Predecisional Draft

Environmental Assessment

for the

East Avenue Security Upgrade

at

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/

Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California

![](media/image1.wmf){width="1.7777777777777777in"
height="1.7777777777777777in"}

July 2002

U.S. Department of Energy

Oakland Operations Office

Oakland, CA 94612

DOE/EA-1439

This page intentionally left blank.

# Preface

This Environmental Assessment for the proposed East Avenue Security
Upgrade of the 1.25-mile roadway running between the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory and the Sandia National Laboratories, California,
provides an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed action in order to determine whether to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement or a Finding of No Significant Impact. It
provides a brief discussion of the purpose and need for the proposed
action, a description of the proposed action and alternatives, and an
analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action
and alternatives. The document complies with the Council on
Environmental Quality's "Regulations for Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act," *Code of Federal
Regulations*, Title 4, Parts 1500--1508 (40 CFR 1500-1508); and the U.S.
Department of Energy's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing
Procedures (10 CFR 1021); and DOE Order 451.1B.

Contents

**Preface [iii](#preface)**

Executive Summary [6](#executive-summary)

1 Purpose and Need for Action [6](#purpose-and-need-for-action)

2 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
[6](#description-of-the-proposed-action-and-alternatives)

*2.1* *Proposed Action* [6](#proposed-action)

2.1.1 Construction [6](#construction)

2.1.2 Traffic Diversions [6](#traffic-diversions)

*2.2* *Alternatives to the Proposed Action*
[6](#alternatives-to-the-proposed-action)

2.2.1 No-Action Alternative [6](#no-action-alternative)

2.2.2 Construction of New Facilities and Relocation of Personnel and
Equipment
[6](#construction-of-new-facilities-and-relocation-of-personnel-and-equipment)

3 Description of the Affected Environment
[6](#description-of-the-affected-environment)

*3.1* *LLNL and SNL/CA Site Description*
[6](#llnl-and-snlca-site-description)

*3.2* *Topography, Geology, and Soils*
[6](#topography-geology-and-soils)

*3.3* *Seismicity* [6](#seismicity)

*3.4* *Climate and Air Quality* [6](#climate-and-air-quality)

3.4.1 Climate [6](#climate)

3.4.2 Air Quality [6](#air-quality)

*3.5* *Hydrology* [6](#hydrology)

3.5.1 Surface Water [6](#surface-water)

3.5.2 Groundwater [6](#groundwater)

3.5.3 Floodplains and Wetlands [6](#floodplains-and-wetlands)

*3.6* *Vegetation and Wildlife* [6](#vegetation-and-wildlife)

*3.7* *Sensitive Species* [6](#sensitive-species)

*3.8* *Land Use and Population* [6](#land-use-and-population)

*3.9* *Cultural Resources* [6](#cultural-resources)

*3.10* *Paleontological Resources* [6](#paleontological-resources)

4 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
[6](#potential-impacts-of-the-proposed-action-and-alternatives)

*4.1* *The Proposed Action* [6](#the-proposed-action)

4.1.1 Potential Impacts of Construction
[6](#potential-impacts-of-construction)

4.1.2 Potential Impacts from Traffic Diversion
[6](#potential-impacts-from-traffic-diversion)

4.1.3 Potential Impacts Associated with Postulated Accident Scenario
[6](#potential-impacts-associated-with-postulated-accident-scenario)

4.1.4 Cumulative Impacts [6](#cumulative-impacts)

4.1.5 Conformity with State Implementation Plans
[6](#conformity-with-state-implementation-plans)

4.1.6 Environmental Justice [6](#environmental-justice)

*4.2* *The No-Action Alternative* [6](#the-no-action-alternative)

*4.3* *Construction of New Facilities and Relocation of Personnel and
Equipment*
[6](#construction-of-new-facilities-and-relocation-of-personnel-and-equipment-1)

5 Names of Agencies and Persons Consulted
[6](#names-of-agencies-and-persons-consulted)

This page intentionally left blank.
[6](#this-page-intentionally-left-blank.)

6 Acronyms [6](#acronyms)

7 References [6](#references)

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 Overview of the San Francisco Bay Area and the LLNL and
SNL/CA Sites 7

Figure 2-2 Location of the Proposed Action 8

Figure 3-1 Geologic Map Showing Known Faults in the Vicinity of the LLNL
and

SNL/CA Sites 12

#  

This page intentionally left blank.

# Executive Summary

The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore,
California, is owned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and operated
by the University of California. The Sandia National Laboratories,
California (SNL/CA) is also owned by DOE; however, it is operated by
Sandia Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. DOE
proposes to administratively control a portion of East Avenue between
South Vasco and Greenville Roads. The purpose and need for the project
would provide DOE with the ability to restrict or close the roadway to
the general public on either a temporary or permanent basis to improve
security at LLNL and SNL/CA. This is consistent with DOE's overall
security enhancement plan at both laboratories.

The alternatives considered to the proposed action are (1) no action and
(2) construction of new facilities and relocation of personnel and
equipment. Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not
administratively control East Avenue between the LLNL and SNL/CA sites,
and the short-term impacts associated with the construction and traffic
congestion would not occur. However, the no-action alternative would not
meet DOE's purpose and need. Under the second alternative, DOE also
would not administratively control East Avenue between the LLNL and
SNL/CA sites, but would undertake construction to relocate several
essential facilities. Construction and operating impacts associated with
Alternative 2 would be greater than those of the proposed action.

Environmental issues are described and discussed in proportion to their
potential effects. The principal environmental issues discussed in this
Environmental Assessment (EA) are those associated with construction of
security kiosks, a truck inspection station, road improvements, and a
badging facility; placement of additional fences, gates and signs
(release of fugitive dust, construction waste generation, and increased
noise and traffic); and transportation (impacts related to traffic
diversions from the controlling of East Avenue). Potential cumulative
impacts are also discussed.

The environmental consequences of the proposed action would be
associated with either the construction of the facilities, or increased
traffic congestion on Livermore surface streets during the construction
phase. Construction impacts are expected to be minor and short-term.

Although there is some potential that cultural or paleontological
materials would be encountered during excavations for the project, the
probability is considered low. In the event that these materials are
encountered during project construction, a formal process exists to stop
construction, assess the find, and ensure that any resources would be
appropriately managed. These procedures are considered as routine,
ongoing actions that implement mitigation measures to avoid adverse
impacts from continued operation of LLNL, as outlined in the *August
1992 Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact
Report for Continued Operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore* (DOE/EIS-0157, SCH No.
90030 847) (DOE 1992), and its January 21, 1993, Record of Decision (58
FR 6268).

