MINUTE ITEM This Colendar Item .No. C. { q

was ap§roved as Minute Item No. fl ' by the State LQnds CJiin!Jlfsslon by o vpte Q~ t~ at Its <-~ t9.0t~ meeting.

A 2

s 2

CALENDAR ITEM

Cl9 09/23/91 PRC 7166 N. Smith

AMENDMENT OF A qENERAL PERMIT - RIGHT-OF-WAY USE

APPLICANT: American Telephone ang Telegraph Company 4430 Rosewood Drive, Ropm 3696 Pleasanton, California 94588

AREA, TYPE L1\ND AND L~)CATION: A 10.27-acre ,parcel of tide land in the Pacific ocean near Point Arena, Mendocino County.

•• LAND USE~

Construction and maintenance of a. fiber optic cable for telecommunications signals •

TERMS OF ORIGINAL PERMIT: Initial period:

Continuous use plus one (1) year beginning November 1, 1987.

CONSIDl~RATION: E~empt by Law, Section 7901, Public Utilities Code.

PREREQUISITE CONDITIOllS / FEE3 AND EXPENSES: .. Filing fee, processing costs, and environmenta~ analysis

costs have been received.

STATUTORY AND OTHER REFERENCES: A. P.R.C.: Div. 6, Parts 1 and 2; Div. 13.

B. Cal. Code Regs.: Title 3, Div. 3; Title 14, Div. 6.

1\B 884: 10/28/91

-1-

__ , ~1 '''' CALENDAR PAGI?:: al!/$

'MINUTE PAGE_~_-------1

CALENDAR ITEM No.C 1 9 (CONT'D)

OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION: 1. Amend lease desc~~ption to incl~de const~uction of a

fiber optic from P~:lint Arena to.' Japan, within State­oY(?led sovereign lari:~ loc?tted in the Pacific Ocean.

2. Pursuant to the Commission's delegation of authority and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15025), the staff' has prepared a Proposed Negative Declaration identified as EIR ~D 559, State Clearinghouse No. 91083042. Such Proposed Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated.~or public review pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.

Based upon the Initial Study, the Proposed ~egative Declaration, and the comments received in response thereto, there is no. substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the ~nviroriment. (14 Cal Code· Regso 15074(b))

3. The annual rental value of the site is estimatad to be $3,470.

4. This activity involves lands identified as possessing significant ~nvironmental values pursµant to ~

E:a!IBITS:

P.R.C. 6370, et seq. Based upon the staff's consultation with the persons nominating such lands and through the CEQA review process, it is the staff's opinion tqat the project, as _proposed, is consistent with its use classification.

A. Land Description B. .Location Map c. Negative Declaration

IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION:

1. CERTIFY THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, EIR ND 559, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 91083042, WAS PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CEQA AND THAT THE COMMISSION HA.S REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN.

2. ADOPT THE NEGA'ljfVE DECL.1\RATION AND THE MITIGATION.MONITORING PLAN AND DETE~ LNE THAT THE PROJECT, AS APPROVED, WILL·. NOT HAVE A SIGNIFI~ANT EFFBCT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

-2-

•

r· ................ ,-

l cAt:~NDAR PAG!:::- ~7 • :>J.INUTE PAGE "~·· 3 ~{)

----------·------'

CALENOAR ITEM NO. C 1 9 (CONT 1 D)

3. AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT OF PERM!~ .PRC 7166, GENERAL.PERMIT -RIGHT:..OF-WAY USE FOR THE LAND DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED ~liliD BY ·REF~RENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.

-3-

lcALENDAR PAGE. 1:,~~ l~All\lll"fT·· 3177-~PAtbf: __ _..,... .. ._, --

EXHIBIT II A"

PRC 7166

LAND DESCRIPTION

Two 10 foot strips of tide and submerged land located the Pacific Ocean, north of Point Arena, Mendocino County, California, lying 5 feet on each side of the following described centerlines:

PARCEL 1 COMMENCING at a point at Latitude 38° 58.92' N, Longitude 123° 42.35' W; thence northwesterly on an azimuth of 302.3° to the ordinarv high water mark of the Pacific Ocean and the.POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along on the azimut~ of 302.3° to a point at Latitude 38° 59.15' N, Longitude 123° 42.75' W, ,hereafter known as Point "A"; thehce northwesterly on an azimuth of 307.7°to a, point at Latitude 3'8° 59.17' N, Longitude 123° 42.79' W; thence northwesterly on ·an azimuth of 306.5° to a point at Latitude 38° 59.93' N, Longitude 123° 44.11' W; .thence northwesterly on an azimuth of 315.6° to a point on th,e offshore ownership boundary of the State of California as determined according to the decree entered by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. California, Original No. 5 on January 31, 1966, 382US488, and the end of the herein described centerline.

PARCEL2 B;GINNING at Point "/>~·" in the a.bovementioned Parcel 1; thence northwesterly on an azimuth of 31~:1° to a point on the offshore ownership boundary of the State of Cal:.fornia as determined ·according to the decree entered by the United States Supreme Court in United States v.-California, Original No. 5 on January 31, 1966, 382US488, and the end of the herein described centerline.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion lying landward of the ordinary high water mark of the Pacific Ocean.

END OF DESC~IPTION

PREPARED SEPTEMBER, 1991 BY LLB

' 139 ICA,LENDAR PAG!;..._ __ ,_ .... _ra;w...-..___ , MINUTE PAGE 317~

J .·t

I

1·

i I I

-1

! !

EXHIBIT 11 B11 ~ , ·~-.: 1--~~PR_C~71_6_6_.9~~~--1-~--~ ...u--:.-~-~~+.:__i~--.:.~~~=-~~£.:...

••<11\•Ull• \ 1•'1 U•t•

EXHIBIT "C" SlAT[ or CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON. Govornor

STATE LANDS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE OFFICE

LEO T. Mc_CARTHY. ~-eutenant Govt:rnCJf GRAY DAVIS. Con11oller

1 ~07 • 13th Street Sacremento, CA 95814

THOMAS W. HAYES, D11ec1or of Finance CHARLES WARREA Executive Officer '9

AMENDED NOTICE OF PUBLIC REvIEW

OF A PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

Project Title:

Project Proponent:

Amended Project Location:

Project Description:

Contact ·Person:

A:.Ugust 21, 1991 EIRND559

File: PRC 7166 S~ No. 91083042

POINT ARENA TO JAPAN FIBER OPTIC1CAJJLE (1P~-4)

American Telephone and Telegraph Company

From AT&Ts facilities. west of Hwy. 1, near Point Af1;na and Manchester State Beach, Mendocino County, to Chikura, Japan.

This project proposes to construct and place a 2" fiber o;tic cable within a 2' wide, 4' deep trench onshore and to be pulled through an existing conduit which will exit .4 miles 'from shore. The offshore portion of the cable will be trenched approximately two feet for a distance to the edge of the continental shelf~ where the cable y.iill simply rest on the ocean floor for the remainder of the route.

Judy Brown Telephone: (916) 324-4715

A Negative Declaration has been prepare~ pursuant to the requirements of the California EnvironmeJ:}tal Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq., Public Resources Code), the State CEQA Guide~.es (Section 15000 et seq., Title 14, California Code Regulations), and the State Lands Commission regulations (Section 2901 et seq., Title 2, California Code Regulations) for a project currently being processed by the stnff of the State Lands Commission.

