;47 

, t 

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

U. S. AIR FORCE 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH COMPLEX 

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, CALIF. 

MARCH 1990 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

• 1111/7' 

FOR RELEASE 

‘,‘,41ietilNE 

02.01.03 

Compliance Actions - NEPA - 

E'i+s!EISs 

Environmental Impact 

Analysis Process 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

rosiAAL 2015 

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH COMPLEX 

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA 

Prepared For: 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION 

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIVISION 

EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 

March, 1990 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

j0NE 2015 

PAGE NO. 

viii 

ix 

1-1 

2-1 

2-1 

2-1 

2-2 

2-8 

2-10 

2-11 

2-14 

2-15 

2-19 

2-19 

2-21 

2-23 

2-23 

2-24 

2-24 

2-24 

2-25 

2-25 

2-25 

2-27 

2-28 

2-28 

2-29 

2-31 

2-34 

2-34 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF TABLES 

LIST OF FIGURES 

L0 INTRODUCTION 

2.0 THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

2.1 Proposed Action 

2.1.1 Introduction 

2.1.2 Project Elements 

2.1.2.1 Titan IV/Centaur Space Launch Vehicle 

2.1.2.2 Primary Support Structures 

2.1.2.3 Ancillary Project Elements 

2.1.2.4 Other VAFB Facilities 

2.1.3 Project Construction Activities 

2.1.4 Launch Activities 

2.1.4.1 Launch Preparation 

2.1.4.2 Launch Operations 

2.1.4.3 Post-launch Refurbishment 

2.1.5 Overall Project Schedule and Personnel 

2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

2.2.1 Other Launch Vehicles 

2.2.1.1 Space Shuttle 

2.2.1.2 Other Vehicles 

2.2.2 Other Launch Locations 

2.2.2.1 Existing Government Sites 

2.2.2.2 Remote, Undeveloped Sites 

2.2.3 VAFB Launch Sites 

2.2.3.1 Sites Considered and Rejected 

2.2.3.2 SLC-6 Conversion 

2.2.3.3 Boathouse Flats 

2.2.3.4 Vina Terrace 

2.2.4 No Action 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

U 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

3.0 BIOLOGICAL SETTING 

3.1 Terrestrial and Aquatic Biota 

3.1.1 Regional Biota 

3.1.2 Local Biota 

3.1.2.1 Cypress Ridge 

3.1.2.1.1 Project Site 

3.1.2.1.2 Utility Corridors 

3.1.2.2 SLC-6 

3.1.2.3 Boathouse Flats 

3.1.2.3.1 Project Site 

3.1.2.3.2 Road and Utility Corridors 

3.1.2.4 Vina Terrace 

3.1.2.4.1 Project Site 

3.1.2.4.2 Road and Utility Corridors 

3.2 Channel Islands Terrestrial and Aquatic Biota 

3.2.1 Vegetation 

3.2.2 Amphibians and Reptiles 

3.2.3 Land Mammals 

3.2.4 Land Birds 

3.2.5 Marine Birds 

3.3 Marine Wildlife 

3.3.1 Marine Mammals 

3.3.1.1 Marine Mustelid 

3.3.1.2 Pinnipeds 

3.3.1.3 Cetaceans 

3.3.2 Marine Turtles 

3.3.3 Marine Birds 

4.0 SPECIAL INTEREST SPECIES 

4.1 Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species 

4.1.1 Plant Species 

4.1.1.1 Crisp Monardella 

4.1.1.2 Curly-leaved Monardella 

RAGE ES1 

3-1 

3-1 

3-1 

3-3 

3-6 

3-6 

3-15 

3-19 

3-20 

3-20 

3-21 

3-21 

3-21 

3-22 

3-23 

3-23 

3-24 

3-24 

3-24 

3-25 

3-25 

3-25 

3-26 

3-26 

3-29 

3-30 

3-30 

4-1 

4-1 

4-3 

4-3 

4-4 
NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

yriTti N E 2015 iii 

4.1.1.3 

4.1.1.4 

4.1.1.5 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

Black-flowered Figwort 

Shagbark Manzanita 

Soft-leaved Indian Paintbrush 

PAGE NO. 

4-5 

4-5 

4-6 

4.1.2 Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal Species 4-6 

4.1.2.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback 4-6 

4.1.2.2 Island Night Lizard 4-8 

4.1.2.3 California Red-legged Frog 4-8 

4.1.2.4 Arroyo Toad 4-9 

4.1.2.5 Southwestern Pond Turtle 4-9 

4.1.2.6 Tidewater Goby 4-10 

4.1.2.7 Townsend's Western Big-eared Bat 4-11 

4.1.3 Marine Amphibians 4-12 

4.1.3.1 Leatherback Sea Turtle 4-12 

4.1.3.2 Loggerhead Sea Turtle 4-13 

4.1.3.3 Green Sea Turtle 4-13 

4.1.3.4 Pacific Ridley Sea Turtle 4-14 

4.1.4 Marine Mammals 4-14 

4.1.4.1 Sei Whale 4-14 

4.1.4.2 Pacific Right Whale 4-14 

4.1.4.3 Sperm Whale 4-15 

4.1.4.4 Gray Whale 4-15 

4.1.4.5 Blue Whale 4-16 

4.1.4.6 Fin Whale 4-16 

4.1.4.7 Humpback Whale 4-16 

4.1.4.8 Guadalupe Fur Seal 4-16 

4.1.4.9 California Sea Otter 4-17 

4.1.4.10 Northern Fur Seal 4-18 

4.1.5 Marine Birds 4-18 

4.1.5.1 California Brown Pelican 4-18 

4.1.5.2 California Least Tern 4-22 

4.1.5.3 Elegant Tem 4-25 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 iv 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

PAGE NO. 

4.1.6 Terrestrial Birds 

4.1.6.1 Southern Bald Eagle 

4.1.6.2 Least Bell's Vireo 

4.1.6.3 California Black Rail 

4.1.6.4 Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

4.1.6.5 American Peregrine Falcon 

4.1.6.6 White-faced Ibis 

4.1.6.7 Ferruginous Hawk 

4.1.6.8 Western Snowy Plover 

4.1.6.9 Long-billed Curlew 

4.1.6.10 Tricolored Blackbird 

4.2 Regionally Rare and Declining Species 

4.2.1 Plant Species 

4.2.1.1 Fiddleneck 

4.2.1.2 Purisima Manzanita 

4.2.1.3 Santa Barbara Ceanothus 

4.2.1.4 Western Dichondra 

4.2.1.5 Saint's Daisy 

4.2.1.6 Large-leaved Wallflower 

4.2.2 Terrestrial Animal Species 

4.2.2.1 Badger 

4.2.2.2 Mountain Lion 

4.2.2.3 Monarch Butterfly 

4.2.3 Marine Animal Species 

4.2.3.1 California Sea Lion 

4.2.3.2 Northern Elephant Seal 

4.2.3.3 Harbor Seal 

4.2.3.4 Northern (Steller) Sea Lion 

4.2.4 Bird Species 

4.2.4.1 Black-shouldered Kite 

4.2.4.2 Northern Harrier 

4.2.4.3 Cooper's Hawk 

4.2.4.4 Merlin 

4-25 

4-25 

4-26 

4-28 

4-29 

4-30 

4-32 

4-34 

4-34 

4-35 

4-35 

4-36 

4-37 

4-37 

4-37 

4-37 

4-38 

4-38 

4-39 

4-39 

4-39 

4-39 

4-41 

4-42 

4-42 

4-44 

4-45 

4-46 

4-47 

4-47 

4-48 

4-48 

4-48 
I 

,,t r\IRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

,AJNE 2015 `

V 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

PAGE NO 

4.2.4.5 Prairie Falcon 4-49 

4.2.4.6 Burrowing Owl 4-49 

4.2.4.7 Long-eared Owl 4-49 

4.2.4.8 Short-eared Owl 4-50 

4.2.4.9 Willow Flycatcher 4-50 

4.2.4.10 Purple Martin 4-51 

4.2.4.11 Tree Swallow 4-51 

4.2.4.12 Swainson's Thrush 4-51 

4.2.4.13 Warbling Vireo 4-52 

4.2.4.14 Yellow Warbler 4-52 

4.2.4.15 Wilson's Warbler 4-53 

4.2.4.16 Yellow-breasted Chat 4-53 

4.2.4.17 Blue Gtosbeak 4-53 

4.2.4.18 Grasshopper Sparrow 4-54 

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5-1 

5.1 Vegetation 5-1 

5.1.1 Introduction 5-1 

5.1.2 Regional Impacts 5-1 

5.1.3 Local Impacts 5-1 

5.1.4 Cypress Ridge 5-2 

5.1.4.1 Construction 5-2 

5.1.4.2 Operations 5-3 

5.1.5 SLC-6 5-6 

5.1.5.1 Construction 5-6 

5.1.5.2 Operations 5-6 

5.1.6 Boathouse Flats 5-8 

5.1.6.1 Construction 5-8 

5.1.6.2 Operations 5-8 

5.1.7 Vina Terrace 5-9 

5.1.7.1 Construction 5-9 

5.1.7.2 Operations 5-9 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE vi 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

PAGE NO. 

5.2 Wildlife 5-10 

5.2.1 Introduction 5-10 

5.2.2 Regional Impacts 5-10 

5.2.3 Local Impacts 5-14 

5.2.4 Terrestrial and Aquatic Animals 5-14 

5.2.4.1 Cypress Ridge 5-14 

5.2.4.1.1 Construction 5-14 

5.2.4.1.2 Operations 5-15 

5.2.4.2 SLC-6 5-19 

5.2.4.2.1 Construction 5-19 

5.2.4.2.2 Operations 5-20 

5.2.4.3 Boathouse Flats 5-20 

5.2.4.3.1 Construction 5-20 

5.2.4.3.2 Operations 5-20 

5.2.4.4 Vina Terrace 5-21 

5.2.4.4.1 Construction 5-21 

5.2.4.4.2 Operations 5-21 

5.2.5 Marine Animals 5-21 

5.2.5.1 Marine Turtles 5-21 

5.2.5.2 Marine Mammals 5-22 

5.2.5.2.1 Regional Impacts 5-22 

5.2.5.2.2 Local Impacts 5-23 

5.2.5.3 Marine Birds 5-25 

5.2.5.3.1 Regional Impacts 5-25 

5.2.5.3.2 Local Impacts 5-26 

6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES 6-1 

6.1 Introduction 6-1 

6.2 Specific Mitigation Measures 6-1 

6.2.1 Vegetation 6-1 

6.2.2 Wildlife 6-2 

6.3 Erosion Control and Restoration Plan 6-3 

6.4 Monitoring Program 6-3 
,J\IRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

‘tr'JUF\JE 2015 

vu 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

(Continued) 

PAGE NO. 

I I 

7-1 

7 - 1 

7-1 

7.0 CONCLUSIONS 

7.1 Vegetation 

7.2 Wildlife 

8.0 REFERENCES 

9.0 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

8-1 

9-1 

APPENDIX A: 

APPENDIX B: 

APPENDIX C: 

APPENDIX D: 

APPENDIX E: 

I 

PLANT SPECIES 

TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ANIMAL SPECIES 

MARINE ANIMALS 

CHANNEL ISLAND SONIC BOOM ANALYSIS FOR 

TITAN IV LAUNCHES FROM SLC-7 

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM, ACIDIC DEPOSITION, 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH FROM THE CYPRESS 

RIDGE SITE 
R0 APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

vl JUNE 2015 

viii 

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 

2.1 Existing SLC-6 Facilities and Proposed 2-33 

Utilization 

3.1 Approximate Distribution of Vegetation Located 3-7 

at Alternative Sites 

4.1 Special Interest Species Known or Expected 4-2 

to Occur Within Study Region 

4.2 Yearly Population Data for California Brown Pelican 4-19 

Nesting Colonies in the Southern California Bight 

4.3 California Least Tern Breeding Colony Size 4-24 

and Fledging Success for Central California 

4.4 Summary of Recent Sightings of Bald Eagles in 4-27 

Santa Barbara County 

4.5 Summary of Recent Sightings of Peregrine Falcons 4-33 

From the Mainland of Santa Barbara County 

A.1 Plant Species Observed in the Study Area A-1 

A.2 Candidate Plant Species on VAFB A-10 

A.3 Special Interest Plants at the Cypress Ridge Site A-14 

B.1 Key to Species Lists B-1 

B.2 Amphibians and Reptiles Observed or Expected B-5 

to Occur Within the Study Region and Project Area 

B.3 Land Mammals Observed or Expected to Occur 8-7 

Within the Study'Region and Project Area 

B.4 Birds Observed or Expected to Occur Within B-12 

the Study Region and Project Area 

C.1 Marine Mammals of the Study Area C-1 

C.2 Marine Mammals Within Five Nautical Miles C-2 

of Point Arguello 

C.3 Recorded Marine Turtle Sightings, C-3 

Central California 
j\1R0,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

fl JUNE 2015 ix 

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE NO, TITLE PAGE NO, 

2.1 Regional Location Map 2-3 

2.2 Vicinity Map 2-4 

2.3 Alternative Sites 2-5 

2.4 Conceptual Drawing Cypress Ridge Site 

and Facilities 

2-6 

2.5 Preliminary Launch Complex Plan 2-7 

2.6 Titan IV Vehicle Configurations 2-9 

2.7 Titan Program Existing VAFB Facilities 2-16 

2.8 Preliminary Construction Schedule and Personnel 2-17 

Requirements 

2.9 Proposed Borrow and Spoil Locations 2-18 

2.10 Titan IV/Centaur Typical Vehicle Assembly Flow 2-20 

Diagram 

2.11 Titan IV/Centaur Typical Vehicle Assembly Time Line 2-22 

2.11 Over-water Launch Azimuths 2-26 

2.13 Project Alternatives Access and Utility Corridors 2-30 

2.14 SLC-6 Site 2-32 

3.1 VAFB Vegetation Communities 3-2 

3.2 Environmental Study Area and Vegetation Communities 3-4 

3.3 Vegetation Communities Project Site Area 3-5 

3.4 Locations of Curly-leaved Monardella and Crisp 3-9 

Monardella on VAFB 

3.5 Environmental Study Region Colonies of 3-10 

Monardella undulata var. fruzescens 

3.6 Nesting Locations of California Least Tern 

and Western Snowy Plover 

3-34 

4.1 Brown Pelican Nesting Areas in Study 6 Region 4-21 

4.2 Monarch Butterfly Overwintering and Roosting 4-43 

Sites on VAFB 

5.1 Near-field Acidic Deposition Titan IV/Centaur Launch 5-5 

5.2 Near-field Acidic Deposition SLC-6 Site 5-7 

Titan IV/Centaur Launch 

5.3 Titan IV/Centaur Sonic Boom Footprint 5-12 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE X • 

1 JUNE 2015 

LIST OF FIGURES 

(Continued) 

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO, 

5.4 Simplified Focus Signature 5-13 

5.5 Acidic Deposition in Vicinity of Honda Creek 5-16 

E.1 Acidic Deposition in Vicinity of Honda Creek E-2 
NFROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 1-1 

1 JUNE 2015 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

1. The United States Air Force (USAF), Headquarters Space Systems Division, proposes to 

construct and operate a space launch complex on South Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), 

California. The launch complex would: (1) support timely and reliable launch of critical 

Department of Defense (DOD) satellites from a location from which highly inclined and polar 

orbits can be safely achieved, (2) provide capability to launch payloads in the 10,000-pound 

class to high energy, inclined orbits, and (3) maintain assured access to space by providing 

backup launch capability for the Titan IV/Centaur and Titan IV/NUS (no upper stage) space 

launch vehicles. Associated support facilities and other ancillary improvements are planned 

in connection with the proposed project. A detailed project description is presented in 

Chapter 2.0. 

2. The USAF Headquarters Space Systems Division in Los Angeles, California, is responsible 

for meeting environmental requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

and USAF regulations. Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act requires the USAF to 

evaluate the effects of the project on federally-listed threatened and endangered species. In 

accordance with the Act, as amended, this Biological Assessment has been prepared for the 

USAF by Environmental Solutions, Inc., to meet the requirements of Section 7(c). The Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed project (USAF 1989a) was released 

in July 1989. 

3. This Biological Assessment addresses South VAFB, the adjacent coastal zone, and the 

offshore Channel Islands that may be affected by the proposed project. A determination 

of the species to be assessed and the analyses contained in this Assessment were based on 

the technical reports prepared in support of the Draft EIS and summarized in Appendices A, 

B, and C (Collins 1988b; Hickson 1988; Woodhouse 1988b). The Section 7 consultation on 

this proposed project will be conducted by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and 

the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 

4. Table 4.1 (Special Interest Species Known or Expected to Occur Within Study Region) lists 

special interest species, including plants and animals that are federally- and state-listed as 

threatened or endangered candidates for listing, and other special interest biological resources 

that could be affected by the proposed project. This assessment addresses species currently 

listed under the Endangered Species Act and those protected by the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act (MMPA). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 1-2, 

1 JUNE 2015 

5. This Biological Assessment is organized as follows: 

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives - This chapter describes the 

proposed action and alternatives considered. 

• 3.0 Biological Setting - This chapter provides a detailed description 

of the types and characteristics of local and regional biological resources. 

• 4.0 Special Interest Species - This chapter identifies and presents 

information on aquatic, terrestrial, and marine threatened, endangered, 

and candidate species in the study area. It also addresses regionally rare 

and declining species. 

• 5.0 Impact Assessment - This chapter discusses the potential impacts 

resulting from implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. 

Mitigation measures to avoid or reduce potential impacts also are 

described. 

• 6.0 Mitigation Measures - This chapter provides mitigation 

measures to be adopted to minimize impacts from project construction and 

operations. • 

• 7.0 Conclusion - This chapter presents a summary of impacts and 

evaluation of their potential significance for each threatened, endangered 

candidate and protected species known to frequent the potential impact 

area. 

• 8.0 References - This chapter contains a list of materials and persons 

consulted in preparation of this document. 

• 9.0 List of Abbreviations - This chapter provides a reference list of 

abbreviations and acronyms utilized in the Biological Assessment. 

• Appendices - The appendices contain relevant supporting material to the 

descriptions and evaluations presented in the text of the Biological 

Assessment. 
.NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-1 

2.0 THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION 

2.1.1 INTRODUCTION 

1. The USAF has proposed the construction and operation of a Titan IV/Centaur space launch 

complex in support of the DOD space program. The proposed project would be located at 

South VAFB, California, and would be designed for a minimum operational period of 

25 years. 

2. The Titan IV/Centaur is an unmanned, expendable space launch vehicle capable of launching 

critical DOD satellites, including payloads in the 10,000-pound class, to high energy orbits. 

The proposed project would allow achievement of polar and highly inclined orbits. The 

project would be designed specifically to accommodate the Titan IV/Centaur, but would also 

be able to serve as a backup to other facilities for launch of the Titan IV/NUS to assure access 

to space and timely and reliable launch of critical missions. The proposed facility represents 

the latest modification to the continuing Titan program at VAFB. 

3. VAFB is assigned to the USAF Strategic Air Command (SAC). As host command, SAC's 

1st Strategic Aerospace Division (ISTRAD) is responsible for providing management, 

operational analysis, and material support for SAC and over 40 federal and civilian tenant 

agencies located at VAFB, as well as for controlling and conducting the SAC Intercontinental 

Ballistic Missile (ICBM) operational flight tests into the western test range. VAFB provides 

extensive launch and technical support facilities for the variety of space and missile systems 

that operate from the base. 

4. In addition to the Titan program, VAFB has been a base of operations for ongoing space 

launch activities associated with the Scout, Delta, Atlas, and Space Shuttle launch programs 

for over 25 years. Space Launch Complex 6 (SLC-6), the most recently constructed launch 

facility, was modified from its original configuration for the Manned Orbital Laboratory 

program to support Space Shuttle launches, but has since been placed in mothball status. It 

is evaluated as an alternative site for the proposed action in Section 2.2 (Alternatives to the 

Proposed Action) of this chapter. Other recent construction activities at VAFB have occurred 

at Space Launch Complex 4 (SLC-4). SLC-4 East is being modified for processing and 

launch of the Titan IV/NUS. SLC-4 West has been modified and is currently an operational 

Titan II facility. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-2 

5. VAFB is located on a promontory along the California coast where space vehicles can be 

launched in southerly directions over the Pacific Ocean without overflying populated areas. 

These launch directions (azimuths) facilitate near polar (rather than equatorial) satellite orbits 

and sub-orbital westerly test and developmental flights of the ICBM. The ability to launch 

over unpopulated areas is necessary for the maintenance of a controlled launch safety 

program. VAFB provides the only location within the contiguous United States where 

hazards from southerly launches of large boosters can be maintained at acceptable levels. 

In general, the VAFB launch azimuthS are- complementary to the over-water launch azimuths 

available at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administrations (NASA) Kennedy Space Center in Florida, which provide launch 

locations for near equatorial satellite orbits. 

6. VAFB occupies an area of 98,400 acres and is situated approximately 140 miles northwest of 

Los Angeles and about 50 miles northwest of the northern (Santa Barbara) Channel Islands as 

shown in Figure 2.1 (Regional Location Map). Originally known as Camp Cooke Army 

Post, VAFB was transferred to USAF in 1957. The southern portion of the base, previously 

assigned to the U.S. Navy, was known as the Naval Missile Facility, Point Arguello, before 

being transferred to USAF in 1964 as shown in Figure 2.2 (Vicinity Map). 

7. The proposed action would be situated within an area of South VAFB which consists 

primarily of existing space launch complexes and grazing land. The four alternative sites 

considered are located as shown in Figure 2.3 (Alternative Sites). Three of the four 

alternative sites, Boathouse Flats, Cypress Ridge, and Vina Terrace are undeveloped. The 

fourth, SLC-6 as described above, is a developed launch complex. 

2.1.2 PROJECT ELEMENTS 

1. Project elements necessary for the proposed Titan IV/Centaur program would include onsite 

facilities, adjacent offsite facilities (such as utilities), other existing VAFB facilities (such as 

the launch control center), and the Titan IV/Centaur vehicle itself. A schematic diagram of 

the facilities as constructed at the Cypress Ridge site is shown in Figure 2.4 (Conceptual 

Drawing, Cypress Ridge Site and Facilities). A conceptual site plan developed for Cypress 

Ridge is shown in Figure 2.5 (Preliminary Launch Complex Plan). Implementation of the 

project at the rest of the undeveloped sites (i.e., Vina Terrace and Boathouse Flats) would 

result in a site plan similar to that shown for Cypress Ridge. The layout at SLC-6 would 

contain the same major project elements in a different configuration. The configuration of the 
0 10 

SCALE 

SOURCE: ES & SWRI 1988. 

20 MILES 

FIGURE 2.1 

REGIONAL LOCATION MAP 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

0 

Ilr:0,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

UNV015 

GROVER CITY 

O SANTA MARIA 

PT. SAL._ 

VANDENBERG 

AFB 

LOMPOC 

.t 

-0 PROPOSED PROJECT 

AREA SANTA GOLETA OBARBARA PT. CONCEPTION - 

VENTURA 

LOS ANGELES 

0 

CHANNEL ISLANDS 

O 

0 

<c• 

ANACAPA 

ISLAND 

SAN MIGUEL 

ISLAND 

SANTA ROSA 

ISLAND 

SANTA CRUZ 

ISLAND 

ti 

1t, 

CO 

V)

-J 

co 

co 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

CALIFORNIA 

VANDENBERG 

AFB 
■ 

AREA SHOWN 

POINT 

SANTA I . 

BARBARA 

PACIFIC 

CHANNEL ISLANDS 

PURISIMA 

PO4HT 

OCEAN BEACH 

COUNTY PARK 

BEAR CREEK 

ROAD 

COAST 

ROAD 

POINT 

PEDERN 

It 

POINT 

ARGUELLO 

JALAMA BEACH 

COUNTY PARK 

POINT 

CONCEPTION FIGURE 2.2 

OcFgN 

VICINITY MAP 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

SOURCE USAF 1985a 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

0 1 2 3 4 5MILES 

OCEAN 
INRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

It 1 JUNE 2015 

SOUTH 

VANIENBERG 

AIR FORCE 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 
z-o 
LIQUID HELIUM 

GASEOUS HELIUM 

S.I 7 0 2 J -J 

z 

4 

-J 

Q. 

>" X 

• CC ui 

4 —I 

Z 

a rjo 

• 

Lir 

aZ 

-J 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

O 

0 

0 

Ui 

LL 

SOURCE: USAF 1988b. 

2 

n 

09 

13 

i'ci 2 

w W 

w 

fr Ill 9 g&" 5 < m Q2W 03 

I" 6" 

4 .i 0 c(:( (7, ( N! 

GUARD HOUSE 

P 

OX WASTE TANK 

OX SCRUBBER 

SITEE NTRANCE ROAD 

ORDNANCE BUNKER 

TRLTI VENT 

0.1 

iNCINERATon 

FUEL HOLDING AREA FAN BUILDING 

10. FUEL WASTETANK 

OXIDIZER 1. 1OLDING AREA 

2-7 

I 

MOBILE SERVICE TOWER 

X 

-J 

2 

0 >- 

C.) cc 

< 

C.) Z 40 -J 

1- 

Z i- _1 co 

 W D Z < . 

F 2 u) 

< 6 O i--D 11- 2 0_1 Z c.) ..c p Z X CC I-. 0 — cn 0 0 0 cc x co Lc_ EL ic 

0 < Z O. D Lii C.) vow < < la CL CC Z a) u- W El 0 ir- 0 I- CC 44D1-- zD z,,,. z to a cn < -2co u) LU D '-' '" 0 z • u_ z 

▪ <ZO - Wir0 

,-----_,r, I ill 111-/-

0 

 Ill 

0 

1 

til 

cci W k I— 0 ic ..m ) u_ 4 id 1.- 

z 

liril 

0 

D 

0 

r-U, 

D 

4 

I 

x 

al 

SUPPOR 

o 6," 

Z r: 0 2 m g§ 

cc 2 

4 u_ ;-c u, 

O. 0 unZ fr n"i.4.. ; 

0 x 

% Vi 

esi ei ... vi ft; 04 0. 

04 04 01 04 CM 

1 

 _ JUNE 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-8 

1 JUNE 2015 

SLC-6 site is described in more detail in Section 2.2. This preliminary layout is based upon 

current concepts for the facility, which may be revised when detailed engineering studies are 

completed. As shown in Figure 2.5, the launch complex would be an area about 2,300 feet 

long, 1,000 feet wide, and about 53 acres in size. This site area would be surrounded by 

security fencing and accessed through a single location. 

2. The launch complex provides the ability to assemble, check out, and launch the 

Titan IV/Centaur or, in the case of a launch abort, to safely shut down the vehicle systems. 

Following a launch, post-launch refurbishment and preparation for the next launch would 

begin according to specific mission requirements. Storage capacity for propellants (fuels, 

oxidizers, etc.) is planned to meet a timely turnaround requirement for successive launches. 

3. Ancillary facilities adjacent to the launch complex would include a parking area for privatelyowned vehicles, a weather station, a sanitary sewage treatment plant, evaporation/percolation 

ponds, an electrical substation, and utility corridors. Elements of the launch complex, 

including the Titan IV/Centaur vehicle, primary support structures, and ancillary structures, 

are described below. 

2.1.2.1 Titan IV/Centaur Space Launch Vehicle 

1. The Titan IV/Centaur is the latest development in the continuing Titan program. This launch 

vehicle will provide high energy, earth orbit delivery of satellites weighing up to 10,000 

pounds and has thrust capability of 3.2 million pounds. Components of the Titan IV/Centaur 

include two upgraded solid rocket motors (SRMUs), core vehicle (stages I and II), Centaur 

stage, payload fairing (PLF), and satellite vehicle (SV) as shown in Figure 2.6 (Titan IV 

Vehicle Configurations). Another configuration that could be supported from the proposed 

launch complex is the Titan IV/NUS launch vehicle (see Figure 2.6). 

2. The SRMUs, which power the initial liftoff, together contain a total of approximately 

1.4 million pounds of solid rocket propellant, consisting of ammonium perchlorate and 

an aluminum binder fuel. The SRMUs fire for approximately 2.5 minutes, at which time 

they separate from the core vehicle. The expended SRMUs fall into the ocean and are not 

recovered. The core vehicle consists of two stages and uses liquid propellants consisting of 

a fuel, Aerozine 50 (50 percent hydrazine and 50 percent unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine 

[UDMI-1]), and an oxidizer, nitrogen tetroxide (N204). Stage I bums for approximately three 

minutes, at which time it separates from stage II. Stage II then bums for approximately four 
SOLID ROCKET 

MOTOR UPGRADE 

r– — 

ELEASE 

PROPELLANTS COMPONENTS 

SATELLITE VEHICLE (SV) 

PAYLOAD FAIRING (PLF) 

CENTAUR STAGE 

CENTAUR STAGE 

LH2 = 7,489 LBS. 

LO2 = 37,446 LBS. 

HYDRAZINE - 340 LBS. 

CORE VEHICLE 

STAGE!! 

STAGE II 030DrZER 

N204 = 49,134 LBS. 

STAGE II FUEL 

AEROZINE 50 = 27,735 LBS. 

--J 

SRMUs 

TOTAL PROPELLANT 

= 1,360,788 LBS. 

STAGE I OXIDIZER . 

. N204 = 223,166 LBS. 

STAGE I FUEL 

AEROZINE 50 = 117,965 LBS. 

I CORE VEHICLE 

STAGE I 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR 

LEGEND 

WZ UOUID HYDROGEN 

LO2 - UOUID OXYGEN 

N204 NITROGEN TEZROXIDE 

AEROZINE - 50% HYDRAZINE. 50% UOMI, 

SOURCE USAF 1986n 

TITAN IV/NUS 

FIGURE 2.6 

TITAN IV 

VEHICLE CONFIGURATIONS 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

1 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-10 

1 JUNE 2015 

minutes, at which time it separates from the remainder of the space vehicle. These stages 

also fall into the ocean and are not recovered. The Centaur is the last stage of the space 

launch vehicle and is used to boost the satellite into high energy orbit with one to three burns, 

depending on the desired orbit altitude for the satellite. After the final burn, the Centaur 

separates from the satellite and remains in orbit. The PLF, which houses the satellite, is 

a cylindrical encasement which is 16.7 feet in diameter and up to 84 feet long. The PLF 

consists of three sections called "trisectors" which, when joined, form the cylindrical satellite 

housing. The PLF is jettisoned during Stage I burn, falls into the ocean, and is not recovered. 

2.1.2.2 Prima!), Support Structures 

1. Various support structures and equipment are necessary to process and launch the 

Titan IV/Centaur. These consist of specific structures at the proposed launch complex, as 

well as facilities and utilities located elsewhere on VAFB. The primary support structures 

described below would be located within the launch complex area (see Figure 2.5). 

Launch Support Structure 

1. The launch support structure (LSS) is a partially underground concrete structure, which is 

topped by the Titan IV/Centaur launch deck. The LSS provides the staging area and necessary 

facilities to support launch-related activities, including assembly of the Titan IV/Centaur 

vehicle components, systems check-out, and launch. 

2. The LSS also contains an open channel, known as the exhaust duct, that directs the exhaust 

flame from the two SRMUs during ignition of the launch vehicle for safe dispersal of the 

exhaust plume away from the launch deck and complex. The exhaust duct also serves as a 

retention basin for wastewater runoff from water sprayed for deluge and fire suppression 

during launch and from post launch cleanup activities. The LSS is designed to withstand the 

effects of a launch by providing flame shields, protective coatings, and cooling water to 

reduce the effect to the structure from heat generated by the SRMUs. 

Launch Mount and Umbilical Tower 

1. The launch mount (LM) and umbilical tower (UT) are situated over the LSS. The LM 

provides structural support for the launch vehicle. The UT provides electrical, propellant, and 

air conditioning systems to support the launch vehicle while it is on the LM. The UT also 

provides personnel access to various levels of the space launch vehicle during final launch 

preparation. 
NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-11 

Mobile Service.Tower 

1. The mobile service tower (MST) is a structure approximately 300 feet high, housing a 220- to 

240-ton crane for vehicle assembly and a clean enclosure for satellite vehicle integration and 

testing. The MST has internal platforms that provide access to the launch vehicle. The MST 

is mounted on a track and is moved into place surrounding the LM. Launch vehicle 

components arrive at the launch pad deck on transporters and are positioned under the MST 

crane to be hoisted into a vertical position on the LM. 

Operations Support Building 

1. The operations support building (OSB) is a two-story, 56,000 square foot structure located 

in the westerly portion of the complex, with facilities necessary for daily engineering and 

operations support and coordination of the proposed project. Included within the OSB are: 

briefing/training room, technical operations area, offices, data library, communications 

equipment, complex management center, maintenance and machine shops, storage, toilets, 

lockers, showers, lunchroom, and other necessary personnel support areas. 

2.1.2.3 Ancillary Project Elements 

1. Ancillary project elements necessary for the launch of the Titan IV/Centaur include roads, 

buildings, storage facilities, and utilities, as depicted in Figure 2.5. Roads and utilities would 

link the proposed complex with existing systems at other locations within VAFB. 

Roads and Parking 

1 New paved road construction for access to the launch complex and other offsite facilities 

would include a realignment of a portion of the existing Space Shuttle external tank tow route 

(Coast Road) and provision for other roads to give access to the site, the'electrical substation, 

and the sanitary sewage treatment plant. Existing roads to the north and south of the proposed 

Cypress Ridge site would be repaired, as necessary, and utilized as security patrol roads. 

New roadways within the launch complex area would include the perimeter road, the 

entrapment area road, and other access roads linking project elements and associated parking. 

An approximate 5-acre parking area would be located adjacent to the launch complex within 

the site boundary (see Figure 2.5). 

Support Equipment Buildings 

1. Support equipment buildings would be provided within the fenced area and include a paint and 

lubricant storaee building, an ordnance bunker, a storage facility, an essential power building. 

and other structures, as necessary. 

I 

I 

I 

I 
Propellant and Gas Holding Areas 

I. Propellant and gas holding areas include a gas storage area, Titan IV core vehicle fuel and 

oxidizer holding areas, payload fuel and oxidizer holding pads, and cryogenic holding areas. 

The various holding areas also would include pollution control devices, as appropriate. 

Storage facilities and approximate commodity quantities are as follows: 

• The Gas Storage Area would include storage and handling facilities 

for approximately 3,000 cubic feet of gaseous helium, at 6,000 pounds 

per square inch, gauge (psig), and 5,000 cubic feet of gaseous nitrogen, 

also at 6,000 psig. Gaseous nitrogen is used in the pressure testing of the 

Titan IV/Centaur fuel and oxidizer storage tanks. It is also used as a 

purge gas for the hypergolic propellant lines after propellant transfer. 

• The Titan Core Vehicle Oxidizer (N204) Storage Area would 

consist of a 40,000-gallon ready storage vessel (RSV), pump, vapor 

control system, propellant loading unit, anda 40,000-gallon waste vessel. 

Separate containment areas are provided for the storage and waste vessels. 

These areas are sized to contain about 60,000 gallons each. 

• The Titan Booster Vehicle Fuel (Aerozine" 50) Storage Area 

would consist of a 40,000-gallon RSV, pump, vapor control system, 

propellant loading unit, and 40,000-gallon waste vessel. In addition, an 

automatic deluge water system would dilute any spill, thereby reducing 

the chance of vapors escaping to the atmosphere. There would be two 

separate containment areas for the RSV and waste vessel. Each 

containment area would have a volume of approximately 175,000 gallons 

and is designed to hold the contents of each vessel plus deluge water at a 

ratio of 1:3. In addition, there is a 1,500-gallon sump within the waste 

tank containment area. The sump functions as a drain from each area and 

is designed for one-way flow so that fluid which enters cannot flow out. 

• The Payload Fuel and Oxidizer Holding Pads would be used for 

short- term storage until payload fuel and oxidizer can be transferred to the 

satellite vehicle. 

• The Cryogenic Holding Areas would include storage for about 

15,000 gallons of liquid oxygen (L02), about 40,000 gallons of liquid 

hydrogen (LH2), and about 4,000 gallons of liquid helium (LHe). The 

LH2 area would use a flare stack to burn excess vapor, and the L02 area 

would use a dump pond to evaporate LO2 spills. LHe spills would be 

contained by a wall surrounding the LHe tank. LO2 and LH2 are used as 

propellant for the Centaur stage of the Titan IV. LHe is used for Titan 

IV/Centaur processing and engine conditioning and for payload fairing 

processing. 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-12 „ 

1 JUNE 2015 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-13 

Utilities/Utility Corridors 

1. Utilities necessary for operation of the proposed project would include a series of onsite 

systems, including water (potable, wastewater, and deluge), sanitary sewer, propane gas, 

communications, and electrical. New utility lines would connect the launch complex systems 

to existing VAFB facilities. 

Electrical 

1. Electrical demand for the launch complex is estimated to be approximately 6,000 kilovoltampere (kVA). This demand would be met by a new electrical substation located northwest of 

the launch complex. Power to the substation would be provided by dual 12.47 kilovolt (kV) 

overhead transmission lines, one from a commercial power source, and one a new line from 

the space transportation system (STS) power plant. The new line would be used as a standby 

power source in the event that commercial power is lost. A switching mechanism in the 

substation would allow either commercial or standby power to be fed to the secondary power 

distribution system. During launch processing, the 12.47 kV line from the STS power plant 

would be used, with commercial power providing a standby power source. For launch, 

commercial power would be used, with the STS power plant providing backup. 

2. An essential power generator has also been included in conceptual plans. This would be a 

480 volt, three-phase generator capable of supplying a minimum of 500 kVA. In case of a 

power failure during launch operations (i.e., in the event of failure of both the STS power 

plant and commercial power supply), the essential power generator would supply power for 

the launch site security system and for essential launch shutdown and safety functions. 

Propane 

1. Propane gas would be utilized for heating and cooling and as auxiliary fuel for flare stack pilot 

flames, if required. Appropriate storage vessels and distribution lines would be constructed in 

support of these needs. In addition, there would be a utility corridor easement in the event of 

natural gas being provided to the site at some future date. 

Potable Water 

1. A water distribution system would be developed to supply the launch complex with water 

for fire suppression, launch deluge, washdown, and domestic uses. For each Titan IV/ 

Centaur launch, approximately 146,000 gallons of water would be required. Of this amount, 

80,000 gallons would be used for pre-launch check-out, 26,000 gallons for launch deluge, 

and 40,000 gallons for post-launch washdown. Of the 146,000 gallons, 20,000 would 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-14 

evaporate during launch and form a ground cloud. Based on fire suppression water 

requirements, a minimum of 800,000 gallons would be stored in reserve. This storage and 

distribution would be achieved through a local water distribution system, interconnected with 

the existing VAFB water supply system. Lines would be extended from the Space Shuttle 

external tank processing and storage facility and an existing tank located north and east of the 

proposed Cypress Ridge site. In addition, an easement for a second water storage tank 

would be reserved. 

Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facility 

1. A sanitary sewage treatment facility would be located outside the fenced launch complex. The 

facility would be designed to accommodate domestic sewage discharge from project facilities. 

Treated effluent would be disposed of in new evaporation/percolation ponds. 

Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Disposal 

1 Disposal of wastewater from launch deluge and washdown would be accomplished by use 

of existing VAFB treatment and disposal facilities. Transfer of wastewater would be by 

tank truck from the project site, directly to the treatment plant at SLC-6, then to the SLC-6 

evaporation ponds. Easements for future wastewater pipelines and tank between the 

undeveloped sites and SLC-6 has been provided, in the event transportation by tank truck 

should become economically unfeasible. A ultraviolet (UV)/ozone wastewater treatment 

system would be used to treat launch deluge and washdown water, if available at VAFB. 

Communications 

. Communications would be provided for voice (intercom and telephone), closed circuit TV, 

computer data, public address, and area warning systems. Remote TV and film cameras 

would be positioned at offsite locations surrounding the launch complex. Communications 

would be via buried fiber-optic cable, scheduled for completion prior to the initial launch. 

2.1.2.4 Other VAFB Facilities 

1. There are facilities and systems at VAFB that serve as common support for the existing array 

of launch complexes. The proposed project would utilize a number of these facilities during 

various launch preparation and operations activities. For example, facilities are in place for 

the receipt, testing, inspection, and assembly of vehicle components. Building 8510 on 

North VAFB would be used as a launch control center (LCC) during launch operations to 

communicate with the launch complex and the Titan IV/Centaur vehicle. Other systems are 

in place for transportation and utilities (power, water, gas, and communications). Existing 
NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-15 

industrial wastewater storage and treatment facilities are available at SLC-6. The specific 

functions and locations of other existing facilities are shown in Figure 2.7 (Titan Program 

Existing VAFB Facilities). 

2.1.3 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 

1. It is anticipated that construction of the proposed project would be accomplished over a 

period of approximately four years, beginning in 1991, as shown in Figure 2.8 (Preliminary 

Construction Schedule and Personnel Requirements). There is the potential for this schedule 

to extend to five years, in which case the activation/operations phase would occur in Year 6. 

• Facility Construction (36 months) - involves facility design, 

grading, utility and road construction, Operations Support Building 

construction, Launch Support Structure and flame duct construction, 

fencing, and landscaping. 

• Ground Support Systems Design, Procurement, and 

Installation (42 months) - involves installation of Mobile Service 

Tower, Launch Mount, Umbilical Tower, storage tanks, and other 

aerospace ground equipment and systems. 

2. Initial construction activities after final design would primarily entail grading for the project 

site, the parking area, roads, and evaporation/percolation ponds. 

3. In order to accommodate the engineering design of the planned 50-acre space launch complex, 

approximately 120 acres would be disturbed by grading activities, equipment movement and 

storage, and the establishment of temporary construction "laydown" areas. Depending 

upon the final design and grading plans, earth movement would involve a minimum about 

1.5 million cubic yards (CY) of cut and 1.5 million CY of fill. Between 0.2 and 0.6 million 

CY of fill would come from borrow areas located on VAFB (see Figure 2.9, Proposed 

Borrow and Spoil Locations). The balance of the unused cut material would be removed 

from the project area and transferred to a spoil site located about three miles north of the 

Cypress Ridge site near Point Arguello or other, approved location. The top six inches of 

topsoil would be removed and stockpiled onsite for re-spreading on disturbed areas for 

revegetation and erosion control after completion of construction. Appropriate erosion control 

measures would be implemented at the stockpile. Corridors for communication, water, 

electrical, and other utilities would temporarily disturb about 65 acres of land. The majority of 

utility distribution lines are planned to be underground. For electrical power lines, only those 

portions crossing existing roads or railroads would be located underground. Utilities would 
0 APPRO 

UNE 2015 

0 

POINT 

PEDERNALES 

POINT 

ARGUELLO 

VANDENBERG 

de VILLAGE 

. 

BOATHOUSE FLATS SITE 

FACILITY BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS 

1. BOOSTER VEHICLE RECEIPT AND PROCESSING - #6401 

2. STS POWER PLANT 

3. WATER STORAGE 

4. SSW RECEIPT. INSPECTION AND STORAGE - #398 

S. PAYLOAD FAIRING RECEIPT AND PROCESSING - #8337 

6. SLC-6 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT - SLC-6 SITE 

7. LAUNCH CONTROL CENTER - #8510 

8. HYPERGOLIC PROPELLANT STOCKPILE FACILITIES 

#975 ANO 1977 

SOURCE: USAF 1989; 

2 4 MILES 

P.111.111 .111..11111IMI 

SCALE 

FIGURE 2.7 

TITAN PROGRAM 

EXISTING VAFB FACILITIES 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. . 
14 

F, 8 S E 8 

GROUND SUPPORT SYSTEMS 

I 

a_ 

z 

MST/LM/UT 

z Z 

(Al 0 

c.T.3 < —3 < 

C7) 0 

• A a. 4- 

. . 

e, 77 .

ACTIVATION/OPERATIONS 

z 

LLI 

U) 

w 

U, 

CJ) 

—J 

0 —J 

0 

85 

0 —J 

C-3 

z 

U) 

cf) 

z ;7.1 

z 

z 

2-17 

Cl) 

W Z 

W 

Lu 

w cc >- = 5 tr c.) 

N Q U.1 

ui Z Z Cr 

o 

(5 :3 17-W 

a. 11-1 Z 

CC 0 

I— C0 

U) CC 

Z LU 

0a 

U 

z 

c 

• 

.= 

o o 

-.:-.. c ... . 

• E c co c., 

-5 0 

a. a. —.I c 

60 a. - 

o -0 s., 

E • 

c 

-- c., r..- .... 

0, 0 a. • ._- 

c C 

• 1..) 't 

E

• 

a 

111 <a c) • .,.. .. 

= 0. . '-- 

U .. 0 

,. v) . 

. 

U V. C E 

c L.. p = 

i. U ...c.1 11 g. E. g -o 2.- = c 

 .c o ZS -o CO 0 2 ,...:- 9 

3 r7 

wt .c > 

..., u ":; . CC 

e: 17 := 7 CI. in 

, 

., -4 .73 -1:7 c ,-4 

= 

.< 

U 

-0 C zi 

O ).-. ..... 3 err 

I.. 

Ts g u 

• o c c _ — 8 a ,..9 ucl .= 13 t; o ›. 

... u ..._ S. E ..0 

• 

d el a V) 0 

0 • ... 0 

t cii E .0 

6" il 

U 

o c ... 73 - ... 

o c.) T. c el U 

u° 

T = iii TS m c. ›... 

-C t.) f— - C 

)-s oo io 

7 < c -o c zt i...7 

G 

U 

..n 

,

" 

✓

. C) 

0

c 

o cs 

•

c a ._ 

U

- 

ID C 

v. el Ia. C .'—' ''' .0 -. > C 7, ✓ a 

a .; • -- c c o .:', 6' 

✓ 

c '..0 ._ o ,--- >-, • cn -e' < 

-o 

'ay '15 ct TS el .t C, 

LI: 

-`:.' g >1.'" 

2 a 6. c. < ^ E 

c • — 

.,—. U T.; • — C ..g = = v) 

-, E c .. 7,. ma u r.)) v)- = c u .c c., 

,'r•0 •E-'-'"- g 1' 2 

0 ... 

.... (.1 C7 C., C '... .... 

> - ,:: S t .: tr. ,.. 0 ' =J. , • •■• 

.---, 

...... 

r1 r-. Tr 

U) 

0 
i 9c3 APPRO 

1" UNE 2015 

O 

CV 

POINT 

PEDERNALES 

SLC-4 

SLC-5 

NORTH 

BORROW PIT 

'ALTERNATE 

BORROW PIT 

FIGURE 2.9 

PROPOSED 

BORROW AND SPOIL 

LOCATIONS 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS. INC. r 

POINT 

J

ARGUELLO 
1 

1 

-NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-19 

be extended within one of two corridors: (1) along the Coast Road from existing lines in the 

vicinity of SLC-6, or (2) substantially east of Coast Road from the vicinity of the SLC-6 

wastewater treatment ponds. Water distribution lines would be extended from an existing 

water storage site located on a knoll about 1.5 miles north and east of the Cypress Ridge site, 

and from the Space Shuttle external tank processing and storage facility. 

4. Construction of the launch complex facilities would include previously discussed structures, 

such as the launch support structure, operations support building, and ancillary support 

facilities. Fencing and landscaping would be completed after construction of these buildings. 

2.1.4 LAUNCH ACTIVITIES 

1. The Titan IV/Centaur launch vehicle components would be shipped separately to VAFB. 

Upon arrival, the components would undergo a variety of receiving inspections and off-line 

processing before being transported to the launch pad for integration, test, and launch. 

2. The SRMU segments would arrive by rail at a receiving facility on South VAFB. The 

Titan IV core vehicle stages I and II would arrive at the airfield on North VAFB and be 

transported to Building 8401, the vehicle assembly building/horizontal test facility 

(VAB/HTF). The liquid propellant rocket engines would arrive for installation on the core 

vehicle at the VAB/HTF. The Centaur stage would be received and sent directly to the launch 

complex for processing. The payload fairing sections would be trucked to Building 8337, the 

payload fairing processing facility, where each would be received, inspected, and processed, 

then transported to the launch complex. 

3. Launch process operations that would occur at the launch complex include launch preparation, 

launch operations, and post-launch refurbishment. These activities are planned to begin in 

1994 or 1995. 

2.1.4.1 Launch Preparation 

1. Launch preparation activities involve assembly and testing of the Titan IV/Centaur vehicle. 

Vehicle assembly is depicted in Figure 2.10 (Titan IV/Centaur Typical Vehicle Assembly 

Flow Diagram). The launch vehicle components and payload elements would be transported 

to the launch pad from their off-line processing areas, or from the point of arrival at VAFB, 

their individual transporters. The elements would be sequentially erected on the LM. The 

individual SRMU segments would be erected and assembled, followed by the Titan IV core 
87-271SLC-78A REV. 2/6/90 

ca=31##=4 

IL 

z 

Zw 2 ! i

2. 6 

co 1— < 

9 

0 0 

A FT SEGMENT ASSEMBLY 

JUMP 201' 

LLI 

w 

0 w 

0 

C2 

Ll. 

0 0 

z 0 

w 
. NRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-21 

vehicle, stages I and II, and the Centaur stage with the aft PLF section installed. In this 

assembled configuration, the booster vehicle would undergo check-outs, including subsystem 

verification, integrated system tests, and Centaur tests, to verify all systems and interfaces. 

2. Following successful completion of integrated system tests, the satellite would be brought to 

the launch site and erected in a clean enclosure in the MST, where prelaunch check-outs would 

be conducted. Testing would be performed on the satellite to verify interfaces and functions. 

The forward PLF sections then would be installed. Completion of the vehicle assembly and 

testing activities leads to a prelaunch phase in which the launch vehicle and payload are 

prepared for launch countdown. This includes battery installation, propellant loading, 

ordnance installation (e.g., stage separation charges), and other selected hookups. 

3. Titan IV core vehicle commodity servicing is provided by propellant loading systems (oxidizer 

and fuel) installed at the launch pad and comprised of ready storage vessels, propellant loading 

units, and piping. Piping from the LSS and UT would be used to fill and drain umbilical 

connections from the UT to the vehicle. Centaur stage commodity servicing includes loading 

of liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen, gaseous nitrogen, hydrazine, gaseous helium, and liquid 

helium. Support equipment systems are provided at the launch pad to accommodate these 

requirements. Propellants would be piped from onsite storage vessels and transfer systems to 

the launch vehicle through umbilicals at the UT. 

4. Scheduling of launch preparation activities is depicted in Figure 2.11 (Titan IV/Centaur 

Typical Vehicle Assembly Time Line). As shown, off-line processing of vehicle components 

would occur over a 70-day period. Components then would be transferred to the launch 

complex for approximately 150 days of vehicle assembly and testing, which are necessary 

prior to launch. 

2.1.4.2 Launch Operatio:is 

1. Countdown and launch activities are divided into two parts, known as the R-count and 

terminal count. The R-count begins approximately two weeks prior to launch and involves 

activities such as installation of flight batteries, oxidizer and propellant loading, and ordnance 

installation. The terminal count begins about one day prior to launch and includes activities 

such as Centaur propellant loading, vehicle verification and guidance checks, range safety 

checks, moving of the MST away from the vehicle, and the final countdown to launch. The 

launch complex would be evacuated of all nonessential personnel prior to fueling the Centaur 

stage. After Centaur fueling has started and been stabilized, all other personnel are evacuated. 
>-

-J 

cc w 

< cn 

< w 

z 

W 

—a 

w 

E 

w — z > 

< 0 

FI

GURE 2.11 

j 1 zl 

z. 

SLC-7 BIOLO

GICAL ASSES

SMENT 

I-- 

n 

0 

Y I— 

0 Z 

WU- / 

I—' 0 

0°• Z i 

_I 0 D U) 

< 1-- < cc er Z _.) c° et 0 cn 0 

cc w u- 0 cn Li. I— 1— 0 eCcr e iOw 0 w c.) 

LU 0 LU 

iii

—J i6 Zt rco - > 7(10 5 

o r.< __ 1_ 0 

2t 11 0 c) z WWI<- zmgi _ a- CM z g 

O W 

,.., 

LU CL 0 1-0 a cc 2 alc 

)- 

CO 

RECEIVESRMUs 

RECEIVE PLF 

w 0 1— 

§ 

C) 

W 

< o2 

w m 

00 

LU w 

> D w2 

0 w ;1., 

LU 

cc 

0 

0 

WORKING DAYS/ 

000000 000 

C> U) 0 4) 0 CL) er (.1 CV C4 ■- 

ONISS3008d IN3N0d11400 Sa AO1d1/43 

Z 

:5 cc 

'e C) C) u- --/ 

]C 4( 

C) 4C 2E CI 

:: 0 W uj LL C) CI I— co Z 

W d 0 < 

2E W < 0 

W 0 Z < 

• Z 0 CC 

2 cc P T 

cc < C') 

O Z 

U- CL cc CC 

CL CC 

CL 

0 

41 ammo. 

0 

CD 

CO 

0 

e.4 

0 

T-• 

0 

0 

0 

as 

0 

CO 

0 

co C') 

o 

Ln 0 

0 

o cC 

• a_ 

0 

in a_ 

0 

o

U) 

1: 

Z 

• LJ, U) o w 

0 

0 o cc 

Lc, — 

N. 

co 1-1- 0 

_L. 

a. 

0 

CC 

CC < 

CO 1— 

z 

0 —J 

lc C.) CC 

010 W W 11- 

> eC UJ UJ 

>- —10w co 0 

LU 

< 

,JJ 

• CI 

0< 

w (-) 

W 

cc 

0 

LU 

UJ 

0 

co 0 

87-271SLC-713A/TilVCe REV. 3/7/ 90 

NOTES 

I . Timeline shown asworking days based on 8-hour/day, 5-day/week schedule. 

2. 24-hour/daywork schedule. 

LEGEND 

uJ 

LU 

CL 

0 

0 

JJ 

O 

• 

Lc) 

c CL < LU 

0 Lj

X 

Z 

a l ions Concept, SLC-7, Titan IV/Centaur Launch 
NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-23 

Launches from the proposed launch complex would be controlled from an LCC located on 

North VAFB. The LCC would communicate by means of a fiber-optic cable, with a launch 

complex computer receiving commands from the LCC. The LCC would be used to perform 

the prelaunch testing and check-out and would run the entire countdown and launch phase. 

Selected prelaunch onsite testing and check-out functions would be performed at the project 

site. The terminal launch countdown would start approximately 500 minutes prior to launch 

and could include built-in time delays. The MST would be moved back to the park posidon 

and away from the launch pad during the countdown. 

3. At launch, water would be sprayed at the vehicle exhaust from valves located at the UT, 

LM, LSS, and exhaust duct. This spray serves the function of exhaust cooling in order to 

minimize damage to the launch pad. Approximately 26,000 gallons of water could be sprayed 

during the vehicle launch. Wastewater from this process would be retained in the exhaust 

duct. 

2.1.4.3 Post-launch Refurbishment 

1. Following a launch, washdown and cleanup of the launch area would be completed. Postlaunch activities would also entail replenishment of commodities such as propellants, 

cryogenics, and gases, and minor repair to launch support facilities. 

1. Other activities following a launch would be centered on completion of receipt and off-line 

processing of vehicle components in preparation for the next launch. The initiation of this 

phase would be concurrent with and overlap the previously described on-pad launch 

preparation activities. 

2.1.5 OVERALL PROJECT SCHEDULE AND PERSONNEL 

1. A schedule for the proposed action, including employee requirements, is shown in Figure 2.8. 

The schedule indicates that the two construction phases would overlap and continue over a 

period of about four years. Initial launch capability (ILC) is scheduled for 1994 or 1995. 

2. Personnel requirements are estimated to vary from about 550 individuals at the peak of 

construction activities to about 100 at the termination of construction. Operations personnel 

are estimated at 300 during normal launch operations. About 400 persons would be onsite 

during an approximate one-month period prior to launch for final vehicle processing. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-24 

1 JUNE 2015 

3. As depicted in Figure 2.11, the on-pad receipt and processing of Titan IV/Centaur components 

would require about 150 working days. Overlap of off-pad processing schedules for some 

components is planned. Within a period of one year, a maximum of three vehicles could be 

launched froth the proposed space launch complex. 

2.2 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 

1. Alternatives to the proposed action must have the potential to achieve the basic objectives of 

the proposed action, which are to provide a facility with the capability to safely launch a 

Titan IV vehicle to a polar orbit, to achieve highly inclined orbits with payloads in the 10,000-

pound class, and to back up existing launch facilities to assure access to space for critical 

satellite missions. Basic criteria necessary to support this objective include siting of the 

facility to obtain the proper satellite orbit and availability of support facilities, which include 

launch support infrastructure, such as a launch control center, telemetry and tracking facilities, 

propellant storage, and vehicle component processing facilities. In addition, communityprovided facilities, such as access roads and utilities (power, sewer, water, and 

communications), port availability, and employee housing are necessary. Other related 

considerations include availability of a local work force, construction costs, operation and 

maintenance costs, and availability of land for the project site. Alternatives that meet these 

basic criteria are evaluated to determine if they are capable of eliminating significant adverse 

environmental effects or reducing adverse effects to a level of insignificance. 

2. Feasibility criteria are reviewed in the following sections for alternate launch vehicles, other 

launch locations, existing VAFB launch sites, and the "no action" alternative. Four 

alternative sites are evaluated, in detail. 

2.2.1 OTHER LAUNCH VEHICLES 

2.2.1.1 Space Shuttle 

1. The Space Shuttle program resumed launches in 1988 at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, 

Florida, following the more than two-year delay resulting from the January 1986 Challenger 

accident. The Space Shuttle vehicle is not available for launches from VAFB, and launches 

from Cape Canaveral in Florida cannot safely provide a polar orbit. Since one element of the 

project objective is to launch critical DOD payloads into near-polar orbit, use of the Space 

Shuttle has been determined not to be viable and has been eliminated from further 

consideration. 
I 

I 

NRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-25 

1 JUNE 2015 

2.2.1.2 Other Vehicles 

1. Use of other available launch vehicles was considered relative to the desired mission 

objectives. The current Titan IV/NUS can achieve a low energy, but not a high energy, orbit. 

Other available launch vehicles are designed for lighter weight payloads. For example, the 

Titan 34D can deliver a 27,500-pound satellite to low earth orbit. However, modification for 

a high earth orbit reduces its capacity to approximately 4,200 pounds. 

2. Since the objective of the proposed action includes launching satellites in the 10,000-pound 

class to a high energy orbit, the Titan IV/Centaur is required. 

2.2.2 OTHER LAUNCH LOCATIONS 

2.2.2.1 Existing Government Sites 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station/Kennedy Space Center 

1. Facilities are available to launch the Titan IV/Centaur at the eastern test range (ETR) (CCAFS). 

Launch azimuths from the ETR are generally limited to between 35 and 120 degrees, as 

shown in Figure 2.12 (Over-water Launch Azimuths). Consequently, space vehicles 

launched from this location cannot safely achieve polar orbit. 

Naval Pacific Test Range 

1. The U.S. Department of the Navy maintains a missile test range base on San Clemente Island, 

off the coast of Southern California. It is operated by the Naval Pacific Test Range, located at 

Point Mugu Naval Air Station, California. Use of the Navy's Pacific Test Range for launch 

of the Titan IV/Centaur would permit attainment of a polar orbit. However, the launch 

support infrastructure that currently exists on the island is not capable of accommodating the 

large Titan IV/Centaur space launch vehicle. 

2. Location of the space launch complex on this island was eliminated from further consideration 

based primarily upon the lack of available launch support work force, housing, and 

infrastructure, which includes power, sewer, water supply, communications, and vehicle and 

payload processing and preparation facilities. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

JUNE 2015 
. NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2-27 

22.2.2 Remote. UndeveloDed_Site_s 

Territories/Possessions of U.S. 

1. The proposed action could be constructed at another Pacific Ocean location, thereby enabling a 

near polar orbit to be achieved. Available locations to accomplish this objective are primarily 

located on remote islands in the south Pacific Ocean. However, necessary community support 

facilities, including access roads, adequate utilities (power, sewer, water supply, and 

communications), and port access, if available, are generally not adequate on these islands. 

Additionally, there is only limited availability of a trained local work force and employee 

housing. Further, there would be the need to establish an entirely new launch support 

infrastructure, which would include a new launch control center, telemetry and tracking 

facilities, propellant storage, and vehicle component processing facilities. 

2. It is anticipated that environmental considerations for construction of a new space launch 

complex at a south Pacific location would be similar to or greater than those at the proposed 

VAFB site. Additional issues of environmental concern, including expanded land use and 

land restrictions, could occur, since the complex would be independently located, could not 

share existing facilities, and would likely be lacking a suitable supporting infrastructure. This 

alternative was, therefore, eliminated from further consideration. 

Hawaii 

1. The state of Hawaii has been evaluated as a potential site for space vehicle launch activities. In 

two separate reports prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc. (1987, 1988), Hawaii was evaluated as 

being in an advantageous position to serve the market for commercial launch services for small 

and mid-sized payloads. 

2. The study concluded that "... a launch facility developed on Hawaii should be designed to fill 

a niche market: the launch of small to mid-sized commercial payloads. Such a launch facility 

would be of modest size, of a scale similar to Wallops Island" (Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1987). 

This assessment was based on the market outlook for launch services and the availability of 

launch capacity at existing ranges. The potential sites were identified and evaluated for their 

ability to accommodate expendable launch vehicles in the size range of the Scout vehicle and 

not larger than the commercial Titan 

3. Based on the results of these studies, and the inherent limitations of the identified sites to 

accommodate military requirements for facilities of the size and complexity required for the 

proposed action, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-28 

1 JUNE 2015 

2.2.3 VAFB LAUNCH SITES 

2.2.3.1 Sites Considered and Rejected 

1. VAFB is the primary location for launching USAF space vehicles that must achieve near polar 

orbit. The base has an array of launch complexes to support the current range of launch 

activities. Support systems, such as centers for launch control, component receipt and 

processing facilities, warehouses, roads and utilities, are available. Neighboring communities 

supply labor and other services. 

2. An alternative to constructing a new launch complex would be to raze and reconstruct or to 

modify one of the existing SLCs for use by the Titan IV/Centaur. SLC-2 (Delta) is located on 

North VAFB, and, although it has current mission requirements, the Delta program is in a 

phase-out period. Use of SLC-2 would require razing and reconstruction to meet Titan 

IV/Centaur requirements. More important, however, North VAFB locations require a dog-leg 

maneuver to avoid over-flight of populated areas. This maneuver reduces the required 

payload capacity below the required 10,000 pounds necessary for a high earth orbit. 

3. Launch facilities located on South VAFB consist of SLC-3 (Atlas), SLC-4 (Titan), SLC-5 

(Scout), and SLC-6 (Space Shuttle). SLC-5 (Scout) has scheduled missions and is not large 

enough to accommodate a Titan IV/Centaur. SLC-4 East is being refurbished to accommodate 

Titan IV/NUS missions, and SLC-4 West is an operational Titan U facility. Since each 

existing launch complex is designed to accommodate a particular launch vehicle, 

reconstruction or modification for the Titan IV/Centaur would reduce the base capabilities for 

current launch programs. 