The California red-legged frog *(Rana aurora draytonii)*, a
federally-protected amphibian, has been observed in several areas of the
LLNL Livermore site, such as the centrally located Drainage Retention
Basin; however, the completion of the proposed activities would not
result in adverse impacts to the California red-legged frog populations
or designated critical habitat at LLNL or SNL/CA. The proposed location
of these activities is also not within nesting or foraging habitat of
the white-tailed kite (*Elanus leucurus*) or burrowing owl (*Speotyto
cunicularia*), two other protected special-status species at the LLNL
site. Additionally, the proposed activities would not result in impacts
to the California tiger salamander (*Ambystoma californiense*), a
federal candidate species, or the loggerhead shrike (*Lanius
ludovicianus*), a state species of special concern, present at SNL/CA.

# 1 Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose and need for the East Avenue Security Upgrade by DOE is to
provide additional protection to essential LLNL and SNL/CA facilities
and personnel along East Avenue. Due to recent world events and the
emerging security threats, the DOE needs the ability to restrict or
close the roadway to the general public on either a temporary or
permanent basis to improve security at LLNL and SNL/CA. This is
consistent with DOE's overall security enhancement plan at both the
laboratories.

In 1991, there was a previous initiative that proposed to
administratively control East Avenue after a bombing incident in the
SNL/CA parking lot. An Environmental Assessment (EA) and a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) were prepared, but the initiative was
cancelled prior to issuance of the FONSI due to the lack of funding. The
East Avenue project (as an "acquisition") was also considered as a
proposed action within the 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR.

# 2 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives

## *2.1 Proposed Action*

DOE proposes to create an administratively controlled open area (ACOA)
on the DOE-owned 1.25-mile section of East Avenue between South Vasco
and Greenville Roads. This public roadway lies between the Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories,
California (SNL/CA), in Alameda County, California. The action would
consist of administratively controlling seven tracts totaling about 16.3
acres.

The ACOA of East Avenue would provide DOE with the ability to restrict
or close the roadway to the general public on either a temporary or
permanent basis. A security review, to be completed by the Laboratories,
would determine the timing and means for controlling East Avenue on an
ongoing basis. Alternatives to the prepared action were considered,
including the alternative to take no action.

Controlling access to East Avenue would require vehicle and pedestrian
portals at both the Vasco Road and Greenville Road ends of East Avenue.
The area that would be created in the East Avenue corridor between the
portals would be a joint LLNL and SNL/CA ACOA. The proposal consists of
construction of a new leased trailer or modular badging facility near
the southeast corner of East Avenue and Vasco Road; a Vasco Road control
point maintained 24 hours a day, seven days a week; a Greenville Road
control point maintained 24 hours a day, seven days a week; and a new
truck inspection station located to the northwest side of the East
Avenue-Greenville Road control point. Modifications to East Avenue would
include a vehicle turnaround area, and traffic-stacking lanes at both
ends of East Avenue, to ensure that traffic would not back up into
adjacent intersections. Pedestrian and bicycle access would continue to
be provided. Additionally, fences along East Avenue may be relocated to
allow more open access between LLNL and SNL/CA, and new signage would be
appropriately placed on East Avenue, Vasco Road, Greenville Road,
Patterson Pass Road, and the Interstate 580 freeway to alert traffic to
the roadway modifications and federal access rights (per 10C.F.R. 860).

The Vasco Road control point would be positioned approximately 400 feet
east of Vasco Road and would consist of a minimum of two vehicle portals
(supporting three incoming lanes of traffic) and one pedestrian portal.
There would also be two exit lanes associated with this control point
with no exit portals. Approximately 700 feet east of Vasco Road, and
beyond the vehicle portals, "State Department-style" movable vehicle
barriers would be installed across the entire roadway. These barriers
would be normally flush with the roadway but could be activated by the
portal access control officer to prohibit unauthorized access into the
ACOA. The Greenville Road control point would be located approximately
300 feet west of Greenville Road and would consist of one inbound and
one outbound lane, supported by one portal kiosk. The vehicle barriers,
as described above, would be located approximately 750 feet west of
Greenville Road. Staffing of the new badge office and security kiosks
would be accomplished with existing SNL/CA personnel.

The joint LLNL/SNL/CA truck inspection station would be located on the
north side of the East Avenue-Greenville Road control point with a turn
lane to support the inspection station located approximately 200 feet
west of Greenville Road. The entrance would be of adequate size to
provide vehicle queuing for the worst-case (peak) delivery periods. A
covered inspection shed would be approximately 30 feet by 80 feet and
would accommodate a large double-trailer big rig. The inspection area
would also include a small office and restroom of approximately 600
square feet total. The exit of the inspection shed would be equipped
with movable vehicle barriers to prevent passage prior to inspection.
The inspected trucks would exit the inspection area back onto East
Avenue (within the ACOA) and would continue to the respective LLNL or
SNL/CA shipping/receiving areas. LLNL would operate the vehicle
inspection station during normal working hours with existing personnel.

### *2.1.1 Construction*

The proposed activity would consist of site improvements including new
construction of a vehicle inspection station and a new leased trailer or
modular badging facility; construction of portal kiosks; excavation;
grading; trenching for utility connections; road improvements; paving
access and parking areas; installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and
landscaping; installation of storm water drains connecting to existing
storm water drains; and debris removal. Additionally, the proposed
administrative control of East Avenue would require that traffic be
rerouted away from the access points during construction. Appropriate
signage would be placed on East Avenue, Greenville Road, Vasco Avenue,
and (if necessary) Tesla Road prior to the points of necessary
short-term traffic diversions.

### *2.1.2 Traffic Diversions*

The completion of the proposed administrative control of East Avenue
would require that vehicle and truck traffic be redirected. Permanent
signage would be placed on East Avenue, Greenville Road, Vasco Road, the
580 freeway, and (if necessary) on Patterson Pass Road to alert truck
traffic that all trucks would be required to enter at the new East
Avenue-Greenville Road Control Point for inspection. Signage would also
direct visitors to respective LLNL and SNL/CA badge offices and to alert
vehicles that East Avenue has been restricted to the general public and
direct them to alternate routes. Access to LLNL and SNL/CA would be
limited to those on official business or those who have appropriately
authorized and sponsored access to supporting facilities such as the
Federal Credit Union, LLNL pool, auditoriums for presentations, and
sponsored tours.

