Board of Supervisors.
The Planning Commission is required to certify the Final EIR is in compliance
with CEQA and that it has been reviewed before consideration of the project.
The Commission also must certify that the Final EIR, including responses to
comments, reflects the independent judgment of the County.
To support a decision approving the project, CEQA requires that the County must
make findings for each significant environmental impact that the project has
been: (1) changed or altered, including adoption of mitigation measures, to avoid
or substantially lessen the significant impact as identified in the Final EIR. The
County may make findings that specific economic, legal, social, technological;' or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives
identified in the Final EIR. Required findings must be supported by substantial
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 8 of 13■
evidence in the record. In making findings on the significant impacts identified in
the Final EIR, the Planning Commission must also adopt a program for reporting
on the changes and mitigation measures that it has required. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091 is shown below:
15091. Findings
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been
certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project
unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant
effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible
findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
(b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in
the record.
(c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding
has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation
measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific
reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a
program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the
project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant
environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit
conditions, agreements, or other measures.
(e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other
material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based.
(f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings
required by this section.
CEQA requires the Planning Commission to balance the economic, legal, social,
technological or other benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks in considering its approval. If the. project is approved, the
Commission must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations that states the
specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR or other information
in the record. CEQA. Guidelines Section 15093 is provided below. The attached
project approval resolution to this report contains findings for project approval
including the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
■ Butte County Department of DevelopmentServices ■ Planning Division ■
M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 9 of 13■
15093. Statement of Overriding Considerations
(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh
the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may
be considered "acceptable."
(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially
lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based
on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding
considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of
determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings
required pursuant to Section 15091.
The Statement of Overriding Considerations that is included in the attached
resolution includes the findings necessary to approve the project with significant
unavoidable impacts. The key, project benefits related to CEQA section 15093
are summarized below and detailed in the attached resolution (Attachment C,
Exhibit 1).
A. Continued supply of readily available high quality aggregate for use in
local public and private construction projects. At present, the County
only has approximately 40 percent of its 50 -year demand for aggregate
permitted. The State Geologist/Division of Mines and Geology
conducted a Mineral Land Classification Study for the Project site in
2000 and determined the land was a significant mineral deposit and
classified the land at MRZ-2a (Draft EIR, section 4.2.2, p. 4-2.1).
B. Generation of employment opportunities associated with mining of
aggregates, required monitoring and reporting, construction associated
with on site facilities and improving and maintaining roadway facilities;
and restoration of wildlife areas.
C. Generation of employment opportunities for a locally based company
Baldwin Contracting, which employs approximately 200 people during
peak construction season (approximately 80 employees are employed
year round) and has an annual payroll of more than 9 million dollars.
D. Protection and development of a significant aggregate resource
designated under the Mineral Land Classification. system by the
California Department of Conservation as a. MRZ-2a. As explained in
Draft EIR Section 3.4.3, the M&T Chico Ranch Site has been classified
by the State Geologist. This report classifies the site as MRZ-2a. for
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division is
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 10 of 13■
construction aggregates. Mineral Resource Zone 2a is specifically
defined as'.
Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data
indicate that significant measured or indicated resources are
present. MRZ-2 is divided into MRZ-2a and MRZ-2b on the
basis of degree of knowledge and economic factors. Areas
classified MRZ-2a contain discovered mineral deposits that
are either measured or indicated reserves as determined by
such evidence as drilling records, sample analysis, surface
exposure, and mine information. Land included in MRZ-2a
is of prime importance because it contains known economic
mineral deposits.
Total Project reserves are estimated at over 5.5 million cubic yards
(approximately 8.25 million tons). The resources identified ori the
Project site are considered by the State to be excellent potential
aggregate sources for use in both ready -mix concrete and asphaltic
concrete product. There is no other land, proximate or otherwise, in
Butte County that the State Geologist has classified as a significant
mineral resource.
E. The Project will include fair share monetary contributions to improve
and maintain transportation facilities in the area including road
pavement, intersection safety, and Little Chico Creek Bridge
reconstruction. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 requires Baldwin to
contribute a fair share contribution to reconstruct the Ord Ferry Road at
Little Chico Creek. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 requires Baldwin to
contribute a fair share'of the cost to improve the pavement on River
Road Between Chico River Road and the Project access with a two-
inch asphalt overlay. Mitigation Measure 4.6-9 requires Baldwin to
contribute a fair share of the cost to install a traffic signal and improve
lane configurations at the Durham -Dayton Highway and Midway
intersection.
F. Potential decrease in the use of fuels and transportation costs for
trucking aggregate to markets in Butte County and Chico compared
with the current Baldwin Contracting Company aggregate source on
Stony Creek. Section 4.3.2 of the Final EIR cites that transportation
costs are a significant part of aggregate prices: In areas lacking
nearby aggregate sources, delivery charges may be greater than the
sale price of the material at the plant site. Transportation is a key
'factor in underscoring the economic importance of maintaining local
aggregate sources. In many cases, for each 30 miles of haul distance,
the price per ton of delivered aggregate doubles. Since much of the
statewide use of aggregate is for public works projects (see Figure 4.0-
1) each doubling of the price of the construction aggregate means less
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 11 of 13■
public improvements (e.g., roadway maintenance projects, public
building construction) can be accomplished for each public dollar.
G. Maintenance of adequate aggregate reserves available for future use
in Butte County to account for population growth. Final EIR Section
4.3 provides a collective response concerning comments received
regarding the necessity of additional aggregate resources in Butte
County. In the next 30 years .(the maximum permit time frame
requested by Baldwin), the City of Chico will consume over 20 million
tons of aggregates (four times the total reserves at the M&T Chico
Ranch Mine site) while the County as a whole will consume over 60
million tons. Over the next 50 years, Chico will require more than 45
million tons, and the County will need nearly 130 million tons. When
compared to the current estimates of supply, the County may currently
have approximately 40 percent of its 50 -year demand *and, without
permitting of additional reserves for development, could exhaust
aggregate supplies before 2030. While actual conditions will vary
based on a number of factors, including actual unreported supplies and
production. levels (which vary in response to the economy and local
growth), it is clear that the County will need new aggregate production
if demand is to be met.
H. Extraction of a known valuable aggregate resource consistent with
local and state policy.
I. Potential to reduce impacts on transportation systems and reduce air
.quality impacts if Baldwin Contracting Company's Stony Creek
operation is replaced by this facility, since the aggregate resource will
be closer -to the Chico and Butte County markets.
J. Highly regulated, responsible mining under carefully controlled
conditions, with the ability to revoke the individual permit at any time
after due process, for failure to comply with the terms and conditions of
the permit.
K. Creation of an opportunity- for open space and new wildlife habitat
areas after Reclamation Plan implementation., The end use of the
mine site will include an over -wintering pond 'for waterfowl and
associated aquatic and wetland fauna. The pond area shall become a
managed wildlife preserve. Shallow cuts along the perimeter of the
pond will result in the creation of wetland areas along the pond.
L. Maintenance of 100 -year flood plain, increased storage of floodwaters
and improved flood protection. As discussed under Final EIR 4.7.4
and Impact 4.4-8 (Page 4.4-76 of the Draft EIR), the creation of the
proposed pond/pit will result, at the end of operations, in approximately .
1,000 acre-feet of available floodwater storage and the same amount
of groundwater recharge. This will be a sustained beneficial impact of .
the Project. Mitigation Measures 4.4-7a, b, and c. provide
approximately ten-year flood protection for the created lake from
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 12 of 13m
overflows of Little Chico Creek and from local agricultural runoff. For
flows in Little Chico Creek exceedin a roximatel 2 000 cfs or for
g pP Y ,
flooding . from the Sacramento- River which yields, equivalent flood
stages, floodwaters will flow into the pond/lake, serving to reduce flood
depths.
M: Protection of adjacent wells and generation of data relevant to
groundwater quality and quantity over a period of up to 30 years (life of
operation) for use by the State and County in, gaining a greater
understanding of groundwater resources in the area. Mitigation
Measures 4.4-3e and 4.4-2c require that Baldwin develop a
groundwater monitoring program, approved by the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board and by Butte County.
N: Avoidance and reduction in reliance upon highly disturbing in -stream
mining and related environmental concerns associated with in -stream.
mining. Baldwin Contracting Company's closest available source of
aggregate is its mining operation at Stony Creek near.Hamilton City in
Glenn_ County (located on SR -32). This site is nearing depletion and is
considered an in -stream mining operation. The proposed M&T Chico
Ranch Mine is considered an "off channel" mine, meaning that it is not
located within a stream. The M&T Chico Ranch Mine is instead
located on alluvial terraces away from environmentally sensitive in -
stream mine sites.
O. Generation of property and sales.tax revenues.
The above discussion and the attachments to the report have been prepared in
support of staffs recommendation to certify the Final EIR and approve the
project.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■
■ M & T Mine MIN 96-03 ■ Agenda Report ■ November 30, 2006 ■ Page 13 of 13■
VICINITY .MAP "I., .1 1
..........
ti
et
Project Location
7,
Durham'-Daylon Hv
.... ... ...... . ... ..
%
Ca
z
Burdick Rd
17,
Fi
ev
K
i,
J
MIN 96-03
039-530-019 & 020
``
-
��
. .144 •. . . ' �
`�%.
r
!r I
ewe
River
to
eft
-
„' Project Location
ZIr
_T -T -I - - - - -- - - - -
A-40
OFC
;rr 4_-40 �-
OFC I -
�V f= i.
DAYTON
it
°`
>;�
OFC
2,800 1,400 0 2,800 5,600 8,400 11,200 14,000 16,800 19,600 22,400 25,200
Feet
BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
®1
Supervisorial
Applicant: M & T Chico Ranch Mine Owner: Pacific Realty Associates, LP
Hearin Date: November 30, 2006 @ 1:30 p.m. I Existing Zone: A-40 (Agricultural, 40 acre minimum)
Request:
Mining & Reclamation plan for a 193 acre parcel over a 20 to 30 year period.
District #4
Assessor Parcel No: 039-530-019 & 020
File: MIN 96-03
ATTACHMENT A — Reclamation Standards Discussion
RECLAMATION STANDARDS
Reclamation activities must comply. with the reclamation standards found in
California Code of Regulations, title 14, sections 3700-3713. The following is a
discussion of how the project will comply with each of these standards.
§ 3702 Financial Assurances
Sections 2770 and 2773.1 of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975,
Public Resources Code Section 2710 et seq.("SMARA") require surface mining
operators to obtain lead agency (city or county) approved financial assurances
for reclamation. To this end, the County annually requires Baldwin to update the
existing financial assurances to ensure there are adequate financial assurances
in.place for all, costs related to completing the reclamation. The current financial
assurances cost estimates for the Project are $103,526.93. (See Reclamation
Plan, Attachment 4.)
§ 3703 Performance Standards for Wildlife Habitat
The Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section 3703.
Baseline conditions are described in Section 4.6 (Biological Resources) of the
Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR"). (See Reclamation Plan,
Attachment 15.) As discussed in the revised Reclamation Plan dated September
2004 ("Reclamation Plan"), shallow wetlands will be established along the
margins of a reclaimed lake. A combination of shallow and deep water habitat for
a variety of wildlife species will be created using the best management practices.
Further, a nesting island will be constructed using excess overburden. (See
Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, Attachments 7, 13.) Native vegetation will be
established on reclaimed area by a combination of natural revegetation and
plantings. Topsoil will be respread on the margins of the lake and in the shallow
wetlands areas to enhance the establishment and growth of native vegetation.
(Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, 22-23.)
Baldwin will retain an expert in wildlife habitat reclamation ,to implement the
revegetation plan and monitor success. Performance standards for the shallow
wetlands and lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the
vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measured of cover,
density and species richness for the reclaimed lands to similar parameters on
reference areas and the baseline conditions put forth in the Draft EIR. Methods of
monitoring and assessment will be based on guidelines. provided in the
Department of Conservation's recently published manual on the rehabilitation
process for disturbed lands (Newton and Claassen, 2003). (Reclamation Plan,
pp. 22-23.)
§ 3704 Performance Standards for Backfilling, Regrading, Slope Stability,
and Recontouring
A comprehensive slope stability study was prepared for the Project by AGRA
Earth & Environmental, Inc., Excavation Stability. M&T Chico Ranch Mine
Reclamation (See Draft EIR, Appendix E; Reclamation Plan, Attachment 8.) The
study found that 3:1 is an appropriate factor. of safety for slopes at the Project
site. Therefore, Baldwin has incorporated a 3:1 slope for all final slopes into the
Project design. In addition, the design of any structures proposed onsite,
including batch plants, offices, and other ancillary facilities will be regulated by
the Butte County Building Division of the Development Services Department.
(See Draft EIR, Section 4.3, p. 4.3-16.)
§ 3705 Performance Standards for Revegetation
Section 3705 measures success of revegetation "based upon the effectiveness
of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by comparing the quantified
measures of vegetative cover, density, and species -richness of the reclaimed
mined -lands to similar parameters of naturally occurring vegetation in the area."
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3705(m).)
The Reclamation Plan provides for a detailed and exhaustive revegetation plan.
The Reclamation Plan's revegetation standards track the statutory; requirements
mandated by SMARA and its associated regulations.
California Code of Regulations, section 3705(m) states the following:
Success of revegetation shall be judged based upon
the effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved
end use, and by comparing the quantified measures
of vegetative cover, density, and species -richness of
the reclaimed mined -lands to similar parameters of
naturally occurring vegetation in the area.
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3705(m).)
The Reclamation Plan tracks these requirements. The Reclamation Plan states:
"Performance standards ... will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the
vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measures of cover,
density and species richness of the reclaimed lands to similar parameters on
reference areas."
Further, the Reclamation Plan specifically provides that revegetation monitoring
will take place for five years. During the five-year monitoring period; annual
reports will be submitted to the Butte County Planning Division. The reports will
describe the success of the revegetation plan and will include recommendations
for how to improve, if possible, the plan's success in the following year. In
addition, -.the reclamation plan requires that "[m]ethods for monitoring and
assessment will be based on guidelines provided in the Department of
Conservation's recently published manual on the rehabilitation process for
disturbed lands (Newton and Claassen, 2003).
§ 3706 Performance Standards for Drainage, Diversion Structures,
Waterways, and Erosion Control
The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section 3706. Baldwin will
obtain coverage under a general stormwater control permit from'the Regional
Water Quality Control Board before initiating onsite activities. The stormwater
permit will require the development and implementation of a stormwater pollution
prevention plan ("SWPPP"). By complying with the requirements of the
stormwater permit and SWPPP,. Baldwin will necessarily control runoff to ensure
that discharge of surface flows from the site meet stormwater pollution control
permit requirements, and will comply. with applicable erosion control and
sediment control requirements. Further, as indicated in the excavation stability
study (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 8), the 3:1 final slopes incorporated into the
final Project design will stabilize the reclaimed area, allowing most onsite runoff
to remain onsite, thereby minimizing contribution of sediment to nearby streams
and limiting erosion.
The streambed and streambanks of Little Chico Creek will not be disturbed
except for road and conveyor crossings. Stanchions supporting the conveyor will
be footed in nonsensitive areas, and the road crossing of the stream will be
improvements on an already existing crossing, thus resulting in no increased
impact: There will be no in -stream mining. (Reclamation Plan, p. 13.)
§ 3707 Performance Standards for Prime Agricultural Land Reclamation
This performance standard does not apply to the project because it is not located
on Prime Agricultural Land.
§ 3708 Performance Standards for Other Agricultural Land
The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section 3708. As discussed in
Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, the Project's ensured use will be reclamation to
agricultural uses for the plant area (40 acres), while the mining area (193 acres)
will be reclaimed as open water and wetlands.
The revegetation scientist that Baldwin will retain for the Project will set up
appropriate reference areas for both the plant site agricultural reclaimed area, as
well as the perimeter of the lake/wetland area. Productivity of the irrigated
agricultural land at the reclaimed plant site will be compared to .that of adjacent
irrigated agricultural land on the M&T Ranch. The plant site. will revert to become
a part of a larger field on the M&T Ranch, and will be managed the same as the
rest of the land in that field. Performance standards for the shallow wetlands and
lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the vegetation for
wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measures of cover, density and species
richness of the reclaimed lands to similar parameters on reference areas
approved by County staff.
§ .3709 Performance Standards for Building, Structure and Equipment
Removal
There are currently no buildings or structures within the proposed permit area.
Buildings and structures associated with the aggregate processing plant will be
removed when mining is completed.
§ 3710 Performance Standards for Stream Protection, Including Surface
and Groundwater
Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) of the Draft EIR describes the
potential water -related impacts of the Project. The only proximate surface water
stream, Little Chico Creek, will not be disturbed or impacted by the Project. There
will no in -stream mining. Other surface water bodies include wetlands which will
be mitigated as required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other state
and federal agencies. During mining operations, industrial stormwater and
process water will be collected in onsite recycle ponds. In addition, Baldwin will
operate the Project in accordance with a California Regional Water Quality
Control Board stormwater control permit and SWPPP.
As -discussed in the Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel Mining-'M&T'Chico
Ranch (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 9; Draft EIR, Appendix,D.1), the Project
will not have a significant impact on groundwater resources. (See Draft EIR,
section 4.4). The proposed lake will actually result in enhanced groundwater
recharge from precipitation and evaporation from the shallow groundwater.
Further, although there is recharge to the water table which occurs as a result of
percolation losses from Little Chico Creek, the Project will not alter that process.
(Draft EIR, p. 4.4-38.)
The groundwater quality study prepared for the Draft EIR by Monarch Laboratory
concluded that there is no groundwater impact associated with the proposed
operations. (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 11; Draft EIR, Appendix D-3).
Following reclamation, as part of the approved Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for
the Project, Baldwin will develop a groundwater monitoring program to be
approved by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and Butte
County to monitor recharge and water quality following reclamation. (Draft EIR,
pp. 4.4-64 - 4.4-78.)
§ 3711 Performance Standards for Topsoil, Salvage, Maintenance, and
Redistribution
The Reclamation Plan describes how topsoil and subsoil (growth medium) will be
saved and stockpiled for reclamation uses as shown in Attachment 7
Revegetation Plan. (Reclamation Plan, p. 8; Attachment .3, Item 6, p. 5;
Attachment 5.)
§ 3712 Performance Standards for Tailing and Mine Waste Management
Under the Reclamation Plan, the Project will not generate any mine wastes
because all mine products will be sold or used, in reclamation. (Reclamation Plan,
Attachment 3, Item 5, p. 5.)
§ 3713 Performance Standards for Closure of Surface Openings
There are no drill holes, portals, shaft or tunnels proposed for the mining
operations that would require abandonment.
ATTACHMENT B
Resolution No..
A RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, AND CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT. REPORT FOR THE M&T CHICO RANCH MINE MINING USE PERMIT
AND.RECLAMATION PLAN (MIN 96-03)
BACKGROUND
The M&T Chico Ranch Mine ("Project') proposed by Baldwin Contracting
Company ("Baldwin") consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation
approximately 5 -miles southwest of the City of Chico. The mining would take
place on 193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over a 20 to 30—year period. The Project
site would be reclaimed to high-quality, open -water, wetland wildlife habitat and
agricultural uses. The mined aggregate would be processed' (washed and
screened) on a 40 -acre area at the site.
The Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR") for the Project came
on public hearing before the Planning Commission of the County of Butte
("County") on October 23, 2003 and January 22, 2004. Having considered all the
written and documentary information submitted, the staff reports,. oral. testimony,
other evidence presented, and the administrative record as a whole, the Planning
Commission hereby finds and decides as follows. - .
RECITALS
1. Lead Agency Status: Butte County is the lead agency under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.
("CEQA") for preparation and certification of the Final EIR for the Project.
2. Proiect Description: The Project allows a long-term, off -channel gravel
mining operation. The mining would take place on 193 -acres of a 235 -acre site
over an estimated 20 to 30—year period. Approximately six acres will be mined
each year. The aggregate would be processed (washed and screened) on a 40 -
acre area at the site. .
a) Acreages: The approximate acreages for the Project are as follows:
Lease area: 627 acres
Project site: 235 acres
Page 1 of 17
Mined area: 193 acres
Equipment area: 40 acres
Topsoil stockpile: 2, acres
b. Location: The Project is located on a portion of the M&T Chico Ranch
approximately 1.5 miles east of the Sacramento River and. approximately
5 miles southwest of the City of Chico, in an area north of and adjacent to
Old Ferry Road, and east of, and partially adjacent to, River Road.
Access to the site would be provided by River Road.
c. Material to be mined: High quality construction, aggregates including
gravel and sand. The Project site is part of the present Sacramento River
Floodplain and the gravels .and sands underlying the site consist of
channel deposits from the river.
d. Production: Production numbers for the Project are as follows:
Maximum annual mine production: 275,000 cubic yards (mined)
Maximum annual mine production: 250,000 cubic yards (marketed)
Average annual mined product amount: 66,667 cubic yards
Total production: 5,500,000 cubic yards
e. Traffic Volumes for Trucks: According to the traffic study contained in
the Draft EIR, the Project will generate approximately 16,667 trips per
year. Average daily trips generated will be 128 (64 arriving and 64
departing). The- Project will generate 20 additional AM and PM Peak
Traffic Trips.
3. Discretionary Approvals Required: The proposed Project involves the
following discretionary approvals and CEQA actions by the Planning
Commission:
a) Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
implementing mitigation measures. (See Exhibit 2.)
b) Certify the Final EIR for the M&T Chico Ranch Mine Long -Term
Off -Channel Mining Use Permit application (SCH 97022080), based
on Findings of Fact documenting compliance with CEQA, independent
review and consideration of the information in the EIR prior to taking
action on the Project.
c) Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. (See
Attachment C; Exhibit 1 to the staff report.)
d) Approve the M&T Chico Ranch Mining Use Permit No. Min 96-03,
to allow for the excavation of 193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over an
estimated 20 to 30—year period, including portions of Assessor Parcels
039-530-019 & 039-530-020.
e) Approve the M&T Chico Ranch Mine Reclamation Plan, to allow for
Page 2 of 17
the establishment of a lake with shallow wetland areas along the
perimeter for wildlife habitat, and a 40 -acre area reclaimed to
agricultural uses.
f) Approve Financial Assurances in the amount of $103,526.93 to
ensure reclamation of the mine site.
4. Preparation of an EIR: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality.
Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines,
14 Cal. Code Regs. sections 15000 et seq. ("CEQA" and "CEQA Guidelines"), an
EIR was prepared for the Project to analyze the environmental effects of- the
Project. Butte County, the CEQA lead agency for the Project, engaged Resource
Design Technology, Inc. to prepare the EIR.