A copy of this document may be obtained by written request to the State lands Commission, 1807 • 13th Street, Sacramento» California 95814 or by calling -the contact person. All comments must be received by ~p!~~bf,:r 16, 1991.

CHARLES WARREN Executive Officer

•

--··-----------

STATE OF CAt!FORNIA

STATE LANDS COMMISSION LEO T.'Mc<:ARTHY. Lieutenant Governor

llifJiRAY DAVIS, Controller WHOMAS W. HAYES. Director of Finance

PETE WILSON,.Govemor

EXECUTIVE OFFICE 1807 - 13th Street Sacramento;' CA 95814

<;HARLES WARREN ·Executive Officer

Augµst 16, 1991 Fpe.Ref.i .RRC 7166

TIIR::ND:, 559

NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW OF A PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION '(SECTION 15073 CFR)

A Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the.California Environmental Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq., Public~Resources Code), the State .CEQA guidelines (Section 15000 et seq., Title 14, California Code Regulations), and the State Lands Commission Regulations (Section ?%.let seq., Title 7, California Code Regulations) for a project ~urrently being processed by the staff of ·the State Lands Commission.

The document is attached for your review. Comments should be addressed to the State Lands Commission office shown above with attention to the undersigned: All comments must be received·by September 16, 1991.

Should you have any questions or I)eed additional information, please call the undersigned at (916) 324-4715.

Attachment

~ I 1Lte/J24.11JJ JGiVsi ~ivision of · vironmental Planning \) and anagemep.t

STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON. Governor

STATE !:.'ANDS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE OFFICE 1807 • 13th Street Sacr~mento. CA 95814 LEO T. McCARTHY. Lteurcnanr Governor

GRAY DAVIS. Controller THOMAS W. HAYES, Direcror of Finance- CHARLES WARR­

Executive Officer

PROPOS-~D NEGATIVE DECLARATION

Project Title:

Project Proponent:

Project Location: ·

Project :O~sqiption:

Contact Person:

EIR ND 559

File: PRC 7166

SCH No. 91083042

POINT ARENA TO JAPAN FIBEt:•OPTIC CABLE (TPC-4)

A111erican Tel~phone and Telegraph Company

From AT&Ts facilities west of I-5, near Point Arena and Mandiester State Beach, Mendocino County, to Chikura, Japan.

"ibis project proposes to construct and place a 2" fiber optic cable within a 2' wide, 4' deep trench ons@re and to be pulled through an existing conduit which will erit .¥miles from shore. The offshore portion of the cable will' be trenched approximately two feet for (.,\ distance to the edge of the continental shelf, where the came will simply rest on the ocean' floor for the remainder of Jt\"~ 'f1ute.

Judy·Brown Telephone: (916) 324-4715

Thi~.. document is prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environrnehtal Quality Act (Section 21000 et seq., Public Resources Code), the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15000 et ~eq., Title 14, California Code Regulations), and the State Lands Commission regulatio~1(Section 2901 et seq., Title 2J California Code Regulations).

Based upon the attached Initial Study, it has been found ·that:

LI that project will not have a signifi~t effect on the environment.

LX../ mitigation measures included in the project will avoid potentially significant effects.

j . ~

JCALENDAR PAG.E ,.A~.~ ;­I. ·1• 1urE "'""'E 318~ Li •~ rM'-' • ·- " I

Sr A TC' lANOS COMMISSION

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA_r.T ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST - PART II PRC 7166 hirm JJ.20 (7/82) File Ref.:.._-"----------

1.-ACKGROUND INFORMATION

A. Apphcant: .American Telephone & Telegraph Company

c/o Black & Vea~ch P. 0. Bgx 8405

Kansas· C1ty, M_ issouri 64114

" I;. Checklist Date: 07 I 29 / 91

c. Contact Person: Judy Brown

Telephone: J 916 '-.~ 324-4715

o Purpose· __ 11_o_co_ns_tru_-_c_t_._, _fua_in_ta_i_n_an_d_o_.p._e_r_a_t_e_a_s_u_l:ma __ r_in_e_f_i_·b_e_r_o .... t.>_t_i_c .... _i: ..... ab_le"'-_, ------

E Location: From AT&r facilities at Point Arena. C-alifomia. to Cbi!sura. Japan

F

G

Description Installation of a 211 fiber optic cable which will involve the coos.tniction.

of a 4' trench onshore for approximatelv 300 feet from AT&T's ~isfir.g.~omnunication

facilities to an existing 5" diamet~r ste~l pipe._ The c.able_wi1.1 _ _bg__mJlled_t:brqtigh_ -Persons Contacted. the existing steel pipe which exits .. 4 miles from shore. The remainder

of the cable will be trenched approximately ti..u feet into. th~ ocean floor for a distance

extending to the edge of the continental shelf (approximately 40 miles from shore).

From the edge of the continental shelf to Japan, the cable will rest on the ocean

floor.

Valerie Gizinski Departlnent of ParkS ana Recreation 396 Tesconi Court .: . Santa Rosa, CA 95401

11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. (Explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers}

A. l:nrth. Will the proposal result in:

1. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geolpgic subst1uctures? ••.....

2. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of the soil? .•••................•......

3. Change m topography or ground surf<ce relief features? ...•.•..

4 The destruction, co~,mng. or mod1f1e< lion of any unique geologic or physical featu~;:s? ............. .

Yes Maybe No

0 D OCJ 0 0'[] CJ D fiJ D D []

a. 5

6

Any increase in wmd or water erosion of soils, either on or Off the site?. , ....•..• · .... · U: .xi' W • .11.. II.I• ·.IJ·W.·l:L·--;o _ _,.o...,.~OCJ'l'"r ~--i 'W Changes in deposition or erosion of baach sand~· 'Or changes m s1lta11on. deposition or ero~Q

modify the channel of a nver or stream or the bed-of the ocean or any bay, inl1'!t, or lake? ., .... ." ••.... . CALENDt~R PAG~:.::; ·~ r--

7 Exposure of all people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudshde~.llro!-'nd r-:71 ••• b~. ~J f I 'I h ,. 7 1 '1~1NU1- Pl\r,c 1 • ' ...:.· ___ : • a1 ure. or s1m1 ar aza~ .. s ......••.....•........•...•.•...•••.•.• · · · · ·t~ · · · .~. · · v.- -L:J ''. 1

8. .lir. Will the propos;;I result in:

I. Suhstantial air emmissi~ns 01 cleterrorat1c.n of ambient air quality?

:>. The creation of objectionable odors?. . ...

3. Alterat1cn of air movement, mo1stu:e or tempr.rature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally?.

C. ll'11t1•r. Will the proposal result in:

1. Chang1~s in the currents. or the course or direction of water movements, m either marine or fresh waters?

2. Changes m abso1ption rates. dramaye patterns, or the rate and amount of.surface water runoff? ........ .

3. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... : •.

4. ChangP. in the amount of surface water in any water body,? .......................•...•..•..

5. Oischarqe mto, surface Naters, or in any alteration of surface water· quality, including but not limited to lP.mperature, dissolved c xygen or turbidity? ......... ·. . ............... · ............. .