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="5.999305555555556in"
height="7.740972222222222in"}Figure 2-1 Overview of the San Francisco
Bay Area and the LLNL and SNL/CA Sites

> ![](media/image3.png){width="5.564583333333333in"
> height="1.8298611111111112in"}

[]{.mark}

![](media/image4.png){width="6.0in" height="1.9965277777777777in"}

Figure 2-2 Location of the Proposed Action

## *2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action*

### *2.2.1 No-Action Alternative*

DOE currently proposes to provide additional protection for LLNL and
SNL/CA essential facilities and personnel along East Avenue by
administratively controlling East Avenue. The No-Action Alternative
would mean that the public would have continued access to roadways near
sensitive facilities at both LLNL and SNL/CA. This alternative would
leave the essential facilities and personnel at LLNL and SNL/CA
vulnerable to emerging security threats, such as sabotage and vandalism.
The short-term impacts associated with the construction, such as
generation of fugitive dust and noise and traffic diversions would not
occur; however, the No-Action Alternative would not meet DOE's purpose
and need.

### *2.2.2 Construction of New Facilities and Relocation of Personnel and Equipment*

Under the second alternative, DOE would not administratively control
East Avenue between the LLNL and SNL/CA sites; however, additional
construction of several facilities would be needed to house the
essential programs that would be relocated away from East Avenue. At the
LLNL site, activities in Buildings 111, 113, and 115 (B111, B113, B115)
and accompanying personnel and equipment would need to be relocated
onsite in a classified area. At the SNL/CA site, activities in Building
912 and accompanying personnel and equipment would need to be relocated
to another classified area. At this time, there are no excess or unused
facilities at LLNL or SNL/CA that could be economically modified to
support these programs; therefore, new construction of four facilities,
with approximately 552,000 sq. ft. (LLNL, 424,206 sq. ft./SNL/CA,
128,241 sq. ft.) would be needed to provide housing for these existing
personnel and equipment. If this proposal were to be adopted, the
associated construction and operating impacts would be much greater than
for the proposed action. Therefore, the alternative of constructing new
facilities and relocating personnel and equipment at both LLNL and
SNL/CA was not considered further.

# 3 Description of the Affected Environment

A brief description of the affected environment surrounding the LLNL and
SNL/CA sites is presented in this section as it relates to the scope of
the proposed action and alternatives. A more detailed description can be
found in the 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR.

## *3.1 LLNL and SNL/CA Site Description*

The LLNL site occupies a total area of approximately 3.3 km2 (821 acres)
at the southeast end of the Livermore Valley. The SNL/CA site is located
on 410 acres across East Avenue and south of the LLNL site. These sites
are located about 80 km (50 mi) east of San Francisco, in southern
Alameda County, California (Figure 2-1). Activities at the LLNL and
SNL/CA sites are varied in nature, with the vast majority dedicated to
research and development programs. The LLNL site is bordered by
Greenville Road to the east, East Avenue to the south, Vasco Road to the
west, and Patterson Pass Road to the north. A very small amount of
low-density residential lies to the east of the Livermore site, and
agricultural land extends to the foothills that define the eastern
margin of the Livermore Valley. Land immediately north of Patterson Pass
Road is light industrial, and a 200-hectare parcel of open space to the
northeast has been rezoned to allow additional light industry. Beyond
Vasco Road to the west, the land use ranges from low to high-density
single-family residential. South of the site, East Avenue separates the
LLNL site from the SNL/CA site. Further to the south, property is
primarily open space and ranchettes, with some agricultural use (LLNL
2001), although new residential development along South Vasco Road
(immediately west of the SNL/CA site) and Tesla Road (south of SNL/CA)
has been planned by the City of Livermore.

## *3.2 Topography, Geology, and Soils*

The Livermore Valley is characterized by nearly level, shallow-to-deep
soils that vary in texture from clays to sandy clay loams or mixed
gravels. The soils tend to be high in sodium, calcium, magnesium, iron,
chlorides, and sulfur, and low in organic matter, nitrates, phosphates,
and potassium. The characteristics of the soil series found at the LLNL
and SNL/CA sites are hard when dry and plastic when wet; the soils have
high permeability and high water-retention capacity. Because the LLNL
site is nearly flat, there are no areas of potential slope instability
with the exception of banks along arroyos (DOE 1992). The terrain on the
southern portion of the SNL/CA site has up to a 3% grade; however, in
the area where the proposed badge office/visitors center would be
located, the land is relatively flat and has no potential for slope
instability.

## *3.3 Seismicity*

The LLNL and SNL/CA sites are located in a region that has experienced
earthquakes within historical times. The effect of seismic activity is
likely to be confined to ground-shaking with no surface displacement
(DOE 1992). Active faults considered capable of causing strong ground
motion at the LLNL and SNL/CA site have been identified, and the
potential impact on operations assessed (DOE 1992). Figure 3‑1 shows the
known faults in the vicinity of the LLNL and SNL/CA sites.

![](media/image5.png){width="5.925in" height="8.27361111111111in"}Figure
3-1 Geologic Map Showing Known Faults in the Vicinity of the LLNL and
SNL/CA Sites (Source: DOE 1992)

## *3.4 Climate and Air Quality* 

### *3.4.1 Climate*

The Livermore Valley is characterized by mild, rainy winters and warm,
dry summers. The average daily maximum temperatures range from 56.3 °F
(13.5°C) in January to 89.4°F (31.9°C) in July. The average daily
minimum temperatures range from 36.1°F (2.3°C) in January to 54.0°F
(12.2°C) in July. The average annual daily temperature is 59.2°F
(15.1°C) (SNL 2002).

Both rainfall and wind exhibit strong seasonal patterns. Most of the
annual rainfall, which averages 36.9 cm (14.5 in.)(SNL 2002), occurs
between October and April and is associated with migratory, low-pressure
systems from the Gulf of Alaska. Prevailing winds are from the west and
southwest from April through September.

### *3.4.2 Air Quality*

The LLNL and SNL/CA sites are located within the area administered by
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). With respect to
attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, this area is
designated as "non-attainment" for federal and state ozone and is
"non-attainment" or "unclassified" for federal and state PM10/PM2.5, and
"in attainment" for all other criteria pollutants (BAAQMD 2002).

