SECTION SUMMARY
The San Ardo to Coalinga Heated Oil Pipeline Project could have a potentially
significant impact on two Native American prehistoric archaeological sites located
within or in close proximity to the Project right‐of‐way. These sites are documented in
the California Historical Resources Information System as sites CA‐FRE‐2092 [P‐10‐
002092] and CA‐FRE‐2518 [P‐10‐002518]. Neither site has been formally evaluated in
consultation with the State Historical Resources Commission or the State Historic
Preservation Officer. Site FRE‐2092 is assumed eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). CA‐FRE‐2518 is considered a significant historical resource under the
eligibility criteria for the CRHR. Direct impacts to sites CA‐FRE‐2092 and CA‐FRE‐2518
can be avoided during the construction and operation of the San Ardo to Coalinga
Heated Oil Pipeline by properly boring and installing the oil pipeline below cultural
deposits at FRE‐2092 and by constructing the pipeline to bypass site FRE‐2518.
CULTURAL RESOURCES SECTION SUMMARY TABLE
Level of Significance
Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Before MitigationAfter
Impact 3.6-1: Disturbance of Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural Resources: Resource Evaluated as Eligible for Listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources (CRHR)
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1a: Archaeological Monitoring
CPL shall provide qualified cultural resources monitor(s) to monitor construction activities where cultural resource sites are known to occur and to train construction crews with regard to both known and potentially unknown cultural resources that could occur along the pipeline alignment. Monitors shall examine all potential work areas to ensure avoidance of cultural resource sites.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1b: Avoidance of Site CA‐FRE‐2092 through use
of Specific Construction Techniques
The pipeline shall be constructed in a manner that will avoid damaging the archaeological deposit identified as CA‐FRE‐2092. The pipeline shall either be installed beneath the cultural deposit at the site through implementation of horizontal directional drilling (HDD) or another equally effective
Level of Significance
Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Before MitigationAfter
construction technique or by avoidance of the resource by minor realignment of the pipeline centerline.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1c: Protection and Avoidance of Sites CA‐FRE‐
2092 and FRE‐2518 from Construction
Activities using Physical Barriers
The pipeline shall be constructed in a manner that will avoid damaging Site FRE‐2518 which lies adjacent to the pipeline corridor and Site FRE‐2092 which lies within the pipeline right‐of‐way. This shall include the installation of barrier fencing or other physical barriers to prevent construction personnel and vehicles from coming onto either site during construction. During construction, the area shall be monitored by a professional archaeologist as per Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1a and by a representative of the Salinan or Tachi Yokuts tribe to ensure that (1) barrier fencing is maintained, (2) vehicles and workers do in fact remain off the site, and (3) violations of the exclusion area are reported and infractions are policed in accordance with treatment of other environmental violations. Any construction or post‐construction use of the road adjacent to Site FRE‐2518 in support of the pipeline shall be confined to the road which shall be used “as is” and shall not be modified by grading or expanded in width.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1d: Protection of Sites CA‐FRE‐2092 and FRE‐2518
during Possible Pipeline Emergencies
Emergency plans addressing pipeline leaks, ruptures, or other failures that could require accessing the pipeline in the vicinity of sites CA‐FRE‐2092 or FRE‐2518 to make repairs or to remediate any oil spills shall stipulate that the archaeological site area will be avoided in all cases except in the event of a failure of the pipeline beneath the site itself.
Impact 3.6-2: Disturbance of Unanticipated Subsurface
Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural Resources or Human Remains During Construction
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2a: Cultural Resources Awareness Training
CPL’s cultural resources monitor shall train field personnel in identification and resource protection procedures, prior to any construction‐related disturbance. The training materials shall be prepared by a professional archaeologist with contributions by Salinan and/or Tachi Yokuts culturally affiliated with the Project area and shall provide a review of the natural and cultural history of the Project corridor, archaeological sensitivity, most likely locations of buried cultural materials, legal requirements for historic preservation, and specific instructions on how to address such discoveries and what immediate actions to take in the event that materials are, in fact, unearthed.
Level of Significance
Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Before MitigationAfter
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2b: Prepare and Implement a Construction
Monitoring and Unanticipated Discovery
Plan
Prior to construction, the Applicant will prepare a ‘Construction Monitoring and Unanticipated Cultural Resources Discovery Plan’ to be implemented if an unanticipated discovery is made.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2c: Inadvertent Discovery of and Subsequent
Handling of Human Remains
Any human remains discovered during Project activities will be protected in accordance with current state law including, specifically California Public Resources Code Sections 5097.91 and 5097.98, as amended. The discovery of human remains will be treated as defined in the Construction Monitoring and Unanticipated Cultural Resources Discovery Plan, as defined in Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2b. Archaeological excavations at sites will not, if at all possible, inappropriately disturb or remove human remains. Native Americans will be consulted to develop a protocol to be followed if human remains are encountered during any Project activity.
Impact 3.6-3: Construction Staging and Work Area Effects on
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐3: Survey and Clearance of All Staging and Work
Areas and Access Roads Prior to Disturbance
Prior to any ground disturbance or vegetation removal, the Applicant shall direct the cultural resources monitor or other qualified professional archaeologist to survey the proposed work and staging areas and/or access roads to be located outside of the previously surveyed corridor. Any potential impacts to cultural resources shall be managed as per the Construction Monitoring and Unanticipated Discovery Plan as per Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2b.