4. SLC-3 (Atlas) also has current mission requirements but is in a phase-out period. Although 

located on South VAFB, the SLC-3 complex at launch requires direct over-flight of existing 

SLC-4 and SLC-6 facilities, which poses human health and safety risks. Also, SLC-3 is too 

small in its current configuration to accommodate the Titan IV/Centaur and would require 

significant demolition prior to building. Additionally, SLC-3 is closer to Lompoc than other 

space launch facilities on South VAFB, and Titan IV/Centaur activities there would result in 

increased impacts to the Lompoc community. 
a 

J I 1 

• 

. NRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-29 

1 JUNE 2015 

5. Based on the above considerations, SLC-2, SLC-3, SLC-4, and SLC-5 were eliminated 

from further consideration. However, based upon the range of alternatives considered, it was 

determined that development of the Titan IV/Centaur program at another VAFB location would 

be reasonable, based upon mission requirements, technical needs, engineering and design 

factors, cost, and environmental factors. 

2.2.3.2 5LC-6 Conversion 

Introduction 

1. VAFB covers about 98,400 acres of land bordering the Pacific Ocean. While this area is 

large, the sites available for new launch complexes are limited, due to factors including 

topography, access, environmental constraints, and proximity to other space launch 

complexes, since they must be spaced at appropriate distances according to the required safety 

clear zone. Based upon these siting factors and mission requirements, appropriate sites for 

locating the proposed launch complex are generally restricted to South VAFB. In this area, 

four sites have been selected for engineering and technical evaluation: (1) Cypress Ridge, 

(2) SLC-6, (3) Boathouse Flats, and (4) Vina Terrace. These locations are shown in 

Figure 2.13 (Project Alternatives Access and Utility Corridors). The Cypress Ridge, 

Boathouse Flats, and Vina Terrace sites are undeveloped and located in an area of South 

VAFB that is utilized for grazing. The SLC-6 site is a developed space launch complex, with 

facilities which were modified for the Space Shuttle. 

Because of the proximity of these four potential sites and the size of the area evaluated relatiVe 

to biological resources, unless otherwise noted, the results of this Biological Assessment 

apply equally to each of the four sites under consideration. 

3. Launching the Titan IV/Centaur from SLC-6 would involve establishment of the capabilities 

described above. The SLC-6 site was originally constructed in 1970 for the Titan IIIM 

manned launch space vehicle. The Titan IIIM was to be used for the manned orbital 

laboratory (MOL) program. Subsequent to cancellation of the MOL program, the SLC-6 site 

was modified for the Space Shuttle. However, primarily as a result of the 1986 Challenger 

disaster, the USAF has not used SLC-6 for Shuttle launches. Use of the facility to fulfill the 

objectives of the proposed project would result in utilization of some of the structures and 

equipment intended for the Space Shuttle program. 
LU 

U) 

LLI 

LU 

0 

uJ 

0 LO 

D:? ) 

a. 

a_ 

z < 

Z 
I 1 

. NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 2-31 

4. The SLC-6 facility is located about one mile north of the Cypress Ridge site and about one 

mile inland from the Pacific Ocean. The fenced SLC-6 complex covers an area of about 100 

acres, although the area including ancillary structures that would be utilized for Titan 

IV/Centaur launches is estimated to be about 280 acres, as shown in Figure 2.14 (SLC-6 

Site). Access to SLC-6 is primarily through the VAFB south gate. The location of SLC-6 in 

relation to the Cypress Ridge, Boathouse Flats, and Vina Terrace sites is shown in 

Figure 2.3. 

5. As planned, implementation of the SLC-6 alternative would involve retention of some 

facilities, modification or demolition of others, and some new construction. All construction 

or modification activities for the Titan TV/Centaur are planned to occur in areas disturbed by 

previous construction. A list of major facilities and their utilizations, given conversion of the 

SLC-6, is shown in Table 2.1 (Existing SLC-6 Facilities and Proposed Utilization). 

2.2.3.3 Boathouse Flats 

1. The 130-acre site known as Boathouse Flats is located adjacent to the coastline, south of the 

Cypress Ridge site. The site is relatively level, with elevations ranging from 50 to 150 feet. 

This site was selected based upon an anticipated reduction of project costs and engineering 

requirements from grading, access, and utilities extensions. 

Grading for the launch complex at this site would require about 0.6 million CY of cut and 

about 0.4 million CY of fill. A maximum of 0.4 million CY of fill would be taken from a 

borrow area located on VAFB (see Figure 2.9). The amount of fill needed would depend on 

the suitability of cut material for use as fill. 

3. The Space Shuttle external tank tow route bisects the site and would provide access. Some 

modifications to the tow route would be necessary. Electric, underground piping, and 

communication lines would be extended to the site from SLC-6, along the existing Coast 

Road and external tank tow route, then along the northern boundary to the launch complex. 

The area of disturbance for utilities would be about 90 acres, as shown in Figure 2.13. 

A distribution line for potable water would be extended about two miles from the existing 

water tank, disturbing an area of about one acre. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2

015 

87-271SLC-713A REV. 2/6/90 

. 

.. 

, ' 4. I 1 / . . 

, N rge 1 II. , .• ft.- 

A 

•

". / Al 0 : PT 1C(12 ) ' 11. 7 '•: 4'4. F11, ri . \ \. .. . &■-.."/--. '‘ 

ft> 7 ■ -} Z ) 

75.--( 

. 

a 

. 

'. ,.• i .‘ier . - 1 6;0001 P SI 

GOO WM 

(r - C ,950' 

A •• . i fJ IS• 

CHSTR tlyTiON 

9 • ?°° PIPING • 

-'1. 

J. 

... 

/1 

',, • - • ---- 

1. 0 0 rmf 0 0000 I C A •21 7C' ' 75.Ig . -32-1C e_ .. 6P°. 0 

.. • 

°U. 

.i.,...\: 1 '.1 /: -t7_ (1',, 1;11"/(/:. i :.\ .', r , '' 

,_... 

....._,•, i - .--:.,,,--,_.„.....„ :,00 

'' [ ' i''' //,''' 

$.4

/- f ,- -\!'" 

Z`-/ ----\ '--. 

pi; ' . 1 , W, ■ ,1.-4,- t',.,/, 1._, .._;., ., , .. , 

.,. 

5, ,,, , , ,,,,,,. .. 

, :/-:, 

i j • I■ F' . ' s. ,ii/, .c? ..-•„,,,,„ ..' ” .--' ) ,. ---. ',•••k( ., ...„, 450 1 

1 ., h ,ti • . ' It ,/ - ,. ,,,' 0 1 11, ■ • ' 4 ' ..'. . \ .1-nt.4.■ NG ...:, ..it,,. , . : ! ...m.1 

• 

tt i '' ' ' ' 

( 

.) '''. 141"( li I 4 „ rgai• . I 

.. ,-.-___.-- ((no ,,,(5. • 

, , 

• ., ,: ,- . - 

_ .,„ rri• itins FOI, eL: ,. .s., , . ?CO 

-1- 

, \

. . 

{ ' f t k5? , .: A 

,;' . 78 7 t , ;,':/,', f. ' 1 ' ,/ re , .,. .,„ \,. ..„,... .,;----„.:. ..,,,. C8340 -, --, (. 

• 

I. 

• ( \ k ,i , 

/), st i 

• 

1'N \ ‘ ' • /ll , ,f\ .1.1 let • A ... . re , X 

___-_

„. _ _ \ , 

_ :-/-7--71:,5 .--,------- ((,), ... :,, .. t., .\ • os-:, ,.. ,1 )...-\ . \ 

li‘ -----76 ,. 

- frSIO ---, 

.% •,,. 4. t • , „ , ,KILICOPT00 ; a ..., 

/4.. ' '': 1 ' at ' Miele

lire ' i :-'..'-' '. . 0 \ 

.0T 

\IN \ I I 

\ 

 \ 

\ \ 

' ■ \ 

, 

' 

/ r .\\ '! \, . ''-'''s( 41 

• 

\ 

• */ t 'I 

/ 

1 "‘....',..., .... 44,. ,....;'1!........, .4 

_ .. Iris -1,-... - , 1 

. ,, . :r6000r. Tv& .. 

2950

?n l

t

' ,\V;Afi .2,.',',;.. ' i . -i'-• — ,--- -,.., -NN _ ir -2./.. is!„r,„. 

, , '' /. , .4.....7, ...., 

.: ,-.,;„:„.4.,_....,... ,,, . ----., 

.. z.„ 

. dok

\,._ 

.,;,...\ 

. \ '''' .., <( 

•to, ‘ 

r.

_ ft. . 

. \ i _.Y 

4," 

• 

s,i7. ' S' .1 — . , n ,,,, c 

Z . 1 

/

I/ 1 

Cc- 9X, 

( \ '', \ ' 

_, : I N \ \ \ N • 

.:. \ ,,,:' 

t • \\ 4 • \_. , ,. • . , • ' P../1/ • • ( 4, ,., - T\ Ctrs / 

.-. erIP ..

• / 

ifi 1 /_,00—___ — —•- '--=.—, \ c,30 • \ ., 32.7Q / ,' Ponas 1. • '.7 ' ' ' ' AVIS C'-;-6 ' 1 ,V,' 348 30C)., ,# 1 TV. lowtot • "--7-4"-4141 '' •-• 1 •• gii ../ / / ' SI-C-6 ---'5°

7e,/00 ----- ---- -- ---N--\ ' ' '-'7...-.,.... 1970 ; 

......(te 1 /,.1--/ e ,c,, '•.-, '. '-• -:-;, ..: _: ....—: • ----• ----.: ---.::.) - .. .. ,...., . 

513---900----------„, 

/ 

4 0 \--:-..... AIr 0• .4..1.,...,.. ....... 

SITE \ c 1, ( 9.;77,---N, 

4.. ev. ..,r,co 

, . nn ,..,, ,• .... .:, 

ppr \ •. ' \ 

. 

PER 

.7 • -PONDS .1 j c .'l C 

BOU

NDARY -, 10 ■ . , \ --:,;.,- ,'-' 0 .-. . ..• -':- 

- , . Ve .i.''. r.. '■ ' , ..11190 I f. .._. ,,, ' 

..._ 

(---------------- 

---. . .4- ... . , 4 •we \ . ,..„ . 0 •,A,,. 

i i I i r 

. . , / / r-. %p19_2 '7— • .. , I •--,.....,, , \ 

,- ) .„ 2 10' , , INV • .• I. '"` r --." . . -* '1 ! 4 't0 PSI; , , .. . - .15 " -''.• 

-■. :: 

lilt ,.,7: 1 rcip,' '.• — _\ I e',/01,,, ' ' ' • ..•, ' .1 e • ..•. . iNT.,,„ ,• 20`>0 de., , , , 

90.5 

• 

, .....,.(5.,,i,. INV ■ s) 

II 

. 

. 

' , ) / i • 

I 

, 

1 . 

9140.-----. 

. / .0 i 1.,,( 

, . 

' /. / 6 / Po ... •, ,, ,,..). 7 / AIR ,,„r-,,,,,„,;:,, 4„,, 1; 4,•, , 0 , ,,,,,,,, 77 ( .,, ■. , ( ''./ ,...._........,..,......4.4.„. -1. _ goo 

FIG

URE 2.14 

0 800 1,600 FEET 

SCALE SLC-6 SITE 

CONTOUR INTERVAL: 10 FEET SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT * 

TOPO: 10 DONE BY INTERNATIONALMAPPING 

E

NVIRONMENTAL SOLI

T""nNS, INC. 

JF I .A. — 

- . . ..--• ,e- ............... 7.......-■ - 

•

, ' - 

• 

. . 

• 

, - I .. • . 

____ 

- 

I—

z 

w 

2 

u) 

cn 

w 

co 

co 

< 

-J 

< 

0 

0 

0 -J 

65

0 

l':* 

0 -J 

co 
NRO, APPROVED FOR RELEASE TABLE 2.1 2-33 

1 JUNE 2015 

EXISTING SLC-6 FACILITIES 

AND PROPOSED UTILIZATION 

FACILITY 

STATUS 

PROPOSED UTILIZATION 

Mz 

g 

4 3 

a ;Ai u 

i. 

g 8 

UTILIZED WITH 

MODIFICATIONS 

MOTHBALLED OR UTILIZED FOR OTHER PROJEC

TS 

DEMOLITION 

Payload Processing Room (PPR) X Utilized in present configuration 

Payload Changeout Room (PCR) X Backed up to PPR 

Shuttle Assembly Building (SAB) X Utilized in present configuration 

Access Tower X Modified to accommodate Titan IV/Centaur 

Aerial Escape Tram X Disassembled and disposed of offsite 

Launch Mount (LM) X Subject to demolition 

Launch Exhaust Ducts (LD) X Modified to accommodate Titan IV/Centaur. 

Mobile Service Tower (MST) X Interior to be modified from Shuttle to 

Titan IV configuration 

Ope? ations Support Building (OSB) X Modified to accommodate Titan IV/Centaur 

Launch Control Center (LCC) X Utilized for office space 

Security Systems, guard shack X Completed, modify as necessary 

Hydrazine Storage and Transfer X Modified, prepared for use, APCD permit 

Nitrogen Tetroxide (N204 ) Storage 

and Transfer 

X Modified, prepared for use, APCD permit 

Cryogenic Storage Areas X Modified, prepared for use 

Industrial Wastewater Treatment 

Facility 

X Modified with addition of equipment and 

storage capacity, cleaned, prepared for 

operation. 

Deluge Water Transfer System X Inspected, cleaned, prepared for operation 

Communications System X Modified to accommodate Titan IV/Centaur 

Utilities Inspected, cleaned, prepared for operation 

Water X 

Electricity X 

Propane X 

Sewage Disposal X 

Water Tank X Inspected, cleaned, prepared for use 

Parking X Utilized in present configuration 

2/1/90 (87-271) 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 2-34 

1 JUNE 2015 

2.2.3.4 Vina Terrace 

1. The Vina Terrace site is located about one-half mile east of the Cypress Ridge site. It occupies 

about 150 acres on a westerly sloping terrace at an elevation between 600 and 800 feet. This 

site was selected based upon an anticipated reduction in impacts to cultural resources. The 

complex would require grading in the amount of about 10 million CY of cut. (No fill is 

anticipated.) It also would require construction of a new access road approximately three 

miles in length. 

2. To accommodate the six percent road grade limitation for transportation of vehicle 

components, an access road would be extended about one and one-half miles from the Coast 

Road, primarily winding along a ridge top (see Figure 2.13). Utilities, including electricity, 

underground piping, and communications, would be extended along this new roadway. The 

area of disturbance for the road and utilities would be about 100 acres. 

2.2.4 NO ACTION 

I. If the Titan IV/Centaur project proposed for VAFB were not implemented, the USAF would 

not be able to achieve the required high energy, near polar orbit for DOD satellites in the 

10,000-pound class, and there would not be backup launch capability for other Titan 

IV/Centaur and Titan IV/NUS vehicles. The absence of this capability would unacceptably 

impact national security, since current defense programs rely on the capability to launch heavy 

payloads into near polar orbit. 

2. If the no action alternative were pursued, the Titan IV/Centaur program would not be 

developed at VAFB. As a consequence, potential adverse environmental impacts of program 

implementation would be avoided. Since there are no other space launch vehicles available to 

meet mission requirements, there would be no displacement effect to result in environmental 

impacts elsewhere. 
• NRQ.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-1 

3.0 BIOLOGICAL SETTING 

1. The project area is located within a biogeographic boundary area between coastal southern and 

central California provinces (USAF 1976; 1977; 1983; 1987b). Being situated at the southern 

end of the coast range and at the western end of the transverse ranges, there are a number of 

plants and animals that reach their northern, southern, or western limits in the VAFB-Point 

Conception area of western Santa Barbara County. For this reason, the project area is situated 

in a region of ecological and biogeographical interest 

2. Detailed reviews of biological resources in the VAFB region can be found in a number of 

studies (Coulombe and Cooper 1976; Coulombe and Mahrdt 1976) and in environmental 

documents prepared for projects on VAFB (USAF 1976; 1977; 1978; 1987a, 1988a; 

Engineering-Science 1987; Versar 1987; Howald et al. 1985). In particular, the 

Environmental Assessment for the SLC-4 area on South VAFB (Versar 1987; EngineeringScience 1987) contains baseline data that are directly applicable to habitats in the project area. 

3.1 TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC BIOTA 

3.1.1 REGIONAL BIOTA 

1. A wide variety of vegetation communities occur on VAFB. Following the California 

Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) non-game heritage program classification of the 

natural communities of California (Holland 1986), they include southern foredunes, southern 

coastal bluff scrub, central dune scrub, central coastal scrub, Venturan coastal sage scrub, 

chaparral (including central maritime chaparral), coast live oak woodland and savanna, 

grassland, tanbark oak forest, southern Bishop pine forest, and diverse wetland communities, 

including coastal salt marsh, freshwater marsh, riparian forests, scrub, and vernal pools. The 

areal extent of each plant community on VAFB is shown in Figure 11 (VAFB Vegetation 

Communities). Many of these are of limited distribution and considered "high priority" by the 

Department of Fish and Game California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). These 

varied plant communities provide terrestrial wildlife habitats that are regionally diverse, 

although limited within the South VAFB project area. 

2. Much of the vegetation on VAFB has been modified or otherwise disturbed by humans over 

the past century. Roads, USAF facilities, housing, and agricultural lands, which make up a 

portion of the disturbed area, occupy approximately eight percent of the base (Provancha 

1988). Ruderal vegetation, which includes mainly introduced species, covers many extremely 
COMMUNITY 

NAME 

APPROXIMATE 

ACRES 

PERCENT 

OF TOTAL 

Southern foredunes 760 0.8 

Coastal scrub* 30,600 31.1 

Central dune scrub 7,700 7.9 

Venturan coastal sage scrub 3,860 3.9 

Chaparral 13,100 13.3 

Coast live oak woodland 4,350 4.4 

Grassland 18,650 18.9 

Tanbark oak forest 60 0.1 

Southern Bishop pine forest 450 0.5 

Wetlands/riparian woodland 5,400 5.5 

Nonvegetation area 10,700 10.8 

Ruderal/exotic species 2,770 2.8 

TOTAL ACRES 98,400 100.0 

NRose, 

1 JU1E 2015 

LEGEND 

7 271SLC-7BA RE 

II V ; 

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF VEGETATION 

COMMUNITIES AT VAFB 

'Coastal scrub ins:lucies southern coastal bluff scrub. 

central coastal scrub, and grassland - coastal scrub. 

FIGURE 3.1 

VAFB VEGETATION COMMUNITIES. 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

R.sferen,:c: Provancha I9SS. ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

3-2 
°NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-3 

or repeatedly disturbed areas. In some cases, these plants are replacing rare or other native 

species and habitats. One introduced community, annual grassland, is commercially important 

for cattle grazing. Much of the remaining natural vegetation has been disrupted by firebreaks 

and communication and utility lines. Grazing and fires are causes of disturbance to many 

communities on the base. Purposely or accidentally introduced exotic species such as ice plant 

(CaPpobrotus sp.), Veldt grass (Ehrharta calycina), and pampas grass (Conaderia jubata) are 

now dominants in some areas of VAFB (Schrnalzer and Hinkle 1987). 

3.1.2 LOCAL BIOTA 

1. For purposes of this analysis, the project study area consists of the southern portion of South 

VAFB, within an area that incorporates the Cypress Ridge, SLC-6, Boathouse Flats, and Vina 

Terrace sites, associated utility corridors, and proposed borrow sites located near Manzanita 

and Mesa Roads. Boundaries of the study area (excluding the borrow sites) are shown in 

Figure 3.2 (Environmental Study Area and Vegetation Communities). 

2. The following descriptions of the vegetation communities found on the Cypress Ridge, 

SLC-6, Boathouse Flats, and Vina Terrace sites are based on Holland (1986) and a field 

inventory in support of this analysis, including surveys for special interest plants, conducted 

in March through June 1988 and March 1989. The plant communities occurring within the 

project site area are shown in Figure 3.3 (Vegetation Communities Project Site Area). No 

federal- or state-listed endangered or threatened plant species were found in the study area, 

and none is expected to occur. An inventory of plant species observed is included in 

Appendix A (Plant Species). 

3. Based on historical air photos, the vegetation on the three undeveloped sites has been 

subjected to cattle grazing for at least the past 60 years. It also has been subjected to 

occasional fires, both intentional, for range improvement in accordance with the Wildland Fuel 

Management Plan (USAF 1980), and accidental, usually as a result of sparks from passing 

trains (Hickson 1987). 

4. Within the project study area, wildlife is not as diverse as elsewhere on VAFB, due to: 

(1) the absence of habitats that are known to support higher species diversities, such as 

coastal wetlands, riparian woodlands, Bishop pine forests, live oak woodlands, tanbark oak 

forests, and (2) the occurrence of habitats that are widespread on VAFB and known to contain 

relatively limited species diversity (e.g., grasslands and three phases of coastal sage scrub). 
0 4000 

EXTERNAL TANK 

TOW ROUTE 8000 FEET 

3-4 

NI ArtiogAv6ED FOR RELEASE 

I • NE'20T5 

El CENTRAL COASTAL SCRUB 

IE GRASSLAND-COASTAL SCRUB 

▪ GI CENTRAL DUNE SCRUB 

— VENTURAN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB 

^ CHAPARRAL 

El GRASSLAND 

o WETLANDS/RIPARIAN WETLAND 

• NONVEGETATION AREA 

RUDERAL/EXOTIC SPECIES 

• EUCALYPTUS 

co 

S,0 „ N?__v Q L 

SOUTH 

SLC-5 

VANDENBERG 

POINT 

P EDE R NAL ES 

SLC-6 SITE 

'71 

POINT 

ARGUELLO 

CYPRESS RIDGE SITE 

AIR FORCE 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

STUDY AREA 

BOUNDARY SANTA YNEZ MOUNTAINS 

N^40014/

.BASE onf,„oGe 

BOATHOUSE AREA 

VINA TERRACE SITE I 

BOATHOUSE FLATS SITE SCALE 

FIGURE 3.2 

ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AREA 

AND VEGETATION COMMUNME 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC 

u - • 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-6, , 

1 JUNE 2015 

3.1.2.1 Cypress Ridge 

3.1.2.1.1 Project Site 

1. The Cypress Ridge site covers approximately 120 acres and includes four vegetation 

communities, primarily central coastal scrub, grassland (predominantly non-native grassland), 

and Venturan coastal sage scrub. In addition, some areas have sparse shrub cover, with 

openings dominated by grasses and herbs, classified herein as grassland-coastal scrub. 

Ruderal vegetation occurs along Coast Road and around the Monterey cypress trees 

(Cupressus macrocama) located west of Coast Road. Small amounts of riparian wetland 

occur on the southwestern area of the site. Table 3.1 (Approximate Distribution of Vegetation 

Located at Alternative Sites) shows the plant communities and the area each community 

occupies, including proposed utility corridors. Figure 3.2 shows the proportion of each 

community within the site area. 

2. In general, the wildlife community present at the Cypress Ridge site is composed of common, 

wide-ranging species that frequent a variety of habitat types found throughout the study region 

and project area. These habitats support a variety of ubiquitous species such as western fence 

lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), western rattlesnake 

(Crotalus viridis), Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii), bushtit (Psaltriparus minima), 

white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), Botta's 

pocket gopher (Thomomys bortae), and deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus). Wideranging birds of prey like the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), red-tailed hawk (Buteo 

jamaicensis), and American kestrel (Falco sparverius), along with large, wide-ranging 

carnivores, such as coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis 

mephitis), and bobcat (Fells rufus), are known to forage in the vegetation types found at the 

Cypress Ridge site. 

Central Coastal Scrub 

1. The most extensive vegetation community within the Cypress Ridge site is central coastal 

scrub, covering approximately 85 acres. This community is characterized by a dense cover of 

shrubs approximately three to five feet in height. Dominant shrub species include mock 

heather (Haplopappus ericoides), coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica), black sage (Salvia 

mellifera), bush monkey flower (Minuilus aurantiacus), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis 

ssp. consanguinea). Small openings and disturbed areas are inhabited by such sub-shrubs as 

golden yarrow (Eriophyllum confertiflorwn) and cudweed aster (Corethrogynefi/aginifolia) 

and annual and perennial herbs such as bedstraw (Galium spp.), Chorizanthe spp., and 

everlastings (Gnaphaliunz spp.). 
• NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-7 

1 JUNE 2015 TABLE 3.1 

APPROXIMATE DISTRIBUTION OF VEGETATION 

LOCATED AT ALTERNATIVE SITES 

PLANT 

COMMUNITY 

PRIMARY SITE 

(ACRES) 

UTILITY 

CORRIDORS 

(ACRES) 

TOTAL 

(ACRES) 

PERCENT 

PLANT 

COMMUNITY

DISTURBED 

CYPRESS RIDGE 

Venturan coastal sage scrub 4.5 0.0 4.5 2.4 

Grassland - coastal scrub 8.5 8.0 16.5 9.0 

Grassland - nonnative 18.5 9.0 27.5 14.9 

Ruderal 4.5 4.0 8.5 4.7 

Central coastal scrub 83.5 37.0 120.5 65.0 

Riparian/wetland 0.5 5.0 5.5 3.0 

Central dune scrub 0.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 

Chaparral 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 

120.0 65.1 185.1 100.0 

5LC-6 

Not vegetation - 140.0 Corridors in place. 144.0 61.0 

Ruderal 44.0 No additional 44.0 12.0 

Central coastal scrub 82.0 disturbance. 82.0 23.0 

Chaparral 9.5 9.5 3.0 

Maritime chaparral 1.0 1.) 1.0 

Riparian/wetland 3.5 3.5 

280.0 280.0 100.00 

BOATHOUSE FLATS 

Grassland - nonnative 130.0 19.0 149.0 68.0 

Grassland - coastal scrub 0.0. 10.0 10.0 4.6 

Ruderal 0.0 8.0 8.0 3.6 

Riparian/wetland 0.0 5.0 . 5.0 2.2 

Central coastal scrub 0.0 42.0 42.0 19.1 

Central dune scrub 0.0 2.0 2.0 . 1.0 

Venturan coastal sage scrub 0.0 3.0 3.0 1.4 

Chaparral 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 

130.0 89.1 219.1 100.0 

VINA TERRACE 

Central coastal scrub 90.0 60.0 150.0 59.2 

Grassland - nonnative 25.0 14.0 39.0 15.4 

Grassland - coastal scrub 20.0 11.0 31.0 12.2 

Venturan coastal sage scrub 15.0 7.0 22.0 8.7 

Ruderal 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.8 

Chaparral 0.0 . 2.0 2.0 0.8 

Riparian/wetland 0.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 

Central dune scrub 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.8 

Not vegetation 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 

150.0 103.2 253.2 100.0 

2/1/90 (87-271) 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-8• 

2. Special interest species (discussed in detail in Chapter 4.0) that occur in the central coastal 

scrub community at the Cypress Ridge site include large-leaved wallflower (Erysimum 

suffrutescens var. grandifolium), primarily on the upper slopes east of Coast Road, western 

dichondra (Dichondra occidentalis), common on upper slopes of site, and a few scattered 

individuals of Santa Barbara ccanothus (Ceanothus impressus var. impressus), also on the 

upper slopes. 

3. Some central coastal scrub on the proposed site is transitional to central dune scrub, 

particularly where the sandy soil has been disturbed. These areas are devoid of introduced ice 

plants and veldt grass, which are common elsewhere on VAFB in similar situations. 

4. In this transitional community, a population of over 650 mature individuals (greater than six 

inches tall) of the federal Category 2 candidate species curly-leaved monardella (Monardella 

undulata var. frutescens) occurs along two old roads just east of Coast Road, and small 

populations of between 10 and 60 plants are scattered in openings in central coastal scrub 

throughout the site, as shown in Figure 3.4 (Locations of Curly-leaved Monardella and Crisp 

Monardella on VAFB) and Figure 3.5 (Environmental Study Region, Colonies of Monardella 

undulata var. frurescens). In total, approximately 800 to 1,000 mature plants, and many more 

seedlings, occur on the Cypress Ridge launch complex site. The populations on and near this 

site represent the southern limit of this species (Smith 1976; Howald et al. 1985). Some 

plants appear to be what has beer. identified by an expert in the genus (Jokerst 1988) as a 

hybrid between curly-leaved monardella and another federal Category 2 candidate, dune mint 

(M. crispa). 

5. Central coastal scrub is adapted to periodic burning and many of the shrub species regenerate 

by crown-sprouting after fires. This was evident during the field inventory of May and June 

1988 in the portion of the site to the east of Coast Road. Shrubs such as mock heather and 

black sage were vigorously resprouring in the area that had been burned, but not crushed, and 

the open areas were dominated by annual and perennial herbs. These included blue dicks 

(Dichelostemma pulchellum), fairy mist (Prerostegia dryrnarioides), Camissonia micrantha, 

and Cryptantha leiocarpa. 

6. Two special interest plants were also noted in the burned area: (1) western dichondra, 

commonly scattered on the upper slopes, and (2) fiddleneck (Amsinckia spectabilis var. 

microcatpa), endemic to western Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, which was 

common to abundant on the lower slopes. 
BASE 

JALAMA 19. JALAMA BEACH 

COUNTY PARK 

0 1 2 3 4 5 MILES 

NRO.APPROVEL FOR RELEASE 

1 ,I[JNIV,,c3kibsAL. 

VANDENBERG 

El (948,699 

O 

OCEAN 

BEACH • 

COUNTY. 

PARK 

AIR 

NORTH 

VAFB 

FORCE 

VANDENBERG 

VILLAGE 

246 

SURF 

a_ 

POINT 

PEDERNALES 

POINT igzEs ARGUELLO 

F 0400 

E2 (2001' > 

SOUTH 

VAFB 

CYPRESS RIDGE SITE 

N 

V 

LOMPOC 

PURISIMA POINT 

BURTON MESA 

I. LOCATIONS FOR BOTH 

MONARDEU_A UNDULA TA VAR. 

FRUTESCENS AND MONARDEL1A 

CRISPA ARE INCLUDED BECAUSE 

OF CONFUSION OF THESE SPECIES' 

NAMES. 

♦ CN006 NONSPECIFIC LOCATION (WITHIN 

1 MILE) 

U CNODE3 GENERAL LOCATION (WITHIN 5 MILES) 

E1 MDR 1980 

E2 USAF 1987a 

F FIELD OBSERVATIONS DURING THIS STUDY 

P R. NICHOLS (PEPS COMM ), GENERAL LOCATION 

FIGURE 3.4 

LOCATIONS OF CURLY-LEAVED 

MONARDELLA AND CRISP 

MONARDELLA ON VAFB 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

Li 

SCALE 

2. ESTWATES OF POPULATION SLTE, 

F AVAILABLE, ARE IN 

PARENTHESES. 

use= 

• CALIFORNIA NATURAL DIVERSITY DATA 

BASE (CNDOB) SPECIFIC LOCATION (WITHIN 

$0 ACRES) 

ORCUTT 
3-10 
NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-11 

7. As many as 12 species of reptiles have been found to inhabit the three stages of coastal scrub 

habitat on VAFB (Coulombe and Cooper 1976; Coulombe and Mahrdt 1976). Western fence 

lizard, California legless lizard, (Anniella pulchra), western spotted skunk (Spilogale gracilis), 

striped racer (Masticophis lateralis), and western rattlesnake are some of the more common 

species of coastal scrub habitats. Amphibians are uncommon in this dry environment, 

generally occurring only during the winter months. Ensatina (Ensatina eschscholtzii), 

blackbelly slender salamander (Batrachoseps nigriventris), and Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris 

regilla) are the most likely species to occur. No threatened, endangered, federal 

Category 2 listed, or regionally rare or declining amphibians or reptiles are expected to inhabit 

coastal scrub in the project area. 

8. California quail (Callipepla californica), Anna's (Calypte anna) and Costa's (C. costae) 

hummingbirds, bushtit, Bewick's wren, California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum), rufoussided (Pipilo erythrophthalmus) and brown (P. fuscus) towhees, song sparrow, whitecrowned sparrow, and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus) are characteristic breeding 

species of coastal scrub habitats in the project area. Locally common nesting species are the 

greater roadrunner, loggerhead shrike, and rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps). 

Other species of birds known or expected to occur in coastal scrub habitats within the project 

area are listed in Appendix B.4. There are no threatened or endangered species of birds 

known or expected to frequent coastal scrub habitats in the project area. Ferruginous hawk 

(Buteo regalis), a federal Category 2 candidate species, can be expected to forage over this 

habitat during the fall and winter. Regionally rare and declining bird species that are expected. 

to forage in coastal scrub habitats at the Cypress Ridge site include black-shouldered kite 

(Elanus caeruleus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), 

Merlin (Falco columbarius), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), burrowing owl (Athene 

cunicularia), and short-eared owl (Asio flammeus). 

9. Coastal scrub is an important habitat for mammals, with 14 species of rodents and nine 

mammalian predators known or expected to occur in this habitat (see Appendix B.3). 

The dense cover of coastal scrub vegetation makes it ideal habitat for small mammals, 

which in turn are prey for a number of resident carnivores and birds of prey. Some of 

the more common small mammals include Botta's pocket gopher, California pocket 

mouse (Perognothus californicus), Heermann's (Dipodomys heermanni arenae) and agile 

(Dipodomys agilis fuscus) kangaroo rats, California mouse (Peromyscus californicus), deer 

mouse, pinyon mouse (Peromyscus truei), and desert (Neotoma lepida) and dusky-footed 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-12 

(N. fuscipes) woodrats. Carnivores of this habitat include coyote, raccoon, long-tailed weasel 

(Mustela frenata), western spotted and striped skunks, and bobcat. Dense stands of brush in 

this habitat also provide shelter and browse for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). 

10. There are no threatened or endangered species of mammals expected to occur in the project 

area. Badger (Taxidea taws) is the only regionally rare or declining species of mammal 

known or expected to occur in this community type at the Cypress Ridge site. Active sign of 

badger was observed on the Cypress Ridge site during field inventories conducted in the 

spring of 1988. 

Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub 

1. Venturan coastal sage scrub occurs in the northeast portion of the Cypress Ridge site, 

covering approximately four acres. It is characterized by a dense cover of shrubs two to five 

feet in height, many of which crown-sprout after fire, and is dominated by purple sage (Salvia 

leucophylla), coastal sagebrush, and bush sunflower (Encelia caltfornica). 

2. The community at this site is typical of the Venturan coastal sage scrub on the rest of VAFB, 

where it occupies approximately 3,900 acres (Provancha 1988), predominantly on the southfacing slopes to the east of the Cypress Ridge site. 

3. The wildlife species that are common to Venturan coastal sage scrub are the same as those 

previously addressed above in the portion of Section 3.1.2.1 that addresses central coastal 

scrub. 

Nonnative Grassland 

1. Nonnative grassland occupies approximately 18 acres within the Cypress Ridge site. The 

dominant species are introduced annual grasses such as wild oaks (Avena spp.), fescues 

(Vulpia spp.), and bromes (Bromus spp.). Annual herbs found in grassland include tarweeds 

(Hemizonia spp.), thistles (Cirsiwn spp.), and the showy wildflowers tidy tips (Layia 

platyglossa), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), and sky lupine (Lupinus nanus). 

Native perennial bunchgrasses are infrequent. The grassland here is typical of grassland on 

the rest of VAFB, where it occupies approximately 19,000 acres. One special interest plant, 

fiddleneck, is common to abundant in the grassland at the Cypress Ridge site. 
1 

I 

1 I

I 

, NRO .\PPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-13 

2. Although grasslands are low in species diversity, they often support large numbers of 

individuals in a few vertebrate populations. The Pacific treefrog and blackbelly slender 

salamander are the only amphibians expected to occur commonly in grasslands. Western 

skink (Eumeces skiltonianus), western fence lizard, southern alligator lizard (Elgaria 

multicarinatus), common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus), and gopher snake are the most 

common reptile species expected to occur in grasslands in the Cypress Ridge site. No 

sensitive amphibians or reptiles are expected to occur. 

3. Western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), 

and European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) can be found in large flocks in grasslands during the 

winter months. Several species of raptors, including the black-shouldered kite, northern 

harrier, red-tailed hawk, American kestrel, common barn-owl (Tyro alba), and burrowing owl 

rely on open expanses of grasslands for hunting. Short grass areas in northern Santa Barbara 

County are favored by large flocks of horned larks (Eremophila alpestris), water pipits 

(Anthus spinoletta), and long-billed curlews (Numenius americanus). Tall grass hillsides at 

Point Sal and, locally, south of Lompoc to Point Conception, are the last sites in Santa 

Barbara County known to support populations of grasshopper sparrows (Ammodramus 

savannarum), a regionally rare and declining species (Lehman 1982). Grasslands in the 

vicinity of the Cypress Ridge site provide essential foraging habitat for two federal Category 2 

candidate species of birds (ferruginous hawk and long-billed curlew) and nine regionally rare 

and declining birds (black-shouldered kite, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, merlin, prairie 

falcon, burrowing owl, short-eared owl, tree swallow [Tachycineta bicolor], and grasshopper 

sparrow). Only the northern harrier has been observed foraging in grasslands at the Cypress 

Ridge site. 

4. Grasslands in the project area are favored habitat for broad-footed mole (Scapanus latimanus), 

California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), Botta's pocket gopher, western harvest 

mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), and California vole (Microtus californicus). Mammalian 

predators, including the coyote, long-tailed weasel, and badger, depend on grasslands for 

foraging and denning sites. Places where grasslands are bordered by woodland or dense 

brush are excellent foraging areas for mule deer. The badger is the only regionally rare 

mammal known to frequent grasslands in the project study area. Active badger sign was 

found on the Cypress Ridge site during field inventories conducted in the spring of 1988. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-14 

1 JUNE 2015 

Grassland - Coastal Scrub 

1. An area of grassland - coastal scrub of approximately eight acres on the western edge of the 

Cypress Ridge site is characterized by widely scattered coastal sagebrush and mock heather. 

The native bunchgrass, purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra), dominates much of the open areas 

within the scrub there and on the northern edge of the site east of Coast Road. The presence 

of this native grass is notable. The eastern edge of the site is bounded by a seasonally flowing 

stream. The vegetation in the stream bed is dominated by coyote brush and coastal sagebrush, 

with occasional elderberry (Sambucus mexicanus). 

2. The widespread destruction of native grassland habitat has led the Nature Conservancy to 

consider it threatened throughout its range (Jensen 1983), and the County of Santa Barbara 

(1979) to consider it "an ecological community of great interest." 

Ruderal Vegetation 

I . Ruderal vegetation (characterized by disturbance-tolerant, predominantly exotic species) 

covers roughly four acres of the Cypress Ridge site, occurring along the portion of Coast 

Road within the site, and includes milk thistle (Silybum marianum), bull thistle (Cirsiwn 

vulgare), and annual grasses. The road cuts are dominated by introduced annual grasses, 

clovers (Trifolium incarnatum, T. hirtum), Australian saltbush (Arriplex semibaccam) and 

native lupine (Lupinus arboreus) used in a revegetation program in 1984 (Parsons 1984), 

and mustards (Brassica spp.). 

2. These ruderal areas tend to support a subset of ubiquitous wildlife which are characteristic of 

the surrounding coastal scrub, grassland, and chaparral habitats. However, by the nature of 

the past and ongoing disturbances associated with these modified habitats, the vertebrate fauna 

tends to be depauperate. Some of the more common wildlife species of ruderal habitats 

include western fence lizard, gopher snake, western rattlesnake, American kestrel, red-tailed 

hawk, rock dove (Columba livia), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), Bewick's wren, 

California thrasher, European starling, white-crowned sparrow, song sparrow, Brewer's 

blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), house finch, Botta's pocket gopher, California ground 

squirrel, deer mouse, and California vole. Wide-ranging carnivores such as coyote, bobcat, 

striped skunk, Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and raccoon occasionally forage in 

these disturbed habitats. However, their densities tend to be low due to the low abundance 

and diversity of available vertebrate prey, and to the continuing nature of disturbance. 
I 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-15 

3. There are no threatened or endangered species of wildlife expected to frequent these disturbed 

areas. The badger, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, and burrowing owl are the only 

regionally rare or declining wildlife species which could forage in disturbed/modified habitats 

within the project area 

Planted Windbreaks 

1. The planted windbreaks of Monterey cypress and eucalyptus trees at the Cypress Ridge site 

and at the external tank landing facility in the project area are habitat for migratory landbirds. 

These trees act like plant islands which tend to concentrate migrant landbirds such as 

flycatchers, kinglets, vireos, warblers, sparrows, and orioles. This effect, along with the 

Point Arguello area projecting substantially into the Pacific Ocean, make these planted trees 

good spots to observe migrant landbirds, as the trees provide resting and feeding habitat for 

birds which have been flying long distances over the ocean. 

2. Common raptors like the red-tailed hawk, American kestrel, common barn-owl, and great 

howned owl (Bubo virginianus) are known to utilize these trees for roosting and nesting. For 

most of the year, only a few common species of birds such as rock dove, northern flicker 

(Colaptes aurates), Anna's hummingbird, ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula) (winter 

only), European starling, yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata) (winter only), darkeyed junco (Junco hyemalis), Brewer's and red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), 

house finch and American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis) tend to frequent these planted trees. 

3. These Monterey cypress and eucalyptus trees provide sites for occasional roosting of 

regionally rare or declining raptors such as ferruginous hawk, northern harrier, Cooper's 

hawk, or prairie falcon, and overwintering sites for the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus). 

No other sensitive wildlife species and no threatened or endangered species are expected to 

utilize these planted windbreaks. 

3.1.2.1.2 Utility Corridors 

1. The proposed utility corridors encompass approximately 65 acres and include seven vegetation 

communities, primarily central coastal scrub. The electrical utility corridor includes 36 acres 

of central coastal scrub and contains a population of about 45 mature curly-leaved monardella. 

The corridor also includes two small wetlands (less than one-quarter acre each), about four 

acres of riparian scrub/woodland, and small areas of central dune scrub and chaparral. The 

underground water supply line corridor consists of approximately seven acres and follows 

an existing, partially paved road. The corridor passes through central coastal scrub and 

j 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-16 

grassland. The corridor for underground communication cables, gaseous nitrogen line, and 

an easement for a future natural gas line follow existing roads through primarily ruderal 

vegetation. 

Central Coastal Scrub 

1. The central coastal scrub crossed by the utility corridors is characteristic of the entire project 

area, as discussed for Cypress Ridge in Section 3.1.2.1. The wildlife also does not differ 

from that discussed previously. 

Riparian Wetlands 

1. The two small wetlands occur west of the external tank building (building 330). In this 

location they are dominated by sedges and rushes (Carex praegracilis, Juncus balticus, and 

Juncus effusus var. brunneus). 

2. Wildlife within these areas is addressed below, under riparian scrub woodland. 

Riparian Scrub Woodland 

I . The utility corridors also includes about four acres of riparian scrub/woodland at the Red Roof 

Canyon and Grey Canyon crossings. This vegetation type is dominated in these locations by 

arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) with mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana) and poison oak 

(Toxicodendron diversilobum). 

2. Riparian woodland and freshwater habitats support a diverse assemblage of amphibians and 

reptiles. The California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytoni) and western pond turtle 

(Clemmys marmorata) are the only regionally rare or declining amphibians or reptiles known 

to frequent freshwater wetland habitats on VAFB. Neither of these species, and no threatened 

or endangered species of amphibian or reptile, is expected to occur within the utility corridor 

area because there is not a sufficient year-round flow to sustain deeper pools necessary for 

their survival during the dry summer months. 

3. Riparian woodlands support a diverse assemblage of resident and migrant landbirds. As a 

result of loss and alteration of habitat, there are a number of riparian dependent birds which 

have shown significant declines in their populations over the past century throughout Southern 

California. Species like the yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), long-eared owl 

(Asio orus), willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), and Wilson's warbler (Wilsonia pusilla) 

have been completely extirpated as breeders south of Point Conception. Today, only three of 
, • NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-17 

these species occur in a few isolated locales in northwestern Santa Barbara County. Cooper's 

hawk, Swainson's thrush (Catharus ustulatus), and yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens) are 

now rare throughout much of Santa Barbara County, while warbling vireos (Vireo gilvus) and 

yellow warblers (Dcndroica petechia) are, at present, local and uncommon as nesters in the 

project area. 

4. Twenty-nine species of mammals are expected to occur in riparian woodlands in northern 

Santa Barbara-County (Howald et at 1985). Coulombe and Cooper (1976) recorded a total of 

seven species of small mammals in riparian woodlands on VAFB. Some of the more common 

species known to occur include Towbridge (Sorex trowbridgii) and ornate (Sorex ornatus) 

shrews, California mouse, and dusky-footed woodrat. Riparian woodlands also provide 

excellent foraging habitat for a number of large mammals, such as brush rabbit (Sylvilagis 

bachrnani), bobcat, mule deer, and introduced wild pigs (Sus scrofa). Western gray squirrel 

(Sciurus griseus) is the only regionally rare or declining mammal expected to occur in riparian 

woodlands on South VAFB. This species is not expected to occur in the willow woodlands 

within the project area due to the limited extent of this habitat. There are no threatenettor 

endangered species of mammals expected to occur in these habitats in the project study area. 

Central Dune Scrub 

1. Central dune scrub occurs on stabilized back dunes and comprises about two acres of the 

utility line corridors. It is characterized by a number of low shrubs, including mock heather. 

coastal bush lupine, dune lupine and coyote brush. California wax myrtle can occur in this 

habitat in moist places with willows. It is uncommon in the project area having only been 

observed in small patches within areas vegetated with coastal scrub and grassland. 

2. Central dune scrub is depauperate of wildlife species due to its and and saline aspects and to 

the sparse nature of its protective vegetative cover. In general, this habitat supports a subset 

of wildlife which is characteristic of the coastal scrub habitats. Because of its arid and saline 

aspects, amphibians are uncommon. Common wildlife species include western fence lizard, 

southern alligator lizard, California legless lizard, gopher snake, American kestrel, Say's 

phoebe (Sayornis saya) (winter only), Bewick's wren, California thrasher, yellow-rumped 

warbler (winter only), white-crowned sparrow, song sparrow, Botta's pocket gopher, deer 

mouse, California ground squirrel, and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Breeding 

species in this habitat are few, and include Bewick's wren, California thrasher, and whitecrowned sparrow. The most abundant mammal species are Botta's pocket gophers and deer 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

mice. Mule deer, and carnivores like coyote, raccoon, bobcat, and striped skunk, are 

expected to occasionally forage in coastal dune scrub but are not expected to be permanent 

residents. 

3. There are no threatened or endangered species of wildlife expected to frequent central dune 

scrub habitats in the project area. Ferruginous hawk, a federal Category 2 candidate species, 

can be expected to occasionally forage over this habitat during the fall and winter. Regionally 

rare and declining bird species which are expected to forage in the central dunes scrub habitats 

include black-shouldered kite, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, merlin, prairie falcon, 

burrowing owl and short-eared owl. Badgers are the only regionally rare or declining species 

of mammal expected to occur. 

Chaparral 

1. Small areas of chaparral are crossed by the proposed electrical utility corridor. As habitat, 

chaparral supports species adapted to an arid environment. Therefore, amphibian diversity is 

relatively low, with blackbelly slender salamander, ensatina, and Pacific tree frogs known to 

occur during the winter. In contrast to the amphibians, there are a number of reptiles that are 

known to inhabit the dense stands of brush typical of chaparral communities. The western 

fence lizard, side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), striped racer, western terrestrial garter 

snake (Nerodia elegans), and western rattlesnake are among the commonly occurring 

chaparral associates. No regionally rare or declining amphibians or reptiles occur in chaparral 

habitat of the project study area. 

3. Many of the bird species characteristic of chaparral plant communities also tend to be similar to 

those found in coastal scrub, with which it is often contiguous or even intergraded. Birds 

characteristic of chaparral habitats in the project area include California quail, greater 

roadrunner, Anna's and Costa's hummingbirds, Bewick's wren, scrub jay (Aphelocoma 

coerulescens), wrentit (Chamae fasciata), California thrasher, white-crowned sparrow, 

golden-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia atricopilla), rufous-sided and brown towhees, and 

lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria). Regionally rare and declining bird species expected to 

forage over chaparral in the project area include northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, prairie 

falcon, and tree swallow. 

4. Chaparral supports a reasonably diverse assemblage of mammals. Rodents are well 

represented in regional plant communities, with 13 species recorded in Santa Barbara County 

chaparral (1-lowald et al. 1985). Some of the more common rodents include Bona's pocket 
NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-19 

1 JUNE 2015 

gopher, California pocket mouse, agile kangaroo rat, California mouse, pifion mouse, and 

desert and dusky-footed woodrats. Brush rabbits are common in areas of dense scrub, and 

black-tailed jackrabbits (Lepus californicus), although much less common, may frequent 

openings within chaparral. Because of the wide diversity and abundance of available rodent 

prey, and the dense protective cover provided by chaparral, a number of large, wide-ranging 

carnivores frequent this habitat. The most common species include coyote, gray fox 

(Urocyon cinereoargenieus), striped skunk, and bobcat. Mule deer utilize chaparral for cover 

and forage. 

5. Mountain lion (Fells concolor), a fully protected species in the state of California, is the only 

regionally rare or declining species that is expected to occur in chaparral habitats in the project 

study area. 

3.1.2.2 SLC-6 

1. The SLC-6 site covers approximately 280 acres and includes central coastal scrub, ruderal, 

vegetation, chaparral, riparian/wetlands, eucalyptus, and nonvegetation areas. Because 

SLC-6 is developed, a major portion of the area does not contain vegetation. The 

nonvegetation area, which accounts Rd-about 50 percent of the total, includes the launch 

complex located inside the security fence, wastewater treatment plant and evaporation ponds, 

sewage treatment plant, evaporation/percolation ponds, roads, and other facilities. No federalor state-listed threatened or endangered plants or candidate species are known to occur at this 

site. 

2. Ruderal vegetation, characterized by disturbance-tolerant, predominantly exotic species, 

covers about 44 acres of SLC-6. It occurs in the vicinity of the security fence, roads, and 

evaporation ponds and consists primarily of introduced grasses. Other vegetation on the site 

includes about 82 acres of central coastal scrub, 9.5 acres of chaparral, 3.5 acres of 

riparian/wetlands and eucalyptus, and one acre of maritime chaparral. 

3. The area inside the security fence consists of about 100 acres, most of which (70 acres) is 

developed. The remainder contains central coastal scrub (18 acres), ruderal species (11 

acres), and maritime chaparral (one acre). 

4. The predominant wildlife habitats in the vicinity of SLC-6 are central coastal scrub, ruderal 

vegetation, and chaparral. Wildlife species associated with the central coastal scrub and 

chaparral are the same as discussed for the Cypress Ridge site. Wildlife associated with the 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-20. 

1 JUNE 2015 

ruderal habitat would be similar to that found in the grassland area. The most common 

species expected to be seen at SLC-6 would be western fence lizard, western skink, western 

rattlesnake, Pacific tree frog, and blackbelly slender salamander, as well as such wide ranging 

species as coyote, bobcat, mule deer, and red-tailed hawk. 

5. No threatened or endangered species of wildlife are expected to occur at SLC-6. The site 

does, however, provide suitable foraging habitat for ferruginous hawk and long-billed curlew, 

two federal Category 2 candidate species, and for a number of regionally rare and declining 

species, such as black-shouldered kite, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, merlin, prairie 

falcon, burrowing owl, short-cared owl, tree swallow, grasshopper sparrow, badger, and 

mountain lion. All of these species could be expected to occur occasionally. 

3.1.2.3 Boathouse Flats 

3.1.2.3.1 Project Site 

Nonnative Grassland 

1. Nonnative grassland is the only community found on the 130 acres of Boathouse Flats. 

It is similar to that described for Cypress Ridge, but with scattered coyote brush, coastal 

sagebrush, sawtooth goldenbush (Haplopappus squarrosus), and herbs, including vetch 

(Vicia spp.), and locoweed (Astragalus nunallii). The slopes of the Space Shuttle external 

tank tow route bisecting the site have revegetated since construction, with fescues, tarweeds, 

and Australian saitbush. Some rockier soils in the northern portion of the site have purple 

needlegrass growing on them. However, these areas are not extensive. No federal- or statelisted threatened or endangered plants or candidate species were observed at the Boathouse 

Flats site. Fiddleneck, a special interest plant, is scattered at the site. 

2. Heavy cattle grazing, along with development of the V-33 tow road, the NASA VLB 1 

tracking station, and a series of dirt roads, have reduced the value of the grassland present in 

the Boathouse Flats area for wildlife species. Wildlife associated with grassland habitats in 

the project area were described in Section 3.1.2.1. The most common species observed at this 

site were western fence lizard, red-tailed hawk, European starling, house finch, and California 

ground squirrel. 

3. The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) is the only federal- or state-listed threatened or 

endangered wildlife species likely to regularly use the grasslands at the site. However, two 

additional endangered species, the California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) and the 

California least tern (Sterna antillarum), are known to forage in adjacent nearshore waters. 
NRO, APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-21 

The brown pelican is also known to roost in sizeable numbers on the Boathouse breakwater, 

near the site. Regionally rare and declining species which have been observed in the 

grasslands at or adjacent to the Boathouse Flats site are black-shouldered kite, northern 

harrier, prairie falcon, burrowing owl, and badger. Additional regionally rare or declining 

species that could occur occasionally are the Cooper's hawk, merlin, short-eared owl, and tree 

swallow. Excellent habitat exists for the regionally rare burrowing owl and badger, due to the 

high density of California ground squirrels present on the site. Abandoned ground squirrel 

burrows are used by burrowing owls, while California ground squirrels are a major prey item 

in the diet of badgers. 

3.1.2.3.2 Road and Utility Corridors 

1. The proposed road and utility corridors associated with the Boathouse Flats site cover 

approximately 90 acres. Corridors for communication, gaseous nitrogen, natural gas, and 

electric power utilities are the same as those proposed for the Cypress Ridge site, with an 

extension to the Boathouse Flats site, primarily through grassland and central coastal scrub. 

The proposed underground water line corridor passes through Venturan coastal sage scrub,. 

central coastal scrub, and grassland, paralleling an existing patrol road part of the distance. It 

crosses an area of willow- and coyote brush-dominated riparian scrubland at Oil Well Canyon. 

3.1.2.4 Vina Terrace 

3.1.2.4.1 Project Site 

1. The Vina Terrace site covers approximately 150 acres and contains four plant communities: 

(1) central coastal scrub, (2) Venturan coastal sage scrub, (3) grassland-coastal scrub, and 

(4) nonnative grassland similar to Cypress Ridge. Approximately 90 acres are occupied by 

central coastal scrub, dominated at this site by coyote brush and coastal sagebrush. Silver 

lupine (Lupinus albifrons var. douglasii) is predominant on rock outcrops, and one special 

interest plant, western dichondra, is scattered under the shrubs. With these exceptions, the 

central coastal scrub at this site appears simiiar to that on the Cypress Ridge site. 

2. Eleven acres of Venturan coastal sage scrub occur on the steeper slopes, and grassland covers 

approximately 25 acres. Both of these communities on the Vina Terrace site are similar to 

those occurring on the Cypress Ridge site. Grassland-coastal scrub occupies about 20 acres 

and is characterized by scattered shrubs, with openings dominated by annual grasses and 

herbs and, commonly, Stipa pulchra. 

V 
3. Wildlife habitats present at the Vina Terrace site include coastal scrub and introduced 

grasslands. Wildlife associated with these communities are discussed in greater detail in 

Section 3.1.2.1. Species observed at this site during the Spring 1988, inventory are listed in 

Appendix B. In general, they were composed of taxa that are widespread and abundant in the 

study region. Some of the more common were western fence lizard, western rattlesnake, 

desert cottontail, Botta's pocket gopher, Costa's hummingbird, Bewick's wren, wrentit, 

California thrasher, brown towhee, and white-crowned sparrow, as well as such wide ranging 

species as coyote, mule deer, turkey vulture, and red-tailed hawk. The most significant 

species observed on this site were three regionally rare and declining species, the Northern 

harrier, Wilson's warbler (migrant), and badger. The most important feature of the Vina 

Terrace site for wildlife is its relatively pristine condition and its remoteness from existing 

development. Aside from two seldom used roads and a buried utility line corridor, the only 

other evidence of disturbance at the Vina Terrace site was grazing cattle. Due presumably to 

the limited human access, evidence of species such as coyote, badger, and mule deer was - 

more numerous than would be expected if the area were more accessible. 

4. The grassland habitat is the most important habitat for wildlife at this site. Undisturbed 

grassland, like that found along the eastern edge of the project site, is the type required by 

grasshopper sparrows for nesting and by northern harriers and black-shouldered kites for 

foraging. This kind of habitat is now very localized in distribution and has been declining 

throughout Santa Barbara County. 

5. No threatened or endangered species of wildlife are expected to occur at the Vina Terrace 

site, although the area provides suitable foraging habitat for ferruginous hawk, a federal 

Category 2 candidate species, and for a number of regionally rare and declining species such 

as northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, merlin, prairie falcon, burrowing owl, grasshopper 

sparrow, badger, and mountain lion. All of these species could be expected to occur with 

uncommon but regular frequency at this site. They are discussed in greater detail in 

Chapter 4.0. 

3.1.2.4.2 Road and Utility Corridors 

1 The proposed access road and utility corridors associated with the Vina Terrace site cover 

approximately 105 acres, beginning at Coast Road at the Lockheed temporary storage facilities 

and extending south to the Vina Terrace site, through central coastal scrub, Venturan coastal 

sage scrub, grassland, and willow-dominated and, at Oil Well Canyon, coyote brushdominated riparian scrub. Small occurrences of ruderal vegetation, chaparral, and central 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-22 ' 
• NRO•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-23 

dune scrub were also noted. Some of the distance is along an existing dirt road that passes 

through some area of Stipa pidchra-dominated grassland. North of the Lockheed facilities, the 

electrical, gaseous nitrogen, natural gas, and communication corridors are the same as for the 

Cypress Ridge site. 

2. No federal- or state-listed threatened or endangered plants or candidate species were found 

within the utility corridors leading to the Vina Terrace site. 

3.2 CHANNEL ISLANDS TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC BIOTA 

1. The Channel Islands are included within the study region because they occur below the 

overflight area predicted for the Titan IV/Centaur. Therefore, potential impacts from sonic 

booms may occur to wildlife there. The biota of the Channel Islands is generally similar to 

that of the nearby coast of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. However, notable 

and significant biological differences do occur. Historically, the introduction of pigs, sheep, 

and cattle has been responsible for the destruction of much of the native vegetation and for the 

associated success of many introduced weeds and grasses. Recovery of the native vegetation 

is occurring where feral sheep have been removed (ES and SWRI 1988). 

2. Relict populations of species, subspecies, and races of vegetation and wildlife persist on the 

Channel Islands, in isolation from the current centers of their distribution. Other populations 

are relicts of formerly widespread species that are now extinct or nearly extinct throughout the 

rest of their former ranges. Still other forms, which developed on the islands, represent 

variants of mainland forms (ES and SWRI 1988). 

3.2.1 VEGETATION 

1. The vegetation types on the Channel Islands are generally comparable to those on the 

mainland. They include coastal strand (dune) vegetation, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, oak 

woodland, coniferous woodland (closed-cone and Torrey pines), riparian woodland, riparian 

scrub/freshwater marsh, grassland, and planted trees and ornamentals. Chaparral and 

woodland vegetation are essentially absent from San Miguel and Anacapa Islands. Several 

endemic species occur only on the islands (ES and SWRI 1988). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-24 • 

3.2.2 AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES 

1. Seventeen species of amphibians and reptiles have been recorded on the Channel Islands. 

The island night lizard (Xantu.sia riversiana) is the only endemic, as well as the only federallylisted threatened, species on the islands and is confined to San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, and 

San Clemente Islands which are outside of the study area. The northern Channel Islands 

contain a depauperate herpetofauna, composed of species that are common and widespread 

along the adjacent mainland (Savage 1967). Only three species, the Pacific slender 

salamander (Batrachoseps pacificus), the Channel Island fence lizard (a subspecies of the 

western fence lizard), and the Santa Cruz gopher snake (a subspecies of the gopher snake), 

have differentiated sufficiently to warrant subspecific recognition. 

3.2.3 LAND MAMMALS 

1. As with the other terrestrial vertebrate groups, the land mammal fauna of the Channel Islands 

is depauperate, with 16 native species and at least 19 introduced species recorded. The native 

mice, skunks, and foxes are represented by endemic subspecies or species. The Channel 

Islands gray fox (Urocyon littoralis), which occurs on the six largest of the islands, is the only 

land mammal that is endemic at the species level; it is a state-listed threatened species. 

3.2.4 LAND BIRDS 

1. The avifauna of the Channel Islands is reasonably well known, with more than 320 species 

of birds, primarily migrant or transient visitors, recorded on the northern Channel Islands and 

Santa Barbara Island (Jones et al. 1989). The land birds on the northern Channel Islands are 

unique in that they represent a portion of the species that inhabit similar habitats on the 

adjacent California mainland. Of the 39 species of land birds recorded nesting on these 

islands, ten are represented by endemics, the most distinctive being the Santa Cruz Island 

scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens insularis). 

2. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon are the only federal- or statelisted endangered or threatened species of land birds that are known to frequent the northern 

Channel Islands. The bald eagle, formerly a resident breeder on all the islands (Kiff 1980), is 

now known only to frequent the area as an uncommon to rare winter visitor (Garrett and Dunn 

1981). The American peregrine falcon formerly nested on all of the islands off the coast of 

Southern California (Kiff 1980). Today it is an uncommon to rare winter visitor to the 

Channel Islands. In 1989, the peregrine falcon nested again on San Miguel, Santa Cruz, and 

Anacapa Islands (Nixon 1989). 
`NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-25 

3.2.5 MARINE BIRDS 

1. Hunt et al. (1980) recorded that the Channel Islands off the coast of Southern California 

support breeding colonies of 11 species of marine birds composed of about 24,000 pairs. The 

largest and most important colonies occur at San Miguel Island and its two associated islets, 

Prince Island and Castle Rock, where 14,000 to 15,000 pairs of nine species nest. Sixty 

percent of the seabirds recorded nesting in the Channel Islands occur at San Miguel Island, 

and seven of the 11 species that breed in the region have their largest colonies there, these 

include Leach's (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) and ashy (Oceanodroma homochroa) storm-petrels, 

Brandt's (Phalacrocorax penicillatus), double-crested (Phalacrocorax auritus), and pelagic 

(Phalacrocorax pelagicus) cormorants, pigeon Guillemot (Cepphus columba), and Cassin's 

aulclet (Ptychoramphus aleuticus) (Hunt et al. 1980). Brown pelicans, federally- and statelisted endangered species, are known to breed regularly on west Anacapa and Santa Barbara 

Islands, and occasionally on Scorpion Rock off Santa Cruz Island (Hunt et al. 1980). 

3.3 MARINE WILDLIFE 

3.3.1 MARINE MAMMALS 

1. The region of the California coast that incorporates Point Arguello and Point Conception, the 

northern Channel Islands, and related offshore waters contains one of the world's most 

diverse marine mammal assemblages. One marine mustelid, six species of pinniped, and 25 

to 30 or more cetacean species may be found there, either as resident or transitory species 

(Woodhouse 1988b). 

2. Oceanographically, the region has long been recognized as a transition zone dominated by two 

major water masses and influenced to a degree by a third. Within this transition zone, 

biological boundaries with respect to breeding ranges may be defined for some of the 

pinnipeds, and the occurrences of certain cetaceans may be generally correlated to prevailing 

oceanographic conditions. The region is characterized by an overlap between certain pinniped 

and cetacean species that extend south from more northerly climes and north from more 

southerly climes. 