6. Alteration of the direct on~.:>r rate of flow of ground waters?. . . .....••...•............•.•..

7: Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions er withdrawals, or through inter· ception of an aquifer by cuts or.excavations? . . . . . . . ...........•........ : .......•.•.•.

8. Submmt1al reduction m the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ...... · .... .

9. Exposure of people or property to water·related ha~ar9s ~uch as flooding or tidal waves? ............ .

10. S19r11ficant changes m the temperature, flow or r.hemical content of surface thermal sprangs? .......... .

D. l'lcJllf l.ift'. Wrll the proposal re~ult in:

·i. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aqua~ic plants)? ....... , •..................•.........•..•..........•....•.•

2. Reclucuun of the numb1~rs or any uniqu·e. rare or enCiangered species of plants? •...................

3. Introduction of new species of plants mto an area, or rn a barrier to the normal replenisli~ellt of existing species? ......•••.....•.•..................................• :.·: .... · .•......

·4. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ............................... •'• ........ . E I 11i111al l.iji• Will the proposal result in:

I .. Change,in the d1versrty of species. or number; of any species of animals (birds, land animals mcl~ding reptiles. fish and shellfoh, benthic organisms. or insects)? .........•.....•...........•......

2. RPduct1on of the numb•:rs of any, uniqui;. rare N endangered species of animals?: ................•.

3. Introduction of new SP•!C1es of animals mto an area, or result m a barrier to the m1grat1on or movement of' .mimals? .....•...........................................................•

<I. Deterioration to existin11 fish or wildlife habitat? ....

r- S1111t'. Will the proposal result 111:

1. lncre.:ise m existing noist? levels? ..•..........•.....•..........•..........

2. Exposure of people to St!vere noise levels?

G. l1)d1t anti (,"furl". Will the proposal result in:

1 The p1oduc11on of new light or glare?

H. /.1md U~t'. Will the proposal result rn:

1. A substanual alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? .....................•.

I. Saf/lral lfr.\U111rn Will the proposal result m:

Yes Maybe No

11 Ll I -1

L..J ,iX_,

!] n -·. ocJ [] r ·~ x. l. I

l'I I , ;, I

L..J iX;

D I ·: I' ' I JK..., L-

D r: r-; KJ

~J D --. Ki

0 0 &J 0 0 k.I [] [-:

. • I fJ f -·1 r ,.•••-

LJ Li Kl D i .. x: Lr

LJ L. !x j

L.i [J f.1 [l [J k]

D [J El• D [ .. & 1-

_J l\ J

0 r .. L.J

i.l K.J f-· r-· --.

! I •. X...! ... _

IJ 1-; ,-- -; x ..

D [J El

'"""" r~ r·1 u _J x-1 D D-u

D CJ f]

DD ~J

I. Increase in the rate of use of any natural r.?:ources?. . . . . . . • • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . 0 0 K,) 0 [-_.11 r:-ia 2. Substant111I depletion of any nonrenewable resources? ..•.....•......•........•.•.• •. . . . . . . iK.."W'

-2- . ---··--· ___ ,, _______ _

J. /U.1k of Up.1rt. Do~s the proposal result in: Yes Maybe. No

1. A risk of an explo~ion or the release of hazardous substances (includi;19, but not limited to, oil,';>esticides, O O r.:i chemicals, or radiation) in the event of "'' accident or up~:!i conditions? . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . UIJ

2. Possible·interforence with emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 0 0 l:xJ l'of1u/utio11. Will the proposal result in:

J .. The alteration,.distribution, density. or growth rate of the huma11 POJ?l}lat1on of the area? . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 [J L //011.1i11x. Will the proposal· result m:

[XJ

1. Affecting existing housing, or create a demand'br adcf!tional housing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 TxJ M. Tra11sf1orta1ion/Circula1io11. Wih-i_he proposaLresult in:

1. Generation of substantial additional vehicular rr1ovement? ................................. .

2. Affecting existing parking facilities, or crt!ate a demand for new parking? ....................... .

3. Substantial impact upon existing transportation sysier.is?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .

4. Alterations to present patterns of circulai:ion or movemi:nt of.people an-d/or goods? ............... .

5. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? ......................................... .

6. Increase in traffic hazards to m.otor veniclt?s. bicyclists, or pedestrian;? .................•.......

N. l'uhli<" S1•r1•ire.1. Will the proposal have an eff~ct UP,On, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas:

1. Fire protection? ............................................................. .

2: Police protection? .• : ........................................•.......•........

3. Schools? .... . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Parks and other recreational facilities? ....•..........................................

5. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ....................................... .

6. Other governmental services? ....................................•........•.......

0. Hnergy. Will the proposal result in.

DD IXJ DD lxl DD IXJ DD [XJ q D [XJ II n 1-;1 - - .......

D 0 IXJ DD rKl 0 D fKJ DD !Kl DD Ix] DD IXJ

1. Use of substantial amounts oi.,fuel or energy?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . D D 1KJ 2. Substantial increase in demand 'upon existing sources of energy, or r!JQU1re the development of new sources? . 0 0 O{!

P.. Urilitiel. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:

1. Power or natural gas? ...........•.....•........................................

2. Communication svstens? . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . •................................•...

3. Water~ .........................•..........••.............•................

4. Sewer or septic tanks? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....................•....................

5. St:irm water drainage? . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...•

i;, Solid waste and disposal?· ...... . . .............................................. . 0. Human Health. Will the proposal resulhn:

i. Creation of any health hazard or potential·health hazard (excluding mental h~alth)? .....

2. Exposure of people to potential health ha!ards? ........•...............................

R. ..aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:

D D KJ D 0 PD D D KJ D 0 (] D cJ,£J D D £J

D D fil D D Iii

1 The ob~tn.:ction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the prpposal result m the creation of O O an aesthet1 ... <1lly offensive site open to pulJlic view? .............................. .

llt!crl!ation. Will the ;>r'Jposal result in:

1. An impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportuniti<Js?. • • . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O~

· .. ,., i:·•o'·"' b'AGc. 146· I , "~'--·~ '"'n r. ~-:: .. 3!8t-"" -3- 1.,,,TE"'""'E ~~.. D

I"·"\!,,.,. r1\\.:' - I L.---'-"'-~~~~~~~.....o~----'

T. C11/1ural Rrwmrel.

1. Will the proposal result in the alteration·of or the destruction of a·:irehistoric or historic archeological site?.

2. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effect~ to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? .................•.............•. ; .......................... .

3. Does the propC?sal have tht: potential to cause a physical changt wqich would afle!=i unique-1::nnic cultural

values? .................... · . · : · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ' - · · · · · · • · · · • · · · • · ·

4 Will the proposal restrict ex1stuig religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ....•...

U. Mondawry Fi11d1i1gs nf Significo11ce.

1. Does the project have the potential to de_grade thi: quality of the environment. reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self·sustarning levels, thre0aten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the- number or restricMhe range o! a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major ~eriods of Californi~ history or prehistory? ....... .

2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long·term, environmen1.al goals?:.~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....•......................•.. , .....•......•....

3. Does the project have impacts wllich,are individually iimited, but cumulatively.considerable? ......... .

4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human bei'ngs, either directly or indirectly? .......•.............................•.•..•... · ...... .

Ill. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (See Comments Attached}

See attached.

IV. PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

Yes M.iybe Nn

[J ,.

I , L J !X:

[_l [; • D L. J ix l. ..