## *3.5 Hydrology*

The LLNL and SNL/CA sites are located at the eastern end of the
Livermore Valley groundwater basin. Recharge to the basin is largely
from arroyos originating in the foothills, including Arroyo Seco and
Arroyo Las Positas.

### *3.5.1 Surface Water*

The major surface drainages in the Livermore Valley are the Arroyo
Valle, Arroyo Las Positas, Arroyo Mocho, Arroyo Seco, Cottonwood Creek,
and Tassajara Creek. These surface streams are all intermittent and flow
generally to the west. Only Arroyo Las Positas and Arroyo Seco cross the
LLNL Livermore site. Arroyo Seco crosses the southwest corner of the
LLNL site and receives a minor amount of LLNL site runoff. Arroyo Las
Positas receives the majority of the LLNL Livermore site runoff. All
surface runoff from SNL/CA is discharged into the Arroyo Seco (DOE
1992), which crosses the site from southeast to northwest.

Storm water on the LLNL site is channeled through storm drains and open
ditches designed to accommodate a 10-year storm event. Some surface
water is directed through storm channels into the excavated and lined,
4-acre drainage retention basin (DRB) in the central portion of the
site. The DRB was constructed as one of the measures to limit the
movement of historic contamination present in groundwater under the LLNL
site. To accomplish this, the DRB captures surface water and prevents it
from infiltrating downward into the water table. The depth of the DRB
ranges from 4 to 14 ft. The lining consists of 12-mil PVC plastic
covered with 16 in. of fill (DOE 1996). A second basin constructed by
LLNL to recharge groundwater is located in the west perimeter area at
SNL/CA.

The SNL/CA storm water conveyance system transports surface runoff to
the Arroyo Seco or to a ditch-channel along East Avenue. The channel
along East Avenue is predominately dirt, and runoff eventually
infiltrates into the ground or evaporates. During heavy storms, the
water in the channel flows west and eventually discharges to the Arroyo
Seco via an underground corrugated pipe (SNL 2002).

The LLNL site has a large groundwater cleanup and environmental
restoration program. Contaminated groundwater is pumped from individual
wells, sent to one of many treatment facilities, and, if the treated
groundwater meets discharge limits, either discharged to surface
drainage channels or routed to the central DRB. Water from most of these
treatment facilities remains in the DRB until it is released through
onsite storm drainage channels to the Arroyo Las Positas. A LLNL-managed
recharge basin, which receives treated groundwater from the LLNL
mainsite Treatment Facility A, is situated on the northwest side of the
SNL/CA in the security buffer.

Wastewater discharge permits are issued by the Livermore Water
Reclamation Plant (LWRP) for discharges to the municipal sanitary sewer.
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board issues a
NPDES permit for storm water discharges associated with industrial
activity and low-threat non-storm water discharges. Treated groundwater
discharges are regulated through a Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Record of Decision, and Waste
Discharge Requirements issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (DOE 1992).

### *3.5.2 Groundwater*

A study of the water table configuration below the LLNL site showed the
direction of groundwater flow to be generally westward (DOE, 1992), with
a depth to groundwater between 110 ft in the southeast corner to 30 ft
in the northwest corner. The depth to groundwater at SNL/CA ranges from
80 ft in the northwest corner to 126 ft on the east side of the site
(SNL 2002).

### *3.5.3 Floodplains and Wetlands*

A study was performed in 1986 for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) to determine flood hazards in the Alameda County/Livermore
Area. This study showed three areas where there is the potential for
minor shallow flooding: Arroyo Las Positas (LLNL), an area near the East
Gate (LLNL), and Arroyo Seco (SNL/CA). There are no existing onsite
structures within the 100‑year floodplain at any LLNL or SNL/CA site
location (DOE 1992). The proposed project would not be within the
100‑year floodplain.

There are several wetlands at the LLNL site, including the entire Arroyo
Las Positas. The 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR identified three locations of
wetlands totaling 0.36 acres (1,457 m2) (DOE 1992). A more recent
wetland delineation conducted during the summer of 1997 identified
approximately 2 acres (8,094 m2) (Jones and Stokes 1997). The wetlands
are mostly comprised of cattails and sedges, but there are some
locations where willows have become established. Species observed at
these wetlands include the following: saltgrass (*Distichilis spicata*),
willow (*Salix sp.*), cattail (*Typha sp.*), curly dock (*Rumex
crispus*), Italian ryegrass (*Lolium sp.*), and evening primrose
(*Oenthera biennis)* (Jones and Stokes 1997). Most wetlands are
dominated by saltgrass, and some wetlands have more species diversity
than others.

The wetland area of the SNL/CA site is a riparian corridor along
approximately 1370 feet of the Arroyo Seco channel and occupies 0.44
acres. In 1998, SNL/CA proposed a project to restore a portion of the
arroyo embankments and streambed. The *Floodplain/Wetlands Assessment
for Proposed Embankment and Streambed Restoration Project in the Arroyo
Seco* (SNL 1999) was used to assess this project and disturbed areas
were replanted in December 1999. SNL/CA is required by the California
Department of Fish and Game to monitor the replanted wetland for three
years (SNL 2002).

## *3.6 Vegetation and Wildlife*

The LLNL site is mostly a developed area that provides only limited
wildlife habitat because of the high degree of human activity and the
few areas of undisturbed vegetation. Annual wild oat along with
non-grass annuals and perennials now dominate the grassy areas of the
site (DOE 1992). The SNL/CA site consists primarily of grassland.
Localized areas of coyote brush scrub, riparian woodland, and aquatic
habitat are also present. Areas developed and disturbed by Sandia
operations constitute an additional habitat type, designated altered
habitat (SNL 2002).

The LLNL site hosts numerous birds, reptiles, and amphibians with a
minimum of three species of amphibians and reptiles, 10 species of
mammals, and 31 species of birds. Blacktail jackrabbits (*Lepos
californicus*) are the most common mid-size wild mammals present; and
gophers, snakes, and field mice can be found in the undeveloped areas of
the LLNL site. Typical water bird species that have been found to use
the DRB, include Pied-billed grebe (*Podilymous podiceps*) and
green-backed heron (*Butorides straitos*).

The SNL/CA site also hosts numerous birds, reptiles, and amphibians with
a minimum of five species of amphibians and reptiles, 14 species of
mammals, and 58 species of birds. California ground squirrels
(*Spermophylus beecheyi)* are the most common wild mammals present.

