HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-05-09; City Council; 10015; Statue of the Batiquitos Lagoon enhancementOF CARLSBAD - AGENr * BILL fD
o
o
_io
I
AR« /fftt/f
MTG. 5/9/89
HFPT PLN
TITLE-STATUS OP THE BATIQUITOS
LAGOON ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
OEPT. HD. W$Mr
CITY ATTY\>Op
C.ITY Mf3R^\^
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR REQUESTED. Staff will present an
informational update on the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement
Project.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On November 13, 1987 the City entered into a six-party
Memorandum of Agreement to establish an enhancement project at
Batiquitos Lagoon which would compensate for habitat losses
resulting from construction within Los Angeles Harbor. The
first phase of the project was the preparation of the
preliminary engineering report which was completed in the Spring
of 1988. That report indicated that the enhancement project was
feasible from an engineering and economic standpoint.
The second phase began when the Council approved a contract with
CH2M Hill for the preparation of the environmental documents for
the project on April 19, 1988. The combined Draft Environmental
Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has
been prepared (summary attached), and public review began on
April 28, 1988. On May 25th the City and the Army Corps of
Engineers will hold a non-required hearing to take oral comments
on the Draft EIR/EIS. Public review will end on June 19, 1989.
Staff anticipates that it will take 30 to 60 days for the
consultant to respond to the public comments. When the
responses are finalized, staff will schedule public hearings on
the project and EIR/EIS before Planning Commission (tentatively
early September) . If the comments do not warrant major
revisions to the environmental document, Council could consider
the project and certification of the EIR/EIS in late September.
FISCAL IMPACT
All project costs are being funded by the Port of Los Angeles
through a reimbursement agreement with the City.
EXHIBITS
1. Summary
Batiquitos Lagoon
ENHANCEMENT
PROJECT EIR/EIS
;*•*—
.:•£«'
Vs-ft
'-- ''•***:.'
.^
,.-/;&
-^j
W»lt.
^-!*
'f.lftV,if-s^*'4-..
CITY OF CARLSBAD
SUMMARY
The Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Project Environmental
Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) is a
joint document prepared for the City of Carlsbad and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (lead agencies) to fulfill
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
This document is also intended to fulfill the CEQA/NEPA
compliance obligation specified in the interagency Bati-
quitos Lagoon Enhancement Memorandum of Agreement (MOA; see
Section 1.3.1 for a discussion of the MOA). -The EIR/EIS is
intended to provide decision-makers, agencies, organiza-
tions, and the public with information on the beneficial and
adverse effects of the proposed project.
The document will also serve as a basis for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) issuance of a dredge/fill permit
pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977. The CEQA/
NEPA and COE permitting process for the project will also
initiate the review of this document by the appropriate
resource agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The mandate
of these agencies is to ensure conservation, protection, and
enhancement of marine fish and migratory birds and their
habitats, including the application of a regional perspec-
tive in their project reviews.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project would restore tidal influence to the
Batiquitos Lagoon by construction of a short, nonnavigable,
tidal inlet structure and by dredging the lagoon to produce
adequate subtidal and intertidal habitats to ensure flushing
and good water quality while maintaining existing habitat
values. Additional project components include use of suit-
able dredge spoils from the Central and West Basins for
beach nourishment at Encinas Creek Beach and Batiquitos
Beach (Ponto), the overdredging of the Central Basin for
disposal of dredged materials, possible construction of
sediment control facilities, provision of a managed fresh-
water marsh, and construction of California least tern
nesting sites. Additional project details are provided in
Sections 1 and 2 of this document. In addition to the
restoration of subtidal and intertidal habitats in the
lagoon, the project has the potential to enhance the salt
marsh habitats, facilitate flood control, allow for some
health and safety improvements, and benefit recreation
potential on the public beaches.
PD613.001
The proposed project and attending project objectives (tidal
restoration and protection of existing habitat values) were
established in the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan, which
was prepared by the California Coastal Conservancy pursuant
to Public Resources Code 31000 et seq. The project is pro-
posed through an interagency MOA to provide mitigation for
the loss of habitat value resulting from Port of Los Angeles
landfill development and channel improvements in the Outer
Los Angeles Harbor, San Pedro Bay (see Section 1). The
creation of new habitat value within the L.A. Harbor Dis-
trict is considered infeasible and the resource agencies
(FWS, NMFS, CDFG) have determined that compensation for such
deepwater habitats should emphasize the creation of more
scarce shallow-water, coastal embayment habitat with its
relatively higher value for marine fish and migratory birds.
PUBLIC CONCERNS/AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
PUBLIC CONCERNS
Public concerns about the enhancement project were identi-
fied through the EIR/EIS scoping process. The study method-
ology and scope of work for the EIR/EIS were changed in
response to comments and concerns received during scoping.
During the 4 months following scoping, a series of workshops
were held to discuss and review the project with the public
and several resource agencies. This EIR/EIS focuses on the
issues brought out by the public and resource agencies.
AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
The primary areas of controversy identified during DEIR/DEIS
preparation are:
• Will the enhancement action compromise existing
biological values, especially for birds?
• What part does the present lagoon play in the
regional context of lagoons and embayments in San
Diego County and adjacent areas, particularly
regarding migratory birds, and how may that role
be affected by an enhancement project?
• Will the tidal inlet jetties adversely impact the
littoral drift and related coastal sand transport
processes?
• How will the lagoon be maintained and monitored to
ensure that enhancement goals are met?
PD613.001
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
ACTION ALTERNATIVES
In addition to the proposed project (Alternative A) and the
No Action Alternative (see below), two dredging alternatives
(Alternatives B and C) and two sediment disposal options
were considered in this document. A detailed description of
these alternatives is presented in Section 2. Dredging and
No Action Alternatives were given equal treatment in this
document. Compared with Alternative A/ dredging Alterna-
tives B and C involve increasingly reduced volumes of dredg-
ing, reduced tidal prisms, reduced amounts of subtidal area
(-5.0 to 0.0 feet MLLW), and increasing amounts of inter-
tidal area (0.0 to +5.0 feet MLLW) due to more gradual grad-
ing cuts. Alternative C represents the smallest tidal prism
required to maintain a reliable tidal opening to the ocean.
Alternative C would also result in the least amount of beach
nourishment. All dredging schemes affect the same lagoon
surface area.
