CalVTP Implementation Training

CalVTP Implementation TrainingHow to Use the CalVTP Program EIR for CEQA Streamlining

Presented by:

Board of Forestry and Fire ProtectionAscent Environmental, Inc.

Zoom Webinar – Technical Tips

Participants’ audio, video, hand raising, and chat are automatically off.Participants control the layout of the slides and the panelists video. If something is in the way, move it or resize it. The slide show may display best in full screen.Questions can be submitted in the Q&A box at any time. There will be breaks for Q&A between topics.

This webinar is being recorded and will be made available.2CalVTP Implementation Training

Instructors

Ascent Environmental, Principal

Curtis E. Alling, AICP

Ascent Environmental,Senior Project Manager

Heather Blair

Ascent Environmental,Senior Environmental Planner

Lily Bostrom

Ascent Environmental,Senior Biologist

Lara Rachowicz, PhD

3CalVTP Implementation Training

Board of Forestry and Fire Protection,

Executive Officer

Matt Dias

CalVTP Training Course Content

Part 1: Overview of the CalVTP Program EIR• Treatment types and activities• Treatable landscape• Eligible project proponents

Part 2: Preparing a CEQA Document Using the CalVTP Program EIR • CEQA Fundamentals – Program EIRs• Project-Specific Analysis• Project-Specific Analysis/Addendum• Focused ND, MND, EIR Using the CalVTP PEIR

Part 3: Decision Documentation and Approval Process• Decision Documentation and Approval Process • MMRP Implementation

Wrap Up: CalVTP Training Resources4CalVTP Implementation Training

Part 1Overview of the CalVTP Program EIR

CalVTP Program EIR - Overview

Board of Forestry and Fire Protection certified the CalVTP Program EIR in December 2019

Designed to help public agencies expedite implementation of treatments consistent with the CalVTP to reduce wildfire risks and avoid or diminish the harmful effects of wildfire on the people, property, and natural resources of California


CalVTP Objectives

Serve as the vegetation management component of the state’s strategy to reduce risks to life, property, and natural resources, consistent with state priorities• California’s Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan• California’s 2018 Strategic Fire Plan• $1 billion in 2021/2022 proposed budget for wildfire and forest resilience

Substantially increase the pace and scale of vegetation treatments, consistent with the Shared Stewardship Agreement and Executive Order B-52-18;Improve resiliency in fire-adapted habitats by safely mimicking the effects of a natural fire regime.


Frequently Used Acronyms

CalVTP – California Vegetation Treatment ProgramPEIR – Program Environmental Impact ReportSPR – Standard Project Requirement• e.g., Administrative SPRs: SPR-AD-7

MM – Mitigation Measure MMRP – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramPSA – Project-Specific AnalysisSRA – State Responsibility AreaLRA – Local Responsibility Area

CalVTP Implementation Training 8

CalVTP Program Area

Treatments would occur within the“Treatable Landscape” of the StateResponsibility Area

Defined as the portion of the SRA withvegetation conditions suitable for treatments

20.3 million acres total

Tree, shrub, grass fuel types

Treatable landscape viewer available online• https://bofdata.fire.ca.gov/projects-and-programs/calvtp/


CalVTP Program Description

Covered Treatment Types:Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) fuel reduction - focused in WUI-designated areas and generally consist of treatments to reduce fuel loads and slow or prevent the spread of fire between wildlands and structures, and vice versa; Fuel breaks - are strategically placed vegetation treatment areas that actively support fire-control activities; andEcological restoration projects - generally occur outside the WUI in areas that have departed from the natural fire regime as a result of fire exclusion, and would focus on restoring ecosystem processes, conditions, and resiliency.



Covered Treatment Activities:

Prescribed burning

Manual vegetation treatment

Mechanical vegetation treatment

Prescribed herbivory (targeted grazing)

Targeted ground application of herbicides



Environmentally Protective Standard Project Requirements (SPRs):

Environmentally protective requirements to avoid or minimize impacts and emphasize effective compliance with applicable laws and regulations

Incorporated into later vegetation treatments consistent the CalVTP as a standard part of treatment design and implementation

Formulated through interagency coordination with• California Department of Fish and Wildlife,• California Coastal Commission, • California Air Resources Board, and • State Water Resources Control Board

requires a CDP by the Coastal Commission or a local government with a certified LCP


CalVTP Program EIR – Designed for StreamliningResponsible Agencies

California Department of Fish and Wildlife

• Incidental Take Authorizations

• Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements

Regional Water Quality Control Boards

• Waste Discharge Requirements and Conditional Waivers

California Coastal Commission

• Coastal Development Permit


Activities/Areas Outside the Scope of the CalVTP PEIR

Activities within Federal Responsibility Area and Local Responsibility Area• SRA Treatable Landscape needs to be a substantial part of the project, but LRA or

FRA and potentially tribal land can be added

• An Addendum or Supplement to the CalVTP Program EIR can still streamline!

