Designation of areas within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission that are suitable for power plants

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal Zone
Information
Center

DESIGNATION OF AREAS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
THAT ARE UNSUITABLE FOR POWER'PLANTS

COASTAL ZONE

INFORMATON CENTER

San Francisco Bay Conservation
and Development Commission

December, 1984

This document was prepared with financial assistance
from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, under the provisions of the
Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. Background . . . . . . . . 1

A. Summary 1

1. Purpose and General Conclusions 1

2. Contents of Report . . . . . . . 4

B. Legislative Mandate 5

C. Major Assumptions of Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

D. Partial Designations . . . . . . . . . . . 8

E. BCDC Biennial Revisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

F. Summary of Designations . 10

II. Coordination with the Energy Commission 14

A. Energy Commission's 1979 Biennial Report . . . . . . . . . . . 14

B. Continuing Coordination With Energy Commission . . . . . . . . . 15

C. Co-generation .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. Municipal Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

III. Types of Facilities Anticipated 21

A. Present Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

1. Cooling System . . . . . . . . 21

2. Fuels and Solid Wastes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

B. Anticipated Power Plant Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . 25

IV. Environmental Effects of Power !plants 27

A. Conversion of Land to Power Plant Site . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

B. Construction Impacts 28

C. Impacts of Cooling System 29

D. Air Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

E. Visual Impacts . 33

Page

Criteria and Policies Used for Designations 35

A. Procedure . . . . . . . . 35

B. Commission Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . 36

C. Map Set One: Wildlife Areas, Parks, and Public Access Areas . 38

1. Wildlife Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

2. Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

3. Funded Acquisitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 40

4. Public Access Areas 40

D. Map Set Two: Bay Plan, Marsh Plan, and Water Quality
Control Plan Maps . . . 41

1. San Francisco Bay Plan a 41

2. Suisun Marsh Protection, Plan . . . . . 43

a. Primary Management Areas 43

b. Secondary Management Area 46

3. Water Quality Control Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

E. Map Set Three: Natural Resource Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

F. Map Set Four: Composite Summary Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

G. Criteria Not Mapped 55

Designations . . . . 57

A. General Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

B. Designations in Developed Priority Use Areas . . . . . . . . . 57

C. Designations in Natural Resource and Recreation Areas . . . . 58

1. Full Designations 58

2. Partial Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Page

D. Co-generation in Industrial Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

E. Exclusion of Existing Facilities and Reasonable Expansion Areas63

1. General . . . . . . . 63

2. Electric Transmission Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

3. Pittsburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

4. Collinsville . . . . . . 65

VII. Maps - Detailed Descriptions . . . . . . . 66

VIII. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 98

1. BACKGROUND

A. Summarv

1. Purpose and General Conclusions

The respective roles of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and

Development Commission's (BCDC) and the Energy Fesources Conservation and

Development Commission (Energy Commission) in the siting of power plants have

been defined by the Legislature. The Energy Commission is the sole permitting

agency for power plants, but it cannot approve a power plant in an area

designated by BCDC as unsuitable. Minor ancillary facilities can be approved

in those areas designated by BCDC, but only if BCDC first finds that no

substantial adverse environmental effects will result and that the primary use

of the land will not be interfered with.

The purpose of this study, therefore, is to identify those areas

of San Francisco Bay, its salt ponds and managed wetlands, and a 100-foot-wide

shoreline band around the Bay that are not, suitable for power plants because

they would be inconsistent with the San Francisco Bay Plan (Bay Plan) or the

Suisun Marsh Protection Plan (Marsh Plan).

It is important to recognize that this study is not intended to

identify areas where power plants will be built. It is the prerogative of the

Energy Commission to determine what sites are acceptable for power plants.

This study is only intended to Identify those areas where a power plant would

clearly not be suitable under BCDC's policies. Similarly, any specific power

plant proposal in an area not designated may still be inconsistent with some

BCDC policy, but it is believed that BCDC can adequately express its views on

those proposals by participation in the Energy Commission's permit procedures.

Once an area is designated as being unsuitable, the Energy

Commission is prohibited from approving a power plant in that area. Minor

ancillary facilities can be approved In such an area by the Energy Commission,

but only if BCDC first finds that such a minor facility would not be

inconsistent with the primary use of the land and that there would be no

substantial adverse environmental effect.

A discussion of the legislation requiring this study is found in

Section I-B (page 5). One important part of that legislative scheme is an

attempt by the Legislature to concentrate permit processing for power plants

in the Energy Commission. To the extent that BCDC must make findings

mentioned above for minor ancillary facilities associated with power plants

before the Energy Commission can act on the main power plant, a two-step

permit process for power plants results. To avoid that to the extent

possible, some designations are proposed that only apply to the main power

plant and not to minor ancillary facilities that will have few adverse

impacts. These are called "partial designations" and are discussed more

completely in Section I-D (page 8).

To insure that BCDC does not restrict the development of needed

power plants, the Legislature also required BCDC to consider the most recent

comprehensive Biennial Report of the Energy Commission In making Its designa-

tions. A discussion of that Biennial Report is found in Section II-A and B

(pages 14 and 15) of this report, and the discussion concludes that sufficient

areas are available to satisfy the concerns of the Energy Commission.

-2-

BCDC recognizes that power plants are defined as a water-oriented

use under the McAteer-Petris Act for which some necessary fill in the Bay may

be approved* The Bay Plan policy on power plants states that they ""may be

located in any area where they do not interfere with and are not Incompatible

with residential, recreational, or other public uses of the Bay and shoreline,

provided that any pollution problems resulting from the discharge of large

amounts of heated brine into Bay waters, and water vapor into the atmosphere,

can be precluded" (Other Uses of the Bay and Shoreline Policy No. 8, page

29). However, that policy must be read in conjunction with the other policies

protecting the resources of the Bay and the requirements of the law that no

fill can be permitted in the Bay for any purpose, including power plants,

unless it is shown that there.is no alternative that requires less fill.

With the very limited number of needed new sites forecasted by the

Energy Commis.sion and the very limited geographical jurisdiction of BCDC, it

is evident that the need for siting opportunities around the Bay in the near

future can be met within the constraints proposed In this study. For example,

although -the.surface area of the Bay is designated to prohibit the large areas

of fill that would be needed for a major power plant, most of the Bay is only

partially designated, permitting pipelines for cooling systems to be governed

solely by the Energy Commission. In addition, most of the designated areas do

not extend inland of the salt ponds* managed wetlands, the Suisun Marsh, or

the line of highest tidal action. The 100-foot shoreline band is generally,

designated only in priority use areas, parks, public access areas, and

wildlife refuges. Thus, siting opportunities are available on or near the

-3-

shoreline and adequate provision has been made for ancillary facilities such'

as pipelines for cooling systems that must be located In the Bay.

BCDC must also update its designations every two years, and those

revisions will permit any changes in technology or need for electric power to

be taken into consideration.

2. Contents of Report

A complete description of the legislation mandating this study and

a discussion of how that legislative intent has been incorporated Into this

report are found In Sections I-B (page 5), I-C (page 7) and I-D (page 8).

Section 11 (page 14) describes the necessity for coordinating

power plant siting activities with the work of the Energy Commission.

.Included is a discussion of the forecasting done by the Energy Commission to

estimate the need for new power plant sites that might be needed in the Bay

Area. It generally concludes that few new sites for major power plants will

be needed In the near term. It also concludes that small co-generation

projects (those projects that combine power generation with other Industrial

processes) are likely and are very desirable because of increases in fuel

efficiency and reductions In air emissions. It is necessary, therefore, to

insure that the designations of this report do not substantially interfere

with the promotion of such projects.

In order to determine which areas are unsuitable for power plants,

BCDC must first determine what size and type of power plants are likely to be

proposed within the Bay Area. Section III-A (page 21) discusses the types of

facilities that are likely to be proposed, and concludes that 1,600 megawatt

(W coal- or oil-fired plants may be proposed in Suisun Day, but that smaller

plants (800 MW or less) are likely in San Francisco Bay because of constraints

on the size of the cooling systems.

The adverse effects of the major power plants Identified are discussed

In Section IV (page 27).

The effects of those power plants are of concern because of the

impacts on the resources of the Bay. The resources and priority use areas

identified by BCDC's legislation and plans as most important to the Bay Area

are analyzed in Section V (page 35). The most important areas are designated

as unsuitable for power plants where the adverse effects of a major plant

would conflict with the policies. These areas include important natural

resources such as the surface of the Bay, marshes, public access areas such as

parks, and priority use areas such as water-related industrial use areas.

Specific description of the designation process is provided in

Secti-on VI (page 57). Definitions of each type of partial designation are

provided as well as descriptions of the areas that could not be designated by

the terms of the legislation.

Because of time and funding constraints, a complete set of all the

resource maps cannot be provided with each copy of the report. A summary map

showing the areas designated is provided, however, and Section VII (page 66)

provides a written description of each area that was mapped.

B. Iftgislative Mandate

The legislation containing the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act of 1977
(Marsh Act) also defines the respective roles of BCDC and the Energy Com-

mission in the regulation of power plant siting in the San Francisco Bay

Area. Under this legislative scheme (Government Code Section 66645(b)), BCDC

-5-

is required to designate those areas within Its jurisdiction that are not

suitable for power plants. Although the Energy Commission is the sole

permitting authority for power plants, it Is prohibited from approving any

power plant within the areas designated in this report as being unsuitable by

BCDC. Ancillary or minor support facilities can be approved by the Energy

Commission in BCDC-designated areas, but only if BCDC first finds that the

proposed facility would not be inconsistent with the primary use of the land

and that there would be no substantial adverse environmental effect.

The specific legislative mandate for designating those areas that are

unsuitable for power plants is found in Government Code Section 66645(b):

After one or more public hearings, and prior to
January 1, 1979, the commission shall designate
those specific locations within the Suisun
Marsh... or the area of jurisdiction of the
commission, where the location of a facility, as
defin d in Section 25110 of the Public Resources
Code Fincludes transmission lines and thermal power
plants larger than 50 MW and any appuirtenances
thereto], would be inconsistent with Lthe McAtejr-
Petris Act or the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act .
The following locations, however, shall not be so
designated: (1) any property of a utility that is
used for such a facility or will be used for the
reasonable expansion thereof; (2) any site for
which a notice of intention to file an application
for certification has been filed pursuant to
Section 25502 of the Public Resources Code prior to
January 1, 1978, and is subsequently approved
pursuant to Section 22516 of the Public Resources
Code; and (3) the area east of Collinsville Road
that is designated for water-related industrial use
on the Suisun Marsh Protection Plan Map. Each
designation made pursuant to this section shall
include a description of the boundaries of such
locations, the provisions of [the McAteer-Petris
Act or the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act] ... with
which they would be inconsistent, and detailed
findings concerning the significant adverse impacts
that would result from development of a facility In

-6-

the designated area. The commission shall consider
the conclusions, if any, reached by the State
Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Commission in its most recently promulgated
comprehensive report issued pursuant to Section
25309 of the Public Resources Code. The commission
also shall request the assistance of the State
Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Commission in carrying out the requirements of this
section. The commission shall transmit a copy of
its report prepared pursuant to this subdivision to
the State Energy Resources Conservation and
Development Commission.

C. Major Assumptions of Report

For the purposes of this study, "facility" is used as defined in the

Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act

Narren-Alquist Act):

"Facility" means any electric transmission line or
thermal powerplant, or both electric transmission
line and thermal powerplant, regulated according to
the provisions of this division. (Public Resources
Code Section 25110)

"Thermal powerplant" means any stationary or
floating electrical generating facility using any
source of thermal energy, with a generating
capacity of 50 megawatts or more, and any
facilities appurtenant thereto. (Public Resources
Code Section 25120)

The wide range of types and sizes of power plants and related

equipment and structures that are Included within the definition of "facility"

(eeg., any power plant larger than 50 MW in size and any appurtenance thereto)

raises the question of what "facility" should be used in evaluating whether an

area should be designated. If the most minor appurtenance that could be a

"facility" was used as a standard, then no areas would be designated. If the

largest, most destructively designed plant ever conceived was Used as the

standard, however, then the entire jurisdiction of BCDC would be completely

-7-

designated. Clearly, neither of these extremes was intended by the

Legislature. The statutory framework assumes that both the Energy Commission

an d BCDC will have strong, albeit separate, roles in siting decisions around

the Bay. To reach that result, the following assumptions should govern the

designation process:

The type of facility used to determine consistency

should be a thermal power plant of the type that

can reasonably be anticipated to be proposed in the

Bay Area based on the projections and experience of

the Energy Commission;

Only those areas should be designated that contain

such sensitive resources or are of such value for

other higher priority uses that one would not

anticipate approval of a power plant in that

location based on the policies of the Bay Plan and

the Marsh Plan. Where it Is clear that simple

realistic mitigation measures could make such a

plant acceptable, the area should not be designated

and reliance should be placed on BCDC13

participation in the permit process of the Energy

Commission. The possible mitigation measures

considered, however, do not include relocation of

the plant outside of the area designated.
D. Partial Desig ations

One major purpose of the Warren-Alquist Act was to concentrate all

permit processing for power plants In the Energy Commission. To the extent

that BCDC must first find that no substantial adverse environmental effect

win take place from a minor ancillary facility in a designated area.before

the Energy Commission can approve an associated power plant outside the area,

a two-agency permit process results.

To avoid this duplication wherever pmssible a further refinement of

the designation process is presented in this report. Referred to as "partial"

designations, an area is designated as unsuitable for all power plant

facilities, but certain well-defined ancillary or support facilities are not

designated. This will only apply to those areas where impacts are easily

identifiable and would be limited in nature. It also can apply where simple

mitigation measures would eliminate any adverse effects. For example, in some

areas it is clear that a power plant would be inconsistent with BCDC's mandate

but conduits for the cooling system would be acceptable given sufficient

mitigation measures. In such a case, the area would be designated for the

purposes of all "facilities" except intake and discharge conduits for the

cooling system. It is anticipated that whatever mitigation or control

measures will be required for those ancillary facilities would be imposed

through BCDC's participation in Energy Commission certification procedures.

A second type of "partial" designation is used where the area is

designated not because of the adverse effects of a power plant on the natural

resources of the site, but because the site is more valuable for some other

similar developed use such as the water-related Industrial priority use

areas. In these situations, designation is only needed to protect the primary

use of the land for that priority use and not to avoid adverse effects on

resources. In those places, partial designations have been used to permit

those "facilities" that will not interfere substantially with the primary use

of the site, such as cooling system conduits and co-generatlon facilities.

Although this partial designation procedure Is not required (I.e., the

purpose of the exception procedure in Public Resources Code Section 25526(b)

is to permit just such facilities), it will further the Legislature's intent

by retaining the Energy Commission as the sole permitting authority for power

plants. In this first round of designations, the partial designation system

is not very sophisticated and only those ancillary or minor facilities that

could easily be defined were excluded from the designations. It is

anticipated that these partial designations will be expanded during future

revisions of the designations to further reduce any possible duplication of

permit functions with the Energy Commission.

E. BCDC Biennial Revisions

Government Code Section 66645(c) requires the Commission to revise and

update Its designations every two years. These biennial revisions will give

the Commission an opportunity to update the designations as more resource data

becomes available, as technology is improved, as greater sophistication is

achieved in defining ancillary facilities that may be the subject of partial

designations, and as the Energy Commission revises its energy forecasts and

site planning activities.

F. SummAU of Designations

A complete discussion of the resource areas designated as unsuitable

for power plants or "partially designated" is found in Part IV. Below is a

listing of those resource areas that have been fully designated. Ancillary

facilities may still be approved in such areas, but only If BCDC first makes

the findings required by Public Resources Code Section 25526(b):

-10-

- Existing and Proposed Parks

- Existing and Proposed Wildlife Areas

- Public Access Areas

Areas Designated for Wildlife Area Priority Use in the Bay Plan

Areas Designated for Waterfront Park or Beach Priority Use in the

Bay Plan including marinas, fishing piers, and boat launching

ramps.

Primary Management Area of the Suisun Marsh

Tidal Marshes

Riparian Vegetation

- 'Fare and Endangered Species Habitat

- Shellfish Beds

- Marine Mammal Haul-Out Areas

Anadromous Fish Streams

Fish Spawning Areas

Juvenile Fish Nursery Areas

Below is a list of those areas that have been partially designated and

the ancillary facilities that have been specifically excluded from the

designation. BCDC approval is not needed for any of the ancillary facilities

listed, but it is anticipated that BCDC policies concerning the development of

such facilities will be incorporated into the decisions of the Energy

Commission.

Areas Designated for Water-Related Industrial and

Port Priority Use in the Bay Plan. Electric

transmission lines, intake and discharge lines for

cooling systems, fuel pipelines, steam pipelinesq

and co-generation facilities.

Areas Designated for Airport Priority Use in the

BaX Plan. Intake and discharge lines for cooling

systems, underground electric transmission lines,

fuel pipelines, and steam pipelines.