## *3.7 Sensitive Species*

Resource surveys of LLNL and SNL/CA were conducted in 1986 (Orloff
1986), and a biological assessment in 1991 (pursuant to the U.S.
Endangered Species Act and the State of California Endangered Species
Act) addressed the status of threatened, endangered, and other species
of concern (referred to as sensitive species) that may occur or were
known to occur in these areas at that time (DOE 1992). Although several
listed and proposed endangered and threatened species of plants and
animals may occur in the general area of the LLNL and SNL/CA sites, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determined that, to the best of
its knowledge, in 1991 these species were not known to occur within the
boundaries and proposed future growth areas of these sites at the time
of this assessment (USFWS 1991). Since that time, pairs of one state-
and federally-protected bird species, the white-tailed kite, have been
observed nesting on the LLNL site near the East Gate and along the
eastern and northern site boundaries. In 1998, six nesting pairs of
white-tailed kites were successful in fledging 14 young. Also, one state
and federal species of special concern, the burrowing owl (*Speotyto
cunicularia*), had been found in the north and west buffer zones of the
LLNL site during certain years. The California red-legged frog (*Rana
aurora draytonii*) has also been observed in several areas at the LLNL
site, including the Arroyo Las Positas and the DRB, and both LLNL and
SNL/CA appear to contain portions of critical habitat as designated by
the USFWS. To date, the California red-legged frog has not been found at
SNL/CA. California ground squirrel *(Spermophilus beecheyi)* burrows
located in the open grassland at SNL/CA provide potential habitat for
California tiger salamanders *(Ambystoma californiense*) and western
burrowing owls *(Speotyto curnicularia)*. Both California tiger
salamanders and burrowing owls have been observed in the past years at
Sandia in the western buffer area near the site of the LLNL recharge
basin; however, surveys conducted in 2001 found no California tiger
salamanders or burrowing owls at the recharge basin or elsewhere at
SNL/CA or LLNL. During the 2001 survey conducted at SNL/CA, three nest
sites for loggerhead shrikes were observed. These nest sites are located
along the east and west perimeters of the developed area of the site.
Loggerhead shrikes are a state species of special concern.

## *3.8 Land Use and Population*

Land uses for LLNL and SNL/CA site are addressed together in Section
3.1.

In 1990, the population of the area within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of
the LLNL and SNL/CA sites was approximately 6.9 million persons (DOE
1992). Based on the 2000 Census, the population of the City of Livermore
is about 73,345. In Fiscal Year 1999, 9,631 persons worked at LLNL (LLNL
2001); 1,272 of these workers were contractors and support personnel;
DOE personnel accounted for 142 onsite workers; the remaining 8,217 were
employees of the University of California. Currently, 1,318 persons work
at SNL/CA; 1, 044 of these workers are employed by the Sandia
Corporation (includes exempt, nonexempt, limited term, post docs,
students, and interns), and the remaining 274 are contract personnel.

## *3.9 Cultural Resources*

A background literature search indicates that one historical site of
unknown importance has been reported in the Arroyo Seco at the LLNL
site, in an area that would not be affected by construction activity. No
other prehistoric or historic sites older than 100 years have been
identified or recorded for the proposed location of the project or
discovered during any of the ongoing cultural resource investigations
conducted for the LLNL or SNL/CA sites, in general. LLNL is currently
involved in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer
and DOE to discuss issues aimed at fulfilling DOE's short-term and
broader, long-term cultural resource management obligations as outlined
in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. There is no
evidence of prehistoric or historic archeological sites at SNL/CA. None
of the SNL/CA buildings are historically significant and they have been
determined to not be eligible for the National Register (SNL 2002).

## *3.10 Paleontological Resources*

In December 1997 and January 1998, paleontological resources dating to
the late Pleistocene were found in the northeast quadrant of the LLNL
site during construction of the National Ignition Facility (NIF).
Materials found include the fossil remains of two mammoths and two
horses within an approximately 700-ft × 300-ft area. The fossil locales
lie at a depth of approximately 20 to 35 ft below ground surface in an
unnamed valley fill deposit that lies directly above the Livermore
Formation.

One locale contained the partial skeleton of a mammoth (*Mammuthus
columbi*), including a portion of the skull, jaw teeth, ribs, vertebrae,
humerus, and tusk; and a second locale contained a partial pelvis
(innominate bone) of a horse (likely *equus*). These materials were
excavated under an Antiquities Permit granted to the DOE by the U.S.
Department of the Interior. The materials have been curated into the
collection of the University of California at Berkeley Museum of
Paleontology.

A third locale was also identified as containing a partial mammoth
skeleton, and a fourth locale was identified as containing a partial
horse skeleton. Because these sites would not be disturbed by NIF
construction activities, the exact locations of the fossils were
recorded and the fossils were left in place.

There are no known paleontological resources at SNL/CA.

# 4 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives

## *The Proposed Action*

DOE proposes to create an administratively controlled area (ACOA) on the
1.25-mile section of East Avenue between South Vasco and Greenville
Roads. This public roadway lies between the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (SNL/CA),
in Alameda County, California. The action would consist of
administratively controlling seven tracts totaling about 16.3 acres.

The ACOA of East Avenue would provide DOE with the ability to restrict
or close the roadway to the general public on either a temporary or
permanent basis. Because the final disposition of the roadway has not
yet been determined, this assessment covers the scenario that would have
the greatest impact on the environment. That scenario would be
administrative control of the road to the general public, with access
limited to those on official business or those who have appropriately
authorized and sponsored access to supporting facilities such as the
Federal Credit Union, LLNL pool, auditoriums for presentations, and
sponsored tours.

Controlling access to East Avenue would require vehicle and pedestrian
portals at both the Vasco Road and Greenville Road ends of East Avenue.
The area that would be created in the East Avenue corridor between the
portals would be a joint LLNL-SNL/CA ACOA. The proposal consists of
construction of a new leased trailer or modular badging facility on
SNL/CA land at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Vasco Road
intersection; a Vasco Road control point; a Greenville Road control
point; and a new vehicle inspection station located on the north side of
the East Avenue-Greenville Road control point. Modifications to East
Avenue would include a truck turnaround area, and traffic-queuing lanes
at both ends of East Avenue to ensure that traffic would not back up
into adjacent intersections. Pedestrian and bicycle access would
continue to be provided. Additionally, fences along East Avenue may be
relocated to allow more open access between LLNL and SNL/CA, and new
signage would be appropriately placed on East Avenue, Vasco Road,
Greenville Road, the 580 freeway, and Patterson Pass Road to alert
traffic to the roadway access modifications and federal access rights
(per 10 C. F. R. 860).