PS LTS
Impact 3.6-4: Disturbance of Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural Resources—During Operational Phase
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐4: Record‐Keeping
The Applicant’s cultural resources construction monitor shall prepare a record of the locations of the archaeological sites identified before and during construction and shall maintain this record throughout the Project life. Cultural resource sites shall be identified in the Applicant’s records as “environmentally sensitive areas” that shall be avoided by any earth‐ disturbing maintenance activities, including the operation of vehicles across the site areas.
Level of Significance
Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Before MitigationAfter
Impact 3.6-5: Disturbance of Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural Resources—During Decommissioning Phase
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐5: Identify Archaeological Sites
The Applicant shall maintain a record of the locations of the archaeological sites and shall identify these sites in their Project records as “environmentally sensitive areas” to be avoided by any earth‐disturbing activities associated with decommissioning, including the operation of vehicles across the site areas. PS LTS 3.6.1 Introduction
The San Ardo to Coalinga Heated Oil Pipeline Project could have a potentially
significant impact on two Native American prehistoric archaeological sites located
within or in close proximity to the Project right‐of‐way. These sites are documented in
the California Historical Resources Information System as sites CA‐FRE‐2092 [P‐10‐
002092] and CA‐FRE‐2518 [P‐10‐002518]. Neither site has been formally evaluated in
consultation with the State Historical Resources Commission or the State Historic
Preservation Officer. Site FRE‐2092 is assumed eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). In 2005, Site FRE‐2518 was evaluated as ‘not eligible’ for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources according to its potential to yield significant
archaeological information (ENTRIX 2005b, page 6‐2). However, upon re‐evaluation by
the EIR preparers with input from Native Americans and the Applicant’s consultant
(URS), CA‐FRE‐2518 is considered a significant historical resource under the eligibility
criteria for the CRHR. The presence of a small rock into which cupules have been
pecked indicates that the site has the potential to be of ceremonial significance to Native
Americans. In some areas cupule rocks are associated with rituals designed to affect the
weather; are employed by women seeking to become pregnant; are used for the
preparation of medicine; or are associated with demarcating territorial boundaries of
Native tribelets. Lacking direct historical documentation, it is not possible to know
precisely the use of the cupule rock at CA‐FRE‐2518, but its ritual association and
consequent significance to Native Americans is acknowledged. Therefore, CA‐FRE‐
2518 is considered a significant historical resource under the eligibility criteria for the
CRHR (D) in that it has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in
prehistory.
Direct impacts to sites CA‐FRE‐2092 and CA‐FRE‐2518 can be avoided during the
construction and operation of the San Ardo to Coalinga Heated Oil Pipeline by properly
boring and installing the oil pipeline below cultural deposits at FRE‐2092 and by
constructing the pipeline to bypass site FRE‐2518. Other measures to be taken to avoid
direct impacts to these sites include: (1) construction monitoring by a qualified cultural
resources monitor; (2) installation of barrier fencing around the sites to exclude
construction workers and equipment from the sites during construction; (3) including
provisions in pipeline emergency response plans to ensure the sites do not sustain
adverse impacts during emergency response and recovery operations; and (4) including
provisions in pipeline abandonment procedures to ensure the protection of the two
sites.
A historic trash scatter (“garbage scatter”) was recorded during a supplemental survey
along the Parkfield Grade alternative (outside of the proposed pipeline alignment but
within the maximum impact corridor for one of the alternatives evaluated in Chapter
4.0, Alternatives). The site does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places. The historic
trash scatter is an isolated trash scatter that lacks associations with other features.
Because it lacks clear associations and is a secondary surface depositional feature, it
appears that this site has no potential to yield significant data.
There is the potential to discover unknown, buried archaeological resources during
trenching or other construction activities in the pipeline right‐of‐way. There is the
potential to discover human remains associated with archaeological deposits or in
isolated contexts along the trench to be excavated for the pipeline or during other earth‐
disturbing activities associated with pipeline construction. Prior to any ground‐
breaking activities, an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan will be prepared that defines
appropriate response procedures to be taken by construction personnel, the Project
Applicant, and others in the event of any unexpected discovery of archaeological
remains, human remains, or other cultural resources protected under CEQA during any
project‐related earth disturbing or other activity.
Equipment/materials lay‐down, storage, vehicle parking areas and other areas that have
not been previously investigated for cultural resources and where earth‐disturbing
activities will occur during pipeline construction will be identified far enough in
advance of their use that a records search, Native American consultation, cultural
resources inventory, assessment of impacts, and any appropriate mitigation measures
discovered after approved use of these areas will be managed consistent with the
Unanticipated Discoveries Plan.
3.6.2 Affected Environment
3.6.2.1 Project Area
The proposed pipeline originates in the San Ardo Oil Field in the Coast Ranges
geomorphic province, crosses the summit of the Diablo Range portion of the Coast
Ranges, and descends into the Joaquin Valley near Coalinga, in the Great Valley
geomorphic province. Elevations along the pipeline range from about 450 feet above
mean sea level (msl) at San Ardo, to approximately 3,200 feet msl where the line crosses
the Monterey‐Fresno County line at the Coast Range summit, and then back down to
about 400 feet msl at the eastern terminus at the KLM Facility near Coalinga. A more
complete overview of the Project corridor environment is provided in Section 3.1,
Regional Overview.