D [', . . !.x:

D r: , .... L- Jc:

D c r .. iZ:

0 .--. .. u LX:

[j [J I I

~-

!XJ I find the proposed project COULD NOT, have a sign:f1cant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will ) be prepared.

[) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

l] I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect or .. le environmei:,, and an ENVI R0Nt.1ENTAL IMPACT REPORT is requied.

Date: 08 / 02 . /_91 Fort

-4- - ----Fo.tn+a.r& 111e1,

Project ?escription

This project proposes the construction and pla·cem~nt of a 2 11 fiber­optic communication cable between the existing AT&T facilities at Point Arena, California tq Chikura, Japan with a branch to Point Alberni, British Colnmbia, Canada.

An existing cable was placed in 1987 from AT&T' s communicati:on facility at Point Arena to Hawaii after certification of a Negative Declaration prepared by staff of the State Lands Commission (SCH 87081115). Part of the Point Arena to Hawaii onshore cable route included the placement of a steel pipe which was bored under Point Arena Mountain Beaver habitat and the State Manchester Beach and ~hich exited .4 fui~es from shore. The steel pipe can accommodate up to three cables. This project proposes placement of the second cable within the 511 ste.~l pipe.

On ·shore the tre~~h width, depth and length wil1 be 2'x 4' x 300'. The· fir.st 200 feel: of construction of the trench wil:l occur within AT&T' s 1·communication yard which is composed cf loose gravel. The remaining 100 feet of area t6 be trenched will disturb low-growing groundcover.

From .the waterward end of the steel pipe to a water depth of 60 feet, divers will retrobury the cable using watei jetting equipment to a depth of two feet. The trench width in ocean waters will be approximately two feet. At ocean dep'chs greater than 60 feet, cable burial will be accomplished- by use of a tethered·, unmanned, remote controlled piece of equipment c<Hled at SCARAB. The SCARAB will be operated from the Lay /~_hrial vessel and the cable ship and will.~e used, to dig a trench ~~o feet deep to the edge of the continPntal shelf. The SCARAB travels over the cable and uses water )ets to excavate a two-foot deep trench in the soil on tlie ocean floor. Tne cable falls onto the trench and is covered with soil by the natural movement of the ocean ..

The lay/burial vessel will be located .4 miles off-shore over the ocean side end of the exist~ng five-inch diameter steel pipe and carry the cable necessary to extend from the AT&T facility to approximately 2.3 miles off-shore. The installation of the cable will require approximately seven anchor shifts. 'l'he tugboat will be used to move t~~ anchors which will hold the lay/burial vessel in place while the cable is pulled from the vessel through the existing five-inch diameter· steel pipe to the AT&T facility.

Upon completion of the project, all onshore ground surfaces will be restored to original conditions.

':,;:.u.:r ::)A8 P.t.:le- .. __ 1.._4 .... S_:_·~ I : "1 ·<1.11:: i:-..... :.~e ·=·-=-31 N7 . :

. . ·--- ·---·-----

Environmental Setting

This cable route will be constructed within the same corridor as a t(t previous cable placed in 1987 and will begin at AT&T''s Point Arena facility, near Kinney Road, which provides access from Highway 1 into Manchester State Beach, Mendocino County. There will be 300 feet of new ground disturbance between AT&T's facility at Point Arena to an existing, steel pipe, which was directionally bored und:P.r the Pt. Arena ,Mountain- Beaver habitat :and under the coastal dunes of Manchester State Beach in 1987. The first 200 feet of cable will pe trenched within AT&T' s facility which is a gravele'd surface. The remaining 100 feet of cable will be trenched througl'.!· sparsely vegeta~ed low-g~owing ground cover.

The steel pipe e~its in the ocean .4 miles from sho~e. The ocean bottom was surv~yed within the cable route in the fall of 1986 by Alpine Ocean Seismic survey, f:,nc. for construction activities proposed in 1987. The results' 'of the survey indicated that the cabre route would avoid existing rock outcrop areas. Mr. Dan Gotshall, marine bioiogist, has indicated that as a result of his involvement in a survey 6f the Arena Rock reef in 1989, the proposed cable placement will be north and east of the Arena Rock reef and, that diver surveys of the reef did not reveal the presence of giant kelp, Macro.cystis ,(statement attached).

The State Lands Conmtission certified c;. Negative, Declaration in 1987 for AT&T to place a cable from their Point Arena facilities to Hawaii. During the environmental review process, meetings and ~1~c~ssions b~tween State Lands Commission staff, AT&T staff, and inte~ested agencies and individuals resulted in several amendments to the project which minimized or eliminated potential impacts on the Pqint Arena Mountain Beav~r, Aplondtia rufa nigca and/or its habitat. Those project modifications have been incorporated into the project description for the placement of the second cable.

In addition, AT&T agreed to mapage its property in a manner consistent with conservation of the Mountain Beaver, including but not limited to:

a) minimiza~ion of use of unnecessary foot trails;

b) avoidance of' burrows and vegetation in the habitat area;

c) repai~ and maintenance of the fencing around its property;

Upon conclusion of the first project in 1987, AT&T cooperated with, authorized agencies and individuals wish1ng to access AT&T's property to ~onitor and study the Mountain Beaver and its habitat. The present status of the Point Arena Mountain Beaver, Aplondtia rufa nigra is:

California Federal

Species of Special Conqern Proposed Endangered • ~~~~.....,,~~----..-...;---,

~·,-=:1.:J;:\n ?;..::~- 11~ I : ... ~..!TE rA.~;E ..... 31S~, - 1 - ..... - --------·-- , __

A.

-DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONME:NTAL EVALUATION AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY

SUBMARINE FIBER OPTIC CABLE PT .• ARENA, MENDOCINO COUNTY TO 'CHIK~, JAPAN

Earth

1. No. This proposal does not include disturb<;lnc~. of any geologic substructures, as surface disturbance onshore will be a maximum of 4' and offshore ocean bed disturbance will be 2 'to the edge of the continental shelf.

2. No. Soil wi'l.l be temporarily displaced during the

3.

trenching activities. The land portion of the trench ~ill involve,a 4' x 300' area from Ar & T's facility to a previously installed 3000', 5 11 diameter steel pipe. The waterwa~d portion of the construction proposes a cable buriax depth of 2' within the ocean from .~ miles from shore out 40 miles to the continental shelf. From the edge of the continental shelf to Japan, the cable will rest on the surface of the ocean floor.

No. This project involves the construction of a trench to bury a 211 cable. Ground, surface features; onshore will be restored to original conditions upon completion. Trenches within the 09ean are expected; =co fill naturally redistributing the displaced soils with the movement of the ocean current.

~. No unique geologic or physical features have been identified·. within the project area. Ali onshore construction will 09cur on A T & T property. The caole route avoids State Manchester Beach by use of an existing steel pipe which has been bored undei;neath. the State Park to· accommodate a similar cable placement and two future cable placement projects. The offshore cable placement route from shore to the edge of the continental shelf will be aligned adjacant to a p~eviou~ly placed cable in 198? for which bottom surveys were cohduc.ted.

5. No. on shore, trenches will be backfilled and compacted to reduce erosion of disturbed soil. The project proposes 100 {eet of natural vegetation disturbance to low-growing gr6µndcover which is expected to revegetate naturally.