5. Process: Preparation of -the Final EIR was a multi-year process, which
included the following activities:
a) On -August 30, 1996, the Project application was submitted to the
County.
b) An Initial Study prepared for the County to evaluate the environmental
impacts associated with the - proposed project identified several
potentially significant environmental effects that may occur with
implementation of the project. Accordingly, an EIR was prepared
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064(a).
c) On February 28, 1997, the County distributed a Notice of Preparation.
for the EIR to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and the.
public.
d) In May 1998, the County issued the Draft EIR. The County circulated
the Draft EIR for public review and comment from May 12, 1998 to July
2, 1998. Over 80 comment letters were.submitted to..the County on the
Draft EIR. These comment letters are on file and available for review at
the County Planning Department. These comments were reviewed by
County staff and the EIR consultant, Resource Design Technology_,
Inc. during preparation of the revised Draft•EIR.
e) On June 11, 1998, the Draft EIR for the Project was first heard by the
Planning Commission. Extensive public input was received at that
time. The Planning Commission continued the matter to allow
additional input and analysis following the hearing.
f) The County decided to update and supplement certain sections of the
Draft EIR (including the Traffic, Hydrology and Water Quality, and
Noise sections) in order to update technical data contained in the Draft
EIR. In addition, the County required the completion of a pedestrian
level archaeological survey at the Project site. The County then
Page 3 of 17
decided to recirculate the entire Draft EIR to ensure consistency and
accuracy between the new and old sections, and to maximize the
opportunity for public comment on the Project and the Draft EIR. The
County hired a new consultant, Resource Design Inc., to prepare the
revised Draft EIR. The particular modifications to the original May 1998
Draft!EIR are outlined on page 1-3 of the revised -Draft EIR.
g) In September 2002, the County issued the. revised Draft EIR. The
County circulated the revised Draft EIR for a 45 -day.. public review
period commencing October 12, 2002 through November 25, 2002:
Comments were received on the revised Draft EIR and are included
and responded to within the Final EIR.
h) On September 30, 2002, the County Filed a Notice of Completion for
the revised Draft EIR with the State of California Clearinghouse.
i) On October 24, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
in Oroville to receive public comment on the Project and the revised
Draft EIR. Public notice of this meeting was provided by the County.
j) In October, 2003, the County released the M&T Chico Ranch Final
EIR. The County provided notice of the availability of the Final EIR to
agencies, organizations, and the public.
k) On October 23, 2003, the Planning Commission held a hearing to
solicit public comment on the Final EIR. The Planning Commission has
held. additional hearings to ' solicit public comment on the Project on
January 22, 2004, March 11, 2004, April 8, 2004, and August 26, 2004:.
1) The Department of Conservation raised an issue' regarding
incompatibility with the Williamson Act.
m) On October 11, 2005 Pac Trust filed a, Notice of Partial Nonrenewal for
the 106 acres to be cancelled and' voluntarily submitted a Petition of
Partial Cancellation.
n) On November 28, 2005 DOC commented on the applicant's Petition
for Partial Cancellation and concurred that the "consistency" findings
required for cancellation could be met.
o) February 21, 2006 the Butte County Land Conservation Act
(Williamson Act) Committee (also known as the LCA Committee) met
and the applicant was directed to work withstaff to research and
provide additional support for the cancellation findings.
p) April 18, 2006 the LCA Committee met again on this continued item
and made the recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for denial
Page 4 of 17
of the tentative contract cancellation, with the Committee unanimously
agreeing that Findings 1-4 could be met, and the majority unable to
support Finding 5._
q) On November, 2006 an Updated Response to Comments Regarding the
Williamson Act was released.
r) The County scheduled a duly noticed public hearing before the
Planning Commission to consider certification of the Final EIR on
November 30, 2006.
6. Documents Comprising Final EIR: The Final EIR for the M&T Chico
Ranch Mine Project includes the following items (collectively referred to as the.
"Final EIR").
a) M&T Chico Ranch Mine Draft EIR (SCH 97022080) dated September
2002;
b) Comments and responses to comments on the Draft EIR, dated
October 23, 2003;
c) Draft EIR Errata containing corrections and clarifications made to the
text of the Draft EIR; and
d) Updated Response to Comments Regarding Williamson Act mandated
November, 2006.
e) Mitigation Monitoring and -Reporting Plan
7. Description Of The Record: For purposes of CEQA and the findings.
hereinafter set forth, the administrative record for the Project consists of those
items listed in Section 21167.6 (e) of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1230,
.Statutes of 1994)1 including but not limited to:
a) All application materials and correspondence contained in the Lead
agency's Project files (MIN 96-03);
b) The original Draft EIR; •
c) The revised Draft EIR; '
d) The Final EIR;
e) All Notices of Availability, the Notice of Determination, staff reports and
presentation materials related to the Project;
Page 6 of 17 `
f) All studies contained in, or referenced by, staff reports, the Draft EIR, or
the Final EIR;
g) All public reports and documents related to the Project prepared for the
County and other agencies;
h) All documentary and oral evidence received and reviewed at public
hearings and workshops, and all transcripts and minutes of those hearings
related to the Project; and
i) For documentary and informational purposes, all locally -adopted land use
plans and ordinances, including, without limitation, general plans, area
plans and ordinances, master plans together with environmental review
documents, findings, mitigation monitoring programs and other
documentation relevant to planned growth in the area.
8. Custodian of the Record: The administrative record is maintained at the Butte
County Department of Development Services, 7 County Center Drive, Orovi.11e,
California.
FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. Evidentiary Basis for Findings: These findings are based upon substantial
evidence in the entire record before the Planning Commission.—The references
to the Draft EIR, Final EIR, and other evidence in the record set forth in the
findings are for ease of reference and are intended to demonstrate the analytical
path between the evidence in the record and the findings adopted by the
Planning Commission. The references are not intended to provide an exhaustive
list of the evidence in the record that is relied upon for these findings.
2. Impacts of the M&T Mining Project:: Appendix F of the Final EIR provides
a summary of environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with
this Project. See Exhibit 1. These impacts and mitigation measures are
associated with the following impact categories: Aesthetics and visual resources,
Agricultural Land, Air Quality, Archeological Resources, Drainage and Flooding,
Geology, Noise, Traffic and Circulation, Water Quality/Groundwater, Land Use,
Biological Resources, Cumulative impacts associated with Air Quality and Traffic
and Circulation.
3. , Mitigation Measures: The Mitigation Measures herein referenced are
those identified in the Draft EIR, as clarified or amplified in the Final EIR, and as
modified by Resolution approving the project, including the conditions of approval
contained therein. The tables included in Exhibit 1 specify available and feasible
mitigation measures.
a) All feasible mitigation, measures that avoid or substantially lessen
Page 6 of 17
the significant effects .of the Project and that are adopted in these
Findings shall become binding on the County and Baldwin at the
time of approval of the Project.
b) The County Planning Commission also finds that the Mitigation
Measures incorporated into and imposed upon the Project will not
have new significant environmental impacts that were not already
analyzed in the
4. Findings of Fact: CEQA states that a project shall not be approved if it
would result in a significant environmental impact, or if feasible mitigation
measures or feasible alternatives can avoid or substantially lessen the impact.
Only when there are specific economic, social, or other considerations which
make it infeasible to substantially lessen ,or avoid an impact can a project with
significant impacts be approved.
a) If the project can be defined as having significant impacts on the
environment, then on EIR must be prepared. Therefore, when an EIR has
been completed which identifies one or more potentially significant
environmental impacts, the approving agency must make one or.more of
the following findings for each identified significant impact:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
such projects which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental
effects thereof as identified in the completed Environmental Impact
Report.
2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been
.adopted by such other agency, or can and should be adopted by such
other agency.
3) Specific economic, transportation or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation'measures or project alternatives identified in
the Environmental Impact'Report.
b) Exhibit 1, attached hereto, contains the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact concerning each of the impacts and mitigation measures
identified as significant and mitigatable, and significant and unavoidable in
the Final EIR. The Planning Commission's determination regarding
environmental impacts that remain significant or are reduced to a less -
than -significant level given the implementation of adopted feasible
mitigation is provided in the "Findings of Fact" column.
5. Areas of Controversy: The CEQA Guidelines require that an ; EIR identify
Page 7 of 17
areas of controversy known to the lead agency based upon review of public and
agency comment. Controversial aspects of the Project have been determined to
be: 1) potential impacts to groundwater resulting from mining operations; 2)
potential pit water quality impacts; and 3). potential traffic impacts resulting from
the proposed Project. Mitigation measures have been provided within the Final
EIR to address these impacts, to the extent feasible.
FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
1. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires a discussion of a reasonable
range of alternatives to a project or. to the location .of the project which would
feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. An EIR need not
consider alternatives which are infeasible. For this project, several alternatives
were evaluated. These alternatives are discussed in'the Draft EIR section 5.0.
2. In evaluating the potential alternatives to the Project, the County
recognizes that actual implementation of one or more alternatives could be
remote and speculative due to the complexities in locating and developing
mineral resources. It, is recognized that the range of reasonable alternative
locations is necessarily limited by location of the particular mineral resource.
(See CEQA Guidelines, section 15126.6(f)(2)(B)). In contrast to other forms of
development that can occur anywhere, many factors are considered in the
selection of an aggregate production site, including appropriate quality and
quantity of the resource, its location and distance to the market (consumption)
area, transportation accessibility, availability of the land, a willing lessor or seller,
mine economics and engineering, and proximity to incompatible land uses and
environmentally sensitive receptors.
3. The Draft EIR examines four project alternatives, all at a comparative. level
of detail, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. A' summary comparison of
the alternatives is provided in Table 5-1 of the Draft EIR. The alternatives
analyzed is provided below as
A) Alternative 1, No Project Alternative (Existing Conditions);
B) Alternative 2, Alternative Project Location;
C) Alternative 3, Reduced Project Area Alternative;
D) Alternative 4, Lower Processing Rate Alternative; and
E) Environmentally Superior Alternative.
4. For the reasons stated below, the Planning Commission finds that
adoption and implementation of the current Project as described is appropriate.
The Planning Commission further determines that no other one or combination of
project alternatives would implement the goals and objectives of the Project while
providing the same public benefit. The Planning Commission, therefore, accepts
Page 8 of 17
the Project as proposed and rejects all the alternatives, for the reasons outlined
below:
A. Alternative 1: No Project (Existing Conditions)
This alternative would consist of the continued use of the Project site -for
infrequent agricultural purposes. The consideration of this alternative is required
under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 (e).
Environmental .Impacts: If the,Project site were not developed, other aggregate
mining sites would be used to meet the existing and future growth demand for
aggregate in Butte County. This would generate additional criteria pollutant
emissions; vehicle miles traveled, and truck trips, with" or' without the Project.
Other environmental effects' associated .with quarrying, such as' impacts to
biological resources, hydrology and water quality, noise, etc., would similarly not
be avoided, but simply transferred to other sites. The No Project Alternative
therefore avoids the impacts at the Handley Ranch site, but not the regional
effects associated with the production and distribution of construction aggregate
products, nor the site specific effects from mining activities at another site.
Project Objectives, Time, Economic, and Technical Considerations: The No
Project alternative would not meet the Project objectives in that known aggregate
resources would not be available for use in the construction industry, supplying
County infrastructure needs. Currently, the County has 40 percent of its 50 -year
aggregate demand. Without permitting additional aggregate reserves for
development, the County could exhaust aggregate reserves by 2030. (Final EIR,
p..4.0-19.) Further, if materials are supplied from more distant locations, such as
from outside the County, there is an increase in cost, and the County derives less
economic benefit from the activity. Sales tax, property tax, and secondary
expenditures of goods and services spent outside .the County do not assist in
maintaining or enhancing the County's economy and do not pay for impacts
caused by importation of aggregate. Higher cost materials and lower tax
revenues mean that fewer miles � of County roads can be constructed or
maintained.
Further, as detailed in Alternative 2, if the M&T Chico Ranch Mine is not
developed, other aggregate mining sites would be used to meet the existing and
future growth demand for aggregate in Butte County. Thus, environmental
impacts associated with the Project will only be transferred to another location
when market demands for aggregate warrant new supplies.
B. Alternative 2: Alternative Project Location
Environmental Impacts: If the Project site were not developed, other aggregate
mining sites would be used to meet the existing and future growth demand for
aggregate in 'Butte County. -This would generate additional criteria pollutant
Page 9 of 17
emissions, vehicle miles traveled, and truck trips, with or without the Project.
Other environmental effects associated with quarrying, such as impacts to
biological resources, hydrology and water quality, noise, etc., would similarly not
be avoided, but simply transferred to other sites. The Project Location Alternative
therefore avoids the impacts at the Project site, but not the regional effects
associated with the production and distribution of construction aggregate
products, nor the site-specific effects from mining activities at another site.
Project Objectives, Time, Economic, and Technical Considerations: This
alternative would place the Project in an alternative location within the County or
eastern Glenn County.. The nature of aggregate mining dictates that aggregate
mines can generally only be developed where the resource is available and
proximate to markets. The successful development of .the project at another
location would depend on a number of geologic, environmental, and economic
factors, primarily the existence of marketable quantities of construction grade
aggregate. Options for suitable off-site alternative sites would be limited.
One of the objectives of the proposed Project is to provide aggregate for markets
in the City of Chico and Butte County consumption area. The Project site has
been identified by Baldwin as the best source available for aggregate production
with aggregates being available in sufficient quantity and quality for construction
materials. Further, the State has designated the Project site as MRZ-2a,
meaning the property contains an important and significant mineral resource.
There are no other potential aggregate mine sites that have. been identified in
close proximity to the Project site, or to the Chico/Butte County market. The
nearest areas of potential aggregate deposits have been identified in eastern
Glenn County. However, these aggregate resources have not been quantified,
and have not been designated by the State Geologist as a mineral resource.
Further, if materials are supplied from more distant locations, such as from .Glenn
County, there is an increase in cost, and the County derives less economic
benefit from the activity. Sales tax, property tax, and secondary expenditures of
goods and services spent in Glenn County would not assist in .maintaining or
enhancing the County's economy and would not pay for impacts caused by
importation of aggregate. Higher cost materials and lower tax revenues mean
that fewer miles of County roads can be constructed or maintained.
The Planning Commission finds that this alternative is inconsistent with Project
objectives regarding location (discussed in section 3.3.2 of the Draft EIR)
because the Project site is superior to alternative locations due to the known
aggregate resource and proximity to area aggregate'markets.
C. Alternative 3: Reduced Project Area
This alternative would reduce the area of active mining under the proposed
Project by 50 percent to approximately 96.5 acres thereby reducing the amount
Page 10 of 17
of mined aggregate by approximately 50 percent. The mine life would be
reduced by 50 percent to approximately 10 to 20 years. Mining methods and
reclamation would remain the same as those for the proposed Project. This
proposal would minimize the area of disturbance and thus reduce environmental
impacts accordingly.
Environmental Impacts: The primary reduction in environmental impacts
associated with the Reduced Project Alternative would be the lessened effects to
biological resources and aesthetics' due to the 50 percent reduction in mine
acreage. Reduced impacts at this site could, however, be offset by additional
impacts at other locations, since existing and future construction aggregate
demand would require development of alternative resources, and the Project site
would only operate for a short period. Air quality, water resources, traffic and
noise impact significance would not be reduced under this alternative due to the
cumulative effects of more mines supplying the same amount of material.
Project Objectives,. Time, Economic, and Technical Considerations: The
development of a Reduced Project Alternative would not meet the basic Project
objective of obtaining a reliable long- term source of construction grade
aggregate in Butte County. This Alternative would leave 50 percent or more of
the known reserves in the ground, resulting in questionable economic feasibility
of the Project.
D. Alternative 4: Lower Processing Rate
This alternative would reduce the processing rate approximately 50 percent to a
maximum -rate of 137,500 cubic yards per year mined and 125,000 cubic yards
marketed. The mining and processing of the 5.5 million cubic yards of known
aggregate reserves would take approximately 30 to 40 years, an increase in
project life of 50 percent. Mining methods and reclamation would remain the
same as those for the proposed Project.
Environmental Impacts: If the Project site were not developed, other aggregate
mining sites would be used to meet the existing and future growth demand for
aggregate in Butte County. This would generate additional criteria pollutant
emissions, vehicle miles traveled, and truck trips, with or without the Project.
Other environmental effects associated with quarrying, such as' impacts to
biological resources, hydrology and water quality, noise, etc., would similarly not
be avoided, but simply transferred to other sites. Potential environmental impacts
associated with the Reduced Processing Rate Alternative would be similar to
those identified the proposed Project since the same amount of surface
disturbance (approximately 193 acres) would occur. Further, potential impacts to
biological resources would be similar if not greater than those of the proposed
Project due to the extended life of the mining Project. Thus, the reduced rate
would not offer any significant environmental advantage over the proposed
Project.
Page 11 of 17
Project Objectives, Time, Economic, and Technical Considerations: Since
local supplies would be restricted under this alternative, additional aggregate will
have to be imported to meet project demand. However, the development of
aggregate resources outside of the Butte County/Chico area specifically for the
Butte County/Chico market will only transfer environmental impacts to another
site, and will also result in added environmental impacts including an increase in
vehicle miles traveled and truck trips. Further, the demand for aggregate
products to meet countywide construction project demands would need to be
supplemented from other sites, which may not be efficiently located, and
therefore more costly to Baldwin and the consumer. Therefore, operating at a
reduced production rate would. not substantially reduce any identified significant
impacts, does not meet the basic Project objectives.
E. Environmentally Superior Alternative
,CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 (e)(2) requires the EIR to identify the
environmentally superior alternative. Additionally, if the environmentally superior
alternative is the No Project alternative, the EIR must also identify an
environmentally superior alternative from the remaining alternatives. According
to Draft EIR Section 5.5, for the proposed Project, the, No Project alternative
would be the environmentally superior alternative since no mining would occur on
the site. Among the other alternatives the Reduced Project Area Alternative #3
does offer some environmental advantages over the proposed Project due to the
reduction in mined acreage and the shortened life of the Project. This alternative
would not feasibly 'attain most of. the basic Project objectives, and leave
approximately 50 percent known ore reserves. Since local supplies would be
restricted under this alternative, additional aggregate may be imported to meet
Project demand. This would result in .similar environmental impacts associated
with developing an alternative project location as detailed in the "Alternative
Project Location" alternative.
FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCEMENT
1. CEQA Section 15126 (g) requires that an EIR consider the potential for a
project to create growth inducing impacts. A project could have a growth
inducing impact if it could:
a) Foster economic or population growth, or construction of additional
housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment;
b) Remove obstacles to population growth, for example, developing
service areas in previously unserved areas, extending transportation
routes into previously undeveloped areas, and establishing major new
employment opportunities; and
c) Encourage and facilitate other activities that could signifcantly affect
Page 12 of 17 i
the environment, either individually or.cumulatively
2. The proposed Project will not result in a significant increase in
employment, or any increase in housing. (See Draft EIR, section 6.2, pp. 6-4 —
6-5.) No new.roads or public. services would be installed as a result of the Project
that would remove obstacles to growth. The Project would make available
aggregate materials used. -in a variety of activities, including road building and
maintenance, and construction. While the Project will . make these materials
available, it cannot be considered to be facilitating the activities using aggregate
materials. The Project is not the only source of these materials, and these
activities will occur regardless of the availability of the additional resources made
available by this Project. Therefore, the Project would not encourage or facilitate
activities and create environmental effects other than those addressed in this
Draft EIR..
FINDINGS REGARDING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
1. A cumulative impact is the effect on the environment which results from
the incremental impact of the proposed project when combined with the effects of
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. (CEQA
Guidelines, § 15355, subd..(b).) The significance of a cumulative impact may be
greater than the effects resulting from the individual actions if the effects of more
than one action are additive.
2. Criteria for evaluating the significance of adverse effects were identified
for each environmental issue in Chapter 4.0. of the Draft EIR. These criteria,
which are based on resource sensitivity, quality. and. quantity, are also applicable
to cumulative impacts. The timing- and duration of each activity is also an
important consideration for evaluating the potential cumulative effects of activities
that occur only for a limited period. In those cases,. a cumulative effect may occur
only when two or more of the activities are occurring simultaneously.
3. The CEQA Guidelines provide that cumulative impacts shall be discussed
when they are significant and that the discussion of cumulative impacts shall
reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence (Section
15130 (a) and (b)). These effects, where they occur, are then evaluated for their
impact in combination with other activities in the area for cumulative impact.
4. The following section discusses the potential cumulative environmental
effects that could result when the potential impacts of the proposed Project are
combined with impacts associated with the reasonably foreseeable projects
identified in Section 6.1.1. of the Draft EIR.
A. Land Use
The Project site does not meet the standard for prime farmland. Though the
Page 13 of 17.
Project will result in the conversion of non -prime farmland to open space, the
amount of agricultural land surrounding the site is relatively abundant. (Draft EIR
section 6.1.2, p. 6-3.) In terms of prime agricultural land loss, no significant
cumulative land use impacts are expected as a result of this Project.
B. Hydrology and Water Quality
Impacts to hydrology and water quality from -other projects in the vicinity that
could contribute to a cumulative effect would be mitigated to less than a
significant level. Mining at the M&T Chico Ranch property would have: no
significant effect on the hydrogeology. of the area, nor would it adversely affect
the volume or quality of regional groundwater resources. (Draft EIR section 6.1.2,
p. 6-3.) No significant cumulative hydrological impacts are expected as a result of
this Project.
C. Air Quality
As described in Impact 4.5-1 (see Exhibit 1), when viewed independently, the
proposed Project would result in a significant impact on PM10 emissions, based
solely on the Level C significance thresholds. However, when viewed in relation
to existing conditions at the site and surrounding areas, the Project would result
in a net reduction in PM10 emissions (refer to Draft EIR Table 4.5-8). Because
other impacts from these projects would be individually less than significant,.and
the combined impacts would not :exceed the significance criteria defined for these
issues in Chapter 4.0, no significant cumulative PM10 emission impacts are
expected. (Draft EIR section 6.1.2, p. 6-3.)
As discussed in Draft EIR Section 4.6, Traffic, there are no feasible mitigation
measures to reduce cumulative traffic congestion at certain intersections. This .
cumulative traffic congestion will result in an increase to carbon monoxide
emissions due to increased idle time at these intersections. Under. cumulative
conditions, this is a significant, unavoidable impact.
D. Traffic and Circulation
The cumulative traffic impact analysis contained in Draft EIR section 4.6 (see
also Draft EIR section 6.1.2, pp. 6-3 - 6-4) indicates that the daily levels of
service for all locations would operate at LOS C or better with or without the
Project, except for the following locations, which will operate at LOS E or F with
or without the Project:
• Park Avenue between East 20th Street and East Park Avenue will
operate at LOS F;
• East Park Avenue between Park Avenue and SR 99 will operate at
LOS F;
Page 14 of 17
• Bruce Road between SR 32 and Skyway will operate at LOS E; and
• Skyway — between SR 99 and the Butte Creek Bridge is expected
to operate at LOS E.
The Project will add additional trips to these road segments. In all cases, these
additions represent de minimis increase in traffic. Therefore, the impact of
additional Project traffic to these roadway segments would be minimal yet
significant based upon the significance criteria established by this Draft EIR.
Peak hour intersection operations under cumulative conditions with and without
the Project also indicate that all intersections will operate at LOS C or better,
except for the Skyway/Baldwin Plant Driveway and Durham -Dayton Highway at
Midway. Both locations operate unacceptably without the Project and those
unacceptable operations are exacerbated by the Project. The Skyway/Baldwin
Plant Driveway intersection will operate at- LOS F in the a.m. -peak hour and LOS
D Jn the p.m. peak hour. The Durham -Dayton Highway/Midway intersection will
operate at LOS F in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
As discussed in Draft EIR section 4.6, Traffic, there are no feasible mitigation
measures to reduce cumulative traffic congestion at certain road segments.
Under cumulative conditions, this is a significant, unavoidable impact.
E: Biological Resources
The resulting habitat associated with the reclaimed lake would result in an overall
increase in wildlife values over the long-term. (Draft EIR section 6.1.2, p. 6-4.) No
significant cumulative biological impacts are expected.
F. Noise
None of the cumulative projects noted in Draft EIR Section 6.1.1 are located near
enough. to the M&T Chico Ranch Project to contribute to cumulative noise
impacts associated with operations. (Draft. EIR section 6.1.2, p. 6-4.) No,
significant cumulative noise impacts will result from this Project.