Beach
Dredge Nourishment Mean Dlumal Subtidal Intertidal
Volume Volume Tidal Prism Area Area
Alternative (mil yd9) (yd8) (ac-£t) (acres) (acres)
A 5.05 3.10 1,642 220 176
B 4.13 2.64 1,457 169 227
C 3.55 2.16 1,383 144 252
Other sediment disposal options considered include the pip-
ing of hydraulically dredged materials unsuitable for beach
nourishment to Green Valley, or trucking the dredged mate-
rial overland 34 miles (round-trip) to San Marcos Landfill.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative is fully described as a physical
and biological system, mathematically modeled to determine
the future (approximately 50 years) of the lagoon without
enhancement action. Under this condition, the lagoon would
continue to degrade in terms of water quality, sediment
buildup, and shoreline flood conditions. Biologically, the
extremes that the lagoon currently undergoes (e.g., seasonal
variations from deep, freshwater habitats to hypersaline,
shallow water conditions) would increase. Through their
effect on habitat conditions, these biological extremes have
imposed definite limitations, on fish and wildlife within
the lagoon environment.
Currently, without tidal flushing the lagoon is character-
ized by an aquatic biota low in diversity and abundance, and
PD613.001
composed almost exclusively of environmentally tolerant
species. Without enhancement the aquatic biota is expected
to undergo more severe environmental conditions and further
declines in diversity.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS ELIMINATED DURING EVALUATION PROCESS
A wide range of possible designs that might achieve the
lagoon enhancement goals have been considered. The poten-
tial designs dropped from further evaluation include the
so-called intermittent opening alternative (see Section 2.1.3
for more detail). .This alternative, or set of possible
alternatives, encompasses a range of lagoon configurations
that by design would not maintain an open ocean inlet and
would require periodic opening of the entrance.
The concept of a "staged" or "incremental" lagoon enhance-
ment approach has also been considered. In a staged
approach, the enhancement of the lagoon would be accom-
plished in increments with only a portion of the dredging
being done at any one time.
These ranges of alternative designs would all include peri-
odic closures of the lagoon. Inlet closure would have imme-
diate and dramatic effects on habitat conditions within the
lagoon. Water levels would stop being tidally influenced.
If lagoon closing occurred during the rainy season, changes
in salinity would result in the elimination of marine biota.
The semidaily cycle of submergence and exposure within the
intertidal area would cease. Increased temperature extremes,
lowering of dissolved oxygen values, and increased levels of
nutrient and pollutant loadings from watershed runoff would
likely occur. In addition, sedimentation of fine material
could take place much more rapidly than in the case of a
tidal lagoon. Consequently, these conditions were deter-
mined to be inconsistent with the goals of the enhancement
plan project.
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Impacts from the proposed project have been analyzed in
detail in Section 3, and planned and available mitigation
measures are described. Table ES-1 at the end of this sec-
tion summarizes significant effects and mitigation measures,
CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Alternatives A, B, and C would all change the lagoon to a
tidal system. The size of the tidal prism (i.e., amount of
water exchanged with the ocean) would range between 1,642
and 1,383 acre-feet (see Section 3.2.1.5), depending on the
alternative. Alternative C has only 34 percent of the sub-
tidal volume of Alternative A in the East Basin, resulting
PD613.001
in a smaller amount of water remaining on a low tide. Under
each of the three action alternatives, water quality will
improve significantly. Turbidity and nutrient conditions
will improve the most, and the present hypersaline condi-
tions will no longer occur. The expected salinity of the
lagoon will approximate ocean conditions.
WATER QUALITY
Potentially significant impacts to water quality within the
lagoon during construction include changes in turbidity,
dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and other constituents. Con-
struction impacts to water quality will be minimized by
using seawater during dredging and by maintaining a closed
entrance (during construction). These impacts are all short
term. The long-term effects are beneficial. Dredging will
significantly improve water quality by returning the lagoon
to tidal action (see Sections 3.2.1.6 and 3.2.2). Flushing
rates will be faster under Alternative C, but salinity will
vary more with Alternative C than with Alternatives A or B.
Each action alternative will significantly improve sediment
flushing from the lagoon, thus reducing sediment buildup.
Flushing characteristics will change sufficiently to mini-
mize future sediment buildup.
BEACH NOURISHMENT
The proposed project includes placement of 114,000 cubic
yards (yd3) of sand at the Batiquitos beach (Ponto Beach)
(for all three action alternatives), and between 3.1 million
and 2.1 million yd3 (Alternative A and Alternative C, re-
spectively) at the Encinas Creek site. The dredged sedi-
ments are generally clean, ocean-derived materials to be
dredged from the West, Central, and part of the East Basins.
These sediments are approximately 90 percent sands and
10 percent fine sand and silt.
Short-term impacts to water quality will be limited to in-
creased turbidity and will be partly controlled by construct-
ing berms and appropriate conditions for dewatering. The
beach profiles will change during the short term, thereby
altering the local wave climate. This change will affect
surfing and other recreation activities in the short term,
but should not create safety hazards for beach users. The
beach slope equilibrium will become reestablished, and beach
and wave conditions will return to pre-project conditions,
by the end of the first winter season.
The Encinas Creek nourishment site is adjacent to the Encina
Water Pollution Control Facility. Beach nourishment could
adversely impact, through sand placement, an existing out-
fall pipeline as well as the nearshore conditions that the
pollution control facility must monitor to comply with its
PD613.001
discharge permit. These considerations will be carefully
addressed in the final design and permit process, in asso-
ciation with the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility
staff.
A long-term benefit of beach nourishment will be a net
contribution to the littoral drift of 55,000 yd3/year.
This addition will increase sand flow to beaches south of
Carlsbad.
TIDAL INLET STRUCTURES
Construction will cause local, short-term impacts to water
quality. By their design, the proposed jetties are not
expected to affect the littoral transport processes in
Carlsbad or adjacent areas.
AIR QUALITY IMPACTS RELATED TO DREDGING
Construction activities will not significantly affect air
quality in the short or long term. Emissions from onsite
vehicle exhaust will be much less than emissions from major
roadways. Under each alternative, the Authority to Con-
struct Permit and a Permit to Operate will require a Best
Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis and an air
quality analysis for all criteria pollutants. Estimated
emissions would not initiate Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
(LEAR) and offset requirements for the nonattainment pollu-
tants carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, and particulates under
any alternative. The project would be considered a major
source of nitrogen oxide (NO ) emissions. Because the area
is in attainment for NO , compliance with ambient standards
would be required through the permitting process. Project
impacts are not considered significant.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Existing Conditions
The existing biological resources at Batiquitos Lagoon are
adapted to a wide range of physical conditions that fluctu-
ate annually in response to climatic influences and artifi-
cial breaching of the lagoon ocean barrier. The lagoon can
vary from a flooded, fresh/brackish water lake in the winter
and spring to a hypersaline shallow pond, greatly reduced in
size and surrounded by dry, salt-encrusted flats in the late
summer and fall. During dry cycles, ponded areas may
evaporate completely.