3.6.2.2 Culture
Human populations arrived in California by at least 10,500 years before the present and
archaeological remains suggest they were widely dispersed in the region by 9,000 years
ago. Early populations in both coastal and interior locations appear to have subsisted
on a wide variety of resources. It is unclear whether initial populations arrived in
coastal or interior settings, or in both within a short period. Early populations seem to
be marked by use of plant seed milling tools (handstones and milling slabs). Interior
late Pleistocene–early Holocene cultures are distinguished by distinctive Clovis‐like
projectile points, while large side‐notched forms are typical of coastal populations
(Jones, et al. 2004).
California native populations appear to have grown steadily, albeit not consistently,
over the period until the arrival of Europeans in the 18th century. Historical linguistic
data demonstrate that California probably experienced multiple in‐migrations of
diverse populations (Shipley 1978:80‐90) in prehistory. Human populations were
responsive to climatic changes during the Holocene, with concomitant shifts in
settlement patterns and resource procurement practices. By approximately A.D. 1500,
California Indians had developed the cultural patterns that were later documented by
19th and 20th century ethnographers. Populations had become organized into territorial
units which were largely self‐provisioning with acorn/fishing/hunting providing the
groups and some exchange was facilitated by shell beads which functioned like
monetary units.
Ethnographers document two ethnolinguistic groups in the Project vicinity: Salinan
groups in the area between modern San Ardo and Coalinga; and Tachi Yokuts on the
western plains and hills of the Tulare Lake basin. Ethnographers disagree whether the
Salinan–Yokuts boundary was the summit of the Coast Range, or whether there were
Salinan villages in the Pleasant Valley area (e.g., Gibson 1983; Kroeber 1925).
Salinan and Yokuts were organized into semi‐sedentary village communities. The
subsistence base was oriented to the gathering of plant foods, fishing, and hunting.
Subsistence resources, especially plant resources, were enhanced by careful
management of the landscape using fire to encourage fire‐responsive seed producing
grasses and shrubs as well as bulbs and corms, to promote brouse for deer, and to keep
brush from becoming too dense. Villages were typically populated by less than 50
individuals, but could exceed several hundred people. Villages were made up of small
houses constructed on a frame of branches covered with grass, tule reeds, or brush to
make them weatherproof; one or more dance houses which were typically semi‐
subterranean, with earth‐covered roofs; acorn granaries and food storage structures;
menstrual huts; and various work areas. Villages were occupied by multiple families
and were organized into village communities or tribelets with a recognized male or
female leader who counseled and directed decision‐making among the population.
Resource procurement was typically restricted to the territory controlled by each
tribelet. Intermarriage and exchange promoted social and economic interaction among
tribelets and between ethnic groups.
Salinan and Yokuts material culture included superbly made baskets, bow‐and‐arrow,
thrusting spear, flaked stone knives, mortar and pestle, nets for hunting and fishing,
mats, and the types of structures described for villages, above. Pictographs and
petroglyphs are characteristic of both groups and are art forms with religious, iconic,
and astrological uses (Hester 1978; Kroeber 1925; Latta 1999; Wallace 1978).
Spanish exploration and missionization of the interior of Alta California marks the
beginning of the historic period in this region. Missions San Antonio de Padua (1771)
and San Miguel Archangel (1797) were established in Salinan territory following early
Spanish exploration by Portolá and Crespi (1769), and Anza, Garcés and Díaz (1774)
and Anza and Font (1776). The Garcés expedition of 1776 probably was the first to
1804, Juan Ortega and Jose Pico expeditions in 1815, followed by periodic raids by
Spanish and Mexican forces against Tachi and other Yokuts to capture neophytes
escaped from missions and to recover horses stolen by Indians (Beck and Haase 1974;
Castillo 1978; Phillips 1973).
The arrival of Spanish explorers and subsequent settlement by Spanish, Mexicans, and
eventually Americans had a devastating effect on California native populations.
Introduced diseases alone may have reduced Indian populations by as much as 75
percent (Cook 1955, 1976a, 1976b). Alteration of the landscape by introduced grazing
animals including horses, sheep, cattle, and hogs resulted in direct competition between
Native Americans and Euro‐American agricultural interests. Native Americans were
assimilated into the agricultural industry, many as vaqueros and laborers, or they were
isolated on the margins of the new social order. Rancho San Bernardino was
established in 1841 and includes what would be the western terminus of the proposed
pipeline at San Ardo. No other Spanish or Mexican land grants are traversed by the
pipeline (Beck and Haase 1974).
Following accession of California to the United States, the California legislature created
Monterey County in 1850 and Fresno County in 1856. Lands became available for
homesteading under United States law and established Mexican land grants were
terminated or patents transferred. Santa Rosa Rancheria and Tule River Reservation
were created and many Tachi were relocated to these establishments as Americans
claimed the land. Among these claimants was the butchering company of Brandenstain
and Godchaux, and Bradley Sargent who controlled lands along the western portion of
the pipeline route. Sargent is the namesake for the creek and canyon traversed by the
pipeline route. The town of San Ardo was created when the Southern Pacific Railroad
expanded its line in 1886. Coalinga (formerly Coaling Station “A”) was founded on
another expansion of the Southern Pacific railway in 1887. The San Ardo oil field was
established in 1949. Oil development in the Coalinga vicinity began with the discovery
of the Coalinga oil field in 1887 followed by development on the Kettlemen Hills North
Dome in 1928, and establishment of the Guijarral, Jacalitos, Pleasant Valley oil fields in
the 1940’s (ENTRIX 2005b; Pacific Legacy 2006).