Implementation of defensible space programs and building code creation/enforcement

Removal of trees for commercial purposes (timber harvesting)

• Subject to Forest Practice Act


CalVTP Program EIR – Designed for Streamlining Project Proponents

CalVTP PEIR designed for use by state, regional, special district, and local agencies with land management or funding responsibilities.• “Project Proponent”: state or local public agency providing funding for vegetation

treatment or with land ownership and/or management, or other regulatory responsibilities in the treatable landscape

• Possible project proponents include

• Also applicable to projects on private land, if they receive state or local government grants for vegetation treatment

– CAL FIRE– Cities – Special Districts

– Counties– Water Agencies– Open Space Districts

– Universities– Conservancies– other public agencies…


Part 2

Preparing a CEQA DocumentUsing the CalVTP Program EIR

CEQA Fundamentals: Program EIRs

Program EIRs (CEQA Guidelines § 15168)

Program EIRs can be used for a series of actions characterized as one large project that are related geographically, as logical parts of a chain of actions, or individual activities that have similar environmental effects that can be mitigated in similar ways.Advantages:• Streamlining can be accomplished by finding later activities to be “within the scope.” If so, no

additional CEQA document need be prepared or circulated to the public.• Comprehensive consideration of cumulative impacts (CEQA Guidelines §15168(b)(2))• Within-the-scope finding is protected by substantial evidence standard.• Even if a later activity is not within the scope, the PEIR can be used to focus the subsequent or

supplemental CEQA document on new or substantially more severe significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines §§15162 and 15163).


Program EIRs: Use with Later Activities

How to determine whether it is “within the scope”?• Factual question Lead Agency determines based on substantial evidence• Considerations (CEQA Guidelines § 15168(c)(2)): geographic area, proposed activity

intensityAll feasible mitigation shall be incorporatedThe Lead Agency shall use a written checklist to document the “within-the-scope” evaluation (CEQA Guidelines §15168(c)(4))CEQA Guidelines §15168(c)(5) contemplates that “many later activities” could be “within the scope”

reinforced by Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and Wildlife (3rd Dist. 2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 214


Tailored Checklist for Later Activities

Tailored checklists (e.g., CalVTP PSA) are used to document coverage by a PEIR

For new impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts, a subsequent ND, MND, or EIR is required (CEQA Guidelines § 15162)

• An Addendum may be used to analyze treatment areas extending outside the SRA but with similar environmental conditions.


21

CEQA Flow Chart for CalVTP PSAs

CalVTP Implementation Training

Comparison of CEQA Documents

Within the Scope Findings (i.e., PSAs) = time and cost savings

22

Average Size/Length Public Review Requirements Overall Timeline

to CompleteStandard of

Review

EIR 300-1000+ 30-day review period for the NOP30-45 day review period for draft EIR 12-18 months Substantial

evidence

IS/NDIS/MND 70-120 pages 20-30 day review period for

proposed ND/MND 6-8 months Fair argument

PSAPSA/Addendum 30-80 pages None required 2-4 months Substantial

evidence


QUESTIONS?

Project-Specific Analysis

25

SPR AD-7 reporting requirements• Planned, approved, completed projects

Planned projects• GIS data that include project location

(as a point)• project size (typically acres)• treatment types and activities• contact information for a representative

of the project proponent

Purpose = provide info to the public

CalVTP Implementation Database


CalVTPImplementation

Database– Planned Projects


Project-Specific Analysis (PSA) – Project Description

Prepare Vegetation Treatment Project Information• Treatment types• Treatment activities• Acreage(s)• Fuel type(s)• Treatment maintenance

Describe equipment to be used, planned activity duration, other info to provide evidence for within the scope considerations May use other formats


ExampleProject-Specific Analysis (PSA)

Example: Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Vegetation Treatment Project PSAProject Proponent: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District


Bear Creek Redwoods Vegetation Treatment Project

214 acres proposed for initial treatment, all within the CalVTP treatable landscapeCalVTP treatment type proposed: ecological restorationCalVTP treatment activities proposed: manual and mechanical treatment Treatment maintenance:• Retreatment every 5 to 10 years

• Manual and mechanical treatment methods


QUESTIONS?

PSA Preparation: Environmental Checklist

31

Impact in the PEIR Project-Specific Checklist

Environmental ImpactCovered in the PEIR

Identify Impact

Significance in the PEIR

Identify Location of Impact Analysis

in the PEIR

Does the Impact Apply to the Treatment

Project?

List SPRs Applicable to the Treatment

Project

List MMs Applicable to the Treatment

Project

Identify Impact Significance for

Treatment Project

Would This Be a Substantially More Severe

Significant Impact than Identified in the PEIR?

Is this Impact Within the

Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:

Impact AES-1: Result in Short-Term, Substantial Degradation of a Scenic Vista or Visual Character or Quality of Public Views, or Damage to Scenic Resources in a State Scenic Highway from Treatment Activities

LTS Impact AES-1,pages

3.2-16 – 3.2-19

Yes AES-2 NA LTS No Yes

Impact AES-2: Result in Long-Term, Substantial Degradation of a Scenic Vista or Visual Character or Quality of Public Views, or Damage to Scenic Resources in a State Scenic Highway from Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction, Ecological Restoration, or Shaded Fuel Break Treatment Types

LTS Impact AES-2,pages

3.2-20 – 3.2-25

Yes AES-1AES-3

NA LTS No Yes

Impact AES-3: Result in Long-Term Substantial Degradation of a Scenic Vista or Visual Character or Quality of Public Views, or Damage to Scenic Resources in a State Scenic Highway from the Nonshaded Fuel Break Treatment Type