3. The region is further characterized by an eastern boundary current that is seasonally influenced 

by winds, creating coastal upwelling. As such, biological productivity is relatively high, thus 

contributing to the abundance of key prey species sought by marine mammals. Dense swarms 

of planktonic calanoid copepods occur at depth (Robison 1988), euphausiids may be locally 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

abundant (Ebeling et al. 1970; Brinton 1973; Isaacs et al. 1969), and nektonic species, 

including Pacific Hake, Mackerel, Anchovy, and several cephalopods are prevalent (Kramer 

and Ahlstrom 1968; Ahlstrom 1969). 

4. The marine mammal fauna reflects several patterns of origin and subsequent radiation (see 

Appendix C, Marine Animals). Some are denizens of the North Pacific Rim, others represent 

species populations that are known only from the northern hemisphere, some appear to be 

northward extensions of related species known only from the southern hemisphere, and others 

represent Pacific stocks of more cosmopolitan species (see Appendix C.2, Marine Mammals 

within Five Nautical Miles of Point Arguello). A few are known only from the north Pacific 

Ocean. 

3.3.1.1 Marine Mustelid 

1. The only true marine mustelid, the sea otter (Enhydra lutris), was known historically from the 

northern coast of Hokkaido, Japan, to Baja, California (Kenyon 1969; Ogden 1941; 

Scammon 1874). In California, sea otters currently range from Coho Anchorage (34' 27'N, 

120' 27'W) to Point Arlo Nuevo (37' 07'N, 122' 20'W). Translocation efforts undertaken in 

1987 have effectively extended the contemporary range of the sea otter to one of the southern 

Channel Islands, San Nicolas (USFWS 1987). Some of the translocated otters have 

reappeared along the central California coast, and presumably have moved past the Point 

Arguello area. 

2. Regular sightings of sea otters have been recorded from Santa Barbara northward by CDFG 

and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History (SBMNH). For the past seven years, the 

museum's records indicate an average of three to four otters per year seen along the coast from 

Santa Barbara to Cojo Anchorage. The breeding range of California sea otters, as judged by 

sightings of mother-pup pairs, incorporates the coast from Sandhill Bluff (37' 01'N, 122' 

IOW) just north of Santa Cruz, California, to Shell Beach (35' 10'N, 120' 40W), just north 

of Pismo Beach, California. 

3.3.1.2 Pin nipeds 

Introduction 

1. Within the marine region of the project area, there are several locales of importance to marine 

mammals. The shoreline between Point Conception and Point Arguello supports several haul 

out sites for harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardsi) and, to a lesser extent, California sea lions 

(Zalophus californianus californianus). Northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) 

3-26 
.NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

3-27 

occasionally may haul out along this section of coast, as may northern fur seals (Callorhinus 

ursinus). Harbor seals are the only pinnipeds to use these hauling grounds as rookeries. 

Harbor seal rookery use of these areas occurs during the spring. 

2. The 1986 harbor seal census from 0.8 mile east of Point Conception to Point Arguello 

produced a count of 1,012 animals (Hanan et al. 1987). The pocket beach immediately north 

of the mouth of Oil Well Canyon (about 0.5 mile south of Rocky Point) is an important 

hauling ground and rookery for the area. Additional haul out sites occur towards Rocky Point 

and, to the south, the rocks immediately seaward of the Boathouse breakwater are used as 

haul outs. The 1986 census produced counts totaling 500 seals for these sites (Hanan et al. 

1987). 

3. Nearshore waters in the vicinity (0 to 5 miles) of the project area are used by sea otters, harbor 

seals, California sea lions, and probably occasionally by northern fur seals and elephant seals. 

Because harbor seals tend to occur predominantly nearshore, these waters are probably used 

extensively by them as foraging grounds. From the point of view of prey availability, the area 

appears suitable relative to attracting and perhaps sustaining modest numbers of sea otters. 

4. Any of the migratory pinniped species can be expected to pass through the oceanic region 

offshore of the project area. Hence, California sea lion males will pass through during their 

fall and spring migrations. Further offshore, migratory northern fur seals will move through 

the region in the winter during their non-breeding season. 

5. Offshore, San Miguel Island supports an extensive rookery for California sea lions, northern 

elephant seals, and northern fur seals with a total pinniped population of over 30,000 in the 

summer, and 25,000 in the winter and spring (UC Santa Cruz 1983). Harbor seals also pup 

and breed on the island. In the past, the island was utilized by Guadalupe fur seals 

(Arctocephalus townsendi) and Steller sea lions (Eurnetopias Abaft's). The waters west and 

north of San Miguel appear to be important foraging areas for northern fur seals and California 

sea lions that use the island (Antonelis et al. 1987). 

Ranges and Origins 

1. The six pinniped species may be grouped according to their ranges and presumed origins. 

The northern fur seal and northern or Steller's sea lion are two that range from the north, with 

a southern breeding limit at San Miguel Island. Until 1977, Steller sea lions maintained a 

small rookery at San Miguel (Antonelis and Fiscus 1980). More recently, their southernmost 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-3V 

3.3.2 MA RINE TURTLES 

1. Four species of sea turtle are known to occur in waters offshore of Southern and Central 

California (see Table 4.1, Special Interest Species Known or Expected to Occur Within Study 

Region). The leatherback (Deremochelys coriacea), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), green 

(Chelonia mydas), and Pacific ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea turtles all nest on tropical to 

subtropical shores. However, while at sea, certain numbers make their way into eastern north 

Pacific temperate waters, perhaps as a function of ocean currents. All four species could 

occur in the project area, but would likely be beyond their normal range. 

2. The SBMNH records for leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles are summarized in Table 

C.3., Recorded Marine Turtle Sightings, Central California. They include a leatherback 

sighted alive in June 1985, about two miles offshore of Naples (about 35 miles south and east 

of the project area). Other records include six beach-cast leatherbacks that came ashore 

between 1977 and 1988 from Ventura County to Monterey County, including one specimen 

from the northern Channel Islands. Two loggerheads have been recorded as taken incidentally 

by fishing operations. The third loggerhead is a beach-cast, immature specimen from Jalama 

County Beach, about six miles south of the project area. 

3.3.3 MARINE BIRDS 

1. The marine bird fauna of the waters offshore of VAFB and the northern Channel Islands is 

both large and complex. Many of the 101 species of seabirds recorded for California (Jones 

et al. 1985; Binford 1983) could occur at one time or another within the region. Table B.4 

(Birds Observed or Expected to Occur Within the Study Region and Project Area) contains a 

listing of the species which would be expected to occur with some regularity in the project 

area. Of those listed, as many as 30 could be moderately common during certain seasons of 

the year. The abundance and diversity of the marine avifauna in the study region is due in part 

to the presence of the Channel Islands, to the Santa Barbara Channel's position along the 

Pacific Flyway, and to the occurrence of a boundary zone between warm southern and cold 

northern/offshore water masses within the study region. 

2. The waters in the study region represent one of the most important seabird use areas in 

California (Briggs et al. 1981, 1983). Average seabird densities over the shelf waters (0 to 

199 meters) of the Santa Maria Basin were found to range from 20 to 100 birds per square 

kilometer, while densities in the Santa Barbara Channel region ranged from 28 to 67 birds per 

square kilometer (Briggs et al. 1981). This compares to a density of 7 to 38 birds per square 

kilometer for the state (Briggs et al. 1983). Within the study region, seabirds tend to be most 
NRC) APPROVED FOR RELEASE 3-31 

1 JUNE 2015 

abundant in fall and least abundant in spring with species diversity highest in winter and 

lowest in summer. The seabird fauna of the study region tends to be dominated by nonbreeding (visiting) species (Briggs et al. 1983). 

3. The pelagic or open ocean waters off the coast of Central and Southern California can be 

divided into three distinct zones based primarily on water depth: (1) the continental shelf (0 to 

199 meters), (2) the continental slope (200 to 1,999 meters), and (3) offshore (greater than 

2,000 meters). Each of these zones tends to have its own representative avifauna. Only the 

continental shelf will be dealt with in this review; the other two zones are open ocean habitats 

which are outside of the study area. 

4. The continental shelf tends to be the most biologically productive of the three zones and thus 

the most important to seabirds, with 10 to 30 species known to frequent these waters. The 

continental shelf is quite broad within the study region, extending to 20 kilometers off Point 

Conception. Seabird numbers are highest over the shelf during the summer, with sooty 

sheanvaters (Puffinus griseus) predominating, and lowest during the winter (Briggs et al. 

1983). Large numbers of arctic loons (Gavia arctica), sooty shearwaters, red (Phalaropus 

fulicaria) and red-necked (Phalaropus lobatus) phalaropes, and Bonaparte's gulls (Carus 

philadelphia) pass across the shelf waters during their annual spring and fall migrations, and 

the area is especially important as a feeding area for seabirds during the fall. Cassin's auklet, 

common murre (Uria aalge), and western gull (Larus occidentalis) are the most abundant 

seabirds during the winter. 

5. Nearshore waters (within one kilometer of shore) tend to be used as loafing and foraging areas 

by loons, grebes, cormorants, scoters, phalaropes, gulls, terns, and some alcids during all 

seasons of the year. Peak numbers occur during the spring and summer. During the fall 

(October to mid-December) and spring (March to May) migration periods, a large percentage 

of the populations of Icons, brans, scoters, gulls, and terns that winter south of Point 

Conception pass through nearshore waters adjacent to the project area, many within one mile 

of the shoreline (Lehman, 1982). It has been estimated that as many as 100,000 Icons, 

40,000 to 50,000 scoters, and 40,000 brans frequent nearshore waters adjacent to the project 

area during migration. Gulls, cormorants, and brown pelicans predominate nearshore waters 

of the study region during the summer and fall, with cormorants most abundant in the winter, 

and gulls and western grebes most abundant in the spring. During the winter, larger flocks of 

gulls and terns can be found on beaches in the study region. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-i2 

6. Rocky shorelines, which include rocky cliffs, offshore rocks and islets, and rocky intertidal 

areas, are used for roosting and nesting by pelicans, cormorants, gulls, and terns, and for 

foraging by a variety of shorebirds such as black oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani), 

wandering tattler (Heteroscelus incanus), black (Arenaria melanocephala) and ruddy (Arenaria 

interpres) turn stones, willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus), and surfbird (Aphriza virgata). 

Significant rocky shoreline habitat occurs around the northern Channel Islands and in a 

somewhat disjunct form on the mainland in the Point Conception and Rocky Point to Point 

Pedernales areas. Cormorants, brown pelicans, and a variety of gulls are known to utilize the 

breakwater at the Boathouse for roosting during the fall and winter (Chambers Group, Inc. 

1980). Sowls et al. (1980) documented that 1,084 pairs of seabirds nested at four sites 

between Point Conception and Point Arguello. The principal locations and species are 

Point Pedernales and Destroyer Rock (pigeon guillemot), Point Arguello (pelagic cormorant, 

black oystercatcher, western gull, pigeon guillemot, and rhinoceros auklet [Cerorhinca 

monoceratal), Rocky Point (black oystercatcher, and pigeon guillemot), and Point Conception 

(pelagic cormorant and pigeon guillemot). 

7. Sandy beach habitat is widespread along the south coast of Santa Barbara County, on the 

northern Channel Islands, and in the Point Conception to Point Arguello area, but has been 

disturbed by human use. Moderately sized coastal dunes occur on North VAFB from Shuman 

Creek, south to the mouth of the Santa Ynez River. Sizeable numbers of shorebirds, such as 

black-bellied plover (Pluvialis squatarola), snowy plover (Charadrias alexandrinus), willet, 

whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), long-billed curlew, marbled godwit (Limosa fedoa), and 

sanderling (Calidris alba), along with a number of species of gulls and terns are known to 

frequent sandy beaches in the study region for foraging and roosting (Lehman 1982). Water 

pipit, yellow-rumped warbler, black tumstone, and short- (Limnodromus griseus) and longbilled (Limnodromus scolopaceus) dowitchers are known to forage along the upper portions 

of beaches where rotting kelp attracts invertebrate prey. The only species known to breed in 

sandy beach and backdune habitats in the region include horned lark, Brewer's blackbird, and 

house finch (Lehman 1982). 

8. In addition, the federal- and state-listed endangered least tern, and the federal Category 2 

candidate snowy plover are known to utilize this habitat exclusively for nesting. Least terns 

are known to nest near the mouth of the Santa Maria River, and on VAFB at the mouth of the 

Santa Ynez River, Purisima Point, and San Antonio Creek (USAF 1987a). Snowy plovers 

are known to nest on San Nicolas, Santa Rosa, and San Miguel Islands, and on VAFB near 
. NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 3-33 

the mouth of the Santa Ynez River and on the Purisima Point Beach (Page and Stenzel 1981). 

Known nesting locations for least terns and snowy plovers within the project region are 

shown in Figure 3.6 (Nesting Locations of California Least Tern and Western Snowy 

Plover). 

9. Because of its proximity to the coast, the marine bird population of the project area reflects the 

general marine bird population which occurs within the larger region (see Section 3.2.5), with 

the number of overflying birds decreasing with distance from the ocean. Due to its nearshore 

location, more marine birds would be expected at the Boathouse Flats site than at the Cypress 

Ridge, SLC-6, or Vina Terrace sites. The fewest marine birds would be expected at the Vina 

Terrace site. The three inland sites would be expected to be overflown, while the shoreline at 

the Boathouse Flats site could experience some nesting activity. The sandy beaches in the 

vicinity of the Boathouse Flats site are potential habitat for shorebirds such as black-bellied 

plover, snowy plover, willet, whimbrel, long-billed curlew, marbled godwit, and sanderling, 

as well as a number of species of gulls and terns. 

j 
A 

ENE 

SANTA 

MARIA 

POINT 

SAL 

135d 

VANDENBERG 

RCUTT 

I 1 

VANDENBERG 

AIR 

FORCE 

BASE 

AREA SHOWN 

i s 

SANTA 

`NORT.1),,,s3N 

VAFB ANTONIO 

• 

PURISIMA 

POINT AIR 

01 

OCEAN BEACH 

COUNTY PARK 

VANDENBERG 

VILLAGE 

246 - YtiEZ 

FORCE 

SOUTH 

VAFB 

LOMPOC 

K 

BASEM 

.--- .246 

/ POINT r.f? 

PEDERNALES 

JALAMA BEACH 

COUNTY PARK 

POINT 

CONCEPTION 

NO SCALE 

CREEK 

POINT 

ARGUELLO 

PACIFIC OCEAN 

CHANNEL ISLANDS 

FIGURE 3.6 

NESTING LOCATIONS 

NESTING LOCATIONS 

OF CALIFORNIA LEAST TERN 

AND WESTERN SNOWY PLOVEP 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

•••• •7- ER 

.7 7-'=1N 

0 1 2 3 4 SMILES 

SOURCES: USAF 1967a: 

PAGE AND STENZEL 1981. ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 
• *NRO• APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-1 

4.0 SPECIAL INTEREST SPECIES 

1. This chapter addresses plant and animal species of special interest that are known to occur 

within the study region and which are either known to occur or may occur specifically within 

the project area. A species is considered to be of "Special Interest" if it is: (1) federally- or 

state-listed as threatened or endangered, (2) a candidate to be federally- or state-listed, or 

(3) considered to be regionally rare and/or declining. Agencies with responsibility and/or 

authority for the species addressed in this document include the USFWS, the NMFS, the 

CDFG and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 

2. There are no threatened or endangered species of plants, amphibians, reptiles, or land 

mammals known or expected to occur within the study region or project area. There are, 

however, one species of fresh-water fish, five bird species, four marine amphibians, seven 

cetaceans, one pinniped, and one mustelid which are federally- or state-listed as endangered. 

There also are a number of declining species of plants and animals that occur in Santa Barbara 

County which presently have no specific legislative protection. Some of these are Category 2 

candidates for federal listing as threatened or endangered. Others are of special concern to the 

CDFG (Remsen 1978; Williams 1986), on the National Audubon Society's "Blue List" (Tate 

1986), CNPS, or considered by local biologists to be regionally rare and/or declining. Plant 

and wildlife species that are threatened, endangered, or candidates for federal listing are 

discussed in Section 4.1. Those considered sensitive or regionally rare and/or declining are 

discussed in Section 4.2. The status of all species known or expected to occur within the 

study region is shown in Table 4.1 (Special Interest Species Known or Expected to Occur 

Within Study Region). 

4.1 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES 

1. Species that are federally-listed as threatened or endangered are protected under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Federal Register 41 (110):22915-22922. June 7, 1976), as 

amended (P.L. 94-325, P.L. 94-359, P.L. 95-212, P.L. 95-632, P.L. 96-159, P.L. 97-304). 

Under this legislation, a species is considered endangered if it is "... in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of its range...," and threatened if it is "likely to become 

an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range." 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE TABLE 4.1 

1 JUNE 2015 SPECIAL INTEREST SPECIES 

KNOWN OR EXPECTED TO OCCUR WITHIN STUDY REGION 

4-2 I 

SPECIES FADER AL 

STATUS in 

STATE AND _ 

OTHER STATUS "I 

111REATFNED ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES 

ififif ififfifififf 5fi fiiiif fffi 4VFfifFfF fgYi FITHMiliff i' ii ft 39119' EiiiIIIIII nil 11111111IIIII 1 11 I. ...-. all 

f !!i 

9 

42 3333p 

MI 

M

U

M" Rif fliffilifffil 222 2 

MB 

Mill/011MP p fi 

litr

um 

"11

1

0

111111 

1141i 111101 iliff I 1 

r Ear 

PLANTS 

Corp enocaritUa 

Curly-leaned abonartleUa 

Blot-Ooserad bg oort 

Shag but =mania 

Soft-!oval Winn paintbrush 

TERRESTRIAL/AQUATIC ANIMALS 

Tidewater Geby 

Llionnorad thne-spec oticklebsck 

AMPHIBIANS 

California estl-busd bog 

Sotonvonsm peed mak 

MAMMAL 

Toonsoolfs imam birored bat 

BEDS 

California hours pelican 

South.= bald eagle 

America* swear= fakoo 

California least um 

Lean Bell's vino 

Western rellow-biDul cuckoo 

Califorois block rail 

Elegant tarn 

Whirr-baud ibis 

Ferruginous Ratak 

We snowy planer 

Lowe:mike! as 

Tricolevad blackbird 

MARNE AMPHIBIANS 

Lsatter-bock ma node 

Loggerhead sea turtle 

Green sea turtle 

Pacific Ridley lea none 

MARLNE MAMM ALS 

Pacific ries whale 

Gray whale 

Blue rink 

Fit urban 

Se; 'abide 

Humpback whale 

Spam whale 

Guadalupe fur seal 

California its ono 

Northam dr mal 

PROTECTED OR REGIONAL RARE AND DECUNENG SPECIE., 

MARNE MAMMALS 

California sea lion 

Noonan elephant seal 

Harbor seal 

Northern (Smiler) sea bon 

PLAINTS 

Bildletiock 

Purisinia nismanita 

Sams Barton Ceariothua 

Western dichroncin 

Saints dairy 

large-lasted snack.= 

TERRESTRIAL/AQUATIC ANIMALS 

Biala 

Mountain Mc 

Monarch bonerfly 

BEDS 

Beck-shouldesed kit 

Noreen barrier 

Genet's book 

Psis ideas 

Borrowing end 

Long-crud owl 

Short-eased or) 

Willow flycatcher 

Purple martin 

Tme ovaLlow 

Siminsoca ninon 

Warbling vireo 

'moo warbler 

iidsccia warbler 

Tellow-tmasusil chat 

Blue grosbeak 

Grasabopper sparrow 

NOTES. (1) CI- Federal Category 1 rao,,,ce (ruffle-um c.Itc-malion Ca sts to ninon Mimi as threatened or codri.gcred;. 

C2 = Federal Category 2 Candmie (possibly appropriale for lama, but =forming= is inauCTicient it that ttne)_ 

California Native Plant Sociery 

18 • Plants of highest pionty, rev and endangered to California and eisewbem 2 a Rare and endangered rin but more common elsewhere 

3 L Pleats about Much more information is needed 

4 Plants of lambed dsmbutuoann California to Laid: list) 

Appends I s plants consider:el for Lista I teiro..v. 4 bin non tscluded 

latenuu oral Union of the Constr. aLion of Nature and !ea rival Resources (Nagano and Lane 1985). 

3/7/93 (17.27111) 
NRO•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-3 

2. As indicated in Table 4.1, within the study region, there are five federally-designated 

endangered species of birds (California brown pelican, southern bald eagle, American 

peregrine falcon, California least tern, and least Bell's vireo), one endangered and three 

threatened species of marine amphibians (respectively, the leatherback [endangered] and 

the loggerhead, green, and Pacific Ridley [threatened] sea tunics), one endangered fish 

(unarmored threespine stickleback), and seven endangered and two threatened marine 

mammals (respectively, the Pacific right, gray, blue, fin, sei, humpback, sperm whales 

[endangered] and Guadalupe fur seal and California sea otter [threatened]). 

3. The candidate species discussed herein are being considered for possible addition to the list of 

federally-listed threatened and endangered wildlife (Federal Register 50 [181]:37958-37967 

September 18, 1985). Candidate species are classified as either Category 1 ("substantial 

information on hand to support the biological appropriateness of proposing to list as 

endangered or threatened") or Category 2 (USFWS has sufficient information to indicate the 

probable appropriateness for listing as threatened or endangered, but for which conclusive 

data on biological vulnerability and threat are not currently available to support listing). There 

are five Category 2 species of plants and 14 Category 2 species of animals under review for 

federal listing as threatened or endangered th it could occur within the study region. Thus, 

more detailed information for each species is included in the following sections. 

4.1.1 PLANT SPECIES 

1 This section presents information on the appearance, distribution, and habitat affinities of the 

federal Category 2 candidates crisp monardella, curly-leaved monardella, black-flowered 

figwort, shagbark manzanita, and soft-leaved Indian paintbrush. There are no known 

federally listed threatened or endangered plant species on VAFB. 

4.1.1.1 Crisp Monardella 

1. Crisp monardella (Monardella ^rispa) is a federal Category 2 candidate and is on CNPS List 

1B (plants rare and endangered in California and elsewhere). 

2. According to widely used identification manuals, crisp monardella (Hoover 1970; Munz and 

Keck 1959), is a perennial herb in the mint family, with fragrant foliage, large heads of purple 

flowers, and stems densely covered with short, white hairs. It is found in sparsely vegetated 

dunes, behind foredunes, and on the edges of blowouts at Point Sal and Mussel Rock, at the 

Nipomo Dunes, Oso Flaco Lake, and in the Dune Lakes area of San Luis Obispo County 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-4 

1 JUNE 2015 

(liowald et al. 1985). There is no information on the size of the total population, although 

Howald et al. (1985) suggest there are "certainly hundreds and perhaps thousands" of 

individuals. 

3. There is some confusion concerning the nomenclature of crisp monardella and curly-leaved 

monardella (Monardella undulata var. frutescens). Smith (1983) examined both types of 

specimens and plants from VAFB and areas to the north. He suggested that both Monardella 

crispa and M. undulata var. frutescens may be two geographical species or subspecies of M. 

crispa. However, current names are used in this report. The locations of crisp monardella 

within the study region are shown in Figure 3.4. 

4.1.1.2 Curly-leaved Monardella 

1. Curly-leaved monardella (Monardella undulata var. frutescens) is a federal Category 2 

candidate and is on CNPS List 1B. 

2. Curly-leaved monardella differs from crisp monardella in having smaller flower heads and 

bracts, narrower leaves, and fewer hairs on the stems. The primary flowering period is from 

May to July. It is known from the Cypress Ridge area to near Oceano in San Luis Obispo 

County (Smith 1976; Smith 1983). This plant requires open, sandy habitat to become 

established and, therefore, is found primarily in partially-stabilized dunes and other disturbed, 

sandy areas_ However, it cannot withstand persistent disturbance, such as from off-road 

vehicle use. 

3. As shown in Figure 3.4, curly-leaved monardella occurs on VAFB in backdunes and some 

disturbed areas, primarily along the coast, including the dunes at Casmalia Beach, near 

Purisima Point, immediately to the north of Surf, and from just south of Surf to Honda 

Canyon (Smith 1983; CDFG 1988; Nichols 1988). It also occurs on the San Antonio Terrace 

dune system, on Burton Mesa, and at Cypress Ridge in disturbed central coastal scrub and 

along sandy roadsides. There are no estimates of the total population size, although Smith 

(1983) thought the plant was moderately abundant in some areas. In a study of the San 

Antonio Terrace backdunes, east of the railroad tracks, an estimate was made of roughly 

950,000 individuals (HDR 1980). A population of more than 200 individuals was noted near 

SLC-4 (USAF 1987a). Counts taken during the 1988 field inventory of "mature" individuals 

in populations south of Honda Canyon yielded a total of approximately 1,600 to 1,800 plants 

greater than six inches in height (see Figure 3.5). Many more seedlings were observed 

between populations, ranging from about one to ten times the number of mature individuals. 
NRQ.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-5 

1 JUNE 2015 

4. The individuals on and near the Cypress Ridge launch complex site probably represent the 

southern limit of the range of curly-leaved monardella; the CDFG (CNDDB) and local herbaria 

have no record of it occurring south or east of Cypress Ridge. 

5. The degradation and destruction of habitat at Surf, San Antonio Terrace, and the Guadalupe 

and Pismo Dunes have resulted in the loss of an unknown portion of the total population of 

curly-leaved monardella (Howald et al. 1985). At least 12,000 individuals were destroyed 

on San Antonio Terrace during construction of facilities related to testing of the MX missile 

(IIDR 1980), and an estimated 14,000 more will be destroyed by construction of facilities 

related to the Peacekeeper in the Rail Garrison/Small ICBM flight test program (USAF 

1987b). 

4.1.1.3 Black-flowered Figwort 

1. Black-flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrara) is a federal Category 2 candidate and is on CNPS 

List 3 as a plant about which more information is needed. 

2. Black-flowered figwort is a tall, perennial herb with small, dark maroon flowers that bloom 

from April to June. It is endemic to coastal San Luis Obispo Courty and northern Santa 

Barbara County, although its exact range is in question because it apparently hybridizes 

extensively with California figwort. Smith (1983) studied Scrophularia on VAFB in detail 

and found that most populations showed evidence of hybridization. He also found that 

S. atrata occurs on all types of soils, not just those derived from diatomaceous shale, as 

previously suggested by Munz and Keck (1959). Small populations with flower 

characteristics close to black-flowered figwort were found in the study area in Southern 

Canyon, east of SLC-6, and along Coast Road, north of the road to Point Arguello. 

3. Most Scrophularia plants found during the 1988 field inventory were typical of California 

figwort, or appeared to be hybrids. 

4.1.1.4 Shagbark Manzanita 

1. Shagbark manzanita (Arctostaphylos rudis) is a federal Category 2 candidate and will probably 

be elevated from CNPS List 4 to List 1B in the next CNPS Inventory (Howald 1988). 

2. Shagbark manzanita is a shrub that grows to five feet tall with rough, shredding bark and 

clusters of small white flowers that appear from November to February (Munz and Keck 

1959). Smith (1976) states that it is found in sandy soil ranging from Nipomo Mesa to 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-6 

1 JUNE 2015 

Corralillos Canyon, Purisima Hills, Burton Mesa, and south to Lompoc Canyon. It is locally 

dominant in central maritime chaparral (Davis et al. 1988). Population estimates are not 

available. The CDFG Endangered Plant project is currently soliciting information on its range 

and population size (Howald 1988). Beauchamp and Oberbauer (1977) found Arctostaphylos 

rudis at the SLC-6 site. It was not found in the study region during the 1988 field inventory. 

Known populations closest to the Cypress Ridge launch complex site are around Lompoc 

Canyon (Smith 1976). 

4.1.1.5 soft-leaved Indian paintbrush 

1. Soft-leaved Indian paintbrush (Castilleja mollis) is a federal Category 2 candidate and is 

included in CNPS List 1B. 

2. Soft-leaved Indian paintbrush is a low, multi-stemmed perennial herb with yellow to red 

flower bracts and soft, branched hairs on the stems. It blooms from April to August and 

typically grows in partly-stabilized to stabilized dunes; primarily foredune vegetation and 

central dune scrub. It is endemic to at least Santa Rosa Island; the taxonomic status of the 

mainland plants of this species is uncertain. The mainland distribution of what has been called 

Castilleja moths includes Pismo Beach and Guadalupe Dunes to Oceano in San Luis Obispo 

County, and east of Casmalia, Surf, Point Arguello, and Point Conception in Santa Barbara 

County (Smith 1976). It shows much variation over this range (Howald et al. 1985) and 

appears to hybridize with C. affinis var. contentiosa in some areas. However, the population 

at the base of Cypress Ridge is the most variable on VAFB and is believed to be a hybrid 

swarm and C. affinis. Heckard (1988), an authority on the genus, believes that all mainland 

plants are C. affinis. 

3. There is insufficient information to estimate the size of the mainland population of the plant 

referred to as C. mo/lis. Smith (1983) suggested there were "thousands of plants" on VAFB; 

one study yielded an estimate of 2,140 individuals on the backdunes of San Antonio Terrace 

alone (HDR 1980). The plants on the Cypress Ridge site and in the rest of the study region 

do not have characteristics typical of C. monis and appear to be C. crffinis. 

4.1.2 TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ANIMAL SPECIES 

4.1.2.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback 

1. This species (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) is listed as endangered by the 

USFWS(1985b) and CDFG (1986). 
I 

NRQ•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 1 JUNE 2015 4-7 

2. In the past, the species was widely distributed throughout Southern California, being found 

in the Santa Clara, Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana Rivers, and at some locations 

in Santa Barbara County (Sasaki et al. 1977; Irwin and Soltz 1982). Today, this species only 

occurs in the headwaters of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries in Los Angeles County, in 

San Antonio and Shuman Creeks on North VAFB and in Honda Creek on South VAFB. It 

can be found throughout most perennially flowing sections of San Antonio Creek, including a 

section near Los Alamos (Howald et al. 1985). In San Antonio Creek, unarmored threespine 

sticklebacks occur with Arroyo chub, prickly sculpin, tidewater goby, carp, and mosquitofish 

(Irwin and Soltz 1982; Howald et al. 1985). 

3. According to Baskin and Bell (1976), unarmored threespine sticklebacks prefer clear flowing 

freshwater in densely vegetated small stream pools or backwaters, and they can tolerate a wide 

range of temperatures and opportunistically accept a wide variety of foods (Baskin 1974; 

1975). This subspecies spawns throughout most of the year, with highest recruitment 

occurring between May and September. Sticklebacks commonly forage on aquatic 

invertebrates such as amphipods, ostracods, snails, and a variety of insects (Irwin and 

Soltz 1982). 

4. Much of the preferred habitat for this subspecies has been destroyed as a result of urban and 

agricultural developments. Primary threats to habitats in Southern California include 

increasing urban development and agricultural expansion which result in the degradation of 

water quality via increased sediment, nutrient, or toxic chemical inputs (Sasaki et al. 1977; 

Irwin and Soltz 1982; Howald et al. 1985). Channelization of streams may increase the 

frequency and intensity of floods and may eliminate pools which are prime stickleback 

habitats. Expanded ground water pumping may decrease water tables and surface water flows 

in San Antonio Creek. 

5. Also, the introduction of exotic fish, turtle, or amphibian species could result in the decline of 

stickleback populations through predation or competition. The morphological uniqueness of 

stickleback populations could be lost through introgression if other populations of sticklebacks 

with higher plate counts were introduced. Oil spills reaching the water could have direct 

deleterious consequences, as could increased sediment inputs resulting from overgrazing. 

Finally, beavers introduced into San Antonio Creek by the CDFG in the 1940s could be 

affecting stickleback populations by altering or stopping the flow of water (Dial 1980). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

6. In efforts to increase its range and thus reduce its vulnerability to extirpation, the CDFG, with 

the approval of the Stickleback Recovery Team, recently introduced unarmored threespine 

sticklebacks from San Antonio Creek into Shuman and Honda Creeks on VAFB (Howald 

et al. 1985). Also, a small number of sticklebacks were inadvertently introduced into 

El Rancho Pond on VAFB (Coulombe and Mahrdt 1976). 

4.1.2.2 Island Night Lizard 

1. The island lizard is the only federally-listed threatened reptile species which inhabits the Santa 

Barbara Channel Islands. However, this species is confined to three of the southern Channel 

Islands (San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, San Clemente). The study region for this assessment 

incorporates only the northern Channel Islands of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and 

Anacapa. Therefore, since the island night lizard inhabits areas outside the study region, it 

will not be addressed further (Collins 1988b). 

4.1.2.3 California Red-legged Frog 

1. This species is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 1985b) and is a CDFG 

"Species of Special Concern" (CDFG 1986). 

Red-legged frogs have declined significantly during the past century throughout Southern 

California due to degradation and loss of critical riparian and freshwater habitat, predation 

from introduced freshwater fish, and competition from introduced bullfrogs (Rana 

catesbeiana) (Hayes and Jennings 1986; Jennings and Hayes 1985). In the past they were 

common along most of the creeks in Southern California. Their preferred habitat is freshwater 

ponds and pools associated with streams and coastal estuaries (Sweet, 1988). In Santa 

Barbara Coiinty, red-legged frogs are found to be intimately associated with plunge pools that 

are found in thick growths of emergent aquatic vegetation, especially arroyo willow and 

cattails (Hayes 1988; Sweet 1988). 

3. In the past, this species could be found along the lengths of most of the creeks and rivers in 

northern Santa Barbara County. However, degradation and loss of suitable freshwater 

riparian habitats and their associated watersheds have resulted in the loss of many local 

populations. Red-legged frogs have been found at Bark Slough on San Antonio Creek (Dial 

1980), in Honda Creek on South VAFB (Coulombe and Cooper 1976), off Santa Rosa Road 

east of Highway 1, in Salsipuedes Creek, in the Santa Ynez River at the 13th Street Bridge, 

F 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-9 

in San Miguelito Canyon south of Lompoc, off Jalama Road, in ponds near the junction of 

Yridisis and Llanito Creeks along Highway 1, and at the Campbell Road vernal ponds along 

Highway 246 east of Lompoc (Howald et al. 1985; 1986; Collins 1988a; 1988b; Sweet 

1988). 

4. There are no records of red-legged frogs from within the proposed project area. Further, the 

riparian habitats at Red Roof, Spring, Oil, Wells and Agua Viva Canyons are not suitable for 

sustaining a red-legged frog population. Red-legged frog colonies nearest the project area 

occur in Honda and Jalama Creeks. 

4.1.2.4 Arroyo Toad 

1. This species (Bufo microscaphus cahfornicus) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing and 

is a CDFG "Species of Special Concern" (CDFG 1986). 

2. Its range in California is from San Luis Obispo County southward into northwestern Baja 

California (Stebbins 1985). Its preferred habitat includes dry arroyos and sandy washes 

where streams are usually intermittent (Stebbins 1954; 1985). In Southern California, arroyo 

toads frequent sandy washes and riverbanks which are bordered by willows, cottonwoods, 

sycamores, or coast live oaks (Stebbins 1954). Its preferred breeding habitat is long, shallow 

pools with gravel beds which are situated adjacent to elevated sandy terraces with dense 

growths of willows and cottonwoods (Sweet 1988). 

3. In Santa Barbara County, the arroyo toad has only been found at Mormon Camp along the 

Sisquoc River, at Mono Creek, and in the upper reaches of the Santa Ynez River east of 

Gibraltar Reservoir (Sweet 1988; Collins 1988a). Factors limiting its distribution in Santa 

Barbara County are not readily apparent as many canyons, especially the Santa Ynez River 

east of Lake Cachuma, have habitats that are apparently suitable for the arroyo toad. 

4. This species has not been recorded on VAFB and is not expected to occur within the project 

area. 

4.1.2.5 South-western Pond Turtle 

1. This species is classified as a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 1985b) and is 

a CDFG "Species of Special Concern" (CDFG 1986). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-10 

1 JUNE 2015 

2. Southwestern pond turtles occur throughout Southern California, including parts of the 

Mojave Desert (Stebbins 1985). Their preferred habitat includes unpolluted rivers, streams, 

reservoirs, ponds, marshes, canals, and floodplain backwaters where water is present yearround (Stebbins 1985). The species frequents quiet water and generally selects deeper pools 

which are lined with aquatic vegetation, such as cattails (Sweet 1988). 

The southwestern pond turtle is widespread in Santa Barbara County, although populations 

have shown a gradual decline along much of the south coast during the past century as a result 

of alterations to many south coast watersheds and over-collecting for the pet trade (Sweet 

1988). Pond and deep pool habitats, essential for the survival of this species, have been 

eliminated from many streams in Santa Barbara County. Although this species does not 

appear to be in danger of extinction in areas north of the Santa Clara River in Ventura County, 

it is subject to local perturbations where there are high levels of human disturbance (Sweet 

1988). 

4. Within the study region, southwestern pond turtles have been recorded at the Campbell Road 

vernal ponds, the Santa Ynez River between Buellton and its mouth, San Antonio Creek at 

Barka Slough, Gaviota Creek, Jalama Creek, and at 12 sites on the Hollister and Bixby 

Ranches (Howald et al. 1986; Collins 1988b; Stoner 1988; Dial 1980). Based on available 

information, this species does not appear to be in danger of extirpation in northern Santa 

Barbara County. However, it is subject to local extinctions as a result of agricultural and 

stock pond developments and ground water pumping. 

5. This species has not been observed nor is it expected to occur within the project area. The 

nearest suitable habitat for southwestern pond turtles occurs in Honda Creek on South VAFB 

and in Jalama Creek south of VAFB. Southwestern pond turtles in Jalama Creek are not 

expected to be impacted by construction or operation of the proposed project. 

4.1.2.6 Tidewater Goby 

1. The tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing 

(USFWS 1985b) and is a CDFG "Special Status Species" (CDFG 1986). 

2. This species is confined to fresh or brackish water coastal lagoons from San Diego County 

north to Del None County (Miller and Lea 1972; Swift et al. 1989). Although the tidewater 

goby can breed throughout the year in Southern California, spawning generally occurs from 

late April to July (Irwin and Soltz 1984; Swift 1984). Formerly, tidewater gobys inhabited 
, . NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-11 

1 JUNE 2015 

coastal lagoons from the Smith River in Del Norte County to Agua Hedionda Lagoon in San 

Diego County (Lea et al. 1980). Today its distribution extends south only to San Onofre 

Creek in northern San Diego County. As of 1984 there were only 55 populations of this 

species remaining in the state of California, having disappeared from 74 percent of the coastal 

lagoons it once inhabited between Morro Bay and San Diego (Swift 1984). Human activities 

are thought to have resulted in the elimination of many goby populations in Southern 

California (Swift 1984; Irwin and Soltz 1984; Howald et al. 1985). 

3. In the study region, the tidewater goby inhabits coastal lagoons at the mouths of intermittent 

and perennial streams. Most lagoons are characterized by sand bars which separate them from 

the ocean for most of the year. Tidewater gobys have been collected in most of the coastal 

streams which end in well-defined lagoons, including Gaviota Creek, Jalama Creek, Santa 

Ynez River from the 13th Street bridge to its mouth, San Antonio Creek from the LompocCasmalia Road to its mouth, Shuman Canyon, and the Santa Maria River mouth (Swift 1984; 

Howald et al. 1985; Swift et al. 1989). 

4. The species is not known to occur within the project area. The tidewater goby populations 

nearest the project area occur at the mouth of Jalama Creek and in the Santa Ynez River. 

4.1.2.7 Townsend's Western Big-eared Bat 

1. This species (Plecotus townsendii) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 

1985b) and has a second priority listing in the CDFG "Species of Special Concern" list by 

Williams (1986). 

2. Townsend's big-eared bats occur throughouF California, with one subspecies (P.t. 

townsendii) inhabiting the humid coastal regions of Northern and Central California and 

a second subspecies (P .t. pallenscens) inhabiting the rest of the state, including the Santa 

Barbara region (Hall 1981). The species frequents a variety of habitats, including coastal 

conifer and broad-leaf forests, oak and conifer woodlands, arid grasslands and deserts, and 

high-elevation forests and meadows (Williams 1986). It has been found roosting in limestone 

caves, lava tubes, mine tunnels, and other man-made structures. Primary habitat requirements 

are freedom from disturbance and proximity to fresh water. These bats are so sensitive to 

disturbance that "a single visit by humans can cause the bats to abandon a roost" (Williams 

1986). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-12 

1 JUNE 2015 

3. Active roosts have been found in the Santa Ynez Valley near the town of Santa Ynez and at 

Prisoner's Harbor on Santa Cruz Island (Collins 1988b; SBMNH, unpublished specimen 

records). There are no records of Townsend's big-eared bats occurring within the study 

region or project area and there does not appear to be suitable habitat associated with fresh 

water in these areas. Thus, this species would be expected to occur in the project area only as 

an uncommon spring and fall migrant. 

4.1.3 MARINE AMPHIBIANS 

1. Four species of sea turtle are known to occur in waters offshore of Southern and Central 

California. These turtles nest on tropical to subtropical shores, but while at sea certain 

numbers make their way into eastern north Pacific temperate waters, perhaps as a function of 

ocean currents. The federal and state status of these turtles is shown in Table 4.1. All four of 

these marine amphibians could occur within the study region, and are listed as endangered or 

threatened by the USFWS (1985b). 

4.1.3.1 Leatherback Sea Turtle 

1. The leatherback sea turtle is federally-listed as an endangered species. It nests in the tropics, 

but its non-nesting range includes temperate to boreal waters (Ross 1981). 

2. In the Atlantic, these turtles are known from Newfoundland and the British Isles to Argentina 

and the Cape of Good Hope. In the Pacific, they are known from British Columbia to Chile, 

and from Japan through the Indo-Pacific to eastern Africa (Ernst and Barbour 1972). 

Individuals have been observed as far north as Cordova, Alaska. This turtle is considered to 

be generally pelagic but may enter bays and estuaries. Its diet consists largely of jellyfish. It 

shares nesting beaches with other marine turtle species (Ernst and Barbour 1972). 

3. Populations are affected by human take of eggs on nesting beaches. In some areas, take of 

adults are taken by individuals to provide for subsistence; while in other areas, the taking of 

adults is well organized with large numbers being taken. The world estimate of the nesting 

female population is approximately 14,300 (Ross 1981). 

4. Locally, three beach-cast specimens have been taken by SBMNH from beaches bordering the 

mainland and island sides of the Santa Barbara Channel (see Appendix C.3). However, the 

nearest nesting beaches to Central California are along Mexico's Pacific coast (Ross 1981). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-13 

4.1.3.2 j,oggerhead Sea Turtle 

1. The loggerhead sea turtle is a federally-listed threatened species. 

2. It ranges from Southern California, south to Chile and through the Pacific and Indian Oceans 

to Japan, Australia, India, and Kenya. In the Atlantic, this turtle occurs from Newfoundland 

to Argentina, including the Caribbean and Mediterranean Seas. Loggerheads may wander 

from the open sea to bays, salt marshes, river mouths, and other areas within its range (Ernst 

and Barbour 1972). It is often reported from temperate waters, and younger specimens 

disperse into major oceanic circulations (Ross 1981). 

3. The loggerhead uses the same nesting beaches as other sea turtles and tends to be omnivorous, 

which may account for the species feeding in a variety of shallow water and open ocean 

habitats. Populations throughout the world are under pressure from exploitation of adults and 

their eggs. Incidental take in fishing trawls is also a factor affecting population. Populations 

given protection have shown a tendency to increase, with the world population estimate of 

nesting females at about 41,000 (Ross 1981). 

4. Specimens have been retrieved periodically by SBMNI-1 from the central Southern California 

coast (see Appendix C.3). 

4.1.3.3 Green Sea Turtle 

1. The green sea turtle is a federally-listed threatened species. 

This species is cosmopolitan, known from the coast of Ethiopia, around the Cape of Good 

Hope to western Africa, and eastward through the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Its Pacific 

range includes the coastal Americas from the United States to Chile (Ernst and Barbour 1972), 

where it has been observed primarily in tropical waters and also in subtropical to temperate 

regions. The species migrates over open seas, but feeds in shallow water where submerged 

vegetation is abundant. Nesting areas in the eastern tropical Pacific include the Galapagos 

Islands and the Pacific coasts of Central America and Mexico (Ernst and Barbour 1972). 

3. As with otlieispecies of sea turtle, the green sea turtle is heavily exploited as a food source 

with local depletion of populations directly related to large commercial harvests (King 1981). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2.015 

4.1.3.4 Pacific Ridley Sea Turtle 

I . The Pacific Ridley sea turtle is federally-listed as threatened under the Endangered Species 

Act. 

2. This species ranges the tropical Pacific and Indian Oceans and also is known to occur in the 

warm waters of the Atlantic. California records for the species contain sightings in Monterey 

Bay and Humboldt County. Generally, it is found in protected, shallow marine waters, but 

may be found in the open sea. These turtles nest on the same beaches as other sea turtle 

species (Ernst and Barbour 1972). Extensive commercial exploitation of nesting females for 

meat and leather has greatly reduced numbers nesting along the coast of Mexico, and 

exploitation in other areas has caused the collapse or near-depletion of local nesting 

populations. The world estimate of nesting females is roughly 518,000 (Ross 1981). 

4.1.4 MARINE MAMMALS 

1. Various species of marine mammals have the potential to pass through or reside in the study 

region (zero to five miles from the coast) for short periods of time. Many are provided special 

status under either federal or state of California laws. Of those covered by federal or state 

statutes, seven species of cetacean, one pinniped, and one marine mustelid are likely to occur 

within the study region. These are shown in Table 4.1 and are addressed in detail below. 

4.1.4.1 Sei Whale 

1. The sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis) of the North Pacific is federally-listed as an endangered 

species (USFWS 1985b). 

2. The species ranges from summer latitudes of 40 degrees north to winter latitudes of 20 to 

23 degrees north. The majority occur off the coast of Central California from May through 

October and may come within five nautical miles of the project area Sightings have 

been recorded in March, May, and September by the SBMNH (Woodhouse in preparation), 

and a pair was sighted southwest of Point Buchon during the month of September 

(Dohl et al. 1980). Estimates of northern Pacific stock range from 22,000 to 37,000 

(Mizroch et al. 1984a). 

4.1.4.2 Pacific Right Whale 

1. The right whale of the north Pacific (Eubalaena glacialis japonica) is federally-listed as an 

endangered species (USFWS 1985b). 
' NRO-APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-15 

2. These whales are considered a temperate to boreal species (Townsend 1935; Braham and Rice 

1984). In the eastern North Pacific, their summertime occurrence in the Gulf of Alaska was 

well documented by nineteenth century whalers, but their wintertime grounds are subject to 

speculation (Townsend 1935; Braham and Rice 1984; Scarff 1987). A few winter sightings 

have been made in Southern California waters, and one sighting occurred in the Santa Barbara 

Channel during the month of April (Woodhouse 1982). Although there is a comprehensive 

analysis of historic and contemporary sighting records for the eastern north Pacific (Scarf 

1987), there is still no clear indication whether the species ever wintered off Central and 

Southern California or migrated through the region to more southerly waters, similar to the 

pattern of gray whales. Calving grounds for the north Pacific stock are unknown (Scarff 

1987), although the size of the population has been estimated from 100 to 500 animals 

(Braham and Rice 1984; Scarff 1987). 

4.1.4.3 Sperm Whale 

1. The sperm whale (Physerer carodon) is federally-listed as an endangered species 

(USFWS 1985b). 

2. The specit.s is cosmopolitan, with males tending to range more poleward than females and 

calves which generally occur between 45' north and south latitude (Gosho et al. 1984). In 

general, the species occurs in deep water and seldom enters the Santa Barbara Channel 

(Woodhouse in preparation). Among five sighting records in the SBMNH data base, there 

were four in August and one in December. For Central and Northern California, Dohl et at -

(1980) show a peak in sightings in May, with a lesser peak in December. Gosho et al. (1984) 

report two peaks of abundance off Central California, one in mid-May and a second in midSeptember, by which they suggest a spring migration northward and a fall migration 

southward. They also mention the occurrence of breeding groups present in the winter off 

California over the continental slope from 33' north to 38' north. Their estimate of stock size 

in the eastern north Pacific was 111,400 males age 13 or more, and 162,600 females. 

4.1.4.4 Gray Whale 

1. The gray whale is federally-listed as an endangered species (USFWS 1985b). 

2. The species ranges from the Beaufort, Chukchi, and eastern Siberian Seas to western Baja 

and the Gulf of California, including the coast of Sinaloa, Mexico. The majority occur off 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-16. 

1 JUNE 2015 

the coast of Central California between December and May and may come within five nautical 

miles of the project area. The calving period is during December and January. The estimated 

population of the gray whale is 21,113 plus or minus 688 (Rice et al. 1984). 

4.1.4.5 Blue Whale 

1. The blue whale is federally-listed as an endangered species (USFWS 1985b). 

2. This species ranges from the Chukchi Sea, Gulf of Alaska, and Aleutian Islands south to 

equatorial seas, including Costa Rica. The majority occur off the coast of Central California 

from May through October, and these whales may come within five nautical miles of the 

project area.. Calving occurs during the winter months. The estimated population of the blue 

whale in the northern Pacific is 1,600, with estimates ranging from 1,400 to 1,900 (Mizroch 

et al. 1984b; Woodhouse in preparation). 

4.1.4.6 Fin Whale 

1. The fin whale is federally-listed as an endangered species (USFWS 1985b). 

2. This whale ranges from the Gulf of Alaska (and may occur in the Chukchi Sea) to Southern 

California and the Gulf of California. The majority occur off the coast of Central California 

from May through October and may come within five nautical miles of the project area. 

Calving occurs during the winter months. The estimated population of the fin whale ranges 

from 14,600 to 18,600 (Mizroch et al. 1984c; Ohsumi and Wada 1974; Woodhouse in 

preparation). 

4.1.4.7 Humpback Whale 

I . The humpback whale is federally-listed as an endangered species (USFWS 1985b). 

2. It ranges from the Chukchi and Bering Seas to central Mexico. The majority occur off the 

coast of Central California from May through October and may come within five nautical miles 

of the project area. Calving occurs during the winter months. The estimated population of the 

humpback whale ranges from 410 to 650 (Johnson and Wolman 1984; Woodhouse in 

preparation). 
° NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-17 

4.1.4.8 Guadalupe Fur Seal 

1. The Guadalupe fur seal is federally-listed as a threatened species (USFWS 1985b) and is 

listed as Rare, protected by the state of California (CDFG 1986). 

2. This species is largely confined to Guadalupe Island and its waters, with stragglers recorded 

north to San Miguel and San Nicolas Islands (Bonner 1981; Stewart 1981). In the future, it 

could recolonize its former range, which would include the Point Arguello area. 

3. Within the offshore area potentially affected by the proposed project, this fur seal is not likely 

to occur in significant numbers relative to its population center at Guadalupe Island. 

4.L4.9 California Sea Otter 

1. The California sea otter is federally-listed as a threatened species (USFWS 1985b) and listed 

as Rare, Protected by the state of California (CDFG 1986). 

2. The species ranges from Coho Anchorage to Point Arlo Nuevo. During 1987 and 1988, 

its range south of Avila Beach has been occupied by sparse or scattered individuals. 

The breeding range of Califorr is sea otters, as judged by sightings of mother-pup pairs, 

incorporates the coast from Sandhill Bluff just north of Santa Cruz, to Shell Beach, just north 

of Pismo Beach (USFWS 1987). 

3. Sea otters in general do not make the extensive migrations characteristic of some pinnipeds 

and cetaceans. Males will move throughout the California range, and tagged individuals have 

demonstrated the ability for males to swim from the southern to the northern end of the range 

repeatedly (Estes and Jameson 1983). The size of a male's home range can vary seasonally 

in California, with a narrower range occupied during the summer-fall breeding season 

(USFWS 1987). Data from 10 tagged males show that they occupied an average home range 

of about 100 acres along a coastline length of about 0.7 mile during the breeding season. 

Females tend to stay within a narrower range, previously thought to be limited to about three 

miles of habitat. However, recent data indicate that females may occupy an average of 11 

miles of coastal habitat throughout their lives (USFWS 1987). 

4. Typical of marine mammals, sea otters give birth to a single pup after an eight-month gestation 

period (Kenyon 1981). Pups may be born at any time of the year, but peak pupping has been 

noted from January to March; breeding tends to peak from July to October (USFWS 1987). 
NRC) APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-18 

4.1.4.10 Northern Fur Seal 

1. The northern fur seal is a federally-protected species under the MMPA and is considered to 

be depleted. 

2. The species ranges through the boreal and temperate regions of the North Pacific rim from 

the waters of central Japan north to the Aleutian Islands, and south to California. San Miguel 

Island has been colonized by a relatively small, but reproductively active, group numbering 

an estimated 6,170 in 1981 (Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center 1982). The San Miguel 

Island population stock is believed to remain in California waters throughout the year 

(Gentry 1981). 

3. The breeding sequence at San Miguel Island appears to begin with the arrival of breeding bulls 

in late April, with breeding females arriving one month later. Bulls remain on the rookeries 

for 40 to 50 days and depart by early August. Pups remain on the rookeries until early fall, 

although some immature seals may be seen in nearly all months of the year on San Miguel 

Island. 

4. Northern fur seals spend most of their time at sea where they tend to be solitary, in pairs, 

or sometimes in groups of three or more (Gentry 1981). While they may occur in loose 

aggregations over wide areas at sea, they densely aggregate on rookeries. With the exception 

of neonates, no animals spend more than 60-70 days a year on land. 

5. In waters offshore of San Miguel Island, northern fur seals forage over deep water away from 

the coast (Antonelis et al. 1987). Bonnell et al. (1983) note from their surveys of California 

waters that the species rarely comes closer than 50 kilometers from shore. 

4.1.5 MARINE BIRDS 

4.1.5.1 California Brown Pelican 

1. This species is federally-listed and California state-listed as endangered (USFWS 1985a; 

CDFG 1986). Despite an overall increase in the numbers of brown pelicans nesting in the 

Southern California Bight during the last 10 years (Table 4.2, Yearly Population Data for 

California Brown Pelican Nesting Colonies in the Southern California Bight), the California 

brown pelican has retained endangered status because of its low reproductive success and its 

small U.S. breeding population. Brown pelicans have been shown to be particularly sensitive 

to environmental perturbations and to human disturbance (Anderson and Keith 1980). 

Population fluctuation and reproductive success are also directly related to food availability. 
• NRO•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 TABLE 4.2 4-19 

YEARLY POPULATION DATA 

FOR CALIFORNIA BROWN PELICAN 

NESTING COLONIES IN 

THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT 

YEAR 

ESTIMATED(1) 

NUMBER 

OF PAIRS 

NUMBER OF 

YOUNG 

FLEDGED 

PRODUCTTVITY(2) 

1969 750 4 0.005 

1970 552 1 0.002 

1971 540 7 0.013 

1972(3) 261 57 0.22 

1973 247 34 0.14 

1974 (3) 416 305 0.73 

1975 (3) 292 256 0.88 

1976 417 279 0.67 

1977 76 39 0.51 

1978 (4) 210 37 0.18 

1979 1,258 980 0.78 

1980(5) 2,244 1,515 0.68 

1981 2,946 1,805 0.61 

1982 1,862 1,175 0.63 

1983(5) 1,877 1,159 0.62 

1984 628 503 0.84 

1985(5) 6,194 7,902 1.28 

,1986(5) 7,349 4,601 0.63 

1987 

• 7,317 4,923 0.67 

(1) These estimates represent a compromise between maximum numbers of 

nests constructed, reproductive behavior, and appearance of secondary 

sexual characteristics. 

(2) Expressed as number of young fledged per pair. Data for years 1969 through 

1974 are from Anderson et al. (1975), for 1975 to 1980 from Anderson and 

Gress (1984), for 1981 through 1984 from Gress (1982) and Gress and 

Anderson (1983 and 1984,) for 1985 and 1986 from Lewis and Gress (1987), 

and for 1987 from Gress and Lewis (1988). 

(3) Nesting occurred on Scorpion Rock in 1972 (112 nests; 31 young), 

1974 (105 nests; 75 young), and 1975 (80 nests; 74 young). 

(4) Probable renesting occurred on Anacapa Island in 1978 

(210 pairs built 340 nests). 

(5) Nesting occurred on Santa Barbara Island in 1980 (97 nests; 77 young), 

1983 (21 nests; 10 young), 1985 (1,046 nests; 1,515 young), and 1986 

(1,441 nests; 615 young). 

SOURCE: Gress and Anderson 1984; Lewis and Gress 1987; Gress and Lewis 1988. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-20 

2. The Pacific coast breeding distribution of the brown pelican can be described as four separate 

geographical groups: (1) Santa Barbara Channel Islands southward to northern Baja 

California (Southern California Bight), (2) southwestern Baja California in the vicinity of 

Bahia Tortugas and Point Cortes, (3) Gulf of California, and (4) mainland Mexico from the 

islands off Sinaba southward to Islas Tres Marias off Nayarit and Isla Ixtapa off Acapulco, 

Guerrero, Mexico (USFWS 1983; ES and SWRI 1988). Migratory birds range from 

Vancouver Island, British Columbia, south to Colima, Mexico (ES and SWRI 1988). As 

of 1981, the brown pelican colonies of the Southern California Bight comprised about six 

percent (3,000 pairs) of the total west coast breeding population of about 48,000 pairs 

(Gress and Anderson 1983). 

3. Brown pelicans are a common year-round visitor to open beaches, nearshore waters, and 

protected bays and harbors in Santa Barbara County (Lehman 1982; Webster et al. 1980). 

Their numbers are much reduced during the late winter and early spring when most birds 

are at their nesting sites on islands off the coast of Southern California and Mexico. Peak 

abundance occurs in Santa Barbara County from July through December when pelican 

numbers swell with migrants from Mexico. From July to October 25,000 to 35,000 pelicans 

occupy the nearshore and coastal waters of the study region, as immigrants from Mexican 

colonies and local nesters disperse after their breeding season (Briggs et al. 1983) 

(Figure 4.1, Brown Pelican Nesting Areas in Study 6 Region). 

4. Large numbers of pelicans congregate regularly during the fall and winter at several roost sites 

in northern Santa Barbara County, including Point Sal, Purisima Point and, more rarely, the 

Santa Ynez River mouth. Other important roost and loafing sites for brown pelicans within 

the study region are located at the mouth of Shuman Creek, the mouth of San Antonio Creek 

and on the Boathouse breakwater (USAF 1987a). Pelicans are also known to frequent roosts 

on the northern Channel Islands, at Santa Barbara Harbor, the mouth of the Goleta Slough, 

Point Mugu, and the mouth of the Santa Clara River (Lehman 1982; Briggs et al. 1983; 

Chambers Group 1986). 

5. Since the early 1970s, brown pelican nesting in California has been limited to the Channel 

Islands off Southern California. West Anacapa Island contains the only consistently active 

pelican nesting colony, while Santa Barbara Island has been used increasingly since 1980. 

Scorpion Rock off Santa Cruz Island was used intermittently for nesting in 1972, 1974, and 

1975 (Gress and Anderson 1984). Since detailed counts began in 1969, the west Anacapa 
27 54 MILES 

.4-L. I 

FIGURE 4.1 

R.0 AP 'ROVED FOR RELEASE 

JUNE 2( 15 

SAN LUIS 

OBISPO 

LOMPOC 

PROJECT 

AREA 

SANTA 

VANDENBERG 

AIR FORCE BASE 

BARBARA 

VENTURA 

OXNARD 

SANTA BARBARA 

SAN MIGUEL 

ISLAND acz„ 

SANTA CRUZ 

SANTA ROSA ISLAND 

ISLAND 

_ SCORPION ROCK 0(4 iltivez 

c•• ANACAPA 

ISLAND 

PORT 

HUENEME 10 

BROWN PELICAN 

NESTING AREA 

LONG 

BEACH 

SANTA BARBARA 

ISLAND 

0(I

74;4? .

SAN NICOLAS 

ISLAND 

SANTA CATALINA 

.s. 44 ISLAND , 

1:4 

SAN CLEMENTE 

ISLAND 

cy 

<4,0 

LOS CORONADOS 

ISLANDS 

SCALE 

SOURCE: F ROM ERT, 1984. 

IN ES. SWRI, 1985 

BROWN PELICAN NESTING 

AREAS IN STUDY 6 REGION 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

r\vii:()\\IENTAL 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Island and Scorpion Rock colonies have ranged from 76 nesting pairs in 1977 to 5,908 in 

1986. These colonies produced between 1 and 6,387 fledged young from 1970 to 1985 (see 

Table 4.2). Brown pelicans nested on Santa Barbara Island in 1980, 1983, 1985, and 1986. 

6. Brown pelican habitat consists of coastal waters and shorelines. They generally forage 

over relatively shallow waters within 15 miles of shore, but have been recorded during calm 

weather up to 45 miles offshore over waters along the continental slope. Brown pelicans 

must return to land to roost each night. Preferred roosting and resting areas are provided 

by offshore rocks and islands, river mouths with sandbars, breakwaters, pilings, and jetties 

(USFWS 1983). Pelicans often rest at a variety of sites during the day, but return to a major 

nocturnal most site each night (Briggs et al. 1983). 

7. Brown pelican breeding success and winter populations in the Southern California Bight vary 

with the abundance of northern anchovy (Anderson et al. 1980, 1982). Historically, pelicans 

in the Southern California Bight have competed with commercial fisheries for anchovies 

(Anderson and Gress 1984). Further, the relative proportions of total pelican nesting effort in 

the Southern California Bight region appear to oscillate between the Channel Islands and Isla 

Coronada None in northwestern Baja California, apparently in response to local anchovy 

abundance (Gress and Anderson 1983). 

4.1.5.2 California Least Tern 

1. The California least tern is a federally- and California state-listed endangered species (by 

USFWS in 1969 and CDFG in 1971). 

2. The current distribution of this species extends from the San Francisco Bay area south into 

central Baja California (Massey 1977). Least terns are a migratory species that begin to arrive 

in the study region during late April and early May. They depart in August., following 

breeding, and by late August and early September the species is virtually gone (Lehman 

1982). Known nesting locations in the project region are shown in Figure 3.6. Although the 

winter distribution of this subspecies is currently unknown, it is thought that California least 

terns probably winter in southern Mexico and Central America (Wilbur 1974). Least terns 

tend to feed on small fish in nearshore ocean waters, estuaries, and associated freshwater 

habitats, bays, tidal channels, harbors, and freshwater ponds. They have declined in 

California due to a variety of factors. Development and recreational use of the coast has led 

4-22* • ' 
, NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-23 

1 JUNE 2015 

to the loss of nesting habitat, while foraging and roosting habitats have been destroyed by 

the dredging and filling of coastal wetlands (Wilbur 1974). The introduction of nonnative 

predators such as rats, cats, and red foxes have also contributed to the decline of this species. 

3. Least terns bred in the past at several sites along the south coast of Santa Barbara County, but 

today occur only as rare migrants and visitors (Lehman 1982). The species is known to breed 

south of Santa Barbara County in a disjunct distribution, with nesting colonies in Ventura 

County near the mouth of the Santa Clara River, at Ormond Beach, and at Point Mugu. 

In northern Santa Barbara County and southwestern San Luis Obispo County, least tems 

were recorded breeding at six localities during the 1980s: Pismo Beach, Oso Flaco Lake, 

Guadalupe Dunes near the Santa Maria River mouth, the mouth of San Antonio Creek, 

Purisima Point, and the Santa Ynez River mouth (Table 4.3, California Least Tern Breeding 

Colony Size and Fledging Success for Central California). The nesting colonies in Santa 

Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties are small (1 to 30 pairs), containing approximately 

5.8 to 12.3 percent of the species' total estimated statewide population. However, they 

are significant in that they represent the only currently active nesting areas between Ventura 

County and the San Francisco Bay. These colonies are important to the geographic breeding 

range of the species and to objectives of the recovery plan (USFWS 1980). 

4. Least terns were first noted nesting at the Santa Ynez River mouth and a sandy island along 

the north shore of the Santa Ynez River estuary in 1983 (Bevier 1983). During the summers 

of 1984, 1985, and 1987, the Santa Ynez River mouth closed, resulting in high water 

conditions that flooded the island nesting site. No least terns were found to nest there in 1984 

to 1985. There were eight to ten pairs in 1986 and four in 1987. Although the least tern 

colony at the Santa Ynez River mouth is intermittent and quite low, large numbers have been 

recorded using the area after the nesting season. The Santa Ynez River mouth is apparently a 

key area for feeding, roosting, and post-fledgling congregation of adults and juveniles 

(Bevier 1983). Preliminary observations from least tern banding studies recorded northward 

movements of post-breeding birds from Venice Beach in Southern California to the Santa 

Ynez River mouth. 

5. The least tern is a fairly common but local summer resident along the north coast of Santa 

Barbara County from the Santa Ynez River mouth north to the mouth of the Santa Maria 

River (Lehman 1982). However, it is a rare but regular transient and post-breeding visitor to 

nearshore habitats in the study region and project area. Although least terns migrate through 

the study region, they have not yet been observed in the nearshore water adjacent to the project 
an 

oo 

cn 

, .. 

I I 

, g 1 I I ;01401 "-A 

— 

■ - I ..... 

4 4

..-. 

A 

z 

. . I o ■■• I 

ra — 41. ,,t,'-',45." 4:,,,. " 1 - I 

I I 

cr 

en 

, 

N 

en 

... 

vo 

(.0 

Cls 

U. 

i 

: : 1 ,e,..01 fr..-"n ..4 

i I 

el 

z 

II 

N 

: : ' 

431.....N0 1 TIS 

NN... i 1 

g 

_. 

c

r- o 

au 

A. : , 

. 1 

r■ 

el ota i 1 A ., _ow, 1 0 

I I 

g • en un 

Z 

.. 

I I In 

::t 

Ara_

,, yo. g?, 

o 

0 

; 

oo 

e. 

'a 

U. 

o 1 

1 o If ...-00co nog 

I I 

trl In 

Z 

i I 

I . ,,, 1 

I I i .4 en 0 •-; . * 0. _r...... 

-, 

me , 

I 1 

4 g 

a 

.,-, oc 

a. 

U. 

I I 

,-. S 1 1 t = '420 i .6 ° t 

I I 

8 

I 

se 

Z 

I i 

V.D.A 1 I I I dAvie r21$ 1 .....--. 1 

un r4 

; 

= 

$ — 

U. 

1 1 

001 ev.....-01 •0 : n 

i 1 

.^ 

Z 

I I 

001 :2tg g c...A ,k vi.01 .45•vi I - 

V 

:5 

en 

ce 

On 

U. 

t r t 

..0 0 pl C.V. VI MN... 

I 

t I 

let v 

Z 

I 

C.- .,, VO N 

."N 

I I 

, 

, 

N 

cm 

Gft 

.... 

I.1- 

I I 

4,01 en r%1 -. 1 I ..

°00 

1 I 

,..,1 l'

Z 

1 1 

NI 

0 1 0 a 

en. ' •0 ',. f 

Nn

, 

'-.1 :I

', I 

eei 

1 

00 

A 

u. 

i 1 

0 

tot -- mr:: i 1 *.00 vi 14 

I I 

4 ,A 

Z 

I I 

I o I Awl : 1 ;1 r4 

1 i ° - ... 4 

0 ae

G 

.. 

U. .01 A 1 id., no., 0 ••• 

=1 1 

_ 

I 

... 

, 

• 

or 

z 

I 110 0 I v, r4 i 7, c.a : 1 

rl 4 

A•oc5 

i 1 

7•; 

al. 

t 

'd 

O 

1 I 

1 

1 

.5 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

< 81 I C I II ix A.....;g-t 

4 fl < .., 

,., 

C 

egetP cilitu ili a , .11 g. .:1›.1 ; cim 

...-: .1.< 

15 E21, .!

e ..;E61`i z.,-2,7:1 •5' 

I < I '5. VT 

I I 

TOTAL I 

TABLE4.3 

4-24 

SOURCES: Collins1986; 1988b; CDFG 1989; llowsld et.1. 1985; Goldwasser1980; .nd Webster1981. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-25 

area (Chambers Group, Inc. 1980). Least tem can be expected to occasionally feed on small 

fish in nearshore waters and migrate through the inshore coastal areas adjacent to the project 

area from April through early September. During this time, they can be expected to use 

inshore habitats, such as nearshore kelp beds for foraging and protected beaches for roosting. 

The closest roosting, nesting, and foraging area for least terns in the study region is the 

estuary at the mouth of the Santa Ynez River. 

4.1.5.3 Elegant Tern 

1. This species (Sterna elegans) has recently been federally-listed as a Category 2 species 

(USFWS 1985a) and is considered as a third priority "Species of Special Concern" by the 

CDFG (1986) (Remsen 1978). Although there has been a long-term pattern of growth in the 

species population and expansion of its range in California (Unitt 1984), it was included on 

the Remsen list because it has only one nesting colony in the United States. 

2. In Santa Barbara County, the elegant tern is a common post-breeding inhabitant of the coast 

during the late summer and early fall (Lehman 1982). The species can be found resting in 

flocks on mudflats, sandbars in coastal lagoons, or on beach dunes, and foraging over 

nearshore waters, river mouths, and in bays and harbors (Lehman 1982). An elegant tern was 

observed near the Boathouse harbor in mid-October 1983 during environmental monitoring 

for the Space Shuttle. This species can be expected to roost at the mouths of both the Santa 

Ynez River and San Antonio Creek and to forage over the nearshore waters and beaches 

adjacent to Cypress Ridge during the summer and early fall months. 

4.1.6 TERRESTRIAL BIRDS 

4.1.6.1 Southern Bald Eagle 

1. The southern bald eagle is a federally- and California state-listed endangered species 

(USFWS 1985a; CDFG 1980). 

2. Historically, bald eagles were a common visitor and permanent resident along the coast of 

Santa Barbara County and on the Channel Islands (Lehman 1982; Kiff 1980). By the 1930s, 

the species-was common only on the Channel Islands and rare on the mainland (Willett 1933) 

and nested at a few sites along the south coast until the early 1950s (Garrett and Dunn 1981; 

Lehman 1982). According to Kiff (1980), the species nested on the northern Channel Islands 

until the early 1950s. Sightings that may have involved the last potential breeders occurred on 

May 9, 1949 at Gaviota, and a bird was seen at El Capitan State Beach during June-July 1949 

(Lehman 1982). 
3. Today, bald eagles occur regularly during the winter in small numbers at Lake Cachuma 

(Lehman 1982), and casually in very small numbers at Santa Rosa Island (Jones et al. 1985). 

Along the mainland coast they are a very rare migrant, generally occurring in the late fall and 

early winter (Lehman 1982). There have only been 11 sightings of bald eagles since 1971 

away from their known wintering site at Lake Cachuma. Since 1975, a total of 15 bald eagles 

have been observed on Santa Rosa Island. They occur as a rare winter visitor at Santa Rosa 

Island (Collins 1988b) from November through February (Jones et al. 1985). The wintering 

bald eagle population at Lake Cachuma has varied from 13 in 1978-1979 (Lehman 1982), to 

four in 1980, to 12 to 18 during the winter of 1987-1988 (Table 4.4, Summary of Recent 

Sightings of Bald Eagles in Santa Barbara County) (Bontrager and Foerster 1987; Collins 

1988b). The species typically arrives in November and departs by late March (Lehman 1982). 

Egg collecting, shooting of adults, and pesticides are factors thought to be responsible for the 

disappearance of bald eagles in Southern California (Kiff 1980). Accumulation of persistent 

chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides, such as DDT and its metabolites, have resulted in lowered 

productivity and eggshell thinning, which in turn have led to substantial population declines 

(Sprunt et al. 1973; Wiemeyer et al. 1972). 

4. The sightings nearest the project area are of one bird obServed on VAFB on February 29, 

1976 (Lehman 1982), one bird observed at Refugio Pass on January 5, 1975 (Collins 1984), 

and one bird observed at El Capitan Beach on November 6, 1974 (see Table 4.4). This 

species will likely continue to occur in the study region as a very rare fall and winter transient. 

The most likely site for migrant and wintering bald eagles to occur on VAFB would be along 

the Santa Ynez River from the base boundary to its mouth. This area provides suitable prey 

items (i.e., waterfowl and fish) and roost trees adequate for attracting an occasional transient. 

No concentrations of eagles are known or expected along the coast in the project area. 

4.1.6.2 Least Bell's Vireo 

1. This species is a federally- and California state-listed endangered species (USFWS 1985a). 

2. Formerly, this species was a widespread and common inhabitant of riparian woodlands 

throughout California and Baja California (Grinnell and Miller 1944), described as "common 

in summer willow thickets from coast to foothills" (Willett 1933). Noticeable declines were 

noted in Bell's vireo populations in California beginning in the 1930s. Since that time, the 

species has declined significantly throughout California, due largely to destruction of lowland 

4-26 • 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 
. NRP APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE 4.4 

SUMMARY OF RECENT SIGHTINGS OF BALD EAGLES IN 

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY 

4-27 

LOCALITY DATE NUMBER SOURCE,/OBSERVER 

MAINLAND SIGHTINGS 

(SANTA BARBARA COUNTY) 

Santa Barbara Bird Refuge 9 November 1971 1 Lehman (1982) 

- El Capitan Beach 6 November 1974 1 SBMNH Sighting File 

Refugio Pass 5 January 1975 1 SBMNH Sighting File 

Over Goleta 16 December 1975 1 Lehman (1982) 

Vandenberg Air Force Base 29 February 1976 1 Lehman (1982) 

Lake Cachuma 13 April 1979 3 Schram 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1979 4 hum American Bird Report 

Lake Cachuma 24 November 1980 1 American Bird Report 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1981 4 American Bird Report 

Lake Cachuma 3 May 1981 2 Lehman 

Gibralter Reservoir 2 January 1982 1 Lehman (1982) 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1982 7 American Bird Report 

Goleta Area 1 January 1983 1 bun Paul Lehman 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1983 4 American Bird Report 

Lake Cachuma 27 March 1983 2 Bevier 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1984 4 American Bird Report 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1985 4 American Bird Report 

Lioleta 19 October 1987 1 Imm Hamber 

Santa Barbara 20 October 1987 1 Imm Hamber 

Carpinteria 10 November 1987 1 hnm Lehman 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1987 12 Bontrager and 

Foerster (1987) 

Lake Cachuma Winter 1988 18 Allen 

CHANNEL ISLANDS SIGHTINGS 

(SANTA BARBARA COUNTY) 

Windmill Canyon, (SRI) 28-29 January 1975 1 Ad Wallingford 

Santa Rosa Island 26 September 1975 1 Ad SBMNH Sighting File 

Santa Rosa Island 25 February 1976 2 Collins 

Brockway Point, (SRI) 19 January 1977 1 Imm Jones 

Santa Rosa Island 26 January 1977 2 Collins 

Santa Rosa Island 17 February 1977 1 BLM Data 

Santa Rosa Island 4 May 1977 1 Imm Collins 

Santa Rosa Island 16 January 1982 1 Ad Abbott 

Santa Rosa Island 25 February 1982 2 Imm Wallace 

Santa Rosa Island 7 December 1982 1 Ad Van Riper 

Santa Rosa Island 9-13 December 1982 1 Imm Fellers 

Santa Rosa Island 11 November 1986 1 Collins 

Ad = Adult Individual 

BLM = Bureau of Land Management 

Imm = Immature Individual 

SBMNH = Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 

SRI = Santa Rosa Island 

SOURCE: Collins 1988b. 

3/7190 (87-271H) 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-28' 

riparian habitats and increased rates of brood parasitism by the brown-headed cowbird 

(Lehman 1982). Today, least Bell's vireos breed at only a few locations in Southern 

California. 

3. In Santa Barbara County, least Bell's vireos are a casual visitor along the coast during 

migration (Lehman 1982). They are a localized breeder only along the upper Santa Ynez 

River and nearby Mono Creek (Lehman 1982; Gray and Greaves 1984). In Santa Barbara 

and Ventura Counties, there have been nine sightings of least Bell's vireos away from their 

Santa Ynez River nesting locale during the past 12 years (Lehman 1982, 1986; Collins 1986). 

In 1980, the species was observed in Barka Slough, and a possible nest (inactive) was seen 

(Dial 1980). Despite intensive surveys of riparian habitats on VAFB, this species has yet to 

be found again at Barka Slough or in other riparian areas on VAFB (Webster 1980; Howald 

et al. 1985; Breininger 1988). 

4. The present consensus of local ornithologists is that this species is a migrant visitor and does 

not breed in the VAFB area. The only sightings of this species from within the study region 

are of a bird seen in Sacate Canyon on the Hollister Ranch in 1975 and of a migrant in the 

tamarix trees at Gaviota State Beach Park in September 1985 (Chambers Group 1986). 

Riparian habitats in the project area at Red Roof, Spring, and Agua Viva Canyons are located 

too close to the coast and are not of sufficient size or quality to provide suitable nesting habitat 

for least Bell's vireos. Therefore, it is unlikely that this species would attempt to breed in the 

project area. However, since Bell's vireos migrate through the region, they are expected to 

occur in riparian habitats in the project area as casual transients during spring and fall 

migratory movements. 

4.1.6.3 California Black Rail 

1. The California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) is designated as a Category 2 

candidate for federal listing by the USFWS (1985a) and as a threatened species by the 

CDFG (1986). 

2. This species is a small, secretive bird which is little known. Along the coast of California, 

black rails have been found in fresh and saltwater marshes in scattered localities between 

the San Francisco Bay area and San Diego (Wilbur 1974; Manolis 1977). On the coast, 

black rails occur in the upper portion of tidal sloughs and in infrequently flooded marshes 
NRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-29 

(Malonis 1977). At present, this species occurs regularly along the coast only in the San 

Francisco Bay area and at Morro Bay (Manolis 1977; CDFG 1985). Historically, black rails 

nested in 1936 at Port Hueneme (Webster 1980). 

3. There are four confirmed sightings of black rails from the Santa Barbara region, all prior to 

1940 and from within the city limits (Lehman 1982). There have been no recent confirmed 

black rail sightings from the study region. However, there is a probable but unconfirmed 

record of a black rail briefly seen and heard in suitable habitat at the Santa Ynez River mouth 

in May 1981 (Howald et al. 1985). Potential habitat for black rails is present at the Santa 

Maria and Santa Ynez River mouths, and they could use the tidal marsh at the Santa Ynez 

River mouth on an infrequent basis as casual transient or winter visitors. This species is not 

expected to occur in the project area. 

4.1.6.4 Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

1. This species is designated as a Category 2 candidate by the USFWS (1985a) and a threatened 

species by the CDFG (CDFG 1980). 

In the past, the yellow-billed cuckoo nested in dense cottonwood and willow riparian 

woodlands throughout much of California (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Willet 1933). Today, 

the species has been extirpated as a breeder from most of California due to loss of suitable 

riparian habitat (Gaines and Laymon 1984); there are no recent nesting records for Santa 

Barbara County despite the presence of apparently suitable habitat (Lehman 1982). 

3. Recent sighting records suggest that this species is a casual transient in Santa Barbara County 

(Lehman 1982). It has been observed once on VAFB, a single bird was sighted at Barka 

Slough on June 19, 1982, in appropriate breeding habitat. However, more intensive surveys 

of the Barka Slough area failed to turn up any more yellow-billed cuckoos (Breininger 1988; 

Dial 1980; Webster 1980; Howald et al. 1985). It may be concluded that if the specie:. does 

breed at Barka Slough, it does so rarely and in very small numbers. 

4. Since this species requires relatively large tracts of riparian habitat for nesting, it is unlikely 

to occur other than as a casual transient in the study region and as a very rare transient in 

the relatively small riparian habitats in the project area. The riparian woodlands in Red Roof 

and Agua Viva Canyons are not of sufficient size or quality to attract or support a nesting 

population of California yellow-billed cuckoos. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Al' -0 

4.1.6.5 American Peregrine Falcon 

1. The American peregrine falcon is federally- and California state-listed as an endangered 

species (USFWS 1985a; CDFG 1980). 

2. This species can be found along coastlines, in mountainous areas, and in riparian habitats. 

The American peregrine falcon nests in northern Canada and formerly bred throughout the 

United States. It winters in Mexico and areas in central South America. Peregrine falcons 

occur in California as permanent residents and migrants. They were once much more 

common in Southern California, particularly as a nesting bird (Garrett and Dunn 1981). 

Bond (1946) recorded 328 peregrine falcon nesting sites and estimated that 750 peregrine 

falcons inhabited western North America. In 1944, Grinnell and Miller described the species 

as fairly common in California. 

3. The species has declined throughout California and most of North America since the 1940s 

due to detrimental effects of pesticides, shooting, haliitat destruction, and capture of 

individuals for falconry (CDFG 1980). Eggshell thinning caused by dichlorodiphenyltrichlaoethane (DDT) continues to be a severe problem with peregrines which nest along the 

coast (Walton 1988) and they were extirpated as breeders from the Channel Islands between 

the mid-1940s and early 1950s as a result of DDT-caused breeding failures (Kiff 1980). 

Since then, they have occurred on the northern Channel Islands as occasional transient and 

winter visitors. 

4. Until the early 1950s, peregrine falcons were resident on all of the Channel Islands (Kiff 

1980) and nested in coastal habitats in Santa Barbara County (Collins 1983; Biosystems 

Analysis, Inc. 1981). Along the county's north coast, peregrines nested into the early 1960s 

on coastal bluff faces at Point Sal, near the Boathouse area at Point Arguello, and near the 

lighthouse at Point Conception (Walton, 1988; Howald et al. 1985). 

5. Since 1970, there have been only 12 sites along the central coast of California at which 

peregrine falcons have nested, even though there are 35 known historical nest sites within 

the same area (Biosystems Analysis, Inc. 1981; Collins 1983). However, since 1970, the 

number of breeding pairs of peregrine falcons in California has increased. The USFWS 

estimated that there were 50 to 60 breeding pairs in California in 1979 (USFWS 1982), 64 by 

1984, and 80 by 1985. At least 10 of these pairs were located along the coast (Walton 1988). • 
• NRQ•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

I 1 JUNE 2015 4-31 

6. Relative to the study region, the closest known active peregrine nest sites on the mainland 

are to the north in the Shell Beach/Avila Beach area, at Diablo Canyon, and at Morro Rock 

adjacent to Morro Bay (Walton 1988; URS 1985). At least one or two individuals are seen 

somewhat regularly in the Point Arguello to Point Conception area (Walton 1988; Mills 1988). 

Although there have been no adequate recent surveys for peregrine nests in the Point 

Conception to Point Arguello area, birds have been observed during the nesting season 

(February-July) (Walton 1988). 

7. Preferred peregrine nesting habitat appears to be protected ledges on high cliffs within 

woodland and coastal areas of Central and Northern California. Today peregrine falcons are 

considered a rare transient and winter visitor along the coast in Santa Barbara County where 

they tend to frequent open country such as grasslands, agricultural areas, ponds, sloughs, 

river mouths, and seacoasts for hunting (Lehman 1982). Peregrines are known to hunt for 

shorebirds and waterfowl over the ocean, along beaches, over sloughs, and over reservoirs 

and ponds. The study region and project area contain a substantial amount of suitable 

foraging and nesting habitat. Relatively undisturbed coastline is present, and the damming of 

numerous creeks on the Hollister and Bixby Ranches have formed many small ponds which 

are frequented by waterfowl. 

Since the 1970s, there has been an active program underway in California to reintroduce 

peregrine falcons into their historic range. The recovery program for this species includes 

captive breeding and rearing of peregrines and placement (hacking) into former nesting areas 

in order to have these captive-bred birds reestablish themselves in the wild (CDFG 1980). 

Successful reestablishment of peregrines in the Santa Ynez Range and western Santa Barbara 

County would change their status to permanent residents within the study region and project 

area. 

9. Six birds were released on San Miguel Island between 1985 and 1987 as part of the captive 

breeding and release program. Until that time, peregrines were thought to be uncommon 

but regular visitors to the Channel Islands during the spring and winter (Jehl 1979; 1980; 

Yochem 1985). Peregrine falcons began nesting on San Miguel Island in the spring of 1988 

(Walton 1988), and have been recently found to be nesting on Santa Cruz and west Anacapa 

Islands (Peregrine Fund 1989). In addition, there was a possible active peregrine falcon nest 

located at Point Arguello during June 1989. This has not been confirmed by the Peregrine 

Fund as an active nest (Peregrine Fund 1989). Thus, it appears that the status of peregrine 

falcons on the northern Channel Islands and within the project area is changing. 
10. Until the early 1980s, an average of one or two peregrines per year were sighted along the 

coast of Santa Barbara County (Lehman 1982). At present, largely as a result of the captive 

breeding and release program, there have been increasing sightings in the county (see 

Table 4.5, Summary of Recent Sightings of Peregrine Falcons from the Mainland of Santa 

Barbara County). Since 1970, 43 peregrine falcons have been sighted on the mainland in 

Santa Barbara County (Collins 1988b). There are recent sightings for the Santa Maria Valley, 

the Santa Ynez and Santa Maria River mouths, Jalama, Point Conception, and the Hollister 

and Bixby Ranches. Single birds were observed on VAFB at Purisima Point in August 1986, 

at Jalama in January 1987, on North VAFB in December 1988, at Point Sal in February 1989, 

and at the mouth of the Santa Ynez River in August 1979, December 1987, and April and 

July 1988 (Collins 1988b). Many of these sightings could be of individuals released as 

part of the captive breeding program. It appears that the seasonal status and abundance of 

peregrine falcons in the study region and project area is increasing as a result of the captive 

breeding and release program (Collins 1988b). 

4.1.6.6 White-faced Ibis 

1. The white-faced ibis (Plegadis chihi) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 

1985b) and has been assigned the highest priority of "Species of Special Concern" by the 

CDFG (Remsen 1978). 

2. Due to loss of much of its preferred freshwater marsh habitat, it has declined during the past 

50 years throughout Southern California (Remsen 1978; Garrett and Dunn 1981). Its 

preferred nesting habitat is extensive marshes, while its foraging habitat includes marshes, 

flooded fields, ditches, and occasionally estuaries (Garrett and Dunn 1981). In the past, this 

species was more numerous and nested in Santa Barbara County. Today, white-faced ibis are 

rare fall transients in coastal areas of Santa Barbara County and are casual in winter, spring, 

and summer (Lehman 1982). 

3. Seven birds were observed in September 1978 in the vicinity of the Boathouse on South 

VAFB (Chambers Group, Inc. 1980). Although the species can be expected to occur in the 

project area, its status there would be as a casual fall transient. The nearest suitable foraging 

habitat occurs at the mouth of the Santa Ynez River. 

4-32. ' 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 
J 

j 

NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-33 

1 JUNE 2015 TABLE 4.5 

SUMMARY OF RECENT SIGHTINGS OF PEREGRINE FALCONS 

FROM THE MAINLAND OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY 

LOCALITY DATE NUMBER OBSERVER 

Goleta Slough March 27. 1970 1 Richard Webster 

Hollister Ranch March 2, 1975 1 R. Bailey 

Santa Maria River Mouth October 1, 1978 1 Louis Bevier 

Goleta October 11, 1978 1 D. L. Dittman 

Santa Maria River Mouth December 7, 1978 1 Paul Lehman 

Refugio State Beach Park December, 1978 1 Tim Hodgeson 

In Goleta January 19, 1979 1 Gary Fugle 

Santa Yncz River Mouth August 22. 1979 1(1) Paul Lehman 

In Goleta October 5. 1979 1 E. and J. Gray 

In Goleta April 6, 1980 1 Paul Lehman 

Near Santa Maria August 19, 1980 1(1) Louis Bevier 

In Santa Barbara February 7, 1981 1 N. S. Crawford 

Santa Maria River Mouth July 10, 1982 1 Louis Bevier 

Santa Maria River Mouth August 29, 1982 1 Louis Bevier 

In Santa Barbara September 12, 1982 1 L. R. Ballard 

In Goleta October 4, 1982 1 Louis Bevier 

In Goleta October 22. 1982 1 Helen Matelson 

In Goleta October 25. 1982 1 Louis Bevier 

Gaviota 1982 1 Wester Services 

Santa Maria River Mouth August 24, 1981 1(2) Paul Lehman 

Santa Maria River Mouth October 18, 1983 1(2) Curtis Marantz 

In Goleta November 6, 1983 1(1) Paul Lehman 

West Big Pine Mountain January 13, 1984 1 John Schmitt 

Don Victor Valley February 13. 1984 1 John Schmitt 

Near Carpinteria April 27. 1984 I L. R. Ballard 

In Goleta December 28. 1984 1 N. S. Crawford 

In Santa Barbara January 18. 1985 1 Pipette Bergman 

Bixby Ranch. Wood Canyon Summer, 1985 1(2) Tom Mulroy 

In Goleta November 22, 1985 1 Paul Lehman 

Little Cojo Point January 2, 1986 l(2) Paul Collins 

SLC-6 Hazardous Waste Ponds January 28,1986 lc) Chuck Pergler 

Near Santa Maria April 1, 1986 1 Jon L. Dunn 

Purisima Point August, 1986 1(1) C. D'Antonio 

Santa Maria River Mouth October 5, 1986 1 C. D. Benesh 

Jalama Beach January 15, 1987 1(2) Don Clopfen 

Santa Maria River Mouth July 19, 1987 1 S. E. Finnegan 

In Santa Maria Area November 9, 1987 1 Paul Lehman 

At Lake Cachurna August 25, 1987 1 Brian Arnold 

One Mile North of Point Conception 

t 

December 10. 1987 1(1) John Storrer 

Santa Ynez River Mouth December 17, 1987 1(1) Ken Hollinga 

In Goleta January 1. 1988 10) Jon L. Dunn 

Santa Ynez River Mouth April 16, 1988 1(2) Ken Hollinga 

Santa Ynez River Mouth July 21, 1988 1 Paul Collins 

North VAFB December 18, 1988 1 Paul Collins 

Point Sal , February 11. 1989 1 Paul Collins 

(I) Immature falcon 3/7/90 (87-271H) 

(2) Adult falcon 

Source: Collins 1988b. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

4.1.6.7 Ferruginous Hawk 

1. The ferruginous hawk (Buten regalis) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 

1985b) and appears on the Audubon Society's Blue List as a "Species of Special Concern" 

(Tate 1986). 

2. This species is an uncommon fall transient and winter visitor to grasslands and agricultural 

fields in Santa Barbara County (Lehman 1982). It is most numerous in agricultural areas in 

the Cuyama Valley and occurs regularly but in small numbers in the Los Alamos and Santa 

Ynez Valleys. Along the coast it is a casual fall transient and winter visitor (Lehman 1982). 

Within the study region, ferruginous hawks have been observed during the winter near the 

mouth of the Santa Ynez River (Pergler 1988), at Jalama Beach (Lehman 1982), and on the 

Hollister and Bixby Ranches (Storrer 1988). One ferruginous hawk was reported in the 

vicinity of the Boathouse at South VAFB in May 1983, perhaps in error, as the species is not 

known to occur in coastal Southern California after mid-April (Garrett and Dunn 1981). 

3. Within the project area, this species can be expected to occur regularly but in small numbers 

during the late fall and winter. Grasslands and open coastal scrub habitats provide suitable 

foraging habitat for ferruginous hawks. 

4.1.6.8 Western Snowy Plover 

1. The western snowy plover is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 1985a), is 

listed as a second priority "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG (Remsen 1978), and is 

a "Species of Special concern" on the National Audubon Society's Blue List (Tate 1986). 

2. Western snowy plovers have declined as a nesting species throughout Southern California 

and the study region due in part to human disturbance of their sandy beach nesting habitat 

(Remsen 1978). They have been extirpated as a breeding species in southern Santa Barbara 

County, but continue to breed and winter along undisturbed sandy beaches in northern Santa 

Barbara County, especially on VAFB. 

3. In Santa Barbara County, populations are larger in winter than summer, due to an influx of 

birds from inland breeding localities. Page et al. (1986) estimated that 329 plovers wintered 

on beaches in Santa Barbara County, with major concentrations at the Santa Maria River 

mouth (48 birds), Purisima Point Beach (28 birds), Purisima Point north (22 birds), Santa 

Ynez River mouth (65 birds), Jalama Beach (25 birds) and Devereux Beach (57 birds). 

Pa2e and Stenzel (1981) found that Santa Barbara County held 22 percent (138 pairs) of 

4-34' • 
. NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

t ' 1 JUNE 2015 4-35 

California's coastal breeding snowy plovers. The species nests on undisturbed sandy beaches 

at San Miguel Island (35 pairs), Santa Rosa Island (21 pairs), Santa Ynez River Mouth 

(5 pairs), Purisima Point Beach (55 pairs), south Nipomo Dunes (4 pairs), and the Santa 

Maria River mouth (18 pairs) (Page and Stenzel 1981). 

4. Snowy plovers have not been found nesting on suitable looking sandy beaches between Point 

Arguello and Point Conception, but can be expected to winter there in small numbers. Their 

status within the project area is as an uncommon winter visitor, and within the study region as 

a common winter visitor and an uncommon but localized summer breeder on undisturbed 

stretches of sandy beach. 

4.1.6.9 Long-billed Curlew 

1. This species (Numenius americanus) is a Category 2 candidate for federal listing (USFWS 

1985a) and appears on the Audubon Society's Blue List as a "Species of Special Concern" 

(Tate 1986). 

2. The long-billed curlew is an uncommon transient throughout Southern California, frequenting 

coastal estuaries, dry grasslands, agricultural fields and, to a lesser extent, sandy beaches 

along the coast (Garrett and Dunn 1981). This species is not known nor is it expected to 

breed in the Southern California region. Along the north coast of Santa Barbara County, 

long-billed curlews are locally common transients and winter visitors and are fairly common 

in the late spring and early summer (Lehman 1982). 

3. Long-billed curlews have been observed on beaches north and south of the project area, 

with 200 recorded on NOrth VAFB beaches in June 1982, 460 at Point Sal in July 1980, 

and 20 near Point Conception in January 1988 (Storrer 1988). This species was also 

recorded regularly in small numbers in the vicinity of the Boathouse on South VAFB during 

environmental monitoring for the Space Shuttle project (Collins 1988b). Within the project 

area, this species can be expected to occur regularly in small numbers during the spring and 

summer and in moderate numbers during the fall and winter. 

4.1.6.10 Tricolored Blackbird 

1. The tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) is a Category 2 candidate species for federal listing 

(USFWS 1985a). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-36' 

2. This species is locally resident throughout coastal areas of Southern California and can be 

found in large congregations at breeding and wintering localities (Garrett and Dunn 1981). 

In Santa Barbara County, the species breeds locally in large colonies located in dense stands 

of bullrushes and cattails (Lehman 1982). Nesting colonies of tricolored blackbirds have 

been found in the Santa Maria, Bueliton, Goleta, and Cuyama Valley areas (Lehman 1982). 

Summer foraging occurs in agricultural areas, fields, pastures and short grass habitats adjacent 

to nesting colonies (Lehman 1982). During the fall and winter, this species forages in 

agricultural areas, cattle pens, pastures, and other short grass habitats (Lehman 1982). 

3. The largest concentrations of wintering tricolored blackbirds in the Santa Barbara region have 

been found in the Santa Maria Valley and near the Santa Ynez River mouth on VAFB (Lehman 

1982). This species has not been observed in the project area, but is expected to occur in 

small numbers during the fall and winter, foraging in grassland and open coastal sage scrub 

habitats. 

4.2 REGIONALLY RARE AND DECLINING SPECIES 

1. This section discusses plant and animal species that are of regional importance because they 

have limited distributions, limited population sizes, and/or have shown regional declines in 

their distributions and/or numbers. There are six species of plants, 18 species of birds, and 

two species of mammals that are in this category and have the potential to occur within the 

study region and project area. The plant species are listed by the CNPS in Appendix 1 of 

their Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory or in List 4, a watch list of plants with limited 

distributions. The animal species have shown regional or state-wide declines and have been 

listed as "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG (Remsen 1978; Williams 1986), on the 

National Audubon Society's Blue List (Tate 1986), and/or are considered by local biologists 

to be rare or decreasing significantly in the Santa Barbara region. The plant species are 

included in the CNPS's Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory and watch list of plants of 

limited distribution. 

2. The following accounts summarize the available data pertaining to the past and present status 

and habitat affinities of regionally rare/declining species found or expected to occur in the 

study region and project area. 
it 

. NRQ.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-37 

4.2.1 PLANT SPECIES 

1. This section provides information on the appearance, past and present distribution, and habitat 

affinities of special interest plants found within the study region and project area. 

4.2.1.1 Fiddleneck 

1. This species (Amsinckia spectabilis var. microcarpa) is included in Appendix 1 of the CNPS 

Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory as a plant considered for listing, but considered too 

common to list (Smith and York 1984). 

2. Fiddleneck is a sprawling annual herb, with orange-yellow flowers that appear from February 

through June. It is endemic to sandy areas from Nipomo Mesa in San Luis Obispo County 

to near Surf, Lompoc, and Buellton (Smith 1976) and south along the coast at least to the 

Boathouse Flats site. The population on VAFB is possibly the largest in existence (Smith 

1983), but there is no estimate of its percentage of the total population. Fiddleneck is common 

to abundant in grassland at lower elevations throughout the study area, including the Cypress 

Ridge and Boathouse Flats sites. It is less common at the borrow sites. 

4.2.1.2 purisima Manzani.a 

1. Purisima manzanita (Arctostaplzylos purissima) is included in CNPS Appendix 1 as a plant 

considered for listing, but considered too common to list (Smith and York 1984). 

2. This species is a shrub with smooth bark and small, white flowers that appear from November 

to May. It is endemic to northwestern Santa Barbara County, from Point Sal to the Purisima 

Hills, Burton Mesa, south to Lompoc Terrace and Cypress Ridge, and eastward in the Santa 

Ynez Mountains to about five miles west of Gaviota Pass (Smith 1976). It is common in 

central maritime chaparral on VAFB, especially on Burton Mesa and Lompoc Terrace. No 

estimates of population size are available. In the study region, it occurs on some ridges to the 

east of SLC-6, on a slope southeast of Building 520 near Venus Way, and in sandy soil on 

two ridges to the east of Oil Well Canyon at approximately 650 feet in elevation. It occurs on 

the south, east, and north edges of the proposed borrow site on Mesa Road. 

4.2.1.3 Santa Barbara Ceanothus 

1. This endemic ceanothus (Ceanothus impressus var. impressus) is included in CNPS 

Appendix 1 as a plant considered for listing, but considered too common to list. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2. Santa Barbara ceanothus is an evergreen shrub with blue flowers that bloom from March 

through May. It occurs from Nipomo Mesa in southern San Luis Obispo County south to 

Burton Mesa, east to near Buellton (Munz and Keck 1959; Hoover 1970; Smith 1976), and 

south to the Cypress Ridge site. It is common on the north and south sides of SLC-6 

(southwest of Building 520 and near Building 369, respectively), on the north slope of 

Cypress Ridge (southwest of the V-33 building), and scattered in the recently burned area of 

the Cypress Ridge site, where there are fewer than 10 plants. It is also scattered on the edges 

of the existing borrow site on Mesa Road, possibly favored by past soil disturbance. 

3. Santa Barbara ceanothus often dominates some areas in chaparral for approximately 10 to 

15 years after a fire (Davis et al. 1988); beyond that it is replaced by longer-lived chaparral 

species. It may be locally common in the study region as a result of a large wildfire that 

occurred in 1977 and a controlled burn conducted in 1983 (Hickson 1987); it will possibly 

reestablish in greater numbers in the burned area of Cypress Ridge. 

4.2.1.4 Western Dichondra 

1. Western dichondra (Dichondra occidentalis) is included in CNPS List 4, a watch list of plants 

of limited distribution. 

2. This species is a creeping perennial herb that flowers at or below the soil surface from March 

to May and occurs in coastal scrub, chaparral, and oak woodland from coastal Ventura County 

to Baja California and on some California islands (Munz and Keck 1959; Smith and York 

1984). The distribution and population size in Santa Barbara County are unknown. This 

dichondra is common on the upper slopes of the Cypress Ridge site and infrequent on the 

Vina Terrace site. There are no records of it on VAFB outside of the study region (Schmalzer 

and Hinkle 1987). 

4.2.1.5 Saint's Daisy 

1. Saint's daisy (Erigeron sanctarum) is included in CNPS List 4, a watch list of plants of limited 

distribution. 

2. This species is a small herb with purple flower heads that bloom from May through July. It is 

endemic to coastal San Luis Obispo County, Santa Barbara County, and Santa Rosa Island, 

often associated with chaparral and central coastal scrub. It is known to occur on Burton 

Mesa and VAFB (Smith 1983; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1987; D'Antonio 1988); there are no 

4-38 ' • 
' NRO-APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-39 

estimates of its total population size on VAFB. A small population (about 20 plants) was 

found in the study region on a ridge to the northeast of Cypress Ridge, approximately 

6,000 feet north of the Southern Pacific Railroad crossing of Oil Well Canyon. 

4.2.1.6 Large-leaved Wallflower 

1. Large-leaved wallflower (Erysimum suffrutescens var. grandifolium) is included in CNPS 

List 4, a watch list of plants and limited distribution. 

2. This species is a perennial herb with sprawling branches and yellow flowers. It occurs in 

coastal bluff scrub and dune scrub on the south coast of Santa Barbara County, and from near 

Point Arguello to Point Sal, to Morrow Rock in San Luis Obispo County (Smith 1976). 

Population estimates are not available for this plant. It is scattered in the central coastal scrub 

on the northern part of the Cypress Ridge site, east of Coast Road. 

4.2.2 TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL SPECIES 

1. Two regionally rare and declining amphibians, California tiger salamander and California 

newt, are known to occur within the boundaries of the study region. However, they do not 

occur within the project area and so are not discussed further. 

2. There are a few mammals which show restricted distributions within the study region and 

project area. These include the western gray squirrel, ringtail, muskrat, and beaver. These 

species are not included in the following regionally rare and declining species accounts 

because they are not expected to occur in the project area. However, there are sufficient data 

to suggest that two species of regionally rare land mammals, badger and mountain lion, may 

occur within the project area. These species are discussed below. 

4.2.2.1 Badger 

1. The badger is listed by the CDFG in the third priority of "Mammal Species of Special 

Concern" (Williams 1986) and is considered by local biologists to be regionally rare and 

declining in Santa Barbara County. 

This carnivore is widespread in Santa Barbara County. It inhabits a variety of open 

habitats such as grassland, oak savannah, and sparse coastal scrub and chaparral. Specimen 

and sight records suggest that badgers are still reasonably common on VAFB (Coulombe and 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Mahrdt 1976) and on ranch lands in northwestern Santa Barbara County (Howald et al. 

1985). Coulombe and Mahrdt (1976) list badgers as common in open grasslands, coastal 

sage scrub, and sparse chaparral habitats on VAFB. 

3. Field surveys conducted in the spring of 1988 found that badgers were present in coastal 

scrub and grassland habitats at the Cypress Ridge site. Active badger sign was found along 

the electrical transmission line corridor adjacent to the Coast Road, on the southern edge of the 

Cypress Ridge site, on the eastern edge of the Boathouse Flats site, and on the eastern 

perimeter of the Vina Terrace site. Excellent badger habitat occurs on the Boathouse Flats site 

and in the grasslands and open coastal scrub at the Cypress Ridge site. Based on the above 

data, badgers can be classified as an uncommon resident in the project area. 

4.2.2.2 Mountain Lion 

1. The mountain lion is listed as a protected nongame mammal by the CDFG (i.e., no hunting 

without a special license). 

Mountain lions are reasonably common throughout most of the more remote areas of Santa 

Barbara County, and their numbers appear to be on the rise (Howald et al. 1985). They are 

wide-ranging carnivores that frequent mostly wooded or brushy habitats, preferring steep, 

inaccessible slopes vegetated with a dense cover of chaparral (Koford 1977). Mountain lions 

have been recorded along most of the Santa Ynez Mountains (Collins 1988b). In the study 

region, they have been reported from the Santa Rosa Hills, the western end of the Santa Ynez 

Mountains on the Hollister and Bixby Ranches (Mills 1988; Heubner 1988), and observed on 

South VAFB in the Bishop pine forest and near Bear Creek (Howald et al. 1985). There are 

no specimen records of mountain lions from VAFB, but they are expected to occasionally 

range onto South VAFB from the western end of the Santa Ynez Mountains. 

3. Mountain lions may occasionally forage in the project area, especially at the Vina Terrace site 

and along the ridge east of SLC-6. They are not expected to reside in the project area, due to 

constant activity (Collins 1988b). Chaparral along Honda Ridge and dense coastal scrub in 

Oil Well and Agua Viva Canyons and at the Vina Terrace site is the preferred habitat for this 

species in the project area, where they are considered uncommon to rare. 

4-40 ' 
. • NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-41 

1 JUNE 2015 

4.2.2.3 Monarch Butterfly 

1. The monarch butterfly has a near-worldwide distribution and is not in danger of extinction as a 

species. However, both the western and eastern North American populations are vulnerable 

to heavy loss because of their overwintering strategy, and the North American migration is 

believed to be in danger in the foreseeable future. As a consequence, the conservation of 

monarch butterfly overwintering sites has been designated a top priority of the Species 

Survival Commission of the International Union of the Conservation of Nature and Natural 

Resources (IUCN) (Pyle 1983). Although monarchs are not specifically protected under 

either federal or California law, they can be indirectly conserved under the Public Resources 

and Fish and Game Codes. 

2. During the fall months, monarchs west of the Rocky Mountains migrate west to California, 

while those east of the Rockies migrate south to Mexico. The monarch breeds over much of 

western North America (Urquhart and Urquhart 1977). However, the main summer breeding 

grounds of the western North American population are in the Sacramento and San Joaquin 

Valleys of California, and only this population overwinters on the west coast (Ackery and 

Vane-Wright 1984). The number of monarchs overwintering in California is estimated at one 

to 10 million, with populations susceptible to destruction for a vat iety of reasons, including 

real estate and agricultural development and other human disturbance. The butterflies 

congregate in both temporary and permanent clusters, utilizing the same localities from year to 

year. 

3. Monarchs may cluster in a variety of native and introduced trees, commonly blue gum 

(Eucalyptus globulus), river gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Monterey Pine (Pinar radiata), 

and Monterey cypress (Cupressus macrocarpa). Also, cluster sites are usually characterized 

by a nearby source of fresh water, either natural or manmade and, to provide nectar, winterblooming plants such as gum trees (Eucalyptus), coyote bush, wild mustard, bottlebrush 

(Callistemon), and other native and cultivated species. Cluster sites typically are located 

close to the coast, generally within one mile of the shoreline. The sites are generally wooded, 

with trees of mixed sizes and an understory of brush. The site characteristics provide both 

protection from wind and freezing temperatures, exposure to sunlight during cold weather, 

and cool, shady conditions during unusually warm days (Nagano and Lane 1985). Some 

California overwintering sites are on public land such as parks, nature preserves, and military 

bases, but roosting butterflies are present only during the fall, winter, and early spring, and 

the clusters may not be recognized when the butterflies are absent. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-42 

4. Cluster sites have been found from Anchor Bay in Mendocino County to approximately 

Ensenada in Baja California, Mexico. The estimated population sizes range from 171,000 to 

50 individuals at the permanent roosts and from 30,000 to 30 individuals at the temporary 

sites. The monarch is a permanent resident on Santa Cruz Island and was recently recorded 

on Santa Rosa, Anacapa, and Santa Barbara Islands (Miller 1985). There are 17 monarch 

roosting and overwintering sites on VAFB that are fairly reliable year to year, generally 

characterized by eucalyptus groves or Monterey cypress, the presence of freely available 

water, and shelter from the wind. These sites are shown on Figure 4.2 (Monarch Butterfly 

Overwintering and Roosting Sites on VAFB). 

4.2.3 MARINE ANIMAL SPECIES 

1. In addition to the threatened or endangered marine mammals discussed in Section 4.1.4, 

the northern fur seal, California sea lion, northern elephant seal, harbor seal, and northern 

(Steller) sea lion may be expected to be present in the study region. These mammals are 

protected from harassment or taking under the MMPA. These mammals are addressed in the 

following sections. 

4.2.3.1 California Sqa Lion 

1. The California sea lion is a federally-protected species under the MMPA. 

The species of concern ranges from at least as far south as Mazatlan, Mexico and the Tres 

Marias Islands north to British Columbia (Odell 1981). Population estimates range from 

80,000 to 125,000, making it the most abundant pinniped in the Southern California Bight 

(Antonelis and Fiscus 1980; Bonnell et al. 1983). 

3. The breeding range extends from the southern end of the range in Mexico to San Miguel 

Island although a few pups have been born on Southeast Farallon Island (Odell 1981; Pierotti 

et al. 1977). The largest aggregations of breeding animals occur on the rookeries of San 

Nicholas and San Miguel Islands where upwards of 90 percent of the regional population in 

the Southern California Bight hauls out (Le Boeuf et al. 1978). 

4. The breeding season appears to begin on San Miguel Island in mid to late May when bulls and 

postpartum females begin to arrive. The numbers of territorial males peaks in early July with 

abandonment of the rookery occurring in the first week of August. Pupping season ends in 

mid to late June with mating season beginning in early June, continuing until mid to late July. 
4-43 

130 APP 

1 JUNE 2015 

0 4 8 MILES 

FIGURE 4.2 

SCALE IN MILES 

MONARCH BUTTERFLY 

OVERWINTERING AND ROOSTING 

SITES ON VAFB 

SOURCE: PERGLER 1989 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

REFERENCE: U.S.G.S. 30 x 50 MINUTE QUADRANGLE 

OF SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA, DATED 

1982, NO PHCTORE VISION 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-44 

5. During the summer breeding season in the California Channel Islands, California sea lion 

population peaks with as many as 35,000 counted on land in 1975 (Le Boeuf et al. 1978). 

In the winter of 1976, the number of hauled-out animals dwindled to approximately 15,000 

(Le Boeuf et al. 1978). The migrating behavior of females and yearlings is not clear (Odell 

1981). Females and immatures appear to form up into large feeding groups at sea in winter in 

the Southern California Bight. 

6. Little information has been gathered for sea lions feeding at sea, although recent work on 

animals from San Miguel Island with implanted radio tags has revealed that regionally they 

feed over the relatively shallow waters of the continental shelf, to the north and west of San 

Miguel Island. 

4.2.3.2 Northern Elephant Seal 

1. The northern elephant seal is a federally-protected species under the MMPA. 

2. This species is restricted to the eastern north Pacific Ocean where it hauls out on islands from 

Baja California to Central California. Recent population estimates put numbers at about 

77,000 animals, with about 40 percent associated with the California hauling grounds 

(Bonnell et al. 1983). In California, San Miguel Island supports the largest aggregation of 

elephant seals, second only to Guadalupe Island (McGinnis and Schusterman 1981). 

3. The breeding season begins as adult males haul out in late November, where they remain until 

March (Le Boeuf 1974). By mid-December, adult females start to haul out and give birth. 

Females leave the rookeries after mating, which occurs approximately in mid-January. After 

mating the females remain at sea for a few weeks, then return to the rookeries to molt and rest 

for about one month. They then return to the sea for the next eight to nine months before 

returning for the next breeding season (McGinnis and Schusterman 1981; Bonnell et al. 

1983). 

4. The majority of pups are born in mid-January to early February. Weaned pups form into 

groups and remain on the rookeries for about a month or so before leaving in March and April 

(Bonnell et al. 1983). 

5. Elephant seals produce a dramatic molt which apparently necessitates their coming ashore for 

a second time each year. In late April or early May, adult females and juvenile males and 

females haul out to shed their pelage for a new coat In late June to early July, adult males haul 
. NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-45 

out to molt as well (Bonnell et al. 1983). At islands like San Miguel, elephant seals of one age 

group or another are present in all months of the year, but peaks in abundance occur in the 

winter breeding period and during the spring/summer molt. 

6. Few published accounts of elephant seal observations at sea exist but, from those available, 

there is a general indication that they tend to be solitary and most were noted over the 

continental shelf and slope (Antonelis and Fiscus 1980; Bonnell et at. 1983). 

4.2.3.3 Harbor Seal 

1. The harbor seal is a federally-protected species under the MMPA. 

2. This subspecies ranges from central Baja California to the Aleutian Islands, Bristol Bay, and 

the Pribilof Islands (Shaughnessy and Fay 1977; Bigg 1981). Population estimates for this 

subspecies have ranged from 50,000 to 200,000 (Scheffer 1958; Lockley 1966). More 

recently this has been increased to 320,000, with 40,000 from British Columbia to Baja 

California (Bigg 1981). Population counts for California from 1982 to 1986 have yielded a 

five year average of 15,148 with a range from 14,103 in 1984 to 16,891 in 1982 (Hanan et 

al. 1987). The 1986 census figures for the coast 0.8 miles east of Point Conception to Point 

Arguello show a count of 1,012 harbor seals (Hanan et at. 1987). 

3. Harbor seal pups are produced from February to September depending on latitude. In the 

Santa Barbara area newborn pups have been observed as early as the first week of February, 

whereas in the Northern Channel Islands, pupping occurs in March. Pupping around Point 

Arguello has been reported around late March. Estes and Jameson (1983) note that seals 

congregate in mid-April subsequent to the birth of many pups. At San Miguel Island, pupping 

has been observed from mid-February through mid-April with a peak in March (Stewart et al. 

1988). In California, the mating season may vary with the time of pupping, but once started, 

it lasts about a month (Bonnell et at. 1983). 

4 . In California, the largest aggregations of harbor seals occur in late spring and early summer 

(Bonnell et al. 1983). On San Miguel Island, Stewart et al. (1988) noted peak numbers 

ashore from late May to early June when the seals were molting. In the Santa Barbara 

Channel and the coastline to Point Arguello, harbor seals haul out in specific areas, and 

while numbers may fluctuate between the breeding season and the remainder of the year, no 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-46 

1 JUNE 2015 

additional haul outs have been noted during times when dispersal would be greatest. Once 

breeding and molting are complete, individuals probably spend more time in the water so that 

at any given time relatively fewer are ashore on the hauling grounds (Le Boeuf et al. 1978). 

5. In the vicinity of Point Arguello, there are several small beaches where harbor seals aggregate. 

The pocket beach immediately north of the mouth of Oil Well Canyon is an important hauling 

ground and rookery for the area. Additional haul out sites occur in the direction of Rocky 

Point, and to the south, the rocks immediately seaward of the Boathouse breakwater are used 

as haul outs (Pergler 1988). The 1986 census produced counts totaling 500 seals for these 

sites (Hanan et al. 1987). Patterns of movement between mainland and Channel Island 

populations have not been delineated, but presumably they do occur. 

6. Harbor seals rarely move far offshore and appear to stay in water no deeper than 90 m 

(Antonelis and Fiscus 1980). .Consequently their main foraging grounds parallel the coast, 

where they probably take advantage of concentrations of prey. 

4.2.3.4 Northern (Steller) Sea Lion 

1. The northern (Steller) sea lion is a federally-protected species under the MMPA. 

2. Northern sea lions are limited to the north Pacific Ocean ranging from the north Pacific Rim in 

a pattern similar to northern fur seals with the exception that they occur in shallower waters. 

The northern Channel Islands, specifically Santa Rosa and San Miguel Islands were used 

as hauling grounds and rookeries by the species until recently. The last territorial bull was 

seen on Castle Rock just off the northwest shore of San Miguel Island in 1985. Currently, 

Atio Nuevo Island is the southernmost rookery although individuals may haul out at a variety 

of shoreline locations including Point Sal Rock (Bonnell et al. 1983). A range of 232,000 to 

262,000 has been estimated for a total population (NMFS 1982). In California, a population 

decline has been evident for nearly 60 years. It has been speculated that this decline may be 

due to decreases in sardine stocks (Ainley and Lewis 1974) or increasing water temperatures 

in the southern portion of the breeding range (Bartholomew 1967). For a 50-year period, the 

breeding stock at Ario Nuevo Island remained at approximately 2,000 individuals (Evermann 

1921; Rowley 1929; Ripley et al. 1962; Orr and Poulter 1965; Gentry 1970). Surveys 

undertaken in 1980, 1981, and 1982, made actual counts during the peak of breeding 

season which ranged from 882 to 1,325 individuals (Bonnell et al. 1983). 
I 

I 

I 

NROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-47 

3. Little has been published relative to aggregations of northern sea lions at sea. The most 

notable aggregations per se are those described above regarding rookery islands (Aiio Nuevo 

Island in California). Adult females and juveniles may remain near rookery sites throughout 

the year. Adult males are the first to leave the rookeries in late summer. The bulk of females 

leave in September and October. In California, there appears to be a migration northward that 

some believe involves the entire population that breeds in California waters (Bonne11 et al. 

1983; Mate 1977; Schusterman 1981). 

4.2.4 BIRD SPECIES 

1. In addition to the federally-listed, state-listed, and candidate species discussed in Section 4.1, 

18 other bird species that occur in the study region have shown regional or state-wide decline. 

Birds included in this category are considered by the CDFG as "Species of Special Concern" 

as found in Remsen (1978), included on the National Audubon Society's Blue List (Tate 

1986; Tate and Tate 1982), or found by local ornithologists to be rare or declining within 

Santa Barbara County. These birds are addressed in the following sections as regionally 

rare and declining species. 

4.2.4.1 Blazk-shouldered Kite 

1. The black-shouldered kite is a California state-listed "fully protected" species known to occur 

in the study region and expected to frequent the project area. 

2. This species uses open country such as grazed or lightly grazed grasslands, freshwater marsh, 

and saltwater marsh for feeding and is known to frequent patches of willows, eucalyptus or 

oaks for nesting and roosting (Waian and Stendell 1970; Stendell 1967; Waian 1973). 

3. Small numbers of kites are known to be resident on VAFB near the mouth of the Santa Ynez 

River (Lehman 1982) and in the Barka Slough area (Dial 1980), although none have been 

observed in the project area. There have been recent sightings of kites during the fall and 

winter months on the Hollister and Bixby Ranches (Storrer 1988). Much of the Cypress 

Ridge and Boathouse Flats sites, as well as the eastern section of the Vina Terrace site, appear 

to be suitable foraging habitat. Kites are expected to occasionally forage at the project sites, 

but are not expected to nest or roost there. The nearest black-shouldered kite nesting area is 

located in willow woodlands near the mouth of the Santa Ynez River (Lehman 1982). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

4.2.4.2 Northern Harrier 

1. The northern harrier is listed as a second priority "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG 

(Remsen 1978) and is on the most recent Blue List (Tate 1986). 

2. This species has declined as a wintering bird throughout much of Santa Barbara County due 

to loss of extensive open country foraging habitat (e.g., grassland, open coastal sage scrub, 

marshes, and agricultural areas) (Lehman 1982). In the project area, northern harriers 

frequent open habitats such as grasslands, coastal scrub, marshes, and agricultural areas for 

foraging. Adults with recently fledged young have been observed during the summer on 

VAFB near Point Sal, at the mouths of San Antonio Creek and the Santa Ynez River, and at 

Bear Creek (Lehman 1982). This species occurs in the study region and project area as an 

uncommon resident breeder and is a common transient and winter visitor. Northern harriers 

were observed foraging in the project area during 1988 spring field inventories, but are not 

expected to nest there (Collins 1988b). 

4.2.4.3 Cooper's Hawk 

1. This species is listed in the Blue List (Tate 1986) and is listed in the third priority category of 

"Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG (Remsen 1978). 

2. In Santa Barbara County, Cooper's hawks have declined substantially due, in large part, to a 

loss of relatively undisturbed riparian and oak woodland habitats. The species no longer nests 

along the south coast, but is believed to nest in small numbers in riparian woodlands on 

VAFB (Lehman 1982). One or two pairs may still reside in dense riparian woodlands along 

the Santa Ynez River from Lompoc to its mouth, and in Honda and Bear Creeks. There does 

not appear to be any riparian habitat in the vicinity of the project sites that could support 

nesting Cooper's hawks. As such, this species should be considered as an uncommon 

transient winter visitor to the project area. 

4.2.4.4 Merlin 

1. This species is listed in the highest priority category of "Species of Special Concern" by the 

CDFG (Remsen 1978) and is on the Blue List (Tate 1986) due to severe population declines 

over much of North America . 

4-48 , 
' NRO 'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-49 

2. In Santa Barbara County, merlins are rare transient and winter visitors to coastal areas 

(Lehman 1982). There have been five recent late fall and winter sightings of merlins on the 

Bixby and Hollister Ranches (Stoner 1988). During the winter months, merlins can be 

expected to occasionally forage over grassland and coastal scrub habitats in the project area. 

This species does not nest in the Southern California region. 

4.2.4.5 Prairie Falcon - 

1. This species is listed in the third priority of "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG due 

to a decline in their numbers in California during the past two decades from pesticide 

contamination, falconry, and shooting (Remsen 1978). 

2. The prairie falcon is an uncommon fall and winter visitor along the coast of Santa Barbara 

County, frequenting open country habitats such as grassland, wetlands, and agricultural areas 

for foraging (Lehman 1982). Suitable foraging habitat exists over much of the project area. 

Prairie falcons have been sighted four times during the past two winters on the Bixby and 

Hollister Ranches (Stoner 1988), and an individual has-been observed in the vicinity of the 

Boathouse during four of the past six years (1982-1987) (Crisologo 1983, 1984; Pergler 

1988). Thus, this species can be expected to occur in the project area as an uncommon fall 

and winter visitor. 

4.2.4.6 Burrowing Owl 

1. This species has shown significant declines throughout California in recent times, is listed in 

the second priority category of "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG (Remsen 1978) 

and is on the Blue List (Tate 1986). 

2. Burrowing owls are not known to nest along the coast of Santa Barbara County (Lehman 

1982). Sighting records suggest that this species occurs as a rare but regular winter visitor to 

the project area, with one or two individuals expected each winter. Burrowing owls have 

been observed in the vicinity of SLC-4 (Versar 1987) and along the Sudden Ranch Road 

adjacent to the Boathouse Flats site (Lehman 1988). Good foraging habitat exists over much 

of the project area, especially the Boathouse Flats site, where there is an abundant California 

ground squirrel population. 

4.2.4.7 Long-eared Owl 

1. This species is listed in the second priority listing of "Species of Special Concern" by the 

CDFG (Remsen 1978). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2. Within the project area and along much of coastal Santa Barbara County, long-eared owls are 

very rare transient and winter visitors. Their only known nesting locale in the study region 

was at Santa Rosa Park along the Santa Ynez River west of Buellton (Lehman 1982). The 

species has been observed at Barka Slough on North VAFB where requisite riparian breeding 

habitat still exists (Webster 1980). A few of the drainages on South VAFB, such as Bear 

Creek and Honda Creek, contain sufficient willow riparian habitat for migrant and wintering 

long-eared owls and possibly for breeders. This species could occur as a casual transient 

visitor in riparian habitat in Red Roof and Agua Viva Canyons. 

4.2.4.8 Short-eared Owl 

1. This species has shown a drastic decline in numbers in central and southern coastal California 

and, as such, has been listed as a second priority "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFG 

(Remsen 1978) and is on the Blue List (Tate 1986). 

2. There is suitable foraging habitat at the Boathouse Flats site and along most of the Sudden 

Ranch area southeast of the project area. There have been only three recent sightings of this 

species from coastal areas north of Point Conception (Howald et al. 1985; Lehman 1982). 

As such, this species should be considered as a casual to rare winter visitor to open coastal 

scrub and grassland habitats in the project area. 

4.2.4.9 Willow Flycatcher 

1. This species is listed by the CDFG (Remsen 1978) as a special status species of highest 

priority (i.e., in imminent danger of extirpation if current trends continue) and is on the Blue 

List (Tate 1986). It has been extirpated as a breeder throughout most of Southern California 

(Garrett and Dunn 1981), including most of Santa Barbara County (Lehman 1982). 

Throughout most of Santa Barbara County, willow flycatchers occur only as an uncommon 

fall transient and rare spring transient to willow-dominated riparian habitat (Lehman 1982) 

and, despite intensive surveys, have not been found on VAFB (Breininger 1988; Dial 1980; 

Howald et al. 1985; Webster 1980). The only known breeding colony of willow flycatchers 

within the study region occurs in dense willow riparian woodlands about one mile west of 

Buellton along the Santa Ynez River (Versar 1987). A number of canyons on South VAFB 

contain willow riparian habitat of sufficient size and quality to be used by willow flycatchers 

4-50 , 
NRD APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-51 

during migration (e.g., Bear and Honda Creeks), although riparian habitats in Red Roof, 

Spring, Oil, and Agua Viva Canyons are not of sufficient size or quality for nesting. These 

areas could be visited on an infrequent basis by an occasional fall or spring migrant. 

4.2.4.10 Purple Martirt 

1. This species (Progne subis) has been placed on the Blue List (Tate 1986) and is considered by 

local ornithologists to be regionally rare and declining (Lehman, 1988). 

2. The purple martin occurs as a rare spring and very rare fall migrant in coastal areas of Santa 

Barbara County (Lehman 1982). The nearest consistent lowland breeding population occurs 

in sycamore trees at Nojoqui Falls County Park in the Santa Ynez Valley, just east of the study 

region. The sighting of a single bird in June 1986, on the sea cliffs at Point Arguello, is the 

only known record in the project area (Lehman 1982). There is no suitable nesting habitat for 

this species on South VAFB. 

4.2.4.11 Tree Swallow 

1. This species has been extirpated as a breeder along much of the south coast and is considered 

by local c mithologists an uncommon but localized breeder elsewhere in Santa Barbara County 

(Lehman 1982). 

2. Tree swallows are locally common along the north coast where they can be found breeding in 

moderate numbers in willow-dominated riparian habitats along the larger water courses such 

as the Santa Maria River inland to Guadalupe, on San Antonio Creek inland to Barka Slough, 

and on the Santa Ynez River from Buellton to its mouth (Lehman 1982). Although the species 

could occur over the project area as a migrant, it is not expected to utilize the willow 

woodlands on South VAFB in Bear, Honda, Red Roof, Spring or Agua Viva Canyons for 

nesting. The riparian habitat in these canyons is not of sufficient size or quality to support 

breeding populations of tree swallows. The nearest concentration of tree swallows to the 

project area occurs at the mouth of the Santa Ynez River (Lehman 1982). 