3.6.2.3 Background Research and Consultation
Research concerning the archaeology, ethnography, ethnohistory, and history of the
Project area was completed by ENTRIX (2004; 2005b). Initial consultation with the
and some Native American Contacts identified by the NAHC were notified in 2005
(ENTRIX 2005b). More recently, URS (2006) has corresponded with the NAHC and
with the identified Native American Contacts in Fresno and Monterey Counties.
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM RECORDS SEARCH
Results of records searches at the Northwest Information Center (for Monterey County)
and the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (for Fresno County) of the
California Historical Resources Information System are reported by ENTRIX (2004) and
reaffirmed in a subsequent report by ENTRIX (2005b). Information was requested for
known and recorded archaeological and historic sites, inventory and excavation reports,
properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Historic Property Data
File, the California Historical Landmarks list, the California Register, the California
Inventory of Historic Resources, and the California Points of Historical Interest
recorded within a 500‐foot radius of proposed Project facilities.
According to the ENTRIX report (2004) 18 cultural resource surveys had been
completed at various locations within a 500‐foot radius along some segments of the
proposed pipeline right‐of‐way before 2004. This included an archaeological survey
along an earlier proposed right‐of‐way (Peak & Associates 1990, in ENTRIX 2004), some
portions of which are consistent with the current proposed Project description, and
some of which are not. Seven archaeological sites were recorded within 500 feet of the
proposed right‐of‐way: CA‐FRE‐2097, FRE‐2258H, FRE‐2259H, FRE‐2518, FRE‐5160;
CA‐MNT‐1172 and MNT‐1189H. These sites include prehistoric Native American and
historic era railroad and ranching sites. Four sites were estimated to fall within the
pipeline right‐of‐way, CA‐FRE‐2097, FRE‐2518, FRE‐5160 and CA‐MNT‐1172.
Following pedestrian archaeological surveys along the current Project right‐of‐way
completed in 2004 and 2005, ENTRIX (2005b) reported, “five cultural resources within
or immediately adjacent to the Project corridor and six sites within a 500‐foot radius”.
The sites identified as being within or immediately adjacent to the right‐of‐way are CA‐
FRE‐2092, FRE‐2257H, FRE‐2260H, FRE‐2518, and CA‐MNT‐1172 (ENTRIX 2005b, Table
3.1) although ENTRIX (2005b, page 5‐1) also indicates that material evidence of site CA‐
MNT‐1172 could not be found in the Project right‐of‐way.
The records search indicates that there are no properties listed in the National Register
of Historic Places, the Historic Property Data File, the California Historical Landmarks
California Points of Historical Interest recorded within a 500‐foot radius of any
proposed Project facilities.
In October 2006 URS sponsored a records search for a 3‐mile long San Andreas fault rift
reroute of the pipeline in the vicinity of mileposts (MP) 16 to MP 19 approximately ½‐
mile south of, and parallel to, the original proposed alignment. Information was
requested from the Northwest Information Center and the Southern San Joaquin
Information Center for an area of a half‐mile radius around the proposed reroute. Both
information centers responded that no cultural resource inventories had been
conducted in the area previously and no historic or prehistoric resources were known to
occur in the area (URS 2006c).
URS conducted another record search in December 2006 for the Parkfield Grade and
Warthan Creek alternatives. The records searches for the proposed Parkfield Grade and
Warthan Creek alternatives yielded no cultural resources sites within the construction
right‐of‐way of the proposed pipeline alignment (URS 2006d).
CONSULTATION
ENTRIX (2004, 2005b) documented consultation with the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) in 2003. The NAHC responded in letters dated September 25,
2003 and October 1, 2003 that no Native American cultural resources were known to the
NAHC to exist in the vicinity of the Project. ENTRIX sent letters on May 9, 2005 to the
two federally recognized tribes (Table Mountain Rancheria and Santa Rosa Rancheria)
listed in the NAHC Native American Contacts list provided to ENTRIX. As of
September 2005, according to the ENTRIX report, “only the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi
Yokuts Tribe has responded to the letter via telephone and formal letter responses. The
Tachi Yokut tribe has requested involvement in formal consultation proceedings and
cultural resources related issues” (ENTRIX 2005b:4‐1). Consultation with Native
Americans in direct response to this correspondence is not known to have occurred.
In response to a request by URS, the NAHC (2006) issued a letter dated June 14, 2006
indicating that, “(A) record search of the sacred land file has failed to indicate the
presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate Project area”. The
NAHC provided a list of Native American Contacts for Fresno and Monterey counties
and each of the 15 persons or groups on the list was sent a letter by URS. In its letter
URS described the San Ardo pipeline project and provided a map of the proposed
discovered sites as reported by ENTRIX (2004, 2005b); stated that two archaeological
sites located within or near the Project right‐of‐way could be avoided; and requested
that letter recipients with information regarding cultural resources associated with the
pipeline project contact URS. Subsequently, URS corresponded via telephone with the
Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association, the Santa Rosa Rancheria, and
representatives of the Salinan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and San Benito
Counties who sought to meet with URS, the Applicant, and others to discuss the
Project.
Meetings were held at various places along the proposed pipeline route on November
29, 2006, December 20, 2006, and February 2, 2007 with representatives of the Santa
Rosa Rancheria to discuss the proposed Project. A meeting was held on November 30,
2006 with a representative of the Salinan Nation Cultural Preservation Association, also
at a location along the pipeline route. At these meetings Native American
representatives indicated their concerns (i.e., that cultural resources could be
encountered during construction; that appropriate mitigation measures be stipulated in
this EIR to address unanticipated discovery of human remains and cultural resources;
that an education program be implemented to train construction personnel to
recognize, protect, and report any discovered cultural resources; and that provisions be
made for Native American and archaeological monitors to be present during
construction in archaeologically sensitive areas). No additional cultural resources have
been identified in the proposed Project right‐of‐way as a result of Native American
consultations.