SU Impact AES-3,pages

3.2-25 – 3.2-27

No — — — — —

1NA: not applicable; there are no SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact. CalVTP Implementation Training

PSA Preparation: Impact Discussion

Impact discussions follow the Environmental ChecklistImpact determinations required by CEQA• Need to determine whether criteria for preparation of subsequent CEQA docs apply

(CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a))– No new or substantially more severe significant effects

• Must be supported by substantial evidence:– Include analytical discussions for conclusions

– Identify portions of the PEIR relied upon

– Attach project-specific site surveys or other information relied upon to the PSA

– Include all references


PSA Preparation: Impact Discussion Continued

Impact discussions are required for each CalVTP impactFor CalVTP impacts that are applicable to your project, the discussion should include:• Description of the impact of the proposed treatment project

• Summary of the impact in the CalVTP PEIR

• Evidence the project impact is addressed by the PEIR

• CalVTP SPRs and MMs applicable to the proposed project– Identify those that apply but are not feasible (explain infeasibility)

– Explain how SPRs and MMs will be tailored to the treatment project, as applicable

• Conclusion regarding consistency with the PEIR


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Air Quality Impact AQ-1 Discussion

Impact AQ-1: Generate emissions of air pollutants and precursors during treatment activities that would exceed CAAQS or NAAQS

• Description of the impact of the proposed treatment project:

– “Use of vehicles and equipment during vegetation treatments would result in emissions of criteria pollutants that could exceed CAAQS or NAAQS thresholds.”




• Summary of the impact in the CalVTP PEIR:

– “The potential for emissions of criteria pollutants to exceed CAAQS or NAAQS thresholds was examined in the PEIR.”

– The checklist identifies the PEIR page numbers where this impact is analyzed




• Evidence the project impact is addressed by the PEIR:

– “Emissions of criteria air pollutants as a result of vehicle and equipment use under the proposed project would be potentially significant and are within the scope of the PEIR because the size of crews, the types of equipment, and the duration of equipment use would be consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR.”

– Crew size, equipment type, duration of equipment use is presented in the project description

– These are the factors considered by the lead agency in making its within the scope determination per CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2))




• CalVTP SPRs and MMs applicable to the proposed project:

– “SPRs applicable to the proposed project are AQ-1 and AQ-4”

– “CalVTP Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would be infeasible for the project proponent to implement because the treatments would be implemented by a special district with variable funding. It would be cost prohibitive to use equipment meeting the latest efficiency standards, including meeting the U.S. EPA’s Tier 4 emission standards, using renewable diesel fuel, using electric- and gasoline-powered equipment, and using equipment with Best Available Control Technology. In addition, carpooling may not be feasible or recommended during an active COVID-19 outbreak”




• Conclusion regarding consistency with the PEIR:

– “Therefore, this impact would remain unavoidable and potentially significant for the same reasons explained in the PEIR, but for the reasons explained above, would not constitute a substantially more severe significant impact”

– Significant and unavoidable in both the CalVTP Program EIR and PSA

– Modeling emissions can be used to show a less severe project impact


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Completed Checklist Impact AQ-1

39



Identify Impact


Identify Locationof Impact Analysis

in the PEIR

Does the Impact Apply to the Treatment Project?


Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:

Impact AQ-1: Generate Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors During Treatment Activities that would exceed CAAQS or NAAQS

SU Impact AQ-1,pages

3.4-26 – 3.4-32Appendix AQ-1

Yes AQ-1AQ-4

AQ-1 SU No Yes

1NA: not applicable; there are no SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact.


Air Quality - Other Considerations

Additional requirements for prescribed burning (SPR AQ-2, AQ-3, AQ-6)

• Prepare and submit a Smoke Management Plan to Air District (example SMP provided in Appendix PD-2 to the CalVTP PEIR)

• Create a Burn Plan

• Follow CAL FIRE safety procedures, implement an approved Incident Action Plan

• Coordinate with the applicable air district to determine specific requirements


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Archaeological, Historical, and Tribal Cultural Resources Section

Cultural SPRs require action to complete the PSA• SPR CUL-1: Conduct cultural records search

• SPR CUL-2: Contact NAHC for tribal contact list and Sacred Lands File search– Notify tribes in the counties where the treatment is located

– This is *NOT* AB 52 consultation

Additional Cultural SPRs required for ground disturbing treatments and Rx burning:• SPR CUL-3: Pre-field research

• SPR CUL-4: Archaeological surveys

• SPR CUL-8: Cultural resource training


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Cultural Resources Impact CUL-2 Discussion

Impact CUL-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of unique archaeological resources or subsurface historical resources


– “Vegetation treatment activities would include mechanical treatments that use heavy equipment that could result in ground disturbance as vegetation is removed; this could result in damage to known or unknown archaeological resources if present within a treatment area”





– “The potential for these treatment activities to result in disturbance to, damage to, or destruction of archaeological resources was examined in the PEIR”






– “This impact is within the scope of the PEIR, because the treatment activities and the intensity of ground disturbance that would occur under the proposed project are consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR”

– Treatment activities and treatment intensity are presented in the project description

