If you wish to
comment on the Draft EIR, you may submit written comments until May 17, 2002 to:
Susan Stratton
Real Estate Services Division,
PO Box 989052
West Sacramento, CA
95798-9052
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY
LAND USE
Impact LU-1: In
general, the PDCP would not result in physical alterations to the landscape.
Although the PDCP may require additional greenhouses or other facilities,
development of these types of facilities would be limited in size and located
in existing research or agricultural areas. Thus, no physical division of a
community would occur. Consequently, there would be no significant effect.
Mitigation
Measure LU-1: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact
(LTS). Additional environmental review of new facilities would occur when they
are proposed for development, as required by Sections 15162 and 15168(c) of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-2:
The PDCP includes restrictions on the movement of goods and vehicles. These
restrictions could cause an inconvenience to producers, shippers, and
receivers. Although the agricultural community could experience economic
effects from shipment delays, these delays would benefit the overall economic
health of the agricultural community by controlling Pierces disease. Further,
the inconveniences and economic effects related to the restrictions included in
the PDCP would not result in physical changes to the environment, so no
environmental impact would occur.
Mitigation
Measure LU-2: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-3:
Under the rapid response component of the PDCP, nonagricultural areas could be
treated with pesticides by ground crews. Residents and other site occupants
would be notified prior to application of pesticides, and would be advised to
avoid treated areas until re-entry conditions are met (typically approximately
two hours). Providing ground crew access and avoiding treated areas could
temporarily disrupt use of the treatment sites, which would cause an
inconvenience to residents and occupants. However, this temporary inconvenience
would not result in a significant effect to the physical environment, as
defined by CEQA. (For a discussion of the potential for hazards related to
pesticide use, please refer to Chapter 5.2.)
Mitigation
Measure LU-3: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-4:
The proposed PDCP could result in temporary loss of some wild and hobby-kept
bees. County agricultural commissioners would notify registered beekeepers
within the treatment boundaries about program activities and hobbyist
beekeepers would be notified of program activities through the general
community notification process. Although measures are available to beekeepers
to protect their bees, some loss could occur. However, loss of individual bees
does not necessarily result in the loss of the bee colony. Such losses would
not decrease bee populations below self-sustaining levels, because pesticide
applications are limited to infestation areas and untreated areas would be
accessible to the colony. Thus, impacts to bee colonies resulting from the PDCP
are considered less than significant. For further discussion, refer to chapter
5.4.
Mitigation
Measure LU-4: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards to minimize the effect to bees include
notification of registered beekeepers about program activities in their area
prior to treatment. With this notification, beekeepers could take whatever
action they deem prudent to protect their beehives. In addition, pesticide
label instructions often prohibit application of the pesticide or allowing it
to drift to blooming plants and weeds if bees are visiting the treatment area.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-5:
The PDCP could result in a loss of some beneficial insect species that are a
part of pest management programs. Such a loss could result in a disruption of
normal agricultural operations. As a result, pest management programs may need
to be adjusted where pesticide control of the glassy-winged sharpshooter is
required. This disruption could result in an inconvenience and economic effects
to growers; however, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated from
the operational shift. (For a discussion of the potential for hazards related
to pesticide use, please refer to Chapter 5.2.)
Mitigation
Measure LU-5: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-6:
The PDCP may require the construction of additional greenhouses or other
facilities. Where possible, existing facilities would be used. However, new
facilities could be developed if existing facilities are not available. These
facilities are anticipated to be located within existing agricultural areas or
research facility sites. Thus, no significant environmental impacts are
anticipated with the development of potential new greenhouses and laboratory
facilities.
Mitigation
Measure LU-6: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional environmental review of new facilities would occur when they are
proposed for development, as required by Sections 15162 and 15168(c) of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-7:
PDCP-related applications of pesticides could lead to temporary withdrawal of
organic certifications for growers. Although this effect could be economically
adverse to growers who wish to market organic products, it is not considered an
impact to the physical environment under CEQA. Organic farms could be
temporarily converted to non-organic farms; however, this conversion would not
result in a conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural use. This
impact is less than significant according to CEQA.