3.6.2.4 Field Methods
Archaeological surveys along the proposed pipeline route are documented in various
reports. An initial study by Peak & Associates (1990, in ENTRIX 2004) examined a
proposed right‐of‐way that varies somewhat from the currently proposed right‐of‐way.
As a result, ENTRIX reviewed the study conducted by Peak & Associates, and then
completed an archaeological survey along the right‐of‐way as proposed in 2003
(ENTRIX 2004). A re‐route of the pipeline across the San Andreas Fault required
additional archaeological survey along the 3‐mile segment between MP 16 and MP 19.
This was completed in October 2006 and reported by URS (2006c). Two other
supplemental surveys were conducted by URS in October 2006. One survey was
conducted to cover the Parkfield Grade and Warthan Creek alternatives, while the other
was conducted to cover minor deviations in the alignment that extended outside of
3.6.2.5 Schedule and Personnel
ENTRIX conducted fieldwork between May 20 and June 8, 2004, with some additional
work done on February 9, 2005. ENTRIX personnel employed for the survey are listed
as Brett Rushing, M.A. (Principal Investigator), Alisa Reynolds M.A. (abt), Ian
Alexander, B.A., and Katherine Entriken, B.A. On October 11, 2006, URS archaeologist
Chris Lee conducted a pedestrian archaeological survey along the 3‐mile reroute of the
pipeline across the San Andreas Fault zone (URS 2006c). On October 16‐18, URS
archaeologists Lee and Matt Armstrong conducted a pedestrian archaeological survey
for minor pipeline deviations that fell outside the ENTRIX survey corridor (URS 2007).
On October 20, 2006, Armstrong conducted a pedestrian archaeological survey along
the Parkfield Grade and Warthan Creek alternatives (URS 2006d). All personnel are
reported to meet the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for archaeology.
3.6.2.6 Field Survey
Pedestrian archaeological survey was conducted by ENTRIX along the entire proposed
pipeline right‐of‐way as well as re‐routes that were considered in the process of
determining the proposed right‐of‐way (as of 2003). The survey corridor was 200 feet
wide along the right‐of‐way; 100 feet on either side of centerline. Approximately 8
percent of the right‐of‐way was not examined due to steep slopes and heavy brush that
prevented effective survey. Survey involved crew members walking parallel transects
spaced 30 to 60 feet apart, depending on ground conditions. All visible ground within
the right‐of‐way was inspected for cultural remains. Previously recorded sites were
revisited and site records for those sites were updated as appropriate. A single
previously unrecorded trash dump was found and recorded using California
Department of Parks and Recreation 523 forms. Three previously recorded sites
reported to be along the pipeline right‐of‐way could not be found by ENTRIX crews in
the right‐of‐way: CA‐FRE‐1172, FRE‐2256, and FRE‐2259H.
In May 2006, URS archaeologist Brian Hatoff reconnoitered the proposed right‐of‐way
to ascertain which recorded archaeological sites actually fall within the proposed right‐
of‐way or are immediately adjacent to it. An in‐field review of the ENTRIX findings
and the URS reconnaissance was made with Mr. Hatoff and Thomas L. Jackson, Ph.D.
of Pacific Legacy, Inc. to verify the location and nature of two archaeological sites (CA‐
FRE‐2092 and FRE‐2518) relative to the proposed pipeline.
On October 11, 2006, URS archaeologist Lee conducted a pedestrian archaeological
survey along the 3‐mile reroute of the pipeline across the San Andreas Fault zone (URS
2006c). A 100‐foot‐wide corridor was inspected. On October 16‐18, 2006, URS
archaeologists Lee and Armstrong conducted a pedestrian archaeological survey along
a series of route deviations that took the route outside of the 200‐foot‐wide survey
corridor originally covered by ENTRIX. For the most part, the new survey corridor was
limited to the proposed construction easement which ranges from 80 to 100 feet wide
along these route deviations (URS 2007). On October 20, 2006, Armstrong conducted a
pedestrian archaeological survey along the Parkfield Grade and Warthan Creek
alternatives. The Parkfield Grade and Warthan Creek alternatives are respectively 1.22
and 1.1 miles long. A 200‐foot‐wide survey corridor was employed for these two
alternatives (URS 2006d).
3.6.2.7 Field Survey Findings
ENTRIX (2005b) found five archaeological sites within a 100‐foot corridor along the
pipeline alignment. CA‐FRE‐2257H is the remains of a residential structure and corral.
Most of the remains associated with the site are located outside the right‐of‐way. CA‐
FRE‐2260H is the remains of the Tidewater Oil Pump Station which has been
completely dismantled, leaving a concrete foundation. Site ENT‐SA‐1 is a refuse dump
comprised of tin cans, ceramic fragments and bottle glass, some of which materials can
be dated to pre‐1930, and which appears to be a domestic refuse feature probably
associated with a nearby (but undiscovered) homestead. Site CA‐FRE‐2092 is a
prehistoric Native American site with bedrock milling features and associated cultural
deposit. CA‐FRE‐2518 is a prehistoric Native American site with bedrock milling
features, a cupule rock, chert flakes, and a flaked stone tool fragment.