– These are the factors considered by the lead agency in making its within the scope determination per CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2))




• CalVTP SPRs and MMs applicable to the proposed project

– “SPRs applicable to this impact are CUL-5 through CUL-8”

– “Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would also apply to this treatment to protect any inadvertent discoveries of archaeological resources”





– “This impact of the proposed project is consistent with the PEIR and would not constitute a substantially more severe significant impact than what was covered in the PEIR”

– The CalVTP conclusion is SU and the project’s impact is LTSM


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Completed Checklist Impact CUL-2

47



Identify Impact



in the PEIR



Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:

Impact CUL-2: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change inthe Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources or Subsurface Historical Resources

SU Impact CUL-2,pages

3.5-15 – 3.5-16

Yes CUL-5CUL-6CUL-7CUL-8

CUL-2 LTSM No Yes



Cultural Resources – Other Considerations

Grouse Ridge Vegetation Treatment Project PSA/Addendum

• Received a tribal response (per SPR CUL-2)

• As a result, SPR CUL-6 (Treatment of Tribal Cultural Resources) expanded to include project-specific implementation guidance

– Specific measures developed in consultation with the tribe to protect TCRs

– Project-specific implementation guidance is included in the project’s MMRP


QUESTIONS?

Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact HAZ-3

Impact HAZ-3: Expose the Public or Environment to Significant Hazards from Disturbance to Known Hazardous Materials Sites

• CalVTP concluded less than significant with mitigation (Mitigation Measure HAZ-3)

– Coordinate with landowner regarding known hazardous waste sites

– Database search and review of Cortese List

– Known sites marked, no soil disturbing treatments or prescribed burning within 100 feet

• Historic hazardous waste site was known to Midpen, none on Cortese List. Per MM HAZ-3, Midpen would flag and avoid.





– “Vegetation treatments would include soil disturbance through mechanical treatment activities, which could expose workers or the environment to hazardous materials if a contaminated site is present within a treatment area”





– “The potential for treatment activities to encounter contamination that could expose workers or the environment to hazardous materials was examined in the PEIR. This impact was identified as potentially significant in the PEIR because of the large geographic extent of the treatable landscape, hazardous materials sites could be present within treatment sites, and soil disturbance in those areas could expose people or the environment to hazards”



Impact HAZ-3: Expose the Public or Environment to Significant Hazards from Disturbance to Known Hazardous Materials Sites• Evidence the project impact is addressed by the PEIR:

– “As directed by Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, a database search and review of the Cortese List for hazardous materials sites within the Preserve have been conducted. There are no active Cortese List hazardous materials sites within or adjacent to the Preserve”

– “…a historic-era dump site/landfill is located in the northeastern portion of the Preserve, adjacent to the former Alma College “village.” Concentrations of lead, zinc, and copper were found in excess of hazardous waste toxicity criteria, but due to the use of the site as open space, removal was not recommended (Geocon Consultants 2019; Albion Environmental 2019). The dump site is located in close proximity to an area of proposed habitat improvement treatments and an area of proposed SOD treatments. Consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, the landfill area will be marked/flagged, and no soil-disturbing treatment activities will occur within 100 feet of the site boundaries”





– Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 only






– LTSM for both the CalVTP Program EIR and PSA


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Completed Checklist Impact HAZ-3

56



Identify Impact



in the PEIR



Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:

Impact HAZ-3: Expose the Public or Environment to Significant Hazards from Disturbance to Known Hazardous Material Sites

PS Impact HAZ-3,pages

3.10-18 – 3.10-19

Yes NA HAZ-3 LTSM No Yes



Hazards and Hazardous Materials – Other Considerations

Specific herbicides were analyzed in the CalVTP PEIR • 11 different herbicides:

– Borax – Imazapyr – Sulfometuron Methyl– Clopyralid – Triclopyr – Indaziflam– Glyphosate – Cleantraxx – Nonylphenol 9 Ethoxylates– Hexazinone – Velpar

Use of those specific compounds are covered by the PEIR and analyzed in CalVTP Risk Assessment (see Appendices HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 in PEIR Volume 2)SPRs apply to herbicide useIf other herbicides are proposed, additional CEQA and compound-specific risk assessment may be required


5 MINUTESBREAK

Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Hydrology/Water Quality Impact HYD-2

Impact HYD-2: Violate Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements, Substantially Degrade Surface or Groundwater Quality, or Conflict with or Obstruct the Implementation of a Water Quality Control Plan Through Manual and Mechanical Treatment Activities


– “Vegetation treatments would include manual and mechanical treatment activities. These treatment activities would disturb soils and require the use of fuels, which have the potential to enter waterways and degrade water quality ”





– “The potential for mechanical and manual treatment activities to violate water quality regulations or degrade water quality was examined in the PEIR”





– “This impact is within the scope of the PEIR because the types and locations of treatment activities and use of heavy equipment and hand-held tools to remove vegetation are consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR”





– “SPRs applicable to this treatment are HYD-1, HYD-2, HYD-4, HYD-6, GEO-1 through GEO-4, GEO-7, GEO-8, and HAZ-1”







Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Completed Checklist Impact HYD-2

64



Identify Impact



in the PEIR


Project?


Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project: Completed Checklist Impact HYD-2

Impact HYD-2: Violate Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements, Substantially Degrade Surface or Ground Water Quality, or Conflict with or Obstruct the Implementation of a Water Quality Control Plan Through the Implementation of Manual or Mechanical Treatment Activities

LTS Impact HYD-2,pages

3.11-27 – 3.11-29

Yes HYD-1HYD-2HYD-4HYD-6GEO-1 GEO-2GEO-3GEO-4 GEO-7GEO-8HAZ-1

NA LTS No Yes



Other Considerations for Hydrology and Water Quality

SPR HYD-1: Comply with Water Quality Regulations • Project proponents must conduct proposed vegetation treatments in conformance with

appropriate RWQCB timber, vegetation and land disturbance related Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) and/or related Conditional Waivers of Waste Discharge Requirements (Waivers), and appropriate Basin Plan Prohibitions. Where these regulatory requirements differ, the most restrictive apply

• The current applicable WDRs and Waivers for timber and vegetation management activities are included in Appendix HYD-1 to the CalVTP PEIR

• Update: SWRCB Proposed General Order– General waste discharge requirements for vegetation treatment activities under the CalVTP

– Aimed at streamlining permitting requirements


66

Biological Resources – OverviewData Collection and Mitigation Strategy

Data Review & Recon Survey

SPR BIO-1

If treatment in suitable habitatFocused or Protocol Surveys

SPRs, Mitigation Measures

If species, resources present Avoid Loss, Maintain Habitat Function Or Compensate



67

Project-Specific Data Review• CalVTP PEIR ecoregion tables

• Databases, literature review

Reconnaissance Survey• Assess habitat suitability for special-

status species

• Identify sensitive resources

Create special-status species tableAvoid suitable habitat/resources or conduct additional surveys

SPR BIO-1: Data Review and Reconnaissance Survey


SPR Bio-1



If species, resources presentAvoid Loss, Maintain Habitat

Function Or Compensate



68

Plants and wildlife• Special-status plants

(SPR BIO-7)• Special-status wildlife and nursery sites

(SPR BIO-10)• Common nesting birds

(SPR BIO-12)

Sensitive resources• Sensitive natural communities

(SPR BIO-3)• Identify ESHA in Coastal Zone

(SPR BIO-8)• Delineate wetlands

(MM BIO-4)

Focused or Protocol-Level SurveysData Review & Recon Survey

SPR Bio-1







69

Avoid loss of sensitive speciesand resources (SPRs, MitigationMeasures)• Physical or seasonal avoidance

• Agency consultation

• Provide documentation forcertain exceptions– If treatment would benefit species overall

but individuals may be affected

– If it is infeasible to avoid loss of commonbird nests (not including raptors)

Avoid Loss, Maintain Habitat Function, or Compensate


SPR Bio-1







70

Maintain habitat function (SPRs,Mitigation Measures)• Retain habitat features (e.g., high canopy

closure, tree snags, coarse woody debris),replicate the natural fire regime of community

• Determine if habitat function will remain forlisted or fully protected species

• Agency consultation (listed/fully protected species)• Provide documentation for certain exceptions

– If treatment would benefit sensitive habitats overallbut some loss may occur

Compensation, if significant effects remain(Mitigation Measures)

Avoid Loss, Maintain Habitat Function, or Compensate


SPR Bio-1







CDFW Contactsfor CalVTP

Consultation


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Biological Resources Impact BIO-1 Discussion

Impact BIO-1: Substantially Affect Special-Status Plant Species Either Directly orThrough Habitat Modifications• Data review and reconnaissance survey (SPR BIO-1)

– Central California Coast ecoregion

– Special-status plant table

• Description of the impact of the proposedtreatment project:– “Initial vegetation treatments and maintenance

treatments could result in direct or indirect adverseeffects on the 23 special-status plant species withsuitable habitat in treatment areas.”



Impact BIO-1: Substantially Affect Special-Status Plant Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications


– “The potential for treatment activities, including maintenance treatments, to result in adverse effects on special-status plants was examined in the PEIR.”






– “This impact on special-status plants is within the scope of the PEIR because the affected special-status plant species were covered in the PEIR, and the treatment activities and intensity of disturbance as a result of implementing treatment activities are consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR.”

– Treatment activities and intensity of disturbance are presented in the project description



Impact BIO-1: Substantially Affect Special-Status Plant Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications• CalVTP SPRs and MMs applicable to the proposed project

– “SPRs applicable to this impact are BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-6, BIO-9, BIO-10, GEO-1, GEO-3, GEO-4, GEO-5, GEO-7, and HYD-4.”

– “Per Mitigation Measures BIO-1a and BIO-1b, if special-status plants are identified during protocol-level surveys, a no-disturbance buffer of at least 50 feet would be established around the area occupied by the species within which treatment would not occur unless Midpen determines that the species would benefit from treatment in the occupied habitat area.”

– Midpen determined that Hickman’s popcornflower would benefit from treatment and therefore, compensatory mitigation would not be required





– “This impact of the proposed project is consistent with the PEIR and would not constitute a substantially more severe significant impact than what was covered in the PEIR.”


Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Biological Resources Impact BIO-1 Checklist

77



Identify Impact



in the PEIR


Project?


Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:


LTSM Impact BIO-1,pages

3.6-131 – 3.6-138

Yes BIO-1BIO-2BIO-6BIO-7BIO-9GEO-1GEO-3GEO-4GEO-5GEO-7HYD-4

BIO-1aBIO-1b

LTSM No Yes

1NA: not applicable; there are no SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact. None: there are SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact, but none are applicable to the treatment project.



Impact BIO-2: Substantially Affect Special-Status Wildlife Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications• Data review and reconnaissance survey (SPR BIO-1)

– Central California Coast ecoregion

– Special-status wildlife table

• Description of the impact of the proposed treatment project:– “Initial vegetation treatments and maintenance treatments could result in direct or indirect

adverse effects on special-status wildlife species with suitable habitat within a treatment area.”

– Impact discussion subdivided by species or species groups (e.g., foothill yellow-legged frog, special-status birds, special-status bats, mountain lion)



Impact BIO-2: Substantially Affect Special-Status Wildlife Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications


– “The potential for treatment activities, includingmaintenance treatments, to result in adverse effectson special-status wildlife was examined in the PEIR.”

– The checklist identifies the PEIR page numberswhere this impact is analyzed

79

PEIR Life History Categories Tree or Cavity Nesting Shrub Nesting Ground Nesting Burrowing or Denning Insects and Other Terrestrial

Invertebrates Bats Ungulates Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates Amphibians and Reptiles





– “This impact on special-status wildlife is within the scope of the PEIR because the affected special-status wildlife species were analyzed in the PEIR, and the proposed treatment activities and intensity of disturbance as a result of implementing vegetation treatments are consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR.”

– Treatment activities and intensity of disturbance are presented in the project description




• CalVTP SPRs and MMs applicable to the proposed project

– “SPRs applicable to this impact are BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-9, BIO-10, GEO-1, and HYD-4.”

– Mitigation Measures BIO-2a and BIO-2b: If species are observed during surveys, avoid mortality, injury and disturbance of individuals and maintain habitat function (e.g., no-disturbance buffers, monitoring, consultation with agencies)

– Pursuant to Mitigation Measure BIO-2a: “Midpen determined that implementation of initial and maintenance treatments would maintain habitat function for mountain lion and contacted CDFW to seek technical input on this determination.”





– “This impact of the proposed project is consistent with the PEIR and would not constitute a substantially more severe significant impact than what was covered in the PEIR.”




Identify Impact



in the PEIR


Project?


Project1


Project1


Treatment Project




Scope of the PEIR?

Would the project:


LTSM(all wildlife

species except bumble bees)

SU(bumble bees)

Impact BIO-2,pages

3.6-138 – 3.6-184

Yes BIO-1BIO-2BIO-9

BIO-10GEO-1HYD-4

BIO-2aBIO-2b

LTSM No Yes

1NA: not applicable; there are no SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact. None: there are SPRs and/or MMs identified in the PEIR for this impact, but none are applicable to the treatment project.

Bear Creek Redwoods Example PSA:Biological Resources Impact BIO-2 Checklist


QUESTIONS?

Project-Specific Analysis/Addendum to the CalVTP PEIR

PSA/Addendum

An addendum to an EIR is appropriate when:• a project or circumstances have changed since an EIR was certified, and• there are no new or substantially more severe significant environmental

impacts (CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, and 15168).

Changed treatment project conditions warranting preparation of an addendum:• portions of a treatment area extend outside the CalVTP treatable landscape

(e.g., into Local Responsibility Area),• use of a new herbicide not considered in the PEIR,• Others?


PSA/Addendum

The schedule for preparing a PSA/addendum is the same as a PSANo public review required (like PSA)Checklist is the same as an PSA (same CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 considerations)Standard of review is the same (substantial evidence)Additional approval language is included for addendums in the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and NOD


Grouse Ridge Example PSA/Addendum

Grouse Ridge Research Forest

• owned by Berkeley Forests (UC Berkeley)

• located in Nevada County

Approximately 406 acres of the 1,134-acre treatment area extends outside of the CalVTP treatable landscape

• dispersed in small sections of the treatment areas


Grouse Ridge Vegetation Treatment Project

CCI Forest Health Grant Proposed Treatments• Fuel Break Installation

– Mastication, pile burn

• Roadside Fuel Reduction

• Wildfire Rehabilitation– Site preparation, herbicide, and planting.

• Prescribed Burning

• Mastication

CEQA’s Role in California’s Wildfire Crisis 89

Grouse Ridge Example PSA/Addendum

Additional requirements when preparing an addendum include:• Differentiate treatment areas within and outside of the treatable landscape,• Identify acreage that is within and outside of the treatable landscape,• Impact discussion should describe 1) why the impact is within the scope, and

2) why including areas outside of the treatable landscape do not trigger subsequent review (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162),

• Confirm if areas outside the treatable landscape result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts for each impact discussion, and

• Summarize any impacts resulting from areas outside the treatable landscape at the end of each resource section.


Grouse Ridge Example PSA/Addendum: Impact AES-1

Impact discussion should describe 1) why the impact is within the scope, and 2) why including areas outside of the treatable landscape do not trigger subsequent review (Section 15162),

• “The inclusion of land in the proposed treatment area that is outside the CalVTPtreatable landscape constitutes a change to the geographic extent presented in the PEIR. However, within the boundary of the project area, the existing scenic resources are essentially the same within and outside of the treatable landscape; therefore, the short-term aesthetic impact is also the same, as described above.”