4.2.4.12 ,Swainson's Thrush 

I In Santa Barbara County, Swainson's thrush is now considered by local ornithologists to be 

a very uncommon localized breeder and spring transient along the south coast and a fairly 

common breeder in the remaining extensive riparian and mixed oak-riparian woodlands along 

the north coast (Lehman 1982, 1983). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2. The largest breeding population of Swainson's thrush in Santa Barbara County occurs at 

Barka Slough. Along the north coast, this species is a fairly common breeder in riparian 

woodlands on VAFB, including Shuman Creek, San Antonio Creek inland to Barka Slough, 

Santa Ynez River in scattered sites from Buellton to its mouth, and on South VAFB in Bear 

Creek and Honda Canyons (Lehman 1982; Webster 1980). This species is expected to occur 

as a common spring and fall migrant in willow riparian habitats found within the project area 

in Red Roof, Spring, Oil Well, and Agua Viva Canyons. 

4.2.4.13 Warbling Vireo 

1. The warbling vireo is considered by local ornithologists to be a very uncommon to rare 

localized nester along the south coast and a rather common breeder along the north coast of 

Santa Barbara County (Lehman 1982, 1983). 

2. Breeding populations of warbling vireos have been found along the Santa Maria River inland 

to Guadalupe, on San Antonio Creek inland to Barka Slough, along the Santa Ynez River 

from its mouth to Buellton, and on upper Honda Creek on South VAFB (Lehman 1982; 

Webster 1980). This species probably occurs in the project area as a common spring and fall 

migrant in riparian habitat found in Spring, Red Roof, Oil Well, and Agua Viva Canyons. A 

single bird was observed in Red Roof Canyon during the spring of 1988. Although this bird 

was observed in suitable nesting habitat, it exhibited no nesting behavior and would therefore 

be considered a late spring migrant. The warbling vireo is not expected to nest in riparian 

woodlands in the project area. 

4.2.4.14 Yellow Warbler 

1. The yellow warbler is on the Blue List (Tate 1986) and has declined regionally. 

2. This species is a common spring and fall migrant and is a localized summer breeder in 

requisite riparian woodland habitat in northern Santa Barbara County. Yellow warblers still 

breed in moderate numbers in extensive stands of riparian woodlands on Shuman and San 

Antonio Creeks (especially Barka Slough), the Santa Ynez River from its mouth to Buellton, 

and possibly on upper Honda Creek (Webster 1980-, Lehman 1982). Yellow warblers may 

nest in the willow woodlands found in Red Roof Canyon and probably occur as common 

migrants in woodlands in Spring, Oil Well, and Agua Viva Canyons, and in the Cypress trees 

near the Boathouse and the V-33 tow route. 

4-52 
• • NRQ.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 4-53 

4.2.4.15 Wilson's Warbler 

1. This species has been extirpated as a breeder from much of the south coast of Santa Barbara 

County due to a loss of riparian woodland habitat and to increased rates of brood parasitism 

by brown-headed cowbirds (Lehman 1982). 

2. Wilson's warbler is still a fairly common breeder in the more extensive riparian areas along 

the Santa Maria River west of Guadalupe, along San Antonio Creek inland to Barka Slough, 

along the Santa Ynez River west to Buellton, and in small numbers along Bear and Honda 

Creeks on South VAFB (Lehman 082). In the spring of 1988, this species was observed 

singing in Red Roof Canyon and foraging in coastal scrub in Oil Well Canyon and at the Vina 

Terrace site. It is a common spring and fall migrant in the project area and may nest in small 

numbers in the willow woodlands in Red Roof Canyon. 

4.2.4.16 Yellow-breasted Chat 

1. This species is listed by the CDFG in the second priority of "Species of Special Concern" 

(Remsen 1978). 

2. Historically, yellow-breasted cl.at were common breeders in coastal riparian habitats 

throughout Southern California (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Willett 1933). Today, this species 

is a rare migrant and very rare localized breeder in southern Santa Barbara County and an 

uncommon breeder in northern Santa Barbara County along San Antonio Creek (fairly 

common at Barka Slough) and the Santa Ynez River from Buellton west to its mouth (Lehman 

1982). Yellow-breasted chat are probably rare spring and fall migrants to riparian woodland 

habitat on South VAFB in Bear, Honda, Red Roof, Spring, and Agua Viva Canyons. 

However, the habitat within these canyons is not extensive enough to support a breeding 

population of this species. 

4.2.4.17 Blue Grosttal 

1. This species (Guiraca caerulea) has declined as a breeder throughout much of Southern 

California due in part to a loss of riparian edge habitat and possibly to brood parasitism by the 

brown-headed cowbird (Lehman 1982). 

2. In northern Santa Barbara County, blue grosbeaks continue to nest in riparian and brushy 

areas bordering weedy fields and pastures in the Barka Slough area, in the Los Alamos 

Valley, along the Santa Ynez River from Santa Ynez to Lompoc, along Jalama Road, and near 

New Cuyama (Lehman 1982). Blue grosbeaks are uncommon fall and casual spring migrants 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 4-54 

I JUNE 2015 

in brushy and weedy areas along creeks and ditches within the study region (Lehman 1982). 

Suitable breeding habitat is not present on South VAFB or within the project area, but this 

species is expected to forage in the project area during its annual spring and fall migration, 

especially in Red Roof and Spring Canyons. 

4.2.4.18 Grasshopper Sparrow 

1. This species is on the Blue List due to a reduction in its requisite tall grass breeding habitat 

(Tate 1986). Today, grasshopper sparrows occur in only two isolated locales along the south 

coast (Lehman 1982). 

2. In northern Santa Barbara County, the grasshopper sparrow persists in reasonable numbers 

in the Point Sal area and, locally, in small numbers south to the Barka Slough area, in 

San Miguelito Canyon southwest of Lompoc, and in isolated pockets on grassy slopes along 

the Santa Ynez River west of Buellton to its mouth (Lehman 1982, 1986). Grasshopper 

sparrows may also occur in suitable ungrazed grassland habitats on South VAFB (especially 

along the Sudden Ranch portion of the base) and on the Bixby and Hollister Ranches. It is 

possible that this species nests in grasslands on the eastern edge of the Vina Terrace site and in 

grasslands on the slopes north of the Coast Road from the Cypress Ridge site east to Agua 

Viva Canyon. This species was not observed at any of the project sites during the 1988 

spring surveys conducted for this project. More intensive late spring surveys would be 

needed to determine if this species nests in the project area. 
' NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-1 

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

5.1 VEGETATION 

5.1.1 INTRODUCTION 

1. This section addresses potential impacts to vegetation resulting from construction and 

operation of the proposed action. Such impacts would occur as a result of grading and 

other construction activities undertaken at the launch complex site, access roads, and utility 

corridors. During operations, impacts primarily would result from effects of acidic deposition 

associated with the ground cloud produced during vehicle launch. 

Impacts to vegetation would be considered significant if they: 

• Substantially affect a rare or endangered species of plant. 

• Substantially diminish a regionally or locally important plant community. 

• Substantially diminish habitat for a plant species. 

• Result in a substantial infusion of exotic species. 

5.1.2 REGIONAL IMPACTS 

1. Project impacts primarily consist of removal and alteration of vegetation during construction 

at one of the undeveloped alternatives and the potential for disturbance from project-related 

emissions from all four sites during operations. As these would be local impacts, no regional 

impacts are anticipated. 

5.1.3 LOCAL IMPACTS 

1. Implementation of the proposed action at one of the undeveloped sites (Cypress Ridge, 

Boathouse Flats, or Vina Terrace) would result in impacts to vegetation within the launch 

complex site, corresponding utility corridors, and additional areas to be used for project 

facilities and construction needs (see Section 2.1). These impacts would include: 

(1) removal of portions of vegetation communities, (2) removal of individuals of special 

interest species, (3) potential for establishment of exotic species in disturbed areas, and 

(4) effects of launch-related acidic deposition. 

2. In addition to the launch complex, areas that would be disturbed due to construction 

activities would include the contractor village, construction laydown sites, batch plant, truck 

washdown, access roads, parking, and sewage treatment facility. Therefore, although the 

final, fenced launch complex would be about 50 acres in size, the total area to be disturbed for 

the Cypress Ridge, Vina Terrace, and Boathouse Flats sites would be considerably greater, 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-2 

ranging from approximately 185 to 280 acres, depending on the site chosen. Implementation 

of the SLC-6 alternative would not result in significant impacts to vegetation from 

construction, since neither earth moving nor excavation activities are anticipated. 

3. In the following sections, impacts are described first as they are expected to occur from 

implementation of the project at the Cypress Ridge site. Impacts anticipated at the three 

alternative sites are discussed if they would differ from those projected for the Cypress 

Ridge site. 

5.1.4 CYPRESS RIDGE 

5.1.4.1 Construction 

i. Construction of the proposed action at the Cypress Ridge site would result in a permanent 

loss of approximately 90 acres of central coastal scrub and Venturan coastal sage scrub, 

representing less than one percent of these communities on all of VAFB. Removal of 

approximately 19 acres of nonnative grassland represents a loss of less than 0.1 percent of that 

community on VAFB. Since these losses together represent less than one percent of the 

VAFB community, the impact is considered to be insignificant. 

2. Construction of the electrical power line would result in a potential area of disturbance defined 

by a corridor approximately 125 to 150 feet wide and about three miles long, mostly through 

central coastal scrub. Disturbance during placement of the electrical power poles and stringing 

of electric power lines may affect approximately 40 to 50 individuals of the federal candidate 

Monardella undulara var. frutescens although, as feasible, the power poles would be placed to 

avoid this sensitive plant species. Wetlands would be avoided by adjusting pole spacing to 

clear wetland areas. This design would preserve several small wetland areas covering about 

one-half of one acre and two areas of willow-dominated riparian scrub/woodland at the Red 

Roof Canyon and Grey Canyon crossings (near the SLC-6 external tank storage and checkout 

facility and Lockheed temporary storage facilities). 

3. Construction of the underground communication (fiber-optic cable), gaseous nitrogen, and 

natural gas lines along the proposed alignment would have no significant impact, as these 

utilities would be placed primarily along existing roads and in ruderal vegetation consisting 

mainly of introduced species (see Figure 2.2). Construction of the fiber-optic cable along the 

alternative alignment would be within the electric power corridor and would avoid wetland 

areas. Construction of the water line would have little impact on vegetation, as the corridor 

would follow Coast Road over most of its distance. 
I 

I 

I 

I 

, • NRQ•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-3 

4. Approximately 800 to 1,000 mature individuals of Monardella undulate: var. frutescens would 

be lost as a result of construction of the proposed action at the Cypress Ridge site. This 

represents an estimated 25 to 50 percent of the individuals in known populations south of 

Honda Canyon. Although there are an estimated 950,000 individuals of this taxon on the 

San Antonio Terrace (a portion of its suitable habitat) (HDR 1980), the populations at the 

Cypress Ridge site are important because these plants are at the southern limit of their range 

(Smith 1983), and their loss, therefore, would-be a locally significant impact_ This impact 

would be reduced to an acceptable level by undertaking suggested mitigation measures (see 

Chapter 6.0). Other special interest plant taxa that could be affected are listed in Appendix A, 

Table A.3. 

5. The invasion of construction-disturbed areas by exotic plants is a potential impact to 

vegetation. Sites disturbed by construction activities are prone to exotic plant invasion, due to 

the absence of competing vegetation. Once established, the exotics can spread to previously 

pristine plant communities. Exotic invasive plants such as hottentot-fig (Carpobrows edulis), 

Andean grass (Cortaderia jubara), and slender-leaf iceplant (Conicosia pugioniformis) are 

undesirable on VAFB. 

5.1.4.2 Operations 

1. Impacts to vegetation near the launch complex may occur during launches as a result of acidic 

deposition (hydrochloric acid) formed by contact of the deluge water with exhaust components 

of the SRMUs. Acute vegetation damage has occurred in Space Shuttle exhaust cloud paths 

less than 0.6 mile from the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center (Schmalzer et al. 1986). 

Based on space shuttle launches, impacts could include damage to sensitive species, change 

in vegetation cover type resulting from changes in the soil seed bank as species are lost, soil 

erosion resulting from loss of vegetative cover (Zarnmit and Zedler 1988), and loss of special 

interest plants. 

2. Information regarding the impacts to vegetation from launch exhaust from Titan IV launches 

is sparse since so few launches have occurred. Some preliminary information about potential 

impacts to vegetation from Titan IV launch-related acidic deposition was collected at the 

first Titan IV launch from CCAFS (USAF 1989b). The launch report notes that a field 

investigation of the area under and around the predicted exhaust cloud path (predictions taken 

from the REEDM Model) did not note acidic deposition in either the near- or far-field regions. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-4 

1 JUNE 2015 

In addition, none of the acid spotting or aroma characteristics of space shuttle launches were 

noted by pad area workers. It appears that the Titan IV deluge water volume does not generate 

a ground cloud of the size generated by a Space Shuttle launch. 

3. During the initial liftoff, the Titan IV upgraded SRMUs burn, resulting in ignition products of 

hydrogen chloride gas (HCI), aluminum oxide (A1203), carbon monoxide (CO), and water 

(H20). The HCI gas contained in the exhaust cloud has a strong tendency to combine with 

available water used during a launch. Of the approximately 26,000 gallons of deluge water 

used during liftoff, about 20,000 gallons evaporate and form a ground cloud (this contrasts to 

approximately 44,000 gallons which evaporate from each launch of the Space Shuttle). As the 

launch ground cloud condenses, it forms water droplets which scavenge the HCl gas, 

becoming hydrochloric acid droplets (NASA 1983). 

4. Deposition of the hydrochloric acid droplets on surrounding vegetation has been estimated 

to result in impacts when pH levels approach 3.0. These impacts could include partial or 

complete defoliation and a decline in seedling survivorship, seed germination response, 

and seedling emergence (NASA 1987). Figure 5.1 (Near-field Acidic Deposition, Titan 

IV/Centaur Launch) shows the estimated concentration of acidic deposition at various 

distances from the launch mount. The figure shows that vegetation within a downwind 

distance of approximately three miles could be expected to be impacted to some extent due to 

the low pH content of the exhaust cloud. However, due to dispersion of the ground cloud, 

potential impacts would decrease with distance from the launch site. After a launch, A1203 

also would be expected to fall out from the ground cloud However, analyses of 

launch-related deposition of A1203 have not shown it to be harmful to plant life (USAF 1983). 

5. Populations of Monardella undulata var. frutescens are located approximately one-half mile 

southwest of the Cypress Ridge site (about 400 mature individuals), and about 50 individuals 

are located one-third mile north-northwest of the site. Although unlikely due to prevailing 

wind direction, these populations may be affected by ground cloud deposition. A population 

of approximately 50 individuals of surf thistle (Cirsium rhothophilum), another federal 

candidate species, occurs outside of the study area near Rocky Point, approximately 0.7 mile 

west of the launch pad site. Given the distance and wind direction normally associated with a 

launch, this plant population may not be affected. 
5-5 

NORTH 

VAFB 

PENITENTIARY 

LOMPOC 

BOATHOUSE FLATS SITE 

Distance 

from 

Cypress Ridge (miles) . 

Percent of total 

acidic deposition 

in ground cloud 

Estimated deposition 

per unit area 

(gallons/acre) 

0 to 2 • 76.8 19.35 

2 to 4 0 16.0 4.03 

4 to 6 0 4.8 1.21 

6 plus 0 2.4 0.54 

rt) 

O 

N Rc) AP P 

51 JUNE 201 

MISSION 

HILLS 

POINT 

PEDERNALES 

SLC-6 SITE 

2 4 MILES 

SCALE 

FIGURE 5.1 

NEAR-FIELD ACIDIC DEPOSITION 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

WIND SPEED = 9.8 MILES PER HOUR 

COMPUTATION PERFORMED BY TRAJM (NASA 1983) 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-6 , 

1 JUNE 2015 

6. There could be impacts to plant life as a result of a catastrophic event, although such impact 

is expected to be insignificant. For example, the potential for vegetation to experience 

direct contact with spilled fuel would be minimized by provision of fuel and fuel waste 

impoundments and the spill retention capability of the flame duct. In the event of a solid 

rocket anomaly on or near the launch pad, there would be locally high levels of HCl 

deposition. However, based on observations of nearby vegetation after the Titan 34-D 

explosion at SLC-4 in April 1986, the occurrence of such impact at the Cypress Ridge site 

would not be significant. Further, in the case of a wildland fire resulting from a launch 

anomaly, there would be little long-term impact from the fire itself, as the natural plant 

communities surrounding the Cypress Ridge site are adapted to periodic burning. However, 

such fire could result in secondary impacts from invasion by exotic plants (Hickson 1987). 

Overall, significant impacts from catastrophic events are not anticipated. 

5.1.5 SLC-6 

5.1.5.1 Construction 

1. Since no earth moving or excavation activities are anticipated at the SLC-6 site, impacts to 

vegetation would be minimal and would not be significant. In addition, selection of the 

SLC-6 site would avoid construction impacts at an undeveloped site. 

5.1.5.2 Operations 

1. Impacts from operations at this site would include possible vegetation damage from acidic 

deposition during launches, as described for the Cypress Ridge site. The approximate 

boundaries of acidic deposition resulting from a Titan IV/Centaur launch from SLC-6 are 

shown in Figure 5.2 (Near-field Acidic Deposition SLC-6 Site Titan IV/Centaur Launch). 

The impacts of this deposition would not be known with certainty until after a launch. 

However, indications from experience with the Space Shuttle indicate that most of the 

anticipated impacts to vegetation would occur within three miles of the launch site. The 

greatest impact would be expected within 0.6 mile (NASA 1987). 

2. Special interest species which could be affected include a population of about 300 to 350 

mature individuals of Monardella undulata var. frutescens, located about 2,000 feet southwest 

of SLC-6. Other populations of this species are located south of Cypress Ridge. Due to 

topography and distance, the potential effects of acidic deposition on these populations could 

be somewhat less from a launch at SLC-6 than from a launch at one of the undeveloped sites. 
5-7 

• - - 

JUNE 201 Distance 

from 

SLC-6 

Percent of total 

acidic deposition 

in ground cloud 

Estimated deposition 

per unit area 

(gallons/acre) 

0 to 2 • 76.8 19.35 

2 to 4 0 16.0 4.03 

4 to 6 0 4.8 1.21 

6 plus 0 2.4 0.54 

cn 

us PEMIEN11ARY 

SASSION 

HILLS 

SOUTH 

VAFEt 

SLC-6 SITE 

BOATHOUSE FLATS SIZE"or 

2 4 MILES 

SCALE 

FIGURE 5.2 

NEAR-FIELD ACIDIC DEPOSITION 

SLC-6 SITE 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LNC. 

WIND SPEED = 9.8 MILES PER HOUR 

COMPUTATION PERFORMED BY TRAJM (NASA 1983) 

so: uc,„ 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-8 , 

1 JUNE 2015 

3. A large population of surf thistle, a federal candidate species, occurs approximately one 

mile west of SLC-6 at Point Arguello. A smaller population of about 50 individuals occurs 

approximately 1.2 miles southwest, at Rocky Point. Given the distance from the potential 

SLC-6 launch site and the wind direction normally associated with a launch, these plant 

populations may not be affected. 

4. Impacts from catastrophic events would be comparable to those described for the Cypress 

Ridge site and, therefore, insignificant. 

5.1.6 BOATHOUSE FLATS 

5.1.6.1 Construction 

1. The permanent loss of approximately 130 acres of non-native grassland would result from 

construction of the launch complex at this site. This would have little regional impact, since it 

would represent less than one percent of this community on VAFB. Potential impacts from 

exotic plant invasion are present, but would be less serious here than at Cypress Ridge, since 

this site is already populated with nonnative plants. 

2. Temporary disturbance of 50 to 100 mature individuals of the federal candidate Monardella 

undulata var. frurescens could result from construction of the power line, but additional 

suitable habitat might be created as a result of its construction. Construction of the water 

pipeline would result in the disturhance of a 5-foot wide corridor, approximately two miles 

long, through central coastal and Venturan coastal sage scrub, and less than one acre of 

willow-dominated riparian scrub in Oil Well Canyon. As at the Cypress Ridge site, impacts 

to wetlands and riparian scrub/ woodlands are not expected due to planned mitigation 

measures (see Chapter 6.0). Impacts from construction of the underground communication, 

gaseous nitrogen, and natural gas lines would be insignificant, since primarily ruderal 

vegetation would be disturbed. 

5.1.6.2 Operations 

1. Impacts from operations at this site would include possible vegetation damage from acidic 

deposition during launches, as described for the Cypress Ridge site. The nearest large 

populations of the federal candidate plant Monardella undulata var. frutescens (roughly 600 

and 400 mature individuals each) occur approximately one mile northeast of the proposed 

launch pad. The population of surf thistle near Rocky Point is approximately 1.3 miles 
, • NRQ APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-9 

northwest of the launch pad. The prevailing wind direction at VAFB makes it unlikely that 

these populations would be affected by acid deposition. Accelerated soil erosion from loss of 

vegetative cover is also unlikely on this level site, except possibly on the cliff faces. 

2. Impacts from catastrophic events would be the same as described for the Cypress Ridge site. 

5.1.7 V1NA TERRACE 

5.1.7.1 Construction 

1. A permanent loss of approximately 65 acres of central coastal scrub and 30 acres of grassland 

and grassland-coastal scrub would occur from the construction of the proposed action at the 

Vina Terrace site. Potential impacts of invasion by exotic species would be less serious than 

Cypress Ridge since the soils are less susceptible to invasion by exotics, but of greater 

consequence than at Boathouse Flats since it is already populated by nonnative plants. 

2. An estimated 60 acres of central coastal scrub, seven acres of Venturan coastal sage scrub, and 

less than one acre of willow-dominated riparian scrub would be cleared for construction of the 

access road and utility and water lines across Oil Well Canyon. About one mile of this road 

would follow an existing unpaved road, the widening of which would impact a small amount 

native bunchgrass-dominated grassland. The impacts to central coastal scrub along the 

proposed power line route north of the Lockheed temporary storage facilities and to riparian 

scrub/woodland at the Red Roof and Grey Canyon crossings would be the same as for the 

Cypress Ridge site. No known federal candidate species or special interest plants would be 

affected. 

5.1.7.2 Operations 

1. Impacts from operations at the Vina Terrace site could include possible vegetation damage and 

possible accelerated soil erosion due to vegetative cover removal and from acidic deposition 

during launches, as discussed for the Cypress Ridge site. Because of the steep slopes, the 

potential for soil erosion is greater at this site than at the Cypress Ridge, SLC-6, or Boathouse 

Flats sites. No known federal candidate species would be affected by operations at the Vina 

Terrace site. 

2. Impacts from catastrophic events would be insignificant, as they would be the same as 

described for the Cypress Ridge site. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-16 

5.2 WILDLIFE 

5.2.1 INTRODUCTION 

1. This section addresses potential impacts to terrestrial, aquatic, and marine wildlife that would 

result from construction and operation of the proposed project. Impacts during project 

construction would primarily be related to habitat removal during grading at the undeveloped 

sites. During operations, impacts would primarily be related to launch events and the potential 

effects of associated launch noise, sonic boom, and acidic deposition at any of the four sites. 

2. Impacts to wildlife would be considered significant if they would: 

• Substantially diminish habitat for a terrestrial or marine species. 

• Substantially affect a rare or endangered species of animal or its habitat. 

• Interfere substantially with the movement of resident or migratory wildlife 

species. 

Interfere substantially with reproductive behavior. 

5.2.2 REGIONAL IMPACTS 

1. The primary regional impacts to biota would be potential effects of launch noise and focused 

sonic boom overpressure on marine mammals and birds in the Channel Island region and 

offshore. Construction and most operational impacts would be localized and not extend to the 

offshore/Channel Islands region, due to distance from the launch site. Construction impacts 

would be confined to the South VAFB area. Potential operations impacts related to air 

emissions, normal operational noise, and acidic deposition resulting from launch events would 

occur primarily within the South VAFB area. 

Launch noise and focused sonic booms and their short- and long-term impacts on marine 

birds and mammals are addressed herein. Computer modeling to predict the magnitude, 

footprint, and signature of the focused sonic boom was completed for the proposed action. 

Documentation of the modeling effort and its results is included as Appendix D (Channel 

Island Sonic Boom Analysis for Titan IV Launches from SLC-7). 

3. The SLC-6, Boathouse Flats, and Vina Terrace sites are near (within about one mile) to the 

Cypress Ridge site. Therefore, the sonic overpressures and launch-related noise modeled for 

the Cypress Ridge site would be the same for the three alternative sites. 

4. The launch trajectory, nearfield noise signature of the Titan IV/Centaur and local meteorology 

were input as variables for a computer model (Saber II) to predict the worst-case magnitude, 

footprint, and signature of the focus sonic boom which would result from launch and ascent 
• NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-11 

of the Titan IV/Centaur. A worst-case analysis was undertaken by designating an overflight 

path coincident with the Channel Islands and by assuming meteorological conditions that 

would result in the greatest noise (i.e., no wind). 

5. The Saber II model worst-case analysis predicts 10-pound per square foot (psf) magnitude 

and footprint of the focused sonic boom, shown in Figure 5.3 (Titan IV/Centaur Sonic Boom 

Footprint), occurring over the Channel Islands, with the greatest potential impact being to San 

Miguel Island. As shown in Figure 5.4 (Simplified Focus Signature) the duration of the 

event is very short (less than one-half second). 

6. Impacts to marine birds and mammals from sonic booms and launch-related noise have been 

assessed for physical effects (physiological damage) and startle effects (behavior, breeding, 

and stampeding). The threshold for temporary auditory damage from exposure to a single 

sonic boom has been found to occur in the range of 138 dB to 169 dB (Chappell 1980). 

The maximum, worst-case, A-weighted sound level expected to be produced during a Titan 

IV/Centaur launch is 147 dBA based on a predicted overpressure of 10 psf. This level is 

within the threshold for temporary auditory damage and would cause minor and temporary 

hearing loss in sensitive wildlife species. Non-worst case launch scenarios (azimuths not 

coincident with the Channel Islands or varying wind and temperature conditions) would result 

in lower sound levels and would be expected to incur fewer auditory impacts to marine biota. 

7. Startle responses in marine birds and mammals are known to occur at impulses of as little 

as 80 to 90 dB flat SPL (sound pressure level) (Bowles and Stewart 1980). Noise of this 

intensity may occur within 20 to 30 miles of the launch site from Titan IV/Centaur launches, 

thus leading to potential impacts to biota of the northein Channel Islands. Mammals and birds 

will generally run or fly in response to sonic booms and loud overflights (Speich et al. 1987; 

Bowles and Stewart 1980). However, despite rather intensive long-term studies, there is no 

evidence that leaping, self-damage, crushing, or breeding colony abandonment occur with 

either marine birds or marine mammals as a result of startle responses brought on by sonic 

booms or loud overflights (Bowles and Stewart 1980; Schreiber and Schreiber 1980; Black et 

al. 1984; Speich et al. 1987). Therefore, significant impacts are not expected to result from 

Titan IV/Centaur launch events. 

i751 

u_ 

cn 

T 

0) CO f'- CD LO • C'1/41 r C:, 

CO 

(dScl) 3811SS38c183A0 V4008 OINOS cosnooJ 

1 JUNE 2015 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

TIME (SECONDS) 

O 

AM. 

I I II 1 

tt 

0 

LL 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

SIMPLIFIED FOCUS SIGNATURE 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS,INC. 

5-13 

REVISED 617/89 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-14 

1 JUNE 2015 

5.2.3 LOCAL IMPACTS 

1. In addition to regional impacts, the following sections provide an assessment of impacts to 

the local environment resulting from construction and operation of the proposed project. To 

reduce duplication, impacts are assessed in greatest detail for the Cypress Ridge site. Impacts 

at the SLC-6, Boathouse Flats, and Vina Terrace sites are discussed in detail if they differ 

appreciably from those assessed for Cypress Ridge. The importance of a potential impact was 

determined by assessing the significance of the resource affected, its sensitivity to disturbance, 

and the extent of the affected resource relative to its presence in the project area and study 

region. Impacts from construction, operations, noise, and launch-related sonic booms are 

discussed relative to their potential effects on terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, threatened and 

endangered species, and marine wildlife within the immediate project area. 

5.2.4 TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ANIMALS 

5.2.4.1 Cypress Ridge 

5.2.4.1.1 Construction 

1. Potential impacts to wildlife from construction of the proposed action include: (1) removal 

of vegetation, which could lead to permanent or temporary loss of habitat and displacement or 

elimination of resident animals, and (2) degradation of the value of habitat adjacent to Cypress 

Ridge due to air pollution, noise or human activity. Clearing and grading would generate 

construction impacts through elimination of vegetation communities (habitats) and their 

associated faunas. There also could be some direct mortality to burrow-dwelling and less 

mobile animals that inhabit the project site. More mobile wildlife, such as birds and larger 

land mammals, would be expected to move temporarily into adjacent habitat. Some of the 

displaced species would be lost if adjacent communities are at carrying capacity. 

2. Removal of southern coastal bluff and coastal dune scrub, chaparral, and grassland 

habitats would not result in significant impacts, since these habitats: (1) are widespread on 

VAFB, (2) support wildlife species that tend to be common and wide-ranging both locally 

and regionally, and (3) are not known to support resident populations of threatened or 

endangered species (see Chapter 3.0). 

3. Noise, increased human activity, and exhaust emissions from heavy equipment and other 

construction vehicles during most phases of construction would render habitats adjacent to the 

construction area temporarily unattractive. Large and medium sized animals such as mule 

deer, coyote, skunk, hawk, and rabbit could temporarily stop using nearby areas, but at the 

end of construction would be expected to return to revegetated areas. An increase in road- 
. • NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-15 

killed wildlife would be expected during the construction phase of the project due to increased 

vehicle traffic. These disturbances are expected to create impacts that are short-term and 

localized, and insignificant. 

5.2.4.1.2 Operations 

1. Potential impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat may occur as a result of: (1) air pollutant 

emissions and wastewater resulting from launch, (2) vehicle failure, (3) launch-related noise 

and sonic booms, and (4) increases in human activity. 

Air Pollutant Emissions and Acidic Deposition 

1. It is expected that air pollutant emissions from vehicle launch may result in insignificant, 

short-term, and localized impacts to terrestrial fauna. During a normal Than IV/Centaur 

launch, emissions of A1203 and Ha are generated. Previous studies have shown that actual 

operational emissions of these substances have not resulted in significant impacts to terrestrial 

fauna (Engineering Science 1987; ES and SWRI 1988). 

2. During launch operations, there is an acidic mist formed by contact of the deluge water with 

the solid rocket motor exhaust during igaition that would be deposited regionally around the 

Cypress Ridge area (see Figure 5.1). Terrestrial animals in the vicinity of the launch site 

could come into contact with this acidic deposition for a short period of time. However, this 

contact is not expected to result in significant impacts since the exhaust cloud would be present 

for only a short time and mist, which settles, would evaporate quickly or be diluted in wet 

conditions. 

3. There also is the possibility of acidic deposition into streams and nearby bodies of water, 

which would potentially lower the pH of the water and impact resident aquatic organisms. 

Within the potential area of acidic deposition, Honda Creek is the area of greatest concern 

due to its resident populat'ons of unarmored three-spined stickleback and tidewater goby. 

Figure 5.5 (Acidic Deposition in Vicinity of Honda Creek) shows the extent of acidic 

deposition under worst-case meteorological conditions (wind speed of 25 mph). As shown, 

the greatest acidic deposition would occur within two to four miles of the Cypress Ridge site. 

Chemical analysis shows that the worst-case amount of acidic material deposited into Honda 

Creek would be neutralized by the cations present in the water, thereby reducing the 

possibility of a pH change that could affect the resident three-spined unarmored stickleback 
1N I 

2 4 MILES 

MISSION HLLS 

HONDA CREEK AREA 

A 4iEZ 

61 U,,,7 

SCALE 

FIGURE 5.5 

ACIDIC DEPOSITION IN 

VICINITY OF HONDA CREEK 

WIND SPEED =25 MILES PER HOUR 

COMPUTATION PERFORMED BY TRAJM (NASA 1983) 

SOURCE: USAF 1986b 

SLC-7 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 

Percent of total 

acidic deposition 

in ground cloud 

LOMPOC 
NRO•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-17 

and tidewater goby populations. Further discussion on this subject is presented in 

Appendix E (Technical Memorandum, Acidic Deposition, Titan IV/Centaur Launch from the 

Cypress Ridge Site). 

4. Air pollutants present in the Titan IV/Centaur exhaust plume could result in short-term, 

localized impacts to terrestrial biota exposed to initially high concentrations of pollutants (ES 

and SWRI 1988). Birds flying through the exhaust plume might be exposed to HC1, which 

could irritate eye and respiratory tract membranes. Since most birds would be frightened 

away by the noise, it is unlikely that many would come into contact with the exhaust plume. 

Exposure to A1203 would not be expected to impact resident wildlife populations. The A1203 

would have a relatively short-term presence in the atmosphere. Further, it is known to have a 

low toxicity for humans and as a result is not expected to adversely affect animals. 

5. The launch of a Titan IV/Centaur would generate about 126,000 gallons of wastewater. 

The exhaust duct serves as a retention basin to prevent the release of launch wastewater into 

surface and coastal waters. Launch wastewater generated at the Cypress Ridge site would be 

transported to the SLC-6 wastewater treatment plant for disposal. Therefore, there would be 

no significant impacts to aquatic biota as a result of deluge an I washdown water discharges. 

In addition, containment areas within the launch complex boundary would control accidental 

release of spilled propellants preventing these types of spills from reaching aquatic areas. 

6. The federal- or state-listed wildlife species known to be in the vicinity of the Cypress Ridge 

site that may be affected by project operations are transient and migrant, such as peregrine 

falcon, brown pelican, and California least tern, and would be subject to localized, short-term 

impacts from exposure to air emissions. The unarmored three-spine stickleback, a federaland state-listed endangered species, and the tidewater goby and California red-legged frog, 

which are both Category 2 candidate species proposed for federal listing, occur in Honda 

Creek. However, as discussed above, project operations would not be expected to 

significantly impact the habitats of either species. There would be no significant impact to the 

habitat of other listed species of wildlife that are known to be present in the region as a result 

of project operations. Regionally rare and declining animals known to occur on the Cypress 

Ridge and alternative sites, such as northern harrier, prairie falcon, burrowing owl, least 

Bell's vireo, Wilson's warbler, and badger, are not expected to be exposed to significant 

impacts from project operations. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-18 

1 JUNE 2015 

Launch Anomaly 

I . There is small potential for a catastrophic accident during launch (launch anomaly). If the 

worst-case were to occur, where a Titan IV detonates while still on the launch pad, most 

animals within a few hundred feet of the blast would die, and a wildfire would probably 

ensue. Such a fire would have the potential to kill additional animals in habitats adjacent to 

the launch site. These impacts are judged to be insignificant based on past experience that: 

(1) there were no observable adverse impacts to biota in the vicinity of SLC-4 East following 

the Titan 34D explosion of April 1986, and (2) the habitats and their associated biota which 

are present in the vicinity of the launch site are adapted to, and thus tolerant of, naturally 

occurring wildlifes. 

Launch Noise and Sonic Boom 

1. Noise can impact terrestrial animals in a number of ways. In the short-term it can cause 

hearing damage and impairment and trigger traumatic startles (i.e., startles in which animals 

damage themselves or others). In the long-term, noise can cause changes in the distribution 

and abundance of affected species or alter predator-prey interactions which might lead to 

ecological changes (Janssen 1978). Since launches from the Cypress Ridge site would be 

limited, intensive events and their effects are expected to be short-term (ES and SWRI 1988). 

Thus, this analysis will be confined to potential short-term effects of noise on wildlife in the 

vicinity of the launch site. 

2. Noise from Titan IV/Centaur launches could result in temporary physiological damage, such 

as short-term hearing impairment, to terrestrial biota near the Cypress Ridge site (ES and 

SWRI 1988). Temporary hearing impairment has been recorded for humans at 115 to 120 

dBA (ES and SWRI 1988). The threshold for auditory damage from exposure to a single 

sonic boom has been found to occur in the range of 138 dB (mice) to 142 dB (chinchillas) 

(Chappell 1980). The maximum A-weighted sound level expected to be produced during a 

Titan IV/Centaur launch outside of the launch complex is 110 dBA. Thus, this level is not 

expected to result in temporary impairment or permanent auditory damage to animals in the 

vicinity (ES and SWRI 1988). 

3. Terrestrial mammals, such as kangaroo rat, coyote, gray fox, bobcat, and mountain lion, 

which are known to have reasonably good low-frequency hearing, and which occur within a 

two- to three-mile radius of the launch site, may suffer temporary, short-term (10 to 48 hour) 

impacts following launches. Impacts may include hearing deficits and temporary hearing 

threshold shifts. Effects on animal behavior of these hearing impairments are not known, but 
• NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-19 

are not expected to be serious, since hearing impairment would be temporary (Hammernik 

et al. 1980). Thus, it is not expected that multiple launches would result in significant local 

1 impacts to terrestrial mammals. 

4. Since most birds are relatively insensitive to sounds below 100 Hz, they are unlikely to 

experience auditory damage from sonic booms or launch noises (Collins 1988b). Based on 

studies of the American kestrel (Trainer 1946), it would appear that endangered and declining 

diurnal raptors, such as the peregrine falcon,•bald eagle, black-shouldered kite, northern 

harrier, Cooper's hawk, merlin, and prairie falcon, probably would not be affected by noise 

from either a launch or subsequent focused sonic boom (ES and SWRI 1988). Ellis (1981) 

could find no evidence that frequent loud (82-114 dBA) helicopter overflights affected nesting 

success, adult mortality, or territory use of peregrine falcons and golden eagles, nor could he 

find evidence of opportunistic predation on their nests after they were startled off. Studies of 

other land birds have found no significant effect from occasional disturbances, such as sonic 

booms (Teer and Truett 1973; Higgins 1974). Based on the above information, it appears that 

there would be no significant local impact to land birds from launch noise and sonic booms 

generated from launches at the Cypress Ridge site. 

Increase in Human Activity 

1. An increase in human activity during project construction and operations, especially during 

periodic use of the external tank landing facility, could affect the clusters of monarch 

butterflies in the Monterey cypress near the Boathouse. This species is sensitive to 

disturbance resulting from human activity. Therefore, human intrusion into the area would be 

discouraged, and no significant impacts would be expected. 

5.2.4.2 5LC-6 

5.2.4.2.1 Construction 

1. Additional loss of wildlife habitat is not anticipated as a result of construction at the SLC-6 

site, since earth moving and excavation activities are not planned. Therefore, habitat-related 

impacts would not occur. Further, construction of the proposed project at SLC-6 would avoid 

the loss of habitat that would occur from project implementation at one of the undeveloped 

sites. Other impacts related to construction at SLC-6 would be similar to those described for 

the Cypress Ridge site. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

5-20. 

5.2.4.2.2 Operations 

1. On a daily basis, increased activity in the SLC-6 area would lead to increased noise, human 

activity, and decreased air quality. These changes may initially be disruptive, but wildlife in 

the area would be expected to adapt rapidly. As described above for the Cypress Ridge site, 

exposure to noise and air emissions during launch would produce short-term, insignificant 

impacts to species in the area. Impacts to the unarmored three-spined stickleback in Honda 

Creek would be similar to those for the Cypress Ridge site. Even though SLC-6 is closer to 

Honda Creek than Cypress Ridge, the buffering capacity of the water in the creek is sufficient 

to neutralize acidic deposition that might fall into the creek after a launch. Other operational 

impacts to terrestrial and aquatic animals in the area would be similar to those for the Cypress 

Ridge site and, therefore, insignificant (see Appendix E). 

5.2.4.3 Boathouse Flats 

5.2.4.3.1 Construction 

1. Impacts to terrestrial and aquatic animals from construction of the project at the Boathouse 

Flats site are expected to be nearly the same as those described for the Cypress Ridge site. 

Disruption and loss of potential nesting habitats for American kestrel, mourning dove, rock 

dove, horned lark, cliff swallow, western meadowlark, house finch, and song sparrow would 

result from project construction. However, due to the present degraded condition of the 

grassland habitat at this site, and the widespread occurrence of this habitat and its associated 

species elsewhere in the VAFB region, the loss of this area to wildlife is not expected to be 

significant. Aside from an occasional transient peregrine falcon, there are no other threatened 

or endangered species of land birds expected to utilize the Boathouse Flats site. 

5.2.4.3.2 Operations 

1. Increase in noise, human activity, and decreased air quality would occur in the vicinity of the 

facility during normal day-to-day operations at Boathouse Flats. As described above, nearby 

wildlife would be expected to adapt to those changes. Although impacts would be long-term, 

they would be insignificant 

2. During launches, exposure to noise, air emissions or water discharges could create localized, 

short-term, insignificant impacts to resident, migrant, and transient listed species and 

regionally rare or declining species which are known or expected to occur in the vicinity. 

As previously discussed, no significant impacts to habitats of listed or candidate species 

are expected to result from operation of the proposed action at the Boathouse Flats site. 
. NR,0 APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

I 1 JUNE 2015 5-21 

5.2.4.4 Vina Terrace 

5.2.4.4.1 Construction 

1. Impacts from construction of the proposed action at the Vina Terrace site are expected to be 

similar to those described for the Cypress Ridge site. Although the wildlife habitats present at 

the Vina Terrace site are of higher quality, the loss of these habitats for construction would be 

classed as insignificant for the same reasons as described for the Cypress Ridge site. 

5.2.4.4.2 Operations 

1. The Vina Terrace site is situated in proximity to two drainages, Oil Well Canyon to the west 

and Canada Agua Viva to the east (see Figure 2.2). There exists the possibility that launchrelated acidic deposition could impact the biota of these two drainages. Acidic deposition 

could result in a short-term, localized impact to terrestrial and aquatic biota, and to water 

quality of Canada Agua Viva. This impact would be insignificant because: (1) this semiperennial stream is not known to contain any resident, regionally rare, declining, or otherwise 

sensitive species of fish, amphibians, reptiles, or birds, and (2) the biota of this drainage is 

depauperate, due in part to disturbances resulting from cattle grazing. 

2. There are no records of listed species within the vicinity of the Vina Terrace site, nor are any 

listed species expected to frequent this site on a regular basis. Thus, there would be no 

significant impact to the habitat of listed or candidate species from operation of the proposed 

action. Resident, migrant, or transient regionally rare and declining species, and listed species 

of birds and land mammals may be subject to insignificant, short-term, localized impacts from 

exposure to water discharges or air emissions from operation of the proposed action at the 

Vina Terrace site. 

5.2.5 MARINE ANIMALS 

5.2.5.1 Marine Turtles 

1 As described in Section 3.3, the study region does not appear to be used by large number; of 

marine turtles. The nearest breeding areas and nesting sites are along the coast of Mexico, so 

interruptions of the reproductive cycle from proposed project activities and launches would be 

inconsequential. In general, no impacts from the project are expected to marine turtles. 
5.2.5.2 Marine Mammals 

5.2.5.2.1 Regional Impacts 

1. Launch noise and related sonic booms may have two effects on marine mammals (sea otters 

and pinnipeds) out of water. If the sound pressure levels are strong enough and within a 

certain frequency range, they could cause temporary or permanent hearing loss. Analyses 

done for the Space Shuttle predicted maximum focused sonic boom overpressures of 30 psf 

(156 dB) and indicated that permanent hearing loss was not likely, but that some temporary 

hearing threshold shift was possible for animals in the zone of sonic boom focus (Chappell 

1980). Secondly, loud booms could create startle responses manifested by stampeding to the 

water. If this occurred during critical points in the reproductive cycle of breeding pinniped 

species, it could result in a potential impact to their populations, such as causing adults to 

abandon a breeding ground, nursing females to.abandon their pups, or pups to be crushed 

by stampeding adults. However, the maximum predicted sonic overpressure for the 

Titan IV/Centaur is 10 psf (147 dB) (see Appendix D). Based on results of the Space 

Shuttle analysis, launches of the Titan IV/Centaur would be expected to result only in minor, 

short-term hearing losses. 

2. The exact nature of startle response to loud sonic booms would probably differ among the 

four pinniped species currently breeding at San Miguel Island (California sea lions, harbor 

seals, northern fur seals, northern [steller) sea lion). Bowles and Stewart (1980) provide 

an account of potential reactions of these pinnipeds and indicate that California sea lions and 

harbor seals may be the most reactive. They also point out that, within the California sea 

lion population, individual responses to loud booms may vary as a function of seasonal or 

age-related sensitivity. The same may be true to varying degrees among the other species. 

3. Based on the predicted worst-case focus signature, potential startle impacts are expected to 

be most prevalent at San Miguel Island. The responses of California sea lions, as well as 

northern fur seals, were observed during two breeding seasons (Bowles and Stewart 1980; 

Stewart 1981). Both species were reported as responding (running) in reaction to aircraft 

overflights and sonic booms. The observers, however, did not record evidence of crushed 

pups, panic leaping, overheating due to overexertion, or mother-pup separation. There 

were no other reports in literature which suggest that these findings are not consistent 

(Woodhouse 1988b). 

4. The Guadalupe fur seal is only occasionally sited in the northern Channel Islands and are not 

expected to be impacted by launches of the proposed Titan IV/Centaur. 

5-22 . 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 
NRP APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-23 

5. Harbor seals reportedly are more sensitive to disturbance than are other pinnipeds in the 

study region. However, they are not likely to permanently abandon favored haul-out sites, 

particularly not in response to noise stimuli unaccompanied by a visual stimulus (Stewart 

1981; Speich et al. 1987). Mother-pup separations are subject to some controversy, but 

purely acoustic stimuli, such as sonic booms on San Miguel Island, would result in relatively 

controlled movements which would allow pups to follow their mothers (Bowles and Stewart 

1980; Stewart et al. 1988). 

6. The frequency of Titan IV/Centaur launches would be three per year. At the most, only 

one launch per year would occur during the harbor seal pupping season. Based on breeding 

statistics for San Miguel Island (Stewart et al. 1988), only pups less than two hours old could 

be separated from their mothers during a major startle. On San Miguel Island, 100 to 120 

pups are born each year over a 75-day breeding period, with a maximum of two to three per 

day born during the peak period. Only one sonic boom from a Titan IV/Centaur would be 

possible during this period, so the probable risk and potential consequence of mother-pup 

separation is small. 

7 . Launch-related impacts to the one mustelid (sea otter) that occurs in the region are not 

anticipated. The sea otter occurs periodically rather than regularly, and sightings north of 

Santa Barbara area occasional. The closest breeding grounds, based on sightings north of 

VAFB, are north of Pismo Beach. 

8. Gray whales are known to pass within 100 miles of the VAFB shoreline during the annual 

winter-spring migration, but adverse impacts are not expected due to the relatively infrequent 

launches and the sharp attenuation of noise-related effects below the air/water interface. 

9. As discussed herein, no significant effect to marine mammals is anticipated. However, as 

there is the potential for some impact, Section 7 Consultation is required. 

5.2.5.2.2 Local Impacts 

Cypress Ridge 

1. Potential impacts associated the construction phase at the Cypress Ridge site would be 

temporary. Construction support activities could impact nearshore marine mammal 

populations. If the ocean is utilized as a route for the delivery of construction supplies, 

adverse impacts could result from vessel movements and/or potential fuel spills. These events 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-24 . 

1 JUNE 2015 

could interfere with normal use of the area by marine mammals. Normal uses of the area may 

include harbor seals and, occasionally, California sea lions, which use the rocks immediately 

offshore of the breakwater, and sea otters and gray whales, which may pass through the 

immediate areas as seasonal and other parameters dictate. 

2. The phases of operation may be delineated relative to potential impacts to marine mammal 

populations. Activities before or after launches may involve movements of materials and . 

supplies by ship or barge via the external tank landing facility. This activity may prove 

disruptive to those marine mammal species using the nearshore (i.e., harbor seals, sea otters). 

3. Activities during launches would have a wider impact, primarily noise generated by the launch 

vehicle. Noise would be of two types: (1) generated by the rockets at the launch pad during 

liftoff and ascent, and (2) created by sonic boom as the vehicle achieves supersonic speed 

down range. Noise of the first type may create a startle response and stampede to the water 

by pinnipeds hauled out along the shore in the Cypress Ridge area. Noise of the second type 

would be attenuated by distance and would not result in significant impacts to local pinniped 

populations. 

4. The effect of exhaust gas emissions (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, aluminum oxides, 

and hyrochloric acid) to pinnipeds or sea otters on or near the shoreline would depend in 

part on prevailing winds and rate of dissipation of exhaust gases. However, analyses of the 

effects of exhaust emissions done for the Titan IV program indicates no significant impacts 

to marine biota (ES and SWRI 1988). In addition, analyses undertaken for the SLC-7 Risk 

Assessment (Environmental Solutions, Inc. 1989) indicate that maximum exhaust gas dosages 

are below toxicity exposure limits for humans. 

5. There is a small possibility for an early inflight termination and subsequent activation of the 

vehicle destruct system. Most of the propellant that would be released would ignite and burn 

before reaching the water. In the unlikely event of an inflight failure, coupled with a failure of 

the vehicle destruct system, the possibility exists that some liquid propellant might enter the 

ocean. The magnitude of the impact would depend on the amount of propellant released, the 

area of effective dispersion, and the biological significance of the impact area. Localized, 

short-term impacts to water quality and marine biota would likely result. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 5-25 

1 JUNE 2015 

SLC-6 

1. Impacts from project construction and operations would be the same as those described for the 

Cypress Ridge site. 

boathouse Flats 

1. Implementation of the proposed project at the Boathouse Flats site may cause harbor seals 

using the shoreline immediately fronting the site to abandon the area either temporarily or 

permanently. These impacts would be related to construction and/or operations activities in 

proximity to the cliff. Generally, these pinnipeds are easily spooked by as little stimulus as 

a single person standing in full view on a bluff top. Previous construction activities in 

areas where harbor seals haul out have had a variety of effects. For example, the pier near 

Carpinteria, California (south of Santa Barbara), was built through a haulout used by the 

seals and currently supports continued activity by the oil industry. However, the animals 

have acclimated to these conditions and persist in using the shore. Alternatively, the entrance 

of the Goleta Slough, about 20 miles west of the project area, was used by numbers of harbor 

seals 50 years ago. Subsequently, a freeway was built over it, a beach park was developed 

around its entrance, and the animals essentially ceased using the area. 

The potential effect of launch exhaust gas emissions at this site would also be below toxic 

threshold levels since the gases are hot and rise rapidly from ground level to a stabilization 

point some distance downwind. 

3. The occurrence of a launch anomaly, while unlikely, could have some local impact to 

marine mammals in the path of falling debris or incompletely oxidized propellant. Such 

impact, although potentially significant to involved animals, would be short-term (ES and 

SWRI 1988). 

Vina Terrace 

1. Due to the relative distance of the Vina Terrace site from the shore, construction-related 

impacts to marine mammals are not anticipated. Operations impacts would be comparable to 

those described for the Cypress Ridge site. 

5.2.5.3 Marine Birds 

5.2.5.3.1 Regional Impacts 

1. Noise generated during launch and sonic booms focused over the Channel Islands would 

result in short-term, localized, and insignificant impacts to marine birds. No long-term 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-26 

auditory or physiological impacts are expected to occur as a result of sonic booms or noise 

generated during launches. Launch noise is expected to result in short-term impacts, such as 

temporary hearing impairment, to marine birds within a radius of about three to five miles of 

the project area. Marine birds which nest in the Rocky Point to Point Pedernales area (i.e., 

pelagic cormorant, pigeon guillemot, Western gull, rhinoceros auldet) could suffer temporary 

hearing impairment as a result of exposure to launch noise, but this impact is not expected to 

result in occurrences of colony abandonment (Collins 1988b). California brown pelicans 

would not be adversely affected by Than IV/Centaur space vehicle launches from the project 

area. Due to distance from the launch site, impacts from launch noise are expected to be 

minimal and insignificant to the California least tern nesting colonies at the mouth of the Santa 

Ynez River and at Purisima Point (see Figure 3.6). 

2. Focus sonic booms are not expected to produce significant, long-term impacts to marine bird 

colonies on San Miguel Island for the reasons stated above. Minor egg losses may occur in 

Western gull colonies on San Miguel Island, but these are not expected to significantly impact 

populations. Measurable egg loss is not expected to occur in cormorant nesting colonies on 

the island as a result of sonic booms (Schreiber and Schreiber 1980; HDR 1989; Jehl and 

Cooper 1980; Evans et al. 1979). The nearest California brown pelican nesting colony occurs 

on west Anacapa Island, which has a low probability of receiving focused sonic booms from 

these launches (see Figure 5.3). 

5.2.5.3.2 Local Impacts 

Cypress Ridge 

1. Marine birds could be impacted during construction at the Cypress Ridge site by air pollution, 

noise, and human activity. Intrusion into offsite areas adjacent to known marine bird nesting 

or roosting sites could be particularly disturbing during the spring brooding season. Such 

disturbance could occur during barge deliveries of the MST, and equipment and supplies to 

the external tank landing facility. Due to the distance of the Cypress Ridge site from marine 

bird nesting or roosting sites, impacts from onsite construction activities are not anticipated. 

2. Impacts to marine birds are not expected from deluge or washdown wastewater generated 

during operations since these are not released to grade. Launch- or accident-related ground 

clouds could result in the localized, short-term exposure of marine bird nesting and roosting 

colonies located between Point Arguello and the Boathouse to contaminants. Localized, shortterm impacts to marine birds could occur as a result of a worst-case flight failure and failure of 
, • NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-27 

the vehicle destruct system. The relative intensity of impacts to marine birds would depend on 

the amount of propellant to enter the water and on the biological sensitivity of the area of 

impact 

$LC-6 

1. Significant impacts to marine birds are not expected from construction due to the developed 

nature of the site. 

2. Impacts to marine birds from operations are expected to be substantially the same as those 

described for the Cypress Ridge site. 

Boathouse Flats 

1. Impacts to marine birds during project construction at the Boathouse Flats site are expected 

to be of the same type as those described for the Cypress Ridge site. However, due to the 

proximity of the Boathouse Flats site to the littoral zone, impacts to marine birds, which are 

known to forage and roost in the area, are expected to be greater during the construction phase 

than those described for the Cypress Ridge site. Noise, along with the visual presence of 

perscnnel and equipment less than 0.6 mile from a known brown pelican and cormorant roost 

(the Boathouse breakwater), could cause a temporary dispersal of pelicans and cormorants 

from the area, at least until the end of the construction phase. This displacement would be 

temporary, as these birds would be expected to return. Birds displaced from the Boathouse 

breakwater during construction would have to seek alternate roost sites on offshore rocks in 

the Point Pedernales and Rocky Point areas or on the sandy beach near the mouth of the Santa 

Ynez River. Temporary loss of the Boathouse area as a roosting area for brown pelicans 

would be a localized, short-term, and insignificant impact 

2. Propellant spilled during operations into the coastal environment could result in adverse 

impacts. Such spills are not expected to occur because of the presence of spill containment 

areas within the boundaries of the launch complex. A launch- or accident-related ground 

cloud may affect marine birds in the vicinity of the launch site. However, because this impact 

would be localized and short-term, it would be insignificant. Localized, short-term impacts to 

marine birds could occur in the unlikely event of a worst-case flight failure and failure of the 

vehicle destruct system. The extent of this impact would be dependent on the amount of 

propellant released, the effective dispersal area and on the biological significance of the area 

impact (ES and SWRI 1988). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 5-28 

Vina Terrace 

1. Construction of the proposed action at Vina Terrace would result in fewer impacts to marine 

birds than described previously because the Vina Terrace site is located further from the 

nearshore littoral habitats which are utilized by marine birds for foraging and roosting. If the 

proposed action were built at the Vina Terrace site, increased noise and human intrusions 

during construction are expected to have an insignificant affect on marine biota in the 

Boathouse area. 

2. Impacts to marine birds from operations are expected to be the same as those described for the 

Cypress Ridge site. 
NW) APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 6-1 

6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES 

6.1 INTRODUCTION 

1. Mitigation measures will be established to minimize impacts from project construction and 

operations. These measures include specific procedures related to preconstruction planning, 

project construction, and operations. USAF regulation 126-1, Conservation and Management 

of Natural Resources, Chapter 4, paragraph 12, March 20, 1984, states that species proposed 

for or under review for federal listing (candidate species) should be considered in 

environmental planning and be provided protection when feasible. 

2. An Erosion Control and Restoration Plan (ECRP) also would be prepared, addressing 

measures to prevent erosion, where feasible, and to minimize the extent of erosion which 

would occur. 

3. Finally, a monitoring program would be prepared and implemented in cooperation with 

USFWS and NMFS. The program would provide assessment and reporting procedures for 

tracking the long-term effects of project operations. 

6.2 SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES 

6.2.1 VEGETATION 

1. The extent of land disturbed for construction laydown and stockpile areas and utility corridors 

would be minimized through preplanning. 

2. Prior to construction, an access corridor and turn-arbund area(s) would be staked. 

Construction vehicles and activities would be limited to the staked area(s). Other construction 

vehicle travel would be limited to designated roads. These areas would be shown on 

construction maps. 

3. Areas of special interest plants and habitat that can be avoided would be flagged and, as 

appropriate, an environmental monitor would be present during clearing and grading to 

ensure these areas are protected. An example of this type of area is the proposed construction 

laydown area southwest of the SLC-6 External Tank Storage and Checkout Facility, near a 

large population of curly-leaved monardella. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 6-2' 

4. During construction of the launch complex and utility corridors, the top six inches of topsoil 

would be stockpiled, to be respread at completion of construction. This would enable 

revegetation to occur by seeds present in the topsoil. 

5. During construction of the electric power line, the power poles would be placed, as feasible, 

to avoid populations of Category 2 species Monardella undultua var. frutescens. Wetland 

areas at the Red Roof and Gray Canyon Crossing would be avoided by adjusting pole spacing 

to clear these areas. 

6. Prior to construction, the opportunity would be provided for interested parties (representatives 

of herbaria and botanic gardens, universities, CNPS, etc.) to recover specimens of specific 

interest plants that would otherwise be taken by construction. 

7. If erosion is likely disturbed areas would be revegetated with endemic plants, preferably with 

local seed or with approved, noninvasive, naturalized species. 

8. Soil stabilization measures, such as erosion control fabric, soil cement, and/or gunite, would 

be utilized on areas of steep slopes or highly erodible soils. 

6.2.2 WILDLIFE 

1. Offsite activity by project-related construction and operations personnel would be controlled. 

During construction, workers would be restricted from unauthorized visits to areas of 

sensitive offsite wildlife resources such as harbor seal hauling grounds, the monarch butterfly 

roosting areas, and marine bird roost sites and nesting colonies. 

2. Regulations prohibiting smoking in fire hazard areas would be established and strictly 

enforced. 

3. At the External Tank Landing Facility, procedures would be utilized to minimize the 

opportunity for spills. Proper cleanup equipment would be at hand to contain and remove 

spilled substances. Containers from fuel storage and use would be required to be kept or 

constructed within suitable secondary containment structures. 
. • NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 6-3 

4. A qualified biologist would be employed, as necessary, to periodically inspect construction 

activities. 

5. Employees would be restricted from interfering with wildlife. 

6.3 EROSION CONTROL AND RESTORATION PLAN 

1. The approach to the development of the proposed action is to minimize impacts to the extent 

feasible. Environmental goals specific to the biological resources of the project area and larger 

project region are to minimize both the area and extent of disturbance to plant and animal 

resources. 

2. In compliance with general USAF environmental regulations and specific environmental goals 

related to land use and terrestrial resources, the USAF will prepare an Erosion Control and 

Restoration Plan. The two primary goals of the ECRP are to: 

• Control erosion of disturbed areas during project construction and 

operations. 

• Restore areas disturbed during constructior to natural habitat conditions. 

3. These goals are to be achieved through a program which begins with preconstruction planning 

and continues with monitoring during project construction and operation. 

4. The ECRP would specify measures for erosion control, reyegetation and reclamation of 

disturbed areas, and treatment of sensitive species and wetland areas. These measures would 

include monitoring and control of exotic plants to mitigate impacts from weed invasion of 

disturbed construction areas, in accordance with AFR 126-1 and 19-7. 

6.4 MONITORING PROGRAM 

1. The monitoring program will include efforts related to both vegetation and wildlife species, in 

compliance with USAF Regulations 19-7 and 126-1. This program will be developed in 

accordance with the requirements of USAF environmental regulations and in consultation with 

USFWS and NMFS and will be ongoing during both the construction and operations phases 

of the project. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 6-4 

2. During construction, a qualified biologist would be employed, as necessary, to periodically 

monitor construction activities. Revegetation monitoring would be undertaken, and records 

would be kept of the seed sources and the revegetated locations. During project operations, 

the monitoring program will emphasize listed and, as applicable, other special interest species 

to assess impacts from noise and air emissions. For example, the program would assess the 

effect of acidic deposition on vegetation, with an emphasis on sensitive species. 

3. Monitoring potential impacts to pinnipeds .and sea birds from launch noise and sonic booms 

will be accomplished by utilizing the on-going Sea World Research Institute program. This 

program, funded by USAF, is a five-year effort to gather baseline animal behavior data prior 

to and after launches. These data will be used to monitor changes in populations and mortality 

trends that may result from space launches and to build a predictive model to forecast future 

animal abundance. 
, NRQ•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 7-1 

7.0 CONCLUSIONS 

7.1 VEGETATION 

1. Construction and operation of the proposed project at the Cypress Ridge site would not 

affect any federal- or state-listed threatened or endangered plants. USAF Regulation 126-1 

(Conservation and Management of Natural Resources, Chapter 5, paragraph 12, March 20, 

1984) states that species proposed for or under review for federal listing (candidate species) 

should be considered in environmental planning and be provided protection when feasible. 

Consistent with this regulation, the loss of 800 to 1,000 mature individuals and at least as 

many seedlings of the candidate plant Monardella undulata var. frutescens at the southern limit 

of its range due to construction at the Cypress Ridge site would constitute a locally significant 

impact to the present distribution of this species. As a mitigation measure, an opportunity 

would be provided for interested parties (representatives of herbaria and botanic gardens, 

universities, CNPS, etc.) to recover specimens of special interest plants that would otherwise 

be taken by construction. 

2. An insignificant number of individuals of the federal candidate Monardella undulata var. 

frutescens would be lost if the Boathouse Flats site were chosen; no ilitigation for its loss 

would be necessary. 

3. Implementation of the proposed action at the SLC-6 site would not result in significant 

construction-related disturbance to vegetation since it is a fully developed space launch 

complex. 

4. No known federal candidate species or special interest plants would be affected if the Vina 

Terrace site were selected. 

7.2 WILDLIFE 

1. Impacts to terrestrial, aquatic, and marine wildlife are expected to be minor and short-term. 

Terrestrial wildlife may experience temporary effects associated with construction of the 

launch complex, primarily related to clearing and grading activities. During operations, 

terrestrial wildlife may experience short-term effects from acidic deposition and launch noise. 

It is not expected that aquatic wildlife would be impacted by acidic deposition resulting from 

launches. These effects are not expected to be significant. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 7-2 ' . 

2. Marine mammals also may experience short-term effects associated with construction and 

operation of the proposed action. Pinnipeds hauled out on the shoreline in the vicinity of 

Rocky Point and the external tank landing facility may be disturbed by the proximity of 

humans and human activity, as well as by acidic deposition and launch noise. Marine 

mammals utilizing the northern Channel Islands, especially San Miguel Island, may 

experience intermittent exposure to launch-related sonic booms. Research indicates that 

these effects would not be significant. 