6. No. Offshore, the trench will be two feet in depth extending to the continental shelf. This is expected to he an insignificant impact ~s the naturql movement of the ocean is expected to redistribute the botto~ soils.

7. No. This project will not expose people or property to geologic hazards as it involves .the construction of :a trench and shallow placement of a cable below the earth's surface.

B. Air

1. No. Substantial air emissions are not expected, as one backhoe, deadman a.nchor; winch and horizontal cable sheave will be used on shore. The duration of the onshore construction ~ctivity is anticipated to be two weeks. Offshore equipment will involve one lay/burial vessel, one diver·support vessel, a tug boat and a patrol ~oat. Offsho;e construction activity is anticipated to he completed w1 thin one week. .The construction equipment impacts to the air quality will be short-term and insignificant.

2. No hazardous ,materials are propose~ for use on this project which would cr'?ate objectionable odors.

3. No. This project does not propose to place any above ground structur~s which would affect air movement, moisture or temperature changes. ·

c. Water

j;. No. This project would not direction of water movements .as intake or outfall structure or related activity.

affect the course or it does not propose an any permanent turbine-

2. No. once the cable has been installed, all onshore trenches will be filled, compacted and restored to original conditions eliminating anY< surf ace 'drainage impacts.

3. No. Thif!> project proposes to b~ry a 2 11 cable which will .not affect the course or flow or flood waters.

4. No. 'Thi·s project does not propose to pump, expel or transport water or liquids.

5. No. Offshore construction will result in a minor, temporary increase of water turbidity on the ocean floor due to trenching activities ..

2

• 6-7. No. This project does not propose to disturb ground water or underground aquifers.

8. No. This project does not propose the use of public water supplies.

9. No. Four divers will be used during the ocean construction of the cable placement which ,will be monitored by the lay/burial vessel.

10. No. This project does not propose the disturbance of any surface thermal spri11gs as none have been identified wi~pin the project ro~te.

·b. Plant Life

1. No. The onshore disturbance will involve the constr.uction of a 300-foot trench from the AT&T facility to the ·e}!:isting five-inch diameter steel pipe. The first 200 feet of the trench is located within a graveled, fenced-in yard. The remaining 100 ~eet of trench is located in the ·field north of ~he ~T&T yard ~fea which is sparsely veg~tated with low growing ground cover vegetation.

The cable route and anchor areas are located within 100 feet north and east of the Arena Rock reef .which will avoid disturbance to giant kelp, '"Macrocystis, per correspondence received from Da11 Gotshall, Marine Biologist, attached.

2. No. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to exist at this location. This project proposes to disturb areas adjacent to a previously placed cable in 1987 ·for ·Which a Negative Declaration was prepared ~y staff (SCH 87081105).

3. NO. This project does not propose to introduce any new species of plants into an area nor propose any above­ground structures ~9ich could act as a barrier to the normal reple~~~hment of existing species.

4. No. This project does not propose to disturb any agr~cultural crop lands.

3

. ' : ·, R P,i;.,::;,._+;_'"_'_· ...,1-...·5_~_::-. ___ 1 . TE i:•i,:.;:,, "~·· 3191 t

, '

E. Ar.d:mal ~ife

*· No. This project does not propose to affect the qiversity of species or numbers of species of any animals. The habitat area of the Point Arena Mountain Beaver has been moni~ored for three years since the HAW-4 Cable Landing project. The follow-ing measures have been incorporateg into the project description to reduce construction impacts ·to a level ·Of insignificance:

a)

b)

c)

d)

.e)

Construction activities will be r.elocated outside the most current del'ine~tion of the habitat area of the -Point Arena, Mountain Beaver habitat, identified by ~:. D?,tle T • . Steele as indicated on the attached cable. Profile;

The construction area will be fenced for t:he dur~~ion of the project to preve~t encroachment of construction personnel into the most current habitat area o~ the Point Arena Mountain Beaver. In addition, warning signs will be placed along the perimeter of the habitat jirea stating "Environmentally Sensitive Area, Do Not Enter";

Prior to the start of construction, all workers at the site will be informed about the Point Arena Mountain Beaver and instructed to not enter the "Environmentally Sensitive Area";

Construction will be scheduled to ·avoid the reproductive cycle. (February to ·11ay} of the Point Are11a Mountain Beaver; i'

A qualified biologist will be on the construction site to monitor the Point Arena ·Mountain Beaver during the construction activities.

2. No. See #1 above~

3. No. This protect does npt propose to introduce or place any new species of animals to the area nor.propose any above-ground structures which would affect the migration or movement of animals.

4

153 • , .. ;_.,r~r.,AR w ... Gr; __ _......_ __

319~ :,u:_'T£ PAG!:....;..· .;;.·------

·1

4. No. Thf? onshor,~ construction of the cable between the AT.ltT yard and t1i'e existing '5 11 diameter steel cable will involve the disturbance of a 100' area of a field containing low-growing ground cover. The delineation of the Point Arena Mountain Beaver habitat has been identified by Dale Steel, A Qualified Ecologist, and will be avoided. ~lease refer to response in E.-1,-above.

F. Noise

1. No. There will be short-term, unavoidable noise caused by construction equipment during the onshore trenching activities which will occur on A'l'&T property. constructi<m activity will occur within normal, daytime working hours.

2. No. Coristructior.· activity will not involve any beach disturbance. Offshore construction will occur below the water surface.

G. Light ,an~ Glare

1. No. This project does not propose any{J~rmanen~ above­ground construction.

H. Land Use

1. No. This project does not proposed to alter th6! existing or known future uses within the project vicin.ity.

I. Natural Resourc~s

1. No. This project does not propose to increase ~he rate of use of any natural resource, as it does, ·not ·propose the consumption of water, air or land.

2. No. This project does not proposed to· deplete supplies of nonrenewable resources, qther than temporarily operate some heavy· equ'lpment to c~:mduct excavation Of the trench.

any to

the

J. Risk of Upset

1. No. The cable is designed for a 30-year life with no planned maintenance. Disruptions to the cable can be located and repaired utilizing hand recovery and replacement 'techniques with minor disturbances to the environment.

5

2. No. This project will not interfere with any emergency evacuation plan as it proposes to .bury a 2" c-::;mmunication cable.

K. Population

L No. This proje.ct will involve a sma11:i. number of employees: four laborers, four divers, aiid associated support and supervisory personnel for a prqject duration of three weeks; and therefore w~ll not alter the distribution, density or growth 'r'ate 1.of the ··hu~an population within this area.

·L. Housing

1. No. This project involves a small nuipber of employees for a short period of time and will not create a significant'demand for additional housing.

M. Transportation

1. No. The size and amount of trenching proposed for the onshore portion of the cable route will not cause significant j~ncreases in ve}licular mpvement within the area.

2. No. The onshore construction work will be performed on AT&T property which will accommodate the construction equipment and personnel vehicles required for the conduct of this project.

3. No. This project does not propose numerous ~ruck trips to and from the construction site accomplish this project and will therefore not create· a substantial impact upon existing transportation systems.

4. No. This project does not propose numerou~ truck trips to and from the construction site and .will not affect the alteration of present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or gopds.

5. No. Waterborne vessels r~quired to conduct this project include: One lay/burial vessel, one diver support vessel, a tugboat, and a patrol boat. Communication during the cable pulling operation will be by17HF radio.