Confirm if areas outside the treatable landscape result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts for each impact discussion, and

• “This determination is consistent with the PEIR and would not constitute a substantially more severe significant impact than what was covered in the PEIR.”



Summarize any impacts resulting from areas outside the treatable landscape at the end of each resource section.

• “The project proponent has also determined that the inclusion of land in the proposed treatment area that is outside the CalVTP treatable landscape constitutes a change to the geographic extent presented in the PEIR. However, within the boundary of the project area, the existing environmental and regulatory conditions present in the areas outside the treatable landscape are essentially the same as those within the treatable landscape; therefore, the impacts of the proposed treatment project are also consistent with those considered in the PEIR.”


QUESTIONS?

Focused ND, MND, EIR using the CalVTP PEIR

Focused ND, MND, EIR using the CalVTP

If an impact of a later treatment project is not within the scope, the CalVTPPEIR can be used to focus the subsequent or supplemental CEQA document a subsequent EIR on the impacts that are new or substantially more severe significant impacts (using CEQA Guidelines §§15162 and 15163).For new impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts, the PSA checklist can function as an Initial Study (CEQA Guidelines § 15168(d))• Documents the impacts that are within the scope

• Evaluates/identifies new impacts to support a focused ND, MND, or EIR

• Identifies substantially more severe significant impacts to support a focused MND or EIR


97

CEQA Flow Chart for CalVTP PSAs


Part 3Decision Documentation and Approval Process

CalVTP CEQA Flow Chart – Project Approval


Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) needs to be prepared for each vegetation treatment project and adopted by the lead agencyStart with the Program MMRP (available online)Adapt it to the vegetation treatment project:• Include only those SPRs and mitigation measures that apply to the project

• Update the applicability to initial and maintenance treatments, timing, implementing entity, and verifying/monitoring entity

• Include project-specific implementation instruction where needed


MMRP Example with Project-Specific Implementation


Standard Project Requirements Applicable? (Y/N) Timing ImplementingEntity

Verify/Monitoring Entity

Wildlife

SPR BIO-10: Survey for Special-Status Wildlife and Nursery Sites. If SPR BIO-1 determines that suitable habitat for special-status wildlife species or nurseries of any wildlife species is present and cannot be avoided, the project proponent will require a qualified RPF or biologist to conduct focused or protocol-level surveys for special-status wildlife species or nursery sites (e.g., bat maternity roosts, deer fawning areas, heron or egret rookeries, monarch overwintering sites) with potential to be directly or indirectly affected by a treatment activity. The survey area will be determined by a qualified RPF or biologist based on the species and habitats and any recommended buffer distances in agency protocols. The qualified RPF or biologist will determine if following an established protocol is required, and the project proponent may consult with CDFW and/or USFWS for technical information regarding appropriate survey protocols. Unless otherwise specified in a protocol, the survey will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the beginning of treatment activities. Focused or protocol surveys for a special-status species with potential to occur in the treatment area may not be required if presence of the species is assumed.This SPR applies to all treatment activities and treatment types, including treatment maintenance.Project-Specific Implementation To avoid impacts on special-status salamanders (i.e., California giant salamander, Santa

Cruz black salamander), focused surveys (i.e., walk and turn surveys) would be conducted within habitat suitable for the species.

To determine whether California red-legged frogs are present within upland habitats in treatment areas, focused surveys would be conducted by a qualified biologist within 24 hours prior to implementation of all mechanical and manual treatments.

Initial Treatment: Y

Treatment Maintenance: Y

No more than 14 days prior to treatment (unless otherwise specified)

Midpen Midpen

CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

When an agency approves a vegetation treatment project using a within the scope finding for all environmental impacts, it must adopt its own CEQA findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091If significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project’s “benefits” rendered “acceptable” its “unavoidable adverse environmental effects” must also be adopted (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15093, 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, Section 21081, subd. (b)). The Findings template is available online


CEQA Findings Template for PSAs

Template includes instruction to usersFindings included for LTS, LTSM, and SU impactsImpacts listed are from CalVTP PEIR• Check those that are applicable• Delete impacts and mitigation measures

that are not applicable• Move impacts to lower significance level

as neededRecord of proceedings• Must be available for public review


PSA Adoption/Project Approval Process

Project Approval• Use of CalVTP does not require CAL FIRE approval, if it’s not the lead agency• Lead agency follows its own agency-specific procedures for project approval• As a part of project approval, Lead agency adopts CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding

Considerations, and MMRP• PSA or PSA/Addendum provides substantial evidence supporting the adoption of CEQA FindingsFile NOD• With the State Clearinghouse, within 5 days of project approval• Use CalVTP PEIR receipt to show proof of paid CDFW CEQA filing feesSubmit approved project information to the Board of Forestry (per SPR AD-7):• Completed PSA Checklist• Completed MMRP• GIS package of project area(s)


CalVTPImplementation

Database –Approved Projects


QUESTIONS?