G. Cultural Resources
Records review and field surveys show no evidence of cultural resources at the
proposed Project site. (Draft EIR section 6.1.2, p. 6-4.) The proposed Project will
not contribute to cumulative impacts to cultural resources.
H. Aesthetics
The aesthetic character of the site would change as a result of mining and
reclamation. Completion of reclamation activities at the site would eliminate the
potential for any negative cumulative visual effect. (Draft EIR section 6.1.2, p. 6-
4.) No significant negative cumulative aesthetic impacts will result from this
Page 15 of 17
Project.
Findings Regarding Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
1. . Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, CEQA
Guideline section 15097, and Board policy require the Butte. County Board of
Supervisors to adopt a monitoring and reporting program on the changes in the
Project and Mitigation Measures it has imposed to. mitigate or avoid significant
environmental effects. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan is attached
to this resolution as Exhibit 2.
2. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan fulfills the CEQA mitigation
monitoring requirement because: the Conditions of Approval are specific and, as
appropriate, define performance standards to measure compliance under the
Plan; The Plan contains detailed descriptions of conditions, implementation,
verification, a compliance schedule and reporting requirements to insure
compliance with the Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures; and The
Plan ensures that the Mitigation Measures are in place, as appropriate,
throughout the life of the Project.
NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION:
Adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contained in
Exhibit 2.
II. Adopts revised mitigation measure 4-6.2 such that the project applicant
shall contribute its fair share of the costs to improve the pavement on
River Road between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road with a two-
inch asphalt concrete overlay. This modification represent equal or better
mitigation than that contained int eh Draft EIR.
III. Certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report for The 'M&T Chico Ranch
Mine Mining Use Permit And Reclamation Plan (Min 96-03)
IV. This project has the potential to have a sign ificant'impact to fish or wildlife
habitat. the -collection of Department of Fish and Game fees pursuant to
Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 and 14 CCR 753.5 is required.
Page 16 of 17
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of November, 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
LYNN RICHARDSON, Secretary
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
Page 17 of 17
Chuck Nelson, Chairman
Planning Commission
County of Butte,
State of California
EXHIBIT 1
Impact Statement, Mitigation Measures and
Findings of Fact for the M&T Chico. Ranch Mine
WILL FOLLOW UNDER SEPARATE COVER
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION -
A RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE MINING. USE PERMIT AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR
BALDWIN CONTRACTING COMPANY (MIN 96-03) CONSISTING OF THE
FOLLOWING: A) A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BASED UPON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; B) MINING USE PERMIT
ALLOWING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF AN, AGGREGATE
MINE WITH ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES; AND C) RECLAMATION PLAN
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS, TIMELINES AND PRACTICES FOR PHASED
RECLAMATION.
The M&T Chico Ranch Mine ("Project") proposed, by Baldwin Contracting
Company (`Baldwin") consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation
approximately 5 -miles southwest of the City of Chico. The mining would take place on
193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over an estimated 20 to 30—year period. The Project site
would be reclaimed to high-quality, open -water, wetland wildlife habitat and agricultural
uses. The mined aggregate would be processed (washed and screened) on a 40 -acre area
at the site.
The Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) for the Project came
on public hearing before the Planning Commission of the County of Butte ("County") on
October 23, 2003 and -January 22, 2004. Having considered all the written and
documentary information submitted, the staff reports, oral testimony, other evidence
presented, and the administrative record as a whole, the Planning Commission hereby
finds and decides as follows:
RECITALS
1. The proposed operation is located on approximately 193 acres of the M&T
Chico Ranch. Anticipated lifespan of the operation including reclamation
is approximately 20-30 years. The proposed quarry and processing plants
are approximately 1.5 miles east of the Sacramento River, and
approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of Chico (Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 416-039-530-015 & 018).
2. On August 30, 1997, Pacific Realty filed an application for a Mining Use. -
Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) consisting of the following: 1)
Mining Use Permit to allow the development and operation of a new
aggregate mine with an onsite processing operation and associated
structures, and 2) Reclamation Plan establishing standards, timelines and
practices for phased reclamation of the site to open space/wildlife habitat.
3. In 1996 the County prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the
Page 1 of 10
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and identified
several potentially significant environmental effects that may occur with
implementation of the project. Accordingly, a draft environmental impact
report ("Draft EIR")' was prepared pursuant to section 15064(a) of the
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("Guidelines").
4. On February 28, 1997, the County distributed a Notice of Preparation of
the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies and the
public.
5. From May 12, 1998 to July 2, 1998, the Draft EIR was circulated for
public review.
6. On June 11, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the
Draft EIR. The Planning Commission took extensive public input. The
Project was continued off the agenda to allow further Staff evaluation.
Written comments received during this review period are on file at the
Butte County Planning Division and are incorporate by reference in the
revised Draft EIR/Final EIR.
7. Based on public comment and in order to maximize public participation in
the environmental review of the Project, the County decided to recirculate
the Draft EIR to update and supplement the underlying technical analyses.
8. The County hired a new consultant to prepare the recirculated Draft EIR
(Resource Design Technology, Inc.)
9. In September 2002, the County issued the revised -Draft EIR. On
September 30, 2002, the County filed the Notice of Completion with the
State of California Clearinghouse.
10. The County circulated the 'revised Draft EIR for a 45 -day public review
and comment period commencing October 12, 2002 through November
25, 2002.
11. On October 24, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
the revised Draft EIR in Oroville. The County provided public notice of
this meeting. At the hearing, the Planning Commission heard and received
all relevant oral and written testimony and evidence. filed or presented
regarding the Draft EIR.
12. In October 2003, the County distributed the Final EIR to all commenting
agencies, departments, individuals and organizations. The Final EIR is
comprised of the Draft EIR and the Response to Comments Document
(collectively, "Final EIR").
Page 2 of 10
13. The Final EIR does not contain significant new information, as defined
in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which would require recirculation
of the modified sections or entire document.
Final EIR Section 3.2 delineates the changes to the Draft EIR in
response to comments received on the Draft EIR. The changes are not
substantial, do not include significant new environmental impacts, do
not show a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental
impact, do not identify a feasible project alternative, or mitigation
measure considerably different from others previously identified, and the
Draft EIR was not fundamentally inadequate.
Further, Section 3.2 does not contain significant new information that
deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a
substantial adverse effect of'the Project or a feasible way to mitigate or
avoid such an -effect. All of the information added to the Final EIR
merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications in the
Draft EIR. Therefore, recirculation of the Draf EIR is not required. (See
Guidelines Section 15088.5.)
14. Between January 22, 2004 and November 28, 2005, the
Planning Commission held several noticed public hearings on the
Project in part to resolve concerns regarding the Department of
Conservation's Williamson Act requirements.. The dispute was
addressed off the agenda with the applicant's filing of an immediate
cancellation request.
15. As lead agency' for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq of Public Resources
Code), the Planning Commission has adopted a resolution making
findings of - fact, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan
(State Clearinghouse No. 97022080).
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. FINDING: LAND USE CONSISTENCY - The Project is consistent with the
policies of Ahe Butte County General Plan and with the Butte County
Zoning and Mining Ordinance. Based on. a current interpretation of the .
Butte County General Plan, the proposed mining operation is not only
considered an appropriate use under the Orchard and Field Crops
General Plan Designation, but also compatible in all agriculturally
designated lands within Butte County where minerals are known to
exist, including General Plan Policies 2.6.a, 2.6.b, and 6.1.a. (Butte
County, 1997).
Page 3 of 10
In addition, the Project site also lies approximately two miles west on
the agricultural side of the Chico Area Greenline designated on the
Chico Area Land Use Plan. Land uses on the agricultural side of the
Greenline are limited by the Butte County General Plan to. agricultural
uses, which are defined in the Land Use Element of the Butte County
General Plan as "the `Primary Uses' and the `Secondary Uses' set forth
in the `Orchard and Field Crops' land use designation... The Project
falls within the "Secondary Uses" category, which. includes "resource
extraction and processing," and "environmental preservation activities."
2. FINDING: SITE SUITABILITY - The site. is suitable for the use proposed.
(a) The Project has been reviewed for suitability by the County
Agricultural Commissioner, County Public Works Department,
County Air Quality Management District, Department of
Conservation, County Office of Environmental Health, Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of
Water Resources, City of Chico Department of Public Works and
California State Clearinghouse.
(b) Technical reports submitted by qualified consultants indicate that
there are no physical of environmental constraints such as geologic
or seismic hazard areas, environmentally sensitive habitats or
similar areas that would indicate the site isnot suitable for the use
proposed. The following reports were submitted with the Mining
Use Permit application,, or subsequently submitted, and
independently reviewed by County staff:
1 AGRA Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1996 Aggregate
Investigation Hallwood and M&T Properties. California.
April.
2 AGRA Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1997. Excavation
Stability M&T Chico Ranch Mine Reclamation, West of
Dayton, California. August 22.
3 Hydroscience, Inc., Water Quality Report.
4 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1997.
Memorandum of Prime Farmland Soils Analysis for the
M&T Chico Ranch. September 24.
5 Department of Water Resources, Northern District. 1993.
M&T Chico Ranch Groundwater Investigation, Phase I,
Memorandum Report, Red Bluff, California.
6 Deverel, S.J. 1996 Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel
Mining M&T Chico Ranch.
7 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 1997. Traffic Impact
Analysis for the M&T Chico Ranch Project.
8 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1996
Page 4 of 10
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Use Permit, Mining Permit, and
Reclamation Plan Application.
9 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1996
Jurisdictional Wetlands Delineation: M&T Chico Ranch.
November.
10 City of Chico. 1995. Draft Environmental Impact Report:
Chico Water Pollution Control Plant Expansion. State
Clearinghouse Number 94112054.
(c) . Final EIR prepared by Resource Design, dated October 2003.
3. FINDING: NO VIOLATIONS The subject property is in compliance with all
rules and regulations pertaining to zoning uses, subdivision and any
other applicable provisions of the County's zoning ordinance.
4. FINDING: ' The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of the
County's surface mining ordinance (County Code, Chapter 13-101 et
seq., Surface Mining and Reclamation), which establishes regulations
for mining operations and reclamation.
5. FINDING: 'The Project complies with the provisions of the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975, Public Resources Code, Section 2710 et seq
("SMARA"), which establishes state authority to regulate mining
operations and reclamation, and other applicable State regulations, as
.those provisions may be amended from time to time.
6. FINDING: ` Sections 2770 and 2773.1 of SMARA require surface mining operators
to obtain lead agency (city or county) approved financial assurances for
reclamation. The County will annually require Baldwin to update the
existing financial assurances to ensure there are adequate -financial
-assurances in place for all costs related to completing the reclamation.
The current financial assurances cost estimates for the Project are
$103,526.93. (See Reclamation Plan, Attachment 4.)
7. FINDING: RECLAMATION STANDARDS - The Reclamation Plan complies
with applicable requirements of State regulations (CCR. Sections 3500-
3505, and Sections 3700-3713, as those provisions may be amended
from time to time).
a) Section 3703: Performance Standards for Wildlife Habitat - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3703. Baseline conditions are described in Section 4.6 (Biological
Resources) of the Draft EIR. (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 15.) As
discussed in the revised Reclamation Plan dated September 2004
("Reclamation Plan"), shallow wetlands will be established along the
Page 5 of 10
margins of a reclaimed lake. A combination of shallow and deep water
habitat for a variety of wildlife species will be created. using best
management practices: Further, a nesting island will be constructed
using excess overburden. (Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, Attachments
7, 13.) Native vegetation will be established on the reclaimed area by
a combination of natural revegetation and plantings. Topsoil will be
respread on the margins of the lake and in the shallow wetlands areas
to enhance the establishment and growth , of native vegetation.
(Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, 22-23.) Baldwin will retain an expert in
wildlife habitat reclamation to implement the revegetation plan and
monitor success. Performance standards for the shallow wetlands and
lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the
vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measures of
cover, density, and species -richness for the reclaimed lands to similar
parameters on reference areas and the -baseline conditions put forth in
the Draft EIR. Methods of monitoring and assessment will be based on
guidelines provided in the Department of Conservation's recently
published manual on the rehabilitation process for disturbed lands
.(Newton and Claassen; 2003). (Reclamation Plan, pp. 22-23.)
b) Section 3704: Performance Standards for Backfilling, Regrading,
Slope Stability, and Recontouring - The Reclamation Plan for the
Project meets the requirements of Section 3704. A comprehensive
slope stability study was prepared for, the Project by AGRA Earth &
Environmental, Inc., Excavation Stability 11M&T Chico Ranch Mine
Reclamation (Draft EIR, Appendix E; Reclamation Plan, Attachment
8.) The study concluded a 3:1 slope was an adequate factor or safety
for final slopes. Based on this study, Baldwin has incorporated a 3:1
slope for all final slopes into the project design and Reclamation Plan.
In addition, the design of any structures proposed onsite, including
offices, and- other ancillary facilities will be regulated by the Butte
County Building Division of the Development Services Department.
(Draft EIR, Section 4.3, p. 4.3-16.) No backfilling will take place.
c) Section 3705: Performance Standards for Revegetation - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3705. Section 3705 measures success of revegetation "based upon the
effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density, and
species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar parameters of
naturally occurring vegetation in the area." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §
3705(m).) The Reclamation Plan's revegetation standards track the
statutory requirements mandated by SMARA and, its associated
regulations. For example, Section 3705(m) states the following:
Success of .revegetation shall be judged based upon the
Page 6 of 10
effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density,
and species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar
parameters of naturally occurring vegetation in the area. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3705(m).)
The Reclamation Plan tracks these requirements. The reclamation
plan states "Performance standards ... will be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of the vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of cover, density and species -richness of the
reclaimed lands to similar parameters on reference areas." Further, the
Reclamation Plan specifically provides that revegetation monitoring
will take place for five years. During the five-year monitoring period,
annual reports will be submitted to the Butte County Planning
Division. The reports will describe the success of the revegetation
plan and . will include recommendations for how to improve, if
possible, the plan's success in the following year. In addition, the
reclamation plan requires that "[m]ethods for monitoring and
assessment will be based on guidelines provided in the Department of
Conservation's recently published manual on the rehabilitation process
for disturbed lands (Newton and Claassen, 2003).7
d) Section. 3706: Performance Standards for Drainage, Diversion
Structures, Waterways, -and Erosion Control - The Reclamation
Plan meets the requirements of Section 3706. Baldwin will obtain
coverage under a general stormwater control permit from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board before initiating onsite activities. The
stormwater permit will require the development and implementation of
a stormwater pollution prevention plan ("SWPPP"). By complying
with the requirements of the stormwater permit and SWPPP,. Baldwin
will necessarily control runoff to ensure that discharge of surface flows
from the site meet stormwater pollution control permit requirements,
and comply with applicable erosion control and sediment control
requirements. Further, as indicated in the excavation stability study
(Reclamation Plan, Attachment 8), the 3:1 final slopes incorporated
into the final Project design will stabilize the reclaimed area, allowing
most onsite runoff to remain onsite, thereby minimizing contribution
of sediment to nearby streams and limiting erosion.. The streambed
and streambanks of Little Chico Creek will not be disturbed except for
road and conveyor crossings. Stanchions supporting the conveyor will
be footed in nonsensitive areas, and the road crossing of the stream
will be improvements on an already existing crossing thus resulting in
no increased impact. There will be no in -stream mining. (Reclamation
Plan, p. 13.)
e) Section 3707: Performance Standards for Prime Agricultural
Page 7 of 10
Land Reclamation - This performance standard does not apply to the
Project because it is not located on Prime Agricultural Land.
f) Section 3708: Performance Standards for Other Agricultural
Land - The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section 3708.
As discussed in Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, the Project's end use will
be reclamation to agricultural uses for the plant area (40 acres) while
the mining area (193 acres) will be reclaimed as open water and
wetlands. The revegetation scientist that Baldwin will retain for the
Project will set up appropriate reference areas for both the plant site
agricultural reclaimed area as well as the perimeter of the lake/wetland
area. Productivity of the irrigated agricultural land at the reclaimed
plant site will be compared to that of adjacent irrigated agricultural
land on the M&T Ranch. The plant site will revert to become a part of
a larger field on the M&T Ranch, and will be managed the same as the
rest of the land in that field. Performance standards for the shallow
wetlands and lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of the vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of cover, density and species richness of the
reclaimed lands to similar parameters on reference .areas approved by
County staff.
g) Section 3709: Performance Standards for Building, Structure and
Equipment Removal - There are currently no buildings or structures
within the proposed Project area. Buildings and structures associated
with the aggregate processing plant will be removed when mining is
completed.
h) Section 3710: Performance Standards for Stream Protection,
Including Surface and Groundwater - The Reclamation Plan meets
the requirements of Section 3710. Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water
Quality) of the Draft EIR describes the potential impacts of the
Project. The only surface water stream, Little Chico Creek, will not be
disturbed. There will no in -stream mining. Other surface water bodies
include wetlands which will be mitigated as required by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and other state and federal . agencies. During
mining operations, industrial stormwater and process water will be
collected in onsite recycle ponds. In addition, Baldwin will operate the
Project in accordance with a California Regional Water Quality
Control Board stormwater control permit and SWPPP. As discussed in
Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel Mining — M&T Chico Ranch
(Reclamation Plan, Attachment 9; Draft EIR, Appendix D:1), the
Project will not have a significant impact on groundwater resources.
(See Draft EIR, section 4.4). The proposed lake will actually result in
enhanced groundwater recharge from precipitation and evaporation
from the shallow groundwater. Further, although there is recharge to
Page 8 of 10
the water table, which occurs as result of percolation losses from Little
Chico Creek, the Project is not expected to alter that process. (Draft
EIR, p. 4.4-38.) The groundwater quality study prepared for the Draft
EIR by Monarch Laboratory concluded that there is no groundwater
problem associated with the existing pit. (Reclamation Plan,
Attachment 11; Draft EIR, Appendix D-3). Following reclamation, as
part of the approved Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Project,
Baldwin will develop - a groundwater monitoring program to be
approved by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
and Butte County to measure recharge and water quality following
reclamation. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.4-64 - 4.4-78.)
i) Section 3711: Performance Standards for Topsoil Salvage,
Maintenance, and Redistribution — The Reclamation Plan meets the
requirements of Section 3711. The Reclamation Plan describes how
topsoil and subsoil (growth medium) will be saved and stockpiled for
reclamation uses as shown in Attachment 7 of the Revegetation Plan.
(Reclamation Plan, p. 8; Attachment 3, Item 6, p. 5; Attachment 5.)
j) Section 3712: Performance Standards for Tailing and Mine Waste
Management — The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of
Section 3712. Under the Reclamation Plan, the Project will not
generate any mine wastes because all mine products will be sold or
used in reclamation. (Attachment 3, Item 5, p. 5.)
k) Section 3713: Performance Standards for Closure of Surface
Openings — The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section
3713. There are no drill holes, portals, shaft or tunnels associated with
the mining operations proposed for the site that would require
abandonment.
8. FINDING: HEALTH AND SAFETY — The establishment, maintenance or
operation of the use or structure applied for will not, under the
circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or
injurious to property and improvement in the neighborhood, or to the
general welfare of the. County.
DECISION
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, EVIDENCE, AND THE RECORD AS A
WHOLE, the Butte County Planning Commission hereby adopts the Statement of
Overriding Considerations (attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference herein)
and approves the M&T Chico Ranch Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-
03, Baldwin Contracting Company [`Baldwin"]), subject to the Conditions of Approval
Page 9 of 10
(attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated by reference herein).
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of November 2006; by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chuck Nelson - Chairman .
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California.
ATTEST:
LYNN RICHARDSON, Secretary
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
Page 10 of 10
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION -
A RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE MINING USE PERMIT AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR
BALDWIN CONTRACTING COMPANY (MIN 96-03) CONSISTING OF THE
FOLLOWING: A) A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BASED UPON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; B) MINING USE PERMIT
ALLOWING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF AN AGGREGATE
MINE WITH ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES; AND C) RECLAMATION PLAN
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS, TIMELINES AND PRACTICES FOR PHASED
RECLAMATION.
The M&T Chico Ranch Mine ("Project") proposed by Baldwin Contracting .
Company (`Baldwin") consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation
approximately 5 -miles southwest of the City of Chico. The mining would take place on
193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over an estimated 20 to 30—year period. The Project 'site
would be reclaimed to high-quality, open -water, wetland wildlife habitat and agricultural
uses. The mined aggregate would be processed (washed and screened) on a.40 -acre area
at the site.
The Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) for the Project came
on public hearing before the Planning Commission of the County of Butte ("County") on
October 23, 2003 and January 22, 2004. Having considered all the written and
documentary information submitted, the staff reports, oral testimony, other evidence
presented, and the administrative record as, a whole, the Planning Commission hereby
finds and decides as follows:
RECITALS
1. The proposed operation is located on approximately 193 acres of the M&T
Chico Ranch. Anticipated lifespan of the operation including reclamation
is approximately 20-30 years. The proposed quarry and processing plants
are approximately 1.5 miles east of the Sacramento River, . and
approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of Chico (Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 416-039-530-015 & 018).
2. On August 30, 1997, Pacific Realty filed an application for a Mining Use
Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) consisting of the following: 1)
Mining Use Permit to allow the development and operation of a new
aggregate mine with an onsite processing operation and associated
structures, and 2) Reclamation Plan establishing standards, timelines and
practices for phased reclamation of the site to open space/wildlife habitat.
3. In 1996 the County prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the
Page 1 of 10
environmental impacts associated with the proposed. project and identified
several potentially significant environmental effects that may occur with
implementation of the project. Accordingly,, a draft environmental impact
report ("Draft EIR") was prepared pursuant to section 15064(a) of the
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("Guidelines").
4. On February 28, 1997, the County distributed a Notice of Preparation of
the Draft - EIR to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies and the
public.
5. From May 12, 1998 to July 2, 1998, the Draft EIR was circulated for
public review.
6. On June 11, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the
Draft EIR. The Planning Commission took extensive public input. The
Project was continued off the agenda to allow further Staff evaluation.
Written comments received during this review period are on file at the
Butte County Planning Division and are incorporate by reference in the
revised Draft EIR/Final EIR.
7. Based on public comment and in order to maximize public, participation in
the environmental review of the Project, the County decided to recirculate
the Draft EIR to update and supplement the underlying technical analyses.
8. The County hired a new consultant to prepare the recirculated Draft EIR
(Resource Design Technology, Inc.)
9. In September 2002, the County issued the revised Draft EIR. On
September 30, 2002, the County filed the Notice of Completion with the
State of California Clearinghouse.
10. The County circulated the revised Draft EIR for a 45 -day public review
and comment period commencing October 12, 2002 through November
25, 2002.
11. On October 24, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
the revised Draft EIR in Oroville. The County provided. public notice of
this meeting. At. the hearing, the Planning Commission heard and received
all relevant oral and written testimony and evidence filed or presented
regarding the Draft EIR.
12. In October 2003, the County distributed the Final EIR to all commenting
agencies, departments, individuals and organizations. The Final EIR is
comprised of the Draft EIR and the Response to Comments Document
(collectively, "Final EIR").
Page 2 of 10
13. The Final EIR does not contain significant new information, as defined
in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which would require recirculation
of the modified sections or entire document.