Mitigation
Measure LU-7: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact LU-8:
The PDCP would not directly affect the potential conversion of agricultural
lands to non-agricultural use. Rather, the PDCP would benefit the agricultural
industry by supporting the economic viability of the state's grape industry and
perhaps other commodity groups. As a result, the program could prevent the
indirect conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. No significant environmental
effect is associated with this issue.
Mitigation
Measure LU-8: No mitigation is required.
Significance:
LTS
Hazards
Impact Haz-1:
As a result of pesticide application for the PDCP, people in non-agricultural
areas could potentially come into contact with residues through skin contact,
inhalation, or through ingestion of treated materials. The U.S. EPA and
California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) consider the potential
exposure of people to residues of a pesticide when evaluating it for
registration, and to determine any restrictions necessary to ensure that it can
be used safely. Any pesticide employed in the PDCP is required to be registered
and applied only in a manner consistent with its restrictions. The potential
for spray drift from pesticides applied by ground personnel is monitored and
limited by professional applicators. Pesticide application is also monitored by
county agricultural commissioners and CDPR. The registration program, use
restrictions, and monitoring would ensure that pesticides are applied with a
reasonable certainty of no harm to human health or the environment. Therefore,
this is a less-than-significant impact.
Mitigation
Measure Haz-1: No mitigation is required for this lessthan-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards to minimize potential hazards include
professional application of registered pesticides and monitoring of pesticide
applications by CDPR to verify proper application rates and provide information
about pesticide residues in the surrounding environment. The data from
environmental monitoring would be reviewed to ensure that applications do not
lead to undesirable residue levels. Anomalous results would be evaluated to
determine if application methods needed to be adjusted, and if so, the PDCP
would require that treatments be modified accordingly.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Haz-2:
As a result of the PDCP, some growers and nursery owners may be required to
treat their crops with pesticides to control the glassy-winged sharpshooter.
Growers may choose to use aerial application over commercial cropland areas
where allowed. Agricultural and nursery workers have a potential for exposure
to pesticides. The U.S. EPA and CDPR consider the potential exposure of people
to residues when a pesticide is proposed for registration, and to determine any
application restrictions necessary to ensure that it can be used safely.
Pesticide use restrictions are imposed to ensure that agricultural and nursery
workers are not exposed to pesticide residues before it is safe. Because of use
restrictions and monitoring, pesticide application in agricultural areas would
occur with a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health. Therefore, this
is a less-than-significant impact.
Mitigation
Measure Haz-2: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards to minimize potential hazards include
professional application of registered pesticides. California law requires that
pilots receive training and have a pest control aircraft pilot's certificate
from CDPR. In addition, specific worker health and safety regulations require
notification of pesticide applications and training for field workers.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Haz-3:
Fragile populations, i.e., individuals who are susceptible to health
complications, because of health or developmental status (e.g., acutely ill,
very young or old, or pregnant individuals), may be present in certain
locations, such as parks, recreation areas, sports arenas, hospitals, nursing
homes, adult care centers, day care centers, and schools. When evaluating a
proposed pesticide, CDPR adds an additional uncertainty factor to compensate
for inherent uncertainties in the process. The uncertainty factor takes into
account the variability in susceptibility within populations. In addition, the
PDCP includes measures to ensure that schools, day care centers, and similar
places would be given special consideration in scheduling pesticide treatments,
which would further limit the potential for pesticide exposure. With these
measures, the potential for health hazards to fragile populations would be less
than significant.
Mitigation
Measure Haz-3: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards to reduce potential health impacts to fragile
populations include notification of schools, day care centers, rest homes, and
hospitals that are nearby any proposed treatment operations prior to treatment.
Special scheduling would be arranged, if necessary. Pesticide treatments on
school grounds and busy public areas would be scheduled for off-time hours when
feasible. CDPR would conduct monitoring to verify proper application rates. The
data from environmental monitoring would be reviewed to ensure that
applications do not lead to undesirable residue levels. Anomalous results would
be evaluated to determine if application methods needed to be adjusted, and if
so, the PDCP would require that treatments be modified accordingly.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Haz-4:
Pesticide applicators and agricultural workers have the greatest potential for
exposure to pesticides. PDCP pesticide applications would be made by licensed
pesticide applicators. All licensed applicators are certified through the
Licensing and Certification Program administered by CDPR. Pesticide applicators
receive annual training that includes routine and emergency decontamination
procedures, safety procedures and requirements for handling pesticide materials,
and emergency first aid measures. Pesticide use restrictions are in place to
ensure that agricultural field workers are not exposed to pesticide residues
before it is safe. Compliance with these restrictions by the PDCP would avoid
significant hazards to the health and safety of workers.