Water-Related Industry Site in the Secondary

Management Area of the Susiun Marsh Protection

Plan. Electric transmission lines, intake and

discharge lines for cooling systems, fuel

pipelines, steam pipelines, co-generation

facilities.

Surface Waters of the Boy,_Secondarv Management

Areas in the Suisun Marsh Except for the

Water-Related Industry Site, Lowland Grasslands in

the Suisun Marsh, Salt Ponds, and Shell Deposits.

Underground or underwater electric transmission

lines, intake or discharge lines for cooling

systems, underground or underwater fuel pipelines,

underground or underwater steam pipelines.

Mudflats, and Areas Precluded by Water Quality

Control Plan. Underground or underwater electric

transmission lines, Intake or discharge lines for

cooling systems that pass completely through the

area, underground or underwater fuel pipelines,

underground or underwater pipelines.

-12-

Migratoa Fish Routes. Electric transmission

lines, intake or discharge lines for cooling

systems that pass completely through the area,

underground or underwater fuel pipelines,

underground or underwater steam pipelines.

II. COORDINATION WITH THE ENERGY COMMISSION

A. Energy Commission's 1983 Biennial Report.

The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission is

required to coordinate its designations with the forecasts developed by the

Energy Commission defining the need for new power plants. Government Code

Section 66645(d) requires BCDC to "consider the conclusions, if any, reached

by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in its

most recently promulgated comprehensive report..**"

The most recent comprehensive report issued by the Energy Commission is

the 1983 Biennial Report. Although that report does not give BCDC specific

guidance concerning the number or types of power plants that will be needed

within BCDC's Jurisdiction it does contain the energy Commission's adopted

forecasts, policies and priorities. It should be noted that PGandE prepares

its own long-term forecasting.

The Energy Commission has recently held hearings on revised forecasts of

peak electric demands, which largely determine the need for generating '

capacity. The proposed forecast for the PGandE and Sacramento Municipal

Utility District (SMUD) service areas, for inclusion in the 1985 Biennial

Report, shows the following peak demands:

1989 - 17,374 Megawatts

1996 - 19,423 Megawatts

2004 - 21,698 Megawatts

To meet these peak load demands, the Energy Commission anticipates that

about 8,300 megawatts of new generating capacity will have to be provided

between 1983 and 1996 to account for reserve margins, demand growth,

displacement of oil and gas-fired units, retirement of older units, and

reductions in transfers of electricity from other systems. The 1983 Biennial

Report does not specifly how these capacity Increases will be met by PGandE

and SMUD because the Energy Commission is prohibited from mandating the way in

which a utility will meet demands. Nevertheless, the text and aggregate

forecasts for the entire state of expected types of power plants in the year

1996 indicate that new sites for major new power plants within BCDC's

jurisdiction in the reasonable future are not expected beyond those already

being processed by the Energy Commission. The most likely increased

generating capacity within BCDC jurisdiction other than those already being

processed, would included wind generation, co-generation facilities, and the

repowering of existing obsolete facilities.

The Energy Commission's 1983 Biennial Report also encourages the

development of alternate energy sources such as wind generation. The

Commission recognizes the desirability of such projects but has not included

them within this report. They are not thermal power plants and therefore are

not a part of the statutory scheme for thermal power plant siting, of which

this report is part.

B. Continuing Coordination with Energy Commission

Since BCDC adopted its first designations in 1978, the staff has

continued to work with the staff of the Energy Commission. During that period

the staff of the Energy Commission has prepared a study entitled "Opportunities

to Expand Coastal Power Plants in California, 1981. The focus of these

studies was to determine whether the designations of BCDC or the Coastal

Commission prohibited the reasonable expansion of existing power plants or the

siting of new plants. The reports concluded that the BCDC designations did

neither.

One result of the studies, however, was the adoption of a joint

resolution in 1982 by the Energy Commission, the Coastal Commission, and BCDC

concerning the priorities for the development of power plant sites along the

coast of the State. The following priorities were established in order of

preference:

"1. Expand Facilities Within Existing Power Plant

Sites. This option should be considered first

because, in most cases, expansion would minimize

adverse environmental impacts to coastal and Bay

resources and increase the efficient use of

existing energy facilities.

"2. Develop New Sites Adjacent to Existing Sites.

This option is similar to Priority No One,

although it may result in more environmental

impacts. It also encourages consolidation of new

energy facilities with existing facilities.

"3. Develop NeH Sites in Undeveloped Areas.

Development of opportunities in this priority

option will generally result in greater

environmental impacts than Priority Nos. One and

-16-

Two. However, to the extent adverse impacts can

be adequately mitigated, development of

opportunities in this priority could be an

acceptable, although less preferable, option.

"4. Develop New Sites In Undesignated Areas Which

Require Ancillary Facilities in Designated Areas.

Power plant development of any type should be

avoided in designated areas. However, ancillary

facilities could be allowed through designated

areas if coastal resources are protected according

to the requirements of Public Resources Code

Sections 25526 and 30413, and Government Code

Section 66645.

"5. DevelgR New Sites in Designated Areas. The

California Coastal Commission and the San

Francisco Bay Conservation and Development

Commission.have designated certain coastal and bay

areas as unsuitable for power plant siting because

thermal power plants cannot be sited in these

areas consistent with the Coastal Act or

McAteer-Petris Act coastal resource protection

policies (Public Resources Code Section 30413(b)),

Government Code SectIon 66656(b)). Siting should

only be allowed in these areas after:

"a. A determination that the coastal or bay site

has greater relative merit than available

inland sites, as required by Public Resources

Code Section 25516.1, or Government Code

Section 66646;

"b. A determination that the requirements of

Public Resources Code Section 25526, requiring

that the proposed development be consistent

with the primary use of the land, that there

will be no substantial adverse environmental

effects, and approval of any.public agency

having ownership or control of the land Is

obtained, can be met; and

"c. A determination that development of

opportunities In coastal and Bay siting

Priorities Nos. One, Two, Three, or Four are

not feasible (as defined by Public Resources

Code Section 30108)."

C. Co-generation

Given the potential significance of co-generation projects in the

industrialized portions of the Bay Area, additional consideration should be

given to encouraging such projects. Co-generation is a broad term that covers

a number of technologies that allow the recapture of waste heat from electrical

generation or industrial processes for useful purposes. "Topping cycle" tech-

nology Involves using the waste heat from the turbines of an electrical

generating unit for industrial process steam and the space heating needs of

buildings near the generating unit. 'Bottoming cycle" technology involves

using recovery of high temperature waste heat from an Industrial process to

produce steam and run turbines to generate electricity (Source: California

Energy Trends and Choices, Vol. 1, p. 114, Energy Commission, 1977).

The fuel needed to Wco-generate" the electric and thermal loads is

generally less than would have been required to generate these products

separately, thereby conserving energy and reducing overall air emissions. It

should be noted that co-generation projects using a topping cycle involve

increas.ed fuel usage at the project site over that required for the generation

of the electricity alone' and, thereforep may have Increased difficulty meeting
new source air pollution@ review standards. The overall improvements in both

emissions and energy conservation, however, make such technologies desirable,

and the Energy Commission's Biennial Report encourages such projects. It is

therefore incumbent upon-BCDC to ensure that its designations do not unduly

hinder or interfere with'the development of such projects.

Few conflicts should arise because of BCDC's limited shoreline

jurisdiction; most potential co-generation projects that are large enough to

be classified as facilities will be outsilde of the geographical area of this

study or on developed areas of the shoreline that are not designated at all.

Those portions that would be witiin areas of concern to BCDC are most likely

to be minor ancillary facilities such as pipelines for the cooling system.

Most of these would be covered by partial designations permitting exclusive

control by the Energy Commission or would be subject to the exception

procedure of Public Pesou'rees Code Section 25526(b). That section permits

minor ancillary facilities to be approved In designated areas If BCDC first

finds that they are not Inconsistent with the primary use of the land and that

there will be no substantial adverse environmental effects. Unnecessary

duplication of Energy Commission permit functions is possible, however, in the

priprity use areas reserved for water-related industries and to a lesser

degree in ports. To avoid such duplication, those areas have only been

partially designated; permitting co-generation projects to be evaluated

exclusively through the Energy Commission's procedures although designated as

unsuitable for major power plants. The rationale for such a partial

designation is that legitimate co-generation projects are unlikely to

significantly pre-empt much of the area designated for such an industrialized

priority use.

D, Municipal Utilities

None of the municipal utilities in the Bay Area (Alameda, Palo Alto,

and Santa Clara) have indicated any plans for any electrical generating

capacity within BCDC'3 jurisdiction that was large enough to fall under the

definition of "facility". Therefore, none of the designations proposed herein

should directly affect those utility operations within the near future. In

addition, it is anticipated that such utilities would be most interested in

co-generation facilities. As noted abovet these designations should not

hinder such projects.

-20-

111. TYPES OF FACILITIES ANTICIPATED

A. Present Proposals

In order to determine what areas are unsuitable for power plants, it

is first necessary to determine what size and type of power plants are likely

to be proposed in the Bay Area. To determine what types of facilities might

reasonably be proposed,. it is Instructive to review what is currently being

proposed by PG&E. At the present time, the Energy Commission is reviewing

four PG&E proposals for energy generating facilities. A 19600 MW coal-fired

plant covering about 330 acres of a 1,150-acre site at Collinsville (the solid

waste disposal area associated with that plant is not within BCDC's jurisdic-

tion but covers another,,800 acres of a 3-square-mile site) is the largest

being proposed. A 1,600 MW combined cycle power plant covering about 200

acres Is being proposed at Pittsburg. In addition, a 400 W combined cycle

project is proposed for San Francisco (alternative locations for that plant

are in north San Jose and Brisbare), and 300 MW of gas turbine capacity Is

proposed for Oakland. The 400 MW combined cycle project would require between

10 and 20 acres of land depending upon the cooling system used.

1. Cooling S
ystem

Of the projects proposed by, PG&E, only the 400 MW combined cycle

project proposed at the r.otrero site In San Francisco would use a once-through

cooling system. The other plants that use water for cooling have evaporative

cooling towers and would,;use either brackish water from Suisun Bay (Pittsburg

and Collinsville) or effluent from waste water treatment plants (San Jose and

Brisbane).

It is apparent from the above that power plants of at least 1,600

MW are foreseeable In the Suisun Bay area. Cooling towers are proposed

because of the higher cost of meeting water quality standards for once-through

cooling systems. In San Francisco Bay, power plant generating capacity would

depqnd primarily on constraints on the cooling systems (i.e., It is assumed

that air quality problems can be overcome by purchasing and eliminating other

sources of emissions; an expensive but feasible alternative). .

Traditional once-through cooling systems using San Francisco Bay

water are technically feasible, but can probably only be expected for power

plants of less than about 800 MW (if at all) because of the Cost and

difficulty of meeting water quality standards and the difficulty of avoiding

recirculation of the cooling waters through the system (the 800 MW figure is

approximate and was arrived at in discussions with PG&E siting personnel).

Evaporative cooling towers using San Francisco Bay waters could be

used for much larger plants, but in addition to the problems of meeting water

quality standards, other operating and environmental problems will be

encountered because of the salinity of Bay waters. Corrosion of the towers

will require more maintentance or the addition of chemicals to control it.

Such chemicals and the salt that is concentrated in the water circulated

through the tower is emitted from the tower in small airborne droplets of

water called drift. Depending upon the volume emitted and the constitutents

of the drift, It can have significant effects on surrounding vegetation. The

effects of entrainment on larval marine organisms may also be substantial,

depending upon the location of the plant, because the high salinity of San

Francisco Bay water reduces the number of times It can be recirculated through

_22-

the cooling tower before corrosion problems become serious. The fewer times

the water can be recirculated increases the amount of water needed., and

consequently increases environmental impacts. There are few cooling towers

using water with ocean-level salinities,, however, so little Information is

available on technical problems that may be encountered. Given this limited

Information, it appears reasonable at this time to assume that 800 MW

represents about the maximum size of plaint that can be anticipated within San

Francisco Bay.

Other types of electric generating technology, of course, do not

require use of Bay water for cooling and therefore the problems discussed

above would not represent a constraint. Cooling systems that use effluent

from waste water treatment plants have ailso been proposed. These would

eliminate the need for intake lines In the Bay and consequently entrainment

impacts as well. The use of dry cooling towers is being considered in other

parts of the country. These technologies, however, either have their own

constraints (e.g., availability of waste! waterv high costs, etc.), or do not

require a location near the Bay because they do not require Bay water for

cooling. Only power plants that require. large amounts of Bay water for

cooling are considered a priority use under the McAteer-Petris Act; any other

type of power plant would not be granted special status under that legislation.

Such plants are therefore,not considered further.

The relatively small amount of fresh water needed for the boilers

and other miscellaneous plant processes are assumed to be available from

freshwater su ppliers such as municipal utilities.

2. Fuels and Solid Wastes

It has been assumed that the power plants proposed within BCDC's

jurisdiction would utilize combined cycle units or oil- or coal-fired steam

turbines. Seismic and population constraints, as well as existing state

legislation, are assumed to exclude nuclear power plants from BCDC's

jurisdiction.

Fuel supplies are assumed to arrive by land; coal to arrive by

rail; and oil and other distillate fuels by pipeline from existirg refineries

or petroleum terminals. There is the possibility that at some time in the

future it may be necessary to transport some fuels directly to a power plant

site by ship or barge (e.g., Alaskan coal); thereby permitting the power plant

to locate in a water-related industrial priority use area. However, the

availability of existing marine terminal, rail and pipeline systems In the Bay

Area appears adequate to supply such fuels for a reasonable period of time.

Consequently, new power plants should not require water frontage for

transportation. If the Energy Commission determines that such supply routes

are necessary in the future, it would be appropriate to modify this report

accordingly in one of the biennial revisions.

Fuel storage is assumed to take place at the site, but it is

assumed that solid waste disposal for coal-fired plants would take place

outside the jurisdiction of BCDC. The 1,600 MW coal-fired plant proposed at

Collinsville, for example, would produce about 20,000 acre-feet of solid

wastes over its lifetime and it Is assumed that disposal of such a quantity

along the Bay shoreline would be excessively costly, and environmentally

prohibitive.

_24-

B. Anticipated Power Plant Characteristics

Given these assumptions, the following range of characteristics for

potential power plants within BCDC's Jurisdiction Is used In this report. The

numbers are very rough approximations and only indicate the general magnitude

of oharacteristics noted. The size of a plant site, for example, can be

expanded to over 1,000 acres to provide parking lots, buffer zones, etc., and

water requirements can be changed substantially depending upon the

concentration factors used in operating the cooling towers.

Suisun Bay

Size: 1,600 MW

Type of Generating Unit: Coal- or oil-fired steam turbine,
or combined cycle

Cooling System: Evaporative cooling towers

Size of Site: 200 - 400+ acres

Cooling System Water Requirements: Intake 30 - 50,000
acre-feet/year; Discharge
20 - 30,000 acre-feet/year

San Francisco Bay

Size: 800 MW

Type of Ge.nerating Unit: Coal- or oil-fired steam turbine,
or combined cycle

Cooling Sy stem: Once-through or evaporative cooling towers

Size of Site: 50 - 150+ acres

Cooling System Water Requireme nts:

Once-through: 500 - 700 cubic feet/second

Cooling Towers: Intake 15 - 25,000 acre-feet/year
Discharge 10 - 15,000 acre-feet/year

San Pablo Pay

Given the salinity gradient that occurs across San Pablo Bay,
cooling system constraints would vary depending on location
and plant characteristics would fall between those noted for
Suisun and San Francisco Bays.

-26-

IV. ENVIRONMENT& EFFECTS OF POWER PLANTS

Although there are an Incredibly vast range of environmental effects

caused by power plants (an Energy Commission table listing environmental

impacts and mitigation measures runs for over 300 pages), the purposes of this

study and the nature of BCDC's legislative mandates limit the effects that

need to be considered to those that are likely to be substantial.

The resources that are protected under the terms of the McAteer-Petris

Act, the Marsh Act, the Bay Plan and the Marsh Plan, fall generally into the

following categories:, fish and wildlife resources; public access; and
Industrial and otherwise highly developed priority use areas. The primary

impacts of a power plant on those resources result from (A) destruction of the

resource by placing the power plant facilities on top of them; (B)

construction activities required to build a power plant often involving the

use of heavy equipment,on an area greater than that required for the plant

Itself; (C) operation of the cooling system; and (D) visual effects of such a

major Industrial facility. There are obviously other impacts of major concern

with respect to particular resources, but the discussion focuses on the direct

effects listed above.

A. Conversion of Land to Power Plant Site

The direct effect of-converting a given number of acres of a resource

into a power plant site is the most obvious of adverse environmental effects.