Final EIR Section 3.2 delineates the changes to the Draft EIR in
response to comments received on the Draft EIR. The changes are not
substantial, do not include significant new environmental impacts, do
not show a substantial increase in the severity of ad environmental
impact, do not identify a feasible project alternative or mitigation
measure considerably different from others previously identified, and the
Draft EIR was not fundamentally inadequate.
Further, Section 3.2 does not contain significant new information that
deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a
substantial adverse effect of the Project or a feasible way to mitigate or
avoid such an effect. All of the information added to the Final EIR
merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications in the
Draft EIR. Therefore, recirculation of the Draf EIR is not required. (See .
Guidelines Section 15088.5.)
14. Between January 22, 2004 and November 28, 2005, the
Planning Commission held several noticed public hearings on the
Project in part to resolve concerns regarding the Department of
Conservation's Williamson Act requirements. The dispute was
addressed off the agenda with the applicant's filing of an immediate
cancellation request.
15. As lead agency ' for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental' Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq of Public Resources
Code), the Planning Commission has adopted a resolution. making
findings of fact, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan
(State Clearinghouse No. 97022080).
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. FINDING: LAND USE CONSISTENCY - The Project is consistent with the
policies of the Butte County General Plan and with the Butte County
Zoning and Mining Ordinance. Based on a current interpretation of the
Butte County General Plan, the proposed mining operation is not only
considered an appropriate use under the Orchard and Field Crops
General Plan Designation, but also compatible in all agriculturally
designated lands within' Butte. County where minerals are known to
exist, including General Plan Policies 2.6.a, 2.6.b, and 6.1.a. (Butte
County, 1997).
Page 3 of 10
In addition, the Project site also lies approximately two miles west on
the agricultural side of the Chico Area 'Greenline designated on the
Chico Area Land Use Plan. Land uses on the agricultural side of the
Greenline are limited by the Butte County General Plan to agricultural
uses, which ,are defined -in the Land Use Element. of the Butte County
General Plan as "the .`Primary Uses' and the `Secondary Uses' set forth
in the `Orchard and Field Crops' land use designation..." The Project
falls within the "Secondary Uses" category, which includes "resource
extraction and processing," and "environmental preservation activities.
2. FINDING: SITE SUITABILITY - The site is suitable for the use proposed.
(a) .The Project has been reviewed for suitability by the County
Agricultural Commissioner, County Public Works Department,
County Air Quality Management, District, Department of
Conservation, County Office of Environmental Health, Central
Valley. Regional Water Quality . Control Board, Department of
.Water Resources, City of Chico Department of Public Works and
California State Clearinghouse.
(b) Technical reports submitted by qualified consultants indicate that
there are no physical or environmental constraints such as geologic
or seismic hazard areas, environmentally sensitive habitats or
similar areas that would indicate the site is not suitable for the use
proposed. The following reports were submitted with the Mining
Use Permit application, or subsequently submitted, and
independently reviewed by County staff -
1 AGRA Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1996 Aggregate
Investigation Hallwood and M&T Properties. California.
April.
2 AGRA Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1997. Excavation
Stability M&T Chico Ranch Mine Reclamation, West of
Dayton, California. August 22.
3 Hydroscience, Inc., Water Quality Report.
4 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1997.
Memorandum of Prime Farmland Soils Analysis for the
M&T Chico Ranch. September 24.
5 Department of Water Resources, Northern District. 1993.
M&T Chico Ranch Groundwater Investigation, Phase 1,
Memorandum Report, Red Bluff, California.
6 Deverel, SJ. 1996 Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel
Mining: M&T Chico Ranch.
7 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 1997. Traffic Impact
Analysis for the M&T Chico Ranch Project.
8 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences,. Inc. 1996
Page 4 of 10
J
L M&T Chico Ranch Mine Use Permit, Mining Permit, and
Reclamation Plan Application.
9 Kelley & Associates Environmental 'Sciences, Inc. 1996
Jurisdictional Wetlands Delineation: M&T Chico Ranch.
November.
10 City of Chico. 1995. Draft Environmental Impact Report:
Chico Water Pollution Control Plant Expansion. State
Clearinghouse Number 94112054.
(c) Final EIR prepared by Resource Design, dated October 2003.
3. FINDING: NO VIOLATIONS - The subject property is in compliance with all
rules and regulations pertaining to zoning uses, subdivision and any
other applicable provisions of the County's zoning ordinance.
4. FINDING:' The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of the
County's surface _mining ordinance (County Code, Chapter 13-101 et
seq., Surface Mining and Reclamation), which establishes regulations
for mining operations and reclamation.
5. FINDING: The Project complies with the provisions of the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975, Public Resources Code, Section 2710 et seq
("SMARA"), which establishes state authority to regulate mining
operations and reclamation, and other applicable State regulations, as
those provisions may be amended from time to time.
6. FINDING: Sections 2770 and 2773.1 of.SMARA require surface mining operators
to.obtain lead agency (city or county) approved financial assurances for
reclamation. The County will annually require Baldwin to update the
existing financial- assurances to ensure there are adequate financial
assurances in place for all costs related to completing the, reclamation.
The current financial assurances cost estimates' for the Project are
$103,526.93. (See Reclamation Plan, Attachment 4.)
7. FINDING: RECLAMATION 'STANDARDS - The Reclamation Plan complies
with applicable requirements of State regulations (CCR Sections 3500-
3505, and Sections 3700-3713, as those provisions may be amended
from time to time).
a) Section 3703: Performance Standards for Wildlife Habitat - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3703. Baseline conditions are described in Section 4.6 (Biological
Resources) of the Draft EIR. (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 15.) As
discussed in the revised Reclamation Plan dated September 2004
("Reclamation Plan"), shallow wetlands will be established along the
Page 5 of 10
margins of a reclaimed lake. A combination of shallow and deep water
habitat for a variety of wildlife species will be- created using best
management practices. Further, a nesting island will be constructed
using excess overburden. (Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, Attachments
7, 13.) Native vegetation will be established on the reclaimed area by
a combination of natural revegetation and plantings. Topsoil will be
respread on the margins of the lake and in the shallow wetlands areas
to enhance the establishment and growth of native vegetation.
(Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, 22-23.) Baldwin will retain an expert in
wildlife habitat reclamation to implement the revegetation plan and
monitor success. Performance standards for the shallow wetlands and
lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the
vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measures of
cover, density, and species -richness for the reclaimed lands to similar
parameters on reference areas and the baseline conditions put forth in
the Draft EIR. Methods of monitoring and assessment will be based on
guidelines provided in the Department of Conservation's recently
published manual on the rehabilitation process for disturbed lands
(Newton and Claassen, 2003). (Reclamation Plan, pp. 22-23.)
b) Section 3704: Performance Standards for Backfilling, Regrading,
Slope Stability, and Recontouring - The Reclamation Plan for the
Project meets the requirements of Section 3704. A comprehensive
slope stability study was prepared for the Project by AGRA Earth &
Environmental, Inc., Excavation Stability:.M&T Chico Ranch Mine
Reclamation (Draft EIR, Appendix E; Reclamation Plan, Attachment
8.) The study concluded a 3:1 slope was an adequate factor or safety
for final slopes. Based on this study, Baldwin has incorporated a 3:1
slope for all final slopes into the project design and Reclamation Plan.
In addition, the design of any structures proposed onsite, including
offices, and other ancillary facilities will be regulated by the Butte
County Building Division of the Development Services Department.
(Draft EIR, Section 4.3, p. 4.3-16.) No backfilling will take place.
c) Section 3705: Performance Standards for Revegetation - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3705. Section 3705 measures success of revegetation "based upon the
effectiveness of the. vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density, and
species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar parameters of
naturally occurring vegetation in the area." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §
3705(m).) The Reclamation Plan's revegetation standards track the
statutory requirements mandated by SMARA and its associated
regulations. For example, Section 3705(m) states the following:
Success of revegetation shall be judged based upon the
Page 6 of 10
effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density,
and species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar
parameters of naturally occurring vegetation in the area. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3705(m).)
The Reclamation Plan tracks these requirements. The reclamation
plan states "Performance standards ... will be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of the vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of cover, density and species -richness of the
reclaimed lands to .similar parameters on reference areas." Further, the
Reclamation Plan specifically provides that revegetation monitoring
will take place for five years. During the five-year monitoring period,
annual reports will be submitted to the Butte County Planning
Division. The reports will describe the success of the revegetation
plan and will include recommendations for how to improve, if
possible, the plan's success in the following year. In addition, the
reclamation plan requires that "[m]ethods for monitoring and
assessment will be based on guidelines provided in the Department of
Conservation's recently published manual on the rehabilitation process
for disturbed lands (Newton and Claassen, 2003)." •
d) Section 3706: Performance Standards for Drainage, Diversion
Structures, Waterways, and Erosion Control - The Reclamation
Plan meets the requirements of Section 3706. Baldwin will obtain
coverage under a general stormwater control permit from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board before initiating onsite activities. The "
stormwater permit will require the development and implementation of
a stormwater pollution prevention plan ("SWPPP" ). By complying
with the requirements of the.stormwater permit and SWPPP, Baldwin
will necessarily control runoff to ensure that discharge of surface flows
from the site meet stormwater pollution control permit requirements,
and comply with applicable erosion control and sediment control
requirements. Further, as indicated in the excavation 'stability study
(Reclamation Plan, Attachment 8), the 3:1 final slopes incorporated
into the final Project design will stabilize the reclaimed area, allowing
most onsite runoff to remain onsite, thereby minimizing contribution
of sediment to nearby streams and limiting erosion. The streambed
and streambanks of Little Chico Creek will not be disturbed except for
road and conveyor crossings. Stanchions supporting .the conveyor will.
be footed in nonsensitive areas, and the road crossing of the stream
will be improvements on an already existing crossing thus resulting in
no increased impact.. There will be no in -stream mining. (Reclamation
Plan, p. 13.)
e) Section 3707: Performance Standards for Prime Agricultural
Page 7 of 10
Land Reclamation - This performance standard does not apply to the
Project because itis not located on Prime Agricultural Land.
f) Section 3708: Performance Standards for Other Agricultural
Land - The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section 3708.
As discussed in Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, the Project's end use will
be reclamation to agricultural uses for the plant area (40 acres) while
the mining area (193 acres) will be reclaimed as open water and
wetlands. The revegetation scientist that Baldwin will retain for the
Project will set up appropriate reference areas for both the plant site
agricultural reclaimed area as well as the perimeter of the lake/wetland
area. Productivity of the irrigated agricultural land at the reclaimed
plant site will be compared to that of adjacent irrigated agricultural
land on the M&T Ranch. The plant site will revert to become a part of
a larger field on the M&T Ranch, and will be managed the same as the
rest of the land in that field. Performance standards for the shallow
wetlands and lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of the vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of cover, density and species richness of the
reclaimed lands to similar parameters on reference areas approved by
County staff.
g) Section 3709: Performance Standards for Building, Structure and
Equipment Removal - There are currently no buildings or structures
within the proposed Project area. Buildings and structures associated
with the aggregate processing plant will be removed when mining is
completed.
h) Section 3710: Performance Standards for Stream Protection,
Including Surface and Groundwater - The Reclamation Plan meets
the requirements of Section 3710. Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water
Quality) of the Draft EIR describes the potential impacts of the
Project. The only surface water stream, Little Chico Creek, will not be
disturbed. There will no in -stream mining. Other surface water bodies
include wetlands which will be mitigated as required by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and other state and federal agencies. During
mining operations, industrial stormwater and process water will be
collected in onsite recycle ponds. In addition, Baldwin will operate the
Project in accordance with a California Regional Water Quality
Control Board stormwater control permit and SWPPP. As discussed in
Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel Mining — M&T Chico Ranch
(Reclamation Plan, Attachment 9; Draft EIR, Appendix D.1), the
Project will not have a significant impact on groundwater resources.
(See Draft EIR, section 4.4). The proposed lake will actually result in
enhanced groundwater recharge from precipitation and evaporation
from the shallow groundwater. Further, although, there is recharge to
Page 8 of 10
the water table, which occurs as result of percolation losses from Little
Chico Creek, the Project is not expected to alter that process. (Draft
EIR, p. 4.4-38.) The groundwater quality study prepared for the Draft
EIR by Monarch Laboratory concluded that there is no groundwater
problem associated with. the existing pit. (Reclamation Plan,
Attachment 11; Draft EIR, Appendix D-3). Following reclamation, as
part of the approved Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Project,
Baldwin will develop a groundwater monitoring program to be
approved by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
and Butte County to measure recharge and water quality following
reclamation. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.4-64 - 4.4-78.)
i) Section 3711: Performance Standards for Topsoil Salvage,
Maintenance, and Redistribution — The Reclamation Plan meets the
requirements of Section 3711. The Reclamation Plan describes how
topsoil and subsoil (growth medium) will be saved and stockpiled for,
reclamation uses as shown in Attachment 7 of the Revegetation Plan.
(Reclamation Plan, p. 8; Attachment 3, Item 6, p. 5; Attachment 5.)
j) Section 3712: Performance Standards for Tailing and Mine Waste
Management — The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of
Section 3712. Under the Reclamation Plan, the Project will not
generate. any mine wastes because all mine products will be sold or
used in reclamation. (Attachment 3, Item 5, p. 5.)
k) Section 3713: Performance Standards for Closure of Surface
Openings — The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section
3713. There are no drill holes, portals, shaft or tunnels associated with
the mining operations proposed for the site that would require
abandonment.
8. FINDING: HEALTH AND SAFETY — The establishment, maintenance or
operation of the use or structure applied for will not, under the
circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or
injurious to property and improvement in the neighborhood, or to the
general welfare of the County.
DECISION
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, EVIDENCE, AND THE RECORD AS A
WHOLE, the Butte County Planning Commission hereby adopts the Statement of
Overriding Considerations (attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference herein)
and approves the M&T Chico Ranch Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-
03, Baldwin Contracting Company [`Baldwin"]), subject to the Conditions of Approval
Page 9 of 10
(attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated by reference herein).
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of November 2006, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chuck Nelson - Chairman
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
ATTEST:-
LYNN
TTEST:LYNN RICHARDSON, Secretary
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
Page 10 of 10
n
'
5
EXHIBIT 2 '
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
.. _ MONITORING REPORT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) has been developed for the M&T' Chico
MONITORING REPORT
Ranch Mine Project to ensure compliance with mitigation specified in the Final EIR for the
project. The purpose of this document is to provide a framework from which the lead agency
can adequately monitor, document, and report that the mitigation has been implemented. For
purposes of clarity, this MMRP restates each final mitigation measure and provides a format for
monitoring reporting.
Lead CEQA Agency:
COUNTY OF BUTTE
CEQA (Guidelines Section 15091, subdivision (d)) requires that the mitigation measures being
Oroville, California
monitored or the subject of reporting must be 'fully enforceable through permit conditions,
agreements, or other measures." Thus,.this MMRP identifies what is to be done, when it is to be
done, what standard will be used to measure effectiveness, and who is responsible for the
action. Mitigation monitoring takes various forms and involves many, different activities. For
Prepared by:
some environmental issues, such as those dealing with project design, monitoring will be a one -
RESOURCE DESIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC.
time assessment of adequacy. Other issues, such as noise, will be monitored initially to
4509 Golden Foothill Parkway, Suite 2
establish the adequacy of primary mitigation measures. Once adequacy is established, the
EI Dorado Hills, California 95762
County may allow monitoring to be discontinued. For still other issues, such as revegetation
success and annual assessment of traffic -related fair -share payments, monitoring will continue
throughout the life of the project.
Once collected, monitoring information must be documented through a cooperative effort
involving the Operator, the CEQA Lead Agency (in this case, the Butte County Planning
NOVEMBER 2006
Division, Department of Development Services), and other applicable agencies. The primary
documentation of mitigafion implementation and effectiveness is generally collated in the form of
an annual mitigation status report and permit compliance review.
Preparation of an annual Mitigation Status *Report (MSR) is a key component of this MMRP for
the M&T Chico Ranch Mine. This report will be required of the Operator to fulfill its
responsibilities under the use permit entitlement. The purpose of this Report is to reduce the
level of County monitoring by requiring the Operator to implement a rigorous self -inspection
program which will include a reporting system that keeps the County apprised of field conditions
on a regular basis. The report will be a matter of the public record regarding the implementation
of the required mitigation measures.
The annual MSR institutes a self -inspection and reporting program for measures with ongoing
application. In addition 'to this self -reporting effort, the County may verity compliance through
scheduled or unscheduled inspections. At a minimum, the County will verify the MSR data on an
annual basis, as part of its required annual inspections under the California Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act (SMARA). The County may also use objective third -party contract services to
conduct monitoring and inspections.
The applicanUowner is responsible for all costs associated with monitoring and reporting
activities including but not limited to the hourly rate of County staff time, as approved by the
Board of Supervisors and as amended, and any contract services as may be necessary to
conduct such work on behalf of the County as determined by the Director or designee.
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
EXHIBIT 2 Page 2 of 55
MST CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
,".''
CONDITION !;SDQR 0'If
Z;....
Conditionor Mitigation Measure Nurber:Mitigation easure 4.2-1Ix
Requirement
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.6-1 through 4.6-9 for traffic impacts, 4.8-1a through
4.8-3b for noise impacts and 4.9-1a through 4.9-3 for impacts to aesthetics will reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To reduce potential land use incompatibility.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.6-1 through 4.6-9, 4.8-1a through 4.8-3b, and 4.9-1a
through 4.9-3.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations, during operations
RESRONSIBLE PERSONS) R A ...... . V
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
NON ..........
IT Ii N WS'd H E "DLl L E ./:TIME. -FRAME: '.'
.. . Annually
......
F A
quency: nnually
Season: N/A
Ab*1160IN IV!
Pe'rso'ns Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
By:
MST Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
3 of 55
Date:
MST CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
.URP 8.`
z X"
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 and 4.3-2
Requirement
The Applicant has incorporated a 3HAV slope for final slopes into the project design to provide
an adequate safety factor. No additional mitigation is required.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To provide an adequate safety factor during seismic activity.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation by licensed surveyor or engineer that final slopes are
minimum 3H:1V.
Compliance Timing: During operations, project reclamation
N
RONITORIN64: REVIEW"
.......... .. ... ........ ... ...
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
9:
Frequency: At completion of final slopes for each mining area
Season: N/A
MO NITORING,AC7IVITY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
..... ..........ION /REPORTING..
....
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Date:
XN
Z
.. .. ................ .
MST Chlco Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
1 4 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION SOURCE'hPIIRPOS n ox�►r t .<. ` <.. KA a;...:.:; :...
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.3-3
Requirement
Any structures proposed on-site including offices and related facilities shall be appropriately
designed and constructed in accordance with the seismic safety requirements of the California
Uniform Building Code and other requirements of the Butte County Building Division of the
Development Services Department.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; standard condition
Purpose: To reduce potential seismic damage to structures to a less -than -
significant level.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
12ESPONSIBLE-PERSON(S).OR i4GENCYyFOR MONITO,Fi1NG,/REVIEW r..;..
..
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MO .ITQI2ING;5CHEnULE;1,7)ME f RAMEX "<
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
xMONITG121NG:AC7iViTY"� ° � Y � J � � ':
Persons Involved: .
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
5 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
;?CONDITION
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-2a
Requirement
Any sumps or detention ponds used to contain runoff from within the servicing and refueling
area shall be located where there is a minimum of five feet of separation between the bottom of
the sump and the seasonal high water table. If this criterion cannot be met because the
proposed locations of sumps are in locations where the elevation difference between the bottom
of the sump and the seasonal high water table is less than five feet, then sumps shall be capped
with either an impervious material or an 18 -inch layer of compacted fines which have a
permeability at 90 percent relative compaction of no greater than 1.0 x 10 -8 cm/second. The
above requirement is not extended to those sumps which will collect and recirculate process
water.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent contaminants from being delivered to the water table
directly beneath the processing area.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit as -built design confirming requirements have been met.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESPONSIBLE PERSONS) OR AGENCY FOR MON ITORING-IREVIEW
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITORING SCHEDULETTIME
_,.......:..,a.
Frequency: At completion of sump construction
Season: NIA
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
6 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
SCONDITION %>SOUItCE'1-10. URPOSB % ' Y <' �«
u._ »mss..:.... .,, a
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: M 'Mitigation Measure 4.4-2b
Requirement
All equipment servicing and refueling shall be performed on impervious surfaces.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent contaminants from being delivered to the water table
directly beneath the processing area.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation of designated servicing and refueling area with impervious
surfaces.
Compliance Timing: During operations
FtESpONSIBI:� p.,ERSON(S)�O�:e►GEr±Icr K6R MONITORING / �1=VIBV11 s .;: ., ,,,, � � : ;
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MONITORINCiACTIVITY., L:" ..y „�:x`. :._`,�,.� .. �.'_�:;.,... .......�.`i :.,• ......... ...
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
;'COIVIpUANCE VERIFICATION /;REPOf2TING �; ; _: - ^�` '`
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
FOLLOW'UP '
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
7 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
ONDITION-7;SOURCE
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-2c
Requirement
Project proponent shall develop and implement a groundwater quality -monitoring plan
acceptable to both Butte County and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent contaminants from being delivered to the water table
directly beneath the processing area.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Approval of groundwater quality -monitoring plan by Butte County Public Works Department.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
ARE$PONSIBLEPSRSON(S)`Ot2AGENCYfO_ R,MONITORING;IREVIEW?;
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITORING SCHEOULE l TIME FRAME
Frequency: At completion of groundwater monitoring plan
Season: N/A
MONITORING:ACTIVITY,::; ,
..
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE'VERIFICATION / REPORTING
Report Formal:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
8 of 55
MEAT CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION hSOURCC I PU......
ion ation Me
....<
Conditor Mitigasure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-3a
Requirement
Runoff from the surfaces of the processing area shall be prevented from entering the pit by
regrading the area between the pit and the processing area as necessary to ensure that runoff
from the processing facilities will not flow to the proposed pit area.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent groundwater contamination due to exposure of water
table through mining activities.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed surveyor or engineer that grading is completed
as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
'RESPONSIBLE P�RSON(S).OR AGENCY FOR MONITORING:Y
.... _.... .. .
Name Director or designee
Agency: Public Works
MONITORING.SCHEDULE.Y7IME.FRAME,
:..
Frequency: At completion of process area grading
Season: N/A
MONITORINGACTiVITY, . .:... �
.: ... .... ..<. .. . .. .. .. ..�:'.. 1 . .... .:.. ..:.: v. . �. t . . : .. <..� ...... � ..e.....,.....
Persons involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
„CoMPEIA. NCE ,VERIPICA710N
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
9 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
RPOSE
.: CONDI,TION I;SOURCE f.PU ....:. , ..:.::.,.::,.;...:....<.....,.._....,_...... ..:....:.: :.. -.. ...
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-3b
Requirement
Flows in Little Chico Creek up to 2,000 cis shall be prevented from entering the lake through
construction of a low levee/weir and bypass channel, which will prevent flows from entering the
distributary channel. This mitigation measure is the same as Mitigation Measure 4.4-7c, as
described by NorthStar, 2002). The created lake will be protected from floodwater entry up to
approximately a ten-year recurrence interval flood from Little Chico Creek. The level of flood
protection afforded by this measure by Sacramento River floodwaters is unknown, however, it is
rational to expect that flood protection from that source will approximate a ten-year recurrence
interval since it would be unusual for large floods from the Sacramento River, which is
regulated, to more frequently overflow the new levee and bypass channel that floodwaters from
Little Chico Creek. Typically, regional flooding is correlated with local flooding.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent groundwater contamination due to exposure of water
table through mining activities. This mitigation is the same as
Mitigation Measure 4.4-7c and, thus will also serve as a flood
control measure.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit as -built confirmation by licensed engineer that the levee/weir and bypass
channel are constructed as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations start-up
RESPO,NSIBLE;PERSON.(S);OR AG NCY.,FOF7 MONITORING /;REVIEW
By: Date:
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
10 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
• MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT "
sCONDiTION I,SOURCEf,PURPOSE s ^_
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-3c
Requirement
The existing drainage ditch at the southern limit of the proposed pit, and all drainage ditches
along the east side of the pit up to 1,000 feet beyond the project area shall be improved as
necessary to increase their peak flow capacity to carry a 10 -year recurrence interval peak flow.