Mitigation
Measure Haz-4: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
California worker health and safety regulations specify safe work practices for
employees who handle pesticides or work in treated areas. The regulations
require certification and training for pesticide applicators, notification of
pesticide applications, and training for field workers. CDPR and county
agricultural commissioners enforce worker safety regulations.
Significance: LTS
Impact Haz-5:
Because the effects of pesticides are related to dose, potential impacts to
human health could occur with accidental spills and improper use and disposal
of pesticides. Licensed pesticide applicators receive training on routine and
emergency decontamination procedures, safety requirements for handling
pesticides, and emergency first aid. While it is possible that an accident
could occur with implementation of the PDCP, the program would not result in an
increase in accident risk. PDCP safeguards and annual training of licensed
pesticide applicators would ensure that these risks would be less than
significant.
Mitigation
Measure Haz-5: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Pesticide labels provide instructions for proper handling, storage, and
disposal of pesticides. Licensed pesticide applicators receive training on
routine and emergency decontamination procedures, safety requirements for
handling pesticides, and emergency first aid procedures. Moreover, local jurisdictions
maintain emergency action and preparedness plans in case of an accidental
spill.
Significance:
LTS
Water Quality
Impact WQ-1:
The active ingredients of the pesticides to be used for the control of the
glassy-winged sharpshooter can reach surface water after rainfall or as a
result of spray drift. Applying pesticides consistent with label requirements
would reduce potential water quality impacts. Pesticide application
requirements vary; however, they do not allow direct application to water if
there are potentially significant water quality impacts associated with surface
water applications. In addition, pesticide labels also require precautions be
taken against contaminating water as a result of equipment use and cleaning.
When a pesticide is evaluated for registration, the U.S. EPA and CDPR consider
how it breaks down in water environments. Application restrictions are
developed based on these data. For these reasons, the potential for adverse
water quality impacts related to non-agricultural pesticide treatment is
considered less than significant.
Mitigation
Measure WQ-1 : No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards that mitigate potential impacts to water quality
include using licensed pesticide applicators with oversight by county
agricultural commissioners, and monitoring by CDPR to ensure proper application
of the materials. All pesticide label requirements, including those
specifically intended to avoid impacts to water quality, would be followed.
CDPR would sample surface water before and after PDCP pesticide treatments in
non-agricultural areas. The data from environmental monitoring would be
reviewed to ensure that applications do not lead to undesirable residue levels.
Anomalous results would be evaluated to determine if application methods needed
to be adjusted, and if so, the PDCP would require that treatments be modified
accordingly.
Significance:
LTS
Impact WQ-2:
Aerial pesticide spraying may be used in agricultural areas to implement the
PDCP. Like treatments by the county in nonagricultural areas, pesticide
application would be by licensed pesticide applicators according to product
label directions. Pesticide label requirements specifically prohibit
applicators from allowing application or drift over water bodies. In addition,
pesticide labels require precautions be taken against contaminating water as a
result of equipment use and cleaning. Because applicators are required to
follow all pesticide label requirements to avoid adverse impacts to surface
waters from direct application or runoff, the potential for adverse impacts to
water quality is not considered significant.
Mitigation
Measure WQ-2: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Licensed pesticide applicators would follow pesticide label requirements,
including those to avoid adverse impacts to water quality.
Significance:
LTS
Impact WQ-3:
The active ingredients of some pesticides could reach ground water by
infiltration from treated ground surfaces (see Appendix P). Label requirements
on pesticides containing active ingredients with these attributes include
measures to avoid adverse impacts to ground water. During PDCP pesticide
treatment, licensed pesticide applicators would follow all pesticide label
requirements. Thus, the potential for impacts to ground water are considered
less than significant.