In June 1988, typical wildlife habitats within the project
boundary included zones of highly variable deep (i.e.,
greater than 1 foot) to shallow water (354 acres), and non-
tidal flats (64 acres); relatively depauperate, nontidal,
coastal salt marsh (123 acres); brackish emergent marshes
PD613.001
(39 acres); and brackish and riparian willow-dominated
thickets (9 acres). The areal extent of these habitats
varies seasonally and annually as shown by the following
examples. During 1987 and 1988, deep water habitats varied
between 88 percent (April 1988) and 1 percent (August 1987)
of the project area; shallow water habitats varied between
35 percent (June and October 1987) and 2 percent (April
1988) ; and nontidal flats varied between 59 percent of the
project area (August 1987) and none (January and June 1988).
The areal extents of vegetated habitat types were less
variable than those of water zones and flats but were
partially flooded during the winter and early spring (see
Table 3.4-9).
Wildlife utilizing the Batiquitos Lagoon area is dominated
by birds. Amphibians, reptiles, and mammals comprise a rel-
atively minor component of the total organisms and species
in the project area. The annual bird use of the lagoon
varies with characteristic, annual breeding and migratory
cycles and with fluctuations in available habitat resources,
as described above. A total of 164 species of birds were
recorded during a series of 10 surveys between May 1987 and
September 1988.
Some of the more significant patterns of use include the
seasonal influx of waterfowl, in particular dabbling ducks,
during the winter and spring flooding of the lagoon; and
staging of resting and feeding shorebirds during the late
summer and fall migration. Because the lagoon is typically
flooded during the spring, the nontidal flats are unavail-
able for migratory shorebirds at that time of year. Bird
groups that have been observed within the project area
throughout the year (e.g., diving ducks and herons) adjust
their patterns of habitat use to the variations that result
from the flooding and drying cycles.
Breeding birds include the federally endangered California
least tern and two federal candidates, the snowy plover and
Belding's savannah sparrow. Other federal special status
species recorded in Batiquitos Lagoon include the endangered
California brown pelican and the following candidates for
listing: the tricolored blackbird, long-billed curlew, white-
faced ibis, coastal black-tailed gnatcatcher, and the brack-
ish water snail.
The composition of aquatic fauna and flora in Batiquitos
Lagoon can be expected to vary from year to year depending
on physical extremes and the chance composition of marine
organisms that are introduced into the lagoon when it is
artificially breached. Organisms that can withstand the
extreme variations in salinity, temperature, and biochemical
oxygen demand are relatively few.
PD613.001
Aquatic resources of Batiquitos Lagoon during June 1988
consisted of a limited number of species of fish, inverte-
brates, and plants. Though at least 11 species of fish are
known to occur in the lagoon, only the California killifish
and an unidentified species of shark were collected during
1988. Invertebrates present in June 1988, consisted of
12 species of insects, 2 species of polychaete worms, and
1 species of ostracod. The ostracod and a species of aqua-
tic bug, the waterboatman, were the numerically dominant
species. The only aquatic vegetation present consisted of
wigeon grass and two species of algae.
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Modifications
The short-term impacts of Alternatives A, B, and C are
essentially the same, involving the same habitat areas
(approximately 466 acres) and occurring over approximately
the same time frame (approximately 18 months). The same
habitat areas will be cleared during dredging and grading of
Alternatives A, B, and C. The construction of the fresh-
water marsh area, the filling and grading for California
least tern nesting areas, and the construction of access
roads and construction laydown areas are anticipated to
occur in the same areas for all three alternatives.
After construction dredging, grading, and filling are com-
pleted and permanent tidal flushing is restored, several
years of habitat readjustment will occur. During this
period, marine benthic communities and aquatic vegetation
will establish within the subtidal and tidal zones. Coastal
salt marsh vegetation species will colonize graded areas
above subtidal thresholds, and the other wetland communities
will adjust to the physical and biological conditions result-
ing from the construction impacts.
After this period of adjustment, fish and wildlife habitats
should remain relatively constant. The primary differences
among the three dredging alternatives are related to the
relative amounts of subtidal and tidal habitats created by
dredging and grading. Alternative A would create the most
subtidal habitat (220 acres) and the least intertidal habi-
tat (176 acres). Alternative B is intermediate, with 169
acres of subtidal and 227 acres of intertidal habitat types.
Alternative C would result in the least subtidal habitat
(144 acres) but the most intertidal habitat (252 acres).
After a period of recolonization, tidally influenced coastal
salt marsh (above +4 feet MLLW) is expected to cover approx-
imately 139 acres with Alternative A, 158 acres with Alter-
native B, and 171 acres with Alternative C. The amount of
other major habitat types would be similar for the three
alternatives: approximately 20 acres of.emergent brackish
marsh, 33 acres within the constructed freshwater marsh
area, and 36 acres of sand flats for California least tern
nesting.
PD613.001
The transformation from a complex of nontidal habitats to a
complex of tidally influenced habitats will result in habi-
tat changes for wildlife. These changes include a decrease
in winter brackish/fresh water ponded areas, increased
availability of spring tidal flats for migratory shorebirds,
elimination of hypersaline ponds during late summer, and
year-round improved productivity resulting from daily flush-
ing. However, these habitat modifications should not be
sufficiently different to cause the elimination of any
existing wildlife species.
When wildlife use of predicted habitats is compared for the
three proposed dredging alternatives, it can be assumed that
wildlife species groups will utilize the tidally influenced
habitat types in proportion to habitat abundance. Diving
waterbirds should, therefore, be more abundant in Alterna-
tive A, which results in the largest subtidal area.' Dab-
bling ducks and most shorebirds would be more abundant in
Alternative C, which contains the most intertidal area.
Diving waterbirds, dabbling ducks, and shorebird abundances
would be intermediate in Alternative B. Wildlife groups
that occur in coastal salt marshes would be expected to be
more abundant in Alternative C than Alternatives B or A.
The abundance of wildlife groups utilizing brackish emergent
marsh would be comparable for all three construction alter-
natives. Additionally, Alternative A would favor the dis-
tribution of marine fish because of its more extensive sub-
tidal habitat.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Proposed dredging associated with the three action alter-
natives could adversely affect fossil remains in parts of
the lagoon. The significance of potential impacts cannot be
determined because lagoon sediments have not been completely
analyzed. Under all alternatives (including No Action),
future access to possible fossil sites may be improved;
thus, unauthorized fossil collection or disturbance could
increase. A paleontologic mitigation program for the action
alternatives is recommended to be developed and supervised
by a qualified paleontologist approved by the San Diego
Natural History Museum.
Dredging impacts could occur to seven previously identified
cultural resource sites. The extent of the impacts cannot
be determined at this time because portions of sites may now
be buried under sediments. Beach nourishment could protect
one site by burying it, and disposal of dredged material at
Green Valley could affect two sites. Preliminary tests at
potentially impacted sites (to be determined at final
design) will be conducted to determine appropriate mitiga-
tion plans.