Similarly, a ditch of similar capacity shall be constructed along the western property boundary
through any reaches where the local topography slopes toward the proposed pit. The western
ditch, depending on the design, may be the same as the Little Chico Creek overflow diversion
described above. All ditch construction within the 100 -year floodplain shall be performed
without side casting, and all other ditch improvements must be performed so as not to increase
the heights of any existing berms alongside these ditches. Mining shall cease when the edge of
the proposed pit is within 50 feet of the ditch along the southern boundary.
This measure will eliminate runoff in contact with agricultural lands generated from local storms
from entering the created lake at a frequency, on average, of greater than ten years. Since no
side casting is allowed, these agricultural drainage ditches cannot prevent the entry of
floodwaters backing into the area from the Sacramento River. The exception is the ditch to be
constructed along the western property boundary, which is specifically designed to give the
proposed pit flood protection from Little Chico Creek. ,
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent groundwater contamination due to exposure of water
table through mining activities.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed engineer that drainages are constructed as
specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESPONSIBLE PERSONS) OR AGENCYFOR MONITORING I REVIEW
Name:
Agency: Public Works Department
;MONITORING„SCHEDULE I TIME FRAME ' c
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
' y ................... ... ;::............:
fMONITORING ACTIVITY...:._.:: r
_._t . .:_......_..,.
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
11 of 55 12 of 55
iTCOMPLIANCEVERIFICATIOIJ•/Ftl-I ri"
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Date:
"FOLLOW UP,:?
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
NDITION (SOURCE (PURPOSE;. ; �,:. ,,# 4;,..: ..:.... ; ..`
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-3d
Requirement
Mining shall not be performed with the use of a dredge boat without prior review by Butte
County. All motorized mining equipment, when not in use, shall be parked more than 50 feet
from the edge of the pit during normal operations. When no mining occurs for more than a 14 -
day period, all motorized equipment must be removed to areas which do not drain into the
proposed pit. All refueling will be conducted at a distance greater than 50 feet from the edge of
the pit. Any soil contaminated by fuel or hydraulic fluid must be removed in accordance with
measures to be specified as required by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control
Board.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent groundwater contamination due to exposure of water
table through mining activities.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing During operations
`s FiESf?ONSIBLE,PERSON(S) OR AGENCY FOR MONITORINGL,REVIEW.; ,
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
;MONITORING A'CTIYiTY:
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments
COMPLIANCE; VERIFICATION I:REPORTING::......:... . �.. . -
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION / SOURGE I PUg, ....:...
, RPOS,,
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-3e
Requirement
Applicant shall develop a ground -water monitoring program to be approved by the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and Butte County. If monitoring shows that
drinking water standards (Title 22 of the California State Code of Regulations) are not being met
either at the property boundary nearest the proposed pit in a downgradient direction or at the
Jones domestic well, due to degradation caused by the project, then Butte County, in
consultation with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, shall rescind their
operating permits, and no permit shall be re -issued until such time as a groundwater
remediation plan has been implemented, groundwater at the property boundary once again
meets drinking water standards, and additional measures, as approved by Butte County, have
been implemented to prevent future degradation. The term 'caused by the project" shall be
interpreted as any Increase in contaminant concentrations between the upgradient baseline
monitoring well above the proposed operations area and the downgradient monitoring locations
which exceed drinking water standards.
Monitoring, at a minimum shall consist of monitoring of jVp wells. One located up -gradient of
the proposed pit and operating area, and another approximately 1,000 feet south from the
northwest corner of the pit. As mining proceeds additional wells shall be installed; one located
mid -way between the north and south edges of the pit near the western property boundary, and
the other 25 feet from the ultimate southwest comer of the pit. Figure 4.4-13, Proposed
Monitoring Well Locations, shows suggested locations for the monitoring wells proposed under
this mitigation measure MW Mitigation Measure 4.4-2c. The wells shall be monitored four times
a year each year during the life of operations within the first week of April, July, August, and
September. Once the edge of pit progresses to within 500 feet of the next down -gradient well,
that well shall be monitored and monitoring of the upslope well shall cease. Samples shall be
composites formed by sampling within two feet below the water table, and combining with an
equal volume of water 20 feet below the water table. Samples will be analyzed for turbidity,
fecal coliform, diesel and BTEX compounds. Additionally, pesticides commonly used in the
vicinity shall be sampled annually. The selection of pesticides to be analyzed shall be approved
by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and Butte County. The laboratory
performing the analyses shall forward results directly to Butte County and the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Additionally, Applicant shall monitor the domestic well
on what is referred to as the Jones' parcel if the property owners grant permission for
monitoring. Monitoring shall consist of drawing tapwater samples.
Samples shall be analyzed for turbidity, fecal coliforms, benzene, and atrazine. Prior to the
onset of mining, at least three samples, taken on a monthly interval, shall be taken from the
Jones' domestic water supply to establish a baseline from which subsequent samples shall be
compared. Following the baseline sampling, monitoring shall consist of two phases; an
intensive Phase A, and a routine Phase B. During Phase A samples shall be taken weekly for
12 consecutive weeks beginning June 1. Phase A shall take place during the first irrigation
season after mining operations have commenced, and, at the discretion of Butte County, the
second irrigation season after mining begins. Additionally, Phase A sampling shall occur the
first irrigation season following a flood where floodwaters enter the proposed pit Phase B
sampling shall take place whenever Phase A sampling is not taking place and shall consist of
sampling on the first week of April, July, August, and September. Phase B monitoring will
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
15 of 55
continue for at least four years after all Phase A monitoring is completed. After that, all
monitoring of the Jones' parcel water supply may be discontinued if Butte County determines
that contaminant concentrations at the Jones' parcel well never exceed those at the project
monitoring well(s).
In lieu of monitoring the Jones' domestic water supply as specified above, applicant may
undertake one of two alternatives if requested by the Jones' parcel owners prior to discontinuing
the monitoring described above. It shall be at the discretion of the Jones' parcel owners which
of the two alternatives they wish to accept, if any. The alternatives consist of either replacing
the existing domestic well with a new well of equivalent capacity which draws water only from
the lower aquifer, or installing a filter system capable of reliably furnishing water meeting
drinking water standards.
Applicant shall pay for all costs associated with replacing the existing well and increased
pumping costs, or the costs of installing and maintaining, in perpetuity, a filter system.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent groundwater contamination due to exposure of water
table through mining activities.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Approval of groundwater monitoring program by Butte County Public Works Department and
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations, during operations
RESPONSIgL�;PEaSON(S) OR AGNCYFOR•MONITORING•/;REVIEW:`.>i„... , ..:: _;,: ;
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
WONITOMNGSCHEDOLE.I TIME FRAME„
Frequency: At completion of monitoring program design
Season: N/A
;;MONITORING
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
?COMPLiANCr:VERIFICATIONJREPORTINCa
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
UP
;,POLL bIN,:
....... , _..y .....::.
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
16 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION (SOURCE /PURPOSE z a r
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: x Mitigation Measure 4.4-5
Requirement
.The slope between the buffer strip and the actively mined area shall be designed by a licensed
civil engineer to prevent erosion. Suitable measures may include both structural and
vegetative, if it can be demonstrated that a combination of a gentle slope, in conjunction with
vegetation can prevent erosion from Little Chico Creek overflows. The design shall consider the ' .
potential concentration of floodwaters, the lowest expected antecedent water surface elevation
in the proposed pit, and scour/undermining of the toe of the slope. Butte County must approve
the design prior to initiation of the project. A design report shall be submitted along with plans.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose:_ To prevent floodwaters from flowing over the 50-foot wide buffer
between the Little Chico Creek and the. northern edge of the pit.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed engineer that the slope between the buffer strip.
and the actively mined area is designed to prevent erosion.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
(tE5PONS19LE PER50N,�5) bR?AGENCi�T0l2 MONI,COR�NG•,/'REVI_EWr u.,,. ..� .,.;> ;w
Name: Director or designee w
Agency: Public Works Department
;MONITORING SCNEtyUI� / tIME, f;RAME � , � '< „>:r,* t <,
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
CtyMPLIbNC VaIFiCATION I;REpO,f;fING< `,` . ; ..
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
17 of 55
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
18 of 55
s
- t
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
,CONDITION I SOURCE /PURPOSE'
Condition or Mitlgation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-6
Requirement
The mine pit excavation area shall maintain a minimum setback of 100 feet from the bank of
Little Chico Creek to avoid potential lateral migration of the creek.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent direct linking of surface water and groundwater due to
lateral migration of Little Chico Creek through the proposed 50 -foot
buffer strip separating the creek from the pit edge along the
northern boundary of the proposed pit.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit a map of current surface disturbance in annual report.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESPONSIBLE PERSON(3) OR AGENCY -FOR MONITORING.I REVIEW
s. _
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITORINGSCHEDUhE! TIMEjFRAME ;'X.,�,ft!r f
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MQNI70RING .ACTIVITY'
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCEVEf41PICATfON'/ REPORTING �, r , •... ,;., , , ,,t
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
19 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
;CONDITION LSOORCE /;PURPOSE.„ :;
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-7a
Requirement
Applicant shall remove the existing levee on the east side of Little Chico Creek and replace it
with setback levees at the same elevation. A by-pass channel will be constructed to convey
flows overtopping the new setback levees back to the creek through new, larger culverts. Plans
shall be approved by Butte County prior to construction. This measure will increase the
Floodway width which will decrease the 50 -year flood depth by 0.6 feet (NorthStar Engineering,
2002) and with its implementation, it is expected that there will be no impact on flooding in the
Sacramento River Floodplain.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent flooding of River Road and Jones' parcel due to
placement of dikes or fill within the processing area, and
elimination of existing distributary at the north end of the proposed
pit.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Plans shall be approved by Butte County Public Works Department prior to construction.
Compliance Timing During operations
F
RESPONSIBI_.E PERSO.... R AGENCYfOR MONITORING.I REVIEW r_
Name:..... Director or designee
Agency Public Works Department
E L.........TIME
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
;MONITORfNG. WTIVITY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
'COMPLIANC 1!EIIFICATION /REPORTING.,,;
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
20 of 55
MSFT CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
?;CONDITION / SOURCE,/.PURPOSE
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-7b
Requirement
Applicant shall enter into an agreement with Butte County to either construct or fund the costs of
raising the existing low water crossing on River Road near the gas well site by up to three feet
and installing larger culverts within three years of use permit approval. Plans shall be approved
by Butte County Public Works Department prior to construction.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department, EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent flooding of River Road and Jones' parcel due to
placement of dikes or fill within the processing area, and
elimination of existing distributary at the north end of the proposed
pit.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESPONSIBLE PEF% ON(S);OR ANCY POR M.01. RING/;REVIEWk< n > e
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
;MONITORING SCHEDULE /;TINS:FRAME„
Frequency: Upon signing of funding agreement
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCEI/ERIFICATION /:REPORTING
........ ..... .... ..:...:.. .. .. ,... ....
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
al..:...::.....2:..`,
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
21 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORINGREPORT
hCQNDITION;L SOURCE./ PUAPOSE,I
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.4-7c
Requirement
Applicant shall install a bypass channel to convey flows formerly conveyed by the distributary
channel around the proposed pit area. The overflow weir and adjoining bypass channel will be
designed such that elimination of the distributary will not result in increased Flooding depths or
duration on the Jones' parcel. The bypass channel shall maximize, to the extent possible, use
of native plant materials in the design to control erosion. Plans shall be approved by Butte
County prior to construction.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent flooding of River Road and Jones' parcel due to
placement of dikes or fill within the processing area, and
elimination of existing distributary at the north end of the proposed
pit. This is the same as Mitigation Measure 4.4-2b and, thus, will
also serve as a groundwater quality protection measure.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit as -built confirmation by licensed engineer that the levee/weir and bypass
channel are constructed as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations start-up
RESPONSIBLE P.ERSON(S).Q AGENCYFQR;MONITORING'hREVIEW "
....
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITORING SCHEDULE (TIME
..... .
Frequency. At construction completion
Season: N/A
"MONIT.ORING
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments
COMPLIANCE. lKiCATION /:REPORTING',.:_;;
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
POLLOW.. UP- ;
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
22 of 55
MST CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT ,
'CONDITION I.:SOURCE:I.PURPOSE r,
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1a
Requirement
Unpaved haul roads, service roads, and plants areas shall be treated with water or chemical
stabilizers in sufficient quantity and frequency as necessary to meet the following standards:
No visible emissions extending beyond the property line (BCAPCD Rule 207); and
No visible emissions as dark or darker than Ringlemann 2 or 40% opacity for a period or
periods aggregating more than three minutes in one hour determined using EPA Method
9. (BCAPCD Rule 202); or
Any future standard respecting fugitive dust or visible emissions that is more stringent
than the standards in paragraphs a and b that is adopted or amended by the Butte
County APCD subsequent to the approval of the project.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PM10.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Season: N/A
MQNITORING ACTIV
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments....
COMPM..ERIFICA710N,I;REPORTING " v,i : :
h
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
23 of 55
Date:
MST CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
ON,.*' ISOURCE L,PURPOSE;
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1c
Requirement
Excavation areas shall be treated with water during topsoil removal phases. As excavation
areas are completed and final depths are reached, revegetation shall be implemented as
stipulated in the Reclamation Plan.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services, EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PM,O.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
;RESPONSIBLE
A V
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
:MON -0
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE 15 . IF. P.,kT.!O 1APPOR ... .. .
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
25 of 55
Date:
'*r
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1d
Requirement
Permanent roads from public streets to the processing or loading facilities shall be graveled or
paved to reduce the use of unpaved roads.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PM,o.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by surveyor or licensed engineer that public streets to the
processing or loading facilities are graveled or paved as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
<..kL$P.,ONSIIBLr:'P,F-RS'ON(S).."OR"AGEN.'C. .':MONITORINGJ REYIEWX,::.*:-.,'.
.. ........ ... ... .
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
NIYOMNO;4pHep Lr:,'Z. WE- M
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
.'40MPLIANCE,V.I5f,U IC
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
F 0 L L*OW:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
26 of 55
Date:
MEAT CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
;CONDITION ISOURCE I PURPOSE. .r ��� a ' r.. r3 .., ,✓, �'_.-' .:...... .
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1e
Requirement
Wet sweeping shall be performed on heavily -used on-site paved roads and within 500 feet of
the access roads for the aggregate plants as necessary to control on-site and track -out dust.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PM,o.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified wet sweeping procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESPONSIBLE PERSON(S).OR AGENCYyFOR MONITORING LREVIEW
v.... <.. _.... _ _........ ..
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MON!YORING'SCHEDULE`,F71ME.f�RAIVIE
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
'MONI70RING ACTIVITY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Date:
`FOLLOW
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
27 of 55
MEAT CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CbNbfTION,:/;SOURCE/PURPOSE»,
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1f
Requirement
A truck spraying facility shall be constructed and operated near the exit of the aggregate plants.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive Mo.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed engineer that a truck spraying facility has been
constructed as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
ESPONSIBLE PERSON(S);ORAGENCY:F.OR'MONITORING /.REVIEW::.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
Frequency: At construction completion; annual
Season: NIA
MONITORING ACTIVITY, .,.
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE_VERIFICAT ION l REPORTING :;,; , ..
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
28 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
,.CONDITION FSOURCE'l PURPOSE ,_ .:::
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.5-1g
Requirement
The aggregate Operator shall set up a 24-hour anemometer at the plant site to monitor wind
speeds. If wind gusts exceed 20 miles per hour as defined by the BCAQMD, the Operator shall
terminate topsoil removal and hauling on-site until the high Wind abates. Times that the above
water table mining operations are shut down shall be logged and included in the annual mine
inspection report required by SMARA.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services, EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PMjo.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations, during operations
$ 19 L E::: F-,. E'R OR '0'- �Y ..... M ...h.
w, ... ... .... ... ....
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
AgNIT9RIN 'SCH Wgi
.
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MONITORING;ACTIVITY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
.. .... ......
YERlft
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: . Date:
LOW UP-',"!
..........
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
29 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
ON T. 0
�*q ... PP. Y1'./SOURCE .`/*,
Condidon or Mitigation Measure NumbsMitigation Measure 4.5-1 h
Requirement
Topsoil storage plies shall be covered with gravel/rock or seeded with an erosion control seed
mix to prevent wind-blown dust.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent high levels of fugitive PMo.
Standard for Determining• Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESPAOSIB�'APAR4 N(S) :rql�.."..�.k.qEop-y>f-."�:Mq
.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
E M
Frequency: Annual
Season:. N/A
"MONI,,T NGACTIVITY.,:
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
y;COMPLIANCE_YERIFICATIQN /.REPORTING; .`
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
TX L 0
0
... . ..
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
30 of 53
Date:
M&T CHICO, RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONbITf�N (SO,tJ,RC�,lfstJRPOSE.,>
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measun�rre 4.6-1
Requirement
The project Applicant shall contribute a fair share contribution to reconstruct the bridge on Ord Ferry
Road at Little Chico Creek. The fair share contribution amount should be based upon the relative
proportion of project vehicles traveling on the bridge. The implementation of this mitigation measure
shall occur before building permits are granted.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will add 10 or more trips per day to the
bridge on Ord Ferry Road at the Little Chico Creek.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of their fair share contribution to reconstruct the
bridge on Ord Ferry Road at Little Chico Creek.
Compliance Timing: Annually, based on reported tonnage
RE3F?ONSI.. ' PERSON.(S)AOft AGENCY FOFtMONITORING./REVIEW
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITOItING.SCHEnULEf :TIME Ff2AM� � : y, ,a ;;; , „ „� '
Frequency: Upon receipt of fair share contribution
Season: N/A
;:MONITORING AG.71VIt1!;`
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE: VERIFICATION
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
1 MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION;I'<SOURCEaPtrRPOSE ,> .:
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.6-2
Requirement
The project Applicant shall contribute its fair share of the costs to improve the pavement
on River Road between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road with a two-inch asphalt
concrete overlay. The fair share amount shall be based on the increase in ESALs,
which is 51%. Butte County Public Works estimates the cost of this improvement to be
approximately $1,200,000. Therefore, the Applicant's fair share cost would be about
$40,000 per year. The Public Works Department has indicated that the fee shall be
submitted annually based on the tonnage of material that is hauled from the project site
and shall be relative to an inflation index. Based on the information contained in Table
4.6-9, the cost per ton of material hauled from the project site would be approximately
$0.08.
The project applicant shall contribute its fair share of the cost to maintain the asphalt
concrete pavement on the following roads over the 30 year life of the project:
• River Road; between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road;
• Ord Ferry Road; between County Line and Dayton Road;
• Durham Dayton Road; between Dayton Road and SR 99;
• Dayton Road; between Ord Ferry Road and Chico City Limit;
• Hegan Lane; between Dayton Road and Midway; and
• Chico River Road; between River Road and Chico City Limit.
Road Maintenance shall include a chip seal surface treatment every 10 years with M &
T Chico Ranch Mine project's fair share contribution based on the projected net
increase in ESALs as shown in the attached Table A. Based on the information
contained in Table A, the cost per ton of material hauled from the project site would be
approximately $0.06 and shall be relative to an inflation index.
If maintenance costs are rolled into a single fee per ton of material extracted, the
mitigation fee shall be made up of $0.08 per ton for the overlay on River Road, plus
$0.01 per ton for the improvements to the Ord Ferry Bridge, and the installation of a
signal at Midway and Durham Dayton -highway, for a total of $0.09 per ton of material
9 Y
removed from the site. The amount intended to compensate for the extra maintenance
required due to the increased truck traffic, shall be $0.06 per ton of material extracted.
These fees shall be deposited by the operator into. the Butte County Road Fund, and
shall be adjusted for inflation based upon the change in the Construction Cost Index for
San Francisco, during the month of January of each year. These fees shall cease to be
collected should the County impose a countywide tax or fee for road maintenance
based upon weight of materials moved over the roads.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will add 25 or more truck trips, which cause
an increase in the Traffic index (TI) of 0.5 or greater on a County
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report '
31 of 55 32 of 55
maintained roadway.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of their fair share contribution for the above-specified
improvements.
Compliance Timing: Annually, based on reported tonnage
RESPONSIBLE PERSONS) OR:AdtNCY FOR IT' NREV
M0NO(i. / IEW p
:.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
FOLLOW w. f `a 4 i ` t�' E n c .. .. _...
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
33 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
;,'CONDITION I;SOURCE.'I PURPOSE >-
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.6-4
Requirement
The project Applicant shall contribute a fair share contribution to improve the intersection of SR
32/West 5`" Street by modifying the existing traffic signal to provide split phase timing, including
three seconds of yellow time and one second of all -red time per phase. The fair share
contribution amount should be based upon the relative proportion of project vehicles traveling
through the impacted intersection.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will add 10 or more trips per day to the
intersection of SR 32/West5" Street. This intersection has been
identified as a location having 4 or more accidents in a 12 -month
period over the last three years. This location also had more than
one accident over a 12 -month period, which involved heavy
vehicles.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of their fair share contribution to improve the
intersection of SR 32/West 5"i Street.
Compliance Timing: Annually, based on reported tonnage
RESRON518LE%PERSON(S)'OR AGENCYfOR_MONIT.ORING:IREVIEW,
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
MONITORING,$CHEDULEI;TIME.FRAME '
Frequency: Upon receipt of fair share contribution
Season: N/A
By: Date:
FOLLOVII.UP `. ..:.x<
> w
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
34 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION /.SOURCE 1:P ....P, a:.:
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4'.6-8
Requirement
Improvements to the median crossing, acceleration/deceleration lanes, improved signing and
striping, and channelization of the driveway approach could improve the safety characteristics of
this intersection. In addition, signalization of the Skyway/ Honey Run Road (anticipated by
2005) may provide sufficient gaps in through traffic on Skyway to improve egress from the
driveway. However, no feasible mitigation measure will reduce the level of impact to this
roadway segment. This is considered a significant unavoidable impact.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will exacerbate LOS F operating conditions
in the a.m. hour and LOS D in the p.m. peak hour at the
intersection of Baldwin Plant Driveway and Skyway. Specified
improvements may improve conditions somewhat.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of their fair share contribution.
Compliance Timing: Annually, based on reported tonnage
a`RESpONSIHLE PER&ON(S);OR:aGErfGY �OR,MONIt01�ING TItE?�/IEVu�. ;:
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Public Works Department
.:.
N10NITORING,SCFI�DULR/PIM�:FRANI�'" ,.,z
Frequency: Upon receipt of fair share contribution
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE';VERIFICATION
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Date:
FOLLOW UP H ,ttT
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
35 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
=CONDITION f;SOURCE.I;PURPOSE,;<. ,�,
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.6-9
Requirement
The project Applicant shall contribute a fair share contribution to install a traffic signal and
improve lane configurations with a left -turn lane and shared through/right-turn lane on each
approach of the Durham -Dayton Highway and Midway intersection. With this improvement this
intersection will operate at LOS C under cumulative project conditions. The fair share
contribution amount shall be based upon the relative proportion of project vehicles traveling
through the impacted intersection.
Source of Requirement: Public Works Department; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will exacerbate peak hour LOS F operating
conditions at the intersection of Durham -Dayton Highway and
Midway.
Standard for Determining Compliance
The Operator shall submit annual confirmabon of this fair share contribution.
Compliance Timing: Annually, based on reported tonnage
.. ....
;.COMP LIANC&VERIFICATION (;REPORTING.::.' .,,
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Date:
LLOW UP
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
36 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
-GONDIt10N'/,•:30tJROE`I PURp;Q3E `.�.:rw �.<' . ,�r;':'` ,r., ....>,�..
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-1
Requirement
Slopes along the perimeter of the created lake shall be actively revegetated, where necessary,
to supplement natural colonization of plant species as part of site reclamation to meet the
performance standards specified by SMARA. Specific areas for supplemental revegetation will
be identified using collected data following one year of monitoring natural colonization.
Additional requirements specified by state or federal agencies shall be incorporated into the final
revegetation plan. The revegetation program shall specify planting and maintenance
techniques, with a detailed monitoring program to evaluate restoration success.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Mitigation Measure
Purpose: The proposed project would result in the permanent loss of
approximately 193 acres of annually tilled, non-native grassland
and dryland agriculture to open water and wetland habitat.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by surveyor or registered biologist that slopes are
revegetated as specified.
Compliance Timing: Post operation/reclamation
RESp6NSIBLE pEIt50N(S).OR,AGENCY t=01�,MONITORING /;R,EVIEW,' .:. ;.: . ,, ,;,;,,
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MON170,RING;SCHEDW.Lf: /.TIMEKItAME;,�:
-s:
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
f;MON170RING'ACTIi71TY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
-:COMPLIANCE:VERIFfCATION L a PORTING
a. .w :...,....
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
37 of 55
Date:
. M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
p.CONDIT.ION / SOURCE 1 PURPOSE.;, -
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-3
Requirement
The Applicant shall be required to obtain a Take Permit, pursuant to Section 2081 of the CDFG
Code, prior to mining. The Section 2081 Permit will provide mitigation for the effects of mining
on Swainson's hawk foraging and potential nesting habitat.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will result in the loss of foraging habitat for
Swainson's Hawk. Disturbance to Swainson's hawks during
nesting may also occur.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Issuance of Take Permit.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESPONSIBLE,PERSON.tS)_OR AGENCY FOR MONITORING: /:REVIEW..,,
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
;'.;MONITORING SCHEDULE ITIME.FRAME
Frequency: Upon acquisition of permit; if needed
Season: N/A
jMONITORING ACTIVITY ..; ...... r ,
_.. .:. ,
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION I REPORTING,,, :.. ..,,
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
38 of 55
Date:
M&T CHlco RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
:CONDITION7;SOURCE,I:PWRPOSv
!x. +W...✓v4.. �W �sn vi.4 S✓. .... v. v. -.. ....
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-4
Requirement
The Applicant shall consult with CDFG to determine an appropriate buffer distance or other
conditions to mining for allowable mining activities during the nesting period of any special -
status species found to occur on the project site. When these requirements have been
established a qualified biologist should conduct a pre -construction survey in spring to determine
the presence of active nests for special -status birds and to determine .the presence of
northwestern pond turtles. If survey results are positive for raptor nests, California black rails or
turtles, the best protection measures relative to mining in potential nesting habitat will be
determined in consultation with CDFG. The preconstruction survey is required before project
start-up and not subsequent to operation, provided that all applicable protection measures have
been implemented prior to operation.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Mitigation Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will result in the loss of foraging and,
possibly, nesting habitat for other special -status species. Mining
activities could also disturb nesting for California black rail, if
present, in adjacent Angel Slough.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by qualified biologist that specified conditions have been
met
Compliance Timing Prior to operations
_:RESPONSI9l:E PERSONS) OR AGENCY FOR MONITORING I:REVIEW
_. >..
Name: Director or designee
Frequency: At completion of pre -construction survey
Season:Appropriate season as necessary for species of concern
MONITORING ACTIVITN�y
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANC EjVERIFICATION
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
MST Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
39 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
�CONOIION I SOURCE;I PURPOSE: _: ,_ ;:..:, ,::� : �, •�
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-5
Requirement
Slopes on stockpiled soils shall be graded to 2:1 for long-term storage to prevent use by bank
swallows. At no time during the active breeding season (May 1 through July 31) shall slopes on
stockpiles exceed 1:1, even on a temporary basis. Stockpiles shall be graded to a minimum 1:1
slope at the end of each workday where stockpiles have been disturbed during the active
breeding season. If any vertical slopes are inadvertently created, these slopes shall be
destroyed Immediately following verification by a designated Environmental Monitor that no
bank swallows have begun nesting there. If bank swallows have begun nesting, CDFG will be
consulted as to the best strategy.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Mitigation Measure
Purpose: To prevent bank swallows from creating temporary nesting sites at
the proposed project.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
�RESPON$19LE PERSON(8`:OR.AGENGY,fOR,MON170RING:/;REVIEW
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
F`MONITORING SCHEDULE• TIME
Frequency: Operator: monthly May -July, County: Annual
Season: N/A
?:,MONITORING ACTIVITY
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE,VPRIFICATION: /:REPORTING:.:; .,
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
40 of 55
Date:
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
41 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007 -
MONITORING REPORT
DITION
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-6
Requirement
The oak grove scheduled for preservation will be protected during mining by the placement of
temporary fencing or flagging along the dripline of each of the trees to prevent mining related
damage. The operator will place temporary fencing prior to pit development with potential for
equipment to be within 50 feet of protected plants. Fencing need not be maintained once
operations are beyond 50 feet.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Mitigation Measure
Purpose: To prevent mining related damage to native oak trees and several
mature Fremont cottonwood and red willow.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by surveyor that fences or flags are placed as specified.
Compliance Timing: . Prior to operations
By: Date:
4FOLLOW
ILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
42 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONWION d:SOURr; "
_. ;... : .
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.7-7
Requirement
Potential impacts to jurisdictional wetlands shall be coordinated with the COE prior to project
development to determine whether a permit is required.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project will impact jurisdictional wetlands.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall coordinate with COE prior to project development to determine whether a permit
is required.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESP�bNSIECE pERSbN(5) OI,2AG�NCY �OR;MONI70RING,LRf=VIEW;`; _
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MQNITORING5CHEDUt E 171ME FRAME r
Frequency: One-time, prior to operations
Season: N/A
MONITORING ACTIVI$l?>
.. „h:•:.::x:::.. ✓. alt:.: i..::::.::.::::::::
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE:VEF,iI(=1CA716NJI��P,OF271NG,;, ..:.':..,.,..L.,�.4`;✓..�Y, ,.,..: 7:-? ,..::;;
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
43 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION l SOURCE /PURPOSE,
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.8-1a
Requirement
Construction of an Earthen Bern: The project Applicant has proposed construction of an
earthen berth between the proposed mining activities and the nearest residence (Residence A)
to mitigate this noise impact. The location of this berm is generally shown in Draft EIR Figure
4.8-7. Barrier effectiveness is dependant on the relative heights of the noise source and
receiver, the frequency content of the noise source, as well as the distances from the noise
source and receiver to the lop of the barrier. Given the geometry of the proposed berm
(approximate height 18 feet, approximately width 475 feet) relative to the mining area and
nearest residence, this berm is predicted to reduce excavation noise levels by approximately 15
dB. The degree of attenuation is predicted to reduce excavation -related noise to approximately
50 dB Leq and 60 dB Lmax, which would comply with the project's standards of significance.
Because the proposed berm is predicted to reduce mining -related noise levels to a state of
compliance with the project's standards of significance, 'no additional mining -related noise
mitigation measures are identified for this project. However, because there is no margin of
safety built into these calculations, follow-up noise level measurements shall be conducted as
part of the mitigation monitoring program to ensure that the berm is providing the required
degree of sound attenuation.. In the event that those follow-up noise measurements indicate
that the project's standards of significance are being exceeded, Mitigation Measure 4.8-1 b shall
be implemented.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To mitigate noise level impacts caused by the proposed project.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed engineer that earthen berms are constructed as
specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESPONSIBLE PERSON($) OR AGENCY FOR MONITORING/REVIEW .......
_.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MONITORING :SCHEDULE I:;TIMEFRAM,.,.,
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
44 of 55
COMPLIANCE VERiFICAt10N / RPbRtING,
Report Format
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
45 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION /
'SOU
FkCE / PURpOSB r
-Condition or'Mitigation-Measure Number:' V Mitigation Measure 4.8-1b
Requirement
Creation of Additional Setbacks from Mining Areas: Because the proposed berm is projected to
provide sufficient attenuation of mining -related noise; additional mining setbacks are. not
recommended at this time. However, if the follow-up noise level measurements required in
Mitigation Measure 4.8-1a indicate that the project's standards of significance are being
exceeded even with the proposed bene, this measure should be implemented. As a general
rule, sound decreases at a rate of about 6 dB per doubling of distance from the noise source for
a noise source which generally operates from a fixed location, such as an excavator or drag
line. For example,'if the mining setback from the nearest residence were increased from 300
feet to 600 feet, excavation -related noise levels would be approximately 6 dB lower than those
expected with the 300 -foot setback. The specific setback distances, if required, will depend on
the effectiveness of the proposed berm in reducing the excavation -related noise levels at the
nearest residence (Residence A).
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; Elk Measure
Purpose: To mitigate noise level impacts caused by the proposed project.. -
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation that standards of significance are•not exceeded as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
mRESPOiVSIBLE PERSONS)
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MONIT6RING,SCHED
UGE,/.TIME FRAME.::
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MONITORING'ACTIVITY.,
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
46 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION I SOURCE
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.8-2a
Requirement
Shielding by Aggregate Stockpiles: Figure 4.8-1 shows that the proposed aggregate stockpile
location is north of the proposed processing equipment. As a result, those stockpiles would
provide shielding of the optional asphalt and concrete plants, but not of the processing
equipment, in the direction of the nearest residence to the south. Consideration should be given
to locating one or more stockpiles between the noisiest processing equipment (crushers and
screens) and that residence to the south. If stockpiles can be erected to intercept line of sight
between that equipment and residence, a 5 dB attenuation can be expected. This degree of
attenuation would reduce processing equipment noise to a state of compliance with the
recommended standards of significance.
Source of Requirement Department of Development Services, EIR Measure
.Purpose: To prevent maximum and average noise levels generated by the
crushing and screening plant equipment at the project site from
exceeding the recommended 50 dB threshold.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESPONSIBLEiP.ERSON(S);OR;AGENCY FOR:;MONITORING; /;REVIEW<;
By:
:F.OLLOW,UP
MST Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
47 of 55 48 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
COND11`ION (:SOURCE'1 PURPOSE, �µ° _ •* a. ''
Coridition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.8-2b
Requirement
Additional Processing Equipment Noise Control Measures: If stockpiles cannot be utilized to
achieve compliance with the standards of significance, or if processing equipment noise levels
still exceed those standards following construction of stockpiles, additional noise control
measures shall be required. Specific noise control measures which could be implemented
Include, but are not limited to, lining hoppers and chutes with heavy urethane sheets, utilizing
urethane screen decks (rather than steel), and suspending acoustic curtains around specific
equipment which is found to be the source of the noise level exceedance.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To prevent maximum and average noise levels generated by the
crushing and screening plant equipment at the project site from
exceeding the recommended 50 dB threshold.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
RESQONSIBLE'PERSON(S).OR,AGENCY,FOR MONI,,TORING>I:REVIEW
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
MONITORINGSCHEDOLE.I fIME,FRAM
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
-.G.OMPLIQNCE VERIFICA710N 1.REPORTING...,.:.,:
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
49 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
CONDITION /SOURCE /;PURPO$ ;.
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.9-1a
Requirement
The Applicant shall prepare and implement a screen tree -planting program to block views of the
proposed mining operation for travelers along River Road and from the closest residence.
These trees shall be planted along portions of River Road, and along lines of sight from the
closest residence. The species of trees shall be selected based on viability in that particular
location, screening potential, and compatibility with other local and regional vegetation. These
trees shall block views of the construction of the stationary facilities and provide additional
screening of the completed facilities for the duration of the mining project.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To preserve visual quality of the project site during initial project
construction.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by surveyor that a screen tree -planting program has been
implemented as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESP
ONSIBI E PERSONS) OR;AGENCY FOR;MONITORING. /,REVIEW; ',
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
„MONITORING SCHEDULEI IME FRAME„. ;.l :_ .
Frequency: At completion of planting; annual checks
Season: N/A
yMON......
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
CO.... CEVERIFICATION.. REPORTING.. .. .
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
s;FOLI OtN UP
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
50 of 55
MST CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
' C.OI�fDITION / SDUI,tCE,f PURPO,S�, "4F . , y b r y r�.4� .,;k;� =•a. J '.._
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.9-1 b
Requirement
As described in Section 4.8, Noise, a earthen bene shall be constricted to shield the dragline
and dredging operations from the adjacent residence. This bene will also screen views from the
adjacent residence. The berm shall be placed in the direct line -of -site between the residence
and dragline or dredge operation. The berm shall be temporary and shall be revegetated with
grasses for erosion control purposes and to be aesthetically pleasing. The constructed berm
shall minimize nearby views of the stationary equipment and the dredge and dragline. The berm
shall be removed during final reclamation.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR measure
Purpose: To preserve visual quality of the project site during initial project
construction.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation by licensed engineer that a berm is constructed as specified.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
Agency: Department of Development Services
MONIT6RINGSCHEDUi.E/,TIMEFRAMEs;� ;.:3;.,. �#,;„.;,.� _
f � r
Frequency: At construction completion
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
,;COMPLfANCE 1/ERIFiCATION IR�PORTING,,,,r, i,,.:,,
i. y..
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
51 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
i4'.. ...... E '1::..:;:zJ.:::
CONDITION I;SOURCE / RURP,OSE,;,..., j
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.9-2
Requirement
Temporary stockpiles and/or berms shall be placed around stationary equipment to block line -
of -sight views between processing equipment and the closest residence and along River Road
near the northeastern portion of the site. As the processing facilities will be raised above the
100 -year Floodplain these temporary berms and/or stockpiles would not displace any
Floodwaters.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: Proposed mining and processing operations would result in both
temporary and permanent alteration of the visual quality of the site.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations
q RESP01J51BLE;PERSON.(S);OR AGENCY:F,O,R:MONITORING/:f2EVIEW..,;.` . ,.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
'�MONI1'QRING,SCHEOULE,I;TIME;FRAME.: ,,.„
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MONITORING,ACTIVITY:....
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
zCOMPLIANCEi.VERIFICATION / f2EPORTING,,,..., ;�
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
52 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
`FCd MTV : :SOURCr:"/-*PUFtP*O$F.,.',%"
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.9-3
Requirement
Should night operations occur, directional lighting and shields shall be used to minimize the
distance at which light emanating from the project is visible.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: The proposed project could result in extended lighting for
occasional nighttime mining operations.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of specified directional lighting and shielding
procedures.
Compliance Timing: During operations.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
ITORINGSCHED ' P11 A-*KTIM"t'. P., I. A.M.
. ......... -
Q
Frequency: Ann ' ual
Season: N/A
Persons ' Involved:
- ,
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION. /.REPORTING, RTIN
Report Format:"
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
FdLLbW ... ...........
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
53 of 55
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
,-C,ON
PIT!ON.`1.:,S0U.R E I PPR?.PPE:"Z:
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.10-1a
Requirement
The specific study is based on the findings of an inventory -level surface survey only. There is
always the possibility that potentially significant unidentified cultural materials could
inadvertently be encountered on or below the surface during the course of proposed future
development or construction activities. In such a situation, archaeological consultation shall be
sought immediately.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To protect subsurface archeological, historic, or other cultural
resources uncovered during project operations.
Standard for Determining Compliance
Operator shall submit confirmation of adherence to specified procedures by a qualified
archaeologist if necessary.
Compliance Timing: During operations
9-SF9.N§iBLEP . M �"ORAGENC.Y.:FOR'MONtTP.R!RP-..�/.
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
...........
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By:
MILT Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
54 of 55
Date:
M&T CHICO RANCH MINE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: 2007
MONITORING REPORT
Condition or Mitigation Measure Number: Mitigation Measure 4.10-1b
Requirement
In order to ensure proper identification of any cultural materials that might inadvertently be
encountered during future development, construction, or gravel extraction work, the County's
use permit shall include a provision for training of field personnel in identification procedures,
prior to implementing the quarry construction operation.. The, training shall take the form of a 1/2
day seminar in which a professional archaeologist shall review with operations personnel the
natural and cultural history of the project area, archaeological sensitivity, the most likely
locations of buried cultural materials,, and what kinds of cultural materials would be seen if
prehistoric cultural materials are in fact unearthed. The seminar shall conclude with specific
instructions on how to address such discoveries and what immediate actions to take.
Source of Requirement: Department of Development Services; EIR Measure
Purpose: To protect subsurface archeological, historic, or other cultural
resources uncovered during project operations.
Standard for Determining Compliance,
Operator shall submit annual confirmation of adherence to specified procedures.
Compliance Timing: Prior to operations
RESpON$IBLE p�RSON�5) „Olt>AGENG1lr;FOkMO1Jl't_b,FtING / 1tEVIE(N �., ;; �, � � �; ��•
Name: Director or designee
Agency: Department of Development Services
Frequency: Annual
Season: N/A
MONITORINGACTIVItY„,
Persons Involved:
Agency:
Date of Inspection:
Time of Inspection:
Location:
Compliance Comments:
COMPLIANCE 90IFIGA710N
Report Format:
Submitted To:
Verification of Compliance:
By: Date:
FOLLOW.UPy <.. ;.:r*.X.:X:
MST Chico Ranch Mine Monitoring Report
55 of 55
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION -
A RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE MINING USE PERMIT AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR
BALDWIN CONTRACTING COMPANY (MIN 96-03) CONSISTING OF THE
FOLLOWING: A) A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BASED UPON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; B) MINING USE PERMIT
ALLOWING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF AN AGGREGATE
MINE WITH ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES; AND C) RECLAMATION PLAN
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS, TIMELINES AND PRACTICES FOR PHASED
RECLAMATION.
The M&T Chico Ranch Mine ("Project") proposed by Baldwin Contracting
Company ("Baldwin") consists of a long-term, off -channel gravel mining operation
approximately 5 -miles southwest of the City of Chico. The mining would take place on
193 -acres of a 235 -acre site over an estimated 20 to 30—year period. The Project site
would be reclaimed to high-quality, open -water, wetland wildlife habitat and agricultural
uses. The mined aggregate would be processed (washed and screened) on a 40 -acre area
at the site.
The Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) for the Project came
on public hearing before the Planning Commission of the County of Butte ("County") on
October 23, 2003 and January 22, 2004. Having considered all the written and
documentary information submitted, the staff reports, oral testimony, other evidence
presented, and the administrative record as a whole, the -Planning Commission hereby
finds and decides as follows:
RECITALS
1. The proposed operation is located on approximately 193 acres of the M&T
Chico Ranch. Anticipated lifespan of the operation including reclamation
is approximately 20-30 years. The proposed quarry and processing plants
are approximately 1.5 miles east • of the Sacramento River, and
approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of Chico (Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 416-039-530-015 & 018).
2. On August 30, 1997, Pacific Realty filed an application for a Mining Use
Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-03) consisting of the following: 1)
Mining Use Permit to allow the development and operation of a new
aggregate mine 'with an onsite processing operation and associated
structures, and 2) Reclamation Plan establishing standards, timelines and
practices for -phased reclamation of the site to open space/wildlife habitat.
3. In 1996 the County prepared' an Initial Study to evaluate the
Page 1 of 10
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and identified
several potentially significant environmental effects that may occur with
implementation of -the project. Accordingly, a draft environmental impact
report ("Draft EIR") was prepared pursuant to section 15064(a) of the
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("Guidelines").
4. On February 28, 1997, the County distributed a Notice of Preparation of
the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies and the
public.
5. From May 12, 1998 to July 2, 1998, the Draft EIR was circulated for
public review. _
6. On June 11, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the
Draft EIR. The Planning Commission took extensive public input. The
Project was continued off the agenda to allow further Staff evaluation.
Written comments received during this review period are on file at the
Butte County Planning Division and are incorporate by reference in the
revised Draft EIR/Final EIR.
7. Based on public comment and in order to maximize public participation in
the environmental review of the Project, the County decided to recirculate
the Draft. EIR to update and supplement the underlying technical analyses.
8. The County hired a new consultant to prepare the recirculated Draft EIR
(Resource Design Technology, Inc.)
9. In September 2002, the County issued the revised Draft EIR. On
September 30, 2002, the County filed the Notice of Completion with the
State of California Clearinghouse.
10. The County circulated the revised Draft EIR for a 45 -day public review
and comment period commencing October 12, 2002 through November
25, 2002.
11. On October 24, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
the revised Draft EIR in Oroville. The County provided public notice of
this meeting. At the hearing, the Planning Commission heard and received
all relevant oral and written testimony and evidence 'filed or presented
regarding the Draft EIR.
12. In October 2003, the County distributed the Final EIR to all commenting
agencies, departments, individuals and organizations. The Final EIR is
comprised of the Draft EIR and the Response to Comments Document
(collectively, "Final EIR"),
Page 2 of 10
13. The Final EIR does not contain significant -new information, as defined
in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which would require recirculation
of the modified sections or entire document.
Final EIR Section 3.2 delineates the changes to the Draft EIR in
response to comments received on the Draft EIR. The changes are not.
substantial, do not include significant new environmental impacts, do
not show a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental
impact, do not identify a feasible project alternative or mitigation
measure considerably different from others previously identified, and the
Draft EIR was not fundamentally inadequate.
Further, Section 3.2 does not contain significant new information that
deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a
substantial adverse effect of the Project or a feasible way to mitigate or
avoid such an effect. All of the information added to the Final EIR
merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications in the
Draft EIR. Therefore, recirculation of the Draf EIR.is not required. (See
Guidelines Section- 15088.5.)
14. Between January 22, 2004 and November 28, 2005, the .
Planning Commission held several noticed public hearings on the
Project in part to resolve concerns regarding the Department of
Conservation's Williamson Act requirements. The dispute was
addressed off the agenda with the applicant's filing -of an immediate
cancellation request.
15. As lead agency for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act .(Section 21000 et seq of Public Resources
Code), the Planning Commission has adopted a resolution making
findings of fact, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Mining Use Permit and Reclamation Plan
(State Clearinghouse No. 97022080).
FINDINGS- OF FACT
1. FINDING: LAND USE CONSISTENCY - The Project is consistent with the
policies of the Butte County General Plan and with the Butte County
Zoning and Mining Ordinance. Based on a current interpretation of the
Butte County General Plan, the proposed mining operation is not -only
considered an appropriate use under the Orchard and Field Crops
General Plan Designation, but also compatible in all agriculturally
designated lands within Butte County where minerals are known to
exist, including General Plan Policies 2.6.a, 2.6.b, and 6.1.a. (Butte
County, 1997).
Page 3ofl0
In addition, the Project site also lies approximately two miles west on
the agricultural side of the Chico Area Greenline designated on the
Chico Area Land Use Plan. Land uses on the agricultural side of the
Greenline are limited by the Butte County General,Plan to agricultural
uses, which .are defined in the Land Use Element of the Butte County
General Plan as "the `Primary Uses' and the `Secondary Uses' set forth
in the `Orchard and Field Crops' land use designation..." The Project
falls within the "Secondary Uses" category, which includes "resource
extraction and processing," and "environmental preservation activities."
2. FINDING: SITE SUITABILITY - The site is suitable for the use proposed.
(a) The Project has been reviewed for suitability by the County
Agricultural Commissioner, County Public Works .Department,
County Air Quality Management District, Department of
Conservation, County Office of Environmental Health, Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of
Water Resources, City of Chico Department of Public Works and
California State Clearinghouse.
(b) Technical reports submitted by qualified consultants indicate that
there are no physical or environmental constraints such as geologic
or seismic hazard areas, environmentally sensitive habitats or,
similar areas that would indicate the site is not suitable for the use
proposed. The following reports were submitted with the Mining
Use Permit - application, or subsequently submitted, and
independently reviewed by County staff -
1 AGRA . Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1996 Aggregate
Investigation Hallwood and M&T Properties. California.
April.
2 AGRA Earth and Environmental, Inc. 1997. Excavation
Stability. M&T Chico Ranch Mine Reclamation, West of
Dayton, California. August 22.
3 Hydroscience, Inc., Water Quality Report.
4 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1997.
Memorandum of Prime Farmland Soils Analysis for the
M&T Chico Ranch. September 24.
5 Department of Water Resources, Northern District. 1993.
M&T Chico Ranch Groundwater Investigation, Phase I,
Memorandum Report, Red Bluff, California.
6 Deverel, SJ 1996 Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel
Mining: M&T Chico Ranch.
7 Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 1997. Traffic Impact
Analysis for the M&T Chico Ranch Project.
8 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1996
Page 4 of 10
M&T Chico Ranch Mine Use Permit, Mining Permit, and
Reclamation Plan Application.
9 Kelley & Associates Environmental Sciences, Inc. 1996
Jurisdictional Wetlands Delineation: M&T Chico Ranch.
November.
10 City of Chico. 1995. Draft Environmental Impact Report:
Chico Water Pollution Control Plant Expansion. State
Clearinghouse Number 94112054.
(c) Final EIR prepared by Resource Design, dated October 2003.
3. FINDING: NO VIOLATIONS - The subject property is in compliance with all
rules and regulations pertaining to zoning uses, subdivision and any
other applicable provisions of the County's zoning ordinance.
4. FINDING: The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of the
County's surface mining ordinance (County Code, Chapter 13-101 et
seq., Surface Mining and Reclamation), which establishes regulations
for mining operations and reclamation.
5. FINDING: The'Project complies with the provisions of the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975, Public Resources Code, Section 2710 et seq
("SMARA"), which establishes state authority to regulate mining
operations and reclamation, and other applicable State regulations, as
those provisions may be amended from time to time.
.6. FINDING: Sections 2770 and 2773.1 of SMARA require surface mining operators
to obtain lead agency (city or county) approved financial assurances -for
reclamation. The County" will annually require Baldwin to update the
existing financial assurances to ensure there are adequate financial
assurances in place for all costs related to completing the reclamation.
The current financial assurances cost estimates for the Project are
$103,526.93. (See Reclamation Plan, Attachment 4.)
7. FINDING: RECLAMATION STANDARDS -The Reclamation Plan complies
with applicable requirements of State regulations .(CCR Sections 3500-
3505, and Sections 3700-3713, as those provisions may be amended
from time to time).
a) Section 3703: Performance Standards for Wildlife Habitat - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3703. Baseline conditions are described in Section 4.6 (Biological
Resources) of the Draft EIR.. (Reclamation Plan, Attachment 15.) As
discussed in the revised Reclamation Plan dated September 2004
("Reclamation Plan"), shallow wetlands will'be established along the
Page 5 of 10
margins of a reclaimed lake. A --combination of shallow and deep water
habitat for a variety of wildlife species will be created using best
management practices. Further, a nesting island will be constructed
using excess overburden. (Reclamation. Plan, pp. 18-19, Attachments
7, 1.3.) Native vegetation will be established on the reclaimed area by
a combination of natural revegetation and plantings. Topsoil will be
respread on the margins of the lake and in the shallow wetlands areas
to enhance the establishment and growth of native vegetation.
(Reclamation Plan, pp. 18-19, 22-23.) Baldwin will retain an expert in
wildlife habitat reclamation to implement the revegetation plan and
monitor success. Performance standards for the shallow wetlands and
lake perimeter will be evaluated based on the effectiveness of the
vegetation for wildlife habitat by comparing appropriate measures of
cover, density, and species -richness for the reclaimed lands to similar
parameters on reference areas and the baseline conditions put forth in
the Draft EIR. Methods of monitoring and assessment will be based on
guidelines provided in the Department of Conservation's recently
published manual on the rehabilitation process for .disturbed .lands
(Newton and Claassen, 2003). (Reclamation Plan, pp. 22-23.)
b) Section 3704: Performance Standards for Backfilling, Regrading,
Slope Stability, and Recon touring - The Reclamation Plan for the
Project meets the requirements of Section 3704. A comprehensive
slope stability study was prepared for the Project by. AGRA Earth &
Environmental, Inc., Excavation Stability: M&T Chico Ranch Mine
Reclamation (Draft EIR, Appendix E; Reclamation Plan, Attachment
8.) The study concluded a 3:1 slope was an adequate factor or safety
for final slopes. Based on this' study, Baldwin has incorporated a 3:1
slope for all final slopes into the project design and Reclamation Plan.
In addition, the design of any structures proposed onsite, including
offices, and other ancillary facilities will be regulated by the Butte
County Building Division of the Development. Services Department.
(Draft EIR, Section 4.3, p. 4.3-16.) No backfilling will take place. .
C) Section 3705: Performance Standards for Revegetation - The
Reclamation Plan for the Project meets the requirements of Section
3705. Section 3705 measures success of revegetation "based upon the
effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density, and
species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar parameters of
naturally occurring vegetation in the area." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §
3705(m).) The Reclamation Plan's revegetation standards track the
statutory requirements mandated by SMARA and its associated
regulations. For example, Section 3705(m) states the following:
Success of revegetation shall be judged based upon the
Page 6 of 10
effectiveness of the vegetation for the approved end use, and by
comparing the quantified measures of vegetative cover, density,
and species -richness of the reclaimed mined -lands to similar
parameters of naturally occurring vegetation in the area. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3705(m).)
The Reclamation Plan tracks these requirements. The reclamation
plan states "Performance standards ... will be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of ' the vegetation -for wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of cover, density and species -richness of the
reclaimed lands to similar parameters on reference areas." Further, the
Reclamation Plan specifically provides that revegetation monitoring
will take place for five years. During the five-year monitoring period,
annual reports will be submitted to the Butte County Planning
Division. The reports will. describe the success of the revegetation
plan and will include recommendations for how to improve, if
possible, the plan's success in the following. year, In addition, the
reclamation plan requires that "[m]ethods for monitoring and
assessment will be based on guidelines provided in the Department of
Conservation's recently published manual on the rehabilitation process
for disturbed lands (Newton and Claassen, 2003)."
d) Section 3706: Performance Standards for Drainage, Diversion
Structures, Waterways, and " Erosion Control - The Reclamation
Plan meets the requirements of Section 3706. Baldwin will obtain
coverage under a general stormwater control permit from the Regional
Water Quality Control. Board before initiating : onsite activities. The
stormwater permit will require the development and implementation of
a stormwater pollution prevention plan ("SWPPP"). By complying
with the requirements of -the stormwater permit and SWPPP, Baldwin
will necessarily control runoff to ensure that discharge of surface flows
from the site meet stormwater pollution control permit requirements,
and comply with applicable erosion control and sediment control
requirements. Further, as indicated in the excavation stability study
(Reclamation Plan, Attachment 8), the 3:1 final slopes incorporated
into the final Project design will stabilize the reclaimed area, allowing
most onsite runoff to remain onsite, thereby minimizing contribution
of sediment to nearby streams and limiting erosion. The streambed
and streambanks of Little Chico Creek will. not be disturbed except for
road and conveyor crossings. Stanchions supporting the conveyor will
be footed in nonsensitive areas, and the road crossing of the stream
will be improvements -on an already existing crossing thus resulting in
no increased impact. There will be no in -stream mining. (Reclamation
Plan, p. 13.)
e) Section 3707: Performance Standards for Prime Agricultural
Page 7 of 10
Land Reclamation - This performance standard does not apply to the -
Project because it is not located on Prime Agricultural Land.
f) Section 3708: Performance Standards for Other Agricultural
Land - The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of Section 3708.
As discussed in Section 4:2 of the Draft EIR, the Project's end use will
be reclamation to agricultural uses for the plant area (40 acres) while
the mining area (193 acres) will be reclaimed as open -water and
wetlands. The revegetation scientist that Baldwin will retain for the
Project will set up appropriate reference areas for both the plant site
agricultural reclaimed area as well as the perimeter of the lake/wetland
area. Productivity of the irrigated agricultural land at the reclaimed
plant site will be compared to that of adjacent irrigated agricultural
land on the M&T Ranch. The plant site will revert to become a part of
a larger field on the M&T Ranch, and will be managed the same as the
rest of the land in that field. Performance standards for the shallow
wetlands and lake perimeter will.. be evaluated based on the
effectiveness of the vegetation for. wildlife habitat by comparing
appropriate measures of . cover, density and species richness of the
reclaimed lands 10 similar parameters on reference areas approved by
County staff.
g) Section 3709: Performance Standards for Building; Structure and
Equipment Removal There are currently no buildings or structures
within the proposed. Project area. Buildings and structures associated
with the aggregate processing plant will be removed when mining is
completed.
h) Section 3710: Performance Standards for Stream Protection,
Including Surface and Groundwater - The Reclamation Plan meets
the requirements of Section 3710. Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water
Quality) of the' Draft EIR describes the potential impacts of the
Project. The only surface water stream, Little Chico Creek, will not be
disturbed. There will no in -stream mining. Other surface water bodies
include wetlands which will be mitigated as required by the U.S. Army .
Corps of Engineers and other. state and federal agencies. During
mining operations, industrial stormwater and process water will be
collected in onsite recycle ponds. In addition, Baldwin will operate the
Project in accordance with a California Regional Water Quality
Control Board stormwater control permit and SWPPP. As discussed in
Hydrology Report for Proposed Gravel Mining M&T Chico Ranch
(Reclamation. Plan, Attachment 9; Draft EIR, Appendix D.1), the
Project will not have a significant impact on groundwater resources. _
(See Draft EIR, section 4.4). The proposed lake will actually result in
enhanced groundwater recharge from precipitation and evaporation
from the shallow groundwater. Further, although there is recharge to
Page 8 of 10
the water table, which occurs as result of percolation losses from Little
Chico Creek, the Project is not expected to alter that process. (Draft
EIR, p. 4.4-38.). The groundwater quality study prepared for the Draft
EIR by Monarch Laboratory concluded that there is no groundwater
problem associated with the . existing pit. (Reclamation Plan,
Attachment 11; Draft EIR, Appendix D-3).. Following reclamation, as
part of the approved Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Project,'
Baldwin will develop a groundwater monitoring program to be
approved by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
and Butte County to measure recharge and water, quality following
reclamation. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.4-64 - 4.4-78.)
i) Section 3711: Performance Standards for Topsoil Salvage,
Maintenance, and Redistribution — The Reclamation Plan meets the
requirements of Section 3711. The Reclamation Plan describes .how
topsoil and subsoil (growth medium) will be saved and stockpiled for
reclamation uses as shown in Attachment 7 of the Revegetation Plan.
(Reclamation Plan, p. 8; Attachment 3, Item 6, p. 5; Attachment 5.)
j) Section 3712: Performance Standards for Tailing and Mine Waste
Management — The Reclamation Plan meets the requirements of
Section 3712. Under the Reclamation Plan, the Project will not
generate any mine wastes because all mine products will be sold* or
used.in reclamation. (Attachment 3, Item 5, p: 5.) "
k) Section 3713: Performance Standards for Closure. of Surface
Openings — The Reclamation Plan meets the 'requirements of Section
3713. There are no drill holes, portals, shaft or tunnels associated with
the mining operations proposed. for the site that would require
abandonment.
8. FINDING: HEALTH AND SAFETY — The establishment, maintenance or
operation of the use or structure applied for will not, under the
circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental .to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or
injurious to property and improvement in the neighborhood, or to ,the
general welfare of the County.
DECISION
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, EVIDENCE, AND THE RECORD AS A
WHOLE, the Butte County Planning Commission hereby adopts the Statement of,
Overriding Considerations (attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference herein)
and approves the M&T Chico Ranch Minmi g Use Permit and Reclamation Plan (MIN 96-
03, Baldwin Contracting Company [`Baldwin"]), subject to the Conditions of Approval
Page 9 of 10
(attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated by reference herein).
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of November 2006, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chuck Nelson - Chairman
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
ATTEST:
LYNN RICHARDSON, Secretary
Planning Commission
County of Butte, State of California
EXHIBIT 1
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR
APPROVAL OF THE M&T CHICO RANCH
LONG-TERM OFF -CHANNEL MINING PROJECT
In approving the M&T Chico Ranch Mine (also referred to herein as "Project") which is
evaluated in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the M&T Chico Ranch Mine Mining Use
Permit and Reclamation Plan (State Clearinghouse No 97022080) ("EIR"), the County makes the
following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of its findings on the EIR and in
support of the Project. The Planning Commission has considered the information contained in .
the EM, and has fully reviewed and considered the public testimony and record in this
proceeding.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the Planning Commission finds that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh its acknowledged
environmental consequences. As such, a statement of overriding considerations is hereby
adopted.
The Planning Commission hereby finds and declares, based upon substantial evidence in the
entire record; that specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the M&T
Chico Ranch Mine outweigh the Project's acknowledged environmental impacts. The Findings
of the .Planning Commission set forth in Exhibit 1 identify the environmental impacts of the
Project, as well as feasible mitigation measures which have been incorporated into the Project. In
addition, the Findings reject the Project alternatives as infeasible.
For that environmental impact which remains individually significant after the imposition of
feasible mitigation measures, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted.
SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The environmental analysis contained within Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR concluded that the
following impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable for the proposed Project:
Impact 4.5.-5: Addition to Carbon Monoxide (CO) Hot Spots
Under both with, and without batch plant scenarios, certain intersections in the vicinity of the
Project will experience congestion under cumulative conditions. Carbon monoxide emissions
from vehicle traffic will increase at congested intersections due to increased idling time. Under
Butte County Air -Quality Management District thresholds of significance, the creation of a CO
hot spot is a significant impact.
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce traffic congestion at the impacted
intersections. The air quality impacts are a direct result of traffic congestion. Therefore, there are
no feasible mitigation measures for the air quality impacts. This is a significant and unavoidable
impact.
Page 1 of 8
Impact 4.6-4: Highway 32/West 51h Street Intersection
The proposed Project will add 10 or,more trips per day to the intersection of State Highway
32/West 5h street. This intersection has been identified as a location having 4 or more accidents
in a 12 -month period over the last three years. This location also had more than one accident
over a 12 -month period, which involved heavy vehicles. This is considered a significant impact.
The intersection of SR-32/West 50' Street has had a total of 13 accidents over the last three years
with 6 occurring in 1997. Two of the accidents in 1997 involved heavy vehicles. In 1999, seven
accidents occurred with no heavy vehicle involvement. -
Accident data provided by the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") for this
location revealed that all accidents were due to driver behavior. Field observations revealed there
are no significant obstacles blocking site distance, no significant grades (level terrain), and
adequate signing and striping. However, signal phasing could be improved to increase safety.
Currently there are protected left -turns for the SR -32 approaches and permitted left turns for the
West 50' Street approaches. With permitted phasing; vehicles turning left must yield to opposing
through and right -turn movements. Field observations also revealed the absence of all -red time at
this intersection; consequently, vehicles are not able to clear the intersection between signal
phases.
The following Mitigation Measure is set -forth:
Mitigation Measure 4.6-4: Baldwin Contracting Company ("Baldwin") shall contribute a fair
share contribution to improve the intersection of State Route 32/West 5'h Street by modifying the
existing traffic signal to provide split phase timing, including three seconds of yellow time and
one second of all -red time per phase. The fair share contribution amount should not be based
upon the relative proportion of Project vehicles traveling through the impacted intersection.
The level of significance after implementation, however, is still considered significant and
unavoidable. The MitigatioriMeasure will nevertheless be implemented as a condition of the
Mining Permit as it will improve conditions at the intersection.
Impact 4.6-5:. Park Avenue/East 20th Street/East Park Avenue
The proposed Project will exacerbate LOS F operating conditions on Park Avenue from East 20`h
Street to East Park Avenue under cumulative conditions.
The segment of Park Avenue between East 20'h Street and East Park Avenue is expected to
operate at LOS F under cumulative no Project conditions. The addition of Project trips will
exacerbate unacceptable operating conditions. Possible mitigation measures would include
physically expanding the facility or rerouting Project traffic. The physical constraints of this
roadway segment (i.e., city streets with pedestrian and bicycle facilities, minimal setbacks to
existing buildings) prohibit expansion from four to six lanes. Project trips may be rerouted to
avoid this roadway segment, however, this is difficult to enforce. The cumulative no project daily
traffic volume on this roadway segment is 36,000. The Project will add an additional 20 trips to
this segment. This represents less than 1 percent increase in traffic. Therefore, the impact of
Project trips being added to this roadway segment will be minimal yet significant based upon the
criteria listed in the Impacts and Mitigation Measures section of the Draft EIR.
Page 2 of 8
No feasible mitigation measure will reduce the level of impact to this roadway segment. This is
considered a significant unavoidable impact.
Impact 4.6-6: East Park Avenue/Park Avenue/Highway 99
The proposed Project will exacerbate LOS F operating conditions on East Park Avenue from Park
Avenue to Highway 99 under cumulative conditions.
The segment of East Park Avenue between Park Avenue and Highway 99 is expected to operate
at LOS F under cumulative no project conditions. The addition of Project trips -will exacerbate
unacceptable operating conditions. Possible mitigation measures would include physically
expanding the facility or rerouting Project traffic. The physical constraints of this roadway
segment (i.e., city' streets with. pedestrian and bicycle facilities, minimal setbacks to existing
buildings) prohibit expansion from four to six lanes. Project.trips may be rerouted to avoid this
roadway segment, however, this is difficult to enforce. The cumulative no project daily traffic
volume on this roadway segment is 40,000. The Project will add an additional 40 trips to this
segment. This represents a less than 1 percent increase in traffic. Therefore, the impact of
Project trips being added to this roadway segment will be minimal yet significant based upon the
criteria listed in Impacts and Mitigation Measures Section of the Draft E1R.
No feasible mitigation measure will reduce the level of impact to this roadway segment.. This is
.considered a significant and unavoidable impact.
Impact 4.6-7: Bruce Road/Highway 32/Skyway
The proposed Project will exacerbate LOS E operating conditions on Bruce Road from Highway
32 to Skyway under cumulative conditions.
The segment of Bruce Road between Highway 32 and Skyway is expected to operate at LOSE
under cumulative no project :conditions. The addition of Project trips will exacerbate
unacceptable operating conditions: Possible mitigation measures would include physically
expanding the facility or rerouting Project traffic. The physical constraints of this roadway
segment (i.e., city streets with pedestrian and bicycle facilities, minimal. setbacks to existing
buildings) prohibit expansion from four to six lanes. Project trips may be rerouted to avoid this
roadway segment, however, this is difficult to enforce. The cumulative no project daily traffic
volume on this roadway segment is 31,500. The Project will add an additional 30 trips to this
segment. This represents a les than 1 percent increase in traffic. Therefore, the impact of Project
trips being added to this roadway segment will be minimal yet significant based upon the criteria
listed in the Impacts and Mitigation Measures Section of the Draft EIR.
No feasible mitigation measure will reduce the level of impact to this roadway segment. This is
considered a significant unavoidable impact.
Impact 4.6-8: Baldwin Plant Driveway/Skyway
The proposed Project will exacerbate LOS F operating conditions in the a.m. peak hour and LOS
D in the p.m. peak hour at the intersections of the Baldwin Plant driveway and Skyway under
cumulative conditions.
The intersection of the Baldwin Plant driveway and Skyway is expected to operate at LOS F in
the a.m. peak hour and LOS D in the p.m. peak hour under cumulative no project conditions. The
Page 3 of 8 -
addition of .Project trips will, exacerbate unacceptable operating conditions. The peak hour
volume signal warrant contained in the Traffic Manual, Caltrans, July 1995, is not met at this
location due to the low volumes at the driveway to the Baldwin Plant.
Improvements to the median crossing, acceleration/deceleration lanes, improved signing and
striping, and channelization of the driveway approach could improve the safety characteristics of
this intersection, and this will be reflected as a condition of the Mining Permit. In addition,
signalization of the Skyway/Honey Run Road (anticipated by 2005) may provide sufficient gaps
in through traffic on Skyway to improve ingress- and egress from the driveway. However, no
feasible mitigation. measure will reduce the level of impact. to this roadway segment. This is
considered a significant and unavoidable impact.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Planning Commission specifically finds that to the extent the identified significant adverse
impacts have not been mitigated to less -that -significant levels, the benefits identified in Exhibit A
(Section J) of these .findings support approval of the proposed Project and entitlements, as
follows:
Fiscal and Economic Considerations
1. Continued supply of readily available aggregate for use in local public and private
construction projects.
2. Generation of property and sales tax revenues.
3. Generation of employment opportunities associated with mining of aggregates,
required monitoring and reporting, construction associated with on site facilities and
improving and maintaining roadway facilities, and restoration of wildlife areas.
4. Generation of employment opportunities for locally based company Baldwin, which
employs approximately 200 people during peak construction season (approximately
80 employees are employed year round) and has an annual payroll of more thari-.9
million dollars.
5. Protection and development of a significant aggregate resource designated under the
Mineral Land Classification system by the California Department of Conservation as
a MRZ-2a. As explained in Draft EIR Section 3.4.3, the M&T Chico Ranch Site has
been classified by the State Geologist. This report classifies the site as MRZ-2a for
construction aggregates. Mineral Resource Zone 2a is specifically defined as:
Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate that
significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 is
divided into MRZ-2a and MRZ-2b on the basis of degree of knowledge
and economic factors. Areas classified MRZ-2a contain discovered '
mineral deposits that are either measured or indicated reserves as
determined by such evidence as drilling records, sample analysis, surface
exposure, and mine information. Land included in MRZ-2a is of prime
importance because it contains known economic mineral deposits.
Total Project reserves are estimated at over. 5.5 million cubic yards (approximately.
8.25 million tons). The resources identified on the Project site are considered by the
State to be excellent potential aggregate sources for use in both ready -mix concrete
and asphaltic concrete product.
Page 4 of 8
Potential decrease in the use of fuels and transportation costs for trucking aggregate
to markets in Butte County and Chico compared with the current Baldwin aggregate
source on Stony Creek. Section 4.3.2 of the Final EIR cites that transportation costs
are a significant part of aggregate prices. In areas lacking nearby aggregate sources,
delivery charges may be. greater than the sale price of the materialat the plant site.