The primary purpose of establishing BCDC was to stop Indiscriminate filling of

San Francisco Bay, Including its marshes and mudflats. That mandate was

-27-

extended to Include protection of the critical habitat areas of the Suisun

Marsh by the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act of 1977. Such a mandate.was

necessary because 40 percent of the original surface area of the Bay has been

diked off or filled.

. At the same time, the Legislature in the McAteer-Petris Act recognized

that the economy of the region demanded additional Industrial growth and

permitted limited fill for the development of water-oriented industrial

activities. Particular emphasis was placed on ports, water-related industrial

uses, airports, recreation and wildlife areas; uses that were considered so

significant that areas of the Bay shoreline were to be set aside for those

uses. These priority use areas were identified in the.Bay Plan and cannot be

used for any purpose that would effectively preempt that land area for any use

other than the designated use. The construction of a power plant would

convert between 50 and 400 acres of priority use areas or other resource areas

recognized by the policies governing BCDC, to a use not contemplated by the

Bay Plan or the Marsh Plan.

B. Construction Impacts

. Effects on natural resource areas are also caused by the construction

activity itself. Although such temporary impacts would not be inconsistent

wit), the primary use of industrial areas, their effects may be permanent in

sensitive areas such as marshes and parks. The area affected by construction

activities is ordinarily much larger than the size of the resulting facili-

ties. Construction laydown areas, storage areas, and parking areas for the

large numbers of construction workers, as well as the roads, rail lines and

utility corridors needed to construct any large-scale power generating

facility will directly, and, in many cases, permanently affect substantial

land areas. The effects can be reduced by careful site planning and

mitigation techniques, but they cannot tie eliminated. The effects-of

operating heavy equipment on sensitive areas such as marshes, is such that

those areas may never recover completely, or take such a long time to recover

that the effects are similar for all practical purposes.

Even where such effects are temporary, the construction period may be

of such a length that the disruption is not acceptable given the importance of

the resources identified by the Bay Plan and the Marsh Plan. For example, a

"temporary" disruption lasting several years would have substantial adverse

impacts to aheavily-used public access area given the,importance of those

areas around the densely-populated Bay.

C. Impacts of Cooling System

_. The once-through cooling systems traditionally proposed for power

plants along the coast and within enclosed bays, such as San Francisco Bay,

have been among the most environmentally destructive aspects of power genera-

ting facilities. Once-through cooling systems created enormous impacts from

both the entrainment and mortality of much of the aquatic life in the large

volumes of water needed to cool the plants and the discharge of thermal

wastes. Although these impacts have been significantly reduced by recent

state and federal water quality standards, impacts on important resources may

still be substantial depending upon the specific location of the power plant

and its intake and discharge lines.

The main adverse effects that are caused by the construction and

operation of the cooling systems include: (1) habitat destruction and

1
_29-

turbidity caused by construction and associated dredging for the intake and

outfall pipelines; (2) entrainment of marine organisms; (3) discharges Of

th ermal WR3te; (4) discharge of the concentrated blowdown from cooling towers;

and (5) salt drift from cooling towers. The magnitude of these effects

depends to a great extent on the type Of system proposed, its location and the

volume of water Used. The effects of a cooling System would be significant in

the areas that have been designated.

Once-through cooling Systems will have entrainment and thermal

discharge impacts that are orders of magnitude greater than systems Using

cooling towers. The impacts of entrainment on adult fish have been reduced by

the construction of traveling screens, fish diversion systems, and better

design of intake structures, but the entrainment and mortality of larval and

juvenile forms is still substantial. This is particularly true in enclosed

bays that are part of a major estuarine system. Water quality standards have

also reduced the impacts caused by thermal discharges by limiting the maximum

difference in temperature between the discharged water and the receiving

waters, but such effects can still be significant depending upon the sensi-

tivity of the specific area. Construction impacts of building the intake and

discharge lines are also likely to be substantially greater because of the

size of the conduits themselves and the extensive diffusers needed to disperse

the thermal wastes.

Evaporative cooling towers have less impacts than once-through

systems, but they may still be substantial. Entrainment of larval and

juvenile forms of marine organisms and their mortality will be substantial if,

for example, the intake is located near sloughs, marshes, or spawning areas.

-30-

The discharge of blowdown from cooling towers (salts and other chemicals are

concentrated in the water circulated through cooling towers and some.water

must be discharged or "blowndown" when the'concentrations get too high) into a

water body is less likely to cause major- thermal problems because most of the

heat is lost through evaporation. Problems may arise, however, depending upon

the exact location of the discharge system. The blowdown is likely to be

somewhat more toxic because of the higher concentration of salts and the

chemicals that are used to reduce corrosion and scale buildup In the towers.

Any significant diversion of water, such as occurs through evaporation in

large cooling towers, may also affect the salinity of areas around Suisun Bay

and the Sacramento River Delta, especially during periods of low flow.

Salt drift from cooling towers using water of ocean-level salinity may

be one of the most significant environmental problems if entrainment problems

are reduced by careful location. Manufacturers of cooling towers are now

guaranteeing a drift rate of .002 percent and tests at some operating towers

have shown slightly lower rates (.001 percent and .0005 percent). Given the

differences in salinity between the waters of Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, and

the remainder of San Francisco Bay (maximum surface salinities vary generally

from about 1,500 ppm at the east end of Suisun Bay, 20,500 ppm at the west end

of the Carquinez Straits, 26,000 ppm in the middle of San Pablo Bay, to 32,500

ppm at the Golden Gate), salt drift rates can vary substantially. Salt burns

on vegetation and corrosion problems may result downwind of cooling towers

using salt waters. The magnitude of these drift problems has not been well

documented because experience with brackish and ocean water cooling towers has

been limited.

The water droplets that carry salt from cooling towers also carry

other chemicals. Various types of chemicals are used for controlling

corrosion, controlling bacterial growth, reducing salt deposition,.preventing

scaling, corrosion and cracking in boilers, etc., and these can be found in

the.cooling water. When emitted in the drift from cooling towers and

deposited on the surrounding land, such chemicals can have an adverse effect

on vegetation depending upon the types of chemicals used and their quantities.

D. Air Pollution

Air pollutants emitted from power plants are obviously one of the

major adverse impacts of such facilities. The adverse effects on health and

property caused by air pollution has been extensively documented. The effects

of power plants on the air quality of the air basin have not been Included

within this report, however, for two main reasons: (1) the McAteer-Petris Act

and the Bay Plan have few specific policies dealing with air pollution,

presumably on the assumption that the Air Resources Board and the Bay Area Air

Pollution Control District were in a better position to comprehensively

regulate air emissions; and (2) the Air Resources Board's current policy

regarding air quality tradeoffs, makes it virtually impossible in the absence

of a specific proposal to determine whether a power plant at any given

location would violate air quality standards.

Power plant emissions can also have adverse effects on specific

resources located near the plant. Marsh vegetation'or other sensitive

wildlife habitat, resources specifically protected by the McAteer-Petris Act,

can be adversely affected by air pollutants. With the excepticn of the

constituents of drift from cooling toweraq howeverg these adverse impacts have

-32-

not been used in designating areas as unsuitable for power plants. The

reasons for this are two-fold: (1) The criteria chosen for designating

unsuitable areas in this study were those which could be readily mapped, and

time and staff constraints were such that the sophisticated study necessary

could not be completed in time to take these factors into account; and (2) the

emissions tradeoff policy of the Air Resources Board makes such determinations

virtually impossible unless a specific proposal is made. The effects of

cooling tower drift is in a somewhat different category because the effects

are more localized and there are few existing industrial facilities that

utilize cooling towers in the same magnitude. Because of the difficulties of

mapping, however, even in the case of cooling tower drift, only the actual

boundaries of the resources that would tie adversely effected are designated.

The biennial revisions to this report may permit a more sophisticated

evaluation of these effects.

.E. Visual Impacts

The visual impact of power plants can be substantial even within

industrial settings. Anyone who has traveled in the Suisun Bay area has noted

how much the existing power plants at Pittsburg and Antioch dominate the

shoreline, even among the other industrial facilities of the Contra Costa

waterfront. The main buildings themselves are extremely large, and the

transmission lines and the tall stacks (usually necessary to meet air quality

standards near the plant site) create an impact greater than most shoreline

facilities, with the possible exception of oil refineries. Such visual

impacts can be reduced through careful siting, architectural treatment and

-33-

landscaping, but the impacts cannot be eliminated. In any setting that is not

heavily industrialized, especially in a flat, expansive landscape, the effects

will be substantial.

-34-

V. CRITERIA AND POLICIES USED FOR DESIGNATIONS

A. Procedure

Given the types of power plants that can be anticipated and their

impacts, it is necessary to analyze BCDC's plans and legislative mandates to

determine where such power plants would not be suitable. The policies can be

divided into two groups. The first group is made up of critical habitat and

natural resources such as marshes and spawning areas. The second group

consists of priority use areas such as water-related industrial use areas and

public access areas. All of the relevant areas were analyzed to determine

which would be suitable for partial designations, permitting minor support

facilities associated with power plants. After the areas protected by the

policies were mapped, the results were evaluated with respect to the need for

power plants identified by the Energy Commission. As sufficient areas

remained to provide siting options, all of the policies identified below were

used in the designation process.

The designation program was limited by two main factors. The criteria

chosen had to represent mappable information and the information had to be

readily available and reasonably accurate.

As noted above, no attempt has been made to evaluate the quality of

individual resource areas or to prioritize the various policies contained in

the Bay Plan. The shoreline areas available for siting power plants and the

options available for ancillary facilities, either through the exception

procedure contained in Public Resources Code Section 25526 or through the

..35-

partial designation process, allow sufficient siting options for the range of

power plant sites forecast by the Energy Commission at this time. However, in

the even that the Energy Commission determines that additional siting oppor-

tunities must be made available, BCDC will re-evaluate both the significance

of the various policies and the quality of individual resource areas in the

biennial revisions to this report.

Three sets of maps were drawn showing the important resources and

priority areas protected by BCDC's plans and legislative mandates. The first

set contains wildlife areas, parks and public access areas obtained through

BCDC's permit process. The second set includes priority use areas identified

on the Bay Plan, areas identified for protection in the Marsh Plan, and areas

precluded by water quality objectives. The third set covers natural resources

protected by the policies in BCDC's plans and legislative mandates. A fourth,

summary, set of maps shows all designated and partially designated areas,

based upon the three sets of resource maps.

B. Commission Jurisdiction

The inland boundary of the Commission's jurisdiction is not mapped in

some areas. The boundary can be determined by referring to the description of

the Commission's jurisdiction as defined in the McAteer-Petris Act:

(a) San Francisco Bay, being all areas that are subject
to tidal action from the south end of the bay to the Golden
Gate (Point Bonita-Point Lobos) and to the Sacramento River
line (a line between Stake Point and Simmons Point, extended
north- easterly to the mouth of Marshall Cut), including all
sloughs, and specifically, the marshlands lying between mean
high tide and five feet above mean sea level; tidelands (land
lying between mean high tide and mean low tide); and
submerged lands (land lying below mean low tide).

W A shoreline band consisting of all territory located
between the shoreline of San Francisco Bay as defined in 3ub-

-36-

division (a) of this section and a line 100 feet landward of
and parallel with that line, but excluding any portions of
such ter- ritory which are included in subdivisions (a)p (c)
and W of this section; provided that the commission may, by
resolution, exclude from its area of jurisdiction any'area
within the shoreline band that it finds and declares Is of no
regional importance to the bay.

W Saltponds consisting of all areas which have been
diked off from the bay and have been used during the three
years imme- diately precedJ: 'ng the effective date of the
amendment of this section during the 1969 Regular Session of
the Legislature for the solar evaporation of bay water in the
course of salt production.

(d) Managed wetlands consisting of all areas which have
been diked off from the bay and have been maintained during
the three years immediately preceding the effective date of
the amendment of this section during the 1969 Regular Session
of the Legislature as a duck hunting preserve, game refuge or
for agriculture.

(e) Certain waterways (in addition to areas included
within subdivision (a)), consisting of all areas that are
subject to tidal action, including submerged lands,
tidelands, and marsh- lands up to five feet above mean sea
level, on, or tributary to,, the listed portions of the
following waterways:

(1) Plummer Creek in Alameda County, to the eastern
limit of the salt ponds.

(2) Coyote Creek (and branches) in Alameda and Santa
Clara Counties, to the easternmost point of Newby
Island.

(3) Redwood Creek in San Mateo County, to its confluence
with Smith Slough.,

(4) Tolay Creek in Sonoma County, to the northerly line
of Sears Point Road (State Highway 37).

(5) Petaluma River in Marin and Sonoma Counties to its
confluence with Adobe Creek, and San Antonio Creek
to the easterly line of the Northwestern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way.

(6) Napa River, to the northernmost point of Bull Island.

(7) Sonoma Creek, to its confluenoe with Second Napa
Slough.

..37-

(8) Corte Madera Creek in Marin County to the downstream
end of the concrete channel on Corte Madera Creek
which is located at the United States Army Corps of
Engineers Station No. 318 + 50 on the Corte Madera
Creek Flood Control Project.

The areas under the Commission's jurisdiction by virtue of the Marsh

Act have been mapped in the Marsh Plan.

The resource areas identified and mapped outside of the Commission's

jurisdiction or within federal lands are for informational purposes only and

are not intended to expand the jurisdiction of the Commission beyond that

established by present law.

C. Map Set One: Wildlife Areas,, Parks, and Public Access Areas

This set of maps includes: (1) existing national, state, and private

wildlife areas (refuges and reserves); (2) existing national, state, regional,

and local parks; (3) areas funded for acquisition as parks or wildlife areas;

and (4) public access areas made available through the BCDC permit process.

1. Wildlife Areas

Areas managed by the California Department of Fish and Game

include wildlife management areas and ecological reserves. These areas have

been set up to "maintain sufficient population of all species of wildlife and

the habitat necessary to achieve the beneficial use and enjoyment of wildlife

by all citizens of the state, to perpetuate all species of wildlife for their

Intrinsic and ecological values, as well as for their direct benefits to man,

and to provide for aesthetic, educational, and non-appropriative uses of the

various wildlife species." '(Fish and Game Code, 1977.)

The national wildlife refuges, administered by the United States

Fish and Wildlife Service, were created to aid in the preservation of natural

-38-

resources, to provide educational opportunities, and to protect an important

open space resource and other wildlife-oriented recreation opportunities.

These areas are protected by provisions in the Bay Plan and the

McAteer-Petris Act. The latter states that "the nature, location and extent

of any fill should be such that It will minimize harmful effects to the bay

area, such as, the reduction or impairment of the volume, surface area or cir-

culation of water, water quality, fertility of marshes or fish or wildlife

resources.**" (Chapter 1. 66605(d)). The Act also finds that wildlife

refuges are one of the water-oriented land uses along the Bay that are

essential to the public welfare (Government Code Section 66602).

The Bay Plan contains the following applicable policies:

The benefits of fish and wildlife In the Bay
should be insured for present and future
generations of Californians. Therefore, to the
greatest extent feasible, the remaining marshes
and mudflats around the Bay, the remaining water
volume and surface area of the Bay, and adequate
fresh water inflow into the Bay should be
maintained.

Specific habitats that are needed to prevent the
extinction of any species or to maintain or
increase any species that would provide
substantial public benefits, should be
protected, whether in the Bay or on the
shoreline behind dikes. Such areas on the
shoreline are designated as Wildlife Areas on
the Plan maps. (Fish and WIlAlife Policies 1
and 2.)

Along with the state and national wildlife areas, the Audubon

Societyts Richardson Bay Wildlife Sanctuary has also been designated, because

its resource value is similar to goverriment-owned refuges.

2. Parks

. Also designated in the first set of maps are all existing

national, state, regional, county and city parks. The McAteer-Petris Act

-39-

defines "water-oriented recreation and public assembly" as one of the land

uses along the Bay shoreline that are essential to the public welfare of the

Day Area. (Government Code Section 66602.)

The Bay Plan Policy on Recreation states:

For parks, there is no practical estimate of
the acreage that should be provided on the
shoreline of the Bay, but it Is assumed the
largest possible portion of the total regional
requirement should be provided adjacent to th.e
Bay. (Recreation Policy No. 1.)

3. Funded Acquisitions

Proposed funded acquisitions for parks and refuges are also

designated. Their value is essentially equivalent to existing parks and

refuges as only those areas for which funding Is reasonably assured have beem

designated.

4. Public Access Areas

Public access areas have been included in Map Set One. These

are areas where public access has been obtained as a condition of a BCDC

permit. The McAteer-Petris Act calls for "maximum feasible public access (to

the Bay)..." (Goverment Code Section 66607.) The Bay Plan policies state:

In addition to the public access to the Bay
that will be provided by waterfront parks,
beaches, marinas, and fishing piers, maximum
feasible opportunity for pedestrian access to
the waterfront should be included In every new
development in the Day or on the shoreline,
whether it be for housing, industry, port,
airport, public facility, or other
use.es*Whenever public access to the Bay is
provided as a condition of development, on
fill or on the shoreline, the access should be
permanently guaranteedo" (Bay Plan Policies
on Public Access Nos. I and 4.)

-40-

D. 'Map Set Two: BU Plan, Marsh Plan, and Water Quality Control Plan Maps

The second set of maps contains designations based upon *high-priority

uses of the Bay and shoreline" as mapped in the Bay Plan and the management

areas of the Suisun Marsh as mapped in the Marsh Plan. It also contains areas

under the San Francisco Bay Begional Water Quality Control Board's

jurisdiction within the San Francisco Bay system where a power plant discharge

would be precluded by water quality objectives.

1. San Francisco Bay Plan

Priority use designations (PM1s) in the San Francisco Bay Plan

(Bay Plan) include ports, water-related industry, airports, wildlife areas,

waterfront parks and beaches, =r1nas, fishing piers, and boat launching

ramps. The Bay Plan recognizes that the Bay is a unit and Must be treated as

such in terms of the development of these facilities.

PORTS AND WATER-RELATED INDUSTRIES: Shipping is@

a major factor In the economy of the Bay Area,

and port plann1xg must be coordinatred with

developing adequate water-side sites for

industries that require ac cess to maritime

transportation.

The Bay Plan states that land reserved for

water-related industries should only be used by

Industries that use water for transportation and

thereby gain siffnificant economic benefits by

fronting on navigable water (Bay Plan Policy on

Water-Belated Ivdustry !No. 1 and Finding a).

_41-

Both the Bay Plan and the McAteer-Petris Act

make a clear distinction between the power

plants anticipated for a reasonable period of

time that only require access to water for

cooling and water-related industries. The Bay

Plan notes that both types of uses compete for

waterfront sites, but concludes that industries

requiring water only for cooling purposes should

be located in adjacent upland areas. Pipeline

corridors servirg such facilities may be

permitted within water-related industrial

priority use areas provided that there is no

conflict with pmsent or future water-related

transportation use of the site (Bay Plan Policy

on Water-Felated Industry No. 2).

AIRPORTS: Airports favor a location close to

the Bay so that planes may make takeoffs and

landings away fram populated areas, while still

being close to centers of heavy population.

WILDLIFE AREAS: Wildlife areas designated on

the plan maps are specific shoreline habitats

essential to wildlife considered valuable,

either because tht species is near extinction or

it provides "substlantial public benefits."

_42-

WATERFRONT PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION

FACILITIES: The need for recreational use of

the Bay and shoreline is increasing as

population and leisure time increase. The Bay

Plan states that land near the Bay that may be

needed for recreation in the future should be

set aside now. In addition to parks, beaches,

and trails this category, includes marinas,

fishing piers, and boat launching ramps.

2. Suisun Marsh Protection Plan

The Suisun Marsh Protection Plan (Marsh Plan) identifies "a

primary management area encompassing the! 89,000 acres of tidal marsh, managed

wetlands, adjacent grasslands, and waterways ... and a secondary management area

of approximately 22,500 acres of significant buffer lands." (Letter of

transmittal of Suisun Marsh Protection Plan. December 17, 1976.) Primary and

secondary management areas are designated as unsuitable for power plants.-

a. Primary Management Areas

The primary management area consists of bays, sloughs,

tidal marsh, diked-off wetlands,.seasonal marsh, and louland grassland.

SLOUGHS: The sloughs are the most

vulnerable aquatic habitat type in the

Marsh. Disruption of either salinity,

temperature, or turbidity could greatly

change the character of the flore and

fauna in the sloughs. While the whole

Marsh and Suisun Bay have a large

population of Neomysis, a tiny bay

shrimp, It is mostly concentrated in

sloughs. Neomysis is the main food item

for many species, including striped

bass. Suisun Marsh is the chief nursery

of striped bass in the state. Several

other species of fish are found in the

Marsb sloughs, including salmon,

steelhead, catfish, sturgeon, shad,

smelt, and crappies.

TIDAL MARSH: Tidal marsh includes the

narrow strand outside the levees as well

as other undiked areas. The dominant

plant species, tule and bulrush, provide

cover for nesting waterfowl. Because

these plants grow along the tidal edge of

the dikes and levees, they protect the

levees from erosion. Fat hen, which

occurs in some tidal areas, is an

important food for ducks.

DIKED MANAGED WETLANDS: Eighty-nine

percent of the Suisun Marsh consists of

diked managed wetlandsv which are mainly

hunting preserves. Managed wetlands

provide habitat for many, if not all,

forms of wildlife found in the tidal

marsh. Alkali bulrush, fat hen, and

brass buttons, all grown in abundance in

managed wetlands, are three plants that

are the primary food source for ducks

attracted to the Suisun Marsh.

SEASONAL MARSHES: Seasonal marshes are

the low-lying grasslands which are

flooded by rains for three or four months

per year. Small temporary ponds support

seasonal marsh vegetation of the same

types found in managed wetlands and tidal

marshes, and have high habitat value for

marsh-related wildlife. During the wet

season, the ponds provide resting areas

for migratory waterfowl.

LOWLAND GRASSLANDS: Lowland grasslands

lie adjacent to the wetlands, between the

five- and ten-foot contour level, and

form an ecologic-ally vital transition

zone between the Marsh and the uplands.

They are utilized by a variety of

wildlife common to the marshes and upland

grasslands. Many marshland species,

-45-

including the endangered Suisun shrew and

Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse, move to the

upland areas during high tides and the

flooding of the managed wetlands. More

plant species occur in the lowland

grassland area than in the upland

grasslands and the wetlands combined.

Vernal pools, which exhibit unique

species of plants during the spring

months, arv found in lowland grasslands

as well as in other areas.

b. Secondary Management Area

The secondary management area consists of upland

grasslands, cultivated lands, low-lying areas adjacent to the primary

management area and one area reserved for water-related industry. Its

function is to act as a buffer area insulating the primary management area

from adverse impacts of urban development and other land uses Incompatible

with preservation of the Marsh.

UPLAND GRASSLANDS: Upland grasslands

extend from the ten-foot contour level,

where the land has not been disturbed,

up to the wooded hill areas. They

provide habitat for upland species as

well as species who use both marsh and

upland areas. Golden eagles and other

_46-

birds of prey, as well as several

species of migratory waterfowl and

shorebirds, are found in the upland

grasslands. The main agricultural use

of the area is for cattle grazing.

CULTIVATED LANDS: The cultivated areas

in the secondary management area are

some upper grasslands and higher

portions of the managed wetlands. These

areas still have significant wildlife

value when grains are grown that provide

food for wildlife, particularly birds.

They act as a buffer in a way similar to

the upland grasslands.

LOW-LYING ADJACENT "BUFFER" AREAS: In

some cases, low-lying areas adjacent to

the Marsh have been included because of

special environmental conditions that

could have significant adverse effects

on the Marsh, or because there are

important marsh-related habitats in the

area.

WATER-RELATED INDUSTRY SITE: The

Collinsville site, on the southea3teM

side of the Marsh, is reserved for

-.47-

water-related industry. The PG&E site

east of'ColUn3ville Road is excluded

from designation In this study by the

terms of AB 1717.

3. Water Quality Control Plan

There are certain areas under the San Francisco Bay Regional

Water Quality Control Board's jurisdiction where a power plant discharge would

be precluded by water quality objectives. These are the Suisun Marsh,

Richardson Bay, and all streams tributary to the Bay system, excluding the

Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.

The Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin

specifically prohibits discharge of wastewater to Suisun Marsh in the summer,,

and to Richardson Bay between Sausalito Point and Peninsula Point all year-

round. Both of these areas are characterized by poor dispersion capabilities

and low assimilative capacities.

Other areas where power plant discharges should not be allowed

are the sloughs and predominantly freshwater rivers and creeks which flow into

the Bay system, excluding the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. In general

these streams are too small to be able to assimilate any wastewater discharges.

As it is not practical to map all of the sloughs and small

streams in BCDC's jurisdiction where the Water Quality Control Plan would

prohibit discharges from power plants, only Richardson Bay is so mapped.

However, all of the areas noted above that are within BCDC jurisdiction are

designated, as Indicated on page 61, for the purposes of this study to ensure

that no dis- charges take place that my violate the provisions of the Water

Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Basin.

E. Map Set Three: Natural Resource Maps

The third set of maps shows designations made on the basis of eleven

natural resources of such importance and sensitivity that they are protected

by the policies of the Bay Plan or the MIcAteer-Petris Act. Ucluded are Sur-

face waters of the Bay, marshes, salt ponds, mudflats, lowland. grasslands,

riparian vegetation, rare and endangered species habitat, shellfish beds,

marine mammal haul-out areas, shell deposits, and important fish habitat.

SURFACE WATERS OF THE BAY: The surface waters of

the Bay (up to the line ofbighest tidal action)

are designated as unsuitable for major power

generating facilities, but intake and outfall

lines for cooling systems, underwater electric

transmission lines, and fuel and steam pipelines

are permitted in those less sensitive portions of

the Bay through partial designations. It is clear

that there is sufficient land area surrounding the

Bay that the only fill necessary for the

construction of power plants is for such ancillary

facilities. Under the McAteer-Petris Act, fill

for any purpose (even for priority uses) cannot

take place unless it is the minimum necessary for

the project and there are no alternative

locations. The Bay Plan states: "The surface

area of the Bay and the total volume of water

should be kept as large as possible in order to

maximize active oxygen Interchange, vigorous

circulation, and effective tidal action." (Water

Surface Area and Volume Policy No. 1)

MARSHES: Marshes have been divided into three

3ub-groups: Tidal marshes; seasonal marshes; and

managed wetlands. The value of these habitats has

been described in the previous section on the

Suisun Marsh. The McAteer-Petris Act finds "That

the nature, location and extent of any fill should

be such that it will minimize harmful effects to

the bay area, such as, the reduction or impairment

of the volume surface area or circulation of

water, water quality, fertility of marshes or fish

or wildlife resources..." (Government Code

Section 66605(d)) The Pay Plan contains several

policies calling for the remaining marshes and

mudflats around the Bay to be maintained (Fish and

Wildlife Policies No. 1 and 2, Water Pollution

Policy No. 1, Marshes and Mudflats Policy No. 1,

Salt Ponds and Managed Wetlands Policy No. 2).

SALT PONDS: Salt ponds provide 14 percent of the

total Bay water surface, and are an economically

important use of the Bay. They are used as a
habitat by shorebirds, and, along with other

managed wetlands, moderate the climate and help

-50-

prevent smog. The Bay Plan states that salt ponds

should be maintained in salt production as long as

it Is economically feasible, and if the owners of

the salt ponds wish to withdraw them from

production, the public sbould make every effort to

purchase the ponds and reopen the area to the Bay

(Salt Ponds and Other Managed Wetlands Policies

No. I and 2).

KJDFLATS: Mudflats are used heavily for feeding,

either directly or through the food chain, by most

marine life in the Bay. They are an important

source of oxygen and help control air and water

pollution (Marshes and Mudflats Policy No. 1).

LOWLAND GRASSLANDS: Lowland grasslands, as

described in the previous section on the Suisun

Marsh, are an important transition zone between

the Marsh and the uplands. They form a habitat

for a variety of wildlife, including some

endangered species, and are therefore designated

under the McAteer-Petris Act (Government Code

Section 66605(d)).

RIPARIAN VEGETATION: Riparian vegetation is an

important habitat for wildlife, particularly

birds, who use it as a cover and for nesting. The

plant canopy over the streams also serves as a

cover for aquatic species, and as a habitat for

plant and animal species that form significant

links in the food chain. The removal of the

riparian vegetation would also result in a rise In

water temperature, reducing the biological

productivity of the water (Mars!@ Plan, Environment

Policies No. I and 2).

RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT: Rare and

endangered species habitat are designated under

the McAteer-Petris Act: "...the naturej location

and extent of any fill should be such that it will

minimize harmful effects to the bay area, such as,

the reduction or impairment of the volume surface

area or circulation of water, water quality,

fertility of marshes, or fish or wildlife

resources.@*" (Government Code Section 66605(d)).

SHELLFISH BEDS AND MARINE MAWIAL HAUL-OUT AREAS:

Shellfish beds and marine mammal haul-out areas

are designated by geographically-specific policies

printed on the Bay Plan maps. These areas would

also be protected under the McAteer-Petris Act

which states: "...the nature, location and extent

of any fill should be such that It will minimize

harmful effects to the bay area, such as, the

reduction or impairment of the volume surface area

-52-

or circulation of water, water quality, fertility

of marshes, or fish or wildlife resources***"

(Government Code Section 156605(d))

Policies of the Bay Plan are also applicable.

"The benefits of fish and wildlife in the'Bay

should be insured for present and future

generations of Californians ... Specific habitats

that are needed to prevent the extinction of any

species, or to maintain or increase any species

that would provide substantial public benefits,

should be protected, whether in the Bay or on the

shoreline behind dikes" (Fish and Wildlife

Policies No. 1 and 2).

SHELL DEPOSITS: Oyster shell deposits are dredged

from the Bay floor primarily for use as lime in

the production of cement. The Bay Plan finds:

"Cement is expensive to transport over great

distances, so a nearby source of lime is important

to the Bay Area economy" (Shell Deposits Finding

No. 2).

The shell deposits are also used as soil

conditioner, cattle feed, and poultry grit.

According to the Bay Plan, "Filling or diking that

adversely affect known shell deposits ... should be

allowed only for purposes providing more public

benefit than the availability of shells" (Shell

Deposits Policy No. 1).

IMPORTANT FISH HABITAT: For purposes of this

study, important fish habitat is defined as

follows:

1. A one-half-mile are around the mouth of an

anadromous fish stream.

2. Migratory fish routes. Only the Carquinez

Strait has been designated as a critical

passage for anadromous fish. While the

boundaries of such routes are not easily

definable, in the Carquinez Strait the

channel is so narrow that the boundaries are

clear.

3. Spawning areas. The only information

available is for herring, so only herring

spawning areas have been designated in this

study. As more information becomes

available, this designation can be revised.

4. Juvenile fish nursery areas. This includes

the Napa River, sloughs of the Suisun Marsh,

and shoreline areas as designated by Theodore

Wooster in a Department of Fish and Game

-54-

report entitled Occurrence of Juvenile Forage

and Game Fishes Over the Intertidal Mudflats

of the San Francisco Bay Complex.

Important fish habitat is designated for the same

policy reasons as rare and endangered species

habitat, shellfish beds, and haul-out areas for

marine mammals (see above).

F. Map Set Four: Composite Summary Maps

The fourth set of maps is an overlay of the first three sets and

shows all of the areas completely or partially designated.

G. Criteria Not Mapped

There were many criteria covered by the policies in the Bay Plan, the

McAteer-Petris Act, the Marsh Act and the Marsh Plan that were considered for

mapping and for various reasons were not included.

Scenic views (Bay Plan, page 33) may be included in a future

revision. While this criteria has great importance to the quality of public

access, there was not sufficient time to do an adequate mapping of Scenic

views throughout BCDC's jurisdiction.

Fault zones (Bay Plan, page 15) were not mapped because it was

assumed that the adverse effects could be successfully mitigated and that BCDC

could rely on its participation in the procedures of the Energy Commission to

assure that such mitigation is carried out.

Residential areas (Bay Plan, page 29) that would be incompatible with

power plants were not mapped because insufficient time was available to deter-

mine standards that would form the basis for such maps. Until such time as

-55-

all of the factors necessary for confident designations can be established, a

case-by-case determination will have to be made and implemented through

participation in the siting procedures of the Energy Commission.

-56-

VI. DE51GNATIONS

A. General Designations

The resources protected by Bay Plan and Marsh Plan policies fall into

two general categories: (1) those areas that possess natural resources that

should not be disrupted by major industrial uses such as a power plant; and

(2) those areas that have a higher priority for other forms of industrial or

similar uses. The former category includes such areas as marshes, mudflats,

wildlife refuges and parks. The latter category includes such areas as

water-related industrial use and port priority use areas. As the primary

purpose of protecting the latter areas is not to protect the natural character

of the land or water, but to preserve It for other, more important,

high-intensity uses, the approach of the designation process is different.

Where an area has more than one type of designation, due to the

presence of more than one resource, the most stringent designation will take

precedence.

B. Designations in Developed Priority Use Areas

Designations in water-related Industrial use or similar priority areas

are primarily intended to apply only to those "facilities" that are likely to

significantly pre-empt or Interfere with the use of the land for Its primary

purpose, such as a major power plant. Thus, where no other resource is

identified within any of the following priority use areas, designation does

not refer to the types of ancillary facilities noted:

-57-

Water-related industrial @riority use area:

Electric transmission lines, intake and discharge

lines for cooling systems, fuel pipelines, steam

pipelines, and co-generation facilities.

Port priority use areas: Same as water-related

industrial use areas.

Airport 2rioritv use areas: Intake and discharge

lines for cooling systems, underground electric

transmission lines, fuel pipelines, and steam

pipelines.
C. D@signations in Natural Resource and Recreation Areas

1. Full Designations

Most areas that possess natural resources protected by Plan

poli-cies are sufficiently sensitive that no significant industrial

construction would be permitted. Hence, the designation of those areas is

intended to prohibit all "facilities" unless they are ancillary to the main

power plant and conform to the statutory language contained in Public

Resources Code Section 25526(b) (i.e. "...such use is not inconsistent with

the primary use of the land and that there will be no substantial adverse

environmental effects..."). Given the sensitivity of most of these resources,

it is not possible to make such findings in the absence of a specific proposal

that must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

The areas designated in this category are:

- Existing and proposed parks

- Existing and proposed wildlife areas

-58-

- Public access areas

- Wildlife area priority use designation

Waterfront park or beach priority use

designation, including marinas, fishing piersv

and boat launching ramps

- Primary management areas under the Suisun Marsh

Preservation Plan

- Marshes

Riparian vegetation

Rare and endangered species habitat

Shellfish beds

Marine mammal haul-out, areas

Anadromous fish streams

Spawning areas

Juvenile fish nursery areas

2. Partial Designations

In some natural resource areas, however, it can be assumed with

some degree of confidence what the extent of the impact is likely to be from

certain well-defined ancillary facilities, such as the construction of the

intake and discharge lines from the cooling system. Where such impacts can be

reasonably well identified and are not of such substantial magnitude that they

deserve designation, exclusions of those facilities from the designation have

been made. Thus, where the following resource is identified, designation does

not refer to the types of ancillary facilities noted because the primary

impacts are generally limited to the construction period, the area affected Is

limited in size, and the area is likely to recover quickly.

_59-

All

Water-related industry site in the Secondar

Management Area of the Suisun Marsh Protection

Plan: Electric transmission lines, intake and

discharge lines for cooling systems, fuel pipelines,

steam pipelines, co-generation facilities.

Surface waters of the Bay: Underground or

underwater electric transmission lines, intake or

discharge lines for cooling systems, underground or

underwater fuel pipelines, underground or underwater

steam pipelines.

Secondary Management Areas in the Suisun Marsh

Protection Plan except for the water-related

industry site: Same as surface waters of the Bay.

Salt ponds.: Same as surface waters of the Bay.

Lowland grasslands: Same as surface waters of the

Bay.

Shell deposits: Same as surface waters of the Bay.

Mudflats: Underground or underwater electric

transmission lines, intake or discharge lines for

cooling systems that pass completely through the

area, underground or underwater fuel pipelines,

underground or underwater steam pipelines.

Areas Rrecluded ky Water_Quality Control Plan: Same

as mudflats.

-60-

Migratory fish routes: Electric transmission lines,

intake or discharge lines for cooling systems that

pass completely through the area, underground or

underwater fuel pipelines, underground or underwater

steam pipelines.
D. Co@seneration in Industrial Area

Co-generation projects are excluded from the.designation of

water-related industrial and port-priority use areas on the assumption that

they will not pre-empt much land and to avoid establishing any barriers to the

development of such projects.

The Commission recognizes that it is the policy of the Legislature as

well as the Energy Commission to encourage the development of co-generation

capacity. The Legislature bas determined that "co-generation technology is a

potential energy resource and should be an important element of the state's

energy supply mix. The Legislature further finds that co-generation

technology can assist meeting the state"s energy needs while reducing the

long-term use of conventional fuels, is readily available for immediate

application, and reduces negative environmental impacts. The Legislature

further finds that co-generation technology is important with respect to the

providing of a reliable and clean source of energy within the state and that

co-generation technolOgV_ should receive immediate support and commitment from

state government." (Public Resources Code Section 25004.2)

The Legislature has also established expedited siting procedures for

co-generation projects of less than 300 MW. The Notice of Intention stage of

the Energy Commission's siting process is eliminated and a final decision on

each project is required within twelve months of filing an application. The

Energy Commission's has also stated in its 1979 Biennial Report: "Under the

Commissionts expedited siting regulations, we will certify any co-generation

facility that can be demonstrated to have reasonably mitigable environmental

impacts, can meet existing air, water, and other health and safety standards,

and will result in net fuel savings. Any proposal that meets these criterla

will be deemed needed."

The Commission accepts this emphasis on the desirability of

co-generation projects and believes that the partial designation system

included herein is consistent with it. Most co-generation projects are likely

to involve capacities of less than 50 MW and therefore will not come under the

definition of "facility" that is applicable to this report. A few larger

projects may be affected, but, because of the system of partial designations

contained herein, virtually all will be under the exclusive, expedited sitimg

procedures of the Energy Coamission. Only those areas where the impacts may

not, in fact, be "reasonably mitigable" do the designations apply. And even

in those areas, approval can be made on a case-by-case basis for ancillary

facilities if there are no substantial adverse environmental effects. A PGAE

review of proposed co-generation projects confirms that few, if any, conflicts

are anticipated. It should also be noted that the Commission's ordinary

permit procedures require a final decision by the Commission within 90 days of

filing an application, so there should be little or no conflict with the

Energy Commission's 12-month expedited siting procedures.

In the Commission's first report, adopted in 1978, the Commission also

noted the potential problems associated with the definition of co-generation

-62-

(i.e., it would be possible to combine a very small industrial project with a

power plant to allow it to be defined as, and receive the expedited treatment

of, a co-generation project). Nevertheless, the Commission adopted a broad

definition of co-generation. No problems have resulted from such a broad

definition, and there is no indication that any such problems will

materialize. The Legislature has since defined "co-generation technology" to

mean: "the use for the generation of electricity of exhaust steam, waste

steam, heat or resultant energy from an industrial, commercial, or

manufacturing plart or process, or the use of exhaust steam, waste steam, or

heat from a thermal power plant for an industrial, commercial, or

manufacturing plant or process. For purposes of this division, the

industrial, commercial, or manufacturing plant or process shall not be

considered a thermal power plant or portion thereof. Co-generation technology

shall not include steam or heat developed solely for electrical power

generation." For the purpose of this report, the Commission determines that

this is an appropriate definition of co-generation.

E. Exclusion of Existing Facilities and Reasonable Expansion Areas

1. General

Government Code Section 66645(b) provides that "any property of a

utility that is used for such a facility or will be Used for the reasonable

expansion thereof..." shall not be designated as unsuitable. PG&E has stated

that it does not intend to expand any of its existing power plants beyond the

boundaries of their existing sites. With the possible exception of the

Pittsburg site, which is discussed more fully below, the sites of existing

PG&E power plants have not been designated as unsuitable. Care has also been

-63-

taken to avoid designating any area around existing intake and discharge lines

for cooling systems associated with such plants in the event that the cooling

systems have to be modified at some future time.

2. Electric Transmission Lines

The definition of "electric transmission line" in the

Warren-Alquist Act that brings it within the definition of "facility" applies

only to "...any electric powerline carrying electric power from a thermal

powerplant located within the state to a point of junction with any

interconnected transmission system" (Public Resources Code Section 25106).

Determining whether any particular transmission line may be a facility,

however, is difficult and has been the subject of much debate before the

Energy Commission. The definition was also tl@,e subject of several pieces of

legislation that were directed at clarifying those issues and it is likely

that"some changes will be made in the future. The scale of the maps used in

this study also makes it difficult to precisely define expansion areas around

existing electric transmission lines that may at some time be classified as a

"facility". Therefore, given the difficulty of precisely locating trans-

mission corridors on maps of the scale used in this study, and the

uncertainties concerning what electric transmission lines constitute

"facilities", those areas are not shown on the maps. The statutory mandate

applies, however, and where areas are designated within existing transmission

line corridors on the maps such designations shall not apply to the addition

to, or the expansion or modification of, the transmission lines within that

corridor.

-64-

3. Pittsbu

PG&E owns about 3.5 miles of shoreline property at its Pittsburg

power plant. Most of this property is east of BCDC's jurisdiction. The

existing power generating units at Pittsburg are at the far eastern end of the

property, outside of BCDC's jurisdiction. The portion of PG&E-owned property

that Is within BCDC's jurisdiction is about 1.5 miles from the nearest

existing power plant-related facility on the remainder of the property (tbe

spray pond that was intended to cool Unit 7, but does not function) and over 2

miles from the transmission lines that serve the existing Pittsburg units.

The generating units at Pittsburg are even farther from BCI?C'3 juri3dictice.

Given this large distance, the portion of ME's property within BCDC's

jurisdiction is not excluded from the designation process as an expansion area

for an existing facility, and is evaluated using the criteria applied to all

areas in BCDC jurisdiction. See Section VII, beginning on page 66, describing

the resources and designation on the site.

4. Collinsville

The Collinsville site has not been designated pursuant to the

provisions of Government Code Section 66645(b). Although the location of the

intake and discharge lines for the cooling system are not known at this time,

a large area of water was left partially undesignated in front of the

Collinsville site in recognition of the legislative mandate.

-.65-

VII. MAPS - DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS

Map #1 "San Francisco North" (San Francisco & Marin Countie3j

Set I

Public access at Warm Water Cove.

The area of the shoreline from south of the beginning of BCDCs
jurisdiction at Pt. Lobos to the eastern edge of Aquatic Park, Alcatraz
Island, the area in Marin County from west of Pt. Diablo going east and north
along the shoreline to the Sausalito City line, and Angel Island are all
within the legislated boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation area.

Public access and boat launching ramp south of 855 China Basin Street.

Two areas of public access at Central Basin.

Several areas of public access along Mission Creek inland of China Basin.

Public access and boat launching ramp on China Basin Street near Pier 52.

Public access south of the Ferry Building.

Public access at the Embarcadero Bart platform.

Public access at Pier 7, foot of Broadway.

Public access at Pier 39 and Pier 41 at North Point.

Public access at Pier 43-1/2 at Fisherman's Wharf.

Tiffany Beach, Princess Park, Gabrielson Park and Earl F. Dunphy Park in
Sausalito.

Public access at boardwalk & plaza area in Sausallto.

Bicycle path runs along the Bay for 3.2 miles frw Sausalito to Mill
Valley.

Public access at Peninsula Point on Belvedere Island.

Public access along Paradise Drive at Pt. Tiburon.

Public access along the Boardwalk on Main St. in Tiburon.

-66-

Set 2

The area of the shoreline from south of the beginning of BCDC's
jurisdiction at Pt. Lobos to the east edge of Aquatic Park, Alcatraz Island,
the area in Marin County from west of Pt. Diablo going east and north along
the shoreline to the Sausalito City line, and Angel Island are all designated
in the San Francisco Bay Plan as priority use areas for waterfront'parks or
beaches.

The San Francisco area includes a marina and fishing pier. There is a
marina in Horseshoe Bay and a proposed fishing pier at Cavallo Point. Five
marinas and a launching ramp are shown along the Sausalito waterfront.
Belvedere and Tiburon both have marinas and there is a proposed fishing pier
at Pt. Tiburon.

The surface area of Richardson Bay to a line drawn between Sausalito Point
and Peninsula Point is designated because discharges would violate water
quality standards.
The southern San Francisco shoreline from the China Basin Channel to the
extension of Cargo Way into India Basin is designated for port-priority uses
except"the site of the Potrero Power Plant is excluded.

Set 3

There are marine mammal haul-out areas around Pt. Lobos, Peninsula Pt.
(Belvedere), and Blunt Point (Angel Island).
Horseshoe Bay has mudflats.

There are shellfish beds around Yellow Bluff and in three areas on the
southeastern section of Angel Island.
All of the Marin shoreline on this'map, including Angel Island and
excluding the area west of Pt. Diablo, is a spawning area for herring.
Map #2 "San Rafael" (Marin County)

Set 1

Bicycle path runs along the Bay for 3.2 miles from Sausalito to Mill
Valley.

Public access at Yacht Harbor in Sausalito.

Public access at Mill Valley Community Recreation Center on Corte Madera
Road.

Public access beyond the end of Sycamore Ave. in Mill Valley
Public access at Enchanted Knolls Park in Mill Valley.
Two areas of public access west of Highway 101 and north of Richardson Bay
in Mill Valley.

-67-

Public access on the edge of De Silva Pond.

Public access at a series of parks along Richardson Bay.

Public access at Strawberry Park near Strawberry Point School.

Public access at pier south of Strawberry Point School.

Public access at Richardson Bay east of Strawberry Point School.

The furthest eastern section of Richardson Bay shown on this map is part
.of the Audubon Society's Richardson Bay Wildlife Sanctuary.

Public access on levee top at Muzzi Marsh south of Corte Madera Creek.

Corte Madera Creek Ecological Reserve is Just south of the mouth of Corte
Madera Creek.

Public access at Piper Park in Larkspur.

Public access along Corte Madera Creek in Kentfield.

Public access around the Larkspur Ferry Terminal.

Public access at Beach Park, San Rafael.

Public access at Marin County Civic Center Park, San Rafael.

China Camp State Park is east of Karin County Civic Center.

Set 2

There is a marina in Richardson Bay and a proposed fishing pier and boat
launching ramp to the northwest, nearer the Richardson Bay Bridge.

Near the mouth of Corte Madera Creek there are proposals for a marina and
boat launching ramp.

There is an existing marina on San Rafael Creek near Highway 101.

The surface area of Richardson Bay to a line drawn between Sausalito Point
and Peninsula Point is designated because discharges would violate water
quality standards.

Set 3

There are mudflats in Richardson Bay and east of Corte Madera.

Both of these areas have adjacent tidal marsh, which is also found up
Corte Madera Creek, and on San Rafael Creek.

Shellfish beds are found in two are-as of Richardson Bay on this map.

The Corte Madera Marsh is the habitat for two endangered species, the Salt
Marsh Harvest Mouse and the Clapper Rail.

There is a marine mammal haul-out area in Richardson Bay at Strawberry
.-Point.

Map #3 "San Quentin" (Marin and Contra Costs Counties)

Set 1

Public access at Strawberry Point and on the shore of the inlet north of
Strawberry Point.

Public access on Richardson Bay northwest of the Richardson Bay Wildlife
Sanctuary.

The Audubon Society's Richardson Bay Wildlife Sanctuary is south of
Tiburon Boulevard off Greenwood Beach Road.

Shoreline Park runs for more than 5,000 feet along the Tiburon shoreline
and then into the center of Tiburon. Shoreline path continues in the City of
Belevedere.

San Francisco State Univsersity Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies
and Paradise Beach County Park are located on the north of Tiburon Peninsula.

Public access on the shoreline east of Corte Madera City boundary.

Public access on a levee between Pt. San Quentin and the mouth of San
Rafael Creek.

Pickleweed and Schoen Parks near the mouth of San Rafael Creek.

Shoreline Strip at Main Street and San Pedro Road in San Rafael.

McNear's Beach County Park and China Camp State Park form a continuous
strip along the shoreline starting about 2,0001 north of Pt. San Pedro.

Pt. Molate Beach Park is located south of the point in Richmond.

There are two public access areas at Castro Point.

There is public access on both sides of the long wharf in the town of
Point Richmond.

Two areas of public access in Point; Richmond north of Cypress Point.

George Miller, Jr. Regional Shoreline is between Cypress Point and Point
Richmond.

..69-

The Municipal Fier at Point Richmond has public access.

Set 2

There is a wildlife area priority use designation on the shore of
Richardson Bay near Bel Aire. East of this designation is a Waterfront Park
that extends for about a mile along the shoreline.

On the northeastern edge of the Tiburon Peninsula are three separate areas
(Bluff Pt., Pt. Chauncey, and Paradise Cove) that are designated as Waterfront
Parks.

At Paradise Cove there is a fishing pier and at Paradise Cay a marina.

A fishing pier is shown at Pt. San Quentin.

A Proposed and existing marina are shown near the mouth of San Rafael
Creek. There is an additional existing marina on San Rafael Bay south of San
Pedro Road, and a proposed fishing pier to the northwest. Another marina is
located at McNears Beach.

An area is designated for waterfront park or beach use from south Of Pt.
San Pedro north to Gallinas Creek (past the area mapped).

Marin Islands, The Sisters, and Red Rock should be preserved for their
wildlife value, as should Castro Rocks, which are a harbor seal hauling ground.

A stretch of the Richmond shoreline, from just south of San Pablo Creek,
is designated for Use as a waterfront park.

Four other areas in the vicinity are designated for parks (1) a small area
along the shoreline at the northern end of Pt. San Pablo; (2) a small area near
the Pt. San Pablo Yacht Harbor; (3) The Brothers Islands; and (4) a strip along
the shoreline extending south from north of Pt. oxient and including a large area
from the Naval Supply' Depot north of Pt. Nolate to Castro Pt.- The inland portion
of Pt. San Pablo and the shoreline from the Terminal Four Wharf south to the
park priority use area is designated for port priority use.
Terminal No. One at Pt. ]Richmond is designated for port priority uses.

There are marinas at Pt. San Pablo Yacht Harbor and Castro Point. The
latter area also has a fishing pier.

The rest of this area, from San Pablo Creek to the Long Wharf south of the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, excluding tidal marsh areas, is designated for
water-related industry.

Two parks designations are mapped north of Pt. Richmond, near the
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad.

Southeast of Pt. Richmond are an existing and proposed marina.

The surface area of Richardson Bay to a lion drawn between Sausalito Point
and Peninsula Point is designated because discharges would violate water
quality standards.

Set 3

The edge of Richardson Bay is lined with mudflats, as are Keil Cove, the
shore southeast of Paradise Cay, and a large area off the Corte Madera Marsh
and San Quentin. Mudflats also extend north of Pt. San Quentin, around the
mouth of San Rafael Creek, southeast of San Pedro Road, and around the Marin
Islands. In the East Bay there are mudflats off the north shore of Richmond
around The Brothers Islands.

.There are shellfish beds around Strawberry Point. More shellfish beds are
found south and north of Paradise Cay, west of San Quentin, southeast of San
.Pedro Road, and north of McNears Beach. In the East Bay they are found on
both sides of Pt. San Pablo and on both sides of Cypress Pt. in Pt. Richmond.

Tidal marshes appear around San Clemente Creek in Corte Madera, at the
mouth of San Rafael Creek, and in north Richmond in the East Bay, including
one small area near the Pt. San Pablo 'Yacht Harbor.

Harbor seal haul-outs are north of Strawberry Pt. and on Castro Rocks in
the East Bay.

The eastern and northern shores of the Tiburon Peninsula are spawning
areas for herring, as are several areas on the western Richmond shoreline.
Other important fish habitat are found over the mudflats off northern
Richmond, south of Pt. San Pablo, and south of the Brooks Island breakwater.

The Clapper Rail has been found near the mouths of Corte Madera and San
Rafael Creeks.

The Marin Islands are a heron and egret breeding area.

Map #4 "Point Bonita" (San Francisco and Marin Counties)

Set 1

GGNRA extends east on both sides of the Golden Gate from the edge of BCDC
jurisdiction.

A bike path extends along the Richardson Bay shoreline.

Set 2

The shoreline from south of the beginning of BCDC13 jurisdiction at Pt.
Lobos east to the edge of the section mapped is designated as a priority use
area for waterfront parks or beaches.

In Marin County the area from Pt. Bonita, where BCDC jurisdiction begins,
east to the edge of the area mapped is similarly designated.

-71-

Set 3

There are marine mammal haul-outs around Pt. Lobos and Ft. Bonita.

Map #5 "Petaluma River" (Marin and Sonoma Counties)

Set 1

An area from Donahue Slough north along the west shore of the Petaluma
River to Schultz Slough has been recently purchased by the Wildlife
Conservation Board and the Dept. of Fish and Game is working on a management
.study.

The Board has proposed the acquisition of the land to the northwest
(Neil's Island).

The Black John Slough area is leased by State Lands Commission to the
Dept. of Fish and Game.

Set 2

Neils Island, in the Petaluma Marsh, is designated as a Park. Proposed
marinas are located near the mouths of San Antonio Creek and Black John Slough.

Set 3

All of the area on the west shore of the Petaluma River, with two small
exceptions near Highway 101, is marsh. Much of it is also habitat for the
Clapper Rail and the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse.

On the east shore of the Petaluma River there are intermittant stretches
of marsh. The whole shoreline up to an area near Highway 101 is habitat for
the Clapper Rail and the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse.

Map #6 "Novato" (Marin and Sonoma Counties)

Set 1

Marin County Civic Center Park and Fairgrounds covers 80 acres just east
of Highway 101.

China Camp State Park lies to the east of the Civic Center and south of
Gallinas Beach.

North of Gallinas Creek is Dept. of Fish and Game's San Pablo Bay Wildlife
Area. Adjacent and west of this holding is McInnis County Park.

Two public access areas are found on either side of the Petaluma River at
Black Point.

_72-

Set 2

The area south of Gallinas beach is designated for park use. To the north
of Gallinas Beach the area surrounded on three sides by the levee is also
mapped as park PUD.

There is an existing boat launch ramp and a proposed marina on Gallinas
Creek.

Hamilton Air Force Base is designated as an airport priority use area.

South of Highway 37 on the Petaluma River is a proposed marina and an
existing boat launch ramp. Just north of the highway in Sonoma County is an
existing marina.

The area south of the highway in Sonoma County, excluding tidal marsh, is
designated for water-related industry..

Set 3

Gallinas Creek has large areas of tidal marsh. Near the mouth is Clapper
Rail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat.

On the Petaluma River there are tidal marshes, as well as Clapper Rail and
Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat, on both sides of the river.

Map #7 "Petaluma.Point" (Marin and Sonoma Counties)

Set 1

China Camp State Park includes the area from south of China Camp northwest
to Gallinas Creek.

From Gallinas Creek north to Novato Creek, the shoreline is part of the
San Pablo Bay Wildlife Refuge (Dept. of Fish and Game.)

The San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge extends from the mouth of the
Petaluma River east into Solano County, and includes lower Tubbs Island.

Set 2

From south of China Camp north-west to Gallinas Creek, excluding tidal
marsh, the area is designated for park use.

Hamilton Air Force Base is designated as an airport priority use area.

In Sonoma County the area south of Highway 37 and east of the Petaluma
River is mapped water-related industry PUD. Tubbs Island is a wildlife PUD.

-73-

Set 3

Mudflats and tidal marshes extend virtually along the entire shoreline
shown on this map. Nearly all the marsh area corresponds to the Clapper Rail
and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat. This habitat extends up the Novato
Creek, outside of BCDC jurisdiction.

There are three small shellfish beds northwest of China Camp..

The mouth of the Petaluma River is designated as an anadromous fish stream.

Map #8 "Sears Point" (Sonoma, Napa, and Solano Counties)

Set 1

Tolay Creek north to the Sears Point Road and the shoreline of San Pablo
Bay to the levee are included in the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge.

All of Upper Tubbs Island is under negotiation for acquisition by United
States Fish & Wildlife Service.

Set 2

South of Highway 37, extending east to Lakeville Road, is water-related
industry PUD.

On the west side of the mouth of Sonoma Creek are a proposed marina and
fishing pier.

There is another proposed marina on Hudeman Slough, south of the Southern
Pacific Railroad tracks.

Lower Tubbs Island and Skagg Island are designated as wildlife areas.

The western diked section of Island No. 1, between Napa Slough and the
Bay, is designated as a saltpond-managed wetland.

,@e t 3

There is tidal marsh along Tolay Creek.

There are tidal marshes along the shore of San Pablo Bay with adjoining
mudflats.

Sonoma Creek is an anadromous fish stream and therefore a one-half-mile
are around its mouth has been designated.

Tidal marshes extend up Sonoma Creek, the Napa Sloughs, Hudeman Slough,
and Steamboat Slough.

-74-

Clapper Rail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat are found in southern
Tolay Creek area, along the shore of San Pablo Bay, up Sonoma Creek, the Napa
Sloughs, Steamboat Slough, part way up Hudeman Slough, and Schell Slough. The
last area has the densest population of Clapper Rails in the Napa Marsh, and
perhaps in the entire San Francisco Bay Area.

Map #9 "Cuttings Wharf" (Sonoma, Napa, and Solano Counties)

-Set 1

The shoreline of San Pablo Bay up to the levee is included in the San
P4blo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. I

There is public access along the south shore of Dutchman Slough.

A boat launching ramp and fishing platform are located on Hudeman Slough
at Skaggs Island Road.

The area around Hudeman Slough is a proposed acquisition by the Wildlife
.Conservation Board, as is the area on both sides of the Napa River by Fagan
Slough.

Coon Island is an ecological reserve.

The Napa Marshes Wildlife Area is own ed by Leslie Salt Co. but is leased
for hunting by the Dept. of Fish and Game. It includes Knight Island, eastern
Russ Island, Banty Island, Cross Island, Little Russ Island, and the area
north of Appleby Bay.

The area between Sonoma Boulevard and the Napa River and south from near
Collins is proposed for acquisition by the Wildlife Conservation Board. An
area south of Dutchman Slough is also proposed for acquisition by the Board.

Set 2

Hudeman Slough contains a boat launching ramp and a fishing pier.

Skagg island is designated as a wildlife area.

North of Cuttings Wharf, on the Napa River, is a fishing pier and boat
launching ramp.

Most of the area from the Napa County line east to the Napa River (and
some areas to the east of the Napa River) and from the Bay north to above Bull
Island are salt ponds/managed wetlands. Not included in this designation are
tidal marsh areas or the eastern section of Island No. 1, south of Dutchman
Slough.

-.75-

Set 3

Tidal marshes extend along the edge of San Pablo Bay, with adjoining
mudflats.

Little Island, Buss Island, Island No. 2, part of Island No..1, and Knight
Island are salt ponds, as is the area north and east of Good Luck Point.

Two areas of managed wetlands are on either side of Napa Slough near
Hudeman Slough and Appleby Bay, and another smaller managed wetland is on Russ
Island.

Mudflats are found on much of the Napa River, which is an important
juvenile fish habitat.

Tidal marshes are found throughout the sloughs of the Napa Marsh.

Coon Island is a heron breeding area.

In several tidal marshes in this area there are Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse
and Clapper Rail habitat.

Map #10 "Mare Island" (Contra Costa and Solano Counties)

Set 1

I. The San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge extends to the northern
boundary of the Mare Island Naval Reservation.

The land adjacent to this area north to Dutchman Slough is a proposed
acquisition area by the Wildlife Conservation Board. The Board also proposes
to acquire the land north of Highway 37 on the east aide of the Napa River.

There are four areas of public access on the eastern shore of Mare Island
Strait.

There is also public access on the shoreline in Oleum.

East Bay Regional Park District has waterfront property at Lone Tree Point
in Rodeo and in Hercules. Two areas of shoreline public access are located in
Pinole, just southwest of the latter site. There is a linear park along
Pinole Creek. Montara Bay Park and Montalvin Manor Park are east of Point
Pinole Regional Parkp which extends four miles along the Bay shoreline.

Set 2

North of Dutchman Slough is a salt pond/managed wetland designation.

There is an existing fishing pier and marina on the Napa River by the
Highway 37 crossing.

-76-

Three marina3l a fishing pier, and two boat ramps are currently located in
Mare Island Strait.

The Mare Island Naval Reservation is designated for water-related industry.

On the eastern side of Mare Island Strait, the area from Highway 37 south
along the shore for over 2 miles is mapped for waterfront park or'beach PUD.
South of this area the designation is for water-related industry*

In Contra Costa County, the area from the eastern edge of the map west to
the sewage disp9sal plant in Oleum is mapped water-related industry PUD.

There is an existing marina at Lone Tree Point in Rodeo. At the Hercules
City Line the water-related industry PUD starts again and continues south
nearly to the southern city limit of Hercules.

In Pinole, east of Wilson Point, a boat launching ramp and marina are
proposed.

A park is proposed around Wilson Point.

Pinole Pt. is designated waterfront park or beach PM, excluding tidal
marsh areas.

Set 3

Tidal marshes and adjoining mudflats extend north along the shore of San
Pablo Bay from the Mare Island breakwater. There are also scattered tidal
marshes and mudflats on Mare Island Strait and at the mouth of the Napa
River. Tidal marshes extend up the south bank of Dutchman Slough. On the
south side of Carquinez Strait there are only scatterd tidal marshes, but
extensive mudflats.

A salt pond is located north of Dutchman Slough.

The Napa River is an important juivenile fish habitat.

Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Clapper Rail habitat are found in Vallejo
north of Highway 37 and south of this location, on the Mare Island Strait.
The southwestern portion of the Mare Island Naval Reservation is also habitat
for these two endangered species.

There are shellfish beds at Lone Tree Pt., near the Hercules-Pinole city
boundary, around Wilson Pt., southwest of Wilson Pt., and around Pinole Pt.

Map 011 "Cordelia" (Napa and Solano Coumties)

Set 1

(Nothing mapped)

-77-

Set 2

The Secondary Management Area (SMPA) begins on the east side of Interstate
680 and extends south from Cordelia. The uphill boundary of the Primary
Management Area is the 10-foot contour. At the Benicia Hills the Secondary
Management Area extends west of Interstate 680 from one to two miles.

-Set 3

There is a lowland grassland area east of Highway 680. Just to the north
of this is a seasonal marsh, and north of the marsh are three managed
.wetlands. Between Highway 680 and the managed wetlands are two riparian
vegetation corridors.

Map #12 "Benicia" (Solano and Contra Costa Counties)

Set 1

Public Access at Glen Cove Marina in Elliot Cove.

The Benicia State Recreation Area extends north from Dillon Pt. in Benicia.

There are several areas of public access on the western shoreline of
Benicia.

Public access at City of Benicia Marina at.Benicia Point.

There is a large area of public access around the Martinez marina which
includes a 300-acre property recently acquired by East Bay Regional Parks.

There are two public access areas in Crockett west of the Carquinez Bridge.

Set 2

Mare Island and the eastern shore of Mare Island Strait to Carquinez
Heights are designated for water-related industry.

From Carquinez Heights east to and including the east shore of Southampton
Bay, the area has been designated for waterfront park or beaches.

There is an existing marina at Elliot Cove and one proposed at Glen Cove.

North of Benicia Point is a proposed marina and an existing launching
ramp. A fishing pier is proposed at the Point. Approximately 3000 feet east
of Benicia Point a water-related industry PUD extends east past the Benicia-
Martinez bridge. East of the bridge the water is designated a Primary
Management Area under the SMPA.

-78-

In Contra Costa County a water-related industry PUD extends west from the
edge of the area mapped to the boundary of the Martinez Waterfront Regional
Shoreline. Included is this park is a marina, a launching ramp, and a
proposed fishing pier.

The western shoreline of Crockett -to the Carquinez Bridge is designated
.for water-related industry. To the west of the bridge are a marina and .a boat
launching ramp.

From Selby west to the edge of the area mapped is a water-related industry
PUD.

Sit 3

The mouth of the Napa River (Mare Island Strait) is designated as an
anadromous fish stream.

There are marshes near the river's mouth and a shellfish bed near
Carquinez Heights in Vallejo.

Glen Cove, Southampton Bay, and several other small inlets on the northern
shore of Carq'uinez Strait have mudflats. North of Southampton Bay and east of
Benicia Pt. there are tidal marshes.

There are two small areas of managed wetlands north of the Southampton Bay
marsh and two other small managed wetlands east of Highway 680.

The Southampton Bay marsh is a habitat for Clapper Rail and Salt Marsh
Harvest Mouse.

The Carquinez Strait is critical habitat for migrating fish, especially
salmon and steelhead. It is designated from Selby east to the Benicia-
Martinez Bridge.

On the south shore of the Strait, mudflats extend from Martinez west to
Ozol, with one small marsh appearing west of Ozol. There are tidal marshes
inland of the-Martinez mudflats.

Map #13 "Fairfield South" (Solano County)

Set 1

Public access at marina in Suisun City.

Peytonia Slough Ecological Reserve; Hill Slough Wildlife Area; Grizzly
Island Wildlife Area (Joice Island unit) are administered by the Department of
Fish and Game.

-79-

Set 2

The area from Tbomasson south to Peltier Slough is a Secondary Management
Area under the SMPA-

Potrero Hills, a small area above the 10 foot contour adjacent to Highviay
:12, and an area for the most part west of Interstate 680 are als6 Secondary
Management areas.

The rest of the area roughly south of the Southern Pacific Tracks and
Highway 12, with the exception of the areas south of Subeet and Suisun City,
.are Primary Management areas.

Set 3

Mudflats extend along the shore of Grizzly Bay. Tidal marshes lie between
the mudflats and the levees, both along the Bay and up the sloughs. Three
large tidal marsh areas are found north of Cutoff Slough, north of Peytonia
Slough, and around Hill Slough. A seasonal marsh is located north of the
latter tidal marsh.

The sloughs are an important juvenile fish habitat.

Lowland grasslands extend around much of the southern and western edges of
Potrero Hills. Two other areas of lowland grasslands are east of Highway
680. To the north of the most northern of these grasslands is a small
seasonal marsh.

There is a small habitat area for the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse on Joice
Island.

Most of the rest of this area is managed wetlands.

Map #14 "Port Chicago" (Solano and Contra Costa Counties)

Set 1

There is a public access area southeast of Bulls Head Point.

Set 2

All of the water area and islands in Solano County east of the
Benicia-Martinez Bridge is a Primary Management Area.

The Benicia Hills east of Interstate 680 are a Secondary Management Area.

The Benicia Arsenal area, plus an area east of Interstate 680, is
designated for water-related industry.

-so-

Southeast of the Southern Pacific ]Railroad tracks, including all of Morrow
Island, is a Primary Management Area under the SMPA.

A marina and fishing pier are proposed for the mouth of Suisun Slough.

In Contra Costa County from the eastern edge of the area mapped west, past
.-the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, to the western edge of the mapped area, the PUD
is water-related industry. (Tidal marshes are excluded from*this area.)

Set 3

West of the Benicia-Martinez Bridge is an important migratory fish route.

Tidal marshes line most of the shore on both sides of the Bay and on the
islands. There are mudflats in the Bay, along much of the northwestern edge
of the islands, on the tip of Joice Island, and from the Ft. Edith area west
to Martinez.

There are managed wetlands on Simmons Island, Ryer Island, and Morrow
.Island on the northern shore.

Two lowland grasslands are on the eastern side of Highway 680.

The sloughs are an important juvenile fish habitat.

East of Pacheco Creek are two areas of Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat.

Map 15 "Denverton" (Solano County)

Set 1

Laughing Mallard Unit and Grizzly Island Wildlife Area (Joice and Grizzly
Island Units) are managed by Department of Fish and Game.

Set 2

The northern edge of the Primary Management Area is bounded by Highway 12
until shortly east of Denverton, where the boundary heads south along Shiloh
Road. The Sacramento Northern Railroad tracks eventually become the boundary
which then runs southeast.

There are five Secondary Management Areas on Map #15: A small area near
Tolenas; Potrero Hills; a small area near Denverton; Bradmoor Island; and the
entire eastern edge of the area, including Kirby Hill. The rest of the area
within the mapped boundaries is a Primary Management Area.

Set 3

Tidal marshes and mudflats line the shore of Grizzly Bay. The sloughs are
generally lined with tidal marshes and there is a large marsh in the Hill
Slough area.

Much of the area is managed wetlands.

There are lowland grassland areas around the Potrero and Montezuma Hills,
around Denverton, and near Molina. The lowland grass areas north of the
Potrero Hills and around Denverton and Molina contain seasonal marshes.

In the Potrero Hills area there is a Golden Eagle habitat.

Near Beldons Landing there is a Black Rail habitat. The Canada Goose has
a small habitat area on Grizzly Island, and the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse is
found on the shore of Grizzly Bay.

The sloughs are important juvenile fish habitat.

-82-

Ma2 16 "Honker Bax" (Solano & Contra Costa Counties)

Set 1

Grizzly Island Wildlife Area includes Hammond Island and Grizzly Island.

Set 2

A small area in the northeast corner of the map, including the Sacramento
Northern Railroad tracks, is reserved for water-related industry and is part
of the Secondary Management Area under the SMPA.
All the rest of the mapped area, including the water area, i@ Solano
County is Primary Management Area.

With the exception of tidal marshes and an existing marina at McAvoy Boat
Harbor, all of the mapped area in Contra Costa County from Stake Point west is
water-related industry PUD.

The site proposed for the Pittsburg: Units 8 and 9 power plant is
designated to the five-foot contour line because it is tidal marsh. It is
also partially designated to the 5.5-foot contour because that is the
estimated line of highest tidal action and is therefore considered part of the
surface area of the Bay. The remainder of the site within BCDC's jurisdiction
is partially designated as an area reserved for water-related industry.

PG&E is in the process of evaluating different plant configurations on
different locations which will qualify under the Warren-Alquist Act in the
Pittsburg 8 and 9 proceedings. If PG&E can demonstrate that the site is
superior to all others available for the purpose, BCDC should consider
changing the water-related industrial priority use designation in the Bay Plan.

Set 3

There are mudflats in Grizzly Bay, on the western shores of Van Sickle and
'Chipps Islands, and near Middle Ground Island. Virtually all the shoreline in
this area is tidal marsh.

The site proposed for the Pittsburg Units 8 and 9 power plant is
designated to the five-foot contour line because it is tidal marsh. It is
also partially designated to the 5.5-foot contour because that is the
estimated line of highest tidal action and is therefore considered part of the
surface area of the Bay. The remainder of the site within BCDC'3 jurisdiction
is partially designated as an area reserved for water-related industry.

East of Montezuma Slough are lowland grassland areas and seasonal marshes.

Most of the area in Solano County i it managed wetlands.

The sloughs are important juvenile I"Ish habitat.

-83-

Two areas of Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat are found near the shores of
Grizzly Bay.

Map 16A "Antioch North" (Solano County)

Set 1

(Nothing mapped.)

Set 2

. From the east side of Marshall Cut to an area east of the mouth of
Montezuma Slough, the land has been reserved for water-related industry and is
part of the Secondary Management Area under the SMPA.

A little over a mile f rom the river, the eastern boundary of the Secondary
Management Area turns west and then follows the Collinsville Road north. The
western boundary of the area runs northwest from a point east of the mouth of
Montezuma Slough.

All of the land and water areas in Solano County south and west of thi3
Secondary Management Area are Primary Management Areas.

Set 3

Under the provisions of AB 1717, the Montezuma-Collinsville area canne. be
designated in this study.

There are several seasonal marshes in the Montezuma-Collinsville area,
with some surrounding lowland grasslands in the north. There is a Salt Marsh
Harvest Mouse habitat in the Collinsville area.

To the southwest of the area that cannot be designated is a seasonal marsh
and some managed wetlands.

Map 17 "Richmond" (Contra Costa and Alameda Counties)

Set 1

Montalvin Manor Park is east of Point Pinole Regional Park, which runs
along the shoreline for four miles.

East Bay Regional Parks also has the eastern end of Brooks Island and am
area at Pt. Isabel.

Set 2

An area in North Richmond is water-related industrial PUD.

The City of Richmond has a boat launch ramp on Santa Fe Channel at Cutting
Boulevard.

-84-

The area from west of Pt. Potrero to the western edge of the Inner Harbor
Basin is designated for use as a water-related Industry area.

The area between the western edge of Inner Harbor Basin and the
southeastern border of the City of Richmond is reserved for residential,
recreational, commercial and industrial use under the South Richmond Shoreline
Special Area Plan approved by the City of Richmond and BCDC..

Brooks Island, Ft. Isabel Regional Shoreline, and all of the Albany
shoreline are designated waterfront park or beach use.

.Set 3

The area of San Pablo Bay on this map is rimmed with mudflats and
scattered tidal marshes. A shellfish bed continues from Pinole Pt. to the
north.

Mudflats are also found around the western part of Brooks Island, Richmond
Inner Harbor, along the Richmond-Albany city boundary, and at Fleming Point.
Tidal marshes are on the north of Brooks Island and in the Richmond Inner
Harbor.

The perimeter of Brooks Island, the eastern edge of Richmond Inner Harbor,,
the Albany shoreline, and Fleming Pt. all contain shellfish beds.

There is important fish habitat in the Richmond Inner Harbor, Bird Island
and Albany mudflats.

Map 18 "Oakland West" (Alameda and San Francisco Counties)

Set 1

There is public access at the Berkeley Marina, the Emeryville Marina, the
Emeryville peninsula near Highway 17, and an area near the Bay Bridge toll
plaza.

At the Port of Oakland's Seventh Street Terminal there is a public park,
and there Is public access at the Outer and Inner Harbor.

Several parks and public access areas extend along the Oakland Inner
Harbor shoreline from Jack London Square east and along the Lake Merritt
estuary.

Another public access area is on Brooklyn Basin.

Public access on Alameda shoreline across from Jack London Square and on
Fortmann Basin.

On the southern Alameda shoreline there is public access at Bellena Bay
Yacht Harbor and Robert W. Crown Memorial State Beach, which extends southeast
along Shoreline Drive.

Set 2

Yerba Buena Island is designated for future use as a park.

A strip of land running north along the shoreline from the Berkeley Marina
is also designated for park use.

The Berkeley Yacht Harbor has an existing boat launching ramp,.marina, and
fishing pier, as well as an additional proposed marina. The whole western
portion of the Berkeley marina and a shoreline strip from the marina south to
the Emeryville peninsula are a waterfront park or beach PUD.

The Emeryville Marina contains a marina and a proposed fishing pier. All
of the western and most of the southern area of the Emeryville peninsula is
designated for waterfront park or beach use.

The Emeryville Crescent is designated a wildlife area.

South of the entrance to the Bay Bridge, the present Oakland Outer Harbor,
Inner Harbor, the Alameda Naval Air Station, the Naval Supply Center and
Reserve Shipyard, and the area around Clinton Basin are all mapped port PUD.
The port priority use designation extends to the western-most point of the
fill placed fox the Bay Bridge approach.

Encinal Terminals in Alameda is designated port priority use.

The Oakland Outer Harbor contains a proposed fishing pier and there is an
existing fishing pier at Port View Park, Port of Oakland.

The Jack London Square area contains three marinas and a proposed fishing
pier. The southern edge is designated for future use as a park, as is
Government Island.

A proposed marina is located in the north of Brooklyn Basin and an
existing marina is west of the Basin mouth in Alameda.

Most'of the Alameda Bay shoreline is mapped for waterfront park or beach
PUD. Ballena Bay has an existing and proposed marina and a proposed fishing
pier.

Set 3

Mudflats extend along the Berkeley-Emeryville shoreline, along the
northern side of Yerba Buena Island, and In southern Alameda.

The Emeryville Crescent is rimmed with tidal marsh and there is a tiny
tidal marsh on the tip of the Alameda Naval Air Station.

Shellfish beds are found around the Berkeley Marina, the Emeryville Marina
and Crescent, in the Oakland Inner Harbor southeast of Jack London Square, and
on the southern Alameda shore.

There are important fish habitats along the Berkeley-Emeryville shoreline
and In the Emeryville Crescent.

-86-

Map 19 "Oakland East" (Alameda County)

Set 1

Crown Memorial Beach extends along the southern Alameda shoreline.

Public access at southeastern tip of Alameda.

Public access in two places in Alameda on Tidal Canal.

Public access in three places in Oakland on Brooklyn Basin.

West of the Oakland Coliseum Complex is the Bay Park Refuge run by the
City of Oakland. This is adjacent to the San Leandro Bay Regional Shoreline
(EBRPD).

Set 2

Government Island, the eastern shore of Airport Channel, the southern
shore of Alameda, and the shore west of the Oakland Coliseum are reserved for
waterfront parks or beaches.

There are proposed fishing piers in Oakland on Brooklyn Basin, near 29th
Street, and near High Street. There are existing marinas on Brooklyn Basin in
Oakland and near Park Street in Alameda.

There are two existing fishing piers on either side of Fruitvale Bridge
and one at Bay Park Refuge.

Set 3

There are mudflats in San Leandro Bay. Two small tidal marshes are also
found on the Bay, one on the southern Alameda shore and one west of the
Oakland Coliseum.

- Shellfish beds extend along the southern Alameda shoreline, and a Clapper
Rail habitat is also located in that area.

Map 20 "San Leandro" (Alameda County)

Set 1

Public access extends along the shoreline of Bay Farm Island.

San Leandro Bay Regional Park is on both sides of Airport Channel. A
small strip of the City of Oakland's Bay Park Refuge runs along the shore of
the mainland.

Public access at San Leandro Marina and a shoreline trail south of the
marina.

EBRPD has two holdings as part of the Hayward Shoreline; one north of
Sulphur Creek and the other north of Johnson Landing.

-87-

Set 2

A strip along the northern and eastern shoreline of Bay Farm Island,
extending northeast along the Oakland shoreline, is designated for
waterfront-park or beach. On the northern shore of Bay Farm Isla 'nd are a
.proposed marina and fishing pier. On the eastern edge are an existing boat
lauching ramp and marina.

The eastern section of Bay Farm Island is an airport PUD.

An area southeast of the airport is designated for park use, as is a long
.strip Of shoreline from the San Leandro Marina to the southern edge of the
mouth of San Leandro Creek.

Mulford Landing contains a marina.

Set 3

Mudflats are found in San Leandro Bay, on the west shore of Alameda, and
along the entire San Francisco Bay shoreline from Oakland south.

There are tidal marshes to the east of Airport Channel (San Leandro Bay
Regional Park), at Roberts Landing, Hayward Landing, and Johnson Landing.

There is a salt pond south of Johnson Landing.

Shellfish beds are found in San Leandro Bay on the northern Alameda
shoreline, in Airport Channel, and around the tip of the marsh east of Airport
Channel (San Leandro Bay Regional Park). Further south they are found along
the entire Alameda shore, at the Oakland-San Leandro city border, and at
Mulford Landing.

There are two Least Tern nesting sites in Alameda. The Clapper Rail has a
habitat area in San Leandro Bay Regional Park.

Lar@ge shell deposits are found in the Bay in Alameda and San Mateo
counties.

Map 20a "Hayward" (Alameda County)

Set 1

(Nothing mapped in set 1.)

Set 2

(Nothing mapped in set 2.)

Set 3

(Nothing mapped in set 3.)

_88-

Map 21 "Newark" (Alameda County)

Set 1

Coyote Hills Regional Park (EBRPD) is located mainly south of Coyote Hills
Slough with a small addition to the north of the Slough adjacent to Newark
.-Boulevard. The Alameda Creek Regional Trail runs along both sides of Coyote
Hill Slough inland from the Bay for 12 miles. West and southeast of the
Regional Park are proposed acquisitions.

West and south of Coyote Hills Regional Park is the San Francisco Bay
.National Wildlife Refuge.

Set 2

Much of'the area adjacent to the shoreline is salt ponds and managed
wetlands.

The Coyote Hills Regional Park area is designated for park use on both
sides of Coyote Hills Slough. On the south side of the slough, a designated
strip extends to the Bay. A marina is proposed in the northwest corner of the
park designated area.

At the entrance to Dumbarton Bridge, a fishing pier is proposed, and a
marina is proposed at Dumbarton Point.

Set 3

Mudflats line most of the edge of San Francisco Bay in this area. Tidal
marshes are on the northern shore of Alameda Creek and Coyote Hill Slough,
West of Coyote Hills, and around the Newark Slough area.

Much of the area is covered with salt ponds.

Two areas of Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat and four areas of Clapper
Pail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat are found along the Bay or on
sloughs.

There is a Harbor Seal haul-out at the mouth of Plummer Creek and Newark
Slough.

Shellfish beds are located at either end of the Dumbarton Bridge.

Ma-P 21a "Niles" (Alameda and Santa Clara Counties)

Sets 1, 2, and 3

(Nothing mapped on sets 1, 2, and

_89-

Map 22 "Milpitas" (Alameda and Santa Clara Counties)

Set 1

The Bay shoreline south to Alviso Slough is part of the San Francisco Bay
National Wildlife Refuge.

South of Guadalupe Slough is the Sunnyvale Baylands County Park site.

Set 2

There is an existing marina at Alviso.

There are extensive salt ponds/managed wetlands on both sides of Coyote
Creek.

Set 3

There are mudflats near the mouth and extending up Coyote Creek. Tidal
marsh is found on several sloughs.

There are large areas of salt ponds.

Several habitat areas for Clapper Rail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse are
found in Fremont and Alviso.

Map 23 "Mountain View" (Alameda, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties)

Set 1

The San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge covers the area from north
of Dumbarton Point south to Alviso Slough, and includes a peninsula to the
west of Alviso Slough. Another small addition to the refuge is between Devils
Slough and Jagel Slough.

North of Mathilda Avenue is Sunnyvale Baylands County Park site. West of
this facility is a park proposed by the City of Sunnyvale.

The Mountain View Shoreline Regional Park is being developed between
Charleston Road and the salt ponds around Mountain View Slough.

East of Bayshore Freeway, between the Charleston Slough and the Santa
Clara/San Mateo County line is the Palo Alto Baylands. Included in the
Baylands are two proposed park sites (at the dump and the former International
Telephone and Telegraph property to the west), the Marshland Preserve (the
tidal areas and the flood control basin), a yacht club, a golf course, and
several miles of public trails.

The Faber Tract, although it is located in San Mateo County, is owned by
the City of Palo Alto and is available for limited public access.

-90-

Set 2

Much of the area is salt ponds/managed wetlands.

Moffett Naval Air Station is mapped as an airport PUD.

An area south of the salt ponds and west of Stevens Creek in Mountain
View, and another around Mayfield Slough in Palo Alto are designated for
waterfront park or beach use.

A marina is proposed for the head of Mountain View Slough and marinas are
.in operation at the Palo Alto Yacht Club and Cooley Landing in Menlo Park. A
fishing pier is proposed at the latter site.

Set 3

The shores of San Francisco Bay and Coyote Creek are lined with mudflats
and tidal marshes. The latter extend up numerous sloughs in the area.

With the exception of Palo Alto, salt ponds cover much of the area.

There are two large Harbor Seal haul-outs at the mouth of Mowry Slough and
another smaller one between Mowry Slough and Coyote Creek.

Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Clapper Rail habitat are found at Dumbarton
Point, in the Mowry Slough and Coyote Creek area, on Guadalupe Slough,on the
edge of Moffett Field, and along the Palo Alto shoreline.

A shellfish bed is mapped north of' Cooley Landing in Menlo Park.

Shell deposits are found offshore in San Mateo, Santa Clara and Alameda
Counties.

Map 24 "Redwood Point" (San Mateo and Alameda Countiesl

Set 1

The Alameda Creek Regional Trail (EBRPD) extends inland up both sides.of
Coyote Hills Slough on levee top.

The San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge extends south from the
Hayward/Fremont City boundary.

On the west side of the Bay, the Refuge extends north to Belmont Slough.
It includes mudflats, salt ponds at Ravenswood Point, tidal marshes on Greco
Island, parts of Bair Island and Bird Island.

There is public access at the Redwood City Municipal Marina.

Most of Bair Island is an ecological reserve (DFG).

A levee-top path leads along the ahoreline an the north side of
Steinberger Slough, heads west along Day Sloughq and then continues on the
southern shore of Belmont Slough. The are'a is withinthe Redwood Shores
Ecological Reserve (DFG) and includes the tidal marshes on the bayward side of
the levee.

On the northern edge of Belmont Slough on Brewer Islandl there is a
shoreline strip running north to the San Mateo Bridge.

Set 2

There are extensive salt pond3/managed wetlands.

A strip an the south shore of Coyote Hills Slough is designated for park
use.

nraa n.ronnrl 7,@O-roo@! Crac?- is rarerved for nort r1r@,vf_-lo-.-1-_nt c;zcep,6 th.'It
Bct.-*Lr island and the Zorwer Leslie Salt Company wash ponds have been excluded.

The southeast tip of Bair Island is designated wildlife PUD.

The land between Smith Slough and Bayshore Freeway In sapped as a
waterfront park or beach PUD, as are both sides of Belmont Slough, extending
north along the Bay to the San Mateo Bridge.

There are marinas at the meeting of Smith Slough and Redwood Creek, and at
Redwood City Yacht Harbor.

Marinas are proposed for the mouth of Corkscrew Slough near Redwood Creek,
Steinberger Slough near Corkscrew Slough, further northeast on Steinberger
Slough, and on both sides of Belmont Slough near its south.

A boat launching ramp is proposed on Corkscrew Slough near Steinberger
Slough.

Set 3

With a small exception at Redwood Point, the entire shoreline on both
Bides of the Bay in this area is lined with mudflats. Much of the land just
landward of the mudflat3 is tidal marsh or salt ponds.

Shellfish beds are found south of Ravenswood Pointq at three locations on
Redwood Creek, on the northern tip of Bird Island, and extending north along
the shoreline from the mouth of Belmont Slough.

Two Harbor Seal haul-outs are on Greco Island and a very large one is
found in Corkscrew Slough.

In the East Bay there is a Clapper Rail habitat and a Least Tern nesting
site near the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel. Around the mouth of Coyote
Hills Slough is Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Clapper Rail habitat.

-92-

In the West Bay there are numerous Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Clapper
Rail habitat areas. There is a Least Tern nesting site on Bair Island, and at
Redwood Point there is a Heron and Fgret breeding area.

Large shell deposits are found offshore in Alameda and San Mateo Counties.

Map 25 "Palo Alto" (San Mateo County)

let I

The Faber Tract is open space with limited public access owned by the City
of.Palo Alto in East Palo Alto.

The San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge lies north of Ravenswood
Slough and Westpoint Slough.

The City of Menlo Park has proposed a park to the east of Flood Slough.

Set 2

There are extensive salt ponds/managed wetlands along the shoreline.

An area south of Westpoint Slough in Menlo Park is designated for
waterfront park or beach use.

There is a marina on the southwest corner of the port designation.

West of this marina and north of Bayshore Freeway is an area reserved for
park use.

Set 3

Salt ponds extend across most of the northern edge of this map. Tidal
marshes are found south of the Dumbarton Bridge and around the adjoining salt
pond, around Flood Slough and Westpoint Slough, and around the salt ponds
north of Redwood Creek.

There are shellfish beds by Dumbarton Bridge.

Map 26 "San Mateo" (San Mateo County)

Set 1

There is public access at Marina Park between Belmont Channel and Belmont
Slough.

An edge of Redwood Shores Ecological Reserve (DFG) appears on the eastern
shore of Belmont Slough.

,;Z

A shoreline strip provides public access along the northeastern shore of
Foster City north to the San Mateo County Fishing Pier at the San Mateo Bridge.
San Mateo has four parks along Seal Slough: Aquatic Park (near the mouth
of the slough); Parkside Aquatic Park; Lakeshore Aquatic Park, and an
unimproved open space.

There is public access near the northern mouth of Seal Siough, across from
Aquatic Park (City of San Mateo). A bicycle and pedestrian trail extends
along the Bay from Ryder Court Park off East Third Avenue to Coyote Point
County Park.

Two small public access areas lie east of the Anza Airport Park in
Burlingame. To the south and west of this facility is Bayside Park run by the
City of Burlingame.

Two more public access areas are located near the mouth of Mills Creek.

Set 2

The northern edge of Belmont Slough, extending north to the San Mateo
Bridge, is designated for waterfront park or beach use. There is a fishing
pier at the northern tip of this designation.

More park designation extends from Seal Slough to the northern edge of
Coyote Point County Park, and then again around the Burlingame sewage disposal
facility.

A boat launching ramp is proposed for the southeast shore of Seal Slough
near its entrance to the Bay. There is a marina at Coyote Point Yacht Harbor.

The San Francisco International Airport is mapped for airport PUD.

Set 3

Much of the edge of the Bay is lined with mudflats. Tidal marshes appear
at Belmont Slough, at the mouth of Seal Slough, between Seal Slough and Coyote
Point Yacht Harbor, at Coyote Point Yacht Harbor, and landward from the
Burlingame sewage disposal facility.

Shellfish beds are located on both sides of the Dumbarton Bridge, near the
mouth of Seal Slough, between Seal Slolugh and Coyote Point Yacht Harbor, at
the Yacht Harbor, north of Coyote Point and extending around the shoreline up
into the inlet south of the Burlingame sewage disposal facility.

Clapper Rail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat areas are found on
Belmont Slough and O'Neill Slough. Salt Marsh Harvest House habitat is found
near the mouth of Seal Slough.

Shell deposits are found offshore in San Mateo County.

-94-

Map 27 "Montara Mountain" (San Mateo County!

Set I

Public access off Old Bayshore Highway just north of Millbrae Avenue.

Set 2

San Francisco International Airport is mapped for airport PUD.

Set_3

. - San Francisco Garter Snake habitat is found west of San Francisco
International Airport.

Map 28 "Hunters Point" (San Mateo, San Francisco and Alameda Counties)

Set 1

Public access at Oyster Point Marina.

Candlestick Point State Recreation Area is located just north of the San
Mateo/San Francisco County line.

Public access at Bay Farm Island.

Set 2

The northwestern shore of Bay Farm Island in Alameda is designated for
waterfront park or beach use.

San Francisco International Airport is reserved for airport use.

Oyster Point is mapped for waterfront park or beach PUD.

The Hunters Point Area is reserved for port use.

The southern San Francisco shoreline from the China Basin Channel to the
extension of Cargo Way into India Basin is designated port priority use but
the site of the Potrero Power Plan is excluded.

Set 3

There are mudflats along most of the Bay Farm Island shoreline. A Least
Tern nesting site is found on the north shore.

,North of Hunter's Point are a few small mudflats.

Shell deposits are found offshore in San Mateo, San Francisco and Alameda
counties.

Map 29 "San Francisco South" (San Francisco and San Mateo Counties)

Set 1

Public access at Point San Bruno, Oyster Point Marina, and west of Oyster
Point.

There is also public access along the.shoreline at the San Francisco/San
Mateo County border. From this area Candlestick Point State Recreation Area
extends northward along the edge of the shore to the northern edge of South
Basin Canal.

There are two small parks on either side of Islais Creek Channel just east
of Third Street.

Set 2

San Francisco International Airport and surrounding areas west of Highway
101 and north of the South San Francisco City line are reserved for airport
use,

Oyster Point and a strip of shoreline to the south are designated for
waterfront park and beach.

Sierra Point north to South Basin is also park designation. This area
includes Bayview Park.

Oyster Point has an existing marina and a proposed fishing pier.

There is another proposed fishing pier north of Sierra Point and east of
Highway 101.

Another fishing pier and a marina are proposed between Candlestick Point
and South Basin.

North of South Basin is port PUD.

Set 3

There are mudflats along most of the South San Francisco shoreline.
Mudflats appear again on much of the shore between Sierra Point and
Candlestick Point.

Two small tidal marshes appear north of the airport. There is another at
Oyster Point, and two more on either side of the San Franci3co-San Mateo
County border.

-96-

The San Francisco Garter Snake is found west of San Francisco
International Airport.

Shellfish beds are around Oyster Point and between Sierra Point and
Candlestick Point.

-97-

VIII: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahernt William, et. al., Energy Alternatives for California; Paths to the
Future, Hand, Santa Monica, Deameber, 1975, 321 pp.

Bauer, Richard D. and Speth, John W. Acquisitions Priorites for Coastal
Wetlands of California, U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
and California Department of Fish and Game, April, 1974, 38 PP.

Bodega Bay Institute of Pollution Ecology Population Biology of Harbor
Seals in San Francisco BU, California, Draft Copy, March 15, 1978.

California Natural Areas Coordinating Council, Inventory of California.Natural
Areas, 1975.

California, State of, Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, Final Staff
Recommendation on the Designation of Coastal Zone Areas, where
Construction of an Electric Power Plant would Prevent Achievement of the
Objectives of the California Coastal Act of 1976, June 20, 1978, 114 pp.

California, State of, Coastal Zone Conservation Commission's California
Coastal Plan, December, 1975, 443 PP.

California, State of, Department of Fish and Game, AnadrOMOU3 Fisheries
Branch, An Evaluation of Effects of Thermal Discharges in the Western
Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta on Striped Bass, King Salmon and the
Oppossum Shrimp, December, 1971, 31 PP.

California, State of, Fish and Game Commission, At The Crossroads,
January, 1972

California, State of, Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission,
Energy Assessment, Conservation and Alternatives Division, Assessment of
Major Needs for the PG&E Planning Area (Including Need for the Fossil 1
and 2 Coastal Facility), Staff preliminary report, June 23, 1978.

California, State of, Energy Resources Conervation and Development Commission,
California Energy Trends and Choices: 1977 Biennial Report of the State
Energy Commission, 1977, seven volumes.

California, State of, Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Commission, Final Report on the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Notice
of Intention to Seek Certification for the Combined Cycle Project,
January 1978.

-98-

California, State ofq Energy Re3wrces Conservation and Development
Commission, PG&E Combined Cycle Initial Study, Map 9, 1978, 104 pp.

California, State of, Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission
Preliminary Report on the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Notice of
Intention to Seek Certification for the Combined Cycle Project, June 1977.

Zalifornia, State of, San Francisco Bay, Conservation and Development
CDmmission, San Francisco Bay PlarIL January, 1969, 43 PP.

California, State of, San Francisco Bay, Conservation and Development
Commission, San Francisco Bay Plan Supplement, January, 1969, 572 pp.

California, State of, San Francisco Bay, Conservation and Development
Commission, Suisun Harsh Protection Plan, December, 1976, 48 pp.

California, State of, San Francisco Bay, Conservation and Development
CDMMiS3ion, Suisun Mar3h Protection Plan Supplement, December, 1976,
495 pp.

California, State of, State Lands Commission, Inventory of Uncoveyed State
School Lands and Tide and Submerged Lands Possessing Significant
Environmental Values, December 1, 1975.

California, State of, State Water Resources Control Board, Adoption of New
Water Ouality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and
Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bars and Estuaries of California, March
10, 1976

California, State of, State Water Resources Control Board, Water Quality
Control Plan Report, San Francisco Bay Basin (2), Part II, A2ril, 1975

California, State of, State Water Resources Control Board, Water Quality
Control Policy on the Use and D13105al of Inland Waters Used for Power
Plant Cooling,, June 19, 1975, 9 PP.

Clark, John, Coastal Ecosystems, The Conservation Foundation, John Witey &
Sons, Publishers, Washington, D.C., 1977, 928 pp.

Clark, John, Coastal Ecosystem Management, The Conservation Foundation,
John Witey & Sons, Publishers, Washington, D.C., 1977, 928 pp.

Clark, John and Brownell, Willard, Electric Power Plants in the Coastal Zone:
Environmental Issues, Americal Littorial Society Special Publication No.
7, October, 1973.

Clark, John and Terrell, Charles, Environmental Planning for Offshore Oil and
Gas Volume III, Effects of Living Resources and Habitats, the
ervation Foundation, Washington, D. C. March, 1978, 220 pp.

-.99-

De La Cruz, Armando A., "The Role of Tidal Marshes in the Productivity of
Coastal Waters," ASB Bullet1n, Volume 20, No. 4. October, 1973.

EDAW, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Ma3ter Plan, San Francisco,
October, 1974

Gritz$ William J., Distribution and food Habits of Fishes In Relation to the
Thermal Plume at Pacific Gas and Electric Comm's Pittsbura Power Pla;t
In the Sacramento - San Joaq2in Delta, California Department'of Fish and
Anadromous Fisheries Branch, 1971, 9 PP.

Harvey, H. Thomas, et. al. "'The lbr3he3 of San Francisco Bay: Their Attributes
and Values." Unpublished consultant's report for San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission, June, 1977.

Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., San Francisco Bay_Shellf13h. October, 1977.

Kelly, Randolph and Chadwick, Harold K.. Some Observation on Str@eed Bass
Temperature Tolerance, California Department of Fish and Game, Anadromou3
Fisheries Branch, 1971, 11 pp.

Longley, William L.; Jackson, Rodney: Snyder, Bruce; ManMing Oil and Gas
Activities in Coastal EnvironmentSL U- S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Biological Services Program, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 197B, 66 pp.

Madrone Associates and Michaels, James, The Natural Resources of Napa
Marsh, Coastal Wetland Services No. 19, California Department of Fish and
Game, August, 1977

McAteer-Petris Act (California Government Code Section 66600-66660)

Morton, James Wlater, Ecological Effects of Dredging and Spoil Disposal
A Literary Review, Technical papers of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D.C., volume 94, 1977, 33 pp.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Answers to Information ReQuested
. November 12, 1976 (Combined Cycle Project), 224 pp.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Electric Supply Plan Forms and Summary
of Loads and Resources 1978-1998, March, 1978.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Notice of Intention for Combined Excle
Project, 19T6, 420 pp.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Notice of Intention for Combined Cycle
ProJect Revised for Change of San Jose Site Location, December 8, 1976,
88 pp.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Notice of Intention for Gas Turbine Project,
1977, 296 pp.

-100-

Pacific G&3 and Electric Company, Notice of Intention Fossil I and 2. December,
1977.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Notice of Intention for Pittburg Power Plants
Units 8 and 9. 1978.

.Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Oakland Power Plant Environmental Data
Statement, OPctober 1. 1974*

Odus, William E., Insidious Alteration of the Estuarine EnvIronmento
University of Miami, Institute of' Marine Scienceqq from Transactions Of
the American Fisheries Society, Volume 89, No. 4,, October, 1970.

Oral, James J., Thermal Shock and Upper Lethal Temperature Tolerances of Young
King Salmon, On Corhynchu3 Tsbawtscha,-from the Sacramento - San_Joaquin
River �Xstem.. California Department of Fish and Came, Anadromous
Fisheries Branch, 1971, 16 pp.

Shanks, Larry R., Small Coastal Structures - A Review, U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Serviceg National Space Technology Laboratories$ MiS3133iPPiq 1978l 25 pp.

Shuster, Carol N., The Nature of a Tidal Marsh. U. S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, August,, 1966, 8 pp.

Skinner, John E., An Historical Review of the Fish and Wildlife Resources of
the San Francisco Bay Area, State Department of Fiab and Game, Water
Project Branch Report No. 1, June, 1962.

Spratt, Jerome D., The Pacific Herring Resource of Tomales and San Francisco
Bays: Its Size and Structure.,Marine Resources Technical Report No. 33,
1976.

Suisun Marsh Preservation Act of 1977 (California Government Code, Sections
66645 and 66646, California Public Resources Code, Section 9960 - 9963.
Section 29000 - 29612)

United States, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, San Francisco
L@qy to Antioch, California Nautical Chart 18652, Aprilg 19T8.

Warren - Alqui3t State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act
(Publi Resources Code, Sections 25000 - 25968)

Wooster, Theodore W., Occurrence of Juvenile-Forage and Gamde Fishers over
the Intertidal Mudflat3 of the San Francisco Ba.Y Complex, Department of
Fish and Game, Anadromou3 Fisheries Branch Administrative Report No.
71-2g 1971.

NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

3 6668 14112794 6