Project-Specific AnalysisMMRP Implementation

MMRP Implementation: Monitoring and Reporting

CEQA requires implementation of Mitigation Measures (CEQA Guidelines Section 15097)CEQA monitoring and reporting requirements end at MMRP adoption; monitoring and reporting are up to the lead agency• Best practice is to retain documentation/proof of implementation

SPR AD-7 requires information on completed projects (post-project implementation report)• GIS data of treated area, size of treated area, treatment types and activities, dates of work

• List of SPRs and mitigation measures implemented

• Any explanations regarding implementation if required by SPRs and mitigation measures

MMRP can become post-project implementation report with added columnsCalVTP Implementation Training 108

Yuba Foothills Healthy Forest Project PSA/Addendum


MMRP Implementation Guidance Document, Post-Project Implementation Report

Standard Project Requirements/ Mitigation Measures

TimingApplicable Treatment Activity

Implementation Guidance Implementation Reporting

SPR BIO-1: Review and Survey Project-Specific Biological Resources.

Prior to treatment

Mechanical, prescribed burning

See PSA for results of data review and reconnaissance survey. Was the measure implemented?☒ Yes☐ No

SPR BIO-7: Survey for Special-Status Plants.

Prior to treatment

Mechanical, prescribed burning

For treatments that would be implemented in parcels with gabbro soils, protocol-level surveys for the three species associated with this habitat (Pine Hill flannelbush, Layne’s ragwort, and chaparral sedge) will be conducted prior to implementation of treatments (see Appendix B for location of gabbro soils). If species are present, see Mitigation Measure BIO-1b for avoidance requirements.

Was the measure implemented?☐ Yes☐ No

MMRP Implementation Guidance Document, Post-Project Implementation Report


Standard Project Requirements/ Mitigation Measures

TimingApplicable Treatment Activity

Implementation Guidance Implementation Reporting

SPR AD-4: Public Notifications for Prescribed Burning.

At least three days prior to prescribed burning

Prescribed burning

Notify CAL FIRE Command Center in Grass Valley and the local Volunteer Fire Department


SPR AQ-2: Submit Smoke Management Plan.

At least seven days prior to prescribed burning

Prescribed burning

In compliance with regulations of the Feather River Air Quality Management District, submit a Plan for any proposed burn greater than 10 acres and which occurs at or above a mean elevation of 1000 feet. Complete plan on forms provided by the District.


MMRP Implementation: Required Explanations

Explanations regarding implementation required by SPRs and mitigation measures• Infeasibility explanation of implementing

stated avoidance measures for sensitivenatural communities and common nestingbirds (SPR BIO-12, MM BIO-3a)

• Explanation for a reduction in buffer size fora special-status species and for a reductionin percent surface cover in a WLPZ (SPRHYD-4, MM BIO-1a, MM BIO-2b)


MMRP Implementation: Required Explanations


Standard Project Requirements/ Mitigation Measures Timing Applicable

Treatment Activity Implementation Guidance Implementation Reporting

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Avoid Mortality, Injury, or Disturbance for Other Special-Status Wildlife Species Establish a no-disturbance buffer of at

least 100 feet around occupied sites. Buffer size may be adjusted if the

qualified RPF or biologist determines that such an adjustment would not be likely to adversely affect (i.e., cause mortality, injury, or disturbance to) the species.

If a no-disturbance buffer is reduced below 100 feet from an occupied site, a qualified RPF or biologist will provide the project proponent with a site and/or treatment activity-specific explanation for the buffer reduction in the post-project implementation report

Prior toand during treatment

Mechanical, prescribed burning,herbicide

Implement the following if surveys pursuant to SPR BIO-10 are required: If a purple martin nest is detected

during focused surveys, a no-disturbance buffer of at least 100 feet will be established around the nest, and no treatment activities will occur within this buffer until the chicks have fledged.

If an active pallid bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, or western red bat roost is detected, a no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet will be established around the roost, and mechanical and manual treatments will not occur within this buffer.


Was any buffer reduced from the recommended size? ☐ Yes☐ NoIf so, provide a site-and/or treatment activity-specific explanation for the buffer reduction in the next row of this table.

Buffer Reduction Explanation (MM BIO-2b), if needed:

MMRP Implementation: Completed Projects


Questions?

Wrap Up and Final Thoughts

CalVTP Training Resources

BOF CalVTP Website• https://bof.fire.ca.gov/projects-and-programs/calvtp/

CalVTP PSA preparation – instruction summary sheet (PDF, 2 pages)• summary of most important points of the training, online links to informational

resources

CalVTP Program EIR – Volume 2 (PDF, searchable and bookmarked)PSA template (MS Word, 508 compliant)CEQA Findings template (MS Word, 508 compliant)CalVTP FAQs (December 2020)


https://bof.fire.ca.gov/projects-and-programs/calvtp/

CalVTP Training Resources, cont.

Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Vegetation Treatment Project• Final PSA• MMRP• Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations• Notice of Determination• Emails documenting compliance with SPR AD-7

Grouse Ridge Vegetation Treatment Project• Final PSA/Addendum to PEIR• MMRP• Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations• Notice of Determination• Emails documenting compliance with SPR AD-7


https://bof.fire.ca.gov/projects-and-programs/calvtp/Thank you!

https://bof.fire.ca.gov/projects-and-programs/calvtp/