### *4.1.1 Potential Impacts of Construction*

Potential construction-related impacts from roadway modifications, the
building of the new badging facility, construction of the truck
inspection station, and related trenching for the extension of water,
electrical, sanitary sewer, and telephone lines from existing onsite
utilities, would include increased fugitive dust, noise from general
construction activities and equipment, temporary onsite traffic
disruptions near the project areas, and disposal of waste and debris.
Fugitive dust emissions would be mitigated by water spraying of roads,
excavations, and exposed piles of excavated materials. Construction
equipment and vehicles would be properly muffled to reduce noise
impacts. Additionally, signage would be placed on East Avenue,
Greenville Road, and Vasco Avenue directing construction traffic and
alerting the public and lab employees to short-term traffic alterations.
Construction of the proposed project would be phased to ensure that both
the Greenville Road/East Avenue and the Vasco Road/East Avenue rerouting
of truck and vehicular traffic would not block access to the main gate
at SNL/CA and the southwest gate of LLNL.

Prior to construction-related activities, a survey would be conducted to
determine the presence or absence of the California tiger salamander
(SNL/CA), the California red-legged frog (LLNL only), the loggerhead
shrike (SNL/CA only), and the white-tailed kite in potential habitat
areas near the LLNL and SNL/CA construction sites. If the white-tailed
kite is present, species-specific mitigation measures in accordance with
Section 3511 of the California State Fish and Game Code and Federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act would be implemented as appropriate. These
could include the minimization of incremental, construction-related
traffic activity during the nesting and rearing seasons if the
white-tailed kite is present in these areas. If the loggerhead shrike is
present at SNL/CA, construction activities may be delayed or reduced
until the young have fledged. The previously identified burrowing owl
nest sites in the north and west buffer zones of LLNL and known
red-legged frog locations at LLNL are sufficiently distant from the site
that no impacts are expected from construction. The proposed activities
would not impact existing or designated critical habitat of the
California red-legged frog at LLNL. Approximately 2000 linear feet of
trenching would occur at SNL/CA within designated critical habitat. This
area is grassland with no surface water sources. As such, the area does
not provide permanent habitat for red-legged frogs, but serves as a
dispersal corridor between known aquatic sites within the vicinity of
SNL/CA. Short-term trenching for utility connections would not create a
barrier to dispersal, and would not, directly or indirectly, reduce the
capability of designated critical habitat to satisfy requirements
essential to the survival and recovery of the red-legged frog. SNL/CA
and DOE/Office of Kirtland Site Operations are preparing a biological
assessment to address planned and future construction in the critical
habitat area as part of continued SNL/CA operations. Although no adverse
impacts to the species are expected, any impact mitigation requirements
resulting from consultation with the USFWS would be incorporated into
this project prior to start of activities. Because both California tiger
salamanders and burrowing owls have been observed in the western buffer
area near the LLNL recharge basin at the SNL/CA site, pre-construction
surveys would be conducted, and if the species were found, the
appropriate measures would be implemented to avoid impact. Other
wildlife species would not be adversely affected by the proposed action.

A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to be developed and employed
during construction would use best management practices to minimize
erosion and siltation from disturbed areas of the project site. Upon
completion of construction, storm water runoff from rooftops and paved
yard areas would be channeled into collection points to the LLNL storm
water collection system. The proposed action does not include any new
storm drain outfalls to the DRB.

The proposed construction sites are not in areas that were known or
suspected waste burial sites. Most waste generated from the construction
of the proposal would be excess building materials, although liquid
wastes, such as cleaning and sanitary effluents, could also be produced.
All wastes, including excess soils, would be collected, sampled and
disposed of appropriately and handled in accordance with applicable
regulations and LLNL and SNL/CA procedures.

Several subsurface investigations have already been conducted at the
proposed activity site during sampling for potential soil contamination,
installation of monitoring wells, and trenching for utility connections
for adjacent buildings (LLNL only). No evidence of fossil materials was
encountered during these investigations. In the event that
paleontological or cultural materials are encountered during project
construction, a formal process exists to stop construction, assess the
find, and ensure that any resources would be appropriately managed. DOE
routinely ensures that staff and contractor personnel engaged in
ground-disturbance activities at LLNL are provided appropriate
information, that finds of bone fragments, pottery shards or other
cultural or paleontological resources are promptly reported, and that
the ground-disturbing work is stopped until the proper evaluations are
made. These procedures are considered as routine, ongoing actions that
implement mitigation measures to avoid adverse impacts from continued
operation of LLNL as outlined in the 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR (DOE 1992)
and its January 21, 1993, Record of Decision. At SNL/CA, a standard
clause on preservation procedures is included in all construction
contracts issued onsite. The Sandia-delegated contract representative
would serve as the monitor for archaeological materials found during
construction at the SNL/CA site. These procedures are intended to
minimize any impact to paleontological or cultural materials discovered
during construction activities.

Groundwater monitoring wells currently located close to the proposed
site of the new badging facility would not be demolished or relocated as
part of the proposed action. These wells provide data on groundwater
movement, contaminant concentrations, and other parameters to allow
appropriate monitoring of groundwater contamination and meet LLNL's
responsibilities under the CERCLA Record of Decision for remediation of
the LLNL Livermore site.

### *4.1.2 Potential Impacts from Traffic Diversion*

A traffic study, conducted in 1989 by TJKM Transportation Consultants in
advance of the preparation of the 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR (DOE 1992),
evaluated the potential traffic impacts associated with "closing" or
limiting public access to East Avenue if it was required for security
reasons. This traffic study was also utilized to support the drafting of
an Environmental Assessment for the administrative control of East
Avenue, and a draft Finding of No Significance (FONSI) in 1992; this
project was later cancelled due to funding constraints. Those studies
concluded that under future (2010) build-out conditions in the City of
Livermore, levels of service at intersections in eastern Livermore would
not be substantially altered if East Avenue were closed to the public
(TJKM Transportation Consultants 1989). As identified in the 1992
Sitewide EIS/EIR (DOE 1992), the administrative control of a portion of
East Avenue and subsequent alteration of the traffic flow along this
roadway segment had a less-than-significant impact and impact
mitigations were not warranted.