Transportation ; is a key factor in underscoring the economic importance of
maintaining local aggregate sources. In many cases, for each 30- miles of haul
distance, . the price per ton of delivered aggregate doubles. Since much of the
statewide use of aggregate is for public works projects (see Figure 4,0-1) each
doubling of the price of the construction aggregate means less public improvements
(e.g., roadway maintenance projects, public. building construction) can be
accomplished for each public dollar.
Extraction of a known valuable aggregate resource consistent with local and state
policy.
Social Considerations
1. Generation of employment opportunities associated with mining of aggregates,
required monitoring and reporting, construction associated with on site facilities and
improving and maintaining roadway facilities, and restoration of wildlife areas.
2. Generation of employment opportunities for locally based. company Baldwin
Contracting, which employs approximately 200 people during peak construction
season (approximately 80 employees are employed year round) and has an annual
payroll of more than 9 million dollars.
3. Maintenance of adequate, aggregate reserves available for future use in Butte County
to account for population growth. Section 4.3 of the Final EIR provides a collective
response concerning comments received regarding the necessity of additional
aggregate resources in Butte County. In the next 30 years (the maximum permit time
frame requested -by the Applicant), the City of Chico will consume over 20 million
tons of aggregates (four times the total reserves at the M&T Chico Ranch Mine site)
while the County asa whole will consume over 60 million tons. Over the next 50
years, Chico will require more than 45 million tons, and the County will need nearly
130 million tons. When compared to the current estimates of supply, the County may
currently have approximately 40 percent of its 50-yeardemand and, without
permitting of.additional reserves for development, could exhaust aggregate supplies
before 2030. While actual conditions will vary based on a number of factors,
including actual unreported supplies, and production levels (which vary in response
to the economy and local growth) it is clear that the County will need new aggregate
production if demand is to be met.
4. Potential to reduce impacts on transportation systems and reduce air quality impacts
if Baldwin's Stony Creek operation is replaced by this facility, since the aggregate
resource will be closer to the Chico and Butte County markets.
5. Highly regulated, responsible mining under carefully controlled conditions, with the
ability to revoke the individual permit at any time after due process, for failure to
comply with the terms and conditions of the permit.
6. Creation of an opportunity for open space and new wildlife habitat areas after
Reclamation Plan implementation. The end use of the mine site will include an over-
wintering pond for waterfowl and associated. aquatic and wetland fauna. The pond
area shall become a managed -wildlife preserve. Shallow cuts along the perimeter of
the pond will result in the creation of wetland areas along the pond.
Page 5 of 8
Safety Considerations
1 Maintenance of 100 -year flood plain, increased storage of floodwaters and improved
flood protection. As discussed under Final EIR 4.7.4 and Impact 4.4-8 (Page 4.4-76
of the Draft EIR), the creation of the'proposed pond/pit will result, at the end of
operations, in approximately 1,000 acre-feet of available floodwater storage and the
same amount of groundwater recharge. This will be a sustained beneficial impact of
the Project. Mitigation Measures 4.4-7a, b, and c provide approximately ten-year
flood protection for the created lake from overflows of Little Chico Creek and from
local agricultural runoff. For flows in Little Chico Creek exceeding approximately
2,000 cfs, or for flooding from the Sacramento River which yields equivalent flood
stages, floodwaters will flow into the pond/lake, serving to reduce flood depths.
2 Protection of adjacent wells and generation of data relevant to groundwater quality
and quantity over a period of up to 30 years (life of operation) for use by the State
and County in gaining a greater understanding of groundwater resources in the area.
Mitigation Measures 4.4-3e and 4.4-2c requires that the applicant develop a
groundwater monitoring program, approved by the Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board and Butte County.
3 The Project will include fair share monetary contributions to improve and maintain
transportation facilities in the area including road pavement, intersection safety, and
Little Chico Creek Bridge reconstruction. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 requires the
applicant to contribute a fair share contribution to reconstruct the Ord Ferry Road at
Little Chico Creek. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 requires the applicant to contribute a
fair share of the cost to improve the pavement on River Road between Chico River
Road and the Project access with a two-inch asphalt overlay. Mitigation Measure
4.6-9 requires the applicant to contribute a fair share of the cost to install a traffic
signal and improve lane configurations at the Durham -Dayton Highway and Midway
intersection.
Scientific and Educational Considerations
Protection of adjacent wells and generation of data relevant to groundwater quality
and quantity over a period of up to 30 years (life of operation) for use by the State
and County in gaining a greater understanding of groundwater resources in the area.
Mitigation Measures 4.4-3e and 4.4-2c requires that the applicant develop a
groundwater monitoring program, approved by the Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board and Butte County.
Environmental Considerations
1 Creation of an opportunity for open space and new wildlife habitat areas after
Reclamation Plan implementation. The end use of the mine site will include an over-
wintering pond for waterfowl and associated aquatic and wetland fauna. The pond
area shall become a managed wildlife preserve. Shallow cuts along the perimeter of
the pond will result in the creation of wetland areas along the pond.
2. Avoidance and reduction in reliance upon highly disturbing in -stream' mining and
related environmental concerns associated with in -stream - mining. Baldwin
Contracting Company's closest available source of aggregate is its mining operation
at Stony Creek near Hamilton City in Glenn County (located on SR -32). This site is
nearing depletion and is considered an in -stream mining operation. The proposed
Page 6 of 8
M&T Chico Ranch Mine is considered an "off channel" mine, meaning that it is not
located -within a stream. The M&T Chico Ranch Mine is instead located on alluvial
terraces away from environmentally sensitive in -stream mine sites.
3. Potential decrease in the use of fuels and transportation costs for trucking aggregate
to markets in .Butte County and Chico compared with the current Baldwin
Contracting Company aggregate source on Stony Creek. Section 4.3.2 of the Final
EIR cites that transportation costs are a significant part of aggregate prices. In areas
lacking nearby aggregate sources, delivery charges may be greater than the sale price
of the material at the plant site. Transportation is a key factor in underscoring the
economic importance of maintaining local aggregate sources. In many cases, for each
30 miles of haul distance, the price per ton of delivered aggregate doubles. Since
much of the statewide use of aggregate is for public works projects (see Figure 4.0-1)
each doubling of the price of the construction aggregate means less public
improvements (e.g., roadway maintenance projects, public building construction) can
be accomplished for each public dollar.
4. Potential to reduce impacts on transportation systems and reduce air quality impacts
if Baldwin Contracting Company's Stony Creek operation is replaced by this facility,
since the aggregate resource will be closer to the Chico and Butte County markets.
The Planning Commission has balanced these environmental benefits considerations against
the unavoidable and irreversible environmental risks identified in the EIR and has concluded
that those impacts are outweighed by these environmental benefits, among others. Upon
balancing the environmental risk and countervailing environmental benefits, the Planning
Commission has concluded that the environmental benefits that the County will derive from
the implementation of the Project, when combined with the other beneficial considerations
discussed in this Section, outweigh those environmental risks.
CONCLUSION -
1. The Project includes .an EIR prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. The Planning
Commission has independently determined that this EIR fully and adequately addresses
the impacts and mitigations of the proposed operation.
2. The number of project alternatives identified and considered in the EIR meet the test of
"reasonable" analysis and provide the Planning Commission with important information
from which to make an informed decision.
3: Public noticing,and involvement in the process, as demonstrated in the record, were also
extraordinary.
4. Substantial evidence in the record demonstrates various benefits .and considerations
including fiscal and economic, social, safety, scientific and educational and
environmental which the County would derive and/or face from the .implementation of
the Project.
5. The Planning Commission has balanced these Project benefits and considerations against
the unavoidable and irreversible environmental risks identified in the EIR and has
concluded that those impacts are outweighed by the Project benefits. Upon balancing the
environmental risk and countervailing Project benefits, the Planning Commission has
concluded that .the benefits that the County will derive from the implementation of the
Page 7 of 8
Project, as compared to the existing and planned future conditions, outweigh those
environmental risks.
6. The Planning Commission believes that the above-referenced Project benefits override
the significant, unavoidable and irreversible environmental impacts identified with the
Project EIR.
Therefore, for the reasons enumerated above, the Planning Commission finds that any
remaining effects on the environment attributable to the Project, which are . found to be
unavoidable in the preceding Findings of Fact, are acceptable due to the overriding concerns set
forth in this Statement of Overriding Considerations. Thereforethe Planning Commission should
adopt and certify the Final EIR, and. approve the Project subject to appropriate mitigation
requirements.
Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR M&T CHICO RANCH MINING USE
PERMIT AND RECLAMATION PLAN (MIN 06-03. BALDWIN CONTRACTING
COMPANY)
1. This Mining Use Permit allows the extracting, processing, and sale of up to
5,500,000 cubic yards of aggregates within Assessor Parcels 039-530-019 and
020 ("Project") in accordance with County ordinances and land use regulations
subject to the following terms and conditions.. This approval also allows
construction of facilities ancillary to the mining project and related improvements.
2. Failure to comply with the conditions specified herein as the basis for approval of
application and issuance of the Mining Use Permit constitutes cause for the
revocation of said permit in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
County Zoning Ordinance, including County Code Sec. 24-45.65.
3. Unless otherwise provided for in a special condition to this Mining Use Permit, all
conditions must be completed prior to or concurrently with the establishment of
the granted use. Baldwin shall commence operations within 5 (five) years from
the date of issuance of the final .permit. Should operations not commence within
said 5 (five) years the final permit shall expire and become void, unless extended
by the Planning Commission prior to expiration.
4. Amendments to an approved ' Mining Use Permit may be submitted to the
Planning Commission, detailing proposed changes to the original plan.
Substantial deviations from the original plan shall not be undertaken until such
amendments have been filed with and approved by the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission shall -set a public hearing regarding such amendments
in the same manner as provided for in County Code Section 13-107.
5. The terms and conditions of this permit shall run with the land and shall be
binding upon and be to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors,
and assigns of Baldwin.
6. Financial assurances to ensure compliance with the approved Reclamation Plan
shall be in place to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Development Services or his/her designee prior to the establishment of the
approved mining use. Financial assurances have been initially calculated at
$103,526.93.
7. Prior to use of the site for the proposed use Baldwin shall contact the Planning
Division for a field inspection to verify that all conditions and ordinance
requirements have been met.
Planning Division:
8. All Reclamation work shall be in substantial compliance with the approved
Reclamation Plan.
9. All mine operations shall comply with the Project Description and Mining Use
Permit application as submitted and approved and set forth in the M&T Chico
Ranch Certified Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR"), dated October
Page 1 of 5
2003.
10. Annual inspection of the mine shall be conducted in accordance with the Surface
Mining and Reclamation Act. All applicable inspection fees shall be paid in
accordance with adopted rates.
11. Mine Operation and Reclamation shall be in accordance with the Mitigation
Measures contained within the Final EIR incorporated herein by reference.
12. All Mitigation Measures as identified in the Final EIR for the M&T Chico Ranch
Mine are adopted as conditions of this Mining Use Permit and as such the
Mitigation Measures have full weight and authority in the same manner as
conditions of the Mining Use Permit.
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting shall commence and proceed in accordance
with the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan referenced within the Final EIR.
14. Mining, processing; maintenance and load -out activities shall occur from 7:00 am
to 5:00 pm (nine hours per day) from November through April, and from 6:00 am
to 5:00 pm (ten hours per day) from May through October. Operations shall take
place five days per week; however, Saturday operations may occur sporadically to.
meet customer demands. Aggregate load -out for. delivery to the plant could also
occasionally, not to exceed 30 times per year to be verified by log book, begin by
5:00 am. Only during times of declared emergency (when aggregate resources
are needed to address flood damage or other natural disaster) either under
executive order from the State. or County, operations are allowed 24 hours until
such time as the emergency is declared over.
Butte County Air Quality Management District
15. The Butte County Air Quality Management District requires Baldwin to obtain an
Authority to Construct Permit to operate. Baldwin shall be required to implement
all emission controls necessary to assure specified limits are not exceeded on both
mobile. sources (mining equipment) and stationary sources (processing facilities).
As noted within the Draft EIR for Impact 4.5-2 (Page 4.5-30) all diesel fueled
construction -type equipment shall be required to meet the emission reduction
requirements recently set by the California Air Resources Board ("CARB"). An
equipment inventory shall be maintained at the project site and available for
review by District staff. All equipment shall be maintained and kept in proper
repair per manufacturer's maintenance schedules.
Department of Public Works
16. Prior to operations Baldwin shall construct improvements to River Road at the
Project's entrance, including acceleration/deceleration lanes, turn pockets, signing
and striping. Improvement plans shall be approved by the Butte County Public
Works Department prior to construction.
17. Prior to operations Baldwin shall provide improvements to the median crossing at
the Baldwin Plant site driveway and the - Skyway. Improvements to include
Page 2 of 5
acceleration and deceleration lanes, improved signing and striping, and
channelization of the driveway approach. Improvement plans shall be approved
by the Butte County Public Works Department prior to construction.
18. The project Applicant shall contribute its fair share ofthe costs to improve the
pavement on River -Road between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road with a
two-inch asphalt concrete overlay. The fair share amount shall be based on the
increase in ESALs, which is 51%. Butte County Public Works estimates the cost
of this improvement to be approximately $1,200,000. Therefore, the Applicant's
fair share cost would be about $40,000 per year. The Public Works Department
has indicated that the fee shall be submitted annually based on the tonnage of
material that is, hauled from the project site and shall be relative to an inflation
index. Based on :the information contained in Table 4,6-9, the cost per ton of
material hauled from the project site would be approximately $0.08.
19. The project .applicant shall contribute its fair share of the cost to maintain the
asphalt concrete pavement on the following roads over the 30 year life of the
proj ect:
River Road; between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road;
• Ord Ferry Road; between County Line and Dayton Road;
• Durham Dayton. Road; between Dayton Road and SR 99;
• Dayton Road; between Ord Ferry Road and Chico City Limit;
• Hegan Lane; between Dayton Road and Midway; and
• Chico River Road; between River Road and Chico City Limit.
Road Maintenance shall include a chip seal surface treatment every 10 years with -
M & T Chico Ranch Mine project's fair share contribution based on the projected
net increase in ESALs as shown in the attached Table A. Based on the
information contained in Table A, the cost per torr of material hauled from the
project site would be approximately $0.06 and shall be relative to an inflation
index.
If maintenance costs are rolled into a single fee per ton of material extracted, the
mitigation fee shall be made up of $0.08 per ton for the overlay on River Road,
plus $0.01 per ton for the improvements to the Ord Ferry Bridge, and the
installation of a.signal at Midway and Durham Dayton highway, for a total of
$0.09 per' ton of material removed from the site. The amount intended to
compensate for the extra maintenance required due to the increased truck traffic,
shall be $0.06 per ton of material extracted. These fees shall be deposited by the
operator into the Butte County Road Fund, and shall be adjusted for inflation
based upon the change in the Construction Cost Index for San Francisco, during
the month of January of each year. These fees shall cease to be collected should
the County impose a countywide tax or fee for road maintenance based upon
weight of materials moved over the roads.
Page 3 of 5
Environmental Health Division
20. Baldwin shall a receive a Hazardous Material Release and Response Plan (Health
and Safety Code 25500 et. seq.) (Business Plan) for hazardous materials inventory
and emergency response planning.
21. Baldwin shall receive a septic and domestic water well .permit from the
Environmental Health Division prior to site development for waste water disposal
and drinking water.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
22. If there is a conflict between the mining -operations and the PG&E natural gas
line, Baldwin will be responsible for the relocation of the PG&E gas line and all
- associated costs, along with the acquisition of new rights of ways.
23. Weights of all mining equipment shall be provided to PG&E to ensure that
weights will not damage gas lines.
24. Any use of PG&E easements shall require a'review and consent of PG&E. Upon
review a consent agreement would be prepared if the use is appropriate.
Mosquito Abatement:
25. Baldwin shall be required to comply with Butte County Mosquito and Vector
Control District requirements for the cost of any future mosquito control_ work
performed by the District at the Project site. This shall include stocking the pond
with mosquito fish to prey on and control mosquito larvae.
State and Federal Requirements and Conditions:
26. Baldwin shall comply with the Clean Water "Act and obtain all necessary
approvals, including a 404 Permit for fill or disturbance of wetlands and other
waters of the United States.
27. Baldwin shall comply with. the Federal Endangered Species Act, including a
Section I Oa Permit for incidental take of federally -listed threatened or endangered
species or their habitat, if any.
28. Baldwin shall comply with the California Endangered Species Act, and obtain all
necessary permits, including a Section 2081 Permit (Fish and. Game Code 2081)
and Streambed Alteration Agreement (Fish and Game Code 1603) for incidental
take of State -listed threatened/endangered species or habitat (if anticipated) for
possible impacts, if determined to the Swainson's hawk and for any new stream
crossings.
29. Baldwin shall comply with the following Regional Water Quality Control Board
requirements, and obtain all necessary approvals, including:
a) NPDES Permit or Waste discharge requirements Permit CFR Title 40, Section
436, Subpart B, for on-site gravel washing and discharge of wash water to on-
site settling basins.
Page 4 of 5
b) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan prior to construction activities used to
identify potential pollutants and to eliminate or reduce the amount of
pollutants entering surface waters.
c) General Industrial Activities Storm Water Permit is required if there are storm
water discharges to surface waters.
d) A Review of Groundwater Monitoring Plan prior to approval by the County:
30. Baldwin shall comply with -the following California Department of Water
Resources, Reclamation Board requirements, and obtain all necessary approvals,
including:
a) A Construction Activity Storm Water Permit for any construction activities
where clearing, grading, filling and excavation result in a land disturbance of
five acres or more.
b) A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan must be in place prior to
construction activities.
c) Compliance with the California Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act for
owners and operators of above ground petroleum storage tanks to file a
storage . statement and prepare a federal spill prevention and control
countermeasure plan.
d) A Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required for projects needing an
Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit; this certification must verify that. the
project does not violate State Water Quality Standards.
31. Baldwin shall receive a State Board of Reclamation Encroachment Permit (CCR
Title '23 Section 135) for any encroachment that could reduce or impede flood
flows, or would reclaim any of the floodplain within the Butte Basin, if necessary.
Butte County Counsel
32. If this entire matter or any finding, action or condition of this matter is
appealed to the Board of Supervisors, Baldwin or any other developer/operator
other than Baldwin agrees to indemnify the County of Butte from liability or loss
related to the approval of this- project and agrees -to sign an indemnification
agreement in a form approved by County Counsel before the Board's appeal
hearing. If the application is not appealed, these conditions of approval are
deemed satisfied.
Attachment: 'Table A
Page 5 of 5
Table A
SY of roadway one chip seal 586432 Chip Seal Cost/SY zbz.iu Oosu Sddi n I'-
3 seals in 30 years $3,694,521.60
over all M & T % 12.5% M & T cost $462,473.85
Cost per ton $0.06
MEMORANDUM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Phone 538-7681 Fax 538-7171
o9F•
o�UT7�o
o a
eo �
A'ocICA,�B
TO: Pete Calarco, Assistant Director
FROM: Mike Crump, Director
SUBJECT: M & T Chico Ranch Mine, Revised Condition — Road Maintenance
DATE: November 20, 2006
Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 needs to be updated to reflect the change in the cost
estimate to improve the pavement on River Road between Chico River Road and
Oro Ferry Road with a two inch asphalt concrete overlay.
The revised language for this mitigation measure should read as follows:
The project Applicant shall contribute Its fair share of the costs to
improve the pavement on River Road between Chico River Road and Oro
Ferry Road with a two-inch asphalt concrete overlay. The fair share
amount shall be based on the increase in ESALs, which is 51%. Butte
County Public Works estimates the cost of this improvement to be
approximately $1,200,000. Therefore, the Applicant's fair share cost
would be about $40,000 per year. The Public Works Department has
Indicated that the fee shall be submitted annually based on the tonnage of
material that is hauled form the project site and shall be relative to an
inflation index. Based on the information contained in Table 4.6-9, the
cost per ton of material hauled form the project site 'would be
approximately $0.08.
In addition, Public Works is requesting that the following language be added tc
the project as a condition:
The project applicant shall contribute its fair share of the cost to maintain
the asphalt concrete pavement on the following roads over the 30 year life
of the project:
o River Road; between Chico River Road and Ord Ferry Road
• ' Ord Ferry. Road; between County Line and Dayton Road
o Durham Dayton Road; between Dayton Road and SR 99
• Dayton Road; between Ord Ferry Road and Chico City Limit
• Hegan Lane; between Dayton Road and Midway
• Chico River Road; between River Road and Chico City Limit
1
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT .
'Page 2 of 2
11/22/2006
Road Maintenance shall include a chip seal surface treatment every 10
years with M & T Chico Ranch Mine project's fair share contribution based
on the projected net increase in ESALs as shown in the attached Table A.
Based on the information contained in Table A, the cost per ton of
material hauled from the project site would be approximately $0.06 and
shall be relative to an inflation index.
During .our meeting of November 17, 2006, there seemed to be a' general
consensus that the mitigation costs should be rolled into a single fee per ton.
In that case, the mitigation fee would be made up of $0.08 per ton ,for the -
overlay on River Road plus $0.01 per ton for the improvements to the Ord
Ferry Bridge and the installation of a signal at Midway and Durham Dayton
highway, for a total•of $0.09 per ton of material removed from the site.
The amount intended to compensate for the extra maintenance required due
to the increased truck traffic, $0.06 per ton, would be added as a condition to
the permit. This amount shall also be.adjusted relative town inflation index.
These fees shall be deposited by the operator into the Butte County Road Fund,
and shall be adjusted .for inflation based upon the change in the Construction
Cost Index for San Francisco, during the month of January of each year. .These
fees shall cease to be collected should the County impose a countywide tax or fee
for road maintenance based upon weight of materials moved over the roads.
To summarize:
Mitigation
Overlay River Road $ 0.08 per ton
Signal & Bridge Work $ 0.01 per ton
Condition
Increased Road Maintenance $ 0.06 per ton
Total $ 0.15 per ton
Table A
Total Route
length
ADT
Current
% Trucks
ESAL
% on road
Futurel
# TrucksADT
% Trucksl
i
ESAL I
% Diff
ESAL
County
share
M &T
share
M $ T '
Miles
Truck
River Road; Ord Ferry to Chico River Road to Oro Ferry
5.3
3089
9.8%
265440
55.00%
70
3159
11.8%
332130
25.1%
79.9%
20.1%
1.1
Ord Ferry; County Line to Dayton Road
8.0
3150
13.2%
369960
40.00%
51
3201
14.6%
409170
10.60/.
90.4%
9.6%
0.8
Durham Dayton Road; Dayton Road to SR 99 to 99
10.5
1032
12.1%
109120
10.00%
13
1045
13.2%
122860
12.6%
88.8%
11.2%
1.2
128
Dayton Rd; Ord ferry to Chico City Limit
4.5
4927
9.5%
402730
30.00%
38
4965
10.2%
444470
10.4%
90.6%
9.4%
0.4
He an Lane; Dayton road to Midway to Midway
3.2
1883
10.9%
179720
20.00%
26
1909
12.1%
207890
15.7%
66.4%
13.6% .
0.4
Chico River Road to Chico
4.2
3793
9.8%
332130
'55.00%
70
3863
11.4% .
388300
16.9%
85.5%
14.5%
0.6
d5
wmi�uau mnyui inn w�
SY of roadway one chip seal 586432 Chip Seal Cost/SY $2.10 cost/seal $1,231,507.20
3 seals in 30 years $3,694,521.60
over all M & T % 12.5% M & T cost $462,473.85
Cost per ton $0.06