3. Marine turtles and cetaceans are not expected to be affected by construction and operations 

activities associated with the proposed action, as their normal ranges are outside the region 

reasonably considered susceptible to project-related impacts. 

4. There is the potential for ocean deposition of rocket fuels or falling debris resulting from a 

launch anomaly. Potential effects to marine species would depend upon the location and 

extent of such occurrence. 
.NRO•APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-1 

8.0 REFERENCES 

Ackery, P. R.; Vane-Wright, R. I. 1984. Milkweed butterflies their cladistics and biology. 

Cornell University Press, New York. p. 425. 

Ahlstrom, E. H. 1969. Distributional atlas of fish larvae in the California current region: jack 

mackerel, Trachurus symmetricus, and Pacific hake, Merluccius productus, 1951 through 

1966. CALCOFI ATLAS, 11, xi + 187. 

Ainley, D. G.; Lewis, T. J. 1974. The history of Farallon Island bird populations, 1854-1972. 

Condor 76: 432-446. 

Anderson, D. W.; Gress, F.; Mais, K. L. 1982. Brown pelicans influence of food supply on 

reproduction. Oikos 39:2331. 

Anderson D. W.; Jehl, J. R., Jr.; Risebrough, R. W.; Woods, L. A., Jr.; Deweese, L. R.; 

Edgcomb, W. G. 1975. Brown pelicans: Improved reproduction off the Southern California 

coast. Science 190:806-808. 

Anderson D. W.; Keith, J. 0. 1980. The human influence on seabird nesting success: 

conservation implications. Biol. Cons. 18:65-80. 

Anderson D. W.; Gress, F.; Mais, K. F.; Kelly, P. R. 1980. Brown pelicans as anchovy stock 

indicators and their relationships to commercial fishing. California Coop. Oceanic Fish. 

Invest. Report 21:54-61. 

Anderson, D. W.; Gress, F. 1984. Brown pelicans and the anchovy fishery off Southern 

California. In: Nettleship, D. N.; Sanger, G. A.; Springer, P. F. eds. Marine birds: their 

feeding ecology and commercial fisheries relationships. Canadian Wildlife Service. Ottawa. 

Antonelis, G. A. Jr.; Fiscus, C. H. 1980. The pinnipeds of the California current. California 

Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Report 9:51-56. 

Antonelis, G. A.; Stewart, B. S.; Perryman, W. E. 1987. Foraging characteristics of northern fur 

seals (Callorhinus ursinus) and California sea lions (Zalophus californianus). Seventh 

biennial conference on the biology of'marine mammals. Abst. 2. 

Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1987. Evaluation of the potential for space-related activities in the state of 

Hawaii, executive summary. Prepared for Hawaii Department of Business and Economic 

Development. August. Selection of a location for a space launch facility in Hawaii. Prepared 

for the Department of Business and Economic Development, State of Hawaii. April. 

Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1988. Selection of a location for a space launch facility in Hawaii. Prepared 

for Department of Business and Economic Development, State of Hawaii. April. 

Atwood, J. L.; Minsky, D. G. 1983. Least tern foraging ecology at three major California 

colonies. Western Birds 14:57-72. 

Bartholomew, G. A. 1967. Seal and sea lion populations of the California islands. In: 

Proceedings of a symposium on the biology of the California Channel Islands. Santa Barbara 

Botanic Garden. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 • 8-2' 

Baskin, J. N. 1974. Survey of the unarmored threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus 

williamsoni, in the upper Santa Clara River drainage. U. S. Bureau of Sport Fish Wildlife. 

Baskin, J. N. 1975. Biology and habitat of the unarmored threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus 

aculeatus williamsoni, on the upper Santa Clara River, California. CDFG. 

Baskin, J. N.; Bell, M. A. 1976. Unarmored threespine stickleback survey and report. Report 

for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

Beauchamp, R. M.; Oberbauer, T. A. 1977. Appendix: survey of the botanical resources in the 

Space Shuttle construction zone. VAFB, California. In: Wooten, R. C. Jr.; Strutz, D.; 

Hudson, R. eds. Impact of Space Shuttle support facilities construction on special interest 

plant species, VAFB, California. CEEDO-TR-77-33. Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida. 

Bevier, L. 1983. Least tern breeding season in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura 

Counties. 1982. Unpubl. report. p. 19. 

Bigg, M. A. 1981. Harbour neal, Phoca vitulina Linnaeus, 1758 and Phoca largha Pallas, 1811. 

In: Handbook of Marine Mammals, Volume 2: seals. Academic Press. New York. 

Binford, L. C. 1983. Sixth Report of the California Bird Records Committee. Western Birds 

14:127-145. 

BioSystems Analysis, Inc. 1981. Cliff-nesting raptor habitat survey of the Angeles, San 

Bernardino, and Los Padres National Forests. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service. Contract No. 53-9 JA9-0-233. 

Black, B. B.; Collopy, M. W.; Percival, H. F.; Tiller, A. A.; Bohall, P. G. 1984. Effects of 

low-level military training flights on wading bird colonies in Florida. Prepared by Florida 

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Florida, Gainesville. Prepared 

for the USAF Tech. Rep. 7. p. 190. 

Bond, R. M. 1946. The peregrine population of western North America. Condor 48:101-116. 

Bonnell, M. L.; Pierson, M. O.; Farrens, G. D. 1983. Pinnipeds and sea otters of Central and 

Northern California, 1980-1983: status, abundance, and distribution. Center for marine 

studies, University of California at Santa Cruz. 

Bonner, N. W. 1981. Southern fur seals, Arcrocephalus (Gregory Saint-Hilaire and Cuvier, 

1826). 161-208. In: Ridgeway, S. H.; Harrison, R. J. eds. Handbook of Marine Mammals, 

Volume 1: the walrus, sea lions, fur seals and sea otter. xiv + 235. 

Bonnot, P. 1928. Sea lions of California. CDFG. 14(1):1-16. 

Bontrager, D.; Foerster, K. 1987. Status of three endangered species, the bald eagle, least Bell's 

vireo, and California least tern along the Santa Ynez River from Cachuma Lake to the Pacific 

Ocean. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water 

Resources. p. 31. 
' NRO-APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-3 

Bowles, A.; Stewart, B. S. 1980. Disturbances to pinnipeds and birds of San Miguel Island, 

1979-1980. In: Jehl, J. R.; Cooper, C. F. eds. Potential effects of Space Shuttle sonic 

booms on the biota and geology of the California Channel Islands: research reports. Prepared 

by the Center for Marine Studies, San Diego State University and Hubbs Sea World Research 

Institute. Prepared for the USAF Space Division, El Segundo, California. Tech. Rep. 80-1. 

Section 4, pp. 99-137. 

Braham, H. W.; Rice, D. W. 1984. The right whale, Balaena glacialis. In: The status of 

endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review Vol. 46, No. 4. 

Breininger, D. R. 1988. Survey for least Bell's vireo in riparian habitat on VAFB, Santa Barbara 

County, California NASA Technical Memorandum No. 100984. 

Briggs, K. T.; Chu, E. W.; Lewis, D. B.; Tyler, W. B.; Pitman, R. L; Hunt, G. L. Jr. 1981. 

Distribution, numbers, and seasonal status of seabirds of the Southern California Bight. In: 

Summary Report 1975-1978: Marine mammal and seabird survey of the Southern California 

Bight area, Vol. III, Book 3. U. S. Department of Commerce NTIS PB-81-248-197. 

Briggs, K. T.; Tyler, W. B.; Lewis, D. B.; Kelly, P. R.; Croll, D. A. 1983. Brown pelicans in 

Central and Northern California, 1980-1982. Journal of Field Ornithology 54:353-373. 

Brinton, E. 1973. Distributional atlas of Euphausicea (Crustacea) in the California Current region, 

Part H. CALCOFI Atlas 18, vii + 336 pp. 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1980. At the crossroads, a report on 

California's endangered and rare fish and wildlife. Sacramento, California. p. 147. 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1986. CDFG natural diversity data base. 

Special animals_ p. 17. 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1988. Personal communication with 

R. Bittman. 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1989. Personal communication with 

S. Teresa. November. 

Chambers Group, Inc. 1980. Marine biological study 9f the Point Arguello Boathouse area. 

Final report. SD-TR-80-30 to Air Force Systems Command, Los Angeles Air Force Station, 

Los Angeles, California xii + 384 pp. 

Chambers Group, Inc. 1986. Appendix 6: Terrestrial biology. In: Draft EIR/EIS for proposed 

Arco coal oil point project. Volume I. SCH No. 84011105, SLC No. EIR-401, SBC 

No. 86-EIR-12, U.S. Army COE Permit Appl. No. 85-047-RC. September. 

Chappell, M. A. 1980. Possible physiological effects of Space Shuttle sonic booms on marine 

mammals. In: Jehl, J. R.; Cooper, C. F. eds. Potential effects of Space Shuttle sonic booms 

on the biota and geology of the California Channel Islands. Research reports, prepared by the 

Center for Marine Studies, San Diego State University and Hubbs/Sea World Research 

Institute for the USAF Space Division. Tech. Rep. 80-1. pp. 195-228. 

Collins, C. T. 1986. ed. California least tern field study, 1985. Final report. Prepared for 

CDFG. Prepared by California State University, Long Beach. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-4 

Collins, P: W. 1983. Appendix B: Chapter six-an environmental assessmentlimpact analysis of 

the proposed Santa Barbara Airport development on the terrestrial vertebrate biota of the 

Goleta Slough, 1-56. In: Environmental assessment impact report for the Santa Barbara 

municipal airport and the Goleta Slough biological component. SBMNH. Prepared for The 

Planning Center, Newport Beach, California. 

Collins, P. W. 1984. Oil transportation study site survey for marine terminals, Santa Barbara 

County, California. Appendix H: Terrestrial biology-wildlife resource evaluation. Prepared 

for Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Walnut Creek. 

Collins, P. W. 1986. Least Bell's vireo survey of riparian habitats crossed by the Celeron 

pipeline at the Santa Ynes River, Las Cruces and Gaviota Creeks in Santa Barbara County. 

Prepared for All American Pipeline Company. 

Collins, P. W. 1988a. Report on the status of regionally rare and declining amphibians and 

reptiles that could be impacted by the proposed raising of Bradbury Dam. Prepared for URS 

Consultants. 

Collins, P. W. 1988b. Technical Report: Terrestrial vertebrate and marine bird biota of the 

SLC-7 project area. Prepared for Environmental Solutions, Inc. in support of Draft EIS for 

Space Launch Complex 7. VAFB. July. 

Coulombe, H. N.; Cooper, C.F. 1976. Ecological assessment of VAFB, California. Vol. 1. 

Evaluation and recommendations 1974/1975. Final report prepared by San Diego State 

University, Center for Regional Environmental Studies. Prepared for USAF Headquarters 

SAMSO, AFCEC-R-76-15. 

Coulombe, H. N.; Mahrdt, C. R. eds. 1976. Ecological assessment of VAFB, California. Vol. II. 

Biological inventory. 1974-1975. Prepared by San Diego State University, Center for 

Regional Environmental Studies. Prepared for USAF, Headquarters SAMSO, 

AFCEC-R-76-15. 

Crisologo, R. S. 1983. Environmental surveillance report No. 14. TOR 039. Prepared by the 

Ralph M. Parsons Company. Contract No. V3-640074. 

Crisologo, R. S. 1984. Environmental surveillance report No. 18. TOR 039. December 16, 

1983 through May 15, 1984. Prepared by the Ralph M. Parsons Company. Contract No. 

V3-6400074. 

D'Antonio, C. 1988. Personal communication with University of California, Santa Barbara. 

Ph.D. student in the department of biological sciences. April-May. 

Davis, F.; Hickson, D.; Odion, D. 1988. Composition of maritime chaparral related to fire 

history and soil. Burton Mesa, Santa Barbara County, California. Madrono:35 (3:169-195). 

Dial, K. P. 1980. Barka Slough resources inventory and management recommendations. 

Prepared for the USAF, VAFB, Santa Barbara, California, 121. 

Dohl, T. P.; Norris, K. S.; Guess, R. C.; Bryant, J. D.; Honig, M. W. 1980. Cetacea of the 

Southern California Bight. Part H of summary of marine mammal and seabird surveys of the 

Southern California Bight area, 1975-1978. Final report to Bureau of Land Management. 

NTIS Report PB8I-248189. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-5 

Ebeling, A. W.; Cailliet, G. M.; Ibarra, R. M.; DeWitt, F. A. Jr, 1970. Pelagic communities and 

sound scattering off Santa Barbara, California, 1-19. In: G. Brooke Farguhar. ed. 

Proceedings of an international symposium on biological sound scattering in the ocean. 

Department of Navy, Government Printing Office xi + 629. 

Elias, D. C. 1983. Appendix D. In: Marine mammals of VAFB, Central California. 

Environmental surveillance report, No. 16, TOR 035, June 16, 1983, through September 15, 

1983. Prepared by The Ralph M. Parsons Company. Contract No. V3-G400074. 

Ellis, D. H. 1981. Responses of raptorial birds to low-level military jets and sonic booms. 

Prepared by the Institute for Raptor Studies. Prepared for the USAF and the USFWS. 

October. 

Engineering Science. 1987. Final environmental assessment Mann space launch vehicle 

modifications and launch operations program. VAFB, California. August. 

Engineering Science and Sea World Research Institute, Hubbs Marine Research Center (ES and 

SWRI). 1988. Biological assessment for the Titan II and Titan IV space launch vehicle 

modifications and launch operations programs, VAFB, California. Prepared for USAF, 

Headquarters Space Division, Los Angeles, California. PS019.03. V + 1-1 to 11-1 + app. 

Environmental Solutions, Inc. 1989. Risk assessment, Space Launch Complex 7. Prepared for 

USAF, Headquarters Space Systems Division, El Segundo, California. 

Ernst, C. H.; Barbour, R. W. 1972. Turtles of the United States. University Press. Kentucky. 

Estes, J. A.; Jameson, R. J. 1983. Summary of available population information on California 

sea otters. POCS technical paper No. 83-11. Prepared by USFWS for Minerals Management 

Service. Interagency agreement No. 14-12-001. p. 29. 

Evans, W. E.; Jehl, J. E. Jr.; Cooper, C. F. 1979. Potential impact of Space Shuttle sonic booms 

on the biota of the California Channel Islands: literature review and problem analysis. 

Prepared for USAF, Space and Missile System Organization. Prepared by Center for 

Regional Environmental Studies, San Diego State University and Hubbs/Sea World Research 

Institute. p. 133. Contract F 04701-78-C-0060. 

Evermann, B.EW. 1921. The Afio Nuevo Steller sea lion rookery. J. Mammal. 2:16-19. 

Gaines, D.; Laymon, S. A. 1984. Decline, status and preservation of the yellow-billed cuckoo in 

California. Western Birds 15:49-80. 

Garrett, K.; Dunn, J. 1981. Birds of Southern California: status and distribution. Los Angeles 

Audubon Society. 

Gentry, R. L. 1970. Social behavior of the Steller sea lion. Ph.D. thesis, University of 

California at Santa Cruz. 

Gentry, R. L. 1981. Northern fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus (Linnaeus, 1758). In: Handbook of 

Marine Mammals, Volume 1: The walrus, sea lions, fur seals, and sea otter. Academic 

Press. New York. 

Gosho, M. E.; Rice, D. W.; Briewick, J. M. 1984. The sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus. 

In: The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review. Vol. 46, No. 4. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Goldwasser, S. 1980. Least tern breeding season from San Luis Obispo to Santa Barbara 

County, 1980. Unpublished report. p. 10. 

Gray, M. V. and J. M. Greaves. 1984. Riparian forest as habitat for the least Bell's vireo. In: 

Warner, R. E.; Hendrix, K. M. eds. California riparian systems. University of California 

Press. Berkeley, California. 

Gress, F. 1982. Reproductive success of brown pelicans in the Southern California Bight. 1981. 

Annual report to CDFG. Sacramento, California. 

Gress, F.; Anderson, D. W. 

California Bight, 1982. 

Gress, F.; Anderson, D. W. 

California Bight, 1984. 

1983. Reproductive success of brown pelicans in the Southern 

Annual report to CDFG, Sacramento, California. p. 21. 

1984. Reproductive success of brown pelicans in the Southern 

Annual report to CDFG, Sacramento, California. p. 27. 

Gress, F.; Lewis, D. B. 1988. Reproductive success of brown pelicans on the Southern 

California Bight, 1987. Nongame Bird and Mammal Section Report. October. 

Gress, F. 1989. Personal communication. November. 

Grinnell, J.; Miller, A. 1944. The distribution of the birds of California. Pacific Coast Avifauna 

27:608. 

Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons. New York. 

Hammernik, R. P.; D. Henderson; R. J. Salvi. 1980. Contribution of Animal Studies to Our 

Understanding of Impulse Noise-induced Hearing Loss. Scandinavian Audiology Suppl. 

12:128-146. 

Hanan, D. A.; Scholl, J. P.; Diamond, S. L. 1987. Harbor seal, Phoca vitulina richardsi, census 

in California, June 2-5, 30, and July 1, 1986. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Adrninistration/MNFS southwest region, administrative report SWR 87-3, 41. 

Hayes, M.P. 1988. Personal Communication. 

Hayes, M. P.; Jennings, M. R. 1986. Decline of ranid frog species in western North America: 

are bullfrogs (Rana caresbeiana) responsible? J. Herpetology 20(4):490-509. 

Heckard, L. 1988. Personal communication with curator of herbarium at University of 

California, Berkeley. 

Henningson, Durham, & Richardson (HDR). 1980. Final biological assessment for proposed 

MX flight test program, VAFB, California. Volumes I and II. Technical report ETR-158. 

Santa Barbara, California. 

Henningson, Durham, & Richardson (HDR) Sciences. 1989. Effects of Minuteman launch on 

California least tern nesting activity, VAFB, California. Report No. ETR 865. January. 

Heubner, P. 1988. Personal communication. 

Hickson, D. E. 1987. History of wildland fires on VAFB, California. Draft NASA technical 

memorandum. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 

8-6 • 
NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-7 

Hickson, D. 1988. Technical Report: Vegetation of the SLC-7 project area. Prepared in support 

of Space Launch Complex 7 EIS (TBD). 

Higgins, T. H. 1974. The response of songbirds to the seismic compression waves preceding 

sonic booms. Prepared for the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration. Report No. FAA-RD-74-78. May. 

Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. 

CDFG. Sacramento. 

Hoover, R. F. 1970. Vascular plants of San Luis Obispo County, California. University of 

California Press. Berkeley. 

Howald, A. 1988. Personal communication with botanist from CDFG rare plant project. June. 

Howald, A.; Collins, P.; Cooper, S. Ph.D.; Ferren, W. Jr.; Lehman, P.; Saterson, K.; Steele, K. 

1985. Technical report Appendix F: Terrestrial and freshwater biology. EIS/EIR Union Oil 

project/Exxon project Shamrock and central Santa Maria Basin study area. Prepared for 

County of Santa Barbara, U.S. Minerals Management Service, California State Lands 

Commission, California Coastal Commission, and California Office of Offshore 

Development. Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc., Santa Barbara, California. 

Howald, A.; Collins, P.; Cooper, Dr. S.; Lehman, P.; Reyes-French, G.; Steele, K. 1986. 

Exxon Lompoc pipeline project supplemental EIR. Technical Appendix B. Terrestrial and 

freshwater biology public draft. Prepared for County of Santa Barbara. Prepared by Arthur 

D. Little, Inc., Santa Barbara, California. 

Huber, H. R.; Ainley, D. G.; Boekelheide, R. J.; Henerson, R. P.; Bainbirdge, G. 1981. 

Studies of marine mammals at the Farallon Islands, California, 1979-1980. NTIS Rep. 

PB-81-116708. p. 51. 

Hunt, G. L.; Pitman, R. L.; Jones, H. L. 1980. Distribution and abundance of seabirds 

breeding on the California Channel Islands. In: Power, D. M. ed. The California Islands: 

proceedings of a multi-disciplinary symposium. SBMNH, Santa Barbara, California. 

787, 332-459. 

Irwin, J. F.; Soltz, D. L. 1982. The distribution and natural history of the unarmored threespine 

stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni, in San Antonio Creek, California. Prepared 

for the USFWS. California State University, Los Angeles. 

Irwin, J. F.; Soltz, D. L. 1984. The natural history of the tidewater goby, Eucyclogobius 

newberryi, in the San Antonio and Shuman Creek systems, Santa Barbara County, California. 

Prepared for the USFWS. California State University, Los Angeles. 

Isaacs, J. D.; Fleminger, A.; Miller, J. K. 1969. Distributional atlas of zooplankton biomass in 

the California Current region: Spring and Fall 1955 - 1959. CALCOFI ATLAS 10, xxv + 

252. 

Janssen, R. T. 1978. Noise and Animals. Perspective of Government and Public Policy. In: 

Fletcher, J. L.; Busnel, R. G. eds. Effects of noise on wildlife. Academic Press. New 

York. p. 267-302. 

Jehl, J. R., Jr. 1979. Status of the peregrine falcons on San Miguel Island, Spring 1979. 

Unpublished report to the USAF. p. 7. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Jehl, J. R., Jr. 1980. Status of peregrine falcon in the Channel Islands, 1989-1980. In: Potential 

effects of Space Shuttle sonic booms on the biota and geology of the California Channel 

Islands: research reports. Prepared by Center for Marine Studies, San Diego State University 

and Hubbs/Sea World Research Institute. December. Tech. Rep. 80-1. 

Jehi, J. R.; Cooper, C. F. eds. 1980. Potential effects of Space Shuttle sonic booms on the biota 

and geology of the California Channel Islands: research reports. Prepared by the Center for 

Marine Studies, San Diego State University and Hubbs/Sea World Research Institute. 

Prepared for USAF, Headquarters, Space Division, El Segundo, California. Tech. Rep. 

80-1. 

Jennings, M. R.; Hayes, M. P. 1985. Pre-1900 over-harvest of California red-legged frogs 

(Rana aurora draytonii): inducement for bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) introduction. 

Herpetologica 41(1):94-103. 

Jensen, D. B. 1983. The status of California's natural communities: Their representation on 

managed areas. Report prepared for The Nature Conservancy. p. 301. 

Johnson, J. H.; Wolman, A. A. 1984. The humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae. In: The 

status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review Vol. 46, No. 4. 

Jokerst. 1988. Personal communication with botanist from Jones and Stokes Associates, 

Sacramento, California. April, May. 

Jones, L.; Collins, P.; Stefani, R. 1989. A checklist of the birds of Channel Islands National 

Park, California. Tucson, Arizona. Southwest Parks and Monuments Association. 

Kenyon, K. W. 1969. The sea otter in the eastern Pacific Ocean. North American fauna Vol. 68. 

Kenyon, K. W. 1981. Sea otter, Enhydra lutris. pp. 209-223. In: Ridgway, S. H.; Harrison, 

R. J. eds., Handbook of Marine Mammals. Academic Press. New York. p. 235. 

Kiff, L. F. 1980. Historical changes in resident populations of California Islands Raptors. In: 

The California islands: proceedings of a multidisciplinary symposium. Power, D. M. ed. 

Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. pp. 651-673. 

King, F. W. 1981. Historical review of the decline of the green turtle and hawksbill. In: 

Biology and conservation of sea turtles, proceedings of the world conference on sea turtle 

conservation. Washington, D.C. 

Koford, C. B. 1977. Status and welfare of the puma (Fells concolor) in California, 1973-1976. 

Final report to the Defenders of Wildlife and the National Audubon Society. p. 57. 

Kramer, D.; Ahlstrom, E. H. 1968. Distributional atlas of fish larvae in the California current 

region: northern anchovy, Engraulis mordax Girard, 1951 through 1965. CALCOFI ATLAS 

9, xi + 269. 

Lea, D. S.; Gilbert, C. R.; Hocutt, C. H.; Jenkins, R. E.; McAllister, D. E.; Stauffer, J. R. Jr. 

1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina Biological Survey, 

Publ. #1980-12. 

Le Boeuf, B. 3. 1974. Male-male competition and reproductive success in elephant seals. 

American Zoology 14:163-176. 

8-8 ' 
. NRO.APPROVED FOR RELEASE 8-9 

1 JUNE 2015 

Le Boeuf, B. J.; Bonnell, M. L.; Pierson, M. 0.; DeHman, D. H.; Farrens, G. D. 1978. 

Pinnipedia numbers, distribution, and movements in the Southern California Bight. In: 

Marine mammal and sea bird survey of the Southern California Bight area. NTIS Report No. 

PB-295-932. 

Lehman, P. 1982. The status and distribution of the birds of Santa Barbara County, California. 

1 Unpublished masters thesis. Department of Geography, University of California, Santa 

Barbara. 

Lehman, P. 1983. Chapter 4, the vertebrate fauna of the streams. In: Onuf, C. P. ed. The 

proposed corps of engineers flood control and ground water recharge project for the Goleta 

Valley, Santa Barbara County, California. Inventories of the biological resources of the 

effected creeks and a preliminary analysis of possible effects, including the Goleta Slough. 

Lehman, P. 1986. Bell's vireo study in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. Unpublished 

report. 

Lewis, D. B.; Gress, F. 1987. Draft report. Seabird monitoring in Channel Islands National 

Park 1986. Unpublished report prepared for Channel Islands National Park. 

Lockley, R. M. 1966. Grey seal, common seal. October House. New York. 

Lyon, G. M. 1937. Pinnipeds and a sea otter from the Point Mugu shell mound of California. 

University of California Los Angeles. Biological Science. 1(8):133-168. 

Manolis, T. D. 1977. California black rail breeding season survey in Central California. 

Nongame wildlife investigations study 4, job 1.3. The Resources Agency. California 

Department of Fish and Game. 

Massey, B. W. 1977. Occurrence and nesting of the least tern and other endangered species in 

Baja California, Mexico. Western Birds 8:67-70. 

Mate, B. R. 1977. Aerial censusing of pinnipeds in the eastern Pacific for assessment of 

population numbers, migratory distributions, rookery stability, breeding effort, and 

recruitment. Report to U. S. Marine Mammal Commission. USMMC-75/01. 

McGinnis, S. M.; Schusterman, R. J. 1981. Northern elephant seal Mirounga anqustirostris Gill, 

1866. In: Handbook of Marine Mammals, Volume 2: Seals. Academic Press. New York. 

Meadows, D. "1936" (1937). An annotated list of the Lepidoptera of Santa Catalina Island, 

California. Bull. So. Cal. Acad. Sci. 35:175-180. 

Miller, S. E. 1985. Butterflies of the California Channel Islands. J. Res. Lep. 23:282-296. 

Miller, D. L.; Lea, R. N. 1972. Guide to the coastal marine fishes of California. California 

Department of Fish and Game Bulletin 157:1-235. 

Mills, A. 1988. Personal communication with Santa Barbara area biologist. 

Minerals Management Service. 1985. Biological assessment of threatened and endangered species 

for the cities service San Miguel project and Northern Santa Maria Basin area study. San Luis 

Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, California. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-10 ' 

Mirzoch, S. A.; Rice, D. W.; Breiwick, J. M. 1984a. The sei whale, Balaenoptera borealis. In: 

The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review Vol. 46, No. 4. 

Mirzoch, S. A.; Rice, D. W.; Breiwick, J. M. 1984b. The blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus. 

In: The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review Vol. 46. No. 4. 

Mirzoch, S. A.; Rice, D. W.; Breiwick, J. M. 1984c. The fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus. In: 

The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review Vol. 46, No. 4. 

Muiroy, T. W.; Thompson, R.; Hochberg, M.; Collins, P.; Lehman, P. 1984. Draft technical 

Appendix J: Terrestrial and freshwater biology. Prepared for County of Santa Barbara, U. S. 

Minerals Management Service, California State Lands Commission, California Coastal 

Commission, California Secretary of Environmental Affairs. p. 224. 

Munz, P. A.; Keck, D. D. 1959. A California flora (with supplement by P.A. Munz. 1968). 

Berkeley. University of California Press. 

Nagano, C. D.; Lane, J. 1985. A survey of the location of monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus 

[L.]) overwintering roosts in the state of California. First year 1984/1985. Report to the 

World Wildlife Fund. August. 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 1983. Space Shuttle exhaust cloud 

properties. Technical Paper 2258. Prepared by Anderson, B. J.; Keller, V. W. December. 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 1987. Monitoring biological impacts of 

Space Shuttle launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base: Establishment of baseline 

conditions. Technical Memorandum 100982. Prepared by The Bionetics Corporation, 

Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1982. The marine mammal protection act of 1972 

annual report 1981/1982. U. S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS. Washington, 

D.C. 

Nichols, R. 1988. Botanist, 1 STRAD/ET, VAFB. Personal communication. May-June. 

Nixon, R. 1989. Biologist, Santa Cruz Predatory Bird Group, Peregrine Fund. Personal 

Communications. May. 

Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center. 1982. Fur seal investigations, 1981. NOAA Technical 

memorandum NMFS F/NWC-37. 

Odell, D. R. 1981. California sea lion, Zalophus californianus (Lesson, 1828). In: Handbook of 

Marine Mammals, Volume 1: The walrus, sea lions, fur seals, and sea otter. Academic 

Press. New York. 

Ogden, A. 1941. The California sea otter trade. 1784-1848. University of California Press, 

ix + 251. 

Ohsumi, S.; Wada, S. 1974. Status of whale stocks in the North Pacific, 1972. Rep. Int. 

Whaling Comm. 24:114-126. 

Orr, R. T.; Poulter, T. C. 1965. Pinniped population of An° Nuevo Island, California. Proc. 

Acad. Sci. 32:377-404. 
J 

J 

NRO,APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-11 

Page, G. W.; Stenzel, L. E. 1981. The breeding status of the snowy plover in California. 

Western Birds 12:1-40. 

Page, G. W.; Bidstrup, F. C.; Ramer, R. J.; Stenzel, L. E. 1986. Distribution of wintering 

snowy plovers in California and adjacent states. Western Birds 17:145-170. 

Parsons, R. M. 1984. Environmental surviellance report no. 18. December 12, 1983 through 

May 1984. Report for Martin Marietta Corporation. Prepared by the Ralph M. Parsons Co. 

Pasadena, California. 

Peregrine Find. 1989. Personal communication with Mat Nixon. July. 

Pergler, C. 1988. Personal communication with biologist from Martin Marietta, VAFB. 

Pergler, C. 1989. Personal communication with biologist from Martin Marrietta, VAFB. 

Pierotti, R. J.; Ainley, D. G.; Lewis, P. J. 1977. Birth of a California sea lion on southeast 

Farralon Island. CDFG Volume 63 (1):64-66. 

Provancha, M. 1988. Vegetation and land use map of Vandenberg Air Force Base, California_ 

The Bionetics Corporation. NASA Biomedical Operations and Research Office, John F. 

Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 

Pyle, R. M. 1983. Visit to the Mexican monarchs. Species survival commission newsletter. 

New Series 2:15-16. 

Rice, D. W.; Wolman, A. A.; Briham, H. W. 1984. The gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus. In: 

The status of endangered whales. Marine Fisheries Review, Vol. 46, No 4. 

Remsen, J. V., Jr. 1978. Bird species of special concern in California: An annotated list of 

declining or vulnerable bird species. California Department of Fish and Game, non-game 

wildlife investigations, Wildlife Management Division administrative report No. 78-1. 

Ripley, W. E.; Cox, K. W.; Baxter, J. K. 1962. California sea lion censes for 1958, 1960, and 

1961. CDFG 48:228-231. 

Robison, B. H. 1988. Submersible research in the Santa Barbara Basin. Abstract and paper 

presentation for: The marine environment of Santa Barbara and its coastal waters, a 

symposium/workshop. 

Ross, J. P. 1981. Historical decline of loggerhead, Ridley and leatherback sea turtles. In: 

Biology and Conservation of Sea Turtles. Proceedings of the world conferenced on sea turtle 

conservation. Washington, D.C. 

Rowley, J. 1929. Life history of the sea lions on the California coast. J. Mammal, 10:1-39. 

Santa Barbara County. 1979. Santa Barbara County comprehensive plan: conservation element. 

Adopted by the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. 

Sasaki, S., et al. 1977. Unarmored threespine stickleback recovery team: recovery plan for the 

unarmored threespine stickleback. California Department of Fish and Game, Goleta. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-12 

Savage, J. M. 1967. Evolution of insular herpetofaunas. In: Philbrick, R. N. ed. Proceedings 

of the symposium on the biology of the California Islands. Santa Barbara Botanic Garden, 

Santa Barbara, California. pp. 219-228. 

Scammon, C. M. 1874. The marine mammals of the northwestern coast of North. America 

together with an account of the American whale-fishery. J. H. Carmany and Co., San 

Francisco. v + 319. 

Scarff, J. E. 1987. Historic and present distribution of the right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) in the 

eastern North Pacific south of 50° Naval east of 180° W. Rep. Int. Whale Commn. Special 

Issue 10:43-63. 

Scheffer, V. B. 1958. Seals, sea lions, and walruses, a review of the pinnipedia. Stanford 

University Press. Stanford, California. 

Schmalzer, P. A.; Hinkle, C. R.; Breininger, D. 1986. Effects of Space Shuttle launches STS-1 

through STS-9 on terrestrial vegetation of John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. NASA 

Technical Memorandum 83103. John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 

Schmalzer, P. A.; Hinkle, C. R. 1987. Species biology and potential for controlling four exotic 

plants (Ammophila arenaria, Carpobrotus eduhs, Conaderia jubata, and Gasoul chrystallinwn) 

on Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. NASA technical memorandum 100980. John F. 

Kennedy Space Center, Florida. 

Schreiber, E. A.; Schreiber, R. W. 1980. Effects of impulse noise on seabirds of the Channel 

Islands. In: Jehl, J. R.; Cooper, C. F. eds. Potential effects of Space Shuttle sonic booms 

on the biota and geology of the California Channel Islands: research reports. Prepared by the 

Center for Marine Studies, San Diego State University, and Hubbs/Sea World Research 

Institute. Prepared for USAF, Headquarters, Space Division, El Segundo, California. Tech 

Rep 80-1. 7:138-162. 

Schusterman, R. J. 1981. Steller sea lion, Eumetopias jubatus (Schreber, 1776). In: Handbook 

of Marine Mammals, Volume 1: The walrus, sea lions, fur seals, and sea otter. Academic 

Press. New York. 

Shaughnessy, P. D.; Fay, F. H. 1977. A review of the taxonomy and nomenclature of North 

Pacific harbour seals. Journal of Zoology. Vol. 182. 

Smith, C. F. 1976. A flora of the Santa Barbara region, California. Santa Barbara Museum of 

Natural History. Santa Barbara, California. 

Smith, D. M. 1983. Field study of candidate threatened or endangered plant species at 

Vandenberg Air Force Base. Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Contract No. 

11310-0133-81. With addendum. 

Smith, J. P.; York, R. 1984. Inventory of rare and endangered vascular plants of California (3rd 

edition). Special publication No. 1. California Native Plant Society. 

Sowls, A. L.; DeGrange, A. R.; Nelson, J. N.; Lester, G. S. 1980. Catalog of California seabird 

colonies. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OB5-80-37. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-13 

Speich, S. M.; Troutman, B. L.; Geiger, A. C.; Meehan-Martin, P. J.; Jeffries, S. J. 1987. 

Evaluation of military flight operations on wildlife of the Copalis National Wildlife Refuge, 

1984-1985. Prepared by the Washington Department of Game, Wildlife Management 

Division. Prepared for the U.S. Navy, Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering 

Command. p. 181. 

Sprunt, A., IV; Robertson, W. B. Jr.; Postupalsky, S.; Hansel, R. J.; Knoder, C. E.; Ligas, F. J. 

1973. Comparative productivity of six bald eagle populations, transactions of the North 

American wildlife and natural resources conference. 38:96-106. (cited in ES, 1988). 

Stebbins, R. C. 1954. Amphibians and reptiles of western North America. McGraw Hill Book 

Co., Inc. New York. 

Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Houghton Mifflin Co. 

Boston. 

Stendell, R. C. 1967. Food and feeding behavior of the white-tailed kite near Santa Barbara, 

California. Master of Arts thesis, in zoology. Department of biological sciences, University 

of California, Santa Barbara. 

Stewart, B. S. 1981. The Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi) on San Nicolas Island, 

California. Bull. So. Calif. Acad. Sci. 80(3):134-136. 

Stewart, B. S.; Antonelis, G. A. Jr.; DeLong, R. L.; Yochem, P. K. 1988. Abundance of harbor 

seals on San Miguel Island, California 1927 through 1986. Bull. So. Calif. Acad. Sci. 

87(1):39-43. 

Storrer, J. 1988. Personal communication with consulting biologist from Storrer and Semonson. 

Santa Barbara. 

Sweet. 1988. Personal communication with Paul Collins, Environmental Solutions, Inc. 

project biologist. 

Swift, C. 1984. Eucyclogobius newberryi Girard, 1854. Tidewater goby. IUCN. Inventory 

report form. 

Swift, C. C.; Nelson, J. L.; Maslow, C.; Stein, T. 1989. Biology and distribution of the 

tidewater goby, Eucyclogobius newberryi (Pices: Gobiidae) of California. Los Angeles 

County Museum of Natural History. Contributions in Science 404:1-19. 

Sylvester, A. G.; Darrow, A. C. 1979. Structure and neotectonics of the western Santa Ynez 

fault system in Southern California. Tectophysics 59:389-405. 

Tate, J., Jr. 1986. The blue list for 1986. American Birds 40(2):227-236. National Audubon 

Society. 

Tate, J., Jr.; Tate, D. J. 1982. The blue list for 1982. American Birds 36(2):126-135. 

Teer, J. G.; Truett, J. C. 1973. Studies of the effects of sonic boom on birds. Prepared by 

James G. Teer and Co. Prepared for the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal 

Aviation Administration, under Contract No. DOT-FA72WAI-238. Report No. FAA-RD-73-

148. September. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015. 

Townsend, C. H. 1935. The distribution of certain whales is shown by log book records of 

American whaleships. Zoologica, Vol. 19. 

Trainer, J. E. 1946. The auditory activity of certain birds. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University. 

New York. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1976. Candidate environmental statement. Space Shuttle program. 

Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. Prepared by the Department of the Air Force Space 

and Missile Systems Systems Organization. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1977. Draft environmental impact statement. Space Shuttle program. 

Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1978. Final environmental impact statement for the Space Shuttle 

program. Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1980. Wildland fuel management for Vandenberg Air Force Base, 

California. Environmental analysis report prepared by University of California Department of 

Forestry and Resource Management and U. S. Forest Service Cooperative Forestry and Fire 

Staff, State and Private Forestry, Pacific Southwest Region. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1983. Supplement to final environmental impact statement. Space 

Shuttle program. VAFB, California. July. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1986. Master plan grid, general information map. VAFB, California. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1987a. Draft environmental impact statement for the mineral resource 

management plan, potential exploration, development, and production of oil and gas 

resources. VAFB, California. June. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1987b. Vandenberg Air Force Base master plan-development plan. 

Prepared for Strategic Air Command. Prepared by Ken O'Brian & Associates. September 

(Revision). 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1988a. Environmental assessment for the Titan IV Space Launch 

Vehicle modification and operations. VAFB, California. February. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1988b. Operations concept, SLC-7 Titan IV/Centaur Launch vehicle. 

Generated by WSMC/ST. March. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1989a. Draft environmental impact statement. Construction and 

operation of Space Launch Complex 7. VAFB, California. July. 

U. S. Air Force (USAF). 1989b. Unpublished weekly notes: Evaluation of environmental 

effects of the Titan IV Launch. June 20. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. California least tern recovery plan. U. S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland, Oregon. In: Cooperation with the recovery team. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1982. The Pacific coast peregrine falcon recovery 

plan. Prepared in cooperation with Pacific coast American peregrine falcon recovery team. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1983. A recovery plan for the California brown 

pelican. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Portland, Oregon. p. 179. 

8-14 
NRDAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-15 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1985a. Sensitive bird species, region one. USFWS. 

Portland, Oregon. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1985b. Endangered and threatened and wildlife and 

plants; review of vertebrate wildlife; notice of review. 50 CFR Part 17. Federal register 

50(181):37958- 37967. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Final environmental impact statement. 

Translocation of southern sea otters. Vols 1-3. 

Unitt, P. 1984. The birds of San Diego County. Memoir No. 13. San Diego Society of Natural 

History. San Diego, California. 276. 

University of California, Santa Cruz (UC Santa Cruz). 1983. Marine mammals and seabirds of 

Central and Northern California, 1980-1983, synthesis of findings. National Technical 

Information Service, Washington D.C. Report No. PB85-183838. August. 

Urquhart, F. A.; Urquhart, N. R. 1976. The overwintering site of the eastern population of the 

monarch butterfly (Danus p. plexippus:Danaidae) in southern Mexico. J. Lep. Soc. 30:153- 

158 . 

Urquhart, F.A.; Urquhart, N.R. 1977. Overwintering areas and migratory routes of the monarch 

butterfly (Danaus p. plexippus, Lepidoptera: Danaidae) in North America with special 

reference to the western population. Can. Ent. 109:1583-1589. 

URS Corporation. 1985. Cities Service Oil and Gas Corporation and Celercm Pipeline Company 

of California. San Miguel project and the northern Santa Maria Basin area study. Draft 

environmental impact statement/draft environmental impact report. Prepared for County of 

San Luis Obispo, Minerals Management Service, State Lands Commission, County of Santa 

Barbara, California Coastal Commission, and California Office of Offshore Development. 

Versar. 1987. Environmental assessment for the repair and restoration of Space Launch 

Complex 4. Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. 

Waian, L. B. 1973. The behavioral ecology of the North American white-tailed kite (Elanus 

leucurus majusculus) of the Santa Barbara coastal plain. Ph D. dissertation department of 

biological sciences, University of California. Santa Barbara. 

Waian, L. B.; Stendall, R. C. 1970. The white-tailed kite in California with observations of the 

Santa Barbara population. Calif. Fish and Game 56(3):188-198. 

Walton. 1988. Personal communication with Paul Collins, Environmental Solutions, Inc. project 

biologist. 

Webster, R. 1980. Bell's vireo (Vireo ben) survey, VAFB, Santa Barbara, California. Prepared 

for Endangered Species Office, USFWS. Order # 11310-0150-80. 

Webster, R. 1981. Least terns Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties in 1981. 

Unpublished report prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game. p. 23. 

Webster, R.; Lehman, P.; Bevier, L. 1980. The birds of Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, 

California. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Occasional Paper No. 10. Santa 

Barbara, California. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 8-16 

Wilbur, S. R. 1974. The literature of the California black rail. USFWS. Special scientific 

report. Wildlife No. 179. Washington, D. C. 

Wiemeyer, S. N.; Mulhern, B. M.; Ligas, F. J.; Hensel, R. J.; Mathisen, J. E.; Robards, F. C.; 

Pstupalsky, S. 1972. Residues of organochlorine pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls and 

mercury in bald eagle eggs, and changes in shell thickness, pesticides monitoring. J. No. 

6:50-55 (cited in ES, 1988). 

Willett, G. 1933. A revised list of the birds of southwestern California. Pacific coast avifauna 

No. 21. Cooper Ornithological Club. Los Angeles, California. 

Williams, D. F. 1986. Mammalian species of special concern in California. California 

Department of Fish and Game. Wildlife Management Division administrative report 86-1. 

Woodhouse, C. D. in preparation. A fifteen year catalogue of cetacean occurrences in the northern 

portion of the Southern California Bight. Proceedings of the third California Islands 

symposium. 

Woodhouse, C. D. in press. Estimating information value of beach cast marine mammals. Fish. 

Bull. 

Woodhouse, C. D. 1982. Sighting of northern right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) in the Santa 

Barbara Channel. J. Mammal, 63(4):701-702. 

Woodhouse, C. D. 1985. Sensitive habitats, threatened, and endangered species. pp. 149-160. 

In: Tiffney, W. F. ed. Proceedings of the 1985 California offshore petroleum conference. 

Pallister Resource Management Ltd. xii + 259. 

Woodhouse, C. D. 1988a. Marine mammal research at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural 

History. The marine environment of Santa Barbara and its coastal waters a 

symposium/workshop. Abst. 

Woodhouse, C. D., Jr. 1988b. Technical Report: Marine mammals of the SLC-7 project area. 

Prepared in support of Space Launch Complex 7 environmental impact statement. June. 

Yochem, P. K. 1985. Status of the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrines) at the California Channel 

Islands. Unpublished report submitted to the USAF. p. 15. 

Zammit, C. A.; Zedler, P. H. 1988. Germination response to extreme acidity: impact of 

simulated acid deposition from a single shuttle launch. Environmental and Experimental 

Botany 28(1):73-81. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 :JUNE 2015 9-1 

9.0 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

ISTRAD First Strategic Aerospace Division 

AFR Air Force Regulations 

A1203 Aluminum Oxide 

APCD Air Pollution Control District 

CCAFS Cape Canaveral Air Force Station 

CDFG California Department of Fish and Game 

CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base 

CNPS California Native Plant Society 

CO Carbon Monoxide 

CY Cubic Yards 

dB Decibels 

dBA Decibels (A-Weighted Sound Level) 

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrychlaoethane 

DOD Department of Defense 

ECRP Erosion Control and Restoration Plan 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

ETR Eastern Test Range 

Ha Hydrogen Chloride 

H2O Oxygen 

ICBM Intercontinental Ballistic Missile 

ILC Initial Launch Capability 

IOCN International Union of the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources 

kV Kilovolt 

kVA Kilovolt-ampere 

LCC Launch Control Center 

LD Launch Exhaust Ducts 

LH2 Liquid Hydrogen 

LHe Liquid Helium 

LM Launch Mount 

LO2 Liquid Oxygen 

LS S Launch Support Structure 

MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act 

MOL Manned Orbital Laboratory 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

MST Mobile Service Tower 

N2O4 Nitrogen Tetroxide 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service 

NUS No Upper Stage 

OSB Operations Support Building 

PCR Payload Changeout Room 

PLF Payload Fairing 

PPR Payload Processing Room 

p sf Pounds per square foot 

psig Pounds per square inch 

REEDM Rocket Exhaust Effluent Dispersion Model 

RSV Ready Storage Vessel 

SAB Shuttle Assembly Building 

SAC Strategic Air Command 

SB MNH Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 

SSD/DEV Space Systems Division/Division of Environmental Planning 

SLC-2, -3, -4, Space Launch Complex 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 

-5, -6, -7 

S PL Sound Pressure Level 

SRMUs Solid Rocket Motor Upgrades 

STS Space Transportation System 

SV Satellite Vehicle 

TRAJM Deposition Trajectory Model 

UDMH Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine 

USAF United States Air Force 

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

UT Umbilical Tower 

UV Ultraviolet 

VAB/HTF Vehicle Assembly Building/Horizontal Test Facility 

VAFB Vandenberg Air Force Base 

9,2 
' NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

APPENDIX A 

PLANT SPECIES 

A.1 Plant Species Observed in the Study Area 

A.2 Candidate Plant Species on VAFB 

A.3 Special Interest Plants at the Cypress Ridge Site 
I 

I 

I 

TABLEA. 1 

PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED IN THE STUDY AREA 

• A-1 

U X X X X X 

X 

LA 

X X 

C.) X X X X X X 

. C) V) V) CO v) C.) in 

D) 

Z V) CD 0 0 VI 0 V) h GZ. 

..... 

.,„ 

§ 

D 40 .E 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 oC . 

5 

5

S 

3 0 

y 0 0 .t.' 5 0 Do 

c 

0 0 iz T, C tol 0 co, C.) C.) im 0 U C) 2 go3 (7) = 0 -8 :0 11" .3 

.,.. a c .c, 0 v .E 

rcl I: E -0 13 a 

E-- E 5 -C) ec 

3 — • 0 g a _g c"c""v r) u — 0 g e

.R 0 13 "a- to cu a) ti 2,-. f.) .z,- 5 3 oo '-' g.. mu -0- --..-- to -6 74 tz, >

r..I , u.

= (-) 3 E=i22112`,1:8.E.7007. 8 E 

g ts v 

.... 

r.) 

.c.a 

E 

17 43 

4.1 > ... 

= .`.2 2 1 2 ty Ct.—. ,,,, ,.., '..= .:_. . •... CI ._ ....:= 

c..) NI § ..Z,.... Ze, r., .is in..... C § .‘••4.4 .... CI ....„: ,.., 

Q ..., ,,, ,. . .,..,.,, ,) ,.., ,,,, - z " ,...„ ..-§. -i-, ., ,:e.,-,d c. , , tz .„, ....„. ,,,, .) :: L ,-. , tz..1 tzs„--; 00 0. / i- P...) ....c -....- 0) = S) 

7: '2' . , 41 c . ., • in E i 

Ot .1'..3 >, t% ..."‘ I..' ... t 

■.... s

z E z --‘ad C1C-• -10 t3 C.S C.S ..." Q 'q.. -t3 . 1"/ —% t3 .9. g ..),...„. R. 

, , , .... c cc *. Orr -- E 

■ 7.. 1-., .E .51 i.-.. a z 

.... f:,,,,,,,,,..t3 -c c., g E --- 

LLI f...1 tzs i::: in 

4-: p az -- •-• tic .r. c 1... I:3 z.. 

01 .... - -s 

• 't1 

-CI c5c Oc ot cc Z t Z L..t.tr..,c <t -,: -‹ ..,c -,:c ,c -.4c -‹ ..,c ..,c -4c -.cc ..,c -4c <: ..‹ qz .‹ 

2 

cI) V) V) V) V) VI VI 05 v) cn 0 in " g 61 8 ".E = co A:: 

(-) ce: c.) o {A c.) 0 .;" 1 .g 12' cn ..... Q. -al 

MIIIIII 0 

Od 

Sourcc: Hickson 1988. 
4.1 c 

< 

LU 

1/) 

LU 

LL- J 

0 

LL_ 

a 

LL1 

LO 

Q CNJ (NJ 

< w 

0 

Z 

A-2 

,CI 

C...) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

V) 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 

= X X X X X X X X X X X al 

cd x x x x X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

U 

CO C.) C.) C) VI c■I ca V) cn et CZ cn cn vs 

Z 0 cn co) 

0 ua el cal c..) 0 va C.) c..) c..) as G.I VI VI CO WI V) V) 

cn 03 ca cn 

C7 O ael U C..) U to ft eel va y V) CA CA N U ad) 

N 0 ce; el 0 vs tot c/) co) G La an ara y ch 0 0 cia VI V5 V) V) V) V) 

U 0 0 0 cn cn 0 0 GA CA cn cet 

CA 

= 

-C „p

r) 8 

C1) 13 

▪ 

at ,8 = tv CA a) ...Sg 5, 4.) gl) a) ce. 

ca: at; 10 a mu t) .0 

.5 

g •g 2 U'' Cl V: 6),o) 71) i)c ' — 2 -o -a -:= ,T, .... > op .: , i ' 0.., ..= ,_ • E' -a = ta. :.c, cl‘.-. a) 04Eco cf:".m. CO ..-e9 zu Yu ,t0 .).u 

1 '74: 6 i 7:2 -xE ,.... 6 u ,t, E c 1.-..-0 c z. t ) ■-"" 7:5..m -Ne V eu-a ';" ., -11 

7.30 4,) 6 0 act 

J; C ■•■•• D,.... LI: 0 ... '''' el) ...• tr. 2 4)5==a34)-0gF30808t; 

Zr.<1-AEu 

0 

 ET:) C...) *CRee ES 2 ..= a.) ar) an 7.> v; — .

o c — .0 cn .0 — E cz c 

o 

.--O— 

..Z 

. CS 

,.1 ... 

•••• 1..) 

,., 

• ..... oo =a. • ,--.; c> - , ta 

,:1 --%) 

,. 

t 66c, , E 

= a. — 

o g ''s) ,_O... 

c) g 

> 

. _2 Es,„ I; a * ej ce) > = 2). "E , . . . .r. , • 6 . ta u. 61 

,., L.a 0 ',7, t:3 F.... -CI 

- 11 '6 1 ii • ' z ' . .. R 1•1 g-sg.. 

▪ f

 

, 'Es = It 1 ti, ...6t.E.q_(.4 g N 

-i E 2 —6 .0 -4. E . es 3::: o -CS -ct' ts a .ts ittt, § 1.2 pp 1 t-' cc, 

._ -It.)LI-, Ci CI le '''Zi E 2 .z ;- .s2 E a z 43 t 1.. 4.. z Al e 11'2 

CZyt 4?..1 GI t.1e34 S'V3C)co9 I rz, OC t1.41 ••Q 4). •■•• ...Z .F.• § '47: E.. Q. -.., ..... •.... • ••■• 

,..J 4.5 .L. ..irj • }It 60 Q o ..— o c.';. c.;ZI E E E E ;, — 6 ,,, 'CS v Q p... 0...:. c r Z .13 e3 

-' g)'8 8 80C0C•■••4'gg a., CI t3 CI 

1, .... 1... cn t3 C3 CI 4... to 04 

CS V go CI C3 tt %) ai.; au eu 0.) -Z -tr. 

'`,t 'rC C■ C:12 CC, CO Z2 CO CO U U U U U U U C.) U U C.) U C.) C.) C.) t...) U C..) U U 

2 

'Intused inrevegctatingareasarou

nd SLC-6, would nototherwiseoccurinthestudyarea. 
I 

I 

w 

0 w 

a 

w 

0 Li) 

• CD 

• ILI 

C_) -D 

Z 

z 

soapplant, amok 

▪ u. 1. 

t

V

s 

c 

> 

to a i. -

tu

a 

(L) 

.r3 ..0 

-J X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

A-3 

xx XXX X X XX X X X 

X X 

X x X XXX X X X X X 

V) 

DO cr, cr) V) v) 

z o u; (R, N 

Q v) v) 0 0 0 o 

Ce) 

• v. v. 0 vn t.r. u, V) 0 cr. V) 

(.) O V: tr) v v: 0 0 

V) V) 

cr) 

0 0 yr h 0 

0 

V) V) V, Y V) V) O 0 V. 0 v: 

v) 0 0 y y ce; tr) V) 0 vJ Cr V) 0 

0 0 0 co) cr. 

C CS c4 

Ci. ...e V) 1:3 ,..) v t: v v .c. ,_ e . ,.) :,..; c., 0 7,-: . u 

...

• 

•- .,

,.: 0 

u: -c u .. .0 -0 ... -0 00 a.) 

-E, c 7,1: ,-, e ID 

... ..., 

. - te; 4.) 0 tu > •-• ill.? e c's 

= .., ,... ,.) . , o . 0 t a el — — u e) , o 4.) — •— .: r• c r. v: '0 v: = C = 4.) 

-0 4) ^ .= • rf - • ...- c - e. -0 0 -8 ..., 

. ... -_E- 0 .... 0 ...- 0 

— ..

• 

- .0 - ... :., r 

az Ix) 

z 

h. 

si 

,h) 

[-Lj c., 'Z o, t.) 

F3 z 'e L.. ,?... .,. `.1 

44 o.) . Q. . 

(..: 

cz

..--, 

... 

;V c-.1 CI 1. 0 g Q

>.• 

01.... -Q ci.•:.:: ,•:: 0 I.: j'A' E ... O :',7..• 1■3 Cin .,,L.,. e 

t > 1:1.. n cs ,...) a ss.. •-.. g t3; •..... ts -a = v Ei ts ei 

y' ,. 

,.. ,.., C ' Z Z 'r 114 : ^ -1 • • •. TE i t = t•• ...1 ,.., 

Q. C ii ..t: .., ta t l'• 4C'.i. C3 CO —.

* tt• a 1. b .g. Et."6: i". .), . 2 "5, 6. %. „,-- 2. . — _ — ft % c..> .....6 v; _ Z. ,„Z r, c.. u _. .i,-;c t ---, az; te `...-..e.---• ci .E ...7; ,•:•:. Z ES ,..5 zs„ ,.... z .... 

-- ..... -.. ,..,.... .„., 

11z z — " ''' .'S zt 'Z'-: -- > ' 'LI: P L cs c-) •-• .., zs E *Es `8 ts t3 tt SI ,.. ,..s. c 

z -:.•:•• ‘.. c, = z...-c - tzs g--"-z -. 0-,, u., cac—.114 I•4 45 IS ,2 v) "Et .1,- To "Z.' .."' .i. LI et Q CS 

z......,...... =-.. ,-s...1.=, >, , v a -§ r • „ . - z _ 2 ,,,, =--„Q. -% 'd, -p..., .' ..i '..- , 

„..: ,..-O , „ ,... --- z . = z ,. ,... _...... _•....•....•....._ , -4----. L: I. L:':/ .":: Q Q Q C) --.' Z 'I L.‘ - tt q1.1 04 -.... • ... - .... . _ -..Y. cz.:1 4.1 ... tz 

C..)Uc.)....)C.)(.)(-)UUULA:3C..)(..)C-JUUUQQC:Zi tZ CZ CZQ LLI 
LU 

LLI 

0 

0 

LLJ 

O 

• 

I-0 

'"-- 

O CD, c\I 

Q LU 

0 

X -) 

Z 

A-4 

,.0 

(...) x X X X X x X 

v) 

x X x af X X X 

= x x x x x x 

ca 

rX x x x x )4 x x x x x x x 

U 

co y 0 c.) 4.) col ctS co: 

▪ I4 x X X 

X X X 

X X X 

• VI 

0 CI) VI V) 

QUO Urn 

C.) V) VI V) VI 

O VI 0 VI V) V) (.) V) VI CI VI VI V) 

V) al '...) (.) v) co: co) v) co:. v: co: 0 C.> v: 0 co: cot co: v: cot co: 

(...) 0 0 ref co: 0 v) col col V) V) td) U) 

,... 4) 

3 

C 

is) = 

- 

4.) t a) -"' ›, 

.0 a> c 4.-..' it L- 

, 6, .. 0 _ F..) >, :0,1 g v .. _ : . . > . _ - 8 C. ,e1)0. .0 

== • ... C = , > '" c* t•3 

c4 'F:' 

c ao .erl 2 40 *, el 1 ( . .1 .E. !t),) r4 0 

... Cla c bc4 ..0 1,... r3 LI 

VI 

• 

>v, _V, r3 1:3 4) 43 8.) 6 1:3 ,2 to 0 c..) -:,-; -0 es 1-'1.- ee„=. u s -0 -= •

. . - 

= ,.. C ..... -. -0 c-J . z. ....; r; 0 2V2 t. rtt = ...0 •.... .14 (L) t) el .0 Z: V: Cil v; CA ..0 L.* 0.B () 75 ..c) .ca vl 

U 

5 

C 

C 

-_-.. 

8 

zt E 3 

E = '4. 1 U 

- 2: Z I.•-, .... 

tt -I 

•--, 

1:3 -0 04 17 

i t. 7 C

= 

a?, 1::). 

tl > 

$... 

00 CI Its c..) u.. 

-2 

15 

a .04 

:E. 

t5 

2 

N ,, -E *0 L • = 

!.`.,.. t.) cl 

4....s I, 

> Z..I c.S. z > 

a 

;LI 

E.4 E •..:. > 

..4. _ ... . g 13, 4 

C..) .Zn st 

C.1 ..... 

. .'"'S 

... 1 41 L. = ‘.3 t't ,., /.. c -. 3 .... ...... 

CS .1"'C oc .... i..., ... t4 i .s. ‘" ''''' ''' 

es CLI.--,:... '3 t -It ts ' a.> VS I. . • 04 i...., 04 C i52, 04 • 4 

, ....... at) •-• pd . A S :: '0 M X • • = t • tZ:. = •-.. 7- ea 

-Z 'fr, in ti t 'Z:t Z p = CI tn ) is -t . izi ••Q Z '4 

LPZ44"'..t"3 E "P'll' VC-a'Eq. LI 'Og.k g: 2"4.e.it.14rl ■... ,c) z.3 , t..) ‘.1 • ■ , _ ....Z C.) 4......... to it.3 '5- -._..._.-tz E i=1 p.- Q a Ef .- ts - --- -trg..- ----- 3 fai " ,3NNNIK 

ve = -->-,3--;,g g - z 2 fz.,..1-9. c, 6c.tes...•= x 

.'`, •t••• P.. L?„ C C C 4.....t -C ••• d 2 

-r,,j e.) .tec.4.cc .,0z). c tc.C., S. ,... Cei"3" 4;i -2 1 iz: t')i t.. 4 i zetztEci 3. 1 ,.... 1 1 ....... . S'• 9i e.. i 9i it..t .. 7.1 

• L. C. L.. r... Z. 17. 1.: 1.. r.. t.. L L.. L.. ,,'; .... .-- .... ..... L. I, 't tt t% • •••• 

Lt.] Lt.: LI.1 Lt.,) 41 41 LQ Li.1 47 Lx.: LLI 4.1 LU LL: L1.7 Lt.7 Lt1 Lz.1 Li. Lt. Lt. Lt. (..,L, (..5 LD (.., (D (.D LD (.., C., 
w 

C.0 

_J 

CC 

0 

a 

w 

O 

• 

I-0 

0-- 

0- 

c\I 

- 

z 

rn- c 

,.c 

C....) 

....1 

1.4 

= oa 

cC U 

X x 

x 

X X X 

x >< . < 

x x x x x 

x 

x x 

x x 

x 

x x 

x 

x 

x 

x 

x 

•-• ("4 

04) C 

1:3 

< g 

cz 

Z ca 

al 

z 

0 

C7 

to 

(-) 

co2 

n 

v; 

co, 

0 

to, 

V: 

(..) 

co4 

CZ 

U 

n 

U 

tI5 

tn 

0 

in 

co, 

tot 

0 

0 

0 

tr. 

v 

U 

cl; 

CA 

n 

to, 

v, 

ti, 

to, 

CI) 

V: 

A-5 

XXXX X X X X X 

x x x x x 

x x x x x x 

x x x x x x x x x x 

0 to, to, co, RS V) U V2 

0 

Cf1 U U v, to, 0 

VI VI VI o 

U co, U H U CZ V) of Cl2 

Col cn U uJ to, to, to: 

V) cn v.: 0 0 

v.; 

.0 

10 C 

r 1:-: Uo 

T 2 

-r...: CO2 F.- V; co; al 

- c. 

..... c.3 .- ,: . 0 "z) ,.°) x > — ..= 0 ti) §: "E "E E 0 - ..= .. = --..., a c t) ;.. C.. cr. ,:-: 

:t § .... 

N 0 0> 4.) ::: F. .1. iD0 1.. %. 04: _2 'flo ..sc3 .13 

u Ci...le0, 7-1 po"Te p.) 

8 "r3 ° `1 •›z., "0 >-, 

a r... ° rr: .4, 5: ,... ..,4 v 's 0 t 0 . o ... .F, ao to 3 

o.) 

al.) ,.-: 1... 

-i) `E' ak.) • _ C C a... 'esv it z:.• 

-fl i•-.. > ,.., 

,., 

po ...c, 

K:s E '" tl ci ci. ... 

t..., c --, az c m. 

5 4 ! re.'i.''' • ,.., CS k.. r..1 

"M'' 4 Ci > O.) 