PD613.001
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RELATED TO SAN MARCOS OPTION
Transportation impacts are related only to the San Marcos
Landfill disposal option. Trucking material to San Marcos
Landfill would significantly impact traffic conditions. The
designated route includes intersections that are projected
to be congested (stop-and-go conditions) by the time con-
struction occurs, even without the project.
NOISE IMPACTS RELATED TO DREDGING AND DISPOSAL
Diesel-driven dredging equipment could increase noise levels
from 10 to 20 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at
sensitive receptors. Noise guidelines could be substantially
exceeded. If electric dredges are used, the noise impact
would be 1 dBA CNEL at the four worst-case receptors. If
diesel dredges are used, a mitigation plan to minimize noise
impacts should be developed during final engineering design.
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Mosquito-breeding habitat may be lost through tidal inunda-
tion under any of the action alternatives. The freshwater
marsh will likely create new mosquito habitat, however, and
would require mosquito abatement. The tidal inlet structure
will impede lateral access along the beach for safety vehi-
cles and personnel unless a crossing is constructed. Strong
currents and the rocky shoreline may create potentially
dangerous swimming and surfing conditions near the entrance
jetties. Restricted access to beach nourishment areas will
be required during construction to minimize safety hazards.
MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
The project responsibilities have been identified in the
interagency Memorandum of Agreement. Signatories to the MOA
and their responsibilities are as follows: the City of
Carlsbad is the CEQA lead and will be responsible for per-
mitting, project contracts and construction award, land
dedication, and sediment control; the Port/City of Los
Angeles is responsible for project funding, including pre-
liminary design, environmental documentation, permitting,
construction, maintenance and monitoring, and Carlsbad
administrative costs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cali-
fornia Department of Fish and Game, and National Marine
Fisheries Service are responsible for habitat valuations,
and review and approval of project .design and construction;
CDFG is also responsible for lagoon management as an Eco-
logical Reserve, including long-term physical maintenance
and physical and biological monitoring; and State Lands
Commission is responsible for project review and, as needed,
the holding of lagoon property in public trust with a long-
term lease to CDFG.
PD613.001 10
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED AND CHOICES AMONG THE ALTERNATIVES
The proposed project (Alternative A) and dredge Alterna-
tives B and C have similar short-terra construction impacts
that would not occur with the No Action Alternative. How-
ever, relative to existing conditions and the No Action
Alternative, the proposed project and Alternatives B and C
provide significantly increased water quality, flood control
capacity, recreation opportunities, and increased habitat
for marine resources, diving ducks, dabbling ducks, and
shorebirds.
Alternative A is the alternative least likely to close, it
initially provides the most sand for beach nourishment, and
it provides the most shallow subtidal estuary habitat; as a
result, it would be more favorable to diving ducks and
fishes relative to the other dredge alternatives. Alterna-
tive C provides the minimal margin of error for unpredicted
lagoon closure, provides the least sand for beach nourish-
ment, and provides the least shallow subtidal and the most
intertidal habitat; as a result, it is predicted that this
alternative would favor formation of habitat used by shore-
birds and dabbling ducks relative to Alternative A. Alter-
native B is intermediate to Alternative A and C in these
characteristics. The No Action Alternative would result in
further degradation of the lagoon, including water quality,
flood control, and aesthetics. It is predicted to diminish
the minimal existing marine resources and, in the long term,
diminish habitat for all waterfowl and shorebirds while
upland and nontidal marsh habitat would likely expand.
Under all project alternatives, the freshwater marsh may not
provide anticipated habitat if an adequate amount of natural
fresh water is not available in San Marcos Creek. Alterna-
tive measures that would enhance all dredge alternatives
include: supplementing the freshwater source with reclaimed
or potable water, or elimination of the freshwater marsh
accompanied by modification of the dredge contour line to
conserve some existing brackish marsh (see Section 3.4.2.3).
Use of diesel dredge equipment may result in elevated night-
time noise levels at some receptors during project construc-
tion. Use of an electric dredge would minimize this impact
but might result in significantly higher project costs.
Alternative offsite disposal of dredged material at San
Marcos Landfill and Green Valley may result in noise, traf-
fic, and air quality impacts. Disposal of East Basin mate-
rials in the Central Basin would eliminate these potential
impacts.
PD613.001 11
4J
C
64)
rH
4)
GO<
•rl(0
Q
-PG
g
4)
rH4)
G
O>•H01
4)Q
^JG
s4)
rH
4)
Go>
•rlto4>Q
4JG
g
4)
rH
4)
Gcn
•rH
(04)
Q
•rH
4-1
•Ha
rl
&
T)Gid
G
•HCO
4)Q
4-1
C
cs
4)rH
4)preliminaryc•H
13
4)
cn
•rH
rHO.
Qoo
£j
O^•Hto
4>13 parties,f£
O2
4-1
0
G0•Hcn
•Ho
4)Q
4-1G
g
4)
rH
4)
GO<•<H
CO
4)13
cnw
4)
rH
•8
CO•H4Jidcn <j>a -HO -PH -iH
EH SS(4!
OH
EHH
Q
cn
^*%
C\J
'T
CN
§ m
P G
S3EH D 4->U « 0< EH 4)
2
W
£H
W
3oJ u* aa
H
cn cn
4)
4)cn*•*
Oiid
a,
•rl
4)Uidi-H
^i4J•H
Ul rH4) -H
o4^rH 4-1CO CO
rH -HId
rt 4)
3 rH4J f)
O -H3 CO
rt (0
cn Oi
'Ocid
01c
uid
JQ
rHid
4)
4->id
rH
1
1^14J•H
rH•H•a4-1COC•H
rH«
rl3
4-1
O3
rl
W
CO
01§u
4)
•H
Ol
CO
rl
4)
rl
Q
4)C••H
rl
i!
Cr*G
•rl
Uid
rt
XJ
rHid
rt4)4-1id
rH
-o
^4-1•rl
rH
•H
3toC•H
rHid
rl3
4-1
U3
rl
4-)cn
4-1u4)4->
O
rlQt
to0^
£
•l-l
^Joo
4)O COid 4)
rH OlOi 0s ^05 CO
•^4->•H
rH
•rl
3toG•H
rHid
rl3
4-1
O3
rl
4Jcn
4)
-a"
•rl
rl
jQ
o4->
idoorH
4)
4)
C•rl
rH
4)
04•HOi
COid0^
cnC•Hjjco•H
H
4)G•iH
rH
4)p.
•H
04
4JU
4)
4J
O
rlOi
o•p
c
•rHto
4)Q
^1rH
Hid
rl3
3
4->to
T3
rH3
8
rH
rH>d
t»H
4->3
4)
•H 4)
13 G
rt -H
Id rHOi 4)
0 Oi4) -H
•n Qi
4)N•Ha•H
G
•rla
S
CO 4->
4) U••M (y^J Q.4-1 a
4) -rt•n 4)C (0
0> rt•H 41(0 >
4) 13Q <d
14-4
0
C 4-1
0 rt
•rl O
4-1 Ol «)
Ql CO rH3 C id
rl Id -H
CO rt rt
•rl 4-1 4)
13 4J4) Id
rH rl 8id o
••H A 13
4-1 CO G
C 0> Id
0) G CO•P 0
O rH MHeu id o
rH
>i 4)13 >3 41 C
4-1 rH O C
CO -rl (d
4-1 CO rH
C U rt Ot
rH a -H GOl -H 13 4)
?4) 4) 4)G 4-1 U
•rH Id GH a c <dwS-g£
4) 4-> -rH 4)4-1 4) rHflj rrj J) g
•g o
Ot 0 rl rl
D -P 0 <W
-a41toid
4) O>
rt G
O -rlg -o•H OoH rHid <»H
•rl4-1 -aG G4) id
4J rH
O Oi
•H
4-)
OOHH
mI
-a
3O
rlid
G•HCn134>
13ido
rt
rH
•rHid
rt
13
C3O
rlid
^c•Hcn
134)
rlQ
coCnG•H4-1OOM-l
4)O>•a•H
rlA t Carlsbadtoidw
•aG3
O
rlid
O"*G•H
O>
41
rlQ
to
G
4-1
8U-l
13
rlid
>4)
rj
OCQ t Carlsbadto
4)
13C
rtid
o>c•Ho^•a4)
rta
caOi
r^•H4J
84-1
13
id>
4)
rH3O
C
•rltoidCQ
•ptn4)3
01
C•H
0^""OCO
rla nourish-13
idtn
oid4)A
toidc•H 4->
0 GG 4)
U S
to
4)
•rl
1^| t
4)•n
440
GO
•rH
4-1O3
rl
4-1
UlG
8
tooO A
rt 10
Id rl
Id rtcn cu
4) cn
rl 4)
3 rt
4-1 M-l
U
3 rl G
rl O 04J 4H -HCO U)
,* rt
rl D 0)
•rl 4) >4) Vi -H
S O -O
CMOo
10
Q
0•H
idCP
(N
•d
CO
•O§fi
•rl4-1
oU
O
€
u0)en
0)01
Ul
u
3
rl
•O
01
§
•rl
4-1id
rl
0)
8-
id id
id 01 01
0) 4) X.ui o> o>•d 0101 a> idui ri j:o *d 04
•O 130) 0)01 4-1O 0)
fi O
8 °O> 01id -H
O -rl
A$4J 0)
3 rl
O T3
04-n
0) 4->0) C^ 3
4Juid
•rl
•O•H
4-1
•rl•a•H
fi
1
rH
0)
£5
Cf>•HUl
0)
Q
id fio
C -Hid 4->
rH 0*2
C ui•rl fi
rl Oo u
•rl O»C CO -i-l
3
013 r*i.(— i rj*d 04< S
01fi
0
•rl
4-1id
0)
o
01 ^S fiid
•rl 0)o oG OW — '
*^Q
•H
rl
0)
O4
4->OidOis
•rl
fiOi
•rl
01
1)Q
0>C
•H
rl
01
4-)id?01•d
rl
OM-l
g
0)
XI
•PO
2
4-1
01
COu
t^t4-1
•rl-d•rl
rlg
4-1
•rl
O
ll J*rH
0
r-lido
•Pu1•rl
i-Hid•rl
U
•rl
4H
0)
£5
01to
1
0)ucid
J5
01
c
0-rl
•Pid<u
rl 4->
U fi
fio>•H01
01Q
Ul§
•rl
4Jid
^0)
O40
0)01idA
04
^14-1
•rl
•d
•rlxt
rt3
CCf>
•rl
01
0)a
01
0)
rl
Au01
•rl•a
rH
O
rl
§
U
•«
01
0)
•rl
t3
0)01
D
•O•p
0)
«
^^}•rl
XI
rl
^
4-)01 J3id ui
id
rl 4-> Ul
0) W -rl
4-> -rt ^id x o3 o> id
rl01 0 XI0) 4->u c3 0) -HT3 rH 01
o
•H
•rl
4-1
O>
•rl
id
r-l
fi
1
aiz
id
01a
Ul
•rlQ
fi•HCOidn
r-lid
^44-1
C
0)CJ
T3GidrHcuD
§±4
<4-l
UlG
Ul
r*id2
rl
<U4Jid
f^Ul
rl
0•HUl
0)>•rl•d
rl
0)4Jid3
K^010)
rl
U
Ul
0o
Vtid
IN
(NOo
acu
4J
U4)•n
OU
04
(01-1
04
<Uo
a -.
•H O
idO
OO> it38,
<D
fl
•H
4J
OOE-t —
4)H•a
4-)
§O
>la|
d
«I
§•H4-1
Oo
Vio
•H4-1
I4->id
rl
0)4J
0)
•H
ido•rl
I/I
I
to
u
•H
rHid•HO•H4H
4)
0)
<d
4->
•rl•o•H
^43
•O
0)
0
1H
to
rH
4)
4)
rH
4-1C
•H
4->
COos*•H
•M3O
|
5
•rl
<P4
rH
4)
to
rH
4)
4)
rH
oQ
s
•0<u
id
^1A
IHo
co•H4-)id
•rl
•r,
rH
toCo•H
•H-dcoo
4)C•H
rHidto ar- Dredge approximately everyO4
rH
rH
•H3
C•rltoidCD
4-1to
3
!X
CI
U
Ooo
mr-
U)
rlid4)
ro
jj^j
•H3
rH
rH
•HHH
K,,
rH
rH(d•H4J
•§
n
•rl
04
4)
0>
4)
•O
&
1•rHrrj
4)to
•O4)
•H
^44)7cid
4)oo
to
a
§
o1
id
S
rl
0)
4-)
I
o•rl
•Pid
•rl•a
0)(0
rl
0)
JX
£4
HJ
rtj
B<
tfH
rf.
^^,
CS•n•
CO
go•H
•PU0)01
0)<u01 dredge:0•rl
3U0)rH
Q)
4-1
O
4)to
3
4)rH
A•rlto
(fl
£controla•2.p3rH,«4a
^i
0
*(0
C3
04
T3
id nativerl
4>4JH
(d
rH
4)
4-1
rl
0
*•PC0)a
04•H
j3
4)
• •.to
idO
toto
4)ooid
4)>id
04
•«,A:u3
4->
C
u4)4Jid
4)•O•H
>0
cu
Itoto4>
04
10
4Jto3
rHido•rle4)x:0
0)to
D
^|O
1id
?c•H
£(0idu,__)
4)4)
J-3u
S
4)4->•Hto
§
O
C0u
4Jto3•0
4)
O>
C
£
Xoz
o
0)o
otn
rl0<?*
tofi0
•rltoto
•HsV
4->C!0)
|
'3
C?