The distance from the AT&T facility onshore to the outer continental shelf is approximately 40 miles and will take approximately one week to complete. This impact is expected to be minimal and of short duration.

6

illJU

·,,,•, ·~:: Pt•G:: _ _:;,...:.

•

6. No. This project does not propose significant increases in traffic activity once the equipment arrives at the AT&T fac~lity, anq will therefor~ not affect an increase in _traffic hazards ~o pedestrians, bicyclists or vehicles.

N. Public Services

1. No.. This project dpas not propose any above-ground structures ci: :~n·e use of hazardous materials which would require additional fire protection serv~ces.

2. No. This project does not propose any .habitable . or above-ground structures requiring additional police -protection.

3 • N6. Th1s project does not propose. any habitable structures or long-term projects requiring employees to re~ocate t~eir families.

4. No. This project 4:pes not propose a housing developmen~ which would require the development of additional park and recreation facilities.

5. 1-Jo. This project does not propose a significant increase in ~the use of public facilities or roads which would require additional maintenance beyond that which presently exists.

6 • No. This project does not propose a development which would .require the consideration of additional governmental services.

o-. 'Energy·

1. No. This project will not require the ccnsti:-uction er consideration of new utilities. An existing energy source exists within the AT&T communicatioil yard at Pt. 111;,t:na which will serve the ex~sting cahl? to Hawaii anc:l this proposed c;:able to Japan, as well as a. third future ca~ie. The voltage within each -cable will vary from 3000 to 3500 volt.s.

2. No. This project proposes to provide reliable coniinunication an_d data service.1between the United states / West Coast, British Columbia a~~ Japan.

3. No. This project will· not require additional water services to be provided, as it will not consume water.

7

. -·---------1 i: P. '~;'::--1~ , '

r• :: _ 31.95 j< ---·--· ---;

4. No. This project does not prop9se a habitable development req~iring sewer or septic tanks.

5. N0·, This prcj ect does not inv~l ve any structures requiring storm water drainage capabilities.

6. No. This ;proj~ct does not propose a habitable development ·or pr9ject requiring the disposition,of any solid waste and disposal.

Q. Human Health

1. No. The proposed cable will be buried underground and will not create any known healt.h hazard as a result.

2. No. See #1 above.

R. Aesthetics

1. No. The proposed project will involve burial of a fiber optics cable and does· not propose any above ground structures or reconfiguration of the e?C!sting t9pography.

s. Recreation

1. No. Recreational opportunities known to exist within the project v-icinity occur cit Manchester State' Beach. As stated previously, a steel cable was placed in i:QBB which was directionally bor~d under the State Beach and exits .4 miles from shore. There will be nq_ anticipated impacts to recreational uses ·of the State Beach.

T. Cultural Resources

1. No area will be disturbed having cultural resources values. Ann Peak and Associates have completed cultural =learances for the onshore portion of cable as part of the Point Arena to Dunnigan project previously submitted to the State Lands Commission.

i. No. This proposal does not involve the disturbance to ·any buildings.

3. No. See response in #1 above.

4. No. The onshore trenching activity will vpcur on AT&T property.

•

8

WC --~~ · •• r· -···R p~.~- 157 ! ... • ... ~·n.. {

I ~== ,.,. r'\c: ...... ' ~ .... UC , ' r!l. • ... __..~~f

···----~------

u. Mandatory Finqings of Significance

1.

2.

3.

4 •/

No. Anticipgtea~ ~construction impacts. will be minor and for a short-term. The project is located approx~mately 80 feet west of the Pt. Arena Mountain Beaver habitat; however, measures have been incorporated ~nto the project description.

No. The construction activity is expected to be minimal and short term: two weeks onshqre and one week offshore.

NO'. Te111porary I short-te:rm increa_ses in noise and temporary soil di,sturbance are expected. to occur du:ring onshore construction activities. A .small temporary increase in boat traffic for one week will occur due to the suppor.t vessels requ:ir~!i to conduct tliis project offshore. These impacts are not viewed as cumulatively considerable.

No. As discussed previously, ·there have been no significant effects identified which would result from this proposed proj'ect.

9

.;")-.f{ Pt.~,-;:- ... , "'.58 i ...... ..,,.,.. 9'i~ ••· l

-~I./.:.::. . 3197 J , _ _.._,_........_ _ _,,I . -. __ ., ___ -----

1.

2.

ImpaC?t:

PROJECT MODIFiq~TION AND MONITORING PLAN

The -ground surface will be disturbed during the excavation qf a trench for the placement of a 2 11

fiber optic cable.-

P~oject Modification: Trenches will be backfilled with the removed material and compacted in accordance with · ASTM Standar~ 02922-81. All disturbed surfaces will be returned to pre-existing conditions.

Monitoring: . _

Impact:

Project a)

b)

c)

d).

e)

Applicant will provide. -the staff of the State Lands Commission with certification that the compaction standards have been met.

The project will be located near an area ident:i~i~d as Pt. Arena Mt. Beaver habitat. ·

Modification: construction activities will be relocated outside '.the most current delineation of the habitat area of ·-the :Point Arena Mountain Beaver habitat, identified hy Mr. Dale T. Steele as indicated on the attached. Cable .Profile;

The construction ·area will be fenced for ·the duration of the project to.prevent encroachment of construction personnel into the most current habitat area of the Point Arena Mountain Beaver. In addition, warning pigns will be placed along the perimeter of the habitat ar-ka stating "Environmentally Sensitive Area, Do Not Enter"; J

Prior to the start of construction, all workers at the site will be informed about the Point Arena M:ountain Beaver and instructed to not enter the "Environmentally Sensitive Area";

Construction will be scheduled to avoid the reproductive cycle (February to May) o~ the Point Arena Mountain Beaver;

A qualified biologist will be on the construction site to monitor the Point Arena Mountain Beaver during the construction activit{e's.--~

1

_ •• :-,. f.; p; •. c·- 1.59 ·r ~!\ ·i: . . 3198 . - ______ ...... _

.. -·-·------

3.

4.

•

f) Applicant will notify staff of the State I.lands Commission 72 hours prior to the placement of the fence.,

Monitortng: Staff of 'the state -'Lands, c;ct.i.uissi~!n,, ,or its designated rep:;-esentati ye, wp.:,.L ver.ify !

Impact:

a)

•b)

c)

d)

e}

the· proper -delineat,Von of the nabitat;

the fencing of :~he construction area;

that construction workers have been informed and instructed about the rPt. Arena Mountain Beaver habitat anc;l avoidance thereof;

that the construction\ 1schedule will avoid the breeding seas'C:m (February-May) of the Point Arena Mountain Beaver; and,

that a qualified biologist will be on site to monitor th~- construction activities.

The project will produce temporary construction noise.

Project Modification: The hours pf construction wi11 be limited to daytime hours.

:Monitoring: Staff of the State Lands 'Commission, or i~s designated'. representative, will verify daily close of operation~"''

Impact:

Project

The project wili cause a temporary increase in vessel '-traff::!,c offshore Pt. Arena and the state Manchester Be~~h area.

Modification: Vessei communication during the construction activities will be transmitted by VijF radio. The applicant will provide written notification to the u.s. qoast Guard at least 72 hours prior to beginnfng construction ?Ctivities •

2

-- ...,,_~n . t-!.P•:DARPAGE~.

• ·'' 1''"C PAGE -- . ,3j 99 . ..... --. ··~ ' - - ·---------":"'-'

Monitoring: Applicant will send a copy 9f written notificat~on to staff of the state Lands commission. Commission staff / or its designated representativ~, will monitor any conceJ;n~ expressed by the U'. s. Coast Guard during the conduct of this project.

United Staxes ·Departrnent of the ~nterior

lu ,Reply ·Hr:fcr To: l · l - 91 ·TA · 7708

£1,;;ck nnd v .. at:ch An-:;!il: S.R. Ihnc~

8!100 Ward Pnd-~way

P\O. Box No. 8~05 K.\ns.i~ Ci.cy, Mi:!l:JCllri 6411'•

Dear Mr. Ihnow:

FISH ANf.nS.'.ILD1JFE SERVICE ri:sh um1 v1m1life Enhanceruent

ftacrarncnto Field Offi~ 2P~ C"...otta£<;. Way, R09m E·1803

&:cnimcnm, C~"\ 95S25-1S46

July 22. 1991.

T!;t' Fi:ila an·! ~J1dlJfe ·Scr,•i•.:e ht1s nwi.l!wt.nl Li1c 1~d.t..:ri.ils suhU1!1.,t.::J wit:h yi:rur

lct.t.~l.' c•( ,h11y 10, l99l, wi'.::h 1:egur<:i r,o l.h11 1.:ff<:<;Ls ~,r tl1r. pro.,usc\l proj~ct ••1\

::nc .l'Olr:t :i.rt:r.:; m11uat~lft b::..l'Vt'l" (6,D_L\;<!.Q.!2£J~l. !}.:f~ 1li£.t.!!), \.:e C.;lncur With your ·J~cermi.ri.:n·io11 t.hat: the p.top1.;s~.J pLt.·J~1;L 1:. 11ot 11.kely -::o a.dvers.:-ly affect th;,s ~pech~s. T'n'.!l"i!fo~·e, in accc::dance wll.l; the J.)l."O\'!.sio:as of SQ CFR. § 4U:l .13, .•)fl:>l.l t:<:::; on pursuant: t•:> the Endangered Specie!! Act, as wncnd(.'d, .\:; hereby i.c'l:1~i.n<\tf.:•:l.. ?.nd n.-, furtb"::' ."lcLion ... 1r.der thi3 autho:dty i'3· required.

'!~w .. :. yvu f1;.;: yo·"fi: com:.:::n f1Jr oui:- f:i:.:th cmd wildllf~ rcsoux:cc{o.. lf you huv.::. f-.;r:::-u-:r question:; rcg<sro.!.11& this patt:a;:, please call: Hike lion.tin t>f ill.Y ~.1,.,dt 0.1 \'JlS> 9/tl·'·&66 or rrs 460-t1866.

S in<!ere ly,

,..,-..,

~:::{)!!!.~! (f ~/Field Supervisor . -

<~<:. /1P.D (F'\::E), F',.IS, Foi·rlaiid. Qp•r.•~" r~!i ·SFO· (fedei·~J. !'roj,r:c:ct.), Gacr.-1ml°'lli:o, CA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA- RESOUACES'AGENCY

'DEPARTMENT OF PARKS ANIJ RECREATION r''~orthern RegiGn Headquarters -:"·.:.: 36 Tesconi Court ···::;anta Rosa, California 95401-4653

(707} 576-2188

Mr. S. ·R. Ihnow Black & Veatch 8400 Ward ~arkway P.O. Bex 8405 Kansas City, Missouri 64114

Dear Mr. Ihnow:

March 261, 1991

PETE WILSON, r.0V1mor

Thank you -for the opportunity .to review your AT&T project regar~ing installation of a' second fiber-optic cable (within a previously installeq steel duct) beneath the surface of the lands and beach of Manchester State Beach.

Install~tion of three steel dacts and thP first fiber-optic cable were performed under a Temporary Use Permit issued ,:i'fter extensive envirorunental and project reviews were·.conducted. That Temporary Use Permit remains ~rt effect and wi~~ be renewed before it expires on August 24, 1991.

Except for potential adverse im~acts to the sensitive Point Arena Mountain Beaver, the proposed project will not affect other State Park resources or disturb State Park lands. Ye were pleased to receive your letter of March 19, 1991 ·describing the AT&T/Black & Veatch plan to protect the Point Arena Mountain Beaver during construction. This plan is in full accord with the recommendations of-biologist Dale' T. Steele and is in keeping with the intent of our Permit Condition #17. The proposed ptoject activities are within the scope of the current Temporary Use Permit and therefore no additional permit will be required 'by this Department.

We wish to thank AT&T and .Black & Veatch for their cooperation in this matter, for their sensitivity to State Park resources, and for taking all reasonable precaution~ to protect and minimize di~turbance to the Point Arena Mountain Beaver habitat and population.

cc: Mendocino District Resource Protection Division Dale T. Steele

Sincerely,

MJ.~ Carl S. Chavez ~ Regional Director

TO:

FROM:

Jr( r. and :hfrs. 'Danie/, W .. 9otsfiall 4 Sommerset 'Rise

Skyline 'Forest Jt'fontcrc)', Calif9rnia 939.fO

S . .R. I hnci1,..J -81 a.cK ·!k l..Jea.t:•:h 8400 W~rd ParKwa~ P.O. Box 8405 Kansas City, Mi~souri 64114

D~niel Gotsh.;o.l·l Marine Biolo~ist 4 Sc•mH· ;;e t R i se Monterey, CA 93940

SUBJ~CT: Report on hard bottom hab1titat for giant kelp in the vicinity of proposed TFC-4 cable arei.

I have e~amined the map that you ~~ouided showing your proposed area for anchoring and burying the tPC-4 cable. This .:..rea con·t.t..i ns only one ha.rd bottom reef ~.rea, Arena. Rock reef. In S~ptember 1989, I wa~ involved in a bathymet~ic survey of this reef whi~h resulted in an underwate~ map of the entire ree~ ~Figure 1 and 2). Please note that the latitude and longitude oositions on these figrJr·e;; aro:- slightly off., the actu."°.I r-c-ef loca.ticin is. -:ho1,1m to b~"' sha.ll·J~\ler on NOAA ch~.rt ft18640.

Pl ea.-:.e n-O'te that lat i'tude a.nd 1 ong i tud-: for >'our prop·:::i·:ed cable are located well north and ea5t of the Arena Rock reef complex. Ple.o•.-:.-: ~;novJ also ·that div-:r- surveys of this reo:f have not revealed th~ presence of giant kelp, Macrocystis, I am unawire of any other hard bottom substrate in or near the area of the propose< cable. Ih order to confirm my own observations, I talked to a fishing boat c .... pt~.in, Pat Bel le1,1 on t~,,.. phon.z., and he agreed that the closest ha.rd bottom sub5tra{9 to your project area is Arena Rock and the reefs around ~01nt Areria.

Dan Ge• t sh a 1 l

·-··---~--- ... . _., ....

0

:- -c7·~ I • ) ..

~ ;~ h; • • ? , .. ...; -

In t> "'TJ ):~ ••• ":ti

~

I

i • ! I

( f ·IV "'e { • • r .. c

.---I A.:.;.,;._RE_N_A -~-oc-.:-B-A-TH_Y_M-ET_R___,Y J

50 ----- . . l

-··~ - .

90 ······· '---······; ;_,..,., .. ____ , : . ···- . ' i" 60 \ .l.-······i··· ' ... ----~ ' i ······;-... ' ~ ·······. •-·- .... I

I -., . ••• i i _, - [.- •• -' ,..,... f'" ' ·•••• ~ 0 ' ' . ' ... -- - . : : .... : - 90 - v t2 . . ' ----~ . - ..... ,... . . ..... . . . . .... . . .... . . ... . . . ~ : :-.. -·-~-- ,...._ : """ -.... .:.···-- ' ' : ....... ; : . ..,- . _..... . ..... . -~ .... - ·-·.;. . ' ..... ' _,.. ........ : ' : .. _L,,,·" •• .,. ' ' - • ...... ; ..,. ' ..... ; 1---. . : . ---- ____ , _..., -... ..... ' : ,..... ' ..

I 150 ; - _; .. J" _; f< ""'.;;'°'-· i i ..... 120 ttJ • ! ....;- "··;.... •! I ·~ -r1 -- • . • ... .. '-"-...., ... ,..,_ i ; --~·--· I '...:r1 : ••• • • • .,... 1 I r . n0 : ·:······· l : .. ~a :-1 I 0 • , ... ' V --,.. . ' : i , ...... _ i ,..__ : i .. :····· ,......_ ~ : : ······ 18 lo_

• • ' ' () I I - • • (J ~ . ~

N -115/120 -105/110 - f!/3/100 - f!51 90 -·. 75/ 80 - '05/ 70

DATA DENSITY SCATTER PLOT KRUSE IHt\GING - 10/c;xJ

- --';':~ ,. .':-> \~'::;;.'·.. "'. x'•.:. ~·.::,. ;,~.:· •

~ Fi v 11v--e [)_ e ,e

50

<j0

~ ~ 120 ::c

I 150 --r1 (!]

t:-1 tS0

l

' i 1 j

.; ~. I I. N "

.. ; i.(i . ) . ,., : ; . . , .. , ' I ! ' : : i' ' . , c,.;1-4 ·ft'V~1 · 1010';1 c,11

l ~- ..,., '411••.

·~~/;:..;.\, f· ~: .. ,~ .. ~r ,·1~~ 1] .... ~---..~~'"·• '' ..:.~, ]>. .. Jlf ~ ~· • •

I.ARENA ROCK BA THYME=RY)

. . . . . .

' ...... +····<······ ·····t····-j-·······1·······+······· )1 • .... • • • • fj

·········r······r····t······ , . 50 .

~l-90

·--,.

--··-

/

- I

/!-!} /

:;:·· :::·: ----=:.:-;--....

IU

I 79 .,. 70 r"' ;.·

184 TS 137 71 2011 rN

., .. , ;:....,o ~(~ ~

.:: ' ~-~- 1 ....... ______ ·'\. ~'--.....: ___ 13-_, . - ...... ~..,-.i..., __ "=-- 43S(i0-.3!1J

~ ' 1' "' - . ._ • ..__ -~><-n ' $ I --, .• ,•' " . / = :.,.,_,,

,,,.. 434

73

-119

18

''-• .. I / ' .,.,_I ,...... ,.,,,I' 3113,.. , e · _03 "' . / ,., ·-- / 1\rv . · ~)- ,,J .... ·~"

---- - ·- - ~40-)'"'!3550 ~ 34!) -

~--. -------··-- --• 404 -~,_ 231· 72

11-:" gg ,.,, 65

~1 " 150 eo 208 -~ ... ==.t~--· . --·

10~-, -71· - ,6., -

f:\I ,12 60

n 'G 214

~-545 194

65 58

73

66 62

3'2 711 89 66

'" 70 ·'21

31~/

///,

~-----. ··-·- "W7 140 .

79

~~.: ·137 io 22~ . 85

~ --------~*--- ···--£> ' -.;> Q It .Y o n

173,/\' 65

cf•"' 117 59

-1· Q

43SJo . 415 - -

041

.. ~ ...

;;s-7

157

. 62.

53

61

70 65

e2

59

58.

57

-- ..... -.. _-... 55

t3ll

1

20 65

eo -·-· • ·.,-:t 56 5':1 .•• _'f :L I ~. 7.-L....:..ss--·- • .. ~ .. ~ I •. --"/L.22.,.,.2 ----:,,;:-.-'-- o,">·

/ ., 4t MS 454

-m. ·-· -530 .·

64 51 54 ·-------10-_________ _

65

259'

·95 72

"'" 83 57 53 • - 506

"1

227 69 Y: 3~f-n ~ ·I~ I ~ :::--_ . - ·"'' - X T . ~ ~ 59

44:4 ;' ···-·------~-;---e.a._~_o n. "' .. ftr"

65 ,~.,.

·- - H 84 '\fV\1\1', JV --- ··-- .,~ 74 ,,..-•:"'-···--'I._ ~53

- ,_,,.r! Ill • - . eo --:::- - • - ~ _L..__J f.-,..::r - -A'<J::: ·· .... r ;:;:::f~r·~

,.._,., "' II gS ·. '1'''"'

,...,..rJ'' 14

555 374 335

252 ..

~

-..... ~ .. ~ -- 328 204 W$

71

I

124° THREE MILE LIMIT ,.o· 11---II•-.... "-S.X

.i.Pt. Arena to Trinidad Head} • SOUNOINGS IN FATHOMS· SCAtE 1:200.000

e LORAN-C, {

~,

\

• -~--_J!:

• --+--_J!

I --- ~-~ 'L,. :~·· c:NDhR P.!..GE-~ L~

jMINUTE PAGE ··~·· -J2QS . : i

s'iATEOrCAllFORNIA-THE RESOURCE~ AGENCY

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION NORTH COAST AREA "5 FREMONT, SUITE 2000 SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94105 2219 (415) 904·5260

Septemb~r 9, 1991

Ms. Judy Brown State Lands Commission 1807 13th Street Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Negative Declaration for AT&T Fiber Optic Cable Project: SCH #91073096

Dear Ms. Brown:

Thank you for the opportunity· to comment on the above-referenced environmental document. The following comments arise from the Commission's role as a responsible agency under CEQA pursuant to o~r coastal development permitting authority. -As the Commission has not had an opportunity to review the negative d~claration, these comments are those of Commission staff only.

The Commissi'on is still issuing coastal development permits in the coastal zone of Mendocino County, which incorporates part of the proposed land-based A portion of the fiber optic line. As Jo Ginberg of this office informed Ted ~ Adams of EIP in August of 1990, all other discretionary approvals must be obtained before an application for a coastal development permit can be deemed complete.

The Proposed Negative Declaration appears to have addressed those issues which Commission staff believes to.be important in its jurisdiciton for this project. The incorporation of mitigation meas~res into the project should adequately minimize significant effects to coastal resources.

s~.~~ 12<J~ S". tnP.;.f2A.U-L­Susan Strachan Coastal Planner

1"0'2.. -cc: Nadell Gayou, Resources Agency

Dara Lynn Cox, State Clearinghouse

1254p

.....------=~-..-:i· It CALENDAR PAGE ~ 171 !

3210 ' IM!NUTE~~GE~.:=:;;__~~~