= ,...- L.: r: 

4. -r, .— i... .41. t i 

= 

t z 4 - g §. ‘:3- z), g 4s. !.'s, u E — = 

es & - . 0 t.- = = = z.3,. ,,, O3 E.-. i.= . -Q -2 . , E.i -. z > 1:::6..e z 9 t, , 4 z.... k i -9..t,, sr .>) ' . ... ,, .., ..,7 . :,) P r. t.-.9 to zi , • .... Q. .., •■• .4 te.. „, - 1.1 S)thC6 L. st—. t., -t3 , 

%-.., •••• ,%-' t3 43 ,,,, 1, "". -3•C4. 4::) :ttle. ..... .9. t3 pa .. --F„ --cc E 2 g_ Z. Q Q. , E z cs ts •Z At `) t z :2' -2 L.2 t:1 tj Zi - E Li E. • 

, ... t...) ,z, c ,, ,4 Ca e 

Z1 l':•-• t3 113' 5 5'.0 Z.' 

„. %. , z ° 2 — N t E ..

e

"1N.s-3. -2 I 44 Z.- !ZS .Z. 2 c_ - z - 4--. v v "§ : .-4..--/ 

- 

C .... D- z .:. t4 ..., • 1, CO :i. .1... k.....:._. . 

• t, 

tl

... c...ti. ..z_-, — z.., , et _ z co

•

z c,„ Ng -2 1.. z..., u U i..) c.. ..- .... p,, C... zz. ,. 

. C. C. 0. 0...., -... .:::. t -1-. i..7. col - -- ....z 0 --- -- 0 - -- 

zzi.- 000 1:3uvviut.)-.-yyt:0000>,•" = -C 

C. C.. .-. :r- :: -. '-' :r.. -5. -4 '- 1 z-1. -9 .. ::` ::5 :3 3. 
LU 

LU 

Cr_ 

0 

0 

1.1.1 

LU 

CZ -7 

a_ c\ 

< 

D 

Z 

0. 

.. 6•D -1 4t0h) * ;3 _ C,I• Q. `I., c3 t3 

. • - - • ... ty m i... L. 0... 

.= .= - •:::3 - •-.. --•• eu 

-- z.

'''' ••.. es el .t-) t., ,..e0 e:: ''S = ,• IA 2 2 ,.. .= .5 2 - -- .-z- ,-, :- 6-,,,,, 'd Z. L. 

--. ---. tzt t3 t3 'Ci •-• z O.: --' u.: t",- E E t...' 

--cr: tc: ',14 • -• •-» • ' — 

,... •-• 0 

.... .."' .r., ••••• ...• ■. a. ••••• 

el 

,9-, 

'v 

.*0 

z: .

z..._ 

t x 0. c.: 

z H g . 1 • - g 

e 

• - tb.: . • .t. 

S ...{3:c -15 

. C..1 . co: ".F.. >• e 

.?. %"-.. v" .. = ei 

.2 " 

.. 'A Q. 

6_ > 'R • - * ts2 1.3. > sl ',-zs $-- > - a v3_ c.s2 •E Q V3 § u ,....r P. 2 k 2 

El. 

.,

ci- tz z 

z u 

z

.. ,z, v.!.,.., :-,. ,3 .o• (..) %., e3 17.. % ,.„,, = ,.t.. , 1.. g . *Is !..,, p :••••■ !1„...f, ,a , T,..). C4 `0, P ....?;.L) • S'.. 'S. / SI F.4* % = 5 z . Q `es =-. 6 —7:: cs cs.= C = . . . . .., 2,.. , .2 =. v,, si s, c iti i k 1- ._ g_ Lz" §.- t3 a "red z ts ,__ ... .. zs -. 'zi `,,-3 ' . .n'z' --az a. „„

:C

u .%e :,- 1 -§ ...

h. %) - -,:z 

ku 0 0 c) til 1 .' -... t) .. -- t\ _, -- 

----,., 1- 

C.) co) 

C 

C.) X )c x X X 

CE ; 

= 

co 

X X X x 

174 x x x x x U 

03 c.) cet Q to) 

E.,) 

s g 

In C.) co: N 

< g 

< C.) C.) 0 v: C.) 

5 col U 0 C.) v: co: 

A-6 

X x x x x X x )e 

x 

x x x x x 

x )()(< x x x x x x 

co: 0 V) N V) 0 

y c.) co: co: t? cn N 0 0 %.* H 0 

O 0 0 

• 0 C.) co: co: co: co) v: 0 v: 

0 co: V2 V) CA u. U C.) 0 0 u. co, 0 0 

U 0 yr U 0 

as 

.c ,... a.) I... 7

4) 

a.) v: 

c c j -6 

. — c I.. u 0 et 0 

v: a 'V - - - 

- - a = .= ° 1-. v) = ct — 3: B .2 1 -E g c...'..) 0. E 

.... v_ ,. , cu.= — c v: 2 o A 'E g.° 4) .C.'* t1t) 8 4) .1Z 1:7 

>, c1.) iz • -6.2 fa. a c co ... C 0 cp1" t:'•° 4) 

)e 0 

O = o U 1., 4.) = 

_ 0 ›s c m - 0 c = 0- > 5 v; -9. 

ct c 6.2..7=Epjco:U=ct•-C) ""'' Co • V ..X • :-. 

• —4.) •-• 4/..)cn '' ....-' 40 -a a) 1.2 :.E ei) — c1- — g.., _c 

c..c >.. ,,,••• CA 0 CA 7.7. ..- 

cl eu :- 0 = .Ne 0 ( % •C • "j 0 • •••• = 0 a.) = t•- • , = >-• 

--v i.7: c.. : 10 v: :. . ) ..... c..: P. ..0 C6-0 C.1 5. .ZZ C 5 C . ) ..0 CR 

z 
LU 

111 

0 

0 

LU 

0 In 

a<-.• 

17 

z 

A-7 

x x x X X X X X X x X X >< 

= x x x x 

gra 

a x x x x X it x U 

V) 0 VI Iza c..) v) V) 

co: 0 cf) Urn v.: 0 0 U 

h U v) 0 to: t.) 

V) VI U r.): c05 v; C.) C.) 

V) Cl) Cl) Cl) V') v: 0 

0 V. V) V: V: 0 t) V V) V) to: 0 C.) 0 to: v: 

U 0 to: 0 0 0 v: 495 V) 0 0 0 

.1r) 

U 

Z 

Cl 0 co: 0 

0 < g 

< 0 V) V) Its -0 

V) 0 

watercress 

LU 

z 

z 

annual bluegrass 

4 

, •E ,..:.... 

.,3 Q ,

... 1- 11-z- 1'.:) - —6- t 

g g .1 c.„ It.., 5: 

.. Q. g 13, ,„ 

> = -"ry 6. g > ct el (4 

(..- .r.,- !.., ••••.: I.... ..-* -- ,-, . „ •-• z g . Q.. , 4., I_ ,...... ...........,. .......,.. _. Lcstt 22 5 g •-•.... z t ,..- - 

r2, ,,zL.. .... 1•1 i 1... L.• .... > : 

0 t3 tt = :4-. r.) 0 ••• c., E ,.... t•-• 4 s- •-• 

P Mgag:rP.: I"01 ' •'.1''. 4 'ar c ,ti. '415 L- *L.- z4-p --E c.- g A a a ..,..z z 5 6"0"4' = "s ‘g 2...) 2 z- a zi .1 r- `' .... z t i :::1 ..... _ ,.., ,,... c t ,...- ,.-- ,..) C) :Z.: 4.)Vs Z t..) : = = .Z ... ''') Z...Z. ....., ,..; )..t )"°. ..z.. 

!h,) • ... •

--e.: 4-

■

C> C) •• '''' ' st, ,.:: V C4C :-/- ..t t4 c e,... e C )C r I, It:3 * Z.: . = *.t.t ."'.r.., LI %) = t i r• c,„.. vt r, , .... ..., •..... 0.) c.) c-.) c) -- 4: 1-..• L .... z 4. 4:5 c.) :..) o- -; Z - - C L." Z =r * chi tv .:-. -- ...4- X P1 ',....; CV i: L Vi4 tr., z Q. ta .z. — ..t . ..0.... •.-..- '-- -:-... , 

c... IL: n.. ex.. Fi: el: 67E.: k C-- iz.. a.. c- 0,- a. n- 0.- a.. c... Ohz< c< tc ct ec CZ g:‹ % (32 et- tc. mo

ntereyensis 

z 
A-8 

xxxxxx 

ce) 

x XXXX XXX XX 

a.) - 

c >4 X ae X XXXXX XX X X X 

• - 

a. trs ae x x x 

xxxXXX XX xxX>e >ex xxx XX 

CO V) V) V) V) V VI VI V) GA 

Z CA CA GA V) CA VI C..) 

CZI C.) tn 0 U t#, cif C.) 

VI CI VI C..) tli IA C.) V) EA I.) I.) VI 

0 V VI 0 0 CA V) VI V) VI V) GA tel CA V) 

VI V; VI tA GO ett col ch on Va 0 EI, VI V) 0 til V) V) 0 V) C.) CA 0 0 V ) GA 

U t A cl) G A GA V) GA CA 0 0 in GA 

4-) -0 ✓

V 

es 0 co 0-c-c 

cn 

cn 0 cz.) ...a. 3 -z-u., t..41 se o.., po 

0 ce. 12 a 7..) 0 *— 1.:: • -St 0 .1:4'2 L = ..0 4) ca u 0 ta. _ 7:1 2 ...... .", ,

Ca LN r., .5. 

..... :.: —a %4 inclcs415 0 as v) o,..,— B ,... ;!--, r.r... Ei.. .E 1). 4 ‘g e 2 

. >,-;-; ty — _se c i_ 4) ,., E c E lo —, _ .5 

4) -0 — .... . -- 0....t) U 0— el EL 0 E =..c -..2 = es . = ID c,3 .E:E r- 0 0 - 03—, 

Ce 3 c.) c—c ..= t.) v: (..) 3 E. E as n -5 8-4 

72 

..c..... p, 

a 

..... 

.., Q. q. 

,. g > ci R: CI 0 --::: 

E-- 0 ..) .c..) C".5 Z CS C.) 

tI 1 :?..g.. P- 4 • ts ts ,.., ~`'Cry. , - 

— > C 4 -. -,`-' .... " z t: 0, ._ 

..c ,, ., , .,..> ts , 

• E C.) ,:o boi 

z to --- zlit -z Z2 PI VI I..) C.I ti ZI C3 .1 ...". *". 'Z1 I. ti rt I .... .... ZO .... 4..... %., sy ....-.... -- • ,., t 43. -vp.i 2 0 h 

.-....-- ... 1...*c E.: ... E zs 2 zs 5i, Z:') . Z Z . -- Z. i4 c..) z zi Zi •■• -- E • ..ts )4 c, . a •c"a Z -• .4 

- . C.) '-'• S.4 ..k. .......... C) g 0 't tl Iti 4`1' 

)-f ....„..5..3 • = --I ..z....0 tIC..:."; § 4 oc C)C m"-:: u, a ..1Zb - '.. 

t.J Z3 0 .0 0 0 •• ad zi -.t — >, L.. ''''. Z. 

.... , E Z &... /.. Z C.) CO >.■ ,,N, .5;1 .. . 

c;5 r....) 0 cs tnc:1 tncs c•ncs 32 'g cs U C..) 0; .... %•.; ........: 0 0 0 0 0 k 0... :11 13 t4 .....Z.tl C,1 Ln Col Lel C.01 t.e3 VI Cn Ce) CPI Cel C•01 Ce] C./) te) C - ■• tel Co CO t■ 

2 

3 0 

- E -c 0 

*Plantsused in revegetating areasaround SLC-6, would nototherwise occur inthe studyarea. 
A-9 

X X X X X X X X X 

V

- 

) 

>,e 

CC tr; v. cn V) V) 

cst sz; 

cn 0 vs vs us us V ) ) V) 

0 u 

,0 

0 v, v,eocdU0 

z 0 

C.) V) V: V) 

1

cn 

*Plantsused in revegetating areas around SLC-6, would nototherwise occur inthe studyarea. 

< 

= 

< 

t-.. ZS c-.) -r r c.) ,. z ,..:) n. h-..., 

,z, .6 t,:.)3 

k e, )... Ct. 

-O 

".''` Ei * 

i a: --: , 6 L. 5 tg 

> .17 ,... .:,3 

i-I i3 'E to a— L •-• '.• es -c9 ---- 2 1,2 d s-- hO..., 9 'r E 'Z. 3 . z1 .t3 , , 

=--. Ti .e e 1- et "'' t .,z > {6, O, tci 'b". e c° !,.) z. L. --. t..) ..... .4.) es ... L.. t.) r L. 

:et r -- .--. •-• -:... -SI e..c.-- .... o >, •-•-- .r.: -r. _.,)NN... t3 • -r`:-1 LE "d '") Z

S :-7. .0"--■ 

.Z 6 C..) - ZZS CI ..". . "' ...* C> 

.... 1. ;:•S `..4- 2%:*--,1-

".-:::: i.5L Z . (7 ---, .."- . • 

ti. 

v.) 4. )... u.. '.. CI ts) Oa • - • s- "'" ''

't n"- E-- E---E-- E- i- E- > > ".. >. > 
0 

a 

LLJ 

w 

0 w 

0 • 

LIJ 

O in 

a C7 

a. cc! 

• LLJ 

0 

Z 

A-10 

--c ...• .

= 

,,, 

. C 4.5 v) 

...... ,..- 0 — c 

e,„ = 0 = .. .2 

t - c 

0 

0 ..... sel 

,-: 74 CIO c r L'') .0 = 71 

vl 03 4511 

ri. .c .... 

rci; 

RS • •••• .0 ..,.. 

• ... C..) t S C cc).5 

.... 

H >. `4) _,ii = E 

N Gs 2 vz, L.) g A ) = >,....1 

MON 

oo S • C4 Tes . 

..... 

- c .+ a g o g ,s;s o

1 

.= 1 ,.... a )6c .0 

• i ....... (1) 1.. C 

r- e „K. 

(,) 

0 (o 

• E

.1) • 

u -- 0 

x 5 5 

...0O3 • "? E c, g e • ,....) 

C tii • 0 .0 - a f., E-. ot cp 

0 

.< 

...-:..2 > 41 

V . V 

E

'

g o 81 

c g —4 

= '- .2 Fs fr3 -E 8 ,s 40. o _ .--, u 

e gi e L.L. 

vs•F:' 0 . a c) rs 0- 0 0,2 

zit 1-„) ..F. 2 "a ES z o CNA 

(-4 

U 

1,5 

..to 

o t 0 

o 03 1 '0 

CO3 

C.. ■

• 

E E Ild 

0... CA 

41 • .■ Ei ZS CI. 

. -'. 

• 

C 

CZ,bt) 

-z E ,..3 ,--: -0 

(..) ,..c 2 .. .2 -c 0. 

c. I... ,p, 1.. tit •CC !C 

I ..-.. i 

ea .. oi. e .= is. -8— 

5 L3 > 

,.. 5 = 

.1. ° , Ta o 

Vi 

34 u 

..t.. .1,2 

rd E >, 

.-E `g).,9 ri 

-= 

e .= 73 

c:, c

i S 

9 

...; a 

-o 

= g f-...) - v) •.= D 0 -V 

.scA 11 E 3 1 

4g 

0 0 

*.= 0 0 

• 

...• u .8 -f,; '53 

g t - - -s a .) 

, 

6■ C. 0 ce •T3 CO ... = .5 ,`" 

Ut I 

g g ii 1 

B 17' 1 i ‘,14 g E --5- .r. t t )

a .8 — a — a = 2- t-• i .. 0 .5- .-5 i 

'1

• 

3 `-' Au 1 8 -= e 4 6 

-, c4 tn •c-- E g ..o 0 

t• t" V '2-1 .= :g, IL .,8 9 

l e. 

.11 t E.) — — 0 

to = = - - c g 

to en 

155

0 3 •- .ts _ % 

Z143`61 .v

..2 

. i .0 s : m 0 < 5,.. . ..-- ,.:3 e a ,--- _ 

It ; i:2 31 

!'12 t i R. g! 21 g ? 

r! (-4 11u -a pp n 0 is ci 

Z',43 

L) L....? CC 41 0 -- e.4 eel .3. < (.1) C7 

as 

00 

= 
Ceanothusimpressesvar.nipomoensis 

Calystegiacollina ssp. venusta 

A-11 

tr a) 

• C.' ..,c cc. c 

..c ...:-.. o .._ 

cc. 'O 

..c c 

tit c-4 

—I E 74 

g g ..E 

vs — C) 

1,.. 

43) ,..-.7....

• 

..".• 

in CC el 4) cre C4 

_0% ..- 

,C ''''' I.: cog 

t ° C 

• E c 

-5 8 id g 

c .. 4 

. 

= g.-. 8.= 1.4 C.) t, 

:--,>-, 

az ts n 0 '''' 

)... 

a a 

.... >, .s 

1 

>— v 

.-. — , 0 0.. c,.. 6., •c -•

7. 0 --,: "s 

8 

6. 

 IC 

• ..... , r- o 

ZOF-' 

CG c 1:0 

N N N N N N 

U U 

O w

LL

0 

a_ 

z 

0 

1 JUNE 2015 
o 

U' 

0 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 .JUNE 2015 

A-12 

At Surf (Smith 1976),sixmilesnor h o t f projectarea. 

t> a' 

• - 5 E a o 15 

L. ..- .3.) to M -E. .;:cf 

g 9 2 a. 

11) 

• 

= .-." C 7 - 03 O0 ..-.. u c.) .c 

E' Nt 

'5 eo 0°. ia. A D.,. _,4 eu 11) . 8 -d CZ cl, c4 U 2 ms a

• 

" E 0 "re 

E 

c c 

o e E Edg 8 cs. 

>, cl- c '13 

c... ..„, ....N. 

4.) ,.. CC1 (5. E -6 

c 0 

c .go,... u 

• - C) c.) 

,n 

e u z 3 -A 0 ---.0 2,..- mg -a 0.0 = 8 cvs tz c..... 

C 0 0 46 ".a 

0.) •••• = b b ,i 

u 

• 

u 

,E3 z8<%' 

. . ••• CO E _ I . . . g ri, -2 ..8 . 0 .0 , ..)..-s 

rn-0 g = 74' P--• .c u • 0 c 7:1F, /J. ,..., ........ < 5 2g > ,c..) cs -t 0, ,z,, , . _. v ...... 

c 6 ti c-,,e 0 • i... L.= 0-0P4g, ,... c., 00 Q --1 =-- -. u -c 4. .r• c") ) 0 . ....... 

g 

V

i"S 

es -5e co vg° I E

_ 

E 

. ... 

4 0 

gt6e7 .0 4 .0 .=-- 71....8.3 512gg 

..44...weIrs aac 

-s ci ON a '413 m2 e

• 

g1.62 0> V 99U ""Cl = ri) 

1S,......... rA82 cn- -6...v0' - 

>.„ c., -- 7 ••••• 

W3 = = ›. 4.) ---. ,. 

0 4.) 80. 

040,==1 = =,00 .0 ,..,-0 2. .?,:. 

' N252g ,„03 . ,.... -... - „, 0 .c .:-;.c in ..a. c g. = 0 

Cll'E.

R in et3 

0 3) u 1 

c,., • C/3 7.4)01.30 0. y o 00=.7 Q

• cl 7 II= Cl) i' 1:$ cs.0 
v•■•• (1) 1.. 

C.) = ›•• • E 

.E 8 

-a u ....., _ 

a E -0 

E t 6 

.E 

0 

8 v 

bi) m Ito sn 

....- < .0:t ..., c E 2 

03 > 

E-- 1'3 ..Nc ►

t-- 14- 0 C ''?' .. 0 (4- O

CC 

:".3 1! 0 3 c 

as 2 

• E •- v) E 1.- -= 1-2 

To 4- g 

E 

.„ - - 0 -4 G - 

a >, *E il> . "0 . 3 

-o

0 0 -o • c.) E i5 u: az a = •0 e 

0 0 „, 0. E lE g, C.) c t...... .... 0 0 ›, — cr) 0 o < Z U = a. 

t:0 et 

— 8 v 

••.4.• .... ,„C 

0 

00 2 = ON • ■•••■ 

0 V . 

.c 

C 

0. 

z 

00 -.4. 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

V 

A-13 

ct CO I.) r..-. 

c 

V V-', oc 

S — • 

t si cti >, CI 

= a 2 

c -::.-.. 

= , a:', a..) ›, 

o GA 17.) 

C

an L7

- T •—, 

E T-4 .t.2' .t Ti 0 

142 .t., ctt 

1 

<-4 
1 JUNE 2015 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

U L 2 

C.) 

cr) 

lkson, project botanist. sources: Munz and Keck (1959), Smith (1976), and field observations ' 

C2 = Category 2 Federal candidate(data is not sufficienttosupportlisting). 

A- I 4 

TABLE A.3 

8 c • 0 • 

tic . 

C.) 

- a "C i- 

= "0 c.n o.- ez v. 

u - Ces. 

es E .o ci c 4.- un t) = "c3 

G. u c 4) es 0 

1--- -as c.) 0 ...... -o •- 

- c y ■ 

CT. . 4) dj >, g 1) MCI ^C) 5 U "IZ, ,..-. ..7 .0 v; :-.) 1:10 C..) 4) 1) .a'0 0.0 0 4) 

>-, ,.... , c - a: c c 

■-• u...- 

c• < E 

..c E 

O JD U`- ' ';'< - 

E 

08..,f. , 3 

"c's' -91. 5 

,,; c r. . .-• 1i3 

E • v.. 

t) • 0* . 

Cl. in 

CIO= 

DO t • .... C •••• ...0 

.1.1 

o 

S) ° a,

73. „, 0 

U 

c 8 0 g 7... < 

oE "0 (.) 'C t 

vi u (..) e v g )

oc • tio ' .i § vv2 2Ps 

O co) 

.11 MI .0 

•.... 0e 4.) C E 1- (I 

= 

•- 

0 •!ei E 10 O. c 

.0 

120 '5! (5=i I >,Er.5 O .0 )„, U 0 ••=11 3 

5 E bxc ,• c aa 4 = V2 .2 Ctg i.) 0 .8 

• I■ra E 3 rz, 17 ...1 az v; 0 ea -0es o. io 0 -c 

0 L 

at 3 

7" s 9, a 

a c = 6 Ca el. .4. .0 

P., O c v •... ,.., WI .0 •••- ... GO Z g '0 :,./ E -E. = ., ■/:, 

....1 c .6 ...1 as 

a, a 0 .4 

c 

es at u 

as 2 

0- all .---' 

rs u 3 c(3 -- Ti. ....., G:7 c.6 .' ,., .1u 0 CA V) 4.0. •Ald 00 : v. 5 g T, ... ° utj E .. l'' --a .o -o c 0 41 44 “IZ :I CZ ' CT. CI c a, C/5 -Ft 05 Cwt Z V.' as 0 '' c = ti: a 5 cc's < gas 4,) *0 30-I • '0 1- latl ta.cos 

.... 0 

...1 

fy C: 

CZ 

. 

o c ,... 2 ,1 

c50.2 .--7 : ° > ...e 

,„_..... 

ck p u.) , m 0 

•,-.., 8 ex cetm = 

4) si E c)c 8-5 c^ -, .... " • 

DI5.) 1"

-- 0 ..: • c.. 

a"-- 

v: r4 e3 03 c) . ON . C 

...-..1C4 C ect -Ca 0 " t.. 0E 0 ),-, c.4 c,.: ct ct: 

s --a 

vs 4) _c n cr CI g § ° 9 .1.) '' § .8 -,:l I...0 

.-. c,- E c,-. --- os 0 

C15 .0 " ''''6 

-a U v 

E tr. 

ri .sz, 

0 

r-s' c ...se 

s.---c4= r, c c 

,.... 0 E c°"„; v) >, c 

c

E-. CG c ..... - .... = 

Z Z. v: c 0 4 E 4.) = t 

p„. 3c u .... 4) o 0 3.E0 c . ...t; g. cu 

..■.. 

734-... 0 c/: 8 

,0 ID vs '••••-• •;...., 

< W .- c 

U -C 

-0 :•-• 

>, :-.: 

-Cc "o-d la 0 73 cl 5 3 .E r, 0 

t/3 CtS 

7: • 5 

N os • --. 

CI C.-) tz.• ' E. -.3 -a "S C4 ;e. t.-; _se 

o 0 

c -a 

C..) '--. E E -- 

c - s 

,,) - -• ; • E 

0. •••• ,Ae t g ...0a.-. 

w E- - c '5 c F...,: v 

-as ;€3 0. rd a-, cm C3. E., c iz c 03 

< 

t.-1 cx, 0 .9 e; . .7 Lta .E E < U < ,--. < Z. v.: 

C) JS 

Z cia I 3 

• 
. NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

9 

0 

APPENDIX B 

TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ANIMAL SPECIhS 

B.1 Key to Species Lists 

B.2 Amphibians and Reptiles Observed or Expected To Occur Within the 

Study Region and Project Area. 

B.3 Land Mammals Observed or Expected To Occur Within the Study 

Region and Project Area. 

B.4 Birds Observed or Expected To Occur Within the Study Region and 

Project Area. 

I 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE B- I 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE B.1 

KEY TO SPECIES LISTS 

1. HABITAT ABBREVIATIONS 

TERRESTRIAL(1) 

CI = Channel Islands (Northern Channel Islands only) 

CBS = Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub and Central Dune Scrub 

CSS = Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub and Central Coastal Scrub 

C = Chaparral (northern mixed, central maritime, and blue brush) 

G = Grassland (non-native and native perennial) 

RW = Riparian Woodland (central coast arroyo willow and central coast riparian scrub) 

AGR = Modified Habitats (planted eucalyptus and Monterey cypress windrows) 

MARINE 

OS = Offshore (oceanic) 

SBC = Santa Barbara Channel 

NS = Near Shore 

CS = Coastal Strand (sandy beach) 

RS = Rocky Shoreline (sea cliffs, ledges, shelves, rocky intertidal and 

off-lying rocks and islets) 

2. RELATIVE ABUNDANCE DESIGNATIONS 

The following ratings apply only to the occurrence of a species within the project area and do not 

represent its general abundance within similar habitats elsewhere in Santa Barbara County. These 

abundance designations are somewhat subjective but are helpful in determining the relative value or 

significance of a given habitat with respect to certain species. 

ABBREVIATION DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION 

A Abundant Species nearly always encountered in particular 

habitat type indicated, generally in moderate to 

large numbers. 

C Common Species can usually be found in the designated 

habitat during the appropriate season, but usually 

not in large numbers (5 or more individuals/day). 

U Uncommon Species occurs in small numbers 

(1-4 individuals/day) and is not always observed 

in the given habitat. 

R Rare Species may occur within the designated habitat 

but only in very small numbers 

(1-5 sightings/season). Occurrence is 

irregular, seasonal, or unlikely. 

(1) Habitat types follow Holland (1986). 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE B-2 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE B.1 

KEY TO SPECIES LISTS 

(Continued) 

Ca Casual Within the range of the species, but not of regular 

occurrence. Generally fewer than five sightings 

from the Study Region adjacent to the alternative 

project sites. 

3. SEASONAL STATUS OF BIRDS 

ABBREVIATION STATUS 

SP Spring Migrant 

(March 1 May 31) 

SU Summer Resident 

(June 1 - July 31) 

WI Winter Visitor 

(December 1 -

February 28) 

AU Fall Migrant 

(August 1 -

November 30) 

Known Breeding 

9 Breeding Status 

Uncertain 

4. SITE DESIGNATIONS 

ABBREVIATION LOCATION 

EXPLANATION 

Species occurs within given habitat type as spring 

migrant. 

Species occurs only as spring-summer breeder, 

but migrates out of region for the winter months. 

Species occurs only as winter visitor and is not 

known to breed in the study region. 

Species occurs within given habitat types as a fall 

migrant. 

Species nests within the project area. 

Species may nest within the project area since 

suitable habitat exists. However, no definite 

evidence of nesting has been found. 

DESCRIPTION 

CR Cypress Ridge Includes vicinity of preferred site and Oil Well 

Canyon. 

Includes the flats south of the railroad tracks 

between Oil Well Canyon and the Boathouse. 

Also includes the shoreline and nearshore habitats 

adjacent to the site, including the Boathouse area. 

Includes vicinity of the Vina Terrace alternative 

site. 

Includes vicinity of preferred borrow site. 

Includes vicinity of preferred fill area at and 

adjacent to borrow pit at Point Pedernales. Also 

includes sandy and rocky beaches and off-lying 

and near-shore habitats adjacent to this site. 

BHF Boathouse Flats 

'VT Vina Terrace 

BS Borrow Site 

PFA Preferred Fill Area 
B-3 

NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE B.1 

KEY TO SPECIES LISTS 

(Continued) 

ET Electrical Includes a corridor from the existing liquid 

Transmission Line nitrogen plant north of SLC-6 to the preferred 

Cypress Ridge site. Corridor includes area 

between the railroad tracks and an existing 

electrical transmission line corridor to SLC-6. 

Also included is existing buried liquid nitrogen 

pipeline from the LN Facility to SLC-6. 

WP Water Pipeline Includes water pipeline corridor from existing 

water tank on ridge east of SLC-6 to the preferred 

Cypress Ridge site. 

CI Channel Islands/ Includes the northern Channel Islands and the 

Santa Barbara waters which surround them, including the waters 

Channel of the Santa Barbara Channel. 

NOMENCLATURE: Nomenclature follows Jennings (1987) and Collins et al. (1982) for 

amphibians and reptiles, Jones et al. (1986) for land mammals, and the "Thirty-Fourth Supplement 

to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds" (A.O.U. 1982) and 

Banks et al. (1987) for birds. 

5. SITE-SPECIFIC STATUS 

ABBREVIATION DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION 

O Observed Species was observed at indicated locality during 

field reconnaissance conducted 29 March, 5, 24 

and 29 April, 7-8 and 20-21 May, and 17-18 June 

1988. 

E Expected Species expected to occur at given locality. Site 

is within limits of the species' distributional 

range, and suitable habitat is present. Records 

exist for the study region, but site-specific locality 

records are lacking. 

P Possible Occurrence at the site is possible but not expected. 

Marginal habitat is present at the site. no records 

are available from the project site. 

U Unlikely Occurrence at project site is unlikely due to 

absence of suitable habitat. Known distribution 

range for the species does not include the project 

area. 
B-4 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE B.1 

KEY TO SPECIES LISTS 

(Continued) 

? Status Uncertain Although suitable habitat is present; there are no 

recent records from the project site or the study 

region. Site is within the species' known 

historical range, but populations are now 

considered extirpated from the region. 
Li 

:ted 

I 

TABLE B.2 

CC1 

ai 

UI cl CBS CSS 

z 

z 

z 

B - 5 

(1)SeeKeytoSpeciesTablesB.7, B.8, and B.9 for definitionsof abbreviations. 

C.) C..) < C4 C..) 

C) C..) a a 0 a C) 

cL c:4 EL 

c:G C.) 

cd C.) cd 

-at 

g 1,i3 0 

,... cti E a .1:, O z...- -• 

....•• ... -6 

-a 

2 

lt) t inUcki 1:314 

t

• 

a 14. g 

,-, ,, a ra. 

-8 E .;: 45 !, ts 4." g bow 11.124 

4.)ES. E in ? 

O 1 1 a 

121:1 CI 4> IL. 0 b 1 

Cil

▪ Z' 

2

'. i5 V tu .ci e t>. V; 

.L.- g !---. M in 5 

t.3 2"E =2 -E 8 1) 2 q k: p (". 7Z3 t3 -C) CI fl• S 4.) _... Z,-:, _ al 

;. :ri I ot el 

S). , t , ) 

5 4 4 

.(13 v, 

< <

z U 
LU 

U 

z 

O 

L.T.1 

CC 

LU 

U) 

LU 

11- 1 

CZ 

0 

CI

- . 

LU 

LO 

7c-; 

a_ (NI 

< 

OJ 

Z 

B-6 

cM 0 a. 0 a.. LIJ LU a. a. L1.1 LU c.L1 a. 0 

0 a. 0 a. 43 4.3 43 a, 43 43 c-- 44 a. 43 

1

1. . 43 n. 0 a. na a. a. a. 43 

21 1.1.3 0.. 0 a. a.43a.4.304.3a.w 

0 a.. 0 a. 43 0 a. c.-- 43 43 4.3 a. 43 

5 0 a. 0 a, a. 0 a. a 011au.) a.0 

61 43 a. 0 a. 4.3 0 w Li.34.1 Pa C1,11.1 

U U U 

01 <D< a = U(33 U CZ< 

UI U < U a C-) C:4 U U U cd U 

a < U a U a W U U U W U 

8 O U a a c4 U U 

U = cc 

I 1 ..) y(.) ......, co, 

..z e..) g go c„..) 

g N a 2= -e7-1, :,. :. 1_, g 0 z = ,.!.2 ,z,. g 

cd .e.- c:,..v (%) u -8 ,L, ...2 .. r.t 1 CI Zr'S 95 73 Z IDD .-. ,... -ts c ,...

Va, 3 2 04 eu I., = 

s4 ft- 15 r • c = C c_ ,••• 46 E .t: a 0 .1g 

,_, t..... os 91. ...._ .to, etll C..) 40 El: bp oc ,..., 2 2 a 4, .,.., 4:4n vs 

,.., e.) c ta e... 

o 4.) 5 c E , ... ,... ..,- ti , 74 E g "t1 a ivc a g 44,.. g: E-- -5 Z) E :3. g "'= ,..v) E — ..8 == u•` E hZ 4') .... E , h; ,... ce> 6 c,) tz ,; - 5, cla= SEC .11,-- 6 v, zr) ...,.c ')) 71 ts u 1, -z c— a 0 * t3 1:3 44 E ..k• 0- t..) D-- ,.., ..._ ri). ''"' ... Z CO) L° • t').. "Ei A 4Z1 '6 8 Q. a 

Fe 4 . 2 0 , L%)) hctj U U 0 : ,: : 1 .' ' ''' . 6 : 

oc ... ea SI. ,_ , •rzs , . SI R..., El . 1..- b, 

L1.3 rin V) 

z 

z 

0 

0 -A 

0 cz) = 

e E CA 

t, ....... 3 -z) 

..., 
B-7 

5

.g 

E . t, B 

w 1.1.1 p..1 .-c, u 6,-- 0 -0 g >. .c7, 0 

g c 3 , g -= 

,... a 2 c ,.. L1.1 t.1.) at. w -r.. *... „, . g o cti k

m 7, t ra.rg E 

to...u, il tg 0g ---„, -5 ct, 0 = e a a; L) < .0 R = cn 0 Cl. 

U U U U 

1.-. e L, .. 

4.) 0 a,. , •■• .... is.F., 

= u 13 = .0 ,,:ior. c. >0-.0 ..= — „, 

c — 

u, 

U w < 2, 2 E-a- u .5 

'S E— g g 

6. ,,, 0 0 

7 .... 4" cc

- 

i 19 .

.15 5 — cA E ..p cd 

esc -t:0" 

2,---d e e: 

.2 

t/3 c Y2. rz. Q E 10 C...) U U U = .E" 03 - es E tzL..) 

„, 

5fn . a• 

c .... = ,.... 

1:4 g'cl<t.c -6;3>Tvi -

0 

TABLEB.3 

Lij 0 

LU 

I ---I LU 

0 

LL 

0 

LU 

CY 

a_ 

0 

z 

z 

z 

MARSUPIALIA(M 

F 

•— 

INSECTIVORA (ShrewsandMoles) 

CHIROPTERA (Bats) 

( 1)See KeytoSpeciesListsfordefinitionsof abbreviations. 
RODENTIA(Rodents) 

LAGOMORPHA(Lagomorphs) 

GEOMYIDAE (Gophers) 

SCIURIDAE (Squirrels) 

B-8 

O a. a. t-. [LI 0 

O 0 ;LI c-. 0 c-. 0 

;Li a. 0 

O a 41 O Ill 

O a. LLI e-- 0 a 0 

ill 4.1 0 0 

O a. Ell c- 0 0 

L.) C.) g g U 

U < < 

C.) C.) cd U 

O c4 D ce C.) < 

U < 

cr) 

LU 

tC 

0 

LL 

LU 

c\I 

<z

LU 

2 
SITES

PECI

FICSTATUS 

(,) 

6 

z < z 

2 

E— 

> 

P < 

< wQ 

c.T.a z 

B-9 

• c-. 0 w W a. LI.) c.1.3 

• e-. 0 0 0 a. 0 w 1.11 0 0 

1.1.3 a. 0 a. 

0 W a 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

• C-• a. W a W 0 0 LL1 t:0 

O 0 w 0 a. 0 0 0 0 0 

ce U a U K < 

t4 U< 

r.4 

< U U U U 

U

2 

z 

z • 

z 

IIETEROMYIDAE (KangarooRats) 

CRICETIDAE (Mice 

and Rats) 

.... 

..2

5, `'. 

te) E •-i ., L 

ts ,., 

Ev o...... 

›

E N' a 53 , -• EpOZ z 0 ., .S'S ,O. c; 

O .= 1/4) ct, — = cn ''. ."' 0 ..."7, vs !.7 .... 0 t., = 0 Q. 0 t 

*c) EEz *E E=ozE.Z'" `..--.'47.t.)E t.., 1..) C.) .1:3 t) tn 

!"

0 c.T, ..ct., 1.— fo4 = Ita t r3 P.-.. L" 0 

o cn -'. %-.. 

5..a.)E75•at.t=Q 3 ..z , , , <::, Q4., c, •._. ... 4., .... ,... 

,..., ,.. _. I, "0 1, la. f,-.•„ '0 "0 . tj 

Z; Co 0.) ',4) C.) V.) %.) ... 

C4 CI. CI. CI, 0. Z 
C3 

cr) 

C.1.1 LU 

p 

z ¢z 

a Cr. z LIE< 

CL1 E— 

E— < 

< 

z 

< 

a. 

c" 0 0 w 

0 a) c.t) 

i.L. 0 0 ;I) 

v) 

co 0 14 

O a) v al 

u.. 

O al 

ca 

O a) 

B-10 

w w w a.) a. a) 

al a) a) al a. al 

Ct. 

al 

CI, 

134 

CL, 

a. 

06. 

a. 

ci. 

a 0 

al 0 al al a.. al 

a) 0 al al u.) 

;11 0 al ;LI a. a) 

Sri 

U C4 U U C.) U c (..) r:G 

C.) U < U > 1:4 

U U L) U U U U U 

cn 

cn U U U U U CC U C_) 

z 

z 

CANIDAE (Canids) 

oc 

PROCYONIDAE(Raccoons) 

MUSTELIDAE (Weas

els,Skunks) 

FELI

DAE (Cats) 

LLJ 

_J 

LU 

U_ 

0 

LU 

O 

• 

in 

ZE; 

a_ c 

CL 

< 

O D 

L 

C 

8 

0. 
SITE-SPECIFICSTATUS 

<z 

z 

q E 

< 

< < 

z 

N ROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

U

U 

CERVIDAE 

1 

B-11 

a. 0 

a. 

act 

0 

0 

0 

0 

U 0 

1.13 E 

z - 9 

z 

z W 

c:4 

U 

v7. 

U 

U 

U 
B-12 

i u t-13 1.11W.1 113 03 03 0- 0- LU D 06. u.1 Li] ul L6 [1.1 ul 1.43 A. U.1 

c4 

DDD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D 

DD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDD 

u I C<t OWW WWW DDDDDDC..a.,."- DDDD > 0 

0. u. 

DDD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDD 

0. 

oo I P- D0D 

"v"; t 000 www 0 

aj 0=0 DDD DDDDDDDDD 

uU 

0 

a LU 

O Lc) 

E) 

M 

• W 

0 D 

• 72 1 

F ai 

—3 I >. 

4C 

• LU 

OG 

• g 

< W X E— cg

„ 

oo 

! C) .

oo 

oo

< w U 

Z > E ,,, 

z auu uuu d<u cD DW d u 

2 

Lu ; Cl, uuu uuu d DdCau=ceu (uac U u 

I, 

io Wo3 UWWU< gc4DD 

<t vi 

6D‹ 

W— v) 

L.0 F-I 

< I 

—, 

...IR uuu <00 ddu Duzwddd < 

E 

! D UDD UDC) d UocaD0Ux WDDW d U 

CCCDwd 0 < UDUD 

NC.,) f 

f0. 

I ul <UU VDU wCW WD< VagO U 

W 

t gg i'Vg 

a 2g0 t 1 giltP44 1 13 4,4 E 4q M41441i1 111,13 14g131 Mr g= NzIE 8 E(J,4›,osc2e4 2g 

saE“t -,:pitI.A6V2e›V 

7.¢,9 23*z3zmcc.Y.761;,.m .c...'g u 

3 g 2 R 

0 

U 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

a : 

0 

W 
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE & HABITAT AF

FINITY 

E3 CR BHF VT BSPFA 

SITE-SPECIFIC STATUS 

RS CBS CSS OS SBC NSCS 

B-13 

wa PI 1.11 06 111 41, 06VI :D :D Ou Ul ul ul :D e- 00 41. e- :D 

:p :) :D X00000 :D :D :D :) D :D M O :) 06 0 14 P-) 112 

»> :D :D a- :D :D c6 M a0»»> C) :D 06 0 w w p. w 

wOw a ODDall.D a 0.A.WW0-Ww 0 cl.W4It.M 

MMM M MMMMMM M MMDMMMD w 

MMM M 0O-00M0 M MM=MMMD 0 McL0WA-4.0., 

000 a. 0cuMA.0.M 1:4 0.0t.wwa-OW W WW0144.(1.0. 

DMD M MMMMMM D MMMMMMM 0 ts.W0006a-W 

0 CM DD M 

3 W M MUMD U w 

0 Mw U UUMMCM 

U MM D MwwCM 

M MDCU 

M 

uuM C U MMuw C W De (5 

d De 04 d :3 t) 

C) () (.., e3 d U 04 U :D d () c) (5 

.)c) uxuDdoD 

1 UUM UW M MU UWWD UU U UUMe3U -.1 - _ I 

l

i v, 

(S :D i .et uun uannu c UWDMCUU U wUUDDCU 1 1 

'4 i- 1 Q, <<1P t',0e c u D04 CLIc4CtI U Ut) ti ., ., 1 1 0, 

!v) UUM UwMMuM UWUU un U UU» U 

.15 g g 

a 

r

oTh 7 _ .§E .... 0 •_ mss 

a..E• Dou 37,5 

g g < C 

TERRESTRIAL 
to 

E—

E— SITE-SPECIFIC 

RS CBS CSS C 

T

ERRESTRIAL 

z 

iY 

RELATIVE ABU

NDA

NCE & HABITAT A 

Li1 

uU 

cr. 

0 

LL 

LLI 

O 

CC 

0 

CC 

1 JUNE 2015 

B-14 

(55 

(55 

e-OwW ua LU ul cL cL wa LU LU LU ul ul ua ul ua LU ua ua ua 

04 As 0 0. 0 DDDDDD D DDDDDDDDDDDD 

-0.004 

04000. 

0 

W 

°DDDDD 

0040040W 

D 

w 

DDDDDDDDDDDD 

wwwwawwww0.ww 

DDWD 0 wDDDDD D DDDDDDDDDD 

0 000.00.0. M 00D00-.DDDDDDD 

0.0.°W 0 00.0.0.0-W W WOWWWWWWWC6WW 

0 O cl.nmD D DDDDDDMDMMDD 

wWD 

D U dad 

W U D UDDDDDDUDCOw 

cCD uuuw w C<D 

<dodo mwud Q 00c40 (.) 

acd gaud Q 00 uwu 

bb ()LID 

wwu Q 00(50 

0 

zi e 2 

21'a gla. 4 

ff210 .1§§0 

4Tgm—Z31gEll e2,'22.12o.<<.g u 

3 .5g 

M UDUMUUWQD <U 

D uDUUQUDUMWUU 

6 4 UmDUDWWwWDU 

D UDUUUUDUDWUU 

10 

0" b U. 

Im ...= 0 0 — 

> 0$ > .2 law 00..a 2 428. 'i'...11 g 4' c. ... 

8;m-81=-4 

ILI1C184g g-.0. aili . 3 a0§1..cabomE 1!,,1-512.s1 .c1 r - -4g.V.T]ifi 

=Q0EV. .12 - vs E9.276" 

,§ g 'S 51 gni 1 

a- 3w3ki OP IT a — E .0m)i— 

cn 
B-15 

WWWWWWW 

aaaaaaa 

aaaaaaa 

i.3.) a. a a. a. o., 

aaaaaaa 

aaaaaaa 

14 a. ci.. a, P. 0. 

aaaaaaa 

1.11 G1.3 06 0. 1.1.1 al al al al al 0.W fal W.3 a 06 Z. C6 CI. 0. W] :) 06 0. 

maaDaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa=a==a 

aaDaaaaaaaaaaaaDaaa=aaa 

:D 0. :) awwwwQwa. QQa.acLn Gt. 04 :) O14 06 0. 

aaaDaaaaaa=aaaaaaaaaaa= 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 

0.41..f.1.11.120.141()111(3.()C)O.MIAILIWILIDLI.HI.CL.a 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaDaaa=aa 

aCCua 

C as 

x 04 

aaDUC.)aaUU aaL)a aUCC 

UUaaaaDUU a a C) a aacc 

UUUUUaa¢Ucc :D :D C) :D :D :D 

:D C) c 040 u a C.) :D :D < a a oc :D :D cc = C 

a s aaaa ati 

UaY Uacc Da aUC)U<aa<Ua va = 

u Cd C) C) :D C) :D 0d 0d Od :D C) :) C.) :D :) <( pd :) :) = = = e3 

U UU :) e, :) 04 C.) C.) C) t) oe dace ad a 

c) cd :D Cd Cd C.) U C) 4t :Da< C.) 04 C.) :D 04 :D :D e3 

k-At a.5 I

g.-6„;36-.8 .8 2 

33 

s — Doc ..uc 

57 

vy 

U 

c- 

 - 

-P- Dc.r, 

= fr 1! 0 EEsEc E !i E li 

y,T,175 2 0.gbaT c tot E 

...y."2 to. „S E ' c g-a-= Q eu5=E .1 = cl wEZ 

11 g.5 .? 1 E. cLJP. g -E 0 .2 g 12 0 s ;Z c2 
of 

v) 

V) U 

U 

v5 

U 

ce) 

U 

cc cn 

! 64 ) 

RELATIVE AB

U

NDANCE & H

ABITAT AFFINITY 

TER

R

E

S

TR

I

A

L 

u 

2 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE . 

1 JUNE 20 15 

B-16 

WWwawWaa aWW DD W =W=D a wW Www 

DDDDDD=D A-A-0 DW W aaDD a 00 WWO 

DDDDDDDD a-A-0 A-0 W 0-WA-0- W OW OW0 

W00-DDWDD =OW W OaDD D Oa Daa 

DDDDDDD= Da0 Dw 0 awDD D as Da0 

DDDDDDDD aa0 Ow W Ck.u10. a WW 

wOaDDaDD a00 DO W WWDa a 00 aW0 

DDDDDDDD a00 DO w aWDD a WW a00 

W<UWUD 

U<ODUU 

UUUWUUWW 

DDWW 

DU D C WUX 

W U CD D U C DUW 

DU D D OW cd DD DD 

D D DD UU 

= D > U a DD DU 

D D DD WD 

DUU cUU D D UW at = D 

= 

< D DD WUU D D UW w D D= WUD 

c4ttb :tb VA) c55 5 tAcl 5 5 5bb 

DD DDWD WUU D D UW D DD DUU 

.''zi E,..„ c 

, 

P. 4 

EEcRe e)gt'!Ac m Et 8„ c„,0.8. c opt c 5 

mEagz, 7.8-a.x5u-Ea 

cn 

I a. 

vy 

U LL. 

Celt 
Low a. PILL3 14) 

ww D a. a. a. a. C) 

w0 :D a. pa taa ul pa 11.1 

caw a =»aO w 

IU 

I 

04 U 04 c4 X X 04 04 c :D X XX :D 

XL) 04 XXUUXU X1:4040UXU0ZX 04 XUX X X 

C_, X<XXX U OC QG C4 t.) c) 

eLDc41:4 

X X c4C.)DlYcG r:4 C.) cG 

cd cd 

c4 

X X 

uU(.3C.a 

U000 Ut.)() U UUXUX 

tl) t) (*.A.1)51 t.)t'AS CL a edt)546'5 :ct.) 

.) UcLUt..)? <to 

B-17 

‘11X0.WWILI0.Wia 141 wtaltzla.u.3 

wme aa awaa U 0 awaaa, 01.11 

al a. WU C) C) ul 0U ca W0001.11 0 

a. a.a.f3-0143 11.1.1.1 

0.0.0.0.1.130.0. W G.0. 0.O a w 

1-13 cu 0. 0.W 0. al W LL) a 0. LLI 

cur:60..owat.tuul W fauaczapo taw 

Pawaawacaw 14.1 caww00 caw 

0' 

0 

LU CO

w 

I 

0 

O 

- LLJ 

0 In 

Q_ a_ (NI 

<C Z1-1-1 ' 

O Z 

It cCE..5 

=76 

1St 8 

ea LI t s. tI e ..0 , 0 

.r..F. 2 ii, 1 -1g 0 -= a...c E g a ii v.§ LI 1 g..., g, .8 .2 1.1 al° E *6 bo * >, 1, C :3 8 ,;..Ci-R E Ec 5 E -E, c, vo 2 ›. .g s E 6 .5- S 5,1 -›-•.= ?a rs 76 -82z pi'=3.sard'u3ig 

< L Ft .5 < = 

2-c o.c cry ...---..e .2, 

t.3.),292-ga 

a_ 
iU 

SITE-SPECIFIC TER

R

ESTRIAL 

i 

I 

: 

s 

OS SBC NSCS RS CBS CSS 

`5 

r-- 

N RO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JU NE 20 15 

B- 18 

0 la 06 n LU W W w A. A. W W LU LU LU Cr LU 14 :) ;) po LL1 

w 0 as a awiLl awwwwaawo wo a 

w 0 ww w w00aw wwwwwwwwo WO W 

0 00 0 111nn A.Wa.0..nnD0 0 0 

0. o » D MWA.0n A.WA.A.A.000D0 aW 0 

0 A.A. A. 11.0W awwwwpwao WO A. n 

W 0 ww w Oww» wwwwwwwWw w0 w w 

W 0 WA. A. 00W00 A.WWWWM0 WO a 

0 D as a DW aUcc aD a 

0 < as a c..)(5cd gonnox c4M 

w<rx 

D od 

Daan an< < 

D 

n 

U U au as Du < 

U 

a D 

U < an a auccau aU UWWnU< n< U 0 

-2- 

.('' 

6 :D 1 u < gm g gumgo gummoggmu‹ m‹ u m 

i--. _.. 1 

,,1

0 b :( a 1 166 5 A.5 55:( as 

i c6 

1 U < (50 C WU0 U CO0UU 0U< 0< 0 0 

t 15 

tg bor.> ,o5 

514tf, T, 

V 

§ LI t Vge 2.5-5 

-J,.t.... ,,.. 

rl 

if 9 

1...§ il 1!1,0iire 10, liall 

p,)“.1V-. ltg111 '".„.. • t„. ==,t 

41jg-giiaLliEilthil:M-gicm. 

(E :() c75 U 4 2 ... 2 2 az 
r. 

1 

c4 

cd 

0 

C4 

>- 

< 

RS CBS CSS C 

40 

B-19 

La LL1 ul :7 LO LU LO Cm fal W2 v2 LU L2 LLI LU L11 4. L12 v2 C6 WI WI D WI a. u..1 :7 

a- al 143 Oa a.= :D W W W Cw (1..D W W :D LLI L2 LU c_ 

ul W LI.) aWPO aw 0 W W W ul W cD wwww c) w c6 w 

.DD:):) 000W0w000a00000aa0000 

W LL1 0aa0 ;D 13.7 LLI L4 :7 LLI :D LU :7 LU :7 :7 4. 0 LU A. Cm Cm ZD 

Lu 0 1.111.11u2asaulizicDpItilata.1001.11aLiacil 

O 

fa 

ul 

0 OwwW alLliati.1471111.40.14111CaulaWIAOLULUDIta 

U U < t5c.)Uaccccr:c cccccc 

ce D U CZUU CUUUDDc4c4 

U < C CdU 

CZ D 

U U 

U :D 

:D 

U a U U <CDC uw UU CZ UcL 

g U < Cguu Cuu<DuaDuuDDDDDuu ccucc 

& a V6 Lb V..) b5 66b 1 Scd 

c4 U < drgu0 uuuuri4c4uuuuuuggum 

.674 

c

t_t 

g t..> 3111 tp 

> § IT) 1 E p_ 3 3 — E -0 = .s " I =:?; 9 "5-- § E 9 g 

c/a (11 "9 P-• 7 9 tg) Ec,Erz.:68 t3 ° -a. ee'0 =7 5 EZZ-5 - ..2 1.1.1 co z 3 c >• 'E22i cS E.= 

OS SBC NS 
a. 

SITE-SPECIFIC 

CR BHF VT BS PFA ET 

U U U 

WU U04D 

U U D 

RELATIVE ABUNDANCE & HABITAT AFFINITY 

N ROAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

I4) 

(NI 

w 

z 

B-20 

a, WO D WO wO fol WI WO WU WO 06 WO WO WO WO Wa 

:3 WO LL W2 wO ul WO C) LIO C. C6 LW WO WO 0.a. 

WO C6 WO CD ua WO C) wO W4 WO WO WO WLI WI WO 

as:UaDa ua 0. D WO C) :) :3 

:D a. a. W C) W ;) ua 14 06 a. a. 

u.1 0L3 LIJ 06 a] 113 () C6 04 c) pa PO ca 

LU W W 0a () au ua au c) c) ua wa 

1-11 0 0. W C) W ua C) w W 0. C) O W ua W 

WWWWWW D 

a. 0 060 a0- 

a. 

WOW0I43 0 

D 0 0. a. 

a. 

DOD‘latilla a. 

C) a. 14 W 

0. C) W W W pa ua 

06 C) wa W W ua 

TERRESTRIAL 

g 

I < 

I 

..- Ce g DUUUUDUD UU04M UUWUDU 

UM WWDU 004<UD 

C.) D DDDU<D :D 

DD DDU<DD MU 

D 

cn 

U R S CBS CSS 

D as UaOaUUaaD aaUaU U 

OS SBC NS 

DU DUU<<UUDUUU 

DUccDUUU<UUDUUUWD 

:45oD000`i145 

DUDDUUU<UUDUUUccD 

14 

di 111P =. 

-e_. 

0g 

CC 

g11311111IAii 

„,

aog:0— 7° E.= 

2° 

y y "R 

9 

2 L4,2 9_1203 E53on.z z 
• * NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

APPENDIX C 

MARINE ANIMALS 

C.1 Marine Mammals of the Study Area 

C.2 Marine Mammals Within Five Nautical Miles 

of Pohl Arguello 

C.3 Recorded Marine Turtle Sightings, 

Central California 
' NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

C-1 

1 JUNE 2015 

TABLE C.1 

MARINE MAMMALS OF THE STUDY AREA* 

Page 1 of 1 

MUSTELIDAE: 

Enhydra lutris 

PINNIPEDIA: 

OTARIDAE 

Arctocephalus townsendi 

Callorhinus ursinus 

Eumetopias jubatus 

Zalophus californianus californianus 

PHOCIDAE 

Mirounga angustirostris 

Phoca vitulina richardsi 

CETACEA: 

MYSTICEEI 

Eubalaena glacialis japonica 

Eschrichtius robustus 

Balaenoptera rnusculus 

B. physalus 

B. borealis 

B. edeni 

B. acutorostrata 

Megaptera novaeangliae 

ODONTOCETI 

Physeter catodon 

Kogia breviceps 

K. simus 

Mesoplodon carlhubbsi 

M. densirostris 

M. stejnegeri 

Ziphius cavirostris 

Berardius bairdii 

Globicephala macrorhynchus 

Grampus griseus 

Orcinus orca 

Pseudorca crassidens 

Delphinus delphis 

Lagenorhynchus obliquidens 

Lissodelphis borealis 

Stenella coeruleoalba 

S. attenuatta? 

Steno bredanensis 

Tursiops truncatus 

Phocoenoides dalli 

Phocoena phocoena 

Southern sea otter 

Guadalupe fur seal 

Northern fur seal 

Steller (northern) sea lion 

California sea lion 

Northern elephant seal 

harbor seal 

North Pacific right whale 

gray whale 

blue whale 

fin whale 

sei whale 

Bryde's whale 

minke whale 

humpback whale 

sperm whale 

pygmy sperm whale 

dwarf sperm whale 

Carl Hubb's beaked whale 

Blainville's beaked whale 

Stejneger's beaked whale 

goose-beaked whale 

Baird's beaked whale 

short-finned pilot whale 

Risso's dolphin 

killer whale 

false killer whale 

common dolphin: Northern 

and Baja neritic forms 

Pacific white-sided dolphin 

Northern right-whale dolphin 

striped dolphin 

spotted dolphin 

rough-toothed dolphin 

bottlenose dolphin: coastal form 

Dall's porpoise 

harbor porpoise 

Offshore of Point Arguello (including the Northern Channel Islands). 

Source: Woodhouse 1988. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 C-2 

TABLE C.2 

MARINE MAMMALS WITHIN FIVE NAUTICAL 

MILES OF POINT ARGUELLO 

Page 1 of 1 

SPECIES EXPECTED TO OCCUR 

SPECIES 

FEDERAL 

STATUS 

CALIFORNIA 

Southern sea otter Enhydra lutris Threatened Rare, Protected 

Harbor seal Phoca vitulina richardsi None None 

Northern elephant seal Mirounga angustirostris None None 

California sea lion Zalophus californianus Threatened Protected 

Northern fur seal Callorhinus ursinus Depleted None 

Pacific white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus obliquidens None None 

Pacific bottle-nose dolphin 

(coastal form) 

Tursiops truncatus- None None 

Killer whale Orcinus orca None None 

California gray whale Eschrichtius robustus • Endangered None 

Blue whale Balaenoptera nutsculus Endangered None 

Fin whale B. physalus Endangered None 

Minke whale B. acutorosrrata None None 

Humpback whale Megaprera novaeangliae Endangered None 

Da11's porpoise Phcoenoides dalli None None 

Harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena None None 

Risso's dolphin or 

gray grampus 

Grampus griseus None None 

SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR 

Sperm whale Physeter catodon Endangered None 

Pygmy sperm whale Kogia breviceps None None 

Dwarf sperm whale K. simus None None 

Mesoplodonts Mesoplodon spp None None 

Baird's beaked whale Berardius bairdii None None 

Cuvier's beaked whale Ziphius cavirostris None None 

Steller sea lion Eurneropias jubatus None None 

Guadalupe fur seal Arctocephalus townsendi Threatened Rare, Protected 

North Pacific right whale Eubalaena glacialis Endangered None 

Sei whale B. borealis Endangered None 

Common dolphin Delphinus delphis None None 

Northern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis borealis None None 
• " NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 C-3 

TABLE C.3 

RECORDED MARINE TURTLE SIGHTINGS, 

CENTRAL CALIFORNIA 

Page 1 of 1 

SPECIES DATE LOCATION 

Leatherback July 1977 Ventura River Mouth, Ventura County 

Leatherback Fall 1980 Atascadero State Beach, San Luis Obispo County 

Leatherback July 1983 Emma Wood State Beach, Ventura County 

Leatherback June 1985 2 miles off Naples, Santa Barbara County 

Leatherback August 1985 Morro Bay Sand Spit, San Luis Obispo County 

Leatherback November 1985 Big Sur, Monterey County 

Leatherback May 1988 Santa. Rosa Island, Santa Barbara County 

Loggerhead August 1983 Offshore Montecito, Santa Barbara County 

Loggerhead September 1983 8 miles SSW Anacapa Island, Santa Barbara County 

Loggerhead July 1987 Jalama Beach, Santa Barbara County 

Source: Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 
• • NRO*APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

APPENDIX D 

CHANNEL ISLAND SONIC BOOM 

ANALYSIS FOR TITAN IV LAUNCHES 

FROM SLC-7 
NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE D-1 

1 JUNE 2015 

Technical Report No. 1653 

CHANNEL ISLAND SONIC BOOM ANALYSIS FOR 

TITAN IV LAUNCHES FROM SLC 7 

Prepared for 

Environmental Solutions, Inc. 

15520 Rockfield Blvd., Suite D 

Irvine, CA 92718 

Prepared by 

J. Haber 

P. Lieberman 

NTS Engineering 

6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway 

Long Beach, CA 90803 

November 1988 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-2 

1653 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Section Page # 

1 INTRODUCTION 1-1 

1.1 Sonic Booms 1-1 

1.2 Model Overview 1-7 

1.3 Document Organization 1-11 

2 TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF•MODEL 2-1 

2.1 Trajectory 2-3 

2.2 The Nearfield Signature 2-5 

2.2.1 The Close In Pressure Field and Plume Geometry 2-7 

2.2.2 Strong Shock Propagation 2-20 

2.3 The Atmospheric Description 2-22 

2.4 Propagation 2-23 

2.5 Reflection at the Ground 2-24 

2.6 Ray Tracing 2-25 

2.7 Signal Propagation 2-25 

3 RESULTS 3-1 

3.1 Uncertainty 3-4 

3.2 Previous Applications of the Methodology . . . 3-6 

3.3 Comparison with Other Programs 3-8 

REFERENCES R-1 
D-3 

NRO 'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 

1-i Footprint Reported in STS Environmental 

Page # 

Statement 1-3 

1-2 Initial Shockwave Geometry for Missiles 1-5 

1-3 Shuttle Ascent Sonic Boom Propagation 1-6 

1-4 Primary Model Components 1-8 

2-1 Overview 2-2 

2-2 The Mach Cone and Ray 2-4 

2-3 Turn Focus: Three Dimensions 2-6 

2-4 Nearfield Signature Development 2-8 

2-5 Schematic of Viscous/Inviscid Structure 

In Plume Nearfield 2-10 

2-6 Comparison of Actual and Simulated Plume 

Induced Separation Region 2-11 

2-7 Schematic of Underexpanded Jet 2-13 

2-8 Universal Plume Shape 2-15 

2-9 Methodology for Pressures in Field 

Between Boundaries 2-17 

2-10 Multiple Jets 2-18 

2-11 Dispersed Isobars of Max Splash Pressure . . 2-19 

2-12 Outershock and Plume Boundaries 2-21 

2-13 Signature Aging Process 2-27 

3-1 Titan IV Sonic Boom Footprint 3-2 

3-2 Typical (Simplified) Focus Signature . 3-3 

3-3 Comparison Between Theory and Experiment Near 

Caustics, Threshold Mach Number Flight 3-7 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-4 

1653 

LIST OF FIGURES 

(Continued) 

Figure Page # 

3-4 STS-41D Test Area Showing Groundtrack, Boat 

Locations, and Section of Focus Line 3-9 

3-5 Sonic Boom Near Focus Line (Predicted vs 

Measured) STS-41D 3-10 

3-6 Apollo 17 Measured Ascent Sonic Boom Signature 3-13 

3-7 STS-7 Test Area Showing Boat Location and Peak 

Overpressure for Each Station 3-15 

3-8 STS-7 Sonic Boom Signature Recorded at 

Station 2 3-16 

3-9 STS-7 Sonic Boom Signature Recorded at 

Station 5 3-17 

3-10 STS-7 Sonic Boom Signature Recorded at 

Station 8 3-18 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table Page 

3-1 Comparison of Measured and Calculated Values 

Stations 1, 2, 3, and U8 3-11 
NRWAPPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-5 

1653 

1. INTRODUCTION 

This document has been prepared in support of the Biological 

Assessment for the SLC-7 Environmental Impact Analysis process. 

The document describes the assessment of the Titan IV ground 

level ascent sonic booms. 

Potential sonic boom problems exist for the launch of large space 

boosters which have a ground track near sensitive regions. For 

Titan IV launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base, the ground 

track is near the Santa Barbara Channel Islands. Two of these 

islands, San Miguel and Anacapa, are rookeries or nesting areas 

for species which may be affected by the sonic boom. Consequently, it is necessary to assess the characteristics of the sonic 

boom which may affect the area. 

The analysis performed in the course of this study was carefully 

targeted to the needs of the Biological Assessment. As such, the 

emphasis was on determining estimates of the maximum overpressures that might be generated by Titan IV ascent sonic booms, 

mapping of a typical area which might be subjected to the highest 

intensity booms and mapping of a typical region which might be 

affected by any ascent sonic boom. In contrast to earlier 

analyses no attempts were made to map overpressure isopleths nor 

to assess the sensitivity of results to model inputs. Rather, 

the project staff has drawn upon experience with previous studies 

to estimate these effects. 

1.1 Sonic Booms 

A body moving through the atmosphere generates pressure disturbances about it. These disturbances move at the speed of 

sound, although the air molecules through which the wave travels 

only move a small distance. The wave itself, rather than individual molecules, travels from the moving body to the ground. 
D-6 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

At subsonic speeds this disturbance is normally too gentle to be 

noticed at ground level. However, at supersonic speeds a shock 

wave develops. The shock wave forms a continuous surface that 

travels along with the craft in supersonic flight. 

The primary components of the sonic boom generated by an airplane 

are the compression shock formed at the bow of the aircraft and a 

collapse shock generated by the tail. Intermediate features of 

the aircraft generate secondary systems of shock waves. 

Similarly, space boosters, such as the TITAN IV, generate sonic 

booms during the supersonic segment of their trajectories. The 

aircraft sonic boom is generated almost entirely by the aircraft 

itself. By contrast, a significant portion of the sonic boom 

generated by a space booster results from the plume of exhaust 

gases accompanying the rocket. Particularly at higher altitudes 

the overexpanded exhaust gases behave like a blunt body traveling 

at supersonic speeds. Under these conditions the exhaust plume 

sonic boom dominates that generated by the booster. 

A maneuvering airplane causes distortions in shock wave patterns. 

Some maneuvers, (pushover, acceleration, turn entry) can cause an 

amplification effect. The trajectory of a space booster is 

analogous'to a portion of an aircraft pushover maneuver. This 

produces a region of enhanced ground overpressures. 

The following paragraphs describe the typical ground level sonic 

boom footprint generated by the launch of a space booster. 

Figure 1-1 shows a characterization of the sonic boom footprint 

presented in the environmental statement for Space Shuttle 

Program at Vandenberg Air Force Base (Reference 1). This figure 

identifies the regions represented by many of the terms used in 

the following discussion. 

The greatest ground sonic boom overpressures generated by the 

launch of these vehicles occurs in the focal region (to be 

-2 
D-7 

c 

f-• 

A tN 

HltiON 

%LI 

C.1 

WEST LONGITUDE, deg 

Footprint Reported 

LLI 

CO 

Li! 

LU 

CC 

0 

LL. 

0 0 

0 

CC 

1 JUNE 2015 

1 - 3 
D-8 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

defined shortly). The rise time and the positive phase of the 

shock waves in this region are shorter than other sections of the 

footprint. Beyond the narrow confines of the focus the overpressures decrease rapidly. At the lateral cutoff, rays (paths 

of propagation) refract upward at ground level. Small amounts of 

energy "leak through" by diffraction beyond lateral cutoff to 

create a so-called rumble zone. The overpressures within a large 

portion of the sonic boom "footprint" are below levels of concern 

well within the lateral cutoff, making lateral cutoff a conservative boundary to the sonic boom footprint. 

Typically, a space booster is launched in the vertical direction. 

The initial portion of its trajectory is characterized by 

acceleration along the trajectory and Pitching over of the 

vehicle. The acceleration of the vehicle has the effect of 

reducing the apex angle of the Mach cone (reducing the angle 

between the shock front and the velocity vector). This geometry 

is illustrated in Figure 1-2. Since the direction of shock 

propagation is perpendicular to the shock waves, this increases 

the angle between the direction of propagation of the shock wave 

and the velocity vector. The effect of these maneuvers is thus 

to shift the initial direction of shock wave propagation from 

above the horizontal to progressively larger angles below the 

horizontal. The combination of acceleration and pitchover causes 

the footprints to arrive progressively further uprange with 

successive trajectory times (Figure 1-3). 

At the same time that the vehicle has been accelerating and 

pitching over it has been climbing and moving downrange. Eventually, these positional effects overcome those associated with 

directibn of propagation. When this occurs the footprints cease 

to advance uprange and begin moving downrange. The focal region 

is a region of overpressure intensification along the most 

uprange portion of the footprint. (Uprange of the direct sonic 

boom footprint is a lower overpressure region resulting from 

diffusion of energy beyond focal regions aloft.) 
VELOCITY 

VECTOR VERTICAL 

INITIAL DIRECTION 

OF PROPAGATION 

90 - 

a + 90 - 

MACH CONE 

VERTICAL 

a 90 -' u 

INITIAL DIRECTION 

D-9 

NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1 

1 

1 SONIC BOOM WON'T 

1 REACH GROUND IN 

1 A UNIFORM ATMOSPHERE 

VELOCITY 

VECTOR 

OF PROPAGATION N., MACH CONE 

SONIC BOOM WILL REACH 

GROUND IN UNIFORM 

ATMOSPHERE 

Figure 1-2. Initial Shockwave Geometry for Missiles 

2-5 
FLIGHT PATH 

(TO ORBIT) 

\ 

\ 

\ . 

:( 

S. ' \\ --RAY TRACINGS 

........••• No \ 

...-, \ \ 

41••• \ . \ \ 

.....-3•• % ■=.b-----• \ \` EARTH'S 

SURFACE 

LIFTOFF 

LOCI OF 

FOCAL AREAS 

D-10 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 1-3. Shuttle Ascent Sonic Boom Propagation 
D- 1 1 

NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

The above description of the movement of the footprint is a 

simplification. The entire footprints do not reverse direction 

at the same trajectory time. This is a result of the evolution 

of the shape of the curve along which ground ray intersections 

occur and the differences in transit time as initial azimuthal 

angle of the rays increase. Transit time from the vehicle to the 

ground increases for increasingly shallow angles with respect to 

the horizontal; rays close to lateral cutoff take significantly 

longer to reach the earth's surface than rays immediately beneath 

the vehicle. As the vehicle altitude increases, in general, the 

footprint becomes broader. 

1.2 Model Overview 

Figure 1-4 outlines the relationship of the key elements of the 

model used to characterize the ascent sonic boom and propagate it 

to the ground. The pressure field generated by the booster is 

dominated by the exhaust plume contribution. Thus, the flow and 

associated pressure field for the exhaust plume must be 

developed. The model used for this draws upon theoretical and 

empirical studies over roughly the past twenty years. 

At supersonic speeds, shock waves form upstream of all surfaces 

that are at a positive angle of attack, including the solid 

surfaces of the missile skin as well as the boundary surfaces of 

the rocket exhaust plume. The attached shock waves form a 

conical umbrella over the missile skin. The pressure jump across 

the shock depends upon the ambient static pressure and density at 

altitude, .the geometry of the missile, and speed of the missile. 

The shock waves attached to the exhaust plume boundary surface 

are more complex. The exhaust plume radial expansion at the 

lower ambient atmospheric pressures associated with higher 

altitudes is limited by the formation of a shock wave ahead of 

the plume. The shock increases the back pressure at the nozzle 

1-7 
D-12 .:, 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

EXHAUST PLUME 

PRESSURE FELD 

DEVELOPMENT 

'STRON' SHOCK 

PROPAGATION 

'WEAK' SHOCK 

PROPAGATION 

SABER 2 

Figure 1-4. Primary Model Components 

1-8 
NRVAPPROVED FOR RELEASE D- 1 3 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

exit thus, limiting the radial expansion. The exhaust plume 

boundary, even though it is a gas interface, acts like a solid 

body that drives the upstream bow shock. 

The appropriate technology for source characterization has been 

derived from several sources. JANNAF (Joint Army, Navy, NASA, 

Air Force) plume technology meetings occur every other year 

wherein computer programs (References 2, 3, and 4), laboratory 

tests (References 5 and 6), and field tests (Reference 7) are 

presented regarding rocket plume characteristics. 

The numerical calculation methods and the gas dynamic models have 

progressed from those which treat the plume boundary interaction 

with the ambient air inviscidly to the inclusion of viscous 

effects. These changes result in different calculated plume 

shape and dimensions, thus modify the strength of the upstream 

shock. In order to better match observed results, the exhaust 

plume has been broken into different zones with specific assumptions for each zone. This calculational procedure permits the 

detailed properties of the exhaust plume to be established when 

needed (Reference 8). For this application, the exhaust plume • 

boundary geometry and upstream shock wave geometry are important. 

This allows a number of simplifications. 

Between the umbrella of shock waves attached to the front end of 

the missile, and shock wave attached upstream of the rocket 

plume; there are a series of supersonic, subsonic and air recirculation regimes (Reference 9). These were neglected because of 

the relative insensitivity of the results of this study to their 

effects. 

A section of the pressure field taken parallel to the velocity 

vector near the booster is called a nearfield signature. 

Typically, the nearfield signatures associated with large 

boosters contain "strong" shocks, that is, pressure perturbations 

more than half the ambient pressure. The SABER 2 computer 

1-9 
D-14 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

program requires the input nearfield signatures to be weak. Weak 

nearfield signatures are generated, by propagating the original 

strong nearfield signatures away from the source a sufficient 

distance. 

Historically, characterization of booster nearfield signatures 

was accomplished by creating a scale model of the booster and its 

exhaust plume and performing wind tunnel measurements. Alternatively, complex computer codes have been exercised to numerically'solve the systems of partial differential equation governing the propagation of strong shock waves. The procedure used 

for this study is an approximation developed by NASA investigators at the Ames wind tunnel facility (Reference 10). This 

procedure has been previously employed for the Apollo program and 

for the Space Shuttle program. 

During the 1960's, extensive research was performed regarding the 

sonic boom phenomenon. By the early 1970's investigators at NASA 

and their supporting contractors had developed computer programs 

capable of propagating the weak shocks generated by maneuvering 

aircraft to the ground. Moreover, the theoretical basis had been 

developed for estimating the overpressures within the type of 

focal region generated by the flight of a space booster. 

The SABER 2 program is based upon the Thomas Waveform Parameter 

method (Reference 11) and the Plotkin implementation (Reference 

12) of Hayes theoretical characterization of overpressures in a 

focal region. During the application of this program to analysis 

of the sonic boom generated by the Space Shuttle for the STS 

Environmental assessment a number of program modifications were 

made to reduce the numerical noise in the shock propagation. 

computations. The program was later successfully applied to 

support a sonic boom measurement test program for the launch of 

Space Shuttle mission STS 41D (References 13 and 14). 

1 - 1 0 
D-I5 

, NR,O APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

1.3 Document Oraanization 

The remainder of this report is presented in two sections. 

Section 2 describes how the model operates and characterizes the 

effects of model inputs on sonic boom footprint calculations. 

Section 3 presents the results of the analysis including a brief 

discussion of sources of uncertainty in the calculations and a 

comparison with other programs in which ascent sonic booms for 

missiles and space boosters were investigated. 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2. TECHNICAL ASPECTS OP MODEL 

This section outlines the key features of the models. In order 

to provide a contextual framework for the discussion, we have 

reversed the order of presentation of the model comments over 

that provided in the first section. Figure 2-1 indicates an 

overview of the sonic boom model. 

A body moving through the atmosphere at supersonic speeds will 

continuously generate a system of shock waves in its wake. Under 

appropriate atmospheric conditions these sonic boom shock waves 

will produce a disturbance at the ground. Computer programs for 

estimating the ground level sonic boom must include the following 

. elements: 

• 

• A method for generating (describing) a trajectory for 

the supersonic craft. 

• A method for characterizing the system of shock waves 

generated about the craft. 

• A description of those atmospheric parameters that 

affect the propagation of the sonic boom shock waves. 

• A method for characterizing the path of the shock wave 

propagation through the atmosphere. 

• A method for evaluating the effect of the atmosphere on 

the magnitude and shape of the sonic boom waves. 

• A method for accounting for the reflection/attenuation 

of the sonic boom at the ground. 

D-16 

1653 

2- i 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2-2 
D-18 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

2.1 Trajectory 

The trajectory information serves three functions in the sonic 

boom propagation analysis: 

1. It provides an initial location from which the sonic boom 

shock wave is propagated. At each time point along the 

flight path the sonic boom shock wave system originates at 

the leading edge of the space booster; other features, 

notably the exhaust plume, generate the detail of the 

waveform at the location of these features. The combined 

length of the space booster and exhaust plume (and hence, 

the initial length of the system of shock waves) is much 

shorter than the distance from the aircraft to the ground. 

Thus, the path of the shock wave system may be characterized 

by tracing the path of the leading shock. 

2. The leading shock wave (near the booster) will be a conical 

wave (called the Mach cone) with the axis of symmetry along 

the booster velocity vector, VA(Figure 2-2). The booster 

Mach number, M (M = VA/cA, cAis the speed of sound at the 

aircraft), is related to the apex half-angle, g, by 

1/M = sing. The initial direction of propagation of the 

wave is at ninety degrees to the surface of the Mach cone; 

the collection of the initial directions of propagation 

forms a cone called the ray cone. Thus, the booster velocity vector determines the initial direction of propagation 

of the shock wave. 

3. The ray cones generated by a booster accelerating along its 

velocity vector will have progressively larger apex angles. 

Thus, corresponding portions of the wave front generated at 

short time intervals from each other will tend to constructively interfere with each other at some distance from 

the booster. (The distance from the booster at which this 

occurs will depend cn the rate of acceleration and the 

2-3 
RAY CONE 

VA 

MACH CONE 

INITIAL RAY AT ANGLE 

D-19 

NIIi0 APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 2-2. The Mach Cone and Ray 

2-4 
D-2u 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

manner in which the atmosphere modified the propagation path 

from a straight line.) Analogously, space boosters engaged 

in constant speed turns will, over successive time periods, 

generate ray cones whose axes are misaligned (Figure 2-3). 

The misalignment of the ray cone axes causes the ray cones 

to be closer to each other on one side of the cone. This 

effect is maximal in the plane of the turn. On the side in 

which the ray cones are tilted toward each other there is an 

intensification of the signal, while on the opposite side 

the sonic boom levels are diminished. Since all maneuvers 

can be described as combinations of these basic maneuvers, 

the effect of a maneuver will be some local intensification 

(rarification) of the sonic boom. The magnitude of the 

aircraft acceleration and jerk will affect the location of 

this enhanced (subdued) sonic boom and the degree of amplification or diminishment. 

The SABER 2 trajectory input is a planned or measured time 

history of a missile or space booster position, velocity and 

acceleration. Early in the planning phase of a program actual 

trajectories for specific payloads are commonly unavailable. 

Frequently, however, a trajectory envelope can be obtained. The 

only trajectory data for the TITAN IV which was available at the 

time of the analysis were generic trajectories from a different 

launch pad at Vandenberg AFB. The Western Space and Missile ' 

Center Range Safety group arranged for these trajectories to be 

translated to the SLC-7 launch pad and rotated to directly 

overfly San Miguel Island. Because this is one of the most 

environmentally sensitive areas, this launch azimuth represents a 

worst case condition. It was regarded as a credible worst case 

because.it was within the range of planned launch azimuths. 

2.2 The Nearfield Signature 

In order to extrapolate the sonic boom overpressure signatures to 

the ground, a sonic boom propagation code must be provided a 

2-5 
Roy Cone 

Generated 

of t2 

Roy Cone. 

Gene rote d 

ct t1 

Focus 

D-21 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 2-3. Turn Focus: Three Dimensions 

2-6 
D-22 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

description of the disturbance of the atmosphere generated by the 

supersonic body. This disturbance is described as an overpressure waveform that an observer near the space booster would 

measure as it flies by. Figure 2-4 provides an overview of the 

procedure involved in developing the nearfield signature. For 

solid bodies, such as airplanes, nearfield signatures have been 

developed by testing or by evaluating theoretically the pressure 

perturbation field generated by the aircraft geometry and its 

lift distribution. The analysis for the Apollo and Space Shuttle 

programs had to address the additional disturbance generated by 

the exhaust plumes. For both of these programs extensive 

resources were expended to model the exhaust plume, to machine 

scale models of the boosters and exhaust plumes, to perform wind 

tunnel measurements and to extrapolate these measurements to a 

distance from the source at which strong shocks would be 

attenuated to weak shocks. (The standard sonic boom computer 

programs require a weak nearfield signature.) Numerous modeling 

and measurement problems were encountered in these two programs 

(see References 13, 14, 15 and 16). However, a significant 

result of these investigations is that during the flight regime 

of interest, the exhaust plume is the dominant contributor to the 

sonic boom generated by large space boosters. 

2.2.1 The Close In Pressure Field and Plume Geometry 

,The description of the close-in pressure field of Titan IV during 

its powered supersonic flight, is presented in the following 

sequence: 

• Actual Flow Field 

• Key Parameters and Idealized Flow Field 

• Relevant Non-dimensional Parameters and Universal Plume 

• Pressure Distribution 

• Multiple Exhaust Plumes 

• Comparison to Wind Tunnel Data 

2-7 
D-23 

0 

LU 

UY

• 

CZ 0 (f) --- 

O (J) 

• lJ 

— J 0 

V% lJW 

CC ° 

CO C.- 

• _J 

CO 2 

STRONG SHOCK CODE 

N 

Cu 

L1.1 

0 w LL. 

a W

0 

0 

z 

1 JUNE 2015 

MOTOR CHARACTERISTICS 

NOZZLE SHAPE 

TRAJECTORY POINT 

2-8 
D-24 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

2.2.1.1 Actual Flow Field 

During powered flight, a high-altitude rocket exhaust plume 

becomes greatly enlarged to resemble a hemisphere-cylinder 

afterbody attached to the rear of the rocket vehicle. This large 

afterbody creates a pressure gradient sufficiently strong to 

induce boundary layer separation on the vehicle surface. Two 

shocks are generated: a separation shock and a trailing shock 

(upstream of the plume boundary) (Reference 17). At several 

nozzle radii in the radial direction, these two shocks merge to 

form the shock upstream of the plume gases. 

Figure 2-5 shows the plume afterbody, with the inviscid plume 

interface (plume mixing layer) (Reference 18). This afterbody, 

moving at slow supersonic speeds, supports an upstream low shock. 

within the plume and close to the nozzle exit, there is a barrel 

shock and Mach disc that is formed when underexpanded supersonic 

flow from the nozzle exhaust into low ambient pressure. 

It is the bow shock supported by the plume afterbody that is used 

in this report as a source for the sonic boom. The pressure 

field between the bow shock and plume interface prescribes the 

detailed sonic boom signature along a particular trace. 

At higher supersonic speeds, the shock wave at the nose of the 

missile move to a smaller angle with respect to the missile skin. 

Eventually, the nose cone shock wave interacts with the plume 

shock wave as shown in Figure 2-6. Note that there is a complex 

recirculation flow field along the length of the missile between 

the regions defined by the dividing streamline and missile skin 

(Reference 19). 

The figure also shows how the plume boundary streamline can just 

as well be represented by a solid body because no flow crosses 

normal to the plume boundary streamline. The supersonic flow, 

2-9 
PLUME MIXING 

LAYEPINVISCID PLUME 

INTERFACE 

BOW SHOCK 

__ -- ---- — 

,I c oRE REGION 

X 

REFL ECT ED 

srtOCK 

MACH 

DISC 

MACH DISC 

MIXING LAYER 

R 

D-25 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 1653 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 2-5. Schematic of Viscous/Inviscid Structure in Plume Nearfield 

2-10 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-26 

1653 

RECOMPRESSION SHOOKS 

DIVIDING STREAMLINE 

OF THE EXTERNAL FLOy4 

SHOCK WAVE 

DIVIDING STREAMLINE 

* 

OF THE PUNE 

(A) ACTUAL SEPARATED FLOW FELD 

DiViDiNG STREAMLINE 

SHOCK WAVE 

REATTACJiMENT >SHOCK -\ 

SOLID BOUNDARY 

(B) SIJLATED FLOW FELD 

Figure 2-6. Comparison of Actual and Simulated Plume Induced Separation Region 

2-11 
D-27 

• NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

between the dividing streamline and missile nose shock, interacts 

with the plume to form the reattachment shock. 

2.2.1.2 Key Parameters and Idealized Flow Field 

The key parameters that the sonic boom source model must carry 

are: 

• Atmospheric (at altitude) 

sound speed 

specific heat ratio 

temperature 

static pressure 

density 

• Trajectory 

rocket speed 

• Rocket Motor/Engine 

chamber pressure 

throat area 

nozzle exit plane area 

exhaust gas specific heat ratio 

nozzle exit plane angle 

• Rocket Plume Configuration 

number of plumes 

plume centerline separations 

For the purposes of this study, the first bow shock dominates the 

source strength of the sonic boom signature. The plume is nearly 

spherical and extends backward to the location of the first Mach 

disc (Figure 2-7). The bow shock. is nearly parabolic and extends 

back to almost the same axial location. 

2.2.1.3 Relevant Non-Dimensional Parameters and Universal Plume 

The plume shape of an underexpanded supersonic nozzle has been 

extensively studied by the method of characteristics and in 

laboratory tests. From these studies (see, for example, 

References 20, 21 and 22) evolved descriptions of non-dimen2-12 
Compression woves 

Pim 

Moth disc 

. WNW.. ...- 

F low 

M 4 I 

Slip line 

Po 

M •1 

Nozzle exit alone 

1J-2.6 

1653 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

/ Flow streamline 

Jet boundory Reflected shock 

Figure 2-7. Schematic of Underexpanded Jet 

2-13 
• NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 1653 

sionalized universal plume and bow shock shapes. These curves 

are defined in terms of the following parameters: 

• Dynamic Pressure 

• Vacuum Thrust of the Rocket 

• Weight Flow Rate of Rocket Gases 

• Rocket Motor Chamber Pressure 

• Throat Area of Nozzle 

• Exhaust Velocity at Nozzle Exit Plane 

• Ambient Pressure 

• Nozzle Exit Plane Jet Pressure 

• Nozzle Exit Area 

• Rocket Motor Chamber Stagnation Pressure 

• Rocket Motor Chamber Stagnation Temperature 

• Specific Heat Ratio of Rocket Gases 

• Molecular Weight of Rocket Gases 

Thus, the universal bow shock curve and universal plume boundary 

curve are dependent an all the rocket motor/engine parameters, 

all the nozzle parameters, all the ambient altitude parameters 

and rocket trajectory parameters. 

2.2.1.4 Pressure Distribution 

The'pressure jump across the bow shock can readily be calculated 

from the (1) local tangent angle of the bow shock in the universal plume curve as shown in Figure 2-8, (2) the specific heat 

ratio of the ambient air, and (3) the free stream Mach number. 

Curves are available relating the pressure jump to these parameters for wedge and conical bodies. By treating the exhaust 

plume as a solid, these curves can be applied. 

For purposes of simplification, the pressure along the plume 

surface was considered constant. This introduces error when 

pressure values are selected within a few missile radii away from 

2-12. 
D-30 

165,3 NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

BOW SHOCK 

oar.. 

A.* .•••• 

-- INTERFACE 

-- 

INNER SHOCK 

*1.0 

NOR

MAL IZED WIDTH 

MACH DISC 

MEER.. •■•■■•• • swab ■••••• ■■••••■■ .111.01MMIP 

-1.0 

X 

1.0 2.0 3.0 

NORMALIZED LENGTH 

Figure 2-8. Universal Plume Shape 

2-15 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE D-31 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

the missile centerline, but yields reasonable values at the more 

useful radial distances. 

Based upon detailed calculations performed by other investigators, it has been determined that at close range, the radial 

pressure distribution is nearly linear. For these calculations 

it was assumed to be linear. 

The earlier discussion specified the static pressure along the 

bow shock, the static pressure along the plume surface, and the 

linear static pressure distribution along a radial distance 

between the bow shock and plume surface. Figure 2-9 shows that 

it is a simple mathematical transformation to obtain the static 

pressure distribution versus axial distance for the observer at a 

fixed radial reference distance. 

2.2.1.5 Multiple Exhaust Plumes 

The effects of multiple exhaust plumes on the pressure distribution varies with distance. Figure 2-10 shows simplified views 

of the exhaust plumes or jets and the range of effects. At short 

distances from the nozzle exit plane and where the nozzle centerlines are distant from each other, the jets are decoupled. At 

medium axial distances, the jets begin to interact. At large 

distances, the jets may be considered as a single jet of double 

source strength. An illustration.of these principles is seen in 

Figure 2-11 (Reference 23). In this figure, the locations of 

three exhaust nozzles of a large launch vehicle, and the pressure 

contours (decibels) of the overall system are depicted. 

The model developed by NTS assumes that the multiple jets can be 

treated as a single jet in its universal plume model. 

2-le 
SECTION A-D AT 

PRESSURE 

LINEAR 

Pa 

RADIAL 

DISTANCE 

D-32 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 1653 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 2-9. Methodology for Pressures in Field Between Boundaries 

2-17 
D-33 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 1653 

1 JUNE 2015 

• CLOSE-IN 

JETS ARE DECOUPLED 

▪ INTERMEDIATE 

JETS ARE PARTIALLY COUPLED 

• FAR OUT 

JETS ARE A SINGLE JET WITH-DOUBLE SURFACE STRENGTH 

Figure 2-10. Multiple Jets 

2-18 
70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

-10 

-20 

-30 

-40 

-50 

-60 

-70 

-90 

DI STAN CE FROM VEHICLE C PRELAU NCH POSITION. FT 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-34 

1653 , 

DISTANCE FROM VEMICI.E 4 PRFLAUNCU POSITION, FT 

Figure 2-11. Dispersed Isobars of Max Splash Pressure 

2-19 
NRD APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

2.2.1.6 Comparison To Wind Tunnel Tests 

In order to verify the reasonableness of the results of the 

exhaust plume nearfield model, a comparison was made with wind 

tunnel measurements. At NASA Ames facility, models of the Saturn 

V booster and plume were constructed and tested in a wind tunnel 

at Mach 3 and 5 (Reference 10). The schlieren photos showed the 

bow shock shape. Figure 2-12 shows the NTS model compared to the 

NASA wind tunnel tests. The comparison is favorable. The subtle 

differences between the NTS model and the NASA wind tunnel tests 

shown in the figure, are less than those NASA obtained between 

the model of the shock and plume configuration for the inviscid 

plume boundary versus the configuration for the viscid plume 

boundary. 

2.2.2 Strong Shock Propagation 

The strong shock propagation computer program is conceptually 

similar to the weak shock propagation programs. It employs 

correction terms based upon the higher relative pressures. 

Because a linearized version of isentropic theory cannot be used 

to calculate the propagation speed of each waveform point, 

relationships for normal shocks are used to calculate the change 

in propagation speed across each shock and the full isentropic 

expressions must be used to calculate the variation in propagation speed between shocks. Implicit in this analysis is the 

assumption that all propagation velocities are directed normal to 

the front shock. When the leading shock is strong, this assumption is questionable for aft portions of the signature. Consequently,-only the front portion (positive phase) of the signature is extrapolated. An additional correction term is used to 

account for the modification of attenuation patterns by the 

density variation due to higher overpressures. 

D-35 

1653 

2-20 
4 41. 

7 

6 

EXPERIMENTAL 

SHOCK, O- 29. 

5 

SHOCK F ROM MODEL 

PLUME FROM MODEL 

'.60NI.CAL BODY TO. iNDUCE_EXP. SHOCK 

( 8=22.5° )(CALC. FROM EXP. SHOCK) 

..„ 

EXP. PLUME BODY 

4 6 

(THOUSANDS) 

LENGTH (INCHES) 

2 a 10 

3 

2 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-36 

1653 

RADIUS VS. LENGTH (K 0.6(D/OS-) 

Figure 2-12. Outershock and Plume Boundaries 

2-21 
D-37 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

2.3 The Atmospheric Description 

While the propagation of sonic boom through the atmosphere is 

affected by the detailed characterization of the atmosphere 

(temperature, pressure, winds, and chemical composition), as a 

practical matter useful results may be obtained by employing 

simplified descriptions. A common approach used is to describe 

these atmospheric properties as being horizontally stratified and 

temporally constant. This has the practical consequences of 

making the propagation analysis significantly more tractable and 

creating mathematical models consistent with the meteorological 

data available to use with them while sacrificing only the 

ability to model what are normally rather localized effects 

(focusing or attenuating sonic boom waveforms by small scale 

anomalies). This omission is likely to be important only for 

those atmospheric variations in the immediate vicinity of either 

the aircraft or the ground. 

By altering the path of propagation of a sonic boom wavefront 

changes in meteorological profiles can shift the sonic boom 

footprint and alter the ground overpressure levels. Small scale 

variations (e.g., a cold spot) can cause localized focussing. 

Turbulence tends to create both spiked signatures (of normal 

amplitudes), as well as rounded signatures of reduced amplitudes. 

The primary effect of interest to this study is the changing of 

the curvature of the propagation .path (ray) with respect to the 

surface along which focussing occurs. This type of an effect 

tends to result from medium scale meteorological variations. 

The SABER2 program was designed to accept input pressure, temperature, dew point and wind profiles obtained from rawinsondes, 

rocketsondes or statistical analyses of such historical data. 

The meteorological parameters play three major roles in the 

models adopted: a) specification of the atmospheric pressure at 

the source and key altitudes, b) defining the "effective speed 

of sound" in the direction of propagation as a function of 

2-22 
D-38 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

altitude, and c) defining the effective speed of sound gradient 

seen by the advancing shock wave. The consequences of these are 

to displace the sonic boom footprint, affect the amplitude of the 

initial disturbance and to determine the extent of attenuation/ 

enhancement of the shock wave by the atmosphere. 

The TITAN IV analysis was performed using the standard Vandenberg 

AFB reference atmosphere (Reference 24). This is a no wind 

atmosphere. 

2.4 Propagation 

The sonic boom propagation is based upon the theory of geometric 

acoustics with selected modifications to address its peculiar 

characteristics. The theory of geometric acoustics is valid when 

the wave length is small compared with characteristic macroscopic 

scales of the problem. Such scales include the radii of curvature of the wave fronts and the scale heights of the atmosphere. 

Geometric acoustics is invalid near the source, near a focus, and 

near the boundary of and within a shadow zone. In these areas, 

alternative models are required. 

Standard acoustic theories are linear. For sonic boom propagation, the cumulative effect of ,non-linear effects over large 

distances are significant. The cumulative non-linear effects 

distort the signal and produce shock waves. 

The basic concept of the geometric theory is the propagation of 

the sonic boom along rays, trajectories of points on the wave 

front. Because the wavelength is substantially smaller than the 

characteristic macroscopic scales of the problem, it suffices to 

trace only the rays originating from the leading edge of the 

shock wave. In addition, the analysis is based on the assumption 

that the cumulative non-linear effects do not affect the ray 

geometry. This is an accepted assumption for most sonic boom 

2-23 
D-39 

. NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

problems of interest including characterization of a focal 

region. 

An additionally important concept for the analysis is that of ray 

tube. A ray tube may be visualized as a collection of rays 

emitted from the booster initially displaced from each other by 

small times or distances. It is useful to define a quantity 

which provides a measure of the energy density since it is 

related to the amplitude of the signal. Such a quantity is the 

ray tube area. The ray tube area may be conceptualized as the 

area over which the original collection of rays is dispersed at 

any given time. 

As a consequence of the foregoing assumptions and the horizontally stratified atmosphere, ray tracing may be performed using a 

form of Snell's law. Using this approach, ray-tube areas may be 

calculated employing a straightforward numerical integration. 

The amplitude of the signal and the amount of signal distortion 

may then be derived as a function of these quantities. 

2.5 Reflection at the Ground 

The measured magnitude of a weak shock wave normally incident to 

a perfect reflector will be twice the free field overpressures. 

As a consequence of energy absorption by the ground, the observed 

reflection factors are typically slightly less than two. As the 

angle of the incidence to the ground becomes more oblique, the 

reflection factor decreases, approaching one at cutoff (the 

location at which raypaths have been refracted to the horizontal 

direction at the earth's surface). 

Although geometric acoustics would predict no sonic boom in the 

shadow zone beyond cutoff, as a consequence of diffraction 

effects, a low frequency rumble will be heard in this zone. A 

third phenomenon that occurs near the cutoff boundary is the 

2-24 
D-40 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

focusing of the rays which are turning up. As a consequence, 

observed reflection factors have the greatest spread near cutoff. 

2.6 Rav Tracing 

The program assumes the atmosphere (pressures, temperature, and 

winds) to be stratified in the vertical direction, but uniform in 

the horizontal direction and steady in time. These assumptions 

impose stringent conditions on the possible paths of motion 

(rays) of the wave. This motion is governed by a variant of 

Snell's law. By virtue of the stratification of the atmosphere, 

this requires the horizontal components of wave number to be 

constant with respect to the ground. This constant differs from 

one ray to another. When combined with the requirement that the 

net speed be that of sound relative to the air, it determines the 

size of the vertical component of motion, and thus, the motion 

itself. The result is that, for each ray, there are combinations 

of wind velocity and temperature at which it cannot exist. Where 

the ray can exist, its path curves toward regions more favorable 

to it; i.e., toward levels where the sound speed is lower and/or 

where the wind component in its direction is greater. For each 

ray there is a critical combination of temperature and wind 

velocity that will cause its vertical motion to slow, stop, and 

reverse (acoustical cutoff). 

It should be noted that a downward 

reversal layer and turns away from 

of the stratification assumptions, 

what path it subsequently follows, 

at the same height. 

2.7 Signal Propagation 

moving ray which meets such a 

the ground will never, bedause 

reach the ground no matter 

but will always reverse again 

In the linearized acoustic theory, the wave form of the pressure 

travels along the ray unchanged except for amplitude changes. 

Pressure waves of this amplitude are governed by a non-linear 

2-25 
D-41 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

theory, and although the non-linear effects are small over any 

given region up to some tens of wavelengths in size, they do 

accumulate and are responsible for the typical N-wave profile of 

the direct sonic booms and the bulk of dissipation of acoustic 

energy between the source and the ground. 

In terms of supersonic flow, the sonic boom is "weak," and the 

program applies a weak shock tube theory for the propagation of 

the sonic boom in ray tubes. In general, an overpressure at a 

given point in the wave form so increases the air speed and sound 

speed at its location that it seems to overtake a lesser overpressure located ahead of it. The amount of the overtaking is 

governed by a quantity termed the age, which increases along a 

ray at a rate proportional to the amplitude, and inversely 

proportional, among other terms, to the square root of the 

ambient air density. 

When a section of the waveform actually overtakes one ahead of 

it, the choice among the three or more possible values of overpressures is resolved by fitting a shock (pressure jump), thereby 

cutting off the lobes of the overtaking and overtaken portions. 

To conserve mass, the shocks are so placed as to balance the area 

within the cutoff lobes using the so-called "equal area rule" 

(Figure 2-13). 

When the ray tube area reverses sign along a ray the geometric 

theory implies that the overpressure is infinite at the point 

where the area is zero. This point is called a caustic point. 

Infinite pressures are, of course, contrary to reality and are a 

consequence of the failure of this theory. 

The signature calculated for a caustic is based on the smooth 

caustic similitude solution developed by Seebass (Reference 25). 

This solution requires determining the relative curvature of the 

caustic surface in the direction of collapse with respect to the 

ray curvature. 

2-26 
D-42 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

Figure 2-13. Signature Aging Process 

2-27 
D-43 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

3. RESULTS 

The Titan IV ascent sonic boom analysis consisted of two phases. 

The first phase, accomplished under a previous contract, 

established that for appropriate combinations of trajectories and 

meteorological conditions Titan IV launches from Vandenberg Air 

Force Base can produce a focussed sonic boom at the Santa Barbara 

Channel Islands. The recommendations of the first phase were to 

assess the magnitude of the focus overpressures, to evaluate 

meteorological patterns and planned Titan launches to assess the 

frequency with which the Channel Islands might be subjected to 

focussed sonic booms (including the variation with season) and to 

assess the biological consequences of focussed sonic booms. 

During the second phase, a simplified bounding analysis was 

performed to assess the extreme characteristics of the Titan IV 

ascent sonic booms which may affect the Channel Islands. The 

flight path employed in the analysis was a generic Titan IV 

trajectory translated to the SLC-7 launch pad and rotated to 

directly overfly San Miguel Island. A no-wind standard reference 

atmosphere for Vandenberg Air Force Base was used for the analysis. The nearfield signature for the Titan IV was calculated as 

described in the previous section based upon the approximation 

that the major contribution to the sonic boom during the period 

of interest was the exhaust plume generated by the solid rocket 

motors. 

Figure 3-1 depicts an outline of the region affected by any sonic 

boom (the sonic boom footprint) and of the subregion affected by 

enhanced overpressures (the focal region). The focal region is 

relatively small and the region of "significant" consequences is 

yet still smaller. Peak overpressures occur along the uprange 

edge of the focal region and, within the focal region, decrease 

exponentially with distance in the downrange direction. Figure 

3-2 shows a typical focus signature for the Titan IV launches. 

The positive phase of the waveform was calculated based upon the 

3-1 
LU 

(I) 

LU 

LU 

0 

0 

LU 

0 

0 

0 

CC 

z 

1 JUNE 2015 

to) Co 03 

ci rl 

ci 

M 1 II 111111111 I 

II II 

FOCAL 'REGION 

il MOM 1111 I 

1111111 

III 

'0 41. cl 0.3 ot co. t*: 4 .4 4 cl cl co) 

(saaaoaa) saniuvi 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

D-45 

- 

CQ 

Focus Signature 

- 

1 

,-t ri 

02 0 Es- 0 0 -41 v CQ 0 **4 

3 - 3 
D-46 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

methodology described in the previous section; the amplitude and 

duration of the negative phase is based upon empirical results 

from the STS and Apollo programs. 

A simple examination of the waveform indicates that most of the 

energy is at low frequencies -- a few Herz. (As the first order 

approximation, these frequencies are dictated by the duration of 

the positive phase of the waveform and the duration of the 

negative phase of the waveform.) Since the frequency band of 

maximum sensitivity of most species is in a frequency band in the 

range of 1-32 kilohertz, this mitigates the effect of these sonic 

booms on any affected species. 

3.1 Uncertainty 

There are a number of sources of uncertainty in the results which 

may be expected to cause observed Titan IV sonic booms to differ 

from the focus signature calculated. The following discussion 

presents each uncertainty source, the nature of its effect and an 

estimate of the magnitude of the uncertainty contribution. 

The location of the sonic boom footprint will be affected by the 

particular trajectory exit azimuth and trajectory "shape" as well 

as the meteorological conditions through which the sonic boon 

must propagate. Changes in exit azimuth will cause the footprint 

to be rotated about the launch pad. Variations in trajectory 

shape translates the footprint uprange or downrange along the 

exit azimuth. (A secondary effect of variations in trajectory 

shape is to change the angle the footprint boundary makes with 

the exit azimuth.) 

Meteorological effects on location are somewhat more complex. 

Changes in temperature, relative humidity and density profiles 

produce similar types of effects to changes in trajectory shape. 

Wind profile variations not only translate the location of the 

footprint, but also produce significant variations in footprint 

3-4 
D-47 

NRO'APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

shape. These location effects are important to a complete 

understanding of the sonic boom footprint, but are of secondary 

importance to the current pounding analysis. This is a consequence of the selection of conditions which place the focus 

directly on the Channel Island and of restricting the evaluation 

to a focus signature. 

The calculated focus signature is sensitive to the input nearfield signature, trajectory and meteorological conditions. 

The applicable nearfield signature at a given time in flight is a 

function of the booster speed and the atmospheric density at the 

booster elevation at the time of interest. The applicable 

atmospheric density depends on the trajectory shape (in 

particular, altitude versus time), and atmospheric density 

variability. In addition, a number of sources of uncertainty are 

present in the calculation of the nearfield signatures. These 

are a consequence of approximations in combining the flow fields 

from the two solid rocket motor exhaust nozzles, controversy in 

the literature as to the optimal method of setting the exhaust 

plume boundary (for example, use of mixing boundary versus some 

fraction of the inviscid boundary), uncertainty in the plume 

curvature characterization and omission of the vehicle contribution to the signature. A rigorous evaluation of the effect of 

these uncertainties was not undertaken in this study. It was, 

however, judged to result in an uncertainty range of -30% to +70% 

of the estimated peak ground overpressures. It is important to 

remember that the effect of the uncertainty in the nearfield 

signature does not affect the geometry of the focus region. 

By contrast, the trajectory shape and the meteorological profile 

affect the ground level overpressures by altering the overall 

source to ground attenuation and by changing the geometry of the 

ray paths. This, in turn, alters the geometry of the caustic 

surface, and hence, the focus overpressure amplitudes. 

3-5 
D-48 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

An indication of the anticipated variability in peak focus 

overpressures which may be introduced by meteorological effects 

was obtained from the analyses performed for the space shuttle 

ascent sonic booms for launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base. 

Along the exit azimuth (in the region of highest overpressures), 

meteorological effects generated overpressure variations from 

-33% to +20% of the no-wind nominal calculations. Off-azimuth, 

in the lower overpressure regimes, calculated overpressure ranged 

from -50% to +100% of the no-wind levels. 

No such sensitivity studies were available for estimating the 

effect of trajectory shape variations. Moreover, without a 

specification of the booster trajectory envelope, it would be 

dangerous to apply any past sensitivity analyses to the Titan IV. 

3.2 Previous applications of the Methodology 

Reference 26 describes the results of an analysis of sonic boom 

measurements from low altitude threshold Mach number flight of an 

F-104 fighter. Figure 3-3 presents a comparison between these 

measured signatures and theoretical focussed signatures developed 

by Seebass (Reference 26). Predicted peak overpressures vary 

from half those measured to one and one half times measured 

values. 

Plotkin (Reference 12) describes two comparisons between measurements and theory. Sanai (Reference 27) conducted ballistic range 

experiments studying propagation of converging shocks. Plotkin 

determined that a direct application of the theory overpredicts 

the measured values by about 25 percent. Moreover, he notes that 

the finite actual rise times, rather than theoretical instantaneous ones, are not enough to totally account for this 

discrepancy. He comments that because of the rapid change in 

overpressure in the vicinity of a focus, the measured values may 

not have been the peak focussed pressures. Considering these two 

effects, he argues that there is good agreement between measure3- 
D-49 

J 

LLI ■-1," 

0 

0 

0 

a_ 

0 

z 

f2L 

1 JUNE 2015 

3-7 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 1653 

ment and theory. Wanner et al. (Reference 28) reports an extensive series of flight test sonic boom measurements. Plotkin has 

used Wanner's data on steady turns to compare with a theoretical 

estimate. After adjusting the theoretical calculation for shock 

thickness, he concludes that the theoretical prediction is about 

ten percent larger than the values measured. 

The final example is the ascent sonic boom measurement program 

for space shuttle mission STS 41D (References 29 and 30). This 

measurement program was directed toward focus zone measurements 

extending from near the ground track to lateral cutoff. Seven 

boats and a string of sonabuoys was deployed. Figure 3-4 shows 

the locations of the boats relative to the booster groundtrack. 

Nearfield signatures for predictions were taken from wind tunnel 

data, the mission trajectory was taken from the STS guidance 

computer data, and the meteorological data was obtained from 

rawinsonde and rocketsonde measurement near launch time. As a 

consequence of extensive wind shears aloft the meteorological 

data had to be appropriately smoothed for the computer codes to 

function properly. Table 3-1 presents a comparison of the 

measured overpressures and arrival times with those calculated. 

Figure 3-5 provides a comparison of measured and calculated 

overpressures near the focal line. 

3.3 Comparison with other Programs 

During the later Apollo flights, as a result of people reporting 

hearing sonic booms, interest in sonic booms generated by launch 

vehicles (space boosters and missiles) began to develop. Sonic 

boom measurements and development of estimation methodologies 

continued through the Air Force Operational Base Launch program 

for Minuteman II to the Space Shuttle program. 

The types and sizes of rocket motors powering these vehicles 

varies significantly. The Space Shuttle is a hybrid vehicle with 

two strap-on solid rocket motors and liquid rocket motors on the 

3-3 
LU 

LU 

LU 

_J 

CC 

0 

LL 

W 

0 

0 

CL 

1 JUNE 2015 

O 

1 

0 0 0 CV 'V 

I 1 

S a I I i4 TEDIVIEN '44.10N a6ue 

O 

tr) 

0 

0.1 

J 

3 - 9 
D-52 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

ti 3 

0_ 

0 

• PEAK FOCAL OVERPRESSURE 

RSBMS U8 * 

STATION 3 * 

STATION 2 * MEASURED 

- CALCULATED 

STATION 1 

-2 

FOCAL LINE DISTANCE (NM) 

Figure 3-5. Sonic Boon Near Focus Line (Predicted vs Measured) STS-410 

3-10 
w 

(J) 

w 

w 

0 

LL

a 

LLI 

0 Lr) 

cr cj xa- NI <

a_ LLJ 

0 

CC 

Z 

Table 3-1. Comparisonof Measured and Calculated Values Stations 1, 

ARRIVAL TIME IS ABOUT 12 TO 18 SECONDS PRIOR TO 

• • 

0 

z 

D-53 

++ PRESSURE AT FOCUS NEAR U8 

* NOTCALCULATED, UPRANGE OF FOCAL LINE 

co 

ro 

ARRIVALTIME (SEC) 

CALCULATED 

CO 

• 

.-4 

V) 

tn 

0 

V' 

CI 

V) 

rl 

* 

. 

* 

C) 

41 

g 

4 

ILI 

Z 

361. 363.2 348.9+ 

343.1+ 

PEAK OVERPRESSURE (PSF) —CALCULATED 

+ 

+ 

cv 

,-. 

C) 

o 

. 

cv * * 

MEASURED 

Ill 

NI 

N 

r-1 

• 

N 

NI ,rt 

r-t 

N 

le■ 

• 

0 

STATION 

CO Cl N r-I 

3-11 
D-54 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

orbiter. All engines fire until the solids burn out. The 

Minuteman II is a three-stage missile; each stage is a single 

solid rocket motor. The Saturn V is a three-stage booster; each 

stage is propelled by a liquid rocket motor. The Titan IV 

consists of a liquid fueled rocket core and two solid rocket 

motor strap-ons. Various upper stages may be placed on the Titan 

IV. In contrast to the space shuttle, at the time that the sonic 

boom focus of interest is generated, only the solid rocket motors 

are thrusting. 

Figure 3-6 indicates sonic boom measurements obtained during the 

ascent of Apollo 17 (Reference 31). The sonic boom signature 

shown for Station 2 indicates that this measurement was obtained 

very close to the focus. (For all measurement programs involving 

space booster, range safety regulations require a cross-range 

standoff from the flight track for the measurement stations. The 

magnitude of the standoff varies with the booster.) NASA 

estimated that although the maximum measured overpressure was 8.9 

psf, that at the focus the overpressure was between 10 and 11 

psf. In comparison to the Titan IV trajectory considered, the 

Apollo 17 booster was higher and faster at the time the focus 

sonic boom was generated. The orientation of velocity vector is 

not known. Increased altitude will tend to decrease the amplitude of a sonic boom. The effect of the vehicle speed cannot be 

interpreted without knowing the velocity vector orientation. 

The Minuteman II measurement program (Reference 32) failed to 

capture any focus measurements as a result of major changes in 

meteorological conditions between the time at which the site 

locations for the boats were calculated and launch. The highest 

predicted overpressure for the Minuteman II launch was 18 psf. 

This prediction was based on a signal originating when the 

missile was travelling at Mach 4.3 and an altitude of 133 

thousand feet. 

3-12 
AP(Psf) 

(i) 

T 

8.9 

.5 sec 

M v 3.41 h 8 95,000 ft 

M = 3.55 h = 100,000 ft 

8.8 

M = 3.69 h = 104,400 ft 

•••■••■•■• 

M = 3.78 h = 107,400 ft 

M = 4.0 h = 115,500 ft 

0 0 0 0 0 

208,700 ft 3600 ft 2200 ft 2100 ft 5800 ft 54,100 ft 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE D-55 

1 JUNE 2015 

(i) 1 - 3 

15.6 sec 

M = 4.84 h = 149,400 ft 

If 

Figurt 3-6. Apollo 17 Measured Ascent Sonic Boon Signatures 

3-13 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

During the STS-7 Space Shuttle launch, sonic boom measurements 

were obtained (Reference 33). Figure 3-7 shows the peak overpressures measured and the location of the measured stations. 

Stations 2, 5, and 8 were very close to the focus. Recorded 

signatures for these stations are shown in Figures 3-8 through 

3-10, respectively. Notice that the secondary peak is more 

prominent in these figures than that shown for Station 2 in 

Figure 3-4. This suggests that although these stations were 

close to the focus, they were more distant from the focus than 

Station 2 (Apollo 17 mission) was. 

The final comparison to be presented is the calculations of peak 

focal overpressures for a Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg 

Air Force Base (Reference 13). For thp same meteorological 

conditions used for the Titan IV analysis, the maximum estimated 

focus overpressure calculated was approximately 16.5 psf. At the 

time that the sonic boom focus was generated, the Space Shuttle 

trajectory was not as steep as the Titan IV trajectory considered. The vehicle speed was slightly greater than that of the 

Titan IV. 

Several patterns are noteworthy in the previous presentation. 

The highest predicted focus overpressures for launch vehicle 

sonic booms are significantly higher than the highest measured 

overpressures. Yet, when predictions are done with appropriate 

data, there seems to be good agreement of the locations where 

measurements are taken. This apparent contradiction has been 

attributed to the difficulty in "capturing" a focus measurement: 

The area affected by focal region overpressures is small. 

Overpressures decline rapidly with distance from the location of 

maximum overpressure. Finally, actual focal locations will. 

depend upon the particular trajectory flown (as opposed to a 

planning trajectory) and the atmosphere through which the sonic 

boom wave travels which will differ from that through which a 

rawinsonde or rocketsonde will pass in collecting meteorological 

data. 

3-14 
1 JUNE 2015 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

o

P 

STS-7 Tes tAreaShow ing Boa t Loca tion and Pea k Overpressure foreach Sta tion 

t---- 4r 

0, 1..7r 

4 rot .4.- 

• )- 0 • St 

-• 

4. • ....• 

1-.

... x 

2.. ...t 

:111 

v.r. 

- 

11:I:i .... •:. .. 

. ,•••••• • 

.- 

is,....... 

..... lin 

............. 

442 

.. 

..s. ... -* ....... 

........... 

.. •.*: .... '• 

..... 

.... 

....... 

1:1•-•.r. 

. . 

..... 

..... „Mt ..... 

• r• ........... 

. • 

.. 

1:::::: . r•-•'•••• 

..... ••••:•••••••••. •'::•••.:::. 

X 

to- -..1 

..... 

•••• ....... 

••••••• ................. 

.. .••••'. ... • 

• 

z 

0 .s.. 

... r 

he 

7 

< . 

IA 4 

0, 

4. 

Z 0, 

i:e 

r...—. 

0 

.., 

STS 7 G ROUND TRA CK 

).• 

-.a 

Z . 

0 ••• — 0 o- • o.- 0 NZ 

._•C no 

4 n wi 

n. 

on n; 

..o 

= 

u, 4 

a Z 

4 4 

vu 

• 

O 

0 

snag lY7tl nvw 

D-57 

G) 

4:! cr, 

0 

3-15 
O 

CD 

m 

CD 

Cr-) 

r---- 

CTCr) t--

CI) 

Lli 

1.1J 

U_ 

CD Lii 

a_ 

O 

CY 

z 

1 JUNE 2015 

" 

3 

a 

r'C• 

8 

-a a

2 

a 

-2 

2 

2 

1- 

0 

rn 

CD 

c 

4 0 c 

tcUi 

I tri 

a 

3 

STS-7 Sonic BoomSignature Recorded at Station 2 

le 1 t * .10 

C d ) 391SS3Yd 

D-56 

114 

• 

3-16 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

LU

z 

D-59 

3-17 

a 

-A 

ap?) 

0 

tr 

-02 WvW 

wN 

a 

a 

STS-7 Son ic Boom Signature Recordedat Station 5 

a 

• tSTAT ION 5 

1 

OS •

► 

' PI '1 

USX 341533k:hi 

T- . 

111 MI • I - 
D-60 

w 

w 

LLI 

0 

a 

w 

0 

0 

z 

Cssl 

w 

z 

3 

O 

c 

,1E 

CID 

O 

(r) 

t 

°m_c

r 

Di u) 

:■.`) 

CL 

• 

. T 

PS 'S -; W C le't 01'1 tll IS '1. 1111' CC 45d) 341SS3kici 

STS-7 So

nic Bo

om 

0 

1 

3-18 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

REFERENCES 

D-61 

1653 

1. Environmental Impact Analysis Process - Draft Environment 

•act to e t •ace S ut le • am V nde be. • orce 

Base, California, Department of the Air Force, August 1977. 

2. Dash, S.M. and Wolf, D.E., "Development of Fully-Coupled 

Visccous/Inviscid Technology for the Analysis of Exhaust 

Plume Profiles," JANNAF 13th Plume Technology Meeting, 

Houston, Texas, April 1962, pp 115-182. 

3. Dash, S.M., Wilmoth, R.G. and Pergament, H.S., "Overlaid 

Viscous/Inviscid Model for the Prediction of Nearfield Jet 

Entertainment," AIAA Journal, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp 950-958. 

4. Tannehall, J.C. and Anderson, E.W., "Intermediate Altitude 

Rocket Exhaust Plumes," J. Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 8, 

No. 10, October 1971, pp 1052-1057. 

5. Jarvinen, P.O. and Dyner, H.B., "Rocket Exhaust Plume 

Dimensions," Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 6, No. 11, 

November 1969, pp 1309-1311. 

6. Love, E.S., Grigsby, C.E., Lee, L.P., and Woodling, M.J., 

"Experimental and Theoretical Studies of Axisymmetric Free 

Jets," NASA Langley Research Center, Technical Report R-6, 

1959. 

7. Flynn, E.M., "Comparison of SPF Predictions to Turbojet 

Plume Flowfield Measurements," JANNAF, 15th Plume Technology 

Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, May 1985, pp 105-112. 

8. Dash, S.M., Taylor, M.W., Sinha, N., Wolf, D.E., Pergament, 

H.S., Corier, W.J., York, B.J., Lee, S.H., and Lee, R.A., 

"Progress Towards the Development of the JANNAF SPF/3 

Standardized Plume Flowfield Model," JANNAF 16th Plume 

Technology Meeting, Colorado Springs , Colorado, September 

1986, pp 73-113. 

9. Dash, S.M., Pearce, B.E., Pergament, H.S., and Fishburne, 

E.S., "Prediction of Rocket Plume Flowfields for Difrared 

Signature Studies," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 

17, No. 3, May-June 1980, pp 190-199. 

10. Hicks, R.M., Mendoza, J.P., and C.L. Thomas, "Pressure 

Signatures for the Apollo Command Module and the Saturn V 

Launch Vehicle with a Discussion of Strong Shock Extrapolation Procedure," NASA TMS-62, 117, April 1972. 

11. Thomas, C.L., "Extrapolation of Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures By the Waveform Parameter Method," NASA Tn-D-6832, 

Ames Research Center, California, June 1972. 

R-1 
D-62 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

12. Plotkin, K.J. and Cantril, J.M., "Prediction of Sonic Boom 

at a Focus," Wyle Laboratories, Report No. WR 75-7, October 

1975. 

13. Haber, J.M. and Hoefer, D.N., "Analysis of STS Sonic Boom 

and Risk of Window Damage," J.H. Wiggins Co., Report No. 84-

1449, May 1984. 

14. Haber, J.M., and Hoefer, D.N., "Analysis of STS Ascent Sonic 

Boom," J.H. Wiggins Company, Redondo Beach, California, J.H. 

Wiggins Company Technical Report No. 81-3076-2, September 

1981. 

15. Carlson, H.W., and Mack, R.J., "A Study of the Sonic Boom 

Characteristics of a Blunt Body at a Mach Number of 4.14," 

NASA TP 1015, September 1977. 

16. Ashby, G.C., "Nearfield Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures for 

the Space Launch and Orbiter Vehicles at Mach 6," NASA TP 

1405, April 1979. 

17. Fong, C. "An Analysis of Plume-Induced Boundary layer 

Separation," J. Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 8, No. 11, 

November 1971, pp 1107-1113. 

18. Chang, I.S. and Chow, W.L., "Mach Disk from Underexpanded 

Axisymmetric Nozzle Flow," AIAA, Vol. 12, No. 8, August 

1974, pp 1079-1082. 

19. Pritts, O.R. "A Comparison of the Flow Fields About the S-II 

Stage of the Saturn V Vehicle and Spiked Hemisphere Configurations with Emphasis on the S-II Thrust Cone Heating 

Rates." Technical Report H-64-009, Lockheed Missiles and 

Space Company, 1964. 

20. Latvala, E.K., "Spreading of Rocket Exhaust Jets at High 

Altitude," TR-65-6, Arnold Engineering Development Center, 

January 1965. 

21. Herron, R.D., "Jet Boundary Simulation Parameters for 

Underexpanded Jets in Quiescent Atmosphere," J. Spacecraft 

and Rockets, Vol. 5, No. 10, October 1968, p 1115. 

22. Jarvinen, P.O., and Hill, J.A.F., "Universal Model for 

Underexpanded Rocket Plumes in Hypersonic Flow," CPIA 

Publication No. 201, Vol. 1. 

23. Courtesy of Martin Marietta Aerospace Corp. 

24. Daniels, G.E., "Terrestrial Environment (Climatic) Criteria 

for Use in Aerospace Vehicle Development," 1973 Revision, 

NASA TM X-64757, George C. Marshal Space Flight Center, 

Alabama, 5 July 1973. 

R-2 
D-63 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 

1653 

25. Gill, P.M. and Seebass, A.R., "Nonlinear Acoustic Behavior 

at a Caustic: An Approximate Solution," AIAA Progress in 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, H.T. Nagamatsu, Ed., MIT 

Press, 1975. 

26. Haglund, G.T. and Kane, E.J., "Analysis of Shock Wave 

Extremities for Flight Near Mach 1 and for Airplane 

Acceleration," NASA CR 2417, July 1974. 

27. Sanai, M., Toong, T., and Pierce, A., "Ballistic Range 

Experiments on Superbooms Generated by Refraction," J. 

Acoustic Soc. Am., Vol. 59, No. 3, March 1976. 

28. Wanner, J-C L., Vallee, J., Vivier, C. and Thery, C., 

"Theoretical and Experimental Studies of the Focus of Sonic 

Booms," J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 52, No. 1, 1972. 

29. Stansberry, E.G. and Stanley, J.F., "Sonic Boom Levels 

Measured for STS-41D Launch," NASA Report No. JSC-20218, 

December 1984. 

30. Haber, J.M., "STS Sonic Boom Studies," NTS Report No. 86-

1449-2, April 1986. 

31 Henderson, H.R. and Hilton, D.A., "Sonic Boom Measurements 

in the Focus Region During the Ascent of Apollo 17," NASA 

TN-D-7806, Langley Research Center, Virginia, December 1974. 

32 Pettyjohn, S.D. and Mazzavella, L., "Prediction and Measurement of Sonic Boom Characteristics for Ascent of a Minuteman 

II," Science Applications Inc., October 1974. 

33 Stansberry, E.G., Stanley, J.F., and Potter, A.E., "Sonic 

Boom Levels Measured for STS-7 Launch," NASA Report No. JSC19237, August 1983. 

34. Shapero, A.H., "The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow, Vols. I, II," John Wiley and Sons, 1953 

(also 1982). 

35. Touryan, K.J., Clark, G.E., and Rigali, D.J., "Pressure 

Distribution on Cone-Cylinders in Hypersonic Flow," AIAA, 

Vol. 6, No. 4, April 1968, pp 739-741. 

36. Dash, S.M. and Wolf, D.E., "Development of Fully Developed 

Viscous/Inviscid Technology for the Analysis of Exhaust 

Plume Flow Fields," JANNAF 13th Plume Technology Meeting, 

Houston, Texas, April 1982, pp 115-182. 

R-3 
- o4 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 JUNE 2015 • 

1653 

37. Lombard, C.K., Bardina, J., and Raiszaden, F., "Shrouded 

Multi-Rocket Engine Plume Flow by an Efficient Upwind 

Relaxation Algorithm for Compressible Navier Stokes Equations," JANNAF 15th Plume Technology Meeting, San Antonio, 

Texas, May 1985, pp 327-359, 2982i. 

38. Raghunathan, S. and Reid, I.M., "A Study of Multiple Jets," 

AIAA Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 1981, pp 126-127. 

R-4 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

1 :JUNE 2015 

APPENDIX E 

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

ACIDIC DEPOSITION 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH 

FRCM THE CYPRESS RIDGE SITE 
NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE E- I 

1 JUNE 2015 

APPENDIX E 

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

ACIDIC DEPOSITION 

TITAN IV/CENTAUR LAUNCH 

FROM THE CYPRESS RIDGE SITE 

The launch of a Titan IV/Centaur would result in the formation of a ground cloud composed 

primarily of water, hydrochloric acid (HC1), and aluminum oxide (A1203). Twenty-six thousand 

gallons of deluge water would be utilized during launch, with approximately 75 percent, or about 

20,000 gallons, evaporating into the ground cloud (USAF 1988b). Water vapor in the ground 

cloud would condense around A1203 particles to form droplets and, once condensed, readily 

absorb HC1 from the cloud, thereby forming acidic droplets, which would fall to the ground. 

Based on measurements taken from Space Shuttle launches, the pH of these droplets would be 

between 0.1 and 1.0 (NASA 1983). Because of this high acidity, there is the potential for 

alteration of the pH of nearby streams or bodies of water where droplets might fall. One such 

stream, Honda Creek, which lies approximately three miles north of the proposed Cypress Ridge 

site, could be the recipient of acidic deposition. This deposition could have an adverse impact on 

the unarmored three-spined stickleback, a federal- and state-listed endangered species of fish, 

which is known to occur in Honda Creek. 

In order to determine if the unarmored three-spined stickleback or other aquatic life could be 

harmed by acidic deposition, an analysis was performed to calculate the pH change of Honda 

Creek that would result from a Titan IV/Centaur launch. This analysis utilized a reasonable worstcase scenario, which assumed that acidic deposition from a launch would be most dense in the 

vicinity of Honda Creek. A computer trajectory deposition model, TRAJM, was used to calculate 

the amount of acidic deposition over a given area. TRAJM is a near-field model and can be used to 

predict the amount of acidic deposition close to a launch pad (NASA 1983). It was originally used 

by NASA to predict acidic deposition from Space Shuttle launches in Florida. 

By using an iterative method, it was determined that the maximum amount of acidic deposition 

would fall into Honda Creek when the wind was blowing from the south at approximately 

25 miles per hour. Under these conditions, the model calculated the acidic deposition rate in the 

area of Honda Creek to be about 8.2 gallons per acre. The deposition rates for annuli centered on 

the Cypress Ridge site in relation to the surrounding environment are shown in Figure E.1.