CPC
•rl
•I"0)V*o
to<u
(d
rH3O
•rl
4J
^4•d04
^
4)
CON
O
OO
*.
X0
~-*
to
3Q
4)
•H-P•H
3*CM
rHH
•rl
4-4•OC
•H
^O4-1
U
>P4
M-l<d
•P
id
rH
3
c^O>
^««tn
0u
Mid
C(d01
^idtoato•H
T3
(NOO
aa.
cn 3w c
•H(U 4-1
rH C•3 °Id OEH -^
4-1C
I
ou
§
•rl
4->ido»
-rl
4-1
•rl
C 4-10i G
•H 4)01 g
4) 4)-O rH
4)4J
U C
•n -rl
O 01
)H 4)
Ox Q
•O MH
4) O
UC C4) O
3 -rl
rH 4JMH U
•rl *tj
4)
>. OS
rH
rH
•O CD
•rl 4J
4-1 Id
4J
.C -H
co x-~ -P >P[V) • ID -iH 4^
rv. (>4 • * r*
H • <Nn3 ^* * 0) *O9- t usn • id id
H 1*) rH rH3 01 a 4->G 'O 0) OQ 0 C « 3
55 -rl Id
2 4Jo •*
4->
O
1H
SB 4) •cn en <N
H • CP
b 4) •<« S4) « -rl
01 PI 4->.*- 01 01
•rl 4Jx <d
4) 4->
•HMH jao <d
Cn
•SI
rl Id
Id rH
4) 4-»
rH 4)u *
01
1 4)
85
rH
IS25J3 C
4)
rH 41
^ *t3
rH 41
•rl toid -o
id MH
001
4J C
U CPId -rla. 01
g 4)•H -a
CP
Ula>-o
jju
41•n
O
rl
ft
•a
4)U 01C 4J
41 Id
3 4-1
rH -rl
S rti
>i U
rH -rl
H 4Jid id-O 3•H O*4-i id
5 .p1
•H -rl
S rHid4) 3o o1
id i
rH JS
O4 CP41 -rl
01
1 4-1c id
O 4J
G -rl
㥤O" n3
G .£•rl
4-> U
01 -rl
•rl 4-)x id41 3
O*MH idO
rH
01 id01 TJS.fj•P
1C±
d)rH
4)
G
•rl
01
S
rl 41
4) 4)•P 01
id -^
id 01
4) 41
« -rlc a
O A•rl O
P 41
*d ^^
G 0> >i
O G -PU -rl -rl
CP rH
>iT3 idSH 4) 3id i-i o*
Oi ta 4)
EH" 3 ?
CP
C
^3
4-1
•rl C
rH Oid -H
3 4-> CT>
O* id C
T) -H
h id CP
Id 41 rls -a -o
co•rl4J
•rl•aaoo
?*1
rlid
M0§•4)EH
•801
to
Qt
C
•S
^Jid
•H
•rl
g
I1J j^0 id
4J
4J -H
g-9
g J34)U O
Id -rl
rH 4J
Ot Id01 3
•rl C/*Q >d
co•rl
4J
•rl•s0o
^1
rlid
^0
g
4)
-a4)011
Ol
c0•rl4-)id
•rl
•rl
g
MH
O
1
g
d) 1)O <H(d ,*H
rH rH
S'rH
•rl -rl
0 3
1
01
4)to
-O4)01
^Ql
5 J3
•rl 01
3 rl
4) g0
id to
rH 41
tr>G 4J•H (d
4J 4J01 -H
4) A
O Gid
01 rH
01 4-1
Q 4)i-4 3
014)
•rl
4->
rlida
rt*
i
IHo
G0•H
01
•H
U
4)a
t%
01
i
to41•P
f*jto
41
41
+J
(dG
g
rHpa
co
4-1U
0)MH
MH
41
4101
^41
-§ffl
^1
•P
•rl
rH
3o1
•rl
C
•rl
•P
01
•H
X
4)
41
41 ,C01 014) toto id
04 g
to 01
0 -H
Nj ^^O41 idU to
3 ^O D^01 G 01
•rl 41to 4-1 A4) 01 01
P -rl *<d x <d3 41 g
Go
•rl
P
•rl
T3
G
OO
^J•rl
^01
04
UH
MH3
rH
•Q *C
MH n)O
a, c
O -rl
4-1 COidG OQOrH
rH Id•rl toid 4Jto a4J a)
0
414J 01id G
0 O
U) id
i•P
rH
01
4) 4)i. ^4
•rl
01 rH
01 'O
4) rH
O 3
C -H
i 0>3 cS3 -rl
01
01 0141 idSB ffl
01 4-1
C 01o >dH Wid•aH 2
•rl (3idto *
•P Hid
4) rl0 4->§§
MH O
01
4)U
•8
34J
01
•rl
'O
§•rl
4J
•rl
"S8
toO
4J•rl
•rl
C
•rl
41
5 .CO41
to -id <
01 01
P 4)
U >id -H
T3 O4 4J
2 g id
•rl G
)441'O O 4JG -rl rH
Id 4J <UCP 3 toG to O•H P MH0> 01T3 C <D
4> O g
id
01a>to
MH
MH
O
O
•rl
4->
U3 toid
01 id
01 01
£! rlo ido g
0)^
5cn
5
rl
MH
O
O
•rl
4-)
U3to
4J rH01 -Hc id
csoo
acu
I (UCOW
4J
C0)
8
u
§•H4J>d
•rl
4->•Hs
C0•rl
4-1•rl
1Ou
4->•H
0)
04
J3•p fl•H O»> -rl01fl <0nj T3r-i
04 r4
fl fl
O -rl
4->id C
O> O
•rl
—' 4J "0CO CS -rl 0)a • g 01u m njOS . <o &
O id JSco fl QI 2a o o) z
« -rl U Q4J O4 COrl U
rfj 0)2 co
4JUid
O4
H
3E-t <U 1JO) flD 01 HI
U — ' rl 4J0 0
'O§44
0
4) fl
85id 4JJ3 idti fl
3 -H
•P Sto -3
•rl f-H
Q (U
fl0•rl
4->
•rl
O
U
4->•rl
0)
04
1
1
4->id
§•H4JU3
4->Ulfl
0O
V*
5•Hi
f~\idu
Q
l-l
O4-)
fl
0) 01
H 0)<d uft 3
•-I Oid 01
•rl 0)
iidooi-H
4)UUS0)0)u
A
•rl
J3
S
0) 014-> flid o
<0 4-1
fl0
•rl
4J•rl
0U
•P
rl0)
Xzg
o
4-)
fl0)
Ul
1id
01
Ul1
flo•rl
4-*•rl
O
O
P
•rl
g
0)
04
1H idid uC 0
•rl i-l
i-Hfl id
33? uid01P 0101 0)0) fl4-1 -rl
0) r!4-> 0),J ^J
01 0>
PU fl
T3 *Hfl in0 <i)CJ -O
i0) flo <ufl 4-1id o
A O4
3 <«-l•P 00)
•rl 01
-O 01
O0) r-lr-la r)
001 \01 -a0 fl04 (d
flo•rl
^J•rl
1Ou
4J
,f^
g
0)
04
010)
•rl
4-1
•rl
^ (LJ
•^ o
0 >iid a>
fl t0 3•H 01
U 0)3 >
r) -rl4J 01in flfl d)
O 4->0 fl
•rl
0 4JU01 3C -0O C
•rl O•P U
uT3 -n§ S1
0 O
•rl <0
O A4-1 U
0) rl
•rl Id
A 010) O <U
r) -rl O
O4 Vt rl0 3
rH 4-1 Oid 01 01•rl -rl 0)
•P A rl
101
•o
Ulid
0)Ul3
<M.f-|
^0)
rH 0)
rH 4JId -rl
> W
C r-la) id0) 01
a Oi
co
4J•H•a0o
4-1
.f^
g
0)
04
a> -.