Mitigation
Measure WQ-3: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards that minimize effects on ground water include
using licensed pesticide applicators with oversight by county agricultural
commissioners. All pesticide label requirements, including those specifically
for avoiding adverse impacts to ground water, would be followed. These use
modifications are designed to prevent pesticides from reaching ground water at
concentrations that would be considered pollution (CaIEPA, 1997).
Significance:
LTS
Biological
Resources
Impact Bio-1:
The PDCP includes pesticide treatments in nonagricultural areas. Treatments in
non-agricultural areas could result in the loss of some non-target
invertebrates with temporary effects in treatment areas. Pesticide treatments
would not substantially affect any vertebrate species. The U.S. EPA and CDPR
consider the potential effects of a pesticide on fish and wildlife when
evaluating a pesticide proposed for registration and to determine any use
restrictions necessary to ensure that it will not cause unreasonable risks to
the environment. As an additional safeguard, existing Memoranda of
Understanding (MOUs) and established communication procedures with CDFG, USFWS,
and NMFS would ensure that take or other significant impacts to special status
species and sensitive habitats would be avoided. This potential impact is
considered less than significant.
Mitigation
Measure Bio-1: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Additional program safeguards to minimize potential hazards include
professional application of registered pesticides and monitoring by CDPR to
verify proper application rates and coverage. CDPR monitoring provides
information about pesticide residues in the surrounding environment after
treatment. The data from environmental monitoring would be reviewed to ensure
that applications do not lead to undesirable residue levels. Anomalous results
would be evaluated to determine if application methods needed to be adjusted,
and if so, the PDCP would require that treatments be modified accordingly. As
an additional safeguard, CDFA would notify USFWS, CDFG, and NMFS, when
appropriate, of program activities. CDFA will work with these resource agencies
to avoid "take" of threatened and endangered species and to minimize
adverse environmental impacts to species of concern.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Bio-2:
Pesticide treatments associated with the PDCP would occur in agricultural areas
and nurseries. Some agricultural areas provide important habitat for vertebrate
wildlife species, including some special status species. Nurseries are not
considered important wildlife habitat. The PDCP is not expected to
significantly affect any vertebrate wildlife species because the pesticides
used must be in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations, and
most of the pesticides approved for use are already used routinely in
agricultural areas and nurseries in California. This impact is considered less
than significant.
Mitigation
Measure Bio-2: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Bio-3:
The use of pesticides in the proposed PDCP would pose risks to non-target
insects. Although the PDCP would result in the mortality of some beneficial,
non-target insect populations, the impacts would be temporary and limited to
the application site. Populations of affected insects would recover through
recolonization after treatments; therefore, the temporary loss of non-target
insects is considered to be a less-than-significant impact.
Mitigation
Measure Bio-3: No mitigation is required for this less than-significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Bio-4:
Treatment procedures for the PDCP include the removal of vegetation that serves
as a potential host for the glassy-winged sharpshooter or as a source of
inoculum for the Pierces disease bacterium. Vegetation removal would typically
occur on unmaintained cropland, roadside vegetation, and other areas near an
infestation. The PDCP does not allow the removal of any sensitive habitats or
special status plants. Therefore, this is considered a less-than-significant
impact.
Mitigation
Measure Bio-4: As a safeguard, implementation of the PDCP would not include the
removal of sensitive habitats or special-status plants. No mitigation is
required for this less-than significant impact.
Significance:
LTS
Impact Bio-5:
Non-native natural enemies of the glassy-winged sharpshooter could be released
under the biological control aspect of the PDCP. Prior to the importation and
release of natural enemies, CDFA evaluates them for the potential to cause adverse
impacts in the state. Natural enemies would be released only after evaluation
determined that the release would meet the CDFA criteria regarding reasonable
avoidance of harm to beneficial, non-target organisms and the environment.
Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation
Measure Bio-5: CDFA would evaluate foreign biological control agents prior to
importation and release in California. An important phase in assessing the
suitability of a new biological control agent is determining whether it could
attack nonpest organisms, such as native insects, or cause harm to the
environment. With these program safeguards, the potential for adverse
environmental impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is
required.
Significance:
LTS
If you wish to comment on the Draft EIR,
you may submit written comments
until May 17, 2002 to:
Susan Stratton
Real Estate Services Division,
PO Box 989052
West Sacramento, CA
95798-9052