A recent traffic study conducted by Korve Engineering in February 2002,
was prepared to determine the potential traffic impact of this proposed
action, and to review whether the assumptions and conclusions of the
1989 traffic study by TJKM Transportation Consultants and the
conclusions of the 1992 EIS/EIR remain valid (Korve 2002). The 1989
traffic study by TJKM based its assumptions on improvements to the
eastern Livermore road network that included: the reconstruction of the
First Street, Vasco Road, and Greenville road interchanges to the
partial clover leaf design; the completion of North Mines Road between
First Street and East Avenue; the proposed Concannon Boulevard
extension; the widening of South Vasco Road and Greenville Road between
I-580 and Hawthorne Drive to six lanes and between Hawthorne Drive and
East Avenue to four lanes; the signalization at East Avenue/Vasco Road
and other major intersections; and a new LLNL entrance on Patterson Pass
Road (required when the LLNL population reaches 12,000) (TJKM
Transportation Consultants 1989). All of these improvements, except the
new entrance to LLNL, have been completed. The 2002 study found that
since the combined LLNL and SNL/CA employment has declined from
approximately 11,000 in 1989 to a current level of approximately 10,000
(or 9 percent reduction), that the previous study in 1989 is likely
conservative in its analysis (Korve 2002). The 2002 study by Korve
Engineering also evaluated future traffic conditions up to the year 2020
through the use of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency's
travel demand model. The results predicted only a 0.65 percent annual
increase in traffic in the study area. Thus, the levels of service (LOS)
for the signalized East Avenue/Vasco Road intersection, and for the East
Avenue/Greenville Road intersection, are projected to continue to
operate at LOS B or C in 2020 (Korve 2002). Therefore, the proposed
action would not result in an increase of potential impacts to local
transportation routes beyond those analyzed and presented in the 1992
Sitewide EIS/EIR.

### *4.1.3 Potential Impacts Associated with Postulated Accident Scenario*

In the 1992 EIS/EIR, Volume II, Appendix D, several sitewide accident
analyses were conducted which created a bounding envelope of reasonably
foreseeable accident scenarios for LLNL and SNL/CA. The bounding
envelope is a set of individual bounding accidents covering the range of
probabilities and possible consequences. However, because this proposed
project is specific to location and activity, i.e., the operation of a
truck inspection station and its proximity to Hazardous Waste Management
(HWM) facilities, the discussion will be limited to fuel truck (\>3
axle) accidents at the truck inspection facility. The 1992 EIS/EIR (and
its 1999 Supplement Analysis (DOE 1999)) outlined the potential impacts
of several bounding accident scenarios related to hazardous waste
treatment and storage facilities at LLNL. Also, a previous safety
evaluation reviewed the B611 gasoline filling station operations and the
potential for impacts of large gasoline spills, fires, explosions,
uncontrolled expanding vapor clouds (UEVC) or boiling liquid expanding
vapor explosions (BLEVE) on HWM facilities (Area 612). It concluded that
the probability of catastrophic failures of the HWM facilities leading
to large, unacceptable consequences was not credible; and that smaller
leaks (5,000 gal gasoline) present very minor exposure hazards to the
HWM facilities. A second safety evaluation evaluated the probability, or
frequency, of certain consequences of fuel truck (\>3 axle) accidents at
the proposed location of the truck inspection station that could impact
HWM facilities. The evaluation concluded that the frequency of an
unmitigated fuel truck accident resulting in a large fire is extremely
unlikely; the probabilities of unmitigated fuel truck accidents
resulting in an uncontained vapor explosion (UCVE) or a BLEVE is "beyond
extremely unlikely"; and that a minor fuel truck accident is judged to
be anticipated with "low consequences" on the inspection station and
"negligible consequences" on the LLNL hazardous waste management
facilities (Area 612). The safety evaluations concluded that the
potential impacts associated with the proposed projects are
less-than-significant when compared to the bounding envelope of accident
scenarios already identified for LLNL and SNL/CA operations in the 1992
EIS/EIR.

### *4.1.4 Cumulative Impacts*

Minor, temporary (short-term) cumulative impacts could potentially occur
from construction activities. Fugitive dust and noise from construction
may contribute to minor, temporary cumulative impacts if they occur
simultaneously with other projected LLNL construction projects, such as
the National Ignition Facility (NIF), the Sensitive Compartmented
Information Facility (SCIF), and the Terascale Simulation Facility
(TSF), and construction projects at SNL, California. Good engineering
and construction practices would assure that these impacts would be
minimized to the extent feasible.

The 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR evaluated the potential growth in employment
at the LLNL site from 11,200 employees in 1992 to an estimated 13,200
employees in 2002), and at the SNL/CA site from 1,500 employees in 1992
to an estimated 1,550 employees in 2002 (DOE 1992). The 1992 Sitewide
EIS/EIR concluded that the increase in employment would result in an
increased demand for housing in the Livermore area. However, as noted in
Section 3.8, the actual number of employees has declined significantly
from the 1992-estimated level to the current level of 9,631 employees at
LLNL, and 1,300 at SNL/CA. Even with the operation of other projects
such as NIF, SCIF, and TSF, the total number of LLNL and SNL/CA
employees after the East Avenue project is completed would be
substantially less than levels projected in the 1992 Sitewide EIS/EIR.
Therefore, the proposed action would not result in a significant
increase in demand for local housing over the 1992 level when considered
cumulatively with other DOE actions that would increase employment.

### *4.1.5 Conformity with State Implementation Plans*

The EPA has established criteria and procedures for demonstrating and
assuring conformity of federal actions to the State Implementation Plans
(SIPs) for areas that are designated as non-attainment or maintenance
for national ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for criteria
pollutants (40 CFR 6, 51, and 93). Criteria pollutants include CO, lead,
NOx, ozone, PM~10~, and SO2. The San Francisco Bay Area is currently
designated as "non-attainment" for federal and state ozone and is
"non-attainment" or "unclassified" for federal and state PM10/PM2.5, and
"in attainment" for all other criteria pollutants (BAAQMD 2002). The
BAAQMD has a no-net increase policy that requires emissions from new
permitted sources to be offset by emissions reductions within the
facility or at other sources within the district. Conformity is
demonstrated by showing that additional transportation improvements fall
within the "budget" for such emissions included in the State
Implementation Plan. Since there will be no new permitted LLNL or SNL/CA
sources associated with the construction or operation of the truck
inspection station or the kiosks/badging facilities, it is expected that
BAAQMD and State Implementation Plan requirements would be met.