In May 2006, Hatoff visited each of the reported site locations discussed by ENTRIX as
being within or immediately adjacent to the 100‐foot‐wide maximum construction
disturbance corridor. Hatoff concluded that only site CA‐FRE‐2092 would be in the
area of direct impact for the pipeline. However, site CA‐FRE‐2518 and a surface lithic
scatter [Locus A] (which is crossed by an actively‐used dirt road) were determined to be
sufficiently close to the proposed right‐of‐way that site protection measures were
warranted during construction. The other sites identified by ENTRIX along the pipeline
route were sufficiently removed from the right‐of‐way that they would not be affected
by the Project. URS reports that no evidence of cultural material was observed during
the October 2006 survey of the 3‐mile reroute across the San Andreas rift (URS 2006c).
2006 minor route deviation survey (URS 2007). URS reports that one isolated cultural
resource feature and a historic isolate were found during the October 2006 Parkfield
Grade and Warthan Creek alternatives survey. An isolated historic refuse scatter
(assigned temporary name “garbage scatter”) was located along the Parkfield Grade
alternative. The site contains a patinated ink bottle, scraps of metal that appear to have
come from cans, a “New Perfection No. 2” stove that may date to the 1920s, and a
Sanford’s Ink bottle dating to ca. 1900‐1920. The materials appear to have been pushed
down from level ground above the gully. The isolate found within the Warthan Creek
alternative is a wooden slab containing a round hole; the age and purpose of this item
are unknown. Isolated trash scatters without association to other features and
individual isolates are typically not regarded as significant cultural resources.
3.6.2.8 Archaeological Test Excavations
In July 2004 ENTRIX conducted archaeological test excavations at sites CA‐FRE‐2092
and FRE‐2518. The stated purpose of the subsurface testing program was to, “identify
any potentially significant cultural materials present in the Project area” (ENTRIX
2005a, page 2‐1). Fifteen “shovel test pits” were excavated at FRE‐2092 and eight at
FRE‐2518. Shovel test pits were at least 20 centimeters (cm; 8 inches) in diameter, with
soils removed in 10‐cm (4 inch) levels, typically to 30 to 40 cm below surface. Excavated
soils were screened through ¼‐inch mesh hardware cloth to recover artifacts. No
cultural material was collected from the shovel testing and all units were backfilled
upon completion.
At CA‐FRE‐2092 ENTRIX found primarily chert flakes and some core fragments, mostly
in the vicinity of the bedrock milling feature. Artifacts were typically found in the
upper 20 cm (8 inches) of the soil column. A total of 43 artifacts were found, made on
both Monterey and Franciscan chert. Excavations at FRE‐2518 produced only two chert
flakes from one of the shovel test pits.
ENTRIX (2005a, page 4‐1) concludes that site CA‐FRE‐2518, “does not contain a
significant subsurface component”, but notes the presence of, “a large surface scatter of
lithic artifacts is present, as is a partially buried cupule rock.” In their 2005b report
(page 6‐2) ENTRIX, “found that the site does not contain a substantial subsurface
component, and does not require further evaluation to support a finding of no
significance.” At FRE‐2092 ENTRIX (2005a, page 4‐2) notes that artifacts are present in
an intact subsurface deposit to depths up to 35 cm. ENTRIX (2005b, page 6‐2)
therefore meets criterion D (36 CFR 60.4) for listing in the NRHP” [National Register of
Historic Places]. ENTRIX does not evaluate the historical significance of either site with
reference to other California Register or National Register eligibility criteria.
3.6.2.9 Human Remains
Human remains are known to occur in Native American archaeological contexts in the
Project vicinity. There are no known occurrences of human remains within the
proposed Project right‐of‐way and none were detected during test excavations at CA‐
FRE‐2092 and FRE‐2518.
3.6.3 Regulatory Setting
CEQA provides for the consideration of historic resources which are defined in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5(a). Significant historic resources include (1) those on or
eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources; (2) those on or
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places; (3) those locally identified
in a local register of historical resources; and (4) resources a lead agency finds to be
historically significant based on substantial evidence. A project with an effect that may
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is
considered to have a significant adverse impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5[4][b]). A substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical
resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the resource would
be materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[4][b][1]).
Historical resources may be listed in the California Register if they meet the eligibility
criteria for listing in the California Register as defined at PRC 5024.1, Title 14 CCR
Section 4850.3. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) (3), “Generally, a
resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the
resource has integrity and meets at least one of the criteria for listing in the California
Register of Historic Resources”.
CEQA Guidelines at 15064.5(d) and (e) make provision for the discovery and
disposition of human remains and reference other applicable state law:
(d) When an initial study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood, of
Native American human remains within the project, a lead agency shall work
Heritage Commission as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98.
The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with
appropriate dignity, the human remains and any items associated with
Native American burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified
by the Native American Heritage Commission. Action implementing such an
agreement is exempt from:
(1) The general prohibition on disinterring, disturbing, or removing
human remains from any location other than a dedicated cemetery
(Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5).
(2) The requirements of CEQA and the Coastal Act.
(e) In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains
in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps should be
taken:
(1) There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
(A) The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and
(B) If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
• The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours.
• The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify
the person or persons it believes to be the most likely
descended from the deceased Native American.
• The most likely descendent may make recommendations to
the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation
work, for means of treating or disposing of, with
appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated
grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section
5097.98, or
(2) Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance (see Public Resources Code 5097.98(e), as amended).
(A) The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site (see Public Resources Code 5097.98(e), as amended).
(B) The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation; or
(C) The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
CEQA Guidelines at 15064.5(f) make provision for the discovery and disposition of
accidental discovery of other historical or archaeological resources:
(f) As part of the objectives, criteria, and procedures required by Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code, a lead agency should make provisions for historical or unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during construction. These provisions should include an immediate evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an historical or unique archaeological resource, contingency funding and a time allotment sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation should be available. Work could continue on other parts of the building site while historical or unique archaeological resource mitigation takes place.
3.6.4 Standards of Significance, Environmental Consequences, and
Mitigation Measures
3.6.4.1 Standards of Significance
A basis for defining the significance of historical resources under CEQA is found at
of Historical Resources is established, “to identify the state’s historical resources and
indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from
substantial adverse change”. Historical resources may be listed in the California
Register if they meet the eligibility criteria for listing in the California Register as
defined at PRC 5024.1, Title 14 CCR Section 4850.3.
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) (3), “Generally, a resource shall be
considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the resource has integrity
and meets at least one of the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historic
Resources as follows”:
(1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California’s history or the United States; or
(2) It is associated with lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or
(3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or
(4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Integrity, as defined for the California Register, is “the authenticity of an historical
resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed
during the resource’s period of significance” (California Office of Historic Preservation
2006:2). This means that a historic resource must keep enough of its historic character
or appearance to be recognizable as historic. In addition, that historic character must
reflect the era in which the resource was historically important.
Integrity is assessed in terms of retention of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association. For instance, if a resource has never been
moved from its original location, then it maintains its integrity of location. To maintain
integrity, a resource must possess at least some of the integrity aspects. The more
integrity aspects that a resource retains, the better its integrity is. A historic resource
can have lost sufficient integrity to be ineligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places and still be eligible on a California Register level. In fact, a resource may
has the potential to yield significant scientific or historic information or specific data
(California Office of Historic Preservation 2006:2).
3.6.4.2 Construction Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 3.6-1: Disturbance of Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural
Resources: Resource Evaluated as Eligible for Listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)
The Project could result in the disturbance of and impacts to Native American archaeological sites CA‐FRE‐2092 and FRE‐2518. This would be a significant impact.
Prehistoric Native American archaeological site, CA‐FRE‐2092, is located within
the proposed pipeline right‐of‐way. Archaeological investigations at the site
indicate it is potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places for its scientific values. Using the criteria for listing in the CRHR the site
would be considered eligible for CRHR listing per CRHR eligibility criterion 4.
Construction of the pipeline through the archaeological site would result in
damage to or destruction of archaeological attributes of the site that make it
historically significant under CEQA. The implementation of certain construction
techniques and ongoing emergency plan protocols could reduce or eliminate the
potential for the Project to have impacts on archaeological site CA‐FRE‐2092.
Prehistoric Native American archaeological site, CA‐FRE‐2518 is adjacent the
proposed pipeline right‐of‐way. This site was evaluated by ENTRIX (2005b) as
not eligible for listing in the CRHR. However, upon re‐evaluation by the EIR
preparers with input from Native Americans and the Applicant’s consultant
(URS), CA‐FRE‐2518 is considered a significant historical resource under the
eligibility criteria for the CRHR. The presence of a small rock into which cupules
have been pecked indicates that, the site has the potential to be of ceremonial
significance to Native Americans. In some areas cupule rocks are associated with
rituals designed to affect the weather; are employed by women seeking to
become pregnant; are used for the preparation of medicine; or are associated
with demarcating territorial boundaries of Native tribelets. Lacking direct
historical documentation, it is not possible to know precisely the use of the
cupule rock at CA‐FRE‐2518, but its ritual association and consequent
significance to Native Americans is acknowledged. Although limited testing was
done at the site the potential to discover other, potentially significant
the site, described as a surface lithic scatter, is located outside the construction
right‐of‐way, but is traversed by a dirt road that is in current use by ranchers. It
is possible this road would also be used by construction vehicles. For these
reasons the site is regarded as potentially eligible for listing in the CRHR (D) in
that it has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory.
Construction activities encroaching on the archaeological site could result in
damage to or destruction of archaeological attributes of the site that make it
historically significant under CEQA. The implementation of certain protective
measures to limit disturbance and ongoing emergency plan protocols could
reduce or eliminate the potential for the Project to have impacts on
archaeological site CA‐FRE‐2518.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Significant
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1a: Archaeological Monitoring
CPL shall provide qualified cultural resources monitor(s) to monitor construction activities where cultural resource sites are known to occur, to train construction crews with regard to both known and potentially unknown cultural resources that could occur along the pipeline alignment, to supervise fencing and/or staking of known resources, to document compliance with avoidance procedures, and to implement cultural resources clearance procedures at all previously unidentified work areas to be impacted by construction activities. Monitors shall examine all potential work areas to ensure avoidance of cultural resource sites. Monitors will be provided with a County‐approved clearance checklist to be developed in consultation with the Counties prior to any ground disturbance.
All construction personnel shall be trained by the cultural resources monitor (see Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2a) regarding the potential for exposing cultural resources, including prehistoric and historic resources during construction, the locations of potentially sensitive areas, and protocols to treat unexpected discoveries. Training shall be implemented prior to the initiation of construction or ground‐disturbing activities. Training shall inform all construction personnel of the procedures to be followed upon the discovery of archaeological materials including Native American burials.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1b: Avoidance of Site CA‐FRE‐2092 through use of Specific Construction Techniques The pipeline shall be constructed in a manner that will avoid damaging the archaeological deposit identified as CA‐FRE‐2092. The pipeline shall either be installed beneath the cultural deposit at the site through implementation of horizontal directional drilling (HDD) or another equally effective construction technique or by avoidance of the resource by minor realignment of the pipeline centerline. The depth of the cultural deposit likely does not exceed 35 centimeters (14 inches). Thus, whatever technique is employed to avoid the cultural resource at this site, it shall avoid disturbance of the top 3 feet of soil at a minimum to provide a buffer between the resource and the construction activities. The cultural resources monitor shall document compliance with these measures.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1c: Protection and Avoidance of Sites CA‐FRE‐
2092 and FRE‐2518 from Construction
Activities using Physical Barriers
The pipeline shall be constructed in a manner that will avoid damaging Site FRE‐ 2518 which lies adjacent to the pipeline corridor and Site FRE‐2092 which lies within the pipeline right‐of‐way. This shall include the installation of barrier fencing or other physical barriers to prevent construction personnel and vehicles from coming onto either site during construction. Under the direction of the cultural resources monitor, fencing shall be installed at FRE‐2518 along the northeast margin of the construction right‐of‐way for a distance beginning 100 feet before the boundary of Locus B as the site is mapped on archaeological site record forms in ENTRIX (2005b) and extending 100 feet beyond the southwest corner of Locus A of the site. At site FRE‐2092, fencing shall be installed (under the direction of the cultural resources monitor) around the entire perimeter of the site, including a buffer of at least 25 feet beyond the boundary of the site as it is mapped on archaeological site record forms in ENTRIX (2005b). Construction supervisors and other responsible persons shall be advised by the cultural resources monitor that the site constitutes an “environmentally sensitive area” that is off‐limits and appropriate signage shall be placed marking the site area off limits. Signage should not, however, identify the resource as an archaeological site. During construction, the area shall be monitored by a professional archaeologist as per Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1a and by a representative of the Salinan or Tachi Yokuts tribe to ensure that (1) barrier fencing is maintained, (2) vehicles and workers do in fact remain off the site, and (3) violations of the exclusion area are reported and infractions are policed in accordance with
treatment of other environmental violations. Following completion of construction of the pipeline, the barrier fencing or other exclusion materials shall be removed from the site perimeter without damaging the site. Any construction or post‐construction use of the road adjacent to Site FRE‐2518 in support of the pipeline shall be confined to the road itself where it traverses Locus A. The road shall be used “as is” and shall not be modified by grading or expanded in width.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐1d: Protection of Sites CA‐FRE‐2092 and FRE‐ 2518 during Possible Pipeline Emergencies Emergency plans addressing pipeline leaks, ruptures, or other failures that could require accessing the pipeline in the vicinity of sites CA‐FRE‐2092 or FRE‐2518 to make repairs or to remediate any oil spills shall stipulate that the archaeological site area will be avoided in all cases except in the event of a failure of the pipeline beneath the site itself. Should the pipeline beneath the site fail, Chevron shall implement procedures defined in its emergency response plan to avoid or minimizes impacts to the archaeological site by, to the extent possible, making repairs to the pipe without excavating within the archaeological site from the ground surface down to the pipeline.
Level of Significance After Mitigation: Less than Significant
Impact 3.6-2: Disturbance of Unanticipated Subsurface Archaeological, Historic, or Cultural Resources or Human Remains During Construction
There is a possibility that significant archaeological deposits or human remains could be discovered buried beneath the ground surface during trench excavation or other construction‐ related activities.
The Project has the potential to encounter buried or otherwise undiscovered
cultural resources and human remains during ground‐disturbing activities such
as trenching and grading. The potential to encounter subsurface archaeological,
historic or cultural resources or human remains is considered slight, but possible.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2a: Cultural Resources Awareness Training
CPL’s cultural resources monitor shall train field personnel in identification and resource protection procedures, prior to any construction‐related disturbance. The training materials shall be prepared by a professional archaeologist with contributions by Salinan and/or Tachi Yokuts culturally affiliated with the Project area and shall provide a review of the natural and cultural history of the Project corridor, archaeological sensitivity, most likely locations of buried cultural materials, legal requirements for historic preservation, and specific instructions on how to address such discoveries and what immediate actions to take in the event that materials are, in fact, unearthed. Instructional materials or artifacts are to be kept on‐site and under direction of identified specific individuals.
Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2b: Prepare and Implement a Construction
Monitoring and Unanticipated Discovery
Plan
During construction it is possible that previously unknown archaeological or other cultural resources or human remains could be discovered. Prior to construction, the Applicant will prepare a ‘Construction Monitoring and Unanticipated Cultural Resources Discovery Plan’ to be implemented if an unanticipated discovery is made. At a minimum, the plan shall detail the following elements:
• Worker and supervisor training in the identification of cultural remains that could be found along the pipeline corridor, as per Mitigation Measure 3.6‐2a;
• Worker and Supervisor response procedures to be followed in the event of an unanticipated discovery, including appropriate points of contact for professionals qualified to make decisions regarding the potential significance of any find;
• Identification of persons authorized to stop or redirect work that could affect the discovery and their on‐call contact information;
• Provide for monitoring of construction activities in archaeologically sensitive areas;
• Stipulate a minimum radius around any discovery within which construction work will be halted until the significance of the resource has