r) 01
||
01o in
•H 0)01 Uu
0)
«
^3 ^n
3 0)0 ^
id a>•-ic ja
O^ *rl•H 01ui in0) Oa 04
fl0•rl4_),f4-a
0u
P
•rl
g
0)
04
1S * flid ui o
rl Ol-rlCT> l-t 4->o o idS0 S.C 0)0) 4J U)4^ -H d)(d S V*
•rl O4
Qu C O
O 0) -rl
O4 0) O
Ol 0) 4->id M 01
Ol < S3O
01 -rl 4J> 4J id<D fl PQ S CO
•H
0 O
C <4-l3
O CU 0•H
S- ^
rl Id
35> 0)
(flfi ^4
04
1 0
Id -rl
^30) 01
M-lii i f^
0 0
4J
SO
•rlM-l•rl
O»
CO in
i^ 0
rH -rl<d 4J
•rl Id4J U
§54J0 -P
>i a
fl -H
§•H4J
•rl
4-1
•rl
•rl
4-1
infl
•rl
Ulid
M-l
O
01C
•rl
01id
Xt
M-l
O
•rl
in
»
CMoo
0)i-lQ
0)!H
Q
vOaa,
PIo
I (1)ui 9U C•HIt) 4J^ e•9 °Id O
Poid
I
,»^
^*
vO
CO
c
O-Hjj
00)CO
11)0)CO•**ment to mini- Permit conditionA01
'u9Oe
01r-l
9
<u
0
A
•HS
t>o
(Uu0)4-1
0)
c asonal)4101
014-1U
1•H
01N
'e
in
Q)to9
r*4idC
.3P
(U
oa)
i
oo
o
01
a>
c
•r-l
0101<00uid c
O 4Ju u4J 9
§13u tn
§•HP•H
•O
OU
MO
TJ(I)01
1a
c0
P
•H4J
'&
OZ
tPC•HM-l
(U 9> 01idS u00*4
4,3u idid EHp. >r4
S r-l teral access Permit conditionid
CQ
Z
PU9M4->
O
O
tnCoHid
01Ul
0)uuid
id
0)P
*o West CarlsbadP
4JC0)
Uid•n
•3
0)
4-1
gM
•O0)Pidc
g
^0)
oido>
<u
«•Hk
•0
id><ur-4
9OCQ
M(U
4^
0)
0>
CP
C
c
9
01
0-H
4-1U9
P01
U
0)oidHcu
^,3
4)
^P
0
Cfl*»-*
<oo§01•H3
§•HP
•H
0U
01id0)
!3
.^jo
•H
P01id<o
§
•a
tna>
0)
cu
P•rH
••HP
U9MPin
a>
r-lcM
o•HPO9U4Jtn
I
OO
CU
I 4)CO 3W fl•rH
fl) 4-1
rH fl
Q O
Id OEH -"
4JC
Iou
J*o
•H
4->ido>
•rH•p
jfj
4J
g
fl)
•PC
g
4)I
4)
•O-•H fl
fi -P
•H rQ01 fl
fl) O
Q U
1 •rH TJ1 0 fl)•H W TJ4-> fl•H 4) fl)g rj g
EH Bfl) O£ U. fl)
§u k4)U fl 01
fl "H01 id4) s .c> o
•rH fl) Id4J i o
m* 1 ^ 8*O» QI C (U
4-1 -r4n 1-4, 01id -a cWG (U -H
CO O rH -P S
H -r( rH Id O
0 4-> < CPrHZ U4)
W ^
4->
OidOiBH
§
•rH
4-1•H
TJfl
3
o
^t•P••H
•rH
4->
O
4) 4-1 PQ W4) fl -O rHcn id 4)— o o >
•rH <N fl)
•rH 0
C 4-1 4)
O» 0)•H O -H01 rH O
-* fi
id <u fl
•rH 01 -rH4-1 «fl fl) — >
4) k r-34J O W0 C ZOi -H U
I "o?
04 fl)•H >
3 -rH
O1 4-*4) idCa> kC fl)•H 4J
'O flJfl)
T3 O
C -Pfl) U> id•H
•O rH
1 <d
rH — '
0)
0) 4->a> c
•rH 0)Q S
4J
<r4s
0)
04
4J
fl
g
4)
c~t
4)
T3
•-H fi
fi JtP "iH•H -O0) fi4) OQ 0
C *^3
fl -H r-lid 3rH -a oQi 0) 0) 0 .fl0 rrj 0
C C 3 fl 3
O Id rH O 0)
•rH fi O -H
4J Jk4 fl 4J UHid o -H id o01 4H CT>•rH 'H 4) -H 014-> 4) J3 -P C•H Ot -HOS O S -rHfl) 4J 4J
4) 01 Id
01 -rH 01 • fl
•rH O fi 01 -rH
O fl O -P A "
fl -rH C g 01Oi 4J 4) 0 idId O Id I U
rH U 3 014) fl) -H U fl) 0)U > MH O T3 Uid fl) -H T3 3 3OiTJ O rH 01fl) 4) T3 U id
>4 ^ Qj -H C 0)04 o w ja -H g
4)01
•r4oc
O4
13Oi
^d)4J01
8PQ
4Jfl
rl 4)o o<4H Id
r-H
0) Oi
i* vIg
fl •£?fl) 01
> -rl•H U
rl 3
T3 O1 fl
rH
0) £01 u0) id•H 0)Q .a
•p
•H
g
4)
O4
£
C4)S4)
fl)
T3•H C
fl 4->Oi «H
•H T301 fl
38
a
4)
•r4
^•O
^rH
rHido•iH
^4-1
U
rH
4)0)MH fl)
fl) 4)01 l-lD -O
0
4-1
idu
<4H
•r4 tt
01 id•H 01
01 g
rH 0
Id rl
••H <4H•pfl 4)0) 01
4J -rHo o
04 fl
4->fl
•C01
•H
^3Oc
r^oid0)PQ
4J•H
g
4)
Oi
.pc
4)S4)
4)
•a
•r) fi
C '4-1
01 -rl
•rl T3
01 fl
4) O
Q 0
01
3o
O»C
01 -rH
4) 4-1
VH Id3 h0) 0)O p|
H 0
0) UV4 fi <4H
4) 4) O•H
rl rH Ck id 0id o -H
A -H 4J4J id4) 0) 4->01 3 -rH
•rl O 6O 0 -rH
Z < K?
999
4-)
fi
4) Q)B 4-) O!O4 3 C
•H O -H3 U O!a* m
fl) 94-)C 01
•P O
fl H *44) id id3 4)4) 4) Cu 01 idId -H T3 d>rH O fl r»QI ^ id id
rH
rH
•rH
<4H•O
C
3
0)
O
On
§
C.O
4->id
rHtd
01oOi01•HQ
fl)
fl -r*fl) -Pfl) -rlS 01
•P fl 4->4) 0) 01J3 0) 3id4) *O AU C XC id 4)id•P W H01 4) 4)
•rH U 0)
•O rl fl)
3 01 -rl U)
O> O V* <O kfl 01 O 4)•H -P «4H O
4J fl) CU O C
•rl 01 0) 4)
g -rH O 4) r-H•H 0 0) W -H
iJ fl rl P 01
0 ^
OO
a
A4
I CUcn 3w a
•rl
CU 4J•-< aa o<d oEH —
4-1
C
Q
C
0CJ
c0
•rl
4-1idcn
•rl
4J
•rl
£
co•rl
4J•rl•9cou
•p
•rl
g
&
•»GCn
•rl
CO
CUQ
idcu
rl<d
C
0•H
4->
U3
rl
4JCO^4 g
EH O
b C7*jj • 44
cn H 4-1
r-l O
2 co cu< u
* § §STJ fa
a or.i A\
4Juid
£H
C0•rl
4-1
•rl
tJCoo
rl
O
>14->
•rl
>
•rl
4-1
H
hM Was cn Aou cu <d
M CU CU
J CO XJ00 —a o04 4J
•P8
!
>14J CO
0) rl
44 CUid cocn 3
c0•H
4-)
U3
rl
4-1toc0u
cu
rl3
4-1O3
tH
4-1
CO
4-1
CU
rH
M
C
O•rl
4J
•rl•a
oo
4->
•rl
rl
CU
04
0
4->
X ca
rl rl
O CUS ca34Ja oO 4-1
rl44 (0
1 4-1
J3 Uu id<d 04cu S
cu cu
rH N
3 -rl
T) g
CU -HA CO -rlcn g
ao•rl
4J•H
T3
OU
4-1
•rlg
CU
04
COUcu
3
CO
s
g1
•rl
•rlid9
4->
COo
04
rl
CU
4Jid
9
*CU^
4-1id
rlcuo<gcuH
c0
•rl
4-1
•rl•a
ou
4-1•H
g
CU
04
1
•rl•aa8>4-1
•rl
r-1id3D4
bcu
1
SH
O44
4-1
CO
CUEH
co
4-1
Oid
8-•rl
>1
4->
•rl
rHid30<
a<c
•rlCcu
O40
r-lid
•rl
4->
•rl
•H
tPa•H
rl3•O
COc0•rl
•P
C
O•rl
4->
•rl•a§o
4-)*Hg
cu
04
CO
rl
g
•rl3LQ
O
4J
COco
•rl4-1 (du cu
•rl rl
rl Id4-1CO 4-1cu cu
rl r-l
4J -rl
COO C04 -n
i.Mcu
4-1id3
O4J
CO
4-1
S1
>1
4-1 CO
0) rl
44 U)id cacn 3
>H^4-1C
0)C
g
^4CU
3
cu
rl3
4JO3M
4-1cn
4Jcu
rH
CM
C
0•rl
-P
•rl•o
OU
4-1
•rl
g
CU
04
CO
rl
CU4->ido£
O4->
CO
Co•rl
4J
U
•rl
V4
•P
CO
CUk
4->
COo
04
ccn
•rl
COcuQ
>
rl A
0)
•rl CO
Vl CO
rl CUid uA uid
rH<d 4Ju cu
•rl rH
10 C
>1-rlA
04£
4-1 -rl
U rl3 4-1 tn
M CO fc4-) CU CU
CO rl -Pc id80 o4J A
G0•rl
4J•H
T)C
O0
4-)
•rl
g
CU
Q4
•k
GCn
•rlcocua
rH -Pid ca
rl CU<u 3:
4J<d oH 4J
A 4J
•P C3 CU0 Oco idI -nA T34-> id
rt
§S
4, §U fc3fc ca
4-> CO
CO CU
C 0o oo id
1
4Jca
•H 0]X cn
0) CUu
44 Uo id
G rH0 id
•H fc
4-> CUid 4-)G id
•rl r-l
g•ri cnH G
W -H
&T3
•rl
fc
A
•O
rlid
CUrH
3
S
•Oid•8
rH
rlido
.£
4->3
3
c
8S1
rH
CO
COo
rl
Uid
ccn•rlcocu•o
«^ao
•rl
4->•rl•O
Ou c0
4-1 -rl
•rl 4->
S •*
rl -Cl
CU T304 id
cu4-1id•a
6
B0uuid cocu
0 r-l
4J U
•rlco A
CU 0)3>
4-1 >iCU U•n CCUfi cn
CU fct3 0)
S cu
«.ca
>1 rl
4-1 CU
CU g
4H a
Id -rl •co s o
CO 4J
•H CU
Id fceo-0 4H CO
•rl U
4-1 0) 0)
•rl 3 44T3 ca fc
T3 CO 31? -rl CO
44 C•ri cn
•rl
» CO
10 CUcu -a•rl
•P H4-i idcu a
•l-l -rl4H4-1o c•rlCnG -•H >i
C fcCU idA cn
4-> COcn cuC Ucu cuJ fi
0}
O
O
g