### *4.1.6 Environmental Justice*

In accordance with the presidential Executive Order (EO) 12898, dated
February 11, 1994, DOE has proposed to establish procedures for
identifying and addressing disproportionate adverse human health and
environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on
minority populations, low-income populations, Native American tribes,
and populations of non-English-speaking residents (Executive Order
1994). The Livermore site region, on average within a 50-mile radius,
does not have more minority or low-income populations than the state
average (DOE 1999).

## *4.2 The No-Action Alternative*

Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not administratively control
East Avenue between the LLNL and SNL/CA sites, and impacts associated
with short-term construction and traffic congestion would not occur.

## *4.3 Construction of New Facilities and Relocation of Personnel and Equipment*

Under the second alternative, DOE would not administratively control
East Avenue between the LLNL and SNL/CA sites; however, additional
construction of several facilities would occur, and associated
construction and operating impacts would be far greater than the impacts
of the proposed action.

At the LLNL site, activities in Buildings 111, 113, and 115 (B111, B113,
B115) and accompanying personnel and equipment would need to be
relocated onsite in a classified area. At the SNL/CA site, activities in
Building 912 and accompanying personnel and equipment would need to be
relocated to another classified area. At this time, there are no excess
or unused facilities at LLNL or SNL/CA that could be economically
modified to support these programs; therefore, new construction of four
facilities, with approximately 552,000 sq. ft. (LLNL, 424,206 sq.
ft./SNL/CA, 128,241 sq. ft.) would be needed to provide housing for
these existing personnel and equipment.

Siting and construction of new facilities could have potential impacts
on sensitive-species habitat (some of which is already Federally
designated Critical Habitat for the California red-legged frog) since
such "greenfield" sites, although not usually desirable for siting, may
have to become the preferred sites for such new development due to the
lack of additional space. Cumulative construction impacts would include
extensive trenching for the extension of water, electrical, sanitary
sewer, and telephone lines from existing onsite utilities; additional
fugitive dust; noise from general construction activities and equipment;
temporary onsite traffic disruptions near the project areas; and
disposal of additional waste and debris. Daily operations of these four
new facilities would also substantially increase the consumption of
electrical and water resources at both LLNL and SNL/CA.

#  5 Names of Agencies and Persons Consulted

No outside agencies were consulted while preparing the EA.

# This page intentionally left blank. 

# 6 Acronyms

AAQS Ambient air quality standards

ACOA Administratively controlled open area

BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District

BLEVE Boiling liquid expanding vapor explosions

> CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
> Liability Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Carbon monoxide

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DRB Drainage Retention Basin

EA Environmental Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EO Executive Order

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Act

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

HWM Hazardous Waste Management Division, LLNL

LLNL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

LOS Level of service

LWRP City of Livermore Water Reclamation Plant

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NIF National Ignition Facility

NOx Nitrogen oxides

> PM~10~ Particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter
>
> SCIF Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility

SIPs State Implementation Plans

SO~2~ Sulfur dioxide

SNL/CA Sandia National Laboratories, California

TSF Terascale Simulation Facility

UCVE Uncontained vapor explosion

UEVC Uncontrolled expanding vapor clouds

USFWS U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

# 7 References

Bay Area Air Quality Management District Attainment Status, January 2002
(BAAQMD 2002). Available at
http://www.baaqmd.gov/planning/resmod/baas.htm

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 1986, Title 40, *Regulations For
Implementing The Procedural Provisions of The National Environmental
Policy* Act, 40 CFR 1500-1508, Council on Environmental Quality,
Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C., July 1.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 1992, Title 10, *National
Environmental Policy Act; Implementing Procedures and Guidelines
Revocation; Final Rule and Notice*, 10 CFR 1021, U.S. Department of
Energy, April 24.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 1993, Title 40, *Determining
Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation
Plans*, 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, and 93, Environmental Protection Agency,
November 30.

Executive Order (EO), 1994, *Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations*, EO 12898,
Office of the President, February 11.

Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., 1997, *Delineation of Waters of the
United States for Arroyo Las Positas, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, Alameda County, California.* Prepared for the University of
California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.
Sacramento, November 7 (JSA-97-107).

Korve Engineering, 2002, *East Avenue/Emergency Response Planning
Traffic Study*, February 2002*.*

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), 2000, *Environmental
Report 2000,* Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, UCRL-50027-00.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), 2001, *LLNL Site
Development Sourcebook,* Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
UCRL-MI-110253-01.

Orloff, S., 1986, *Wildlife Studies of Site 300 Emphasizing Rare and
Endangered Species, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, San Joaquin
County, California*, prepared by BioSystems Analysis, Inc., for Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.

SNL 2002, Sandia National Laboratories/California Environmental
Information Document, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore,
California, March 2002.

SNL 1999, *Floodplain/Wetlands Assessment for Proposed Embankment and
Streambed Restoration Project in the Arroyo Seco*, Sandia National
Laboratories, California, March 29, 1999.

State of California, 1999, Memorandum from Jason Marshall, Department of
Conservation to Janet Neville, DOE/OAK NEPA Compliance Officer, August
31, 1999.

TJKM Transportation Consultants, 1989, *Traffic Impact Study Proposed
Closure of East Avenue in the City of Livermore and the County of
Alameda,* June 1989*.*

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 1992, *Final Environmental Impact
Statement and Environmental Impact Report for the Continued Operation of
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories,
Livermore, August, 1992,* DOE EIS-0157, U.S. Department of Energy (EIS),
Washington, D.C., and University of California (EIR), SCH90030847.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 1993, *Recommendations for the
Preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact
Statements,* Office of NEPA Oversight, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, D.C., May.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 1999, *Supplement Analysis for
Continued Operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia
National Laboratories, Livermore,* DOE/EIS0157-SA-01, U.S. Department of
Energy, Oakland Operations Office, Oakland, California*.*

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1991, Letter of Communication,
Subject: Species Lists for the Proposed Future Growth of the Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories,
Livermore (SNL/CA) Areas, and the Site 300 Area, Alameda and San Joaquin
Counties, California, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service, Sacramento Field Office, Sacramento, CA, March 5, 1991.