SMUD) and Annexation by SMUD of the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland and Portions of Unincorporated Areas of Yolo County

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

Amendment of the Sphere of Influence for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and Annexation by SMUD of the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland and Portions of Unincorporated Areas of Yolo County

SCH #2005092009

Prepared by

URS Corporation 2870 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 150 Sacramento, CA 95833 916.679.2000

JANUARY 2006

Prepared for

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission 1112 “I” Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916.874.6458

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

Prepared by

URS Corporation 2870 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 150 Sacramento, California 95833 (916) 679-2000

January 2006

Prepared for

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission 1112 “I” Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, California 95814 (916) 874-6458

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Executive Summary

Chapter I Summary A. Proposed Actions B. Areas of Controversy Known to the Lead Agency C. Summary of Environmental Impacts/Issues to Be Resolved

Chapter II Program Description A. Program Location B. Background C. LAFCo Review and Policy D. Program Goals and Objectives E. Energy Supply and Delivery Considerations F. Program Components G. Intended Uses of This EIR

Chapter III Environmental Setting A. Regional Setting B. Local Setting

Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts A. Aesthetics B. Agriculture Resources C. Air Quality D. Biological Resources E. Cultural Resources F. Hazards and Hazardous Materials G. Hydrology/Water Quality H. Land Use/Planning I. Noise J. Population/Housing K. Public Services L. Recreation M. Transportation/Traffic N. Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation O. Mineral Resources P. Geology and Soils

Chapter V Cumulative Impacts A. Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects B. Cumulative Effects of Reasonably Foreseeable Projects and the Program

Chapter VI Growth-Inducing Impacts

DRAFT i Table of Contents

Chapter VII Irreversible Changes: Impacts That Cannot Be Fully Mitigated or Avoided

Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Project A. No Program Alternative B. Alternative Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Evaluation C. Alternatives Considered for Detailed Evaluation D. Comparison of Alternatives

Chapter IX Preparers of this Report

Chapter X References Cited

Appendices

A. Energy Supply B. SMUD & CAISO Control Areas & SMUD’s Capacity to Serve C. Not Used D. Siting of Transmission Electric Facilities E. Program Mitigation Monitoring Plan F. CPUC Advisory Resolution G. Air Quality Background Data H. Notice of Preparation and Public Comments on Notice of Preparation (Provided on CD only) I. SMUD Safety Plan (Provided on CD only) J. SMUD Annexation Feasibility Study, Final Report, R.W. Beck, 2005 (Provided on CD only) K. Yolo Annexation Feasibility Study Staff’s Assessment and Recommendations, Final Report, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2005 (Provided on CD only) L. Policies, Standards and Procedures for LAFCO, Sacramento LAFCo, 1990 (amended 1993) (Provided on CD only)

DRAFT ii Tables and Figures

Tables

I-1: Summary of Direct and Indirect Potential Environmental Impacts and Applicable BMPs and Mitigation Measures I-2: Summary of Potential Cumulative Environmental Impacts

II-1: PG&E and SMUD (2003) Outage Duration and Frequency, Including Major Events II-2: Results of Commercial Survey of Customer Satisfaction II-3: Permits and Other Approvals That May Be Required

IV.C-1: Air Quality Standards Attainment Status Chart for SMAQMD and Yolo-Solano AQMD IVC.-2: Summary of Basinwide Air Emissions IVC.-3: Summary of Daily Construction Emissions IVC.-4: SMUD Daily Vehicle Emissions

IV.D-1: Habitat Types and Subtypes in the Project Areas IV.D-2: Potential Special-Status Species Within the Program Study Area

IV.E-1: Geologic Units Considered in Study

IV.F-1: Known Locations of Hazardous Waste Within Analysis Area

IV.I-1: Summary of California Noise Laws and Regulations IV.I-2: Typical Transmission Line Noise Levels IV.I-3: Noise Levels from Construction Equipment

IV.M-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria, Highway Capacity Manual, Operational Analysis Method IV.M-2: Estimated Daily and Weekly Trips for Construction, by Program Component IV.M-3: Maximum Daily Construction Traffic IV.M-4: Existing Traffic Volume at SR 50 and 59th Street IV.M-5: Daily and Weekly Trips for Operation and Maintenance IV.M-6: Per Capita Spending, SMUD and IOUs

VII-1: Significant and Unavoidable Impacts

VIII-1: Comparison of Environmental Impacts of the Program and All Alternatives VIII-2: Comparison of Achievement of Program Goals/Objectives Under Program and All Alternatives

DRAFT iii Tables and Figures

Figures

I-1: Regional Location Map I-2: Annexation Territory I-3: Location of Program Components 4–7

II-1 System Average Rate Comparison, SMUD and PG&E II-2: Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) II-3: North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5) II-4: Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) II-5: Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7)

IV.B-1 Land Enrolled in Williamson Act and Farmland Security Zone Contracts

DRAFT iv Acronyms and Abbreviations

AADT annual average daily traffic AAQS ambient air quality standard AB Assembly Bill AG-ICE Agricultural Internal Combustion Conversion ALUC Airport Land Use Commission APCD air pollution control district APLIC Avian Power Line Interaction Committee AQMD Air Quality Management District ATC Authority to Construct

BACT best available control technologies BLM Bureau of Land Management BMP best management practice BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe BSA Biological Sensitivity Area

CAA Clean Air Act CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAISO California Independent System Operator Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CARB California Air Resources Board CCAA California Clean Air Act CCR California Code of Regulations CD compact disc CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEC California Energy Commission CEQA California Environmental Quality Act/Agency CERES California Environmental Resources Evaluation System CFPC California Farmland Conservancy Program CFR Code of Federal Regulations CKH Act Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL community noise equivalent level CNPS California Native Plant Society CNS central nervous system CO carbon monoxide CPP Consumnes Power Plant CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CRHR California Register of Historic Resources CRMMP Cultural Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan CVP Central Valley Project CVRWQCB Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board CWA Clean Water Act dBA decibel A-scale DBH diameter at breast height

DRAFT v Acronyms and Abbreviations

DERA Department of Environmental Review and Assessment DHS Department of Health Services DMUD Davis Municipal Utility District DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control DWR Department of Water Resources

EIR Environmental Impact Report EMF electromagnetic frequency EMFAC mobile source emissions inventory EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act

FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Aviation Regulation FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FHWA Federal Highway Administration FIP Federal Implementation Plan FIRM flood insurance rate map FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

HABS Historic American Buildings Survey HAER Historic American Engineering Record HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

IC internal combustion ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization IOU investor-owned utility

JPA Joint Powers Authority kV kilovolt

LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission lb/day pounds per day Ldn day-night average noise level Leq hourly equivalent sound level Lmax maximum noise level LOS level of service

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MOU memorandum of understanding mph miles per hour MRP Monitoring and Reporting Plan MRZ Mineral Resource Zone

DRAFT vi Acronyms and Abbreviations

MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan MUD Municipal Utility District MVA megavolt amperes MW megawatts

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NBHCP Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan NCCP Natural Communities Conservation Plan NCIC North Central Information Center NCPA Northern California Power Agency NERC North American Electric Reliability Council NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOP Notice of Preparation NOx oxides of nitrogen NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRHP National Register of Historic Places

O&M operations and maintenance OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Pb lead PCB polychlorinated biphenyl PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in size PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size ppm parts per million PRC Public Resources Code PTO Permit to Operate

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RFP request for proposal ROG reactive organic gas RPS renewable procurement standard RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board

SACOG Sacramento Area Council of Governments SAIDI system average interruption duration index SAIFI system average interruption frequency index SB Senate Bill SCR selective catalytic reduction SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SERA Sierra Energy of Risk Assessment, Inc. SFNA Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area SIP State Implementation Plan

DRAFT vii Acronyms and Abbreviations

SMAQMD Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District SMUD Sacramento Municipal Utility District SNR Sierra Nevada Region SO2 sulfur dioxide SOI sphere of influence SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure SPRR Southern Pacific Railroad SR State Route SRCSD Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board

TDS total dissolved solids TNBC The Natomas Basin Conservancy

UARP Upper American River Project UPRR Union Pacific Railroad URBEMIS Urban Emissions Model USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USC United States Code USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

V/C volume to capacity ratio VELB valley elderberry longhorn beetle VOC volatile organic compound

WAPA Western Area Power Administration WECC Western Electricity Coordinating Council

°F degrees Fahrenheit

DRAFT viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

In 2003, the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland (the Cities) and the County of Yolo formally requested that the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) consider annexing the Cities and unincorporated portions of Yolo County (collectively, the Annexation Territory) into SMUD’s electric service territory (thereby replacing their existing provider, Pacific Gas & Electric Company [PG&E]), citing the potential for lower rates, the ability to participate in decision-making on energy-related issues at the local level, and the potential for improved reliability and customer service.

After reviewing an independent study of the annexation concept, completing its own internal review, and receiving additional public input, SMUD’s Board of Directors voted to seek annexation in May 2005. In August 2005, SMUD submitted its application to the Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). If SMUD’s application is approved by LAFCo and the voters, SMUD will replace PG&E as the provider of electric service in that area. PG&E will continue to provide natural gas service.

SMUD’s annexation and concurrent sphere of influence (SOI) amendment proposal is subject to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act). Under the CKH Act, LAFCo must determine whether to order the annexation and approve the SOI amendment. In making this determination, LAFCo requires a comparison of the cost- effectiveness and service delivery capability of both SMUD and PG&E.

The Program consists of the proposal by SMUD to annex the cities of West Sacramento, Woodland, and Davis and unincorporated portions of Yolo County and to provide electric service to these areas. Sacramento LAFCo, the Lead Agency for this Environmental Impact Report (EIR), will use this EIR in its consideration of SMUD’s proposal for annexation and concurrent SOI amendment.

This Program EIR was prepared to provide Sacramento LAFCo and the public with information on potential impacts on environmental resources from SMUD’s proposed annexation and subsequent provision of electric service to the Annexation Territory.

Program Goals and Objectives

• Improve the reliability of electric service in the Annexation Territory.

• Improve customer satisfaction in the Annexation Territory.

• Provide electric service to the Annexation Territory at rates that are lower than those currently paid by customers in the Annexation Territory.

• Ensure local control by Annexation Territory ratepayers over their electric utility.

• Provide service to the Annexation Territory at no financial cost and no reduction in service quality/reliability to existing SMUD customers.

DRAFT ES-1 Executive Summary

• Provide service to the Annexation Territory at no material financial cost and no reduction in service quality/reliability for existing PG&E ratepayers outside the Annexation Territory.

Program Components

The Program consists of the following program components.

Administrative Components

(1) Expansion of SOI/Annexation

(2) SMUD Acquisition of PG&E Equipment/Infrastructure

(3) Execution of Memoranda of Understanding or Other Operating Agreements with Yolo County Interests

Construction and Operation and Maintenance Components

(4) Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area

(5) North City Interconnection Study Area

(6) Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area

(7) Willow Slough Substation Study Area

(8) Other Distribution System Upgrades

(9) Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System

Some program components will necessarily be implemented if LAFCo and the voters approve the proposed annexation and SMUD is to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory. These Program Components (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9) are analyzed at the project level in this EIR. Other Program Components (6, 7, and 8), most notably a new transmission line, a new substation, and distribution system upgrades, could be constructed in various locations or in various ways. It is premature for this EIR to develop specific locations for Program Component 6 and 7. The basic policy question confronting LAFCo at the present time is whether the ratepayers in the Annexation Territory will be better served by SMUD or by PG&E. This question of governmental efficiency is a matter solely within the expertise of LAFCo. If LAFCo were to determine that it would be in the public interest for SMUD to serve the Annexation Territory, then SMUD would be the agency with expertise in siting electric transmission and distribution facilities. SMUD would then have to conduct that analysis in a way that was consistent with requirements that LAFCo determined were needed to protect the public interest, which LAFCo could accomplish though the inclusion of terms and conditions in any order approving the annexation. Then SMUD also would have to prepare one or more additional environmental document(s) to analyze the impacts of these program components on the environment at a project level. In this way, tiered review of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Program would allow the expert agency on governmental reorganization (LAFCo) to focus its decision on

DRAFT ES-2 Executive Summary governmental efficiency questions and allow the agency with expertise on electrical service (SMUD) to focus its subsequent environmental analysis on those areas (the best way to provide electrical service to an area).

Best Management Practices and Mitigation Measures

This EIR incorporates best management practices (BMPs) into each construction-related program component to minimize the potential for significant impacts on the environment.

SMUD has agreed to include in the Program, as described in the application for annexation, several BMPs that will avoid and/or minimize the potential effects of the Program on the environment. These BMPs incorporate within the Program “state-of-the-practice” standards (largely, but not entirely, relating to construction) that avoid and/or minimize the effects of the Program on the environment. In many cases, implementation of these BMPs will avoid or reduce a potentially significant effect of the Program to a less than significant effect. In cases where there are no BMPs, or where the BMPs may not reduce the potential effects of the Program to a less than significant level, this Draft EIR proposes feasible mitigation measures, if such are available. Inclusion of BMPs in the Program description is consistent with SMUD’s core value of environmental protection.

Thus, the Draft EIR relies on both BMPs and traditional mitigation measures to avoid and/or minimize the effects of the Program on the environment. Because both BMPs and mitigation measures are used to lessen or avoid the effects of the Program on the environment, SMUD will be required to include both BMPs and mitigation measures in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program required by this EIR. Furthermore, to ensure the enforceability of both BMPs and mitigation measures, LAFCo has determined that each of the BMPs and mitigation measures determined to be feasible in either the Draft or Final EIR will be included as a term and condition in any resolution(s) approving the change in SMUD’s SOI or approving the proposed annexation.

SMUD will be responsible for the implementation of the mitigation measures and BMPs. SMUD will designate to LAFCo, prior to beginning work, SMUD personnel or contractors who are independent from those performing the work, who will complete a field checklist and perform periodic site inspections to document compliance with the monitoring and reporting plan (MRP). SMUD or its contractor will have final oversight authority over mitigation monitoring, and will maintain an administrative record of all mitigation and implementation tasks performed. At the monitoring milestones, SMUD must obtain signatures from the responsible parties to verify that the mitigation measures have been adequately implemented before that milestone occurs. SMUD will submit an MRP progress report to LAFCo every six months until all mitigation measures have been completed.

Potentially Significant Impacts on the Environment

The Program will have significant, unavoidable impacts in aesthetics, air quality, and noise (refer to Table ES-1). It is likely that the Woodland-Elverta transmission line (Program Component 6) will encroach on the viewshed of County Roads 16 and 117 in Yolo County. These two roads

DRAFT ES-3 Executive Summary

Table ES-1: Summary of Significant Effects

Significant Direct and Indirect Effects Significant Cumulative Effects Aesthetics Aesthetics Air Quality Agricultural Resources Noise Air Quality Growth Inducement Biological Resources Cultural Resources Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation

are designated as Scenic County Roads. Construction of program components will result in a short-term increase in the emissions of diesel particulate, a toxic air contaminant. Because SMUD will service the Annexation Territory from Sacramento while PG&E indicates that it services the Annexation Territory from local centers, the Program will result in a small long-term increase in diesel particulate emissions. During construction, noise will exceed the noise significance threshold of 50 dBA hourly equivalent sound level (Leq) adopted for this EIR; however, construction noise will be limited to daylight hours in accordance with current community standards in Sacramento and Yolo Counties.

Cumulative Effects

This draft EIR anticipates cumulative effects from the combination of the Program and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in all resource areas except geology/soils and mineral resources. The reason for this conclusion is that the Sacramento metropolitan region is experiencing long-term sustained growth. LAFCo has decided that, in analyzing the cumulative effects of the Program, it will treat any direct or indirect effect as a significant cumulative effect. Of course, if the Program does not have any direct or indirect effect on the environment in a given resource area, it will not have a cumulative effect in that resource area. This EIR treats each and every environmental effect of the Program as cumulatively significant, even if the direct and indirect effects of the Program in a specific resource area are less than significant after implementation of the BMPs and any appropriate mitigation measures. This is the most conservative (i.e., protective of the environment) standard possible for the evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the Program. LAFCo is adopting this conservative standard to ensure that this EIR fully discloses to the residents of the Sacramento metropolitan area the cumulative effects of the proposed Program.

The Program will have significant cumulative impacts in the areas of aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation,

DRAFT ES-4 Executive Summary transportation and traffic, and utilities/service systems/energy conservation (refer to Table ES-1). While the Program will typically have a less than significant direct impact in these resource areas, foreseeable future growth is projected to be so large in the Sacramento metropolitan region that any additional impact will contribute to a significant cumulative impact.

Growth Inducement

The Program does not actually extend public service infrastructure into areas lacking services; however, it will remove an obstacle to growth by improving electric system reliability and lowering rates for electric service.

An unreliable electrical service provider can serve as an obstacle to growth for businesses considering relocation to the Annexation Territory. High rates also can present an obstacle to growth. Reducing these rates by over 25% would give a business located in the Annexation Territory a long-term competitive advantage over a business located in PG&E’s service territory. In this way, lower rates, like improved reliability, could remove an obstacle to growth, resulting in increased economic activity, more jobs, more need for workers, and thus more housing, with all the attendant consequences on the environment (e.g., traffic, noise, energy consumption, etc.).

In summary, the Program is expected to remove obstacles to growth created by low electric system reliability and high electric rates and to support economic growth by attracting new industrial and commercial customers. Any growth induced by the Program would, of course, be consistent with applicable general plans and other land-use policies and regulations.

Alternatives

The alternatives examined in this EIR were selected because they represent potential solutions to the fundamental policy question facing LAFCo in connection with the Program: which type of governmental (or quasi-governmental) agency will best serve the public interest in providing electric service to the Annexation Territory? This chapter analyzes several different, alternative forms of governmental organization and several different providers (including SMUD and PG&E). The alternatives chosen were analyzed and deemed feasible in the Annexation Feasibility Study performed by R.W. Beck et al (2005).

The Program’s environmental impacts are limited to short-term significant and unavoidable impacts on aesthetics and air quality resources and short-term significant and unavoidable short- term impacts on noise impacts due to construction activities and unavoidable significant adverse cumulative and growth-inducement impacts. Nevertheless, to fully comply with CEQA, alternatives that reduced any effects, whether significant or not, were considered for purposes of this EIR.

This EIR presents and analyzes the following five alternatives to the Program.

1. City/County Provision of Service

Under this alternative, SMUD will annex one or two but not all three of the cities. This, in turn, will affect whether (and which) portions of unincorporated Yolo County will be

DRAFT ES-5 Executive Summary

annexed to SMUD. Under this alternative, the city or cities and portions of Yolo County not annexed by SMUD will continue to receive electric service from PG&E. This alternative will not reduce the cost of electric service or provide local control to the areas not included in the reduced Annexation Territory. In addition, electric system reliability and customer service will remain the same in areas where PG&E continues to provide service. Although existing SMUD customers will have the same protections under the Program, PG&E will be required to continue to serve the Annexation Territory load and to complete costly upgrades. Under these conditions, LAFCo has determined that Alternative 1 will not satisfy most of the goals and objectives of the Program, and it has eliminated Alternative 1 from further consideration.

2. Joint Powers Authority (JPA)

Under this alternative, a JPA consisting of the cities will purchase electricity for sale and distribution in the Annexation Territory. The JPA will acquire and operate PG&E’s distribution facilities within the Annexation Territory. The CAISO will continue as the transmission and control area provider. PG&E will continue to own the transmission lines (115 kV) serving the Annexation Territory. JPAs are commonly used by local agencies to offer services more efficiently. Under Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., public agencies may, by agreement, jointly exercise any power common to them. Each of the cities has the constitutional right to establish a municipal electric utility and to acquire PG&E’s facilities by exercising the power of eminent domain. Over time, this alternative will provide improvements in reliability and customer service that are similar to those provided by the Program. The JPA will afford an opportunity for local control, though not to the same extent as the Program. It will not impact existing SMUD or remaining PG&E customers. The JPA alternative will not achieve the Program goal of reducing the cost of electric service for Annexation Territory customers.

3. PG&E Upgraded/Improved Service

Under this alternative, PG&E will continue to provide service to residents in the Annexation Territory, but it will make significant changes to its infrastructure and services to bring its level of customer service and reliability up to the level proposed by SMUD under the Program.

PG&E will be required to make the following changes in the Annexation Territory under this alternative:

(1) Complete the transmission upgrade projects recommended by PG&E;

(2) Shorten the length and increase the capacity of existing distribution lines;

(3) Increase substation capacity;

(4) Increase the number of looped distribution lines;

(5) Reduce the number of multi-terminal transmission lines; and

DRAFT ES-6 Executive Summary

(6) Provide the infrastructure and programs to improve customer satisfaction.

This alternative will result in reliability and customer service levels similar to those offered by SMUD under the Program. Growth inducement under this alternative will be less than growth inducement under the Program because PG&E’s rates still will be much higher than SMUD’s under the Program. It is likely that the costs of improved reliability and customer service in the Annexation Territory will be borne by all of PG&E’s existing customers (i.e., customers within and outside of the Annexation Territory). In addition, though PG&E customers outside of the Annexation Territory will not experience reductions in reliability and customer service levels, they will not benefit from improvements comparable to those that will occur in the Annexation Territory.

This alternative will fulfill some, but not all, of the Program’s objectives. In the Annexation Territory, it will provide customer service and system reliability near the levels expected from the Program. However, it will not meet the following goals of the Program:

• Lower rates;

• Local control by Annexation Territory ratepayers over their electrical utility; and

• Provision of service to the Annexation Territory at no financial cost and no reduction in service quality/reliability to existing PG&E ratepayers outside of the Annexation Territory.

4. Community Choice Aggregation

Under this alternative, one or more of the cities and/or Yolo County will act as a community choice aggregator to group retail electric customers and to solicit bids and broker and contract for energy services for those customers, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 366 through 366.5 and applicable CPUC decisions. Any public agency that serves as a community choice aggregator must offer the opportunity to purchase electricity to all residential customers within its jurisdiction. If two or more of the Yolo Communities participate as a group in a community choice aggregation project, they must form a JPA. Customers in any jurisdiction that does not act as a community choice aggregator and customers who opt out of a community choice aggregation program will continue to be supplied with energy by PG&E. Regardless of who furnishes the power to the customers in the Annexation Territory, PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute the power to all of the Yolo Communities under this alternative.

This alternative will not improve reliability or customer service because PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute electricity in the Annexation Territory. The only change will be who supplies the electric commodity. This alternative will not guarantee lower rates because aggregation covers only the riskiest element of power supply, which will be subject to market price fluctuations, non-bypassable charges, and CAISO fees.

DRAFT ES-7 Executive Summary

Under this alternative, most of the benefits of the Program will not be realized. The alternative will not meet the following Program goals:

• Improved reliability of electric service and customer service in the Annexation Territory;

• Lower rates; and

• Local control over utility decision making.

5. SMUD Annexation With CAISO Service

Under this alternative, SMUD will annex the proposed Annexation Territory without electrically interconnecting PG&E’s existing 115-kV electric transmission system into SMUD’s control area. CAISO will continue as the transmission and control area provider, and PG&E will continue to own the transmission lines (115 kV) serving the Annexation Territory. SMUD will acquire the electric distribution facilities in the Annexation Territory and provide electric distribution and energy services, replacing PG&E as the electric service provider. SMUD will procure the electric energy needs of the Annexation Territory and arrange for energy delivery through the CAISO grid to SMUD-owned distribution facilities within the Annexation This alternative would provide most of the Program goals except for lower rates.

This alternative is significantly more complex than the proposed Program because the Annexation Territory will not be integrated with the existing SMUD service area. The Annexation Territory customer will continue to be subject to CAISO tariffs, rules, and regulations at significantly higher cost relative to the Program. This alternative significantly increases the amount of coordination with CAISO and the operational complexity of the SMUD control area. In addition, this alternative does not meet the following Program objectives:

• Improved transmission system reliability;

• Lower rates; and

• Local control.

All of the alternatives examined meet at least some of the Program’s goals and have been determined to be potentially feasible. However, only the Program meets all of the goals enumerated by LAFCo. In particular, only the Program provides lower rates, improved reliability and customer service, and local control.

Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 5 will result in similar types of ground-disturbing impacts as the Program because they will require construction of electrical transmission and/or distribution facilities. Alternative 2 also will create a new utility and corresponding workforce that will result in environmental impacts such as increased air emissions, increased traffic congestion, and increased demand on public services and utilities. Alternative 4 will have the least environmental

DRAFT ES-8 Executive Summary impacts as compared to the Program because it does not require the construction of electrical transmission or distribution facilities.

See Table ES-2 for a summary comparison of each alternative to the Program’s goals and objectives.

Public Involvement and Next Steps

The purpose of this Draft EIR is to provide to Sacramento LAFCo and the public information regarding potentially significant effects of this Program on environmental resources. The public comment meetings to be held by Sacramento LAFCo on this Draft EIR are designed to solicit public input on the proposed annexation. The public comment period for this document begins on January 6, 2006, and closes on February 21, 2006. All comments must be received by February 21, 2006. Hardcopy comments may be mailed to Peter Brundage, Sacramento LAFCo, 1112 I Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814. Electronic comments may be emailed to Peter Brundage at [email protected]. Sacramento LAFCo will hold a series of public meetings in several locations throughout Yolo County and one location in Sacramento County to answer questions and receive input from interested members of the public and agencies. The schedule for these hearings is as follows:

City Date Time Location ______

Davis January 18, 2005 5:30 pm Community Chambers at City Hall 23 Russell Boulevard (Corner of Russell & B Street) Davis, CA

Woodland January 25, 2006 5:30 pm County Board Chambers Yolo County Administration Building 625 Court Street, Room 204 Woodland, CA

West Sacramento January 26, 2006 5:30 pm West Sacramento Civic Center 1st Floor Galleria Conference Room 1110 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA

Sacramento/LAFCo February 1, 2006 5:30 pm County Board Chambers 700 H Street Sacramento, CA

DRAFT ES-9 Executive Summary

Table ES-2: Comparison of Achievement of Program Goals/Objectives Under Program and All Alternatives

Alternative 1 – City/County Alternative 4 – Alternative 5 – Individual Alternative 3 – PG&E Community SMUD No Provision of Alternative 2 – Joint Upgraded/Improved Choice Annexation with Goal/Objective Program Program Service Powers Authority Service Aggregation CAISO Service Lower Rates No Yes No No No No No Improved Customer No Yes Short-Term No Short-Term No Yes No Yes Service Long-Term Yes Long-Term Yes Improved Reliability No Yes Yes (Distribution) Yes (Distribution) Yes No Yes (Distribution) No (Transmission) No (Transmission) No (Transmission) Local Control No Yes Yes Partial No Partial Yes No Impact on PG&E Yes Yes Maybe Maybe No Yes Maybe Customers Outside of Annexation Territory No Impact on Existing Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes SMUD Customers

Yes: Alternative meets Program goal and objective No: Alternative does not meet Program goal and objective Partial: Alternative provides a portion of the Program goal and objective

DRAFT ES-10 Executive Summary

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT ES-11

CHAPTER I SUMMARY

Chapter I Summary

A. PROPOSED ACTIONS

This Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to provide the Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) and the public with information on potential impacts on environmental resources of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District’s (SMUD’s) proposed annexation and subsequent provision of electric service to the Annexation Territory.

The Program consists of the proposal by SMUD to amend its sphere of influence (SOI) and to annex the territory that includes the cities of West Sacramento, Woodland, and Davis and certain unincorporated areas of Yolo County, and to provide electric service to these areas. Sacramento LAFCo, the lead agency for this EIR, will use this EIR in its consideration of SMUD’s proposal for annexation and concurrent SOI amendment.

The SMUD annexation is a Program—a series of interrelated administrative and construction actions initiated to achieve and implement the proposed annexation. These discretionary actions, termed “program components,” are systematically analyzed in this EIR. Each program component is categorized as either “administrative” or “construction and operation and maintenance (O&M),” as described hereafter.

The Program considers annexing approximately 212 square miles of Yolo County into the SMUD service area, thereby replacing Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) as the provider of electric service. PG&E will continue to provide natural gas service in the proposed annexation territory. To achieve this result, SMUD’s adopted SOI will have to be amended to include this area, which is hereinafter referred to as the “Annexation Territory.” The Annexation Territory (see Figure I-1, Regional Location Map, provided at the end of this chapter) includes the cities of West Sacramento, Davis (with the exception of the campus of the University of California at Davis), and Woodland, along with unincorporated portions of Yolo County between and surrounding those cities.

1. Administrative Decisions

• Program Component 1: Expansion of Sphere of Influence/Annexation

• Program Component 2: SMUD Acquisition of PG&E Equipment/Infrastructure

• Program Component 3: Execution of Memoranda of Understanding or Other Operating Agreements with Yolo County Interests

DRAFT I-1 Chapter I Summary

Because all three of these program components support the Annexation administratively, their generic locations are depicted by the Annexation Territory boundary presented on Figure I-2 (provided at the end of this chapter).

2. Infrastructure Construction and Operation and Maintenance Decisions

• Program Component 4: Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area

• Program Component 5: North City Interconnection Study Area

• Program Component 6: Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area

• Program Component 7: Willow Slough Substation Study Area

• Program Component 8: Other Distribution System Upgrades

• Program Component 9: Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System

The relative locations of the program components involving infrastructure construction decisions are presented on Figure I-3 (provided at the end of this chapter).

Beyond SMUD’s acquisition and operation of the existing PG&E electrical facilities that serve customers within the Annexation Territory, the proposed annexation requires the installation of a new transmission line, reconstruction and reconfiguration of existing transmission lines, a new substation, and distribution system upgrades. Some program components will necessarily be implemented if LAFCo and the voters approve the proposed annexation and SMUD is to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory. These Program Components (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9) are analyzed at the project level in this EIR. Other Program Components (6, 7, and 8), most notably a new transmission line, a new substation, and distribution system upgrades, could be constructed in various locations or in various ways. Where the exact location of a new electrical facility is unknown, the EIR identifies a study area and analyzes potential constraints and impacts within the study area for that facility. Each of these components will be subject to further environmental review and approval when its location and design are known with more certainty.

B. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY KNOWN TO THE LEAD AGENCY

Through the Notice of Preparation (NOP) process and general community discussions, LAFCo is aware of public concerns regarding the following:

1. Cumulative loss of prime agricultural soil;

2. Potential land-use conflicts with Natomas Joint Vision (City of Sacramento, 2002), the Sacramento Region Blueprint Transportation/Land Use, Preferred Blueprint Alternative

DRAFT I-2 Chapter I Summary

(Sacramento Area Council of Governments [SACOG], 2005a), Yolo County Habitat Conservation Plan: A Plan to Mitigate Biological Impacts from Urban Development in Yolo County (EIP Associates et al., 2001), the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (Natomas Basin Conservancy, 2002), Sacramento International Airport Master Plan (Sacramento County Airport System, 2004), and general plans of the City of Woodland (Woodland, City of, 1996) and the counties of Yolo (Yolo County, 1983), Sacramento (Sacramento County, 1993) and Sutter (Sutter County, 1996);

3. Potential air quality impacts as the result of construction, operation and maintenance, and power plant emissions;

4. Energy conservation impacts; and

5. Final location/alignment of the transmission line between Elverta and Woodland and the Willow Slough substation.

C. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS/ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

Tables I-1 and I-2 summarize the potential environmental impacts or effects of the Program.

• Table I-1 is a complete summary of the direct and indirect potential environmental impacts, best management practices (BMPs), and mitigation measures related to the Program.

• Table I-2 is a complete summary of the potential cumulative environmental impacts related to the Program.

DRAFT I-3 Chapter I Summary

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT I-4 Chapter I Summary

Table I-1: Summary of Direct and Indirect Potential Environmental Impacts and Applicable BMPs and Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Best Management Significance Call Before Monitoring Significance Call Potential Impacts Practices (BMPs)a Mitigation Mitigation Planb After Mitigation Aesthetics (Chapter IV, Section A) Impact AES-1 Visual impact to scenic corridors designated in Yolo County N/A Potentially significant None 9 Significant and unavoidable General Plan Impact AES-2 Conflict with scenic policies of the Yolo County and N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Sacramento County General Plans Agricultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section B) Impact AG-1 Fragmentation of an agricultural preserve N/A No effect None No effect Impact AG-2 Acquisition or easement across adopted agricultural preserve or BMP-1: Siting of Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Williamson Act contract land Transmission Electric Facilities Impact AG-3 Conversion of prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of N/A Potentially significant Mitigation Measure AG-1: SMUD will enter into a conservation mitigation 9 Less than significant statewide importance to non-agricultural uses banking agreement established to preserve land currently in agricultural production at a ratio equal to the estimation of loss of prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (i.e., 1:1). Impact AG-4 Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Williamson Act contract Impact AG-5 Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, given N/A No effect None No effect their location or nature, could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use Air Quality (Chapter IV, Section C) Impact AQ-1 Change existing power plant operations N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact AQ-2 Conflict with or obstruct applicable air quality plans N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact AQ-3 Construction emissions BMP-6: Fugitive Potentially significant Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Before construction of the Willow Slough 9 Less than significant for ozone Dust Emissions substation, SMUD will prepare a detailed construction schedule and updated precursors; significant and emissions inventory to determine whether the emissions from this unavoidable for diesel construction, when added to any other infrastructure construction anticipated particulate at the same time, will result in the emission of ozone precursors in excess of 85 lb/day. In the event that the limit may be exceeded, SMUD will incorporate construction emission mitigation measures as recommended by SMAQMD (2004, pages 3-19 and 3-20). Impact AQ-4 Operation and maintenance emissions N/A Potentially significant None Significant and unavoidable Biological Resources (Chapter IV, Section D) Impact BIO-1a Temporary impacts to special-status species that use vernal BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant pools and swales Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-1b Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant grasslands and agricultural lands Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-1c Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit marsh, BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant riparian areas, and woodland Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-1d Permanent loss of habitat used by special-status species BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-1e Loss of special-status bird species from collisions with BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant transmission lines Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-2 Impacts to sensitive natural communities BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-3 Impacts to wetlands BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance

DRAFT I-5 Chapter I Summary

Table I-1: (Continued)

Mitigation Best Management Significance Call Before Monitoring Significance Call Potential Impacts Practicesa Mitigation Mitigation Planb After Mitigation Impact BIO-4 Interference with fish or wildlife movement BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-5 Conflict with local policies or ordinances BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance Impact BIO-6 Conflict with habitat conservation plans BMP-2: Biological Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Resource Avoidance Cultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section E) Impact CR-1a Cultural resource impacts from reconstruction of the Power Inn BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Road to Hedge substation transmission line Resource Avoidance Impact CR-1b Cultural resources impacts from construction of the North City BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant interconnection Resource Avoidance Impact CR-1c Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Woodland BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant to Elverta transmission line Resource Avoidance Impact CR-1d Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Willow BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Slough substation Resource Avoidance Impact CR-1e Cultural resources impacts from reconductoring in the BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Annexation Territory Resource Avoidance Impact CR-2 Impacts to paleontological resources from construction of BMP-3: Cultural Less than significant None 9 Less than significant program components Resource Avoidance Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Chapter IV, Section F) Impact HAZ-1 Expose people or property to hazardous materials or hazardous N/A Less than significant None Less than significant conditions Impact HAZ-2 Conflict with airport comprehensive plans N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact HAZ-3 Conflict with implementation of emergency response plans N/A No effect None No effect Impact HAZ-4 Cause wildfires N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Hydrology/Water Quality (Chapter IV, Section G) Impact H-1 Impacts on storm water quality BMP-2: Revegetation Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Impact H-2 Impacts to groundwater hydrology N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact H-3 Conflict with city or county drainage design standards N/A No effect None No effect Impact H-4 Increased risk from flooding N/A No effect None No effect Impact H-5 Place sensitive equipment in a 100-year floodplain N/A No effect None No effect Impact H-6 Conflict with drainage plans and grading ordinances N/A No effect None No effect Land Use/Planning (Chapter IV, Section H) Impact LU-1 Physical division of an established community N/A No effect None No effect Impact LU-2 Conflict with policies of Sacramento County General Plan BMP-1: Siting of No effect None 9 No effect Transmission Electric Facilities Impact LU-3 Conflict with Measure M, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, and BMP-1: Siting of Less than significant None 9 Less than significant the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan Transmission Electric Facilities

DRAFT I-6 Chapter I Summary

Table I-1: (Continued)

Mitigation Best Management Significance Call Before Monitoring Significance Call Potential Impacts Practicesa Mitigation Mitigation Planb After Mitigation Noise (Chapter IV, Section I) Impact NOI-1a Noise from reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge BMP-4: Noise Short-term potentially Mitigation Measure NOI-1: SMUD will incorporate the following measures 9 Short-term significant impact substation transmission line significant impact in its plans, contracts, and specifications for work on each of the infrastructure components of this Program: (1) Stationary construction equipment, such as generators, that generate noise exceeding 50 dBA at the project boundaries will be located as far as possible from existing residences in the vicinity of any infrastructure component. (2) Access routes for all construction traffic and equipment involved will be located along existing public or private roads to minimize construction traffic volumes passing existing residences in the vicinity of any infrastructure component. (3) All vehicles and equipment not in use will be turned off and not allowed to idle for more than 10 minutes at a time. Impact NOI-1b Noise from construction of the North City interconnection N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact NOI-1c Noise from construction of the Woodland to Elverta BMP-4: Noise Short-term potentially Same mitigation used for Impact NOI-1a. 9 Short-term significant impact transmission line significant impact Impact NOI-1d Noise from construction of the Willow Slough substation BMP-4: Noise Short-term potentially Same Mitigation used for Impact NOI-1a. 9 Short-term significant impact significant impact Impact NOI-1e Noise from reconductoring in the Annexation Territory BMP-4: Noise Short-term potentially Same Mitigation used for Impact NOI-1a. 9 Short-term significant impact significant impact Impact NOI-2a Noise from operations and maintenance N/A No effect None No effect Impact NOI-2b Noise from new transmission lines N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact NOI-2c Noise from Willow Slough substation N/A Potentially significant Mitigation Measure NOI-2: In determining the final location and 9 Less than significant developing the final designs for the Willow Slough substation, SMUD will ensure that transformer noise does not exceed 40 dBA Leq at the property line. Population/Housing (Chapter IV, Section J) Impact PH-1 Increase population growth N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact PH-2 Increase housing demand N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact PH-3 Preempt housing on land planned for housing development N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Public Services (Chapter IV, Section K) Impact PS-1 Impacts on police and fire service response times BMP-5: Public Less than significant None 9 Less than significant Services

Impact PS-2 Desired classroom sizes for public schools N/A No effect None No effect Impact PS-3 Provision of desired parkland N/A No effect None No effect Recreation (Chapter IV, Section L) Impact REC-1 Direct impacts to public recreational facilities N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact REC-2 Accelerated deterioration of recreational facilities N/A No effect None No effect Transportation/Traffic (Chapter IV, Section M) Impact TR-1 Construction traffic impacts N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact TR-2 Operation and maintenance traffic impacts N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation (Chapter IV, Section N) Impact UT-1 Impacts on solid waste disposal facilities N/A Less than significant None Less than significant Impact UT-2 Compliance with statutes and regulations related to solid waste N/A No effect None No effect

DRAFT I-7 Chapter I Summary

Table I-1: (Continued)

Mitigation Best Management Significance Call Before Monitoring Significance Call Potential Impacts Practicesa Mitigation Mitigation Planb After Mitigation Impact UT-3 Increase overall per capita energy consumptions N/A No effect None No effect Impact UT-4 Increased reliance on natural gas and oil N/A No effect None No effect Impact UT-5 Decreased reliance on renewable energy sources N/A No effect None No effect Mineral Resources (Chapter IV, Section O) No impacts N/A No effect None No effect Geology and Soils (Chapter IV, Section P) No impacts N/A No effect None No effect Growth Inducing Impacts (Chapter VI) Impacts Economic growth caused by lowering rates and improved Potentially significant None 9 Significant and unavoidable reliability a See Chapter II for specifics of each BMP. b See Appendix E for specifics of mitigation monitoring plan.

DRAFT I-8 Chapter I Summary

Table I-2: Summary of Potential Cumulative Environmental Impacts

Potential Impacts Description of Potential Impact Cumulative Effects Aesthetics (Chapter IV, Section A) Impact AES-1 Visual impact to scenic corridors designated in Yolo County Significant and unavoidable General Plan Impact AES-2 Conflict with scenic policies of the Yolo County and Significant and unavoidable Sacramento County General Plans Agricultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section B) Impact AG-2 Acquisition or easement across adopted agricultural preserve or Significant and unavoidable Williamson Act contract land Impact AG-3 Conversion of prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of Significant and unavoidable statewide importance to non-agricultural uses Impact AG-4 Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Significant and unavoidable Williamson Act contract Air Quality (Chapter IV, Section C) Impact AQ-1 Change existing power plant operations Significant and unavoidable Impact AQ-4 Operation and maintenance emissions Significant and unavoidable Biological Resources (Chapter IV, Section D) Impact BIO-1a Temporary impacts to special-status species that use vernal Significant and unavoidable pools and swales Impact BIO-1b Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit Significant and unavoidable grasslands and agricultural lands Impact BIO-1c Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit marsh, Significant and unavoidable riparian areas, and woodland Impact BIO-1d Permanent loss of habitat used by special-status species Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-1e Loss of special-status bird species from collisions with Significant and unavoidable transmission lines Impact BIO-2 Impacts to sensitive natural communities Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-3 Impacts to wetlands Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-4 Interference with fish or wildlife movement Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-5 Conflict with local policies or ordinances Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-6 Conflict with habitat conservation plans Significant and unavoidable Cultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section E) Impact CR-1a Cultural resource impacts from reconstruction of the Power Inn Significant and unavoidable Road to Hedge substation transmission line Impact CR-1b Cultural resources impacts from construction of the North City Significant and unavoidable interconnection Impact CR-1c Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Woodland- Significant and unavoidable Elverta transmission line Impact CR-1d Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Willow Significant and unavoidable Slough substation Impact CR-1e Cultural resources impacts from reconductoring in the Significant and unavoidable Annexation Territory Impact CR-2 Impacts to paleontological resources from construction of Significant and unavoidable program components

DRAFT I-9 Chapter I Summary

Table I-2: (Continued)

Potential Impacts Description of Potential Impact Cumulative Effects Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Chapter IV, Section F) Impact HAZ-1 Expose people or property to hazardous materials or conditions Significant and unavoidable Impact HAZ-2 Conflict with airport comprehensive plans Significant and unavoidable Impact HAZ-4 Cause wildfires Significant and unavoidable Hydrology/Water Quality (Chapter IV, Section G) Impact H-1 Impacts on storm water quality Significant and unavoidable Impact H-2 Impacts to groundwater hydrology Significant and unavoidable Land Use/Planning (Chapter IV, Section H) Impact LU-2 Conflict with Policies of Sacramento County General Plan Significant and unavoidable Impact LU-3 Conflict with Measure M, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, and Significant and unavoidable the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan Noise (Chapter IV, Section I) Impact NOI-1b Noise from construction of the North City interconnection Significant and unavoidable Impact NOI-2b Noise from new transmission lines Significant and unavoidable Impact NOI-2c Noise from Willow Slough substation Significant and unavoidable Population/Housing (Chapter IV, Section J) Impact PH-1 Increase population growth Significant and unavoidable Impact PH-2 Increase housing demand Significant and unavoidable Impact PH-3 Preempt housing on land planned for housing development Significant and unavoidable Public Services (Chapter IV, Section K) Impact PS-1 Desired fire and police response times Significant and unavoidable Recreation (Chapter IV, Section L) Impact REC-1 Direct impacts to public recreational facilities Significant and unavoidable Transportation/Traffic (Chapter IV, Section M) Impact TR-1 Construction traffic impacts Significant and unavoidable Impact TR-2 Operation and maintenance traffic impacts Significant and unavoidable Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation (Chapter IV, Section N) Impact UT-1 Impacts on solid waste disposal facilities Significant and unavoidable Growth Inducing Impacts (Chapter VI) Impacts Economic growth caused by lowering rates and improved Significant and unavoidable reliability

DRAFT I-10 Glenn County Butte Sierra County County

Mendocino County

Colusa Nevada Yuba County Sutter County County Lake County Placer Existing SMUD County County Service Area

Yolo Napa County Sonoma County County El Dorado County Alpine County C N A E Sacramento L V IF A County O D Amador R A Proposed County N Solano IA Annexation County Territory Marin County Mono Calaveras County County Tuolumne County Contra Costa San Joaquin County County

San Francisco County

Alameda County Stanislaus Mariposa County County San Mateo County PACIFIC Santa Clara OCEAN County Merced Madera County County Santa Cruz County ¯

San Benito Fresno NOT TO SCALE Monterey County County County

FIGURE I-1: Regional Location Map COUNTY COUNTY

YOLO COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY

Legend

County Boundary

Proposed Annexation Territory COUNTY Note: Sphere of Influence expansion boundary is the same as the Annexation Territory boundary.

FIGURE I-2: Annexation Territory

! !

!"^$

Program Component 6: ?} Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area ?Ã

SACRAMENTO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT !"^$ !"c$

Program Component 7: Willow Slough Substation Study Area ?Ã !"^$ !"c$ Program Component 5: North City Interconnection AÍ Study Area !"c$ Aö

! ! ! ! !"c$ ! !"c$

! I¼ Program Component 4: Power Inn to Hedge Substation ! Transmission Line reconstruction

! Study Area

! !"^$ ?Ã

!"c$ ! ¯ ! NOT TO SCALE

FIGURE I-3 Location of Program Components 4-7

CHAPTER II PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Chapter II Program Description

For years, the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland (the Cities) and the County of Yolo (for unincorporated areas between and surrounding the Cities), hereafter referred to as the Yolo Communities, have been evaluating options for more reliable, lower-cost electric service. In 2003, they identified an opportunity to replace their existing electric service provider, PG&E, with SMUD which, in addition to improved customer service, better reliability, and lower rates, promised these communities local control and participation in energy-related decision making. In that year, the Yolo Communities formally requested that SMUD consider annexing them into its existing electric service territory, citing the potential for lower rates, the ability to participate in decision-making on energy-related issues at the local level, and the potential for improved reliability and customer service. After completing an independent technical and financial evaluation of the annexation concept in 2004, and after receiving public input in numerous public workshops and public meetings, the governing bodies of the Yolo Communities unanimously requested that SMUD become their electric service provider through a joint resolution approved in April 2005.

After reviewing the independent evaluation, completing its own internal review, and receiving additional public input, SMUD’s Board of Directors voted to seek annexation. In August 2005, SMUD submitted its application to the LAFCo. If SMUD’s application is approved by LAFCo and the voters, SMUD will replace PG&E as the provider of electric service in that area (termed the Annexation Territory). PG&E will continue to provide natural gas service.

To provide electric service to the Annexation Territory in Yolo County, the existing electric transmission and distribution system in the Annexation Territory will have to be disconnected from PG&E’s system and connected to SMUD’s existing electric system. The components of the Program include: the adoption of SMUD’s requested modification to its SOI (Program Component 1); SMUD’s acquisition of the existing PG&E electric facilities in the Annexation Territory (Program Component 2); the implementation of the terms and conditions imposed by LAFCo and other necessary agreements with the Yolo Communities (Program Component 3); construction of physical facilities needed to connect the Annexation Territory to SMUD’s system (Program Components 4 through 8); and SMUD’s operation and maintenance of the new Annexation Territory electric system (Program Component 9). Physical facilities for this Program include the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction (in Program Component 4); North City Interconnection (in Program Component 5); Woodland- Elverta Transmission Line (in Program Component 6); and Willow Slough Substation (in Program Component 7). In addition, SMUD will do other distribution system upgrades in the Annexation Territory (in Program Component 8) to increase the reliability of the Territory’s distribution system.

A. PROGRAM LOCATION

The program components are located in Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter Counties. The Annexation Territory consists of approximately 212 square miles of land in Yolo County, including the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland (shown on Figure I-2, which is provided at the end of Chapter I).

DRAFT II-1 Chapter II Program Description

The Power Inn Road to Hedge substation study area and North City interconnection study area are in the Sacramento area. The Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area encompasses a portion of Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties. The Willow Slough substation study area is a square mile between Davis and Woodland in Yolo County (shown on Figure I-3, provided at the end of Chapter I).

B. BACKGROUND

1. SMUD

Since 1915, municipal utility districts similar to SMUD have been authorized, pursuant to the California Municipal Utility District (MUD) Act, to supply and distribute electricity to the residents, businesses, and public agencies within district boundaries. SMUD was formed by a vote of the electorate in 1923, and it began electric operations in 1947. In 1984, in response to a request from the City of Folsom, SMUD annexed that City into its service area. SMUD currently generates, transmits, and distributes electric power throughout a 900–square-mile service area that includes Sacramento County, a small portion of Placer County, and a Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (SRCSD) parcel in Yolo County. SMUD is the nation’s sixth largest community-owned electric utility, serving a population of approximately 1.2 million people. As of March 2005, SMUD had approximately 560,000 customers and approximately 2,400 employees. Two unions—the International Brotherhood of Electric Workers and the Organization of SMUD Employees—represent approximately two-thirds of the employees.

2. Annexation History

a. City of Davis

Since 1997 (after Assembly Bill [AB] 1890 restructured California’s electric industry), the City of Davis has actively explored a variety of public power options. The City Council and citizens have pursued public power options for two primary reasons: (1) to obtain local control of energy decision-making and (2) to obtain lower rates.

In September 1997, the City of Davis joined the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) to explore the potential benefits of the newly deregulated market. Davis also created a Citizens’ Electrical Industry Restructuring Task Force (Task Force) to explore the potential benefits of electric industry restructuring; both PG&E and SMUD attended the Task Force meetings.

In June 1999, the Task Force released its final report, recommending that Davis “explore purchasing green energy from SMUD or issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for green power supplies.” The Task Force was split on recommending any form of municipalization (i.e., Davis Municipal Utility District [DMUD], city utility department, or annexation by SMUD), ultimately choosing to remain neutral on that issue. As a result of the Task Force recommendations, SMUD established a solar program with Davis to provide residents with access to low-cost solar systems. Davis

DRAFT II-2 Chapter II Program Description

also explored using SMUD’s Greenergy® Program, but the direct access to energy suppliers authorized by AB1890 was suspended before any program was established.

In February 2000, the Coalition for Local Power launched a campaign that resulted in the collection of enough signatures to request that an initiative be placed on the November 2000 ballot for the formation of a DMUD. The Yolo County Local Agency Formation Commission (Yolo LAFCo) held hearings in July 2000 to consider placing the proposal to form a DMUD on the November 2000 ballot but rejected the proposal because of uncertainty about which services an independent district would provide, potential conflicts with existing agencies already providing those services, and lack of a fiscal analysis for the proposed DMUD.

In May 2001, the Davis City Council established a second Task Force on Energy Issues to “review municipal energy options available to the City of Davis” (Davis City Council Resolution No. 01-74, Series 2001). In December 2001, Davis hired a consultant, Navigant Consulting, Inc., to review public power options available to Davis. The first phase of Navigant’s Municipal Electric Utility Options Analysis was an evaluation of various public power structures (i.e., city municipal utility, joint powers authority, annexation by SMUD) that would allow local control by Davis over energy decision-making. The second phase (which was not completed because Davis entered into collaboration with West Sacramento, Woodland, and Yolo County to conduct a broader study) would have provided a detailed cost-benefit analysis and operational feasibility study for various options.

Navigant released its final Municipal Electric Utility Options Analysis Phase I Report in September 2002 (Navigant, 2002) (Navigant Study). It examined the pros and cons of different public power structures, taking into consideration a full range of options: (1) establishing a City municipal electric department and a range of relationship opportunities with NCPA and SMUD to provide contract services; (2) formation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to provide electrical services; (3) annexation of Davis into SMUD; and (4) annexation of Davis and other cities in Yolo County into SMUD’s service territory.

The Navigant Study found that annexation could result in economic, reliability, and local control benefits, calling annexation by SMUD an “excellent alternative to PG&E’s service and the most plausible outcome to establish local representation and an element of control over the terms and quality of electric service” (Navigant, 2002, Executive Summary, page vii). The Navigant Study further recommended that if Davis wanted to pursue annexation by SMUD, it should do so in cooperation with the cities of West Sacramento and Woodland. Finally, the Navigant Study recommended that Davis conduct an in-depth feasibility study, including a cost-benefit analysis and an operational feasibility study for the preferred option.

After reviewing the Navigant Study and a PG&E-commissioned report by Sierra Energy and Risk Assessment, Inc. (SERA) that questioned the benefits of the public power options considered in the Navigant Study, the Task Force recommended that

DRAFT II-3 Chapter II Program Description

Davis request annexation by SMUD. The Davis City Council heard presentations from both PG&E and Navigant on the City’s public power options and voted unanimously to contact SMUD about annexation. The City Council also voted to have the Mayor send letters, on behalf of the City of Davis, to West Sacramento, Winters, Woodland, the University of California (UC) at Davis, and Yolo County inviting them to consider annexation into SMUD and participation in funding a joint feasibility study.

b. City of West Sacramento

The City of West Sacramento examined public power options after AB1890 was passed in 1998. West Sacramento first considered finding an alternative energy provider, but it rejected the idea because the market was new, and alternative energy providers were not well known. West Sacramento also considered establishing a city utility department to operate the local transmission and distribution system for various new developments but decided against this course of action because its staff lacked electric utility expertise. When Davis contacted West Sacramento regarding annexation into SMUD’s electric service area, West Sacramento opted to participate in the feasibility study to examine the costs and benefits of annexation.

c. City of Woodland

The City of Woodland became interested in public power options when Davis invited Woodland to participate in a feasibility study to explore the costs and benefits of annexation into SMUD’s service territory. Woodland was not interested in starting its own municipal utility because it lacked technical expertise and experience.

d. Yolo County

By law, counties do not have the right to provide electrical service on their own without special legislative permission, so Yolo County had not explored public power options until the City of Davis contacted the county about participating in the feasibility study to explore the feasibility of joining SMUD.

3. Feasibility Analysis

Based on the analysis in the Navigant Study performed for Davis, the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland and Yolo County in February 2003 formally requested that SMUD consider annexing the Yolo Communities into SMUD’s electric service territory. As reasons for the request, the Yolo Communities cited: (1) the potential for lower rates; (2) the ability to participate in decision-making on energy-related issues at the local level; and (3) the potential for improved reliability and customer service compared to PG&E.

In April 2003, SMUD’s Board of Directors adopted an annexation policy that set the criteria that must be met for SMUD to consider annexing any area beyond its current

DRAFT II-4 Chapter II Program Description

boundary. SMUD will only consider annexing territory into its electric service area if all of the following criteria are met:

• The area proposed for annexation must be a relatively dense urban area;

• The potential annexation territory must be a growing area;

• The area must lie within an approximately 30-mile driving distance from SMUD customer service facilities;

• The local jurisdiction(s) seeking annexation must take the initiative by formally requesting the SMUD Board to consider annexation; and

• The local jurisdictions must agree to share in the costs of a study to assess the feasibility of annexation.

In March 2004, the Yolo Communities and SMUD jointly commissioned and paid for an independent analysis of the feasibility of annexation. An independent team made of up R.W. Beck, Stone & Webster Management Consultants, and Lucy & Co. (collectively R.W. Beck) conducted the in-depth annexation feasibility study. In January 2005, the Annexation Feasibility Study Final Report (R.W. Beck, 2005) (R.W. Beck report) concluded that annexation was technically and financially viable and promised economic benefits to SMUD’s existing customers and to the Yolo annexation customers. The R.W. Beck report was considered at more than 17 public meetings conducted by the Yolo Communities. In March and April of 2005, the City Councils and the Yolo County Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to formally seek annexation by SMUD. On April 5, 2005, the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland and the County of Yolo passed a joint resolution requesting annexation by SMUD.

SMUD staff evaluated and augmented the R.W. Beck report and, in May 2005, released its own comprehensive analysis, which confirmed, with minor modifications, the conclu- sions in the R.W. Beck report (SMUD, 2005a) (SMUD Staff Analysis). SMUD held three public workshops on annexation, made presentations to numerous community groups, and established a Web site (www.smud.org/annexation/) to communicate detailed information regarding the annexation.

SMUD retained Dr. Sanjay Varshney, the Dean of the College of Business Administra- tion at California State University, Sacramento, to perform an independent review of the methodology and assumptions used in both the R.W. Beck report and the SMUD Staff Analysis (Varshney, 2005) (Varshney Findings). Dr. Varshney concluded that “Both the Yolo and SMUD customers are likely to benefit from the annexation since the benefits are achievable” (Varshney, 2005) (SMUD, 2005b).

On May 19, 2005, the SMUD Board of Directors voted five to two to submit an annexation application to LAFCo based on the R.W. Beck report, the SMUD Staff Analysis, the Varshney Findings, public hearings, and other public input. SMUD Board Resolution No. 05-05-08, as amended by SMUD Board Resolution No. 05-07-01, adopted July 14, 2005,

DRAFT II-5 Chapter II Program Description

proposed certain terms and conditions for inclusion in any LAFCo approval of the proposed annexation. SMUD submitted an Application for Annexation of the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland, and Unincorporated Areas of Yolo County and Related Sphere of Influence Amendment to LAFCo on August 1, 2005 (SMUD, 2005b).

C. LAFCO REVIEW AND POLICY

SMUD’s annexation and concurrent SOI amendment proposal is subject to the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act). Under the CKH Act, LAFCo must determine whether to order the annexation and approve the SOI amendment. In making this determination, LAFCo has identified as fundamental a comparison of the cost- effectiveness and service delivery capability of both SMUD and PG&E. LAFCo also enumerated the following policies that apply to its consideration of this annexation proposal; a more substantial list of all factors LAFCo must take into account for annexation proposals is provided in Appendix L.

1. General Policies

• The Commission is charged with encouraging orderly growth and development.

• The Commission is responsible for encouraging the logical formation and determination of boundaries, etc.

• The Commission must exercise its authority to ensure that affected populations receive efficient services.

• The Commission can impose terms and conditions to mitigate environmental impacts, fiscal impacts, or other impacts.

• The Commission may deny the project.

• The Commission will favorably consider those applications that do not shift the cost for services and infrastructure benefits/costs to other service areas.

• Commission policy encourages the use of service providers that are governed by officials elected by the citizens.

2. Boundaries

• Boundaries must be definite and certain.

• Boundaries cannot create islands, corridors, or peninsulas.

• Boundaries cannot split neighborhoods or parcels.

• Boundaries must not create areas that may be difficult to serve.

DRAFT II-6 Chapter II Program Description

3. Revenue Neutrality

• The Commission will approve a proposal for a change of organization only if it finds the proposal is revenue neutral.

• Where revenue neutrality is not possible because of the requirements of state law or LAFCo standards, the Commission shall impose all feasible conditions available to reduce any revenue imbalance, or it may deny the proposal.

4. Efficiency

• An annexation proposal must provide the lowest cost and highest quality of urban services for the affected population. The Commission will approve an annexation only if it determines that the annexing agency possesses the capability to provide the most efficient delivery of applicable urban services.

• For the purpose of this standard, the most efficient services are those that are provided at the optimal combination of service cost and service level. In the case of providers with similar service costs, the provider with higher service levels will be deemed more efficient. In the case of providers of similar service levels, the provider with the lowest cost will be deemed more efficient.

• In comparing the providers of adequate but low-cost services with providers of high quality but high-cost services, the Commission will retain discretion to determine this optimum efficiency based on compliance with other provisions of the standards.

• Identification and measurement of service costs for the purpose of determining revenue impacts, as well as for assessing financial feasibility, should be based on the actual cost of service provided. If actual costs cannot be identified and measured reasonably, costs should be allocated based on the measure that most accurately reflects the level of service received. The Commission will rely on current service providers to estimate service costs, as long as costs are estimated in compliance with these standards.

The Yolo Communities, and not LAFCo, are responsible for land-use planning in the Annexation Territory. LAFCo has no land use authority per government code Section 56375(a)(3).

D. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Program has the following goals and objectives.

1. Improve the Reliability of Electric Service in the Annexation Territory

Two measures of electric system reliability commonly used by electric service providers are (a) the System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) and (b) the System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI). The SAIDI and SAIFI indices, as

DRAFT II-7 Chapter II Program Description

measured by each utility, represent the average duration (SAIDI) and frequency (SAIFI) of a sustained outage that customers can expect to experience from their electric service provider. Table II-1 includes both PG&E’s and SMUD’s SAIDI and SAIFI averages for 2003.

Table II-1: PG&E and SMUD (2003) Outage Duration and Frequency, Including Major Events

SMUD PG&E System average duration index (SAIDI) 97 minutes 280 minutes System average interruption frequency (SAIFI) 1.3 per year 1.7 per year

SMUD has committed to improving the electric system reliability currently experienced by customers in the Annexation Territory. After a transition period of 5 years from the time SMUD begins providing electric service to the Annexation Territory, SMUD has committed to lowering the SAIDI to 140 minutes and the SAIFI to 1.4 per year in the Annexation Territory. SMUD’s ultimate goal is to achieve, as quickly as possible, an average outage duration and average outage frequency comparable to those in the existing SMUD service area.

2. Improve Customer Satisfaction in the Annexation Territory

J.D. Power and Associates conducts an electric utility residential and commercial customer satisfaction survey annually for participating electric service providers. The study is designed to measure multiple aspects of customer satisfaction, such as power quality and reliability, customer service, company image, billing and payment, price, and communication. The results of the commercial survey from March 2005 and the residential survey from July 2005, which are included in Table II-2, indicate that SMUD exceeds both PG&E and the western region averages in customer satisfaction for its current customers.

Table II-2: Results of Commercial Survey of Customer Satisfaction

Customer Survey SMUD PG&E Western Region Average Commercial Score 102 98 100 Residential Score 108 91 97

SMUD has committed to improving the customer service satisfaction currently experienced by customers in the Annexation Territory. After a transition period of 2 years from the time SMUD begins providing electric service to the Annexation Territory, SMUD has committed to improving customer satisfaction to match the western region average, or higher, for both commercial and residential customers, as determined by the J.D Power and Associates customer satisfaction survey. SMUD’s ultimate goal is to

DRAFT II-8 Chapter II Program Description

achieve, as soon as possible, commercial and residential customer satisfaction ratings in the Annexation Territory equal to the ratings in the rest of SMUD’s service territory.

3. Provide Electric Service to the Annexation Territory at Rates that are Lower than Those Currently Paid by Customers in the Annexation Territory

From 1990 to 2005, SMUD’s electric rates have, on average, been approximately 20% below PG&E’s rates. It is expected that this differential will grow to approximately 28% by early next year. Based on PG&E and SMUD rate projections, this rate differential is expected to continue over the long run (see Figure II-1).

Figure II-1: System Average Rate Comparison, SMUD and PG&E

16 14

8 6

Cents/kWh SMUD 4 PG&E 2

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year

If the proposed annexation is approved, SMUD will provide an immediate discount in electric rates for the Annexation Territory customers that will be at least 2% below PG&E’s average rates. The discount will increase over time, as the cost of the annexation is paid off by Annexation Territory customers through an annexation surcharge. While the annexation surcharge is in place, it is expected that rates in the Annexation Territory will be approximately 20% to 23% higher than rates in SMUD’s existing service area (but at least 2% lower than PG&E’s). This rate differential of approximately 20% to 23% will result in annual revenues of approximately $40 million above the annual revenues provided by SMUD rates. SMUD will use these additional revenues to pay for the following Annexation Territory expenses.

• The cost of the electrical facilities acquired from PG&E, the cost of new electrical facilities installed by SMUD, and other costs necessary to complete the proposed Program above those already collected in SMUD rates.

• Any increases in power supply costs required for the Annexation Territory above those already collected in SMUD rates.

DRAFT II-9 Chapter II Program Description

• Exit fees that are required by the CPUC of any load (i.e., customers) departing from Investor Owned Utilities.

• The costs of compliance with any terms and conditions imposed by LAFCo on the annexation to defray the reasonably calculated costs and impacts of the annexation on the Yolo Communities.

The additional revenues will pay off a large portion of the annexation expenses in approximately 5 years. It is likely that SMUD will increase the discount (i.e., reduce rates) for the Annexation Territory customers after that initial 5-year period. In addition, a significant portion of the exit fees mandated by the CPUC will expire in 2012. This is likely to result in an additional reduction in rates. If the additional revenue collected falls below SMUD’s projections, the surcharge can be extended to ensure the Program’s objectives.

After approval of the proposed annexation, SMUD will finalize a power supply strategy for the Annexation Territory. Before taking over the electric service for the Annexation Territory, SMUD should be able to secure a reliable economical power supply for the Annexation Territory using its existing successful power supply and natural gas procurement practices.

4. Ensure Local Control by Annexation Territory Ratepayers over Their Electrical Utility

An important motivation for the Yolo Communities’ request for SMUD service was the potential ability of those communities to participate in decision-making on energy-related issues at the local level. The SMUD governance structure allows citizens and businesses to participate in the decision-making of the utility, which increases local control over the energy policies that can significantly affect a community. Examples follow.

• SMUD’s service area is divided into wards. Each ward of approximately 185,000 persons is represented on SMUD’s Board by a Director elected by the customers who reside in that ward.

• All SMUD Board of Director and Board Committee meetings are publicly announced and open to the public.

• SMUD is subject to the Public Records Act and must make almost all data and records available to the public and news media for review.

• SMUD’s rates are adopted only after public notice and public workshops and hearings in which individual and business customers are encouraged to participate.

DRAFT II-10 Chapter II Program Description

5. Provide Service to the Annexation Territory at No Financial Cost and No Reduction in Service Quality/Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers

In electing to move forward with the annexation, the SMUD Board of Directors determined that the utility’s existing customers must not pay any of the costs of annexation. The Annexation Territory customers will pay the costs of annexation through their rates and a surcharge amount sufficient to recover the costs of annexation. SMUD will reserve its low-cost energy resources, such as SMUD’s hydroelectric Upper American River Project, for the exclusive benefit of its existing ratepayers. After approval of the proposed annexation, SMUD plans to secure a reliable economical power supply for the Annexation Territory through long- and short-term power contracts and spot market purchases available from the existing energy marketplace, as well as possible surpluses from SMUD’s new Cosumnes Power Plant (CPP) scheduled for completion in early 2006. Therefore, the proposed annexation should have no impact on SMUD’s existing hydroelectric, cogeneration, or wind energy resources.

SMUD will use the existing available electric system capacity to service the Annexation Territory with no impact on existing SMUD customers. In addition, SMUD plans to add additional employees to its workforce to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory without impacting existing SMUD service levels.

In March 2004, the Cities, Yolo County, and SMUD jointly commissioned and paid for an independent technical and financial evaluation of the Yolo annexation concept. In addition to the expected financial benefits to be shared by SMUD’s existing customers and the Annexation Territory customers, the study confirmed that the annexation would have no negative impact on the level of service or reliability currently enjoyed by SMUD’s existing customers. A copy of the study is included in the compact disc (CD) accompanying this Draft EIR.

6. Provide Service to the Annexation Territory at No Material Financial Cost and No Reduction in Service Quality/Reliability for Existing PG&E Ratepayers Outside of the Annexation Territory

Because Annexation Territory customers will bear the costs associated with the annexation (while still paying rates lower than PG&E’s), there will be no reduction in service quality or reliability for existing PG&E ratepayers outside of the Annexation Territory.

In an advisory opinion, provided in Appendix F of this EIR, the CPUC concluded that SMUD’s annexation proposal would “not substantially impair Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s ability to provide adequate service at reasonable rates within the remainder of its service territory”.

E. ENERGY SUPPLY AND DELIVERY CONSIDERATIONS

Under the Program, SMUD will assume responsibility for all aspects of the provision of electricity to customers in the Annexation Territory. This involves acquiring an adequate supply

DRAFT II-11 Chapter II Program Description of power and delivering it to individual customers. Thus, analysis of the Program requires consideration of issues relating to (1) available energy supply, (2) control areas and capacity to serve, and (3) impacts on PG&E and SMUD transmission system.

1. Available Energy Supply

Electric service providers typically either generate their own power or purchase power from the energy supply marketplace, or both. The marketplace includes power suppliers and transmission service providers interconnected in an electric grid made up of power plants, transmission lines, and substations. Here, the relevant electric grid is the Western Electric Coordinating Council (WECC). The WECC service territory extends from Canada to Mexico. It includes the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, the northern portion of Baja California, Mexico, and all or portions of the 14 western states in between. Power is available through short- and long-term contracts and spot market purchases. Transmission service providers deliver purchased power to electric service providers.

Both SMUD and PG&E generate electricity from power plants they own and purchase power from the energy marketplace. SMUD has committed to reserve its low-cost energy supply source (e.g., hydroelectric) for its existing customers. It has no plans to change current operating practices for its existing hydroelectric, cogeneration, and other facilities. In particular, SMUD’s recent application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the relicensing of its Upper American River Project Hydroelectric facilities proposes no changes in the operation of these facilities as a result of the proposed Program.

The proposed Annexation Territory’s current estimated peak load is approximately 250 megawatts (MW). If the annexation is approved by LAFCo and the voters, SMUD will replace PG&E as the entity responsible for supplying this energy, and PG&E will be able to lower its energy supply requirements accordingly. Upon approval of the Program, SMUD will complete an energy supply plan for the Annexation Territory. SMUD plans to meet Annexation Territory energy requirements through a combination of new short- and long-term power purchase contracts, spot market purchases, customer-owned generation, new renewable power supply, and possibly surpluses available from the new Cosumnes Power Plant (scheduled for commercial operation in March 2006). Electricity demand in the Annexation Territory represents approximately 0.2% of the amount of power delivered in the WECC region. Given the relatively small size of demand in the Annexation Territory and SMUD’s existing active participation in the WECC energy marketplace, SMUD should have no problem establishing the necessary energy supply for the Yolo Communities. Further, because PG&E will be able to reduce its purchases of electricity after annexation, there will be no energy supply impacts to PG&E.

A detailed discussion of existing energy supply conditions, SMUD’s plans for ensuring an adequate supply of energy for the Annexation Territory, and the potential impacts of the change in energy supplier on SMUD, PG&E, and the energy marketplace in general is included in Appendix A.

DRAFT II-12 Chapter II Program Description

2. Control Areas and Capacity to Serve

a. SMUD and CAISO Control Areas

Control areas are responsible for balancing resources and energy load with adequate operating reserves and managing the control area transmission electric grid on a real- time basis. This is done in accordance with the WECC and the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) standards and prudent utility practices. Control areas exist throughout the nation’s interconnected electric utility industry, and they work cooperatively with each other. SMUD’s control area is one of five in California.

SMUD’s control area includes SMUD’s service area, the Sierra Nevada Region (SNR) of the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), certain directly connected generation sources and municipal loads served by WAPA, and the Modesto Irrigation District. The California Independent System Operator (CAISO) control area surrounds and is interconnected with the SMUD control area.

CAISO currently operates the existing transmission system within the Annexation Territory.

If the annexation is approved, SMUD will disconnect the Annexation Territory transmission system from the CAISO control area and connect it to the SMUD control area, and assume control area responsibilities for the Annexation Territory. Except for changes in existing operational drawings and maps, there will be no significant impacts to the CAISO or SMUD control areas as a result of the Program. Further, integration of the Annexation Territory transmission facilities into SMUD’s control area will be transparent to existing SMUD and Annexation Territory customers. Additional detailed information is provided in Appendix B.

b. SMUD’s Capacity to Serve

“Capacity to serve” represents the transmission system’s capabilities to deliver power assuming contingency conditions. Contingency conditions generally assume the possible failure of the largest single component of the system.

SMUD’s existing total capacity to serve (i.e., throughout its 230-kilovolt [kV] and 115-kV transmission systems) is approximately 3,100 MW. With the completion of several planned system additions over the next approximately 2 years, SMUD’s capacity to serve will increase to approximately 3,900 MW in 2008. SMUD has incorporated these system additions into its plans regardless of whether the proposed Program is approved. SMUD’s system peak load in 2005 was 2,959 MW. Estimated peak load in the Annexation Territory is 250 MW. With these planned additions, SMUD will be able to deliver power to the Annexation Territory as proposed. A detailed discussion of SMUD’s capacity to serve the Annexation Territory is included in Appendix B.

DRAFT II-13 Chapter II Program Description

3. Impacts on PG&E and SMUD’s Transmission System

PG&E currently serves the Annexation Territory with a transmission system consisting of 115,000 Volt (115-kV) transmission lines and substations. SMUD also owns and operates a 115-kV transmission system in its adjacent service area. To disconnect the Annexation Territory system from PG&E’s system and connect it to SMUD’s system, SMUD must complete Program Components 4 through 8 (described in Section F of this chapter). Currently, SMUD has excess transmission and substation capacity in its 115-kV system that can be used to serve the Annexation Territory.

Utilities within the WECC, like SMUD and PG&E, voluntarily share information with each other regarding the configuration of their transmission systems and load cases used to perform analysis. This collaboration between utilities promotes efficient planning and analysis to maintain a safe and reliable regional electric grid.

SMUD has completed an analysis of the expected impacts to the regional electric grid that will result from the Program. SMUD’s analysis determined that the Program should not have any adverse impact on SMUD’s or PG&E’s remaining transmission systems. In fact, the Program changes will result in a better use of existing SMUD transmission system capacity and improvements in reliability for the remaining PG&E transmission system. PG&E also will have transmission capacity that can be used to provide service for future growth in the region. In its response to LAFCo’s NOP, PG&E stated that the Program-related transmission system changes may have an impact on the 500-kV and 230-kV PG&E systems that are interconnected with its 115-kV system through the regional electric grid. However, PG&E has not provided the analysis and data necessary to analyze or confirm this asserted impact.

F. PROGRAM COMPONENTS

The Program involves the provision of electric service to homes and businesses in the Annexation Territory. Providing electric service involves several actions, all of which are needed to provide such service in a reliable and cost-effective manner. The Program consists of several different program components that will be implemented upon approval of the annexation.

Program components 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9 will necessarily be implemented if LAFCo and the voters approve the proposed annexation and SMUD is to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory. These program components are analyzed at the project level in this EIR, and no environmental analysis (other than the analysis provided in this EIR) will be needed for SMUD to proceed with these program components.

Program Components 6, 7, and 8, most notably a new transmission line, a new substation, and distribution system upgrades could be constructed in various locations or in various ways. SMUD will determine the exact locations and configurations of such facilities only after the preparation of site-specific environmental analyses, which will be contained in one or more subsequent environmental documents. Accordingly, the transmission line and the substation are analyzed in this EIR only at the program level, which reflects the information currently available on these facilities.

DRAFT II-14 Chapter II Program Description

1. Administrative Decisions

a. Expansion of Sphere of Influence/Annexation (Program Component 1)

This Program Component consists of the following:

• A discretionary decision by LAFCo whether or not to approve SMUD’s application to expand its SOI and a second discretionary decision by LAFCo whether or not to annex the Annexation Territory and include that territory in the SMUD electric service area (including terms and conditions deemed by LAFCo to be in the public interest, such as requiring increased reliability, enhanced customer service, and reduced rates);

• Preparation and evaluation of an appropriate municipal services review by LAFCo; and

• The subsequent consideration and approval by voters of the annexation and electric service proposal.

This Program Component is analyzed in this EIR at a project level.

b. SMUD Acquisition of PG&E Equipment/Infrastructure (Program Com- ponent 2)

After the recordation of the annexation, SMUD will acquire from PG&E all electric facilities needed to serve the Annexation Territory, as described in SMUD’s application for annexation. This program component is analyzed in this EIR at a project level.

c. Execution of Memoranda of Understanding or Other Operating Agreements with Yolo County Interests (Program Component 3)

To implement any terms and conditions placed by LAFCo on the proposed annexation, SMUD may enter into memoranda of understanding (MOUs) or other legally binding agreements with Yolo County and/or the cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland. In the course of implementing the annexation, SMUD also may enter into other operating agreements with public agencies and private organizations that may be necessary to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory. This program component is analyzed in this EIR at a project level.

At present, it is expected that LAFCo will include, in any approval it may grant regarding the proposed annexation, a term and condition requiring that SMUD implement a mechanism to defray the reasonably calculated costs and financial impacts to the Yolo Communities associated with the provision of electric service by SMUD. SMUD proposed such a term and condition in its LAFCo application. It is likely that such a term and condition will be implemented through MOUs or other agreements with the Yolo Communities.

DRAFT II-15 Chapter II Program Description

2. Infrastructure Construction

Even though SMUD’s construction of facilities for the production of electric energy is exempt from county and city building code requirements by Government Code § 53091(d), SMUD’s standard policy is to fully comply voluntarily with such requirements. In addition, SMUD is adopting the “no net loss” standard suggested by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for the mitigation of potentially significant impacts on biological resources. SMUD and/or its contractors will obtain grading permits for Program construction. SMUD and its contractors also will comply with the Statewide Construction Storm Water General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

a. Infrastructure Required for All Program Configurations

(1) Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4)

This program component (see Figure II-2, provided at the end of this chapter) involves the reconstruction of an existing SMUD 115-kV transmission line that runs 2.5 miles from Power Inn Road east to SMUD’s Hedge substation. The reconstruction consists of the replacement of existing lattice towers with new steel poles and the addition of a new 115-kV circuit. Three overhead wires will be added to the existing six wires, bringing the total number of wires to nine, in addition to one overhead fiber optic cable. The existing right of way includes a SMUD 230-kV transmission line and various distribution lines.

The existing lattice towers and their foundations will be replaced with new foundations and steel poles approximately 100 to 110 feet high. The reconstructed line will require approximately 30 new foundations, with a construction area of approximately 3,200 square feet per foundation. Thus, the total area of potential disturbance by construction will be approximately 2.2 acres. After the installation is complete, the area permanently disturbed by the new transmission line supports will be approximately 0.28 acre. Existing maintenance access roads will be used for construction access. The existing property owners use a large portion of the rights of way for material laydown and parking. Foundations for the new transmission line will be constructed as close to the existing foundations as possible. This program component is analyzed at the project level.

(2) North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5)

This program component (see Figure II-3, provided at the end of this chapter) involves the interconnection of SMUD lines and existing PG&E 115-kV transmission lines near the SMUD North City substation. The actual interconnection will be on the northern side of the American River, in an area where both PG&E and SMUD 115-kV lines are located within the American River Parkway. The proposed interconnection will occur within existing rights of way and will require approximately one or two new foundations and one or two

DRAFT II-16 Chapter II Program Description

steel poles. Existing access roads will be used for construction and maintenance. The total area occupied by new foundations and structures will amount to approximately 800 square feet, all within existing easements. This program component is analyzed in this EIR at the project level.

b. Infrastructure to Be Sited in the Future

(1) Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6)

This program component (see Figure II-4, provided at the end of this chapter) involves the placement of a new 15- to 18-mile 115-kV transmission line to connect PG&E’s existing Rio Oso/Woodland 115-kV transmission line north of the City of Woodland with SMUD’s existing Elverta substation on Elverta Road, approximately 3.5 miles east of Highway 99. Because the precise location of the transmission line route has not yet been determined, this EIR sets forth all known information about the transmission line study area and potential environmental impacts and analyzes this program component at a program level. Upon determination of a precise transmission route, a follow-on project-level environmental analysis will be prepared.

The study area for the transmission line includes portions of Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties. The final route for the transmission line will be influenced by the proximity of Sacramento International Airport to the south of the study area, other airstrips in the area, the Sacramento River, and other constraints within the study area. To the extent possible, SMUD proposes to locate the transmission line in public rights of way and utility easements. The proposed transmission line length is approximately 15 to 18 miles, depending on final route selection. SMUD will construct the transmission line to be operated at up to 230-kV, even though it is not required at this time, to avoid reconstruction if a 230-kV transmission line becomes necessary in the future. Initially, SMUD will operate the line at 115-kV.

A typical easement width for a 115-kV to 230-kV transmission line is 60 to 100 feet, depending on the span between structures. It is likely that the transmission line will consist of 6 conductors (wires) and one overhead ground wire supported on steel poles from 90 to 110 feet high. The poles will be spaced between 500 and 1,200 feet apart. The final transmission line route will cross the Sacramento River and probably will require a pole on each side of the river at a height of approximately 200 feet. Depending on the width of the easement, and on the final length of the transmission line through the corridor, the total land area within the easement is estimated at between 130 and 200 acres. The actual transmission line, however, will occupy only a small part of that easement.

Construction of each concrete foundation and steel pole will require up to 3,200 square feet of space. After construction is completed, the remaining foundation will have a footprint of up to 400 square feet. The total number of foundations for the proposed transmission line is estimated at 160. Thus, during construction, the total area to be disturbed along the route of this new line will be up to 12 acres.

DRAFT II-17 Chapter II Program Description

After the installation is complete, the area permanently disturbed by the new transmission line supports will be up to 1.5 acres.

Whenever possible, transmission lines will be constructed near existing paved roads or near existing farm access roads. In some cases, a temporary access road may be necessary. The transmission line will be located and designed so that the structures and lines will not create a hazardous obstruction for any flight pattern associated with Sacramento International Airport or other airstrips in the area.

Any transmission lines constructed will conform to standards set forth in the Avian Protection Plan Guidelines prepared jointly by the Edison Electric Institute’s Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (APLIC and USFWS, 2005).

This program component is analyzed at the program level.

(2) Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7)

This program component (see Figure II-5, provided at the end of this chapter) involves the construction of a new substation, the Willow Slough substation, in the vicinity of the intersection of Road 102 and Road 27, near an existing PG&E 115-kV line that runs between Davis and Woodland. The exact location of the substation has not been determined at this time; this EIR presents known information about the substation study area and analyzes this program component at a program level. Once the location is determined, a follow-on project-level environmental analysis will be prepared.

The study area encompasses 1 square mile centered on the intersection of Road 102 and Road 27. Because this substation has not been designed or sited at this time, the resultant disturbance to existing property cannot be estimated accurately. Based on existing, similar SMUD substation sites, the estimated area necessary for the Willow Slough substation is 1 to 3 acres. As with other substations of this type, SMUD expects that the substation entrance will be paved with asphaltic concrete, and the remainder of the site will be surfaced with crushed rock. All electrical equipment will be located within the substation. Nighttime security lighting will consist of downward-facing fixtures around the equipment areas. Routine maintenance activity at such a substation typically consists of two visits per week by a technician.

(3) Other Distribution System Upgrades (Program Component 8)

This program component involves the possible “reconductoring” (i.e., replacement of existing overhead wires with new, slightly larger diameter, overhead wires) to increase the electrical load-carrying capacity of sections of acquired PG&E lines. The application for annexation identified several facilities that may require reconductoring. Currently, the proposed reconductoring consists of one existing 115-kV transmission line and several existing 12-kV distribution lines.

DRAFT II-18 Chapter II Program Description

The 115-kV project consists of reconductoring the existing West Sacramento substation to Davis substation transmission line. PG&E already has identified the need for this project and has current plans to complete this project in 2005-2006, regardless of the proposed annexation. Therefore, this work may be completed prior to the proposed annexation. The selection of specific sections of existing 12-kV lines that may require reconductoring will depend on the analysis of PG&E operational data not yet provided. After the approval of the annexation, and when the data are available, a complete 12-kV reconductoring list will be developed, and SMUD will perform any necessary environmental assessments at that time.

c. Best Management Practices/Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Program (Applies to Program Components 4 through 8)

CEQA requires that a public agency mitigate the effects of a proposed project on the environment to the greatest degree feasible and consistent with achieving the goals and objectives of the project. LAFCo, after consultation with SMUD during the preparation of the Draft EIR, has determined that the Program as a whole, as well as its individual components, may have several potential effects on the physical environment.

To carry out the mandate of CEQA to avoid impacts on the environment where possible, LAFCo and SMUD have agreed to include in the Program, as described in the application for annexation, several Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will avoid and/or minimize the potential effects of the Program on the environment. These BMPs incorporate within the Program “state-of-the-practice” standards (largely, but not entirely, relating to construction) that avoid and/or minimize the effects of the Program on the environment. In many cases, implementation of these BMPs will avoid or reduce a potentially significant effect of the Program to a less than significant effect. In cases where there are no BMPs, or where the BMPs may not reduce the potential effects of the Program to a less than significant level, this Draft EIR proposes feasible mitigation measures, if such are available. Inclusion of BMPs in the Program description is consistent with SMUD’s core value of environmental protection.

DRAFT II-19 Chapter II Program Description

(1) Best Management Practice 1: Siting of Transmission Electric Facilities

Program Components 6 and 7, the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area and the Willow Slough Substation Study Area, are analyzed in this EIR at the Program Level. Upon approval of the Program by LAFCo and the voters, SMUD will begin the project level analysis of these facilities. This will include siting these facilities and performing CEQA analysis to determine the locations of the transmission line and substation using the process described in Appendix D. SMUD will use the guidance provided by Sacramento County General Plan and will engage in a cooperative effort with agencies, local jurisdictions, property owners, and the public to determine and analyze alternative alignments and locations for these facilities. SMUD will attempt to site these facilities in locations that avoid or minimize effects on the environment and adjacent landowners without either making the construction of these facilities infeasible or interfering with the authority and responsibility of the SMUD Board of Directors to make the final decision on the location of SMUD’s facilities in the public interest. The proposed locations for the transmission line and substation require approval from the cities or counties where the facilities will be located, though the SMUD Board of Directors may override a local jurisdiction’s disapproval of a siting location with a supermajority vote.

It is premature for this EIR to develop specific alignments for Program Component 6 or specific locations for Program Component 7. The basic policy question confronting LAFCo at the present time is whether the ratepayers in the Annexation Territory will be better served by SMUD or by PG&E. This question of governmental efficiency is a matter solely within the expertise of LAFCo. If LAFCo were to determine that it would be in the public interest for SMUD to serve the Annexation Territory, then SMUD would be the agency with expertise in siting electrical transmission and distribution facilities. SMUD would then have to conduct that analysis in a way that was consistent with requirements that LAFCo determined were needed to protect the public interest, which LAFCo could accomplish though the inclusion of terms and conditions in any order approving the annexation. Then SMUD also would have to prepare one or more additional environmental document(s) to analyze the impacts of these program components on the environment at a project level. In this way, tiered review of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Program would allow the expert agency on governmental reorganization (LAFCo) to focus its decision on governmental efficiency questions and allow the agency with expertise on electrical service (SMUD) to focus its subsequent environmental analysis on those areas (the best way to provide electrical service to an area).

(2) Best Management Practice 2: Biological Resources

In general, potential impacts to sensitive biological resources can be avoided and/or minimized through modification of the project design, construction specifications, and timing of project implementation. Preconstruction surveys for

DRAFT II-20 Chapter II Program Description

special-status species will be conducted before construction begins near suitable habitat. If feasible, design modifications will be made to the project to avoid any areas with rare plants or sensitive habitat (Biological Sensitivity Areas [BSAs].

The following measures will be implemented during construction of all program components to minimize impacts to sensitive biological resources.

• A qualified biologist will survey the transmission line corridor and associated access routes, laydown areas, and staging areas prior to construction. Sensitive habitats or active nest locations will be clearly marked and avoided where feasible.

• BSAs that abut construction areas along or within any of the construction rights of way will be designated as such. These sites will be fenced off or clearly marked to prevent inadvertent destruction. High-visibility fencing will be installed along the margins of construction work areas where those areas are adjacent to sensitive biological resources. All construction personnel working in the BSA will be required to attend environmental awareness training. At a minimum, the training will include: (1) an overview of the regulatory requirements for the project, (2) descriptions of the special-status species in the project area and the importance of these species and their habitats, (3) the general measures that are being implemented to minimize environmental impacts, and (4) the boundaries within which equipment and personnel will be allowed to work during construction. SMUD will maintain a record of all workers who have completed the training.

• Construction will generally take place between May 1 and September 30 to avoid impacting sensitive species except in the vicinity of active Swainson’s hawk nests. Where Swainson’s hawk nests are present, see item (2)(c).

• Temporary erosion-control devices will be installed on slopes where erosion or sedimentation could degrade sensitive biological resources.

• All temporary disturbance areas in annual grasslands will be revegetated with appropriate native species upon completion of construction.

• All spilled substances will be cleaned up promptly and disposed of properly to avoid the chronic or acute poisoning of wildlife.

• All construction debris will be removed from the project area after completion of construction activities. All project-related vehicular traffic will be restricted to established roads, designated access roads and routes, construction areas, storage areas, and staging and parking areas. Off-road traffic outside of designated access routes will be prohibited. A 10-miles per hour (mph) speed limit will be enforced in the project area when vehicles are not on paved roads.

DRAFT II-21 Chapter II Program Description

• In the event that a permanent loss of habitat supporting special-status species is not avoidable, and the area affected falls within the 2003 Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) area, a fee must be paid to the City of Sacramento Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Fund, and other obligations of the 2003 HCP must be met. This fee to the Habitat Conservation Fund is one that landowners may elect to pay in lieu of satisfying federal and state Endangered Species Acts (ESAs) by other methods (City of Sacramento Municipal Code, Chapter 18.40). If the permanent loss of habitat supporting special-status species is not avoidable, and the land does not fall within the 2003 HCP, preconstruction surveys for special-status species will be conducted before construction begins near suitable habitat, as stated above. If any special-status species are affected, the CDFG or the USFWS will be contacted, and mitigation will be negotiated with these agencies.

• If federally jurisdictional wetlands are impacted, SMUD will prepare a wetland mitigation plan to compensate, at a ratio that has been determined in partnership with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), for any wetland habitats lost. The mitigation plan will include monitoring and performance standards to ensure successful mitigation. Wetlands will be mitigated so that there is no net loss of this resource.

• Installation of visual line enhancers and adequate spacing of the conductors will minimize the risk of avian collision and electrocution. Construction design standards can be found in the Edison Electric Institute’s APLIC and USFWS Avian Protection Plan Guidelines (APLIC and USFWS, 2005), APLIC’s Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1996 (APLIC, 1996), or APLIC’s Mitigating Bird Collisions with Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1994 (APLIC, 1994). Avian Protection Plan Guidelines can be found on line at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds.

• It is possible that one or more program components will fall within the service area of three mitigation banks: the Bryte Ranch Conservation Bank, the Fitzgerald Conservation Bank, and the Clay Station Conservation Bank. These banks are approved to sell vernal pool conservation credits for the vernal pool fairy shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp. The Clay Station Conservation Bank also is approved to sell USACE wetland mitigation credits. The Fitzgerald Conservation Bank is approved to sell vernal pool conservation credits for the vernal pool fairy shrimp, in addition to California tiger salamander credits.

• As an avoidance measure to prevent any significant cumulative impacts, habitat fragmentation of existing preserves will be avoided by placing all linear facilities or substations adjacent to existing utility corridors or linear facilities.

DRAFT II-22 Chapter II Program Description

(a) Nesting Birds

Preconstruction surveys will be conducted in annual grassland or other habitat appropriate for nesting birds for any migratory or special-status nesting bird species. To prevent the potential for direct take of special-status birds that may be nesting on the site or their nest, field surveys will be conducted no earlier than 45 days and no later than 20 days prior to construction. The field surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine whether active nests of special-status birds are present in the BSA or within 150 feet of the BSA. Such surveys will be required as part of any construction contract. If an active nest is discovered, clearing and construction within 150 feet will be postponed until the nest is vacated and the juveniles have fledged, as determined by the biologist, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts. Nests located near existing haul roads will not require a 150-foot buffer zone.

(b) Burrowing Owls

Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for impacts on burrowing owls will be established in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG, 1995). Preconstruction surveys will be conducted in grasslands within the project footprint and in suitable habitat within 500 feet from the project footprint. The locations of all observed burrowing owls and active burrows will be marked on a map of the project area at a scale sufficient to accurately show the distance between observed owls and active burrows and the limits of construction.

Mitigation measures and habitat replacement ratios recommended by CDFG (1994) for Swainson’s hawks will be implemented for the proposed project if necessary. If construction begins after April 1, preconstruction surveys for nesting Swainson’s hawks will be conducted within 0.5 mile of the plant site. If nesting Swainson’s hawks are present, CDFG will be contacted. The nest will be monitored by a qualified biologist, and project activities that disturb or agitate the nesting hawks will be delayed until the young have fledged (approximately July 31). If Swainson’s hawks are nesting within 0.5 mile of the project area, the nest tree will be clearly marked, and a 2,500-foot buffer around the nest tree will be avoided during the breeding season or until the young are foraging independently.

(3) Best Management Practice 3: Cultural Resources

• A qualified archaeologist and historian will survey the Woodland-Elverta transmission line corridor and Willow Slough substation study area, as well as associated access routes, laydown areas, and staging areas, before construction. Identified cultural resources that are eligible for, or listed on, the

DRAFT II-23 Chapter II Program Description

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) will be avoided in siting these facilities.

• Construction crews will be trained on the identification of cultural and paleontological resources.

• An archaeological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activity at any program component where excavation takes place in previously undisturbed soils, particularly where such soils are located within 0.25 mile of a perennial water source.

• A paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activity at any program component.

• In the event that unanticipated cultural resources (historic or prehistoric artifacts, concentrations of shell, burnt or unburnt bone, stone features, etc.) are uncovered during grading or construction activities, work in the vicinity of the find will be halted, and a qualified archaeologist will be consulted for an on-site evaluation and the recovery of any important resources.

• If human remains or suspected human remains are found on any site, work in the vicinity will halt, any remains will be protected from further disturbance, and SMUD will immediately contact the appropriate county coroner. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not under his purview, he will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), as mandated by PRC 5097.

• Any structures near construction sites, such as 6501 Florin Perkins Road, will be formally evaluated in the unlikely event that construction will physically affect the structure. If any such structure is found to be eligible for the CRHR, appropriate treatment measures, such as recordation to Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) and Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) standards, will be taken, augmented by additional research, interpretation, and other measures required to reduce the level of impact to less than significant.

Identification of potential transmission line routes or substation locations will attempt to avoid any areas that are particularly sensitive relative to prehistoric archaeological resources. Before a tentative route or site is identified, that area will be subjected to an intensive pedestrian survey for archaeological and historic built environment resources. Identified resources will be avoided by selecting an alternative route or project footprint within the study area that avoids significant cultural resources and/or through careful consideration of tower placement. Access roads and construction staging areas also will be modified as needed to avoid resources. In the event that a significant archaeological resource cannot be avoided, a program of data recovery, guided by a research design, will be undertaken.

DRAFT II-24 Chapter II Program Description

• If important paleontological resources are discovered during the construction of any program component, they will be recovered and archived at an appropriate institution by a qualified paleontologist.

(4) Best Management Practice 4: Noise

The City of Sacramento noise ordinance exempts construction noise from its restrictions as long as construction occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday (Sacramento Municipal Code Section 8.68.080.E). SMUD will conduct all construction activities consistent with these provisions of the City of Sacramento noise ordinance or with more restrictive provisions, if adopted by any of the local governments with jurisdiction over the areas affected by construction.

(5) Best Management Practice 5: Public Service

Program Components 4 through 8 could have a short-term need for police and fire protection services. During construction activities, there may be a need for police services in regard to vandalism or theft of construction materials or equipment from a construction, storage, or lay-down area. Fire protection services may be necessary if construction activities result in a fire or medical emergency.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written security plan to minimize the potential for vandalism or theft from construction, storage, or lay-down sites used for the construction or reconstruction components of the Program. The objective is to reduce or eliminate the need for police or sheriff responses and to prevent the loss of building materials, tools, and equipment.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written Injury and Illness Prevention Plan and Safety Plan, in compliance with minimum OSHA/Cal OSHA requirements, to minimize potential injury and illness of workers or any site visitors for the program components. The objective is to reduce or eliminate the need for emergency medical responses and to reduce injury or illness of any severity.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written fire protection plan to minimize potential fires at construction, storage, or lay-down sites used for the construction or reconstruction components of the program. Each construction site will have appropriate fire prevention and suppression equipment, from fire extinguishers to on-site water tanks or tanker trucks, as appropriate for the work being performed, the weather, and the adjacent environmental conditions. The objective is to reduce or eliminate the need for fire department response.

DRAFT II-25 Chapter II Program Description

(6) Best Management Practice 6: Air Quality

The Yolo-Solano Air Pollution Control District (APCD) has established mitigation measures to reduce fugitive dust from construction projects. These measures also are cited as effective means of controlling fugitive emissions by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Rule 403. Therefore, these mitigation measures are incorporated into the Program as BMPs. During Program construction, SMUD and its contractors will control fugitive dust emissions at construction sites using the following management practices.

• Soil stockpiles will be covered or watered twice daily.

• Exposed soil surfaces will be watered twice daily.

• Haul roads will be watered twice daily.

• Dump trucks will be covered securely.

• To minimize emissions of ozone precursors and diesel particulate matter, non- work-related idling of vehicles and equipment will be limited to no more than 5 minutes.

3. Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System (Program Component 9)

SMUD will operate and maintain, in a way that is consistent with its practices in its current service area, the electrical transmission and distribution facilities that it will acquire from PG&E and such other facilities as may be needed to provide electric service to the Annexation Territory. This program component is analyzed in this EIR at a project level.

G. INTENDED USES OF THIS EIR

The purpose of this EIR is to disclose to decision makers and to the public any significant environmental impacts of the Program. This EIR has been prepared for use by LAFCo, the lead agency for this Program, in its consideration and approval of the Program as a whole.

Consistent with the tiering approach adopted by this Program and encouraged by CEQA, future environmental analyses for projects associated with this Program will concentrate on the environmental effects that may be mitigated or avoided in connection with the decision on each later project. Project-level approvals involve permitting decisions by other agencies, in addition to further environmental analyses. Table II-3 identifies the permits and other approvals that are anticipated to be required from local, state, and federal agencies to implement both the program and project-level activities.

DRAFT II-26 Chapter II Program Description

Table II-3: Permits and Other Approvals That May Be Required Permits, Approvals That May Be Required and Related Environmental Agency Review Requirements Program Level Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission Sphere of Influence Amendment, Annexation Project Level SMUD Decision on whether to implement annexation (if approved by voters) Decisions on construction of individual program components (including siting and location of facilities) Sacramento County Gualco Act for transmission lines Yolo County Gualco Act for transmission lines Sutter County Gualco Act for transmission lines Airport Land Use Commission for Sacramento County Conformance with Airport Land Use Plan Airport Land Use Commission for Sutter County Conformance with Airport Land Use Plan Airport Land Use Commission for Yolo County Conformance with Airport Land Use Plan California Department of Fish and Game, Central Sierra Region 2 Section 1600 Permit California Department of Transportation, District 3 Encroachment Permit(s) California Reclamation Board Encroachment Permit(s) California State Lands Commission Lease for Activities Under and Over the Bed of Navigable Waterways Federal Aviation Administration Airport Safety Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Authority to Construct/Permit to Operate Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District Authority to Construct/Permit to Operate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit, Section 7 Consultation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1 Section 7 Consultation

DRAFT II-27 Chapter II Program Description

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT II-28 Feet Study Area SMUD Line Transmission

n PG&E Line Transmission

a Legend 500

1,000 0 1,000

S g

n Source: USGS, 7.5' Quadangles 7.5' USGS, Source: Carmichael, Elk Grove, Florin, Sacramento East

g ¯

)

E H

n t

s o

r g

N R

(

F D

FIGURE II-2

R E

(Program Component4)

L E

Power Inn Roadto Hedge Substation Transmission Line ReconstructionStudy Area Power Inn Road Inn Power Feet Study Area SMUD Line Transmission PG&E Line Transmission Legend 375 Source: USGS, 7.5' Quadangles 7.5' USGS, Source: Sacramento East ¯ 750 0 750 1,500

d l

i a

a o

l R

i a c

R f

c c i

f a i

c P

n P

n i

o n

n U U E

C P

R ö

E A O

B R

O E H

L M

A T R G

B C L

O L Study Area

Interconnection

l i

S N

R L

I A R

FIGURE II-3

S CityNorth

N Substation ATE B Existing SMUD NORTHG (Program Component5)

R N North City InterconnectionStudy Area ö A E d O H a T E o N r l R i R D a

O d R

a c

o i

H f

l i 6 i

1 c

a a

i n

f i o i

c n E a

N P U

I H

T n

i 1

T 0 1 Existing SMUD Elverta Substation

Legend PG&E Transmission Line SMUD Transmission Line ¯ Study Area Feet 4,5002,250 0 4,500

Source: USGS, 100K Quadangles Sacramento

FIGURE II-4 Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) Feet PG&E Line Transmission Program Component Legend 375 Source: USGS, 7.5' Quadangles 7.5' USGS, Source: Davis, Grey's Bend ¯ 750 0 750 1,500 Transmission Line

Existing PG&E115-kV Road 102 Road

FIGURE II-5 FIGURE

L I W Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7) Component (Program Area Study Substation Slough Willow

CHAPTER III ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Chapter III Environmental Setting

The following information is presented in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15125 (California, State of, 2005). Sources referenced in preparing this chapter include The California Planners’ Book of Lists 2005 (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2005).

A. REGIONAL SETTING

The Program area (Annexation Territory and transmission line study areas) is in California’s Central Valley, northeast of the San Francisco Bay Area. The Central Valley is situated between the Coastal Ranges to the west and the Sierra Nevada to the east. The northern part of the Central Valley, the specific location of the Program area, is primarily known for its agricultural activity. It has relatively flat alluvial soils that can support a variety of crops, such as rice, tomatoes, and fruit and nut orchards. The area has smaller urban areas, such as the cities of Davis and Woodland, that support these agricultural activities. In addition, the larger Sacramento metropolitan area, which is composed primarily of the cities of West Sacramento and Sacramento, is to the east of the cities of Davis and Woodland. Sacramento and West Sacramento are major employment centers for the northern part of the Central Valley and for Northern California as a whole. The presence of the Port of Sacramento in West Sacramento makes these two cities well suited for regional distribution and warehouse activities.

B. LOCAL SETTING

The Annexation Territory includes the cities of West Sacramento and Woodland; the City of Davis, except for the University of California at Davis; and portions of unincorporated Yolo County between and surrounding the Cities. In addition to the Annexation Territory, the transmission line study areas cover portions of the City of Sacramento and unincorporated parts of Sacramento County and Sutter County. These areas are described in the following paragraphs.

1. City of West Sacramento

The City of West Sacramento is in eastern Yolo County, between the Sacramento River on the east and the Yolo Bypass on the west. It lies immediately across the Sacramento River from the City of Sacramento and is approximately 85 miles east of San Francisco. Interstate 80 runs through the northwestern part of the city; Business 80 bisects the city, running east-west through the center of town; and Interstate 5 runs north-south through the City of Sacramento, just across the river. The city limits of West Sacramento encompass what, before the city’s incorporation in 1987, were the four separate communities of Broderick, Bryte, West Sacramento, and Southport.

The population of the City of West Sacramento is approximately 31,615, and the city covers approximately 22 square miles. The city is a powerful job center for the region, given its proximity to the City of Sacramento, which is the state capitol, and its port activity near the Sacramento River.

2. City of Davis

The City of Davis is in the southeastern corner of Yolo County, along Interstate 80 and the main Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line. Davis is positioned in the Central Valley

DRAFT III-1 Chapter III Environmental Setting

50 miles northeast of the San Francisco Bay area and 15 miles west of Sacramento. Davis is separated from the surrounding cities in the counties of Yolo and Solano by 10 to 15 miles of agricultural land. Between Davis and West Sacramento is the 2-mile-wide Yolo Bypass, one of the overflow drainage channels that provide flood protection for the Sacramento River valley.

Davis has a population of approximately 60,308, and the city area covers approxiomately 10 square miles. The city is a university-oriented town with a progressive, vigorous community noted for its energy conservation, environmental programs, parks, preservation of trees, bicycles, and the quality of its educational institutions.

3. City of Woodland

Woodland, the county seat of Yolo County, is 20 miles northwest of Sacramento and located at the intersection of Interstate (I) 5 and State Route (SR) 113. The Sacramento International Airport is 8 miles to the east. Waterways include the Yolo Bypass and Sacramento River to the east, Willow Slough to the southeast, and Cache Creek to the north.

With a population of approximately 49,151, Woodland covers an area of approximately 10 square miles. Woodland has a strong historic heritage, reflected in the historic buildings in its downtown area and surrounding neighborhoods. Woodland’s agricultural setting is largely responsible for the community’s distinct identity, and agriculture plays an important economic role in Woodland. Given its proximity to major transportation nodes, Woodland also has become increasingly important as a manufacturing and distribution center.

4. Yolo County

Yolo County has a population of approximately 168,660 and covers approximately 1,035 square miles. Agriculture is Yolo County’s primary industry. The eastern two-thirds of the county consist of almost level alluvial fans, flat plains, and basins, while the western third is composed largely of rolling terraces and steep uplands used for dry-farmed grain and range. The elevation ranges from slightly below sea level, near the Sacramento River around Clarksburg, to 3,000 feet along the ridge of the western mountains.

Almost 85% of the county’s population lives in the four cities of Davis, West Sacramento, Woodland, and Winters. The county’s proximity to Sacramento Inter- national Airport and two major interstate highways places it at one of the state’s major transportation hubs.

5. Sacramento County

Sacramento County encompasses approximately 994 square miles and has a population of approximately 1.2 million. The county extends from the low delta lands between the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, north to about 10 miles beyond the state capitol, and east to the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The southernmost portion of the

DRAFT III-2 Chapter III Environmental Setting

county has direct access to San Francisco Bay. The county is bordered by Contra Costa and San Joaquin Counties on the south, Amador and El Dorado Counties on the east, Placer and Sutter Counties on the north, and Yolo and Solano Counties on the west.

6. City of Sacramento

The City of Sacramento, which is the state capitol, extends eastward from the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers toward the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. The population of the City of Sacramento is approximately 407,000; it covers an area of approximately 111 square miles. Downtown Sacramento is the urban core for the metropolitan area, serving as the office, commerce, governmental, and cultural center for the region. Sacramento’s proximity to the Sacramento International Airport and the Sacramento River makes it an ideal hub for transportation and commercial activities in the metropolitan area. The Port of Sacramento ships approximately 870,000 short tons of cargo annually.

7. Sutter County

Sutter County has a population of approximately 78,930 and covers approximately 607 square miles. The county is bordered by Yolo and Colusa Counties to the west, with the Sacramento River and Butte Slough forming the western boundary. Yuba and Placer Counties lie to the east, with the Feather and Bear Rivers forming the eastern boundary, and Sacramento County forms the southern boundary. The principal roadways that connect Sutter County to these surrounding counties include SR 20, Highway 99, and Interstate 5. The county can be divided up into topographic areas, the valley region, and the Sutter Buttes region. In addition to its six rural communites, Sutter County includes two incorporated cities, Yuba City and Live Oaks. Yuba City is the County seat for Yolo County.

DRAFT III-3 Chapter III Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT III-4

CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Section 15143 of the CEQA Guidelines directs that an EIR “shall focus on the significant effects on the environment. The significant effects should be discussed with emphasis in proportion to their severity and probability of occurrence. Effects dismissed in an Initial Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR, unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study.”

Sections A through P in this chapter provided discussions of the Program’s potentially significant effects.

A. AESTHETICS

This section describes how development associated with the Program may affect aesthetics. Where significant adverse effects on the environment are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have significant aesthetic impacts.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts related to aesthetics includes the Annexation Territory, the study areas for the new Woodland-Elverta transmission line and the Willow Slough substation, the rights of way where the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line will be reconstructed and the new North City interconnection will occur, and land within 1 mile of the study areas and rights of way. This area will allow the identification of any designated scenic viewpoints, trails, or roadways that might be affected visually by the facilities.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts for aesthetics is the same as the analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

No aesthetic regulatory policies apply to the analysis area.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

The Woodland-Elverta transmission line is the only new transmission line proposed for the Program. The land within this study area is generally flat and dominated by active agricultural uses. Several roads and existing utility lines cross the area, and a major portion of the study area is crossed by the Yolo Bypass flood control facility. Riparian vegetation exists along the Sacramento River, generally along the north- central boundary of the study area. A few residences are located within the study area. An existing 69-kV distribution line runs along most of the length of Elverta Road

DRAFT IV-1 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

across the eastern and central portions of the study area, and several other transmission lines and distribution lines cross the area. Power Line Road runs north-south across the west-central portion of the area. A 60-kV line supported by wood poles crosses from northeast to southwest through the center of the study area.

According to the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System (Caltrans, 1999), there are no specific scenic vista points or recreational areas for which a scenic vista is a major feature within this area. However, County Road 16 is designated as a Scenic County Roadway and an eligible State Scenic Highway. This roadway runs in an east-west direction from Yolo County’s eastern boundary to County Road 107. County Road 117, which runs along the eastern boundary of Yolo County near the Sacramento River from an area just north of County Road 16 to West Sacramento, also is designated as a Scenic County Roadway. The Garden Highway within Sacramento County runs along the eastern line of the Sacramento River. However, the Sacramento County General Plan does not officially designate it as a scenic resource.

The study area for the Willow Slough substation, centered on County Roads 102 and 27, is almost entirely agricultural. Several homes are located in the southwestern portion of the area, and Willow Slough itself is in the northwestern area. The City of Davis and Yolo County general plans and the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System do not identify any designated scenic viewpoints, vistas, or designated scenic roadways in this study area.

The existing right of way of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area contains several transmission and distribution lines, and the 115-kv line to be reconstructed is currently suspended on the northernmost row of steel lattice towers within the right of way. Land uses along the right of way are varied and include some vacant land, agricultural crops, and commercial and industrial uses adjacent to and within the right of way. In some areas, the adjacent commercial or industrial uses have parking or storage areas within the right of way. The Sacramento City General Plan (Sacramento, City of, 1988) and the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System do not identify any designated scenic viewpoints or vistas near the right of way or designated scenic roadways in the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area.

The North City interconnection is located where existing rights of way and transmission lines belonging to SMUD and PG&E cross, immediately north of the American River in the northern portion of the City of Sacramento. The land surrounding the rights of way is within the American River Parkway, a multi- jurisdictional recreational and habitat preserve along the river, and is guided by the American River Parkway Plan, which contains the goals and policies to manage and preserve this area. The site of the proposed interconnection is within the flood control levee along the northern side of the river, between SR 160 and the river, just east of where the two cross. The site is a broad grassy shelf, generally ringed by oaks or riparian vegetation along the river (to the southwest) and the levee (to the northeast).

DRAFT IV-2 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Several bike and hiking trails ring the area, with an orientation generally along the river. The site itself and the immediate grassy flat land around it are dominated by the steel lattice towers of the utility lines that crisscross the area. Other than the existing trails, the Sacramento City General Plan (Sacramento, City of, 1988) and the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System do not identify any designated scenic viewpoints or vistas near the right of way or any designated scenic roadways in the North City interconnection study area.

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on aesthetics if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;

• Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;

• Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or

• Create a new source of substantial light or glare that will adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

None of the program transmission lines will be lighted. A few night lights may be provided at the Willow Slough substation. These lights will be hooded so that the light is directed down; therefore, it will not increase light and glare to the surrounding area. For these reasons, the issue of increased light and glare is not analyzed further in this EIR.

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that Program- related impacts relative to aesthetics will result if the Program or any program component will:

• Involve facilities located in the following scenic corridors, as designated pursuant to the Yolo County General Plan:

– County Roads 16 and 117, and South River Road: County Road 107 to City of West Sacramento

DRAFT IV-3 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

– South River Road: Barge Canal (Jefferson Boulevard) to Sutter Slough (Sacramento County Line)

• Conflict with the policies related to scenic corridors and highways as referenced in Policy SH-8 of the Yolo County General Plan and Policy PF-71 of the Sacramento County General Plan.

(3) Evaluation Methods

The aesthetic impacts of the Program were evaluated, where possible, based on the change in the existing visual quality of the landscape. This change was estimated based on changes in the basic visual components of line, form, color, and texture. Aesthetic impacts also were evaluated in terms of general plan policies regarding visual impacts to scenic resources.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact AES-1: Visual Impact to Scenic Corridors Designated in Yolo County General Plan

If towers for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line are located within one- quarter mile of the two Yolo County designated scenic roadways, County Road 16 and 117, a potential visual impact will occur. The transmission line must be located at a height of approximately 200 feet above the ground where it crosses the Sacramento River to provide for the minimum clearance of the river required by the USACE and U.S. Coast Guard. To avoid encroaching on the protected air space of the Sacramento International Airport, the crossing of the Sacramento River must be well north of the airport. Therefore, it is likely that the Woodland- Elverta transmission line will encroach on the viewshed of County Roads 16 and 117. This will be a significant impact. No BMPs or mitigation measures have been identified to reduce this impact.

(2) Impact AES-2: Conflict with Scenic Policies of the Yolo County and Sacramento County General Plans

Reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line will replace the existing lattice towers with new steel poles and add a new 115-kV circuit (adding three overhead wires to the existing six wires and overhead fiber optic cable). The new steel poles will be approximately 100 to 110 feet high. The reconstructed line will require approximately 30 new poles.

There are no designated scenic roadways, scenic viewpoints, or similar uses adjacent to the right of way or in its vicinity. The reconstructed line will have the same visual character in terms of line, form, and color as the existing transmission line. For these reasons, this program component will have a less-than-significant impact on the landscape.

DRAFT IV-4 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The proposed North City interconnection will occur within existing rights of way near the American River Parkway. The interconnection of the existing SMUD and PG&E transmission lines is expected to require approximately one to two new foundations and steel poles.

The existing transmission towers in this study area already affect existing views. The addition of two new towers and corresponding power lines will not change the visual character of the landscape noticeably. This program component will not block any important views or alter views from trails to existing vegetation along the river. Therefore, this program component will have a less-than-significant impact on the landscape.

According to the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System and the City of Davis and Yolo County General Plans, no scenic roadways or viewpoints have been identified within one mile of the study area for the Willow Slough substation. While the substation will introduce man-made structures that will contrast strongly with the more natural lines, forms, and colors of the existing agricultural landscape, the structures will not be large enough to be visible beyond immediate foreground views that include the substation. For this reason, the Willow Slough substation will have a less-than-significant impact on the landscape.

The specific location of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line has not been selected. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate the visual effects of this transmission line at this time. A separate project-specific CEQA document will be prepared to evaluate the location of this transmission line when it is identified.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The presence of the transmission facilities will not, in itself, change the uses of any other land crossed by Program transmission lines or any land adjacent to those lines or the proposed substation. Therefore, the Program will make no changes in the environment that can result in indirect visual impacts.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in a substantial conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. For example, relative to growth, SACOG Sacramento Region Blueprint Transportation/Land Use Study, Preferred Blueprint Alternative (SACOG, 2005a) (Blueprint) projects that 102 square miles (65,280 acres) to 166 square miles (106,240 acres) of agricultural land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted to urban uses by 2050. This will change the visual character of the study area substantially, altering much of it from views of agricultural land and relatively natural open space to views of man-made structures and urban landscapes. The Program will contribute to this cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-5 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project are required to do so under local jurisdictional requirements as guided by CEQA. Because each project would be carried out under the aegis of CEQA, each project would require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to preserve visual quality. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great to completely mitigate its visual impacts. This will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse impact to visual resources in the study area, and the Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-6 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect agriculture resources. Where significant adverse effects on the environment are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This discussion provides the baseline for determining the significance of Program impacts on agricultural resources. Sources for this discussion are the City of Davis General Plan (Davis, 2001), Yolo County General Plan Update Background Report (Yolo County, 2005a), Yolo County LAFCo Agricultural Conservation Policy (Yolo County LAFCo, 2005a), the agriculture element of the County of Sacramento General Plan (Sacramento County, 1993), County of Sutter General Plan (1996), and the California Department of Conservation Web site.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter, and Sacramento Counties. Figure I-3 (provided at the end of Chapter I) shows the locations for these program components. The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts includes the entire Annexation Territory because Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System (Program Component 9) will take place throughout this area, and Program Component 8, which consists of possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. The analysis area also includes the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7), the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 5), and the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6).

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The potential cumulative impact analysis area is the same as the analysis area for direct and indirect impacts. This area represents large portions of Yolo and Sacramento Counties as well as a portion of Sutter County where the Program, in combination with reasonably foreseeable projects, could have a combined effect on agricultural resources.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

The California State Department of Conservation has evolved over the past 50 years to help balance California’s population growth with agricultural production. The Department of Conservation administers the Williamson Act, which provides the strongest protection against the conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. Landowners volunteering to keep their land in agricultural or open space uses under a 10-year Williamson Act contract are assessed based on those uses rather than full

DRAFT IV-7 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

market or development value during the period of the contract. In 1998, the “Super Williamson Act” became law, providing additional tax incentives to landowners willing to enter into 20-year contracts.

In 1995, another major tool for protecting farmland came into being when Senate Bill 275 established the Agricultural Land Stewardship Program, now known as the California Farmland Conservancy Program (CFCP). Under this grants program, landowners sell the development rights for their property in perpetuity to a land trust while retaining the right to use the land for agricultural purposes. The CFCP enhances the Williamson Act by targeting the agricultural land facing the most development pressure.

Senate Bill (SB) 1240, passed in 1998, acts as a bridge between the Williamson Act and the CFCP. This bill allows lands to be taken out of a Williamson Act contract under certain circumstances if the landowner places a permanent conservation easement on a separate but higher and more valuable parcel of land approved locally and by the state.

California Government Code Section 51290 establishes a state policy to avoid, whenever practicable, the location of public utility improvements in agricultural preserves. Where it is necessary to locate these improvements in agricultural preserves, land under Williamson Act contract should be avoided. In the event that agricultural preserve land is used for the Program, SMUD must make specific findings regarding this use and advise the Department of Conservation of its intention.

The Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter County General Plans have agricultural elements designed to protect important farmlands from conversion and encroachment and to conserve agricultural resources. The Yolo County LAFCo has an agricultural conservation policy that requires it to guide the development or use of land for other than open-space uses away from prime agricultural lands. The Yolo County Right- To-Farm and Farmland Preservation Ordinance provides additional regulation of the conversion of agricultural land and is intended to reduce the loss of agricultural resources by limiting the circumstances under which agricultural operations may be deemed a nuisance. The farmland preservation portion of the ordinance implements a program designed to protect agricultural land located within the planning area for agricultural uses.

To prevent urban encroachment into agricultural lands and regulate the population growth rate, The City of Davis adopted Measure J (Ordinance 2008). That measure requires voter approval for the following types of General Plan amendments: (1) to change an agricultural or urban reserve designation to an urban designation; and (2) to change an agricultural designation to an urban reserve designation. In 2000, Davis voters approved Measure O, which provided a parcel tax over 30 years to fund open space purchases within a planning area of over 102,000 acres surrounding the city. Other measures contained in the City of Davis General Plan and Municipal Code that are designed to protect the agricultural lands surrounding the city include the

DRAFT IV-8 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

establishment of an agricultural transition area land use category and agricultural transition area for new developments.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

Agriculture is a vital and essential part of the Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter County economies and environment. Approximately 30% (226,476 acres) of Sacramento County is classified as important farmland by the Department of Conservation, while 70% (400,592 acres) of Yolo County and 80% (295,696 acres) of Sutter County are classified as important farmland (California Department of Conservation, 2004). Between 2000 and 2002, 749 acres of prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of statewide importance was converted to urban and built-up land uses in Sacramento County (California Department of Conservation, 2002). During this same period, 960 and 559 acres of prime and unique farmland and farmland of statewide importance were converted to urban and built-up land uses in Yolo and Sutter Counties, respectively.

Most of the land outside of the urban boundaries of Woodland, Davis, and West Sacramento in the Annexation Territory is prime farmland under Williamson Act contract, and much of this land is in agricultural preserve (Figure IV.B-1). Small areas of land under Williamson Act contract are located in the Sacramento and Sutter County portions of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area.

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on agricultural resources if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

• Conflict with existing zoning and agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract.

• Involve other changes in the existing environment which, given their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use.

DRAFT IV-9 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that Program- related impacts relative to agricultural resources will result if the Program or any program component will:

• Result in the loss of significant land in a parcel of agricultural land to make it fall below the minimum lot area requirements for establishing an agricultural preserve area. The minimum lot area requirements for an agricultural preserve is 80 acres, as indicated in Title 8 (Section 8-2.406) of the Yolo County Code.

• Result in land acquisition or an easement across adopted agricultural preserves or land under a Williamson Act contract unless these lands cannot be practicably avoided pursuant to Section 51290 of the California Government Code.

• Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the FMMP of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

• Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

• Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, given their location or nature, could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Maps of prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of statewide importance prepared for FMMP were reviewed for Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter Counties. The presence of farmland on these maps in relation to program components was evaluated to determine potential Program impacts to agricultural resources.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact AG-1: Fragmentation of Agricultural Preserves

Construction of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will temporarily disturb about 12.4 acres of land for access roads and laydown areas. Assuming that all of the land crossed by the transmission line was in agriculture, it could be out of production for up to one season, depending on the timing of construction for this program component. The towers for the transmission line will occupy about 1.5 acres permanently. All of this land could be prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance.

DRAFT IV-10 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The presence of the transmission line will not preclude farming on lands that it crosses. Many transmission lines cross productive agricultural land in the Central Valley, with intensive agriculture occurring around the foundations of the towers. The permanent loss of up to 1.5 acres over the 15- to 18-mile length of the transmission line does not represent a large enough area to fragment agricultural preserves so that they would no longer be viable agricultural preserves. Therefore, the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will not impact agricultural lands by preserve fragmentation.

The Willow Slough substation will cover from 1 to 3 acres of prime farmland or unique farmland. The parcels of farmland in the study area for this substation exceed 80 acres. The loss of 1 to 3 acres will not impact the viability of these parcels as agricultural preserves. Therefore, the Willow Slough substation will not impact agricultural lands by preserve fragmentation.

(2) Impact AG-2: Acquisition or Easement Across Adopted Agricultural Preserve or Williamson Act Contract Land

Much of the land within the Yolo County portion of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line is prime farmland under Williamson Act contract and in agricultural preserve. Prime farmland under the Williamson Act also is present in the Sacramento and Sutter County portions of this study area. Acquisition of rights of way for the transmission line across lands under the Williamson Act contract and in agricultural preserve will be a significant impact.

A portion of the Willow Slough substation at the southwestern corner of County Roads 27 and 102 is under consideration for Williamson Act contract. Location of the substation on this land will be a significant impact.

BMP 1 calls for siting all program components to avoid agricultural preserves and land under Williamson Act contract to the extent practicable. This BMP meets the requirements of Section 51290 of the California Government Code. Therefore, the impact of the Program following application of BMP 1 will be less than significant.

(3) Impact AG-3: Conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to Non-Agricultural Uses

As stated under Impact AG-1, the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will impact about 1.5 acres permanently, and the Willow Slough substation will impact 1 to 3 acres permanently. It is likely that at least some of the land occupied by the towers for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will be prime or unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance. All of the Willow Slough substation is located on prime or unique farmland. The study area for this substation has been sited to most efficiently serve the electrical load from the cities of Woodland and Davis and the surrounding unincorporated portion of the Annexation Territory. If this substation location were to be moved to land that is

DRAFT IV-11 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

not either prime or unique farmland, it would have to be located in Woodland or Davis. Locating the substation in either of these two cities would place it too far from major portions of the area it must serve. For these reasons, the Woodland- Elverta transmission line and Willow Slough substation will convert 2.5 to 4.5 acres of prime or unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance to other uses. This will be a significant impact.

(a) Mitigation Measure AG-1: SMUD will enter into a conservation mitigation banking agreement established to preserve land currently in agricultural production at a ratio equal to the estimated loss of prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (i.e., 1:1).

(b) Significance of the Impact After Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1 will reduce the Program’s impact on farmland to less than significant.

(4) Impact AG-4: Conflict with Existing Zoning for Agricultural Use or a Williamson Act Contract

Installation of power transmission facilities does not substantially interfere with agricultural practices. There are many productive agricultural areas throughout the Central Valley that are crossed by power transmission lines or occupied by substations. Electrical transmission facilities physically occupy a very small area of land, as discussed under Impact AG-1. The presence of transmission lines may require a farmer to modify the application of agricultural chemicals on a portion of a field from airborne to ground application; however, this does not prohibit farming the land under the transmission lines. For these reasons, the Program will have a less than significant impact on agricultural zoning or land under Williamson Act contract.

(5) Impact AG-5: Involve Other Changes in the Existing Environment, Which, Given Their Location or Nature, Could Result in the Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Use

Program components will occupy a total of up to about 4.5 acres of farmland. The presence of the transmission facilities will not preclude the use of any other land crossed by Program transmission lines or any land adjacent to those lines or the proposed substation as farmland. The presence of Program transmission facilities will not cause changes in land uses adjacent to those facilities that will affect the use of those lands as farmland. Therefore, the program will make no changes in the environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

As discussed under Impact AG-5, the Program will have no indirect impacts to agricultural resources.

DRAFT IV-12 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

The foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in a substantial conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. For example, the Sacramento Council of Governments Blueprint for growth (SACOG, 2005a) projects that 102 square miles (65,280 acres) to 166 square miles (106,240 acres) of agricultural land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from agricultural use to urban use by 2050. The Program constitutes up to 4.5 acres of this total conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. The Program also will contribute indirectly to this projected conversion of agricultural land by reducing one constraint to growth: electrical utility costs in the Annexation Territory. Lowering electrical prices is just one factor among many that can encourage and fuel long-term growth.

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project are required to do so under local jurisdictional requirements as guided by CEQA. Because each project will be carried out under the aegis of CEQA, each project will require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to preserve prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great to completely protect the agricultural economy in the Program study area. This will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse impact to agricultural resources, and the Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

e. Monitoring and Reporting

Before construction, SMUD will prepare a report describing its mitigation banking agreement for the preservation of land currently in agricultural production. This report will be submitted to LAFCo.

DRAFT IV-13 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-14 SUTTER 0 5

Scale in Miles

YOLO PLACER

Existing SMUD Elverta )" Substation

Existing PG&E Woodland Substation )"

Willow Slough Substation Proposed Proposed Study Area North City Interconnection Transmission Corridor Existing PG&E West Sacramento Substation )" )" SACRAMENTO )" Existing SMUD North City Existing PG&E Substation Davis Substation )"

Existing SMUD Hedge Substation SOLANO )" Existing SMUD Transmissionline Reconstruction C A S

5 0 . 9 2 . 2 1

K J C

d x LEGEND m . r t l

_ Proposed Annexation Area s d n a l Proposed Woodland/Elverta _ n o Transmission Line Study Area s m a County Boundary i l l i w \ s Williamson Act and p a Agricultural Preserve Lands M c r A \ Prime Agricultural Land s s a p y Non-Prime Agricultural Land B o l o

Y Agricultural Land in Non-Renewal _ D U

M Non-Enrolled Land S \ s t c Urban and Built-up Land e j o r P \ S I Source: State of California Department of Coservation, G \ : Division of Land Resource Protection K

Figure 4B-1. Land Enrolled in Williamson Act and Farmland Security Zone Contracts Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

C. AIR QUALITY

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect air quality. It addresses three major issues or areas of concern: (1) emissions from the construction of Program facilities to serve the Annexation Territory; (2) potential changes in air emissions related to service and maintenance trips to and within the Annexation Territory; and (3) potential changes in air emissions at other locations as a result of the change in the mix of energy sources serving the area. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant impact on air quality.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts relative to air quality is the lower or southern portion of the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, specifically the area defined by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) as the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area (SFNA) (SMAQMD, 2004), which includes five air districts in the larger Sacramento Air Basin that do not yet meet federal standards for ozone (Butte, Feather River, Colusa, Yolo-Solano, and Sacramento Metropolitan). The Annexation Territory and all of the infrastructure components of the Program are located within this portion of the air basin.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

SMAQMD (2004) relates the assessment of cumulative impacts to conformance with the land-use assumptions used in its 1994 State Implementation Plan (SIP) report. This plan covers the described SFNA and was based on land-use designations and assumptions contained in the local government general plans applicable to this area. Any land-use changes caused by implementation of the Program will occur within this area. Therefore, the analysis area for potential cumulative impacts relative to air quality will be the same as the analysis area for direct impacts.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

The following agencies are responsible for air quality planning in the SFNA.

• Federal Government: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for defining National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for several pollutants, as called for in the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The NAAQS are presented in Appendix G. The EPA also is responsible for reviewing and approving air quality plans developed by local APCDs, state air quality plans, and SIPs.

DRAFT IV-17 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• State of California: In 1988, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was passed. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has established California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), which are, in some instances, more stringent than the NAAQS. Appendix G includes both the national and state AAQS. CARB is the agency responsible for coordinating and overseeing the state and local air pollution control programs. CARB, which has primary responsibility for setting mobile source standards for California, is implementing a Diesel Risk Reduction Program aimed at reducing exhaust emissions from all diesel vehicles and stationary diesel engines.

• Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District: SMAQMD encompasses the area of Sacramento County. SMAQMD works cooperatively with four other air districts in planning air quality within the SFNA; the Yolo- Solano Air Quality Management District (AQMD) is one of the other four. The five districts work together in preparing required plans and reports and in developing programs to control air emissions. Each district, however, has its own rules and regulations for implementing the air plans and for establishing and implementing their permit authorities over point source air emissions. The objective of air quality regulation is to attain and maintain compliance with the NAAQS and CAAQS. Stationary sources that have the potential to emit regulated pollutants over the specified thresholds are required to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) before construction. These sources must also obtain a Permit to Operate (PTO) before commencing project operations and must provide regular monitoring and reporting to the air district to ensure compliance with permit conditions.

In addition to controlling air emissions through the enforcement of its rules and regulations, SMAQMD (and other districts) also reviews land development and other projects through the CEQA process. Each district establishes the thresholds it uses to define a significant impact and provides consultation and information to local governments to help reduce impacts. The SMAQMD also has a procedure— its construction mitigation fee program—that allows developers to purchase emissions offsets in a way similar to that used for regulated point sources. This construction migitation fee program is available if other applicable mitigation measures are insufficient to reduce construction emissions below the district’s adopted thresholds.

• Local Governments: Cities and counties regulate land uses through their general plans, ordinances, and entitlement process. The SMAQMD and other districts coordinate with the local governments in the review and permitting of land-use projects, assisting with the identification of air quality impacts that may be associated with land use changes.

• Sacramento Area Council of Governments: SACOG acts as the clearinghouse for transportation and other projects within the six-county region, including El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties and the 22

DRAFT IV-18 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

incorporated cities in this region. SACOG assists in the development and promotion of ride sharing and similar activities related to air quality impacts from transportation.

(1) Control of Air Pollution

Guided by the overall planning structure described above, the local air districts (and other agencies) develop and implement procedures to control and reduce air pollution. Sources of air pollution are typically categorized as follows:

• “Mobile sources,” related to vehicular emissions;

• “Point” or “stationary sources,” related to certain industrial or commercial emissions at fixed locations; and

• “Area” or “areawide sources,” related to residential, agricultural, and commercial uses that, by themselves, may have small emission levels but may have considerable emission levels when viewed as a whole

Rules and regulations adopted to control air pollutants are aimed primarily at so- called “criteria” pollutants—those for which NAAQS and CAAQS have been adopted. “Toxic Air Contaminants” also are subject to regulations. These generally have no numerical air quality standards but are regulated based on the health risk that they pose. Toxic air contaminants may be associated with either mobile sources or point sources and are addressed with separate statutory and regulatory responses.

(a) Mobile Sources

Emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the EPA and CARB. The EPA and CARB establish pollutant emission limits for various classes of vehicles. While important in the overall planning for air quality, most of these regulations do not apply directly to land development projects. Emission standards adopted by CARB for off-road (construction) equipment will apply to the grading and construction equipment used for development of the Program. Authority for regulating off-road equipment is divided between the CARB and EPA. At the federal level, EPA issued its final rule establishing the latest reductions in oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter applicable to off-road engines starting in model year 2008 (Federal Register, June 29, 2004).

(b) Stationary Sources

Stationary point sources are subject to regulation by the SMAQMD and other air districts based on procedures set forth in their rules and regulations. Each district has a two-step permit process for stationary sources. First, an ATC is issued. Then, after construction and compliance with the conditions of

DRAFT IV-19 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

approval in the ATC have been ascertained, a PTO is issued. These permits typically contain requirements related to emission limits, operating parameters, control equipment, monitoring, and reporting. Such permits apply to stationary sources, such as power plants, industrial installations, gas stations, and many other types of commercial enterprises.

Notable among stationary point sources that have not been regulated until recently by CARB or by the local air districts are all sources associated with agricultural operations. As air emissions from vehicles and other major point sources are reduced over time, the relative importance of those from agricultural sources increases. In 2003, the statutory exemption for agricultural operations was removed by the state legislature (in Senate Bill [SB] 700). CARB is in the process of developing rules and defining control measures that would apply to such engines, but the major concern of these pending rules is the control of diesel exhaust as a health threat. Other individual air districts have removed or are in the process of removing agricultural exemptions or developing specific rules for agricultural operations pursuant to SB 700. In the Yolo-Solano AQMD, Rule 11.1 was adopted on March 9, 2005. In short, this rule creates an agricultural operating permit program and will regulate agricultural engines that emit more than 12.5 tons per year of either volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or NOx. In the SMAQMD, a revision to Rule 412 (concerning stationary internal combustion [IC] engines) that would remove the agricultural exemption is being considered, but as of late 2005, no workshop dates have been set.

Several voluntary programs are intended to reduce ozone precursor emissions from agricultural sources. These programs encourage agricultural operators to reduce emissions by installing additional pollution control equipment, by changing operations to reduce energy consumption and the use of diesel engines, and by converting stationary diesel engines to electric motors. Both the SMAQMD and the Yolo-Solano AQMD have incentive programs based on the CARB “Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program.” These programs provide for the reimbursement of operators of heavy-duty vehicles and certain types of stationary equipment, such as agricultural pumping engines. The County Farm Bureaus and other agricultural advice services provide information and assistance towards conserving energy and costs in all aspects of agricultural operations, which also helps to reduce air emissions. In August 2005, under a program supported by the CPUC, the California Farm Bureau Federation, and other organizations, PG&E started an incentive program known as the Agricultural Internal Combustion Engine Conversion Program (AG-ICE). This program includes a reduced electricity rate (20% below the standard agricultural electrical rate), capped increases of no more than 1.5% per year through the end of 2015, and an additional allowance to reduce the costs of line extensions to serve new electric agricultural motors. This program is intended to

DRAFT IV-20 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

encourage operators to convert diesel engines to electric motors and thus reduce the emissions of ozone precursors.

Residential, commercial, and office uses and their associated vehicle traffic are not regulated directly by CARB or by local air districts. SMAQMD does review such projects through the CEQA process, however, and attempts to identify mitigation measures that can be applied to minimize vehicle and other emissions associated with land development projects (SMAQMD, 2004). In a similar way, fugitive dust from construction and similar operations is not regulated directly. Instead, SMAQMD addresses fugitive dust through a nuisance rule (Rule 403) and through identifying dust mitigation measures that can be applied to projects case by case.

(d) Toxic Air Contaminants

Several federal and state programs regulate the emission of toxic compounds to the air. The federal CAA Amendments Title III requires local air districts to implement a comprehensive toxic air emissions program. Response at the state level includes the Tanner Toxics Act (AB 1807 in 1983), the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588), AB 3205 dealing with toxic emissions near schools, and the “Hot Spots” Risk Reduction Mandates of SB 1731.

In 1998, after 10 years of study, CARB identified particulate matter in diesel exhaust as a toxic air contaminant. There is no formal rating or standard for allowable diesel exhaust concentrations in air, but ambient concentrations of diesel exhaust particulate matter clearly warrant regulation. They are responsible for an estimated excess of 540 cancer cases per one million population, which is more than the total of the next 10 monitored carcinogenic compounds (CARB, 2000). The Diesel Risk Reduction Program (CARB, 2000) recommends control measures in the form of mobile source regulations and stationary source airborne toxic control measures.

(2) Criteria Pollutants and Air Quality Standards

The federal CAA, as amended, directed the EPA to establish NAAQS for several air pollutants. Primary standards relate to the protection of the public’s health and safety; secondary standards relate to the protection of the public from non-health effects. The following primary NAAQS have been set for the air pollutants.

(a) Carbon Monoxide (CO)

CO, an odorless gas that is highly toxic, is formed by the incomplete combustion of fuels. At high concentrations, CO reduces the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and can cause dizziness, headaches, unconsciousness,

DRAFT IV-21 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

and even death. CO also can aggravate cardiovascular disease. Relatively low concentrations of CO can significantly affect the amount of oxygen in the bloodstream because CO binds to hemoglobin 220 to 245 times stronger than oxygen. Both the cardiovascular system and the central nervous system (CNS) can be affected when as little as 2.5% to 4.0% of the hemoglobin in the bloodstream is bound to CO rather than to oxygen. State and federal ambient air quality standards for CO have been set at levels intended to keep CO from combining with more than 1.5% of blood hemoglobin.

(b) Ozone (O3)

O3 is formed by a complex series of chemical reactions between reactive organic gases (ROG), NOx, and sunlight. ROG and NOx are known as ozone precursors. Ozone is a public health concern because it is a respiratory irritant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and diseases, and because high concentrations of ozone can harm lung tissue. Ozone also has been linked to cardiovascular disease. In addition, ozone can cause substantial damage to leaf tissues of crops and natural vegetation and can damage many natural and manmade materials by acting as a chemical oxidizing agent.

Suspended particulate matter that is less than 10 microns in size (PM10), given its small size, can remain airborne for long periods and can be inhaled, passed through the respiratory system, and lodged in the lungs. The level of fine particulate matter in the air is a public health concern because PM10 can bypass the body’s natural filtration system more easily than larger particles and can lodge deep in the lungs. The health effects vary depending on various factors, including the type and size of particles. Research has demonstrated a correlation between high PM10 concentrations and increased mortality rates. Elevated PM10 concentrations also can aggravate chronic respiratory illnesses, such as bronchitis and asthma.

(d) Fine Particulate Matter

Fine particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) is similar to PM10, but smaller. It generally derives from combustion sources.

(e) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

NO2 is a precursor to the formation of ozone. It results from combustion of fossil fuels. Aside from its contribution to ozone formation, nitrogen dioxide can increase the risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease and reduce visibility. NO2 may be visible as the active coloring agent in a brown cloud on high pollution days, especially when both NO2 and high ozone levels are present.

DRAFT IV-22 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(f) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

SO2 is formed by the combustion of fuels containing sulfur. Like nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide can irritate lung tissue and increase the risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease.

(g) Lead (Pb)

Pb was a greater hazard when leaded gasoline was available. As a result of EPA’s regulatory efforts to reduce the content of lead in gasoline, the contribution from the transportation sector has declined substantially. Today, metal processing is the major source of lead emissions to the atmosphere. Lead accumulates in the blood, bones, and soft tissues. The health effects associated with lead include adverse affects to the kidneys, liver, CNS, and other organs.

Under the California Air Quality Act, the state also has adopted primary and secondary CAAQS for air pollutants. The state has adopted CAAQS for some pollutants not on the list of NAAQS. Specifically, CAAQS have been adopted for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility-reducing particulate matter. The NAAQS and CAAQS typically are stated as concentrations of pollutants that cannot be exceeded. Appendix G contains the current NAAQS and CAAQS with additional explanations regarding the standards. The roles of the various agencies involved in improving air quality are discussed in Subsection 1.C.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

(1) Climate and Topography

The following information is summarized from the Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (SMAQMD, 2004).

The SFNA is in the southern portion of the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. The Sacramento Valley Air Basin is bounded by the North Coast Ranges on the west and Northern Sierra Nevada on the east. During windless conditions, these mountains confine the air mass and pollutants over the flat valley land between them.

Hot dry summers and mild rainy winters characterize the Mediterranean climate of the Sacramento Valley. During the year the temperature may range from 20 to 115 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), with summer highs usually in the 90s and winter lows occasionally below freezing. Average annual rainfall is about 20 inches; snowfall is rare. The prevailing winds are moderate in strength and vary from moist clean breezes from the south to dry land flows from the north.

Periods of low winds and air stagnation occur most often in the autumn and early winter, when large high-pressure cells lie over the valley. The lack of surface

DRAFT IV-23 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

wind during these periods and the reduced vertical flow caused by less surface heating retard outside air from entering the basin and allow air pollutants to become concentrated in a stable volume of air.

The surface concentrations of pollutants are highest when these conditions are combined with smoke from agricultural burning or when temperature inversions trap cool air, fog, and pollutants near the ground.

The ozone season (May through October) in the Sacramento Valley is characterized by stagnant morning air or light winds, with the delta sea breeze arriving in the afternoon out of the southwest. Usually, the evening breeze transports the airborne pollutants to the north, out of the Sacramento Valley.

During about half of the days from July to September, however, a phenomenon called the “Schultz Eddy” prevents this evening transport of pollutants out of the basin from occurring. Instead of allowing for the prevailing wind patterns to move north, carrying the pollutants out of the valley, the Schultz Eddy causes the wind pattern to circle back south. This causes the air pollutants to be blown south toward the SFNA and exacerbates the pollution levels in the area. The eddy normally dissipates around noon, when the delta sea breeze arrives.

(2) Status of Air Basin and Local Air Quality

Geographic areas and air basins are classified for each pollutant as either attainment or nonattainment. In general, nonattainment means that the federal standard has been exceeded more than twice per year anywhere within the air basin. For ozone and PM10, the formula for attainment is more complicated. Areas that are designated as nonattainment are subject to further review by the EPA and to the imposition of pollution control strategies.

The nonattainment designation is further subdivided into five categories (listed in order of increasing severity): marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme. The degree of an area’s nonattainment status is affected by the extent of the pollution and the expected time period required to achieve attainment.

Appendix G contains tables that summarize the air quality in the analysis area by presenting the number of days that air quality in the nearest monitoring stations in Sacramento County (3801 Airport Road) and Yolo County (Woodland-Gibson Road) exceeded applicable federal and state standards. While the data generally indicate that air quality has been improving over the last five years, both the SMAQMD and the Yolo-Solano AQMD continue to have days when state and federal air standards are exceeded. For this reason, this portion of the Sacramento air basin is considered in nonattainment of the state and federal ozone standards. This status, and the status of the air basin relative to other standards, is summarized below in Table IV.C-1. Note that the information in this chart is presented for the SMAQMD. Unless otherwise noted within the chart, the status is the same for the Yolo and Solano County portions of the air basin.

DRAFT IV-24 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.C-1: Air Quality Standards Attainment Status Chart for SMAQMD and Yolo-Solano AQMD

Parameter California Standard Federal Standard Ozone Non-attainment (classification Non-attainment (classification is serious for the 1-hour and is serious for the 8-hour 8-hour standards) standard) PM10 Non-attainment Non-attainment (air quality now meets federal PM10 standards, and SMAQMD must request redesignation and submit maintenance plan) PM2.5 Non-attainment (Yolo and Attainment/Unclassified Solano Counties are unclassified) Carbon monoxide Attainment Attainment Nitrogen dioxide Attainment Attainment Sulfur dioxide Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment Attainment Visibility-Reducing Particles Unclassified No federal standard Sulfates Attainment No federal standard Hydrogen sulfide Unclassified No federal standard

The federal CAA requires the development of an air quality control plan referred to as the SIP. The SIP contains strategies and control measures that states will use to attain the NAAQS. States with areas in violation of the NAAQS are required to update their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. The California SIP is periodically modified to reflect the latest emission inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of various air basins. CARB has primary responsibility for, and produces a major part of, the SIP for pollution sources that are statewide in scope; however, it relies on the local air districts to provide emissions inventory data and additional strategies for sources under their jurisdictions. The SIP consists of the emission standards for vehicular sources and consumer products set by the CARB and attainment plans adopted by local air agencies, as approved by CARB. EPA reviews the air quality SIPs to verify their conformity with federal CAA mandates and that they will achieve air quality goals when implemented. If EPA determines a SIP is inadequate, it may prepare a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the nonattainment area and impose additional control measures.

The clean air plan for the SFNA (prepared by the five air districts within the nonattainment area) was adopted in 1994 in compliance with the 1990 federal CAA Amendments. Under this plan, the federal ozone standard was to have been met by 2005, or “significant consequences ranging from the imposition of financial penalties to the adoption of even more stringent air emission control requirements” will be enforced (Yolo County, 2005). The clean air plan contains an inventory of emissions throughout the air basin, a series of strategies or control

DRAFT IV-25 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

measures to be applied through increasing regulation of point sources, and measures to reduce vehicle emissions and other sources. A brief summary of the emissions inventories for the SFNA as a whole, provided in Table IV.C-2, indicates that overall emissions, particularly as motor vehicle emissions, are reduced.

Table IV.C-2: Summary of Basinwide Air Emissions

Reactive Organic Gases NOx (tons/day) (tons/day) Source 1990 1999 2005 1990 1999 2005 TOTAL for Basin 164 131 124 222 176 167

Excerpts of Specific Sources: Mobile On-Road Vehicles 118 85 80 110 56 38 Agricultural Internal Combustion 0.920 0.100 0.108 0.005 0.005 0.004 Engines Electric Utilities 0.507 0.607 0.661 0.014 0.016 0.017

Source: SMAQMD, 1994, Table C-2.

Since the clean air plan’s original preparation, the districts have prepared two progress or “milestone” reports, the most recent of which is dated May 2003. This report concludes that the districts are making acceptable progress in achieving reductions in air pollutant emissions (SMAQMD, 2003). As of late 2005, SMAQMD is reviewing its updated rate of progress plan (to comply with the 8-hour ozone standard) and preparing an accompanying EIR while working on the conformity analysis to demonstrate consistency between the regional transportation plans and air quality plans. This process should lead to hearings at the AQMDs within the SFNA early next year, followed by submittal to and approvals by the EPA and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15126.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on air quality if the project would cause any of the following effects:

DRAFT IV-26 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(a) Conflict with, or obstruct implementation of, the applicable air quality plan;

(b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation;

(c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors);

(d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or

(e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people

(2) Threshold(s) of Significance Adopted in This EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has determined that air quality impacts will be significant if the Program or any program component surpasses thresholds adopted by SMAQMD and the Yolo-Solano AQMD. The districts adopted these thresholds because they have been found to be protective of human health and the environment based on epidemiological studies and other research done by CARB and EPA. The standards have been designed to be protective of segments of the population that can be sensitive to air pollutants, such as the very young and old and people with respiratory problems. These quantitative thresholds are as follows:

Yolo-Solano AQMD (May 1996): • 82 lbs/day of ROG • 82 lbs/day of NOx • 150 lbs/day of PM10

SMAQMD (2002): • Short Term – No standard for ROG – 85 lbs/day of NOx – No standard for PM10 • Long Term – 65 lbs/day of ROG – 65 lbs/day of NOx – No standard for PM10

These standards were adopted by SMAQMD in 2002 (SMAQMD, 2004). Relative to the assessment of cumulative air quality impacts, SMAQMD (2004, page 7-2) states:

DRAFT IV-27 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Development projects are considered cumulatively significant if the project requires a change in the existing land use designation (i.e., general plan amendment, rezone), and projected emissions (ROG, NOx) of the proposed project are greater than the emissions anticipated for the site if developed under the existing land use designation.

Thus, a change in land-use designation leading to an increase in criteria pollutants, compared to development under the previous land-use designation, will be considered as contributing to a cumulative significant impact.

Other qualitative thresholds also are published by SMAQMD (2004). These include the potential to generate offensive odors, the potential to release toxic air contaminants, and the alteration of a land-use designation so that related air emissions have the potential to be greater than emissions anticipated under the existing designations.

(3) Evaluation Methods

The analysis of air quality effects is based generally on the procedures suggested by SMAQMD (2004). An inventory or projection of the various air emissions from each phase or component of the Program was prepared and then compared with appropriate thresholds. Because ozone is the major pollutant of concern, the focus of the analysis is the precursor compounds that contribute to the formation of ozone in the atmosphere (NOx and reactive hydrocarbons). In most analyses of this type, the URBEMIS urban emission model program, published by CARB, is used to estimate traffic generation and resulting emissions from a project based on the proposed land uses. Because the program components do not translate directly into standard land uses that are commonly used in this Program, an alternative approach was used.

Details regarding the types of construction vehicles and equipment were obtained from SMUD and were based on SMUD’s experience in building similar facilities. These were used with conventional emission factors obtained from the mobile source emissions inventory, EMFAC, 2002 database, or from SMAQMD (2004) to estimate construction emissions. For its own service vehicles, SMUD maintains an extensive database of individual vehicle emissions factors. This information was used along with SMUD estimates of future service, maintenance, and planned trips to the new service territory to estimate operational emissions from the program. Appendix G contains the assumptions, emission factors, and results of this analysis.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

Based on concerns raised during the NOP review period and on analysis of the proposed Program, potential direct effects of the Program are discussed relative to three primary issues: the change in energy sources serving the Annexation Territory;

DRAFT IV-28 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

potential emissions changes in the service area caused by the change in service providers; and the direct effects of SMUD infrastructure construction and SMUD service and maintenance operations.

(1) Impact AQ-1: Change in Existing Power Plant Operations

This potential effect derives from the overall change in electrical service in the Annexation Territory proposed for the Program. PG&E currently provides electricity to the Annexation Territory, relying on its sources, which include a combination of nuclear, gas-fired, hydroelectric, and purchased power. After annexation is completed, SMUD will supply power to the Annexation Territory using long- and short-term purchased power contracts, spot market power purchases, and possibly surplus power from its Consumnes Power Plant (CPP), which is scheduled to be completed in 2006. SMUD also will extend its energy efficiency and renewable energy programs to the Annexation Territory.

The change in electric service providers in the Annexation Territory may change where power for the Territory is generated. It is not possible to determine the location of such a change because the specific source of power provided to a given area, such as the Annexation Territory, is dependent on a wide range of variables that change daily, such as changes in customer power requirements, the price of power in the marketplace, hydrologic conditions, weather conditions, the price of natural gas, transmission system availability and operations, power plant regulatory and contract requirements, and power plant operating conditions. However, with the Program, SMUD does not plan to change the operations of its gas-fired power plants so that permitted emission levels would be exceeded. Nor is SMUD planning to repermit any of these plants to increase their output and emission levels.

For example, the CPP is a 500-MW new combined cycle generating plant located on SMUD property near the inactive Rancho Seco nuclear power plant (see California Energy Commission [CEC], 2003). Regardless of the Annexation Program, SMUD plans to operate the CPP as a “base load” power plant. Base load plants are operated whenever technically and economically feasible.

When compared to all natural gas-fired power plants in California, the CPP will burn approximately 25% less natural gas to generate an MW of power during peak periods. This is because it is a new, state-of-the-art power plant. Therefore, it is likely that SMUD will operate the CPP as often as possible, regardless of the proposed annexation. When the CPP generates more power than is required to serve SMUD’s existing area, surplus power will be sold to the energy marketplace or to the Annexation Territory.

The CPP incorporates all best available control technologies (BACTs) to minimize air emissions. These include the use of dry low-NOx combustors and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to minimize the formation of nitrogen oxides and maintenance and combustion control measures to minimize the generation of

DRAFT IV-29 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

organic compounds. These pollutants are the target of control because they are the precursors for ozone formation. These control measures are expected to keep NOx emissions at or below 2.0 parts per million (ppm) on a 1-hour average. Because the air basin does not attain state and federal standards for ozone, SMUD was required to “offset” any increase in emissions by purchasing and retiring generators of NOx elsewhere within the region.

Through the combination of conditions applied to the power plant and the process of offsetting any anticipated emissions, the CEC concluded “…all potential adverse impacts to air quality will be mitigated to insignificance.” (CEC, 2003, p 21) The conditions are imposed by both the CEC and by SMAQMD, which also has permit authority over the plant. Thus, any air emissions at the CPP that might be attributable to the Annexation Program must be within the limits of the plant’s operating permit and already have been accounted for in regional projections of air emissions. In addition, there will be a reduction in emissions from the PG&E sources currently serving the Annexation Territory. Thus, in considering the source of energy to be used to serve the Annexation Territory, and its potential effect on air quality, there is a less than significant impact on air quality.

(2) Impact AQ-2: Conflict with or Obstruct Applicable Air Quality Plans

This potential effect also relates to the overall change in electrical service that is proposed by the Program. The proposed Program will result in a 2% reduction in all existing PG&E rate classes within the Annexation Territory. This includes the current PG&E AG-ICE program, which provides a 20% reduction, below agricultural rates, to farmers who convert stationary diesel engines to electric motors. It is likely, therefore, that gradual reductions in air emissions from stationary agricultural sources will continue because the Annexation Program will reduce electrical energy costs to farmers below current conditions, providing them with further incentive to convert pumps used to extract groundwater from diesel to electrical. SMUD also will extend its public education, energy conservation, and other programs to encourage efficient energy use to the Annexation Territory.

As dicussed in more detail under Impact AQ-4, the Program may increase vehicle emissions because of increased vehicle miles traveled to operate and maintain the electric system in the Annexation Territory. However, this increase in emissions is projected to be below de minimus levels. These are emission thresholds below which SMAQMD has determined it can achieve its goals in improving air quality.

In conclusion, the net effect on air quality of changing electrical service providers throughout the Annexation Territory from PG&E to SMUD will be less than significant.

(3) Impact AQ-3: Construction Emissions

This potential impact relates to the construction of the infrastructure components necessary for SMUD to serve the Annexation Territory (Program Components 4

DRAFT IV-30 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

through 8). These program components will involve somewhat similar construction steps: clearing and drilling (or grading) and then pouring concrete for foundations; erecting poles; and installing conductors (and other equipment in the case of the Willow Slough substation) and wire.

Appendix G contains the details of assumptions, emission factors, and resulting emissions of hydrocarbons and NOx from the construction phase for each of the Program infrastructure components. The emissions results are summarized in Table IV.C-3.

The Yolo-Solano AQMD uses a critical threshold of 82 pounds per day (lb/day) for NOx and hydrocarbons (the ozone precursors) to define a significant construction emissions impact. The SMQAMD uses a similar figure of 85 lb/day. None of the operations in Table IV.C-3 will approach this threshold.

Table IV.C-3: Summary of Daily Construction Emissions

Total Daily Emissions (lb/day) Program Component Construction Phase HC CO NOx PM 4. Power Inn Road to Hedge 1. Construct Foundations* 3.849* 33.317* 27.187* 0.573* Substation Transmission Line 2. Install Poles* 2.534* 22.957* 14.262* 0.378* Reconstruction Study Area 3. Install Conductors 2.048 17.750 12.504 0.390 5. North City Interconnection Study 1. Construct Foundations 2.014 17.368 14.900 0.292 Area 2. Install Poles 1.368 12.902 7.296 0.190 3. Install Conductors 2.048 17.750 12.504 0.390 6. Woodland-Elverta Transmission 1. Grade/Install Foundations 4.077 34.850 30.918 0.586 Line Study Area 2. Install Poles 3.781 34.201 21.607 0.569 3. String Conductor 2.823 24.026 18.362 0.598 7. Willow Slough Substation Study 1. Grade/Do Underground Work* 4.097* 29.986* 33.482* 1.102* Area 2. Install Foundations 2.116 18.193 15.858 0.292 3. Install Equipment 1.382 13.141 7.566 0.194

Maximum Anticipated Overlap Sum of Items Marked * 10.497 86.260 74.931 2.053

8. Other Distribution System Not specified at this time. Generally minor reconductoring, similar to Phase 3 Upgrades of Program Component 4.

* Construction phases involving the largest emissions that may overlap.

CO = carbon monoxide HC = hydrocarbons NOx = oxides of nitrogen PM = particulate matter

Each phase is such that, at any given location, one phase must be complete before the next can occur. Thus, it is not appropriate to add all of the phases to create an arbitrary “total” of emissions. It is possible, however, that the construction phases could overlap to some extent. Depending on the degree of overlap, that is, depending on which construction activities occur simultaneously, it is possible

DRAFT IV-31 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

that the NOx threshold could be exceeded. To analyze for the degree of this overlap, a preliminary construction schedule prepared by SMUD was reviewed, and the construction phases involving the largest emissions that may overlap were identified. These are marked with an asterisk (*) in Table IV.C-3. With this overlap, the daily emissions of NOx may reach approximately 75 pounds. This is still below the threshold of 82 lb/day. Since the Willow Slough substation figures in this analysis, a more detailed assessment of this issue will have to be performed when construction details are known for this component. It is possible that the specific construction details of the substation or revisions to the construction schedule could result in NOx construction emissions exceeding the threshold. This would be a significant impact.

Fugitive dust also will be released during infrastructure construction. Based on an approximate release of 10 lb/acre-day, and on estimates of the maximum area of disturbance for each infrastructure component, the fugitive dust emissions will be:

Program Component 4 1.1 lb/day Program Component 5 0.07 lb/day Program Component 6 113 lb/day Program Component 7 5 lb/day

All of these figures are below the 150 lb/day threshold used by Yolo-Solano AQMD, and SMAQMD does not have a specific numerical threshold it uses to assess construction fugitive dust effects. Fugitive dust emissions also will be reduced by BMP 6, which incorporates construction fugitive dust emissions requirements established by the Yolo-Solano AQMD and SMAQMD. For these reasons, fugitive dust effects will be less than significant.

These discussions have focused on criteria pollutants, for which numerical thresholds and specific regulations exist within the local air districts. Diesel equipment and trucks used during construction, and diesel trucks used during service and maintenance trips to the Annexation Territory, will emit diesel exhaust particulate matter, which is a recognized toxic air contaminant. Service and maintenance trips by SMUD will replace similar trips currently undertaken by PG&E. PG&E has indicated that it serves the Annexation Territory from local centers. SMUD will service the Annexation Territory from Sacramento; therefore, the Program may result in a small increase in vehicle miles traveled by diesel- powered trucks, resulting in an increase in diesel particulate emissions. This will be a significant impact.

Additional regulations of stationary and mobile diesel exhaust sources are being recommended by CARB (2000), and SMAQMD has initiated this process with Rule 1002, which requires fleet operators to maintain an inventory of vehicle emissions. This initial rule will help to develop a database for organizing and evaluating subsequent rules to control emissions from mobile sources under SMAQMD’s Regulation 10. SMUD maintains and reports its fleet emissions

DRAFT IV-32 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

inventory to SMAQMD and will comply with subsequent rules recommended by CARB and adopted by SMAQMD under Regulation 10.

In conclusion, the only potentially significant air quality impacts anticipated from Program construction is emissions of ozone precursors during simultaneous construction of infrastructure components, including the Willow Slough substation, and emissions of diesel particulates. While the impact of NOx emissions is not expected, based on a review of preliminary schedules, it cannot be ruled out because the location and details of the Willow Slough substation work are not yet known and construction schedules may change.

Fugitive dust emissions will not exceed the construction threshold adopted by the Yolo-Solano AQMD, and all construction operations will incorporate reasonable dust control measures as part of BMP 6. Changing service and maintenance trips from PG&E to SMUD will result in a less than significant impact.SMUD provides SMAQMD with its fleet emissions inventories and will continue to comply with any rules intended to reduce diesel exhaust and other vehicle emissions in the future.

(a) Mitigation AQ-1

Before construction of the Willow Slough substation, SMUD will prepare a detailed construction schedule and updated emissions inventory to determine whether the emissions from this construction, when added to any other infrastructure construction anticipated at the same time, will result in the emission of ozone precursors in excess of 85 lb/day. In the event that the limit may be exceeded, SMUD will incorporate construction emission mitigation measures as recommended by SMAQMD (2004). These measures include the following.

i. Category 1: Reducing NOx Emissions from Off-Road Diesel-Powered Equipment

Before construction of the Willow Slough substation, SMUD will provide a plan for approval by LAFCo, in consultation with SMAQMD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles to be used in the construction program, including owned, leased, and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a programwide, fleet-average, 20% NOx reduction and 45% particulate reduction, compared to the most recent CARB fleet average at the time of construction.

Before construction of the Willow Slough substation, SMUD will submit to LAFCo and SMAQMD a comprehensive inventory of all off-road construction equipment, equal to or greater than 50 horsepower, that will be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours during any portion of the construction program. The inventory will include the horsepower rating, engine production year, and projected hours of use or fuel throughput for

DRAFT IV-33 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

each piece of equipment. The inventory will be updated and submitted monthly throughout the duration of the program, except that an inventory will not be required for any 30-day period in which no construction activity occurs. At least 48 hours before the use of this heavy-duty off- road equipment, SMUD will provide SMAQMD with the anticipated construction timeline, including the start date and the name and telephone number of the Program manager and on-site foreman.

ii. Category 2: Controlling Visible Emissions from Off-Road Diesel- Powered Equipment

The Program will ensure that exhaust emissions from all off-road diesel- powered equipment, used on the Program site do not exceed 40% opacity for more than 3 minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40% opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) will be repaired immediately, and LAFCo and SMAQMD will be notified within 48 hours of the identification of non-compliant equipment. A visual survey of all in-operation equipment will be made at least weekly, and a monthly summary of the visual survey results will be submitted to LAFCo and SMAQMD throughout the duration of the program, except that the monthly summary will not be required for any 30-day period in which no construction activity occurs. The monthly summary will include the quantity and type of vehicles surveyed and the dates of each survey. SMAQMD and/or other officials may conduct periodic site inspections to determine compliance.

If it is determined that, even with the inclusion of these measures, emissions still will exceed 85 lb/day, then SMUD will provide offsets (off-site decreases in similar emissions) by paying a fee to SMAQMD in accordance with its construction mitigation fee program. The fee will be computed by multiplying the daily NOx emissions above the 85 lb/day threshold times the number of days duration for the construction. The resulting total significant NOx emissions will be converted to tons, and the mitigation fee will be computed based on the total tons and the current rate used by SMAQMD.

(b) Significance of the Impact after Mitigation

Mitigation AQ-1 will reduce construction emissions of ozone precursors to a less than significant level. Construction will continue to result in a short-term increase in diesel particulate emissions, which will be a significant impact.

(4) Impact AQ-4: Operation and Maintenance Emissions

Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System (Program Component 9) will result in a slight change in travel patterns. PG&E provides operation and maintenance (O&M) from local service centers. SMUD service vehicles and personnel will make trips to Yolo County from SMUD

DRAFT IV-34 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

facilities in Sacramento. The trips to respond to customer service calls, read meters, conduct normal maintenance, and similar activities will average about 20 per day and involve a total of about 400 vehicles miles traveled each day. Appendix G includes a description of the trips and an estimate of vehicle emissions from these trips. Table IV.C-4 summarizes the estimated daily emissions from SMUD O&M vehicles operating in the Annexation Territory.

Table IV.C-4: SMUD Daily Vehicle Emissions (lb/day)

NOx 2.5 Hydrocarbons 0.34

PM10 0.1 Carbon Monoxide 5.4

Even if these numbers were to double, as anticipated by SMUD for the transition period before and after completing the annexation, the totals are well below the 65 lb/day threshold for a significant impact related to long-term operations. In addition, any such increases related to SMUD vehicles serving the area will be at least partially offset by the reduction in PG&E trips of a similar nature. Therefore, the long-term effect of O&M emissions on criteria pollutants will be less than significant. However, because of the increase in vehicle miles traveled as part of the Program, diesel particulate emissions will increase. This will be a significant impact. No BMP or mitigation measure has been identified to reduce this impact.

Because O&M will occur at the same time as construction of program components, O&M emissions will contribute to the short-term emissions associated with construction. This may result in the exceedance of the construction significance threshold, particularly for NOx. Mitigation AQ-1 will reduce this impact to a level that is less than significant.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

Because of the intermixing of energy from many different sources and suppliers, the emissions related to energy generation are not directly attributable to the Program. Thus, they may be considered indirect effects. For this analysis, however, these emissions are noted as “direct” effects. No other indirect air quality effects are associated with the Program because the presence of transmission facilities will not alter adjacent land uses.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

SMAQMD recommends a specific procedure to determine whether an individual project will contribute toward cumulatively significant air quality impacts (SMAQMD, 2004). The procedure involves comparing the land uses resulting after implementation of the project, or Program in this case, with the land-use designations contained in the applicable general plans. If there is no change, then there is no

DRAFT IV-35 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

contribution toward a cumulative impact. If there is a change, then the process involves comparing the resulting emissions with those that would have occurred under the original land-use designation to see whether the increase is greater than the long-term threshold of 65 lb/day for ozone precursors. In this context, a program such as the proposed annexation has no effect because it does not alter land uses or population or have a major influence on travel patterns. The Program’s contribution toward the regional cumulative air emissions is not expected to be considerable. Nevertheless, in recognition of the severe non-attainment status of the SFNA, the cumulative effect of any increases in emissions of the precursors to ozone may be considered a significant cumulative impact that cannot be mitigated feasibly until attainment status has been achieved.

e. Monitoring and Reporting

Before construction, SMUD will provide LAFCo with a plan for the control of fugitive dust emissions during construction.

DRAFT IV-36 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect biological resources. Where significant adverse effects on the environment are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides the baseline for determining the significance of Program impacts on biological resources.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter, and Sacramento Counties. Figure I-3 (provided at the end of Chapter I) shows the locations for these program components. The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts includes the entire Annexation Territory because Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System, Program Component 9, will take place throughout this area, and Component 8, which consists of possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. The analysis area also includes the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4), the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5), the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Project Component 6), and the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7).

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The potential cumulative impact analysis area is the same as the analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts. This area represents large portions of Yolo and Sacramento Counties and part of Sutter County where the Program, in combination with reasonable foreseeable projects, could have a combined effect on biological resources.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

(1) Federal

Under the federal ESA, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce jointly have the authority to list a species as threatened or endangered (16 United States Code [USC] 1533[c]). The federal ESA defines “endangered” species as those in danger of extinction throughout all, or a significant portion of, their range. A “threatened” species is any species that is likely to become an “endangered” species within the foreseeable future throughout all, or a significant portion of, its range. Additional special-status species include “candidate” species and “species of concern.” “Candidate” species are those for which the USFWS

DRAFT IV-37 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

has on file enough information to propose listing as endangered or threatened. “Species of concern” are those for which listing may be appropriate but for which the USFWS lacks sufficient information to support a listing proposal. A species that has been “delisted” is one whose population has met its recovery goal target and is no longer in jeopardy of extinction.

Section 7 of the federal ESA requires formal consultation with the USFWS or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for only those species listed as endangered, threatened, or proposed for threatened or endangered. Taking of a federally listed species is prohibited under Section 9 of the federal ESA. Taking is defined in the federal ESA, Section 3(19), as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.”

The USACE regulates the disposal of dredged and fill materials into “waters of the United States” under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Waters of the U.S. include intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, and wetlands adjacent to any water of the U.S. (Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 33 Part 328). In areas subject to tidal influence, Section 404 jurisdiction extends to the high tide line. Certain waters of the U.S. are considered “special aquatic sites” because they are generally recognized as having particular ecological value. Such sites include sanctuaries and refuges, mudflats, wetlands, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle and pool complexes. Special aquatic sites are defined by the EPA and may be afforded additional consideration in the permit process for a project. A permit from the USACE is required under Section 404.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703-711) is an international treaty for the conservation and management of bird species that may migrate through more than one country. It is enforced in the United States by the USFWS, and makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (e.g., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) may be considered a “take” and is potentially punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (raptors).

(2) State

The California ESA and the Native Plant Protection Act authorize the California Fish and Game Commission to designate endangered, threatened, and rare species and to regulate the taking of these species (§2050-2098, Fish & Game Code). The state ESA defines “endangered” species as those whose continued existence in California is jeopardized. State-listed “threatened” species are those not presently threatened with extinction; however, they may become endangered if their

DRAFT IV-38 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

environments change or deteriorate. Protection of special-status species is detailed in Sections 2050 and 2098 of the Fish and Game Code. CCR Title 14, Section 670.5, lists animal species that the state considers endangered and threatened. Formal consultation must be initiated with the CDFG for projects that may have an adverse effect on a state-listed species. If no state-listed species will be affected by a proposed project, environmental documentation is provided to the CDFG at the discretion of the lead agency.

Section 2080 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the taking of state- listed plants and animals. The CDFG also designates “fully protected” or “protected” species as those that may not be taken or possessed without a permit from the Fish and Game Commission and/or the CDFG. Species designated as fully protected or protected may or may not be listed as threatened or endangered.

The CDFG maintains a list of designated endangered, threatened, and rare plant and animal species. Listed species are either designated under the Native Plant Protection Act, or designated by the Fish and Game Commission. In addition to recognizing three levels of endangerment, the CDFG can afford interim protection to candidate species while they are reviewed by the Fish and Game Commission.

The CDFG also maintains a list of animal “Species of Special Concern,” most of which are species whose breeding populations in California may face extirpation. Although these species have no legal status, the CDFG recommends consideration of them during the analysis of the impacts of proposed projects to protect declining populations and avoid the need to list them as endangered in the future.

Under the provisions of Section 15380(d) of CEQA, the project lead agency and CDFG, in making a determination of significance, must treat non-listed plant and animal species as equivalent to listed species if such species satisfy the minimum biological criteria for listing. In general, the CDFG considers species on Lists 1A, 1B, or 2 of the California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (Skinner and Pavlik, 1994) as qualifying for consideration under this CEQA provision. Species on the California Native Plant Society’s List 3 or 4 may, but generally do not, qualify for protection under this provision.

The Fish and Game Code provides specific protection and listing for several types of biological resources. These include:

• Fully protected species;

• Streams, rivers, sloughs, and channels;

• Significant natural areas; and

• Designated ecological reserves.

DRAFT IV-39 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Fully protected species are listed in §3511 (Fully Protected birds), §4700 (Fully Protected mammals), §5050 (Fully Protected reptiles and amphibians), and §5515 (Fully Protected fishes). The Fish and Game Code prohibits the taking of species designated as Fully Protected.

Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement for any activity that may alter the bed and/or bank of a stream, river, or channel. Typical activities that require a Streambed Alteration Agreement include the excavation or the placement of fill within a channel, vegetation clearing, structures for diversion of water, the installation of culverts and bridge supports, cofferdams for construction dewatering, and bank reinforcement.

The Fish and Game Code §1930 designates Significant Natural Areas. These areas include refuges, natural sloughs, riparian areas, vernal pools, and significant wildlife habitats. An inventory of Significant Natural Areas is maintained by the CDFG’s Natural Heritage Division and is part of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB).

Section 1580 of the Fish and Game Code lists Designated Ecological Reserves. Designated Ecological Reserves are significant wildlife habitats to be preserved in their natural condition for the general public to observe and study.

(3) Local

(a) Yolo County Tree Retention/Replacement Provisions. The Yolo County General Plan calls for site development standards to prevent the unnecessary disruption of vegetation. The open space element calls for no net loss of riparian habitat and direction of development away from riparian areas.

(b) Sacramento County Tree Retention/Replacement Provisions. The conservation element of the Sacramento County General Plan requires protection of oaks with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 6 inches or greater, replacement, or payment of a fee to the Tree Preservation Fund. It also requires 50- to 150-foot riparian zones on each side of a stream, with no net loss of riparian woodland acreage. The conservation element also requires no net loss of native oak canopy area in discretionary projects. The mitigation canopy must be 50% of the canopy for valley oak and 30% of the canopy for blue oak after 15 years. Off-site mitigation is required when on-site mitigation is infeasible.

(c) Sacramento County Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Tree Preservation Ordinance preserves and protects native oak trees with at least one trunk with a DBH of 6 inches or more, or multi-trunked oaks with an aggregate diameter of 10 inches or more. The ordinance prevents tree removal without a permit as well as damage to trees from grading, filling, trenching, paving, irrigation, and landscaping within the dripline of oak trees.

DRAFT IV-40 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter, and Sacramento Counties. The terrain of the central Sacramento Valley where the components are located is primarily flat and dominated by agriculture. Rice is one of the most important crops, given the relatively impermeable soils in the area. Orchards, principally walnut, almond, prune, and peach, are frequently located along river channels to take advantage of well-drained soils. Vernal pools are common in areas with poorly drained soils, where the rainwater tends to collect in small closed basins. Vernal pools are most common on almost level to gently sloping areas; they become less numerous as the slope increases.

The Sacramento River and its tributaries dominate the landscape of the Sacramento Valley. Between several mountain ranges (the California Coast Ranges to the west, the southern Siskiyou Mountains to the north, and the northern Sierra Nevada to the east) that define the shape of the valley, the river and its tributaries provide water for agricultural, industrial, residential, and recreational uses. Most of the rivers are heavily dammed and diverted.

(1) Habitat Types

Much of the Program study area has been described previously in several HCPs prepared for the region, including the Yolo County HCP, Natomas Basin HCP, and South Sacramento HCP. Information for this section is taken primarily from the Yolo County HCP (EIP et al., 2001). The main habitat types in the area, which are shown in Table IV.D-1, have been broken into specific subtypes and are described in detail hereafter.

Table IV.D-1: Habitat Types and Subtypes in the Project Areas

Habitat Type Habitat Subtype Riparian Stream Course Riparian Forest Wetland Marsh Vernal Pool Pond/Lake/Open Water Woodland Elderberry Savannah Grassland Grassland Agriculture Alfalfa and Pasture Annual Field Crop Vineyard and Orchards Rice

Source: EIP et al., 2001.

DRAFT IV-41 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Riparian Habitat. Riparian habitat includes the entire range of vegetation types and other special elements, such as sand or mud, that are associated with watercourses. The two riparian subtypes identified are streamcourse and riparian forest.

The streamcourse riparian habitat subtype is defined by the open water, channel, and bank of a particular watercourse. This subtype includes the sandbar and bank habitat elements and can be associated with, or be present without, an established overstory of woody shrubs or trees.

The riparian forest habitat subtype is characterized by an established stand of mixed mature riparian trees, such as cottonwood, willows, ash, and valley oak trees. It can occur as a closed canopy forest with a scattered-to-dense understory of smaller trees, shrubs, and vines. Riparian forests currently support or have the potential to support special-status species, such as the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB) (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), northwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata marmorata), giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas), Swainson’s hawks (Buteo swainsoni), western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), and California yellow warbler (Dendroica patichia).

Wetland Habitat. Wetland habitat types include natural wetland areas (whether rainfall or spring-supported), modified creeks and drainage ways, and various artificial impoundments, which refer to wetland types that are supplied with pumped or passive water. One example of passive water is a flood control basin. Wetland habitats are defined on a strictly functional basis as habitats that are subject to seasonal ponding or soil saturation. Accordingly, this habitat includes many areas that do not fall under federal wetland jurisdiction, which requires the presence of vegetation, soils, and natural hydrology that are characteristic of wetlands. On the other hand, it does not include all areas where hydrophytic vegetation occurs, unless they are also regularly characterized by saturation. Wetlands support a diversity of species, including special-status species, such as vernal pool grasses, vernal pool crustaceans, California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), western spadefoot (Spea hammondii), northwestern pond turtle, giant garter snake, and several special-status bird species.

The three wetland habitat subtypes identified in the Program area are marsh, vernal pool, and pond/lake/open water. The marsh habitat subtype includes seasonal and perennial wetland habitats characterized by herbaceous emergent vegetation. Grasses, sedges, and rushes typically dominate the marsh habitat subtype. The vernal pool habitat subtype includes seasonally ponded areas supported strictly by rainfall and localized watersheds within the immediate surroundings of individual pools or pool complexes. Vernal pools are characterized by the presence of a diverse herbaceous flora of native Californian species. The pond/lake/open water habitat subtype includes those natural and artificial wetlands characterized by an aquatic habitat void of emergent

DRAFT IV-42 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

vegetation. A variable fringe of emergent and upland vegetation may border this habitat subtype.

Woodland Habitat. Woodland habitats include a continuously varying series of habitat types dominated in height, if not in areal cover, by trees. These types vary from a closed-canopy oak forest, to open woodland with canopy cover between approximately 10% and 70% or to savannah, which is conventionally defined as having canopy cover of 10% or less. For simplicity, and in recognition of their common biological values, large mature planted trees are also considered woodland habitat. Such trees occur as windrows or along roadways, as clumps of trees planted in agricultural or rangeland settings, and as individual trees within other non-wooded habitat types or urban areas. One habitat subtype, the elderberry savannah, is identified in the study area. This habitat subtype is characterized by single plants or aggregations of elderberry shrubs in grassland habitat. Woodland habitats support the VELB and are particularly important as nesting sites for the Swainson’s hawk.

Grassland Habitat. Grassland habitat in the study area is overwhelmingly vegetated by newly introduced non-native annual grasses, which are primarily wild oats, ripgut brome, soft chess, and barleys. A variety of forbs are interspersed among the grasses, and are nearly all exotic species. Although native plants are relatively absent from this habitat type, grasslands are of high habitat value for many native wildlife species. For example, an important non- vegetational habitat element in grassland is the soil within which burrowing wildlife species create dens or nest sites. These burrows often constitute a crucial habitat element for other species that need them, but are unable to dig them. Ground squirrel burrows and pocket gopher burrows are subsequently used by and are essential for special-status species, such as the western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea) and the California tiger salamander. Grassland can occur within riparian habitat and oak savannah and occasionally is associated with agricultural lands. Isolated wetlands and widely scattered trees also occur within some grasslands. No habitat subtypes are defined within the grassland category in the study area.

Agricultural Habitat. Agricultural habitats comprise the dominant habitat type in the Elverta and Willow Slough substation areas of the Program. Agricultural lands are intensively used lands that historically supported other Great Valley habitat types. Over the last 150 years, conversion of natural lands to agriculture has steadily increased. Many of the habitat values of these agricultural lands overlap with those of less intensively modified lands categorized as other habitat types. For example, many of the habitat values of rice fields are similar to those of wetlands, due to regular inundation. Most rice-growing areas were formally wetlands. Dry-farmed or briefly flood-irrigated croplands used to grow cereal crops, tomatoes, and particularly alfalfa, share some of the habitat values of grasslands. Four habitat subtypes are identified: Alfalfa and pasture, annual field crop, vineyards and orchards, and rice.

DRAFT IV-43 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The alfalfa and pasture habitat subtype is characterized by a more perennial preserve. While alfalfa is mowed regularly during the growing season, the crop is often in place for four to five consecutive years. Pasture is typically irrigated grassland habitat with a varying amount of animal density that will ultimately affect the stand of vegetation at any particular time.

The annual field crop habitat subtype includes those lands subject to yearly production of annual crops. Typical annual cultural practices include discing in preparation for planting, regular irrigation, harvesting, and discing again prior to the winter. Some annual field croplands are subject to winter inundation for flood- control purposes.

The vineyard and orchard habitat subtype is characterized by stands of grapevines and fruit and nut trees. While perennial in nature, vineyards and orchards are typically intensively managed for weed, vertebrate, and invertebrate pest control.

The rice habitat subtype is characterized by seasonal inundation of fields for production. Fields are subject to annual discing and check pulling, flooding, draining, harvesting, and the burning of rice straw, which is being replaced with other methods of removal, such as winter flooding for straw decomposition.

Other Special Habitat Elements. The most important special habitat elements in agricultural lands usually are the berms and fences that bound many parcels. These edges provide valuable burrow opportunities and perches for species that feed on the insects and rodents that are found on and along the edges of some fields. The harvesting process is another special element. This regular removal of cover exposes the resident insect and rodent populations to foraging predators, some of which are special-status species, such as the Swainson’s hawk. In addition, many Yolo County farmers already manage portions of their farms to enhance habitat value on a voluntary basis. Planting of hedgerows and trees, maintenance and strategic location of tailwater ponds, and other management techniques are incorporated into normal farming practices to balance wildlife use with active agricultural use.

(2) Special-Status Species

For the purposes of this evaluation, special-status species include taxa with a moderate or greater potential to occur in the Program study area, including those: (1) listed as threatened or endangered under either the California or federal ESA; (2) candidates for either state or federal listing; (3) species afforded protection under the Fish and Game Code of California; (4) federal and CDFG “Species of Special Concern”; (5) CDFG “Species of Special Concern” highest and second priority lists; and (6) California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 1-3 plants.

The CNDDB, the CNPS electronic database, and the official USFWS species list were reviewed to determine the occurrence or potential occurrence of special status plant or wildlife species and natural communities of special concern within

DRAFT IV-44 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Yolo and Sacramento Counties. This range was used to identify potential special-status species issues because it encompasses a sufficient distance to accommodate for regional habitat diversity and to overcome the limitations of the CNDDB. The CNDDB is based on actual recorded occurrences and does not constitute an exhaustive inventory of every resource. In addition to a survey of the databases described above, a vehicular reconnaissance survey was conducted of the study area on October 5, 2005.

Table IV.D-2 includes a list of these special-status plant and wildlife species with both scientific and common names, legal status and description of habitat preference.

(3) Wildlife Species

This section describes special status wildlife species with the potential to occur in the study area.

Bank Swallow. The bank swallow is a federal species of concern and state listed as threatened. It is generally found near water, both during breeding and in migration. The nesting sites are almost always along a water body on vertical banks of dirt or sand. These colonies can support dozens to thousands of nesting birds. They are largely found in riparian ecosystems, particularly rivers in the larger lowland valleys of northern California.

The bank swallow is a locally common to uncommon breeding season resident in northern and central California. The major breeding population is confined to the Sacramento and Feather Rivers and their major tributaries north of their confluence, where an estimated 75% of California’s breeding population was found in 1987 (Laymon et al., 1988). The Sacramento River population represented approximately 50% of the state’s population in 1987, and the population occurs between Redding, Shasta County, and the Yolo Bypass in Yolo County. The Feather River supported 25% of the state’s population in 1987; this population occurs between Oroville, Butte County, and the confluence of the Sacramento and Feather Rivers in Sutter County.

This species has been recorded nesting along the Sacramento River in and adjacent to the Elverta study area. It also has been observed along the Sacramento River less than 0.5 mile east of the North City interconnection study area (CDFG, 2005).

California Black Rail. The California black rail is a federal species of concern, a state threatened species, and a CDFG fully protected species. It is a yearlong resident of saline, brackish, and fresh emergent wetlands in the San Francisco Bay area and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Zeiner et al., 1990). The species occurs most commonly in tidal emergent wetlands dominated by pickleweed or in

DRAFT IV-45 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2: Potential Special-Status Species Within the Program Study Area

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Mammals Corynorhinus Pacific western big- SC SC NA Humid coastal regions; roosts include Not likely to occur (=Plecotus) townsendii eared bat caves, mines, and buildings townsendii Myotis ciliolabrum Small-footed myotis bat SC None NA Open stands in arid forests, woodlands, Not likely to occur and brushy habitats, near water, western and eastern sides of Sierra Nevada. Southern Contra Costa County is the closest occurrence of this species to the Program components. Myotis thysandoes Fringed myotis bat SC None NA Piñon-juniper forest, valley and foothill Not likely to occur hardwood woodlands, and hardwood- conifer forest Myotis volans Long-legged myotis bat SC None NA Brush, woodland, and forest habitats Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and the North City interconnection study area Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis bat SC SC NA Open forests and woodlands near water Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and the North City interconnection study area Perognathus inornatus San Joaquin pocket SC None NA Grasslands, blue oak savannas; needs Not likely to occur mouse friable soils Birds Agelaius tricolor Tricolored blackbird SC SC NA Open valleys and foothills in streamside Potential to occur in the Woodland- timber, alfalfa and rice fields, blackberry Elverta transmission line study area thickets, tules and cattails on and around marshes and reservoirs Asio flammeus Short-eared owl SC SC NA Meadows, grasslands, wetlands, irrigated Potential to occur in the Woodland- land Elverta transmission line study area and Willow Slough substation study area

DRAFT IV-46 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Athene cunicularia Western burrowing owl SC P NA Nests and winters in grassland and sparse Potential to occur in the Woodland- hypugaea shrubland habitats throughout California; Elverta transmission line study area uses abandoned burrows of burrowing and the Power Inn Road to Hedge mammals for shelter and nest sites substation transmission line reconstruction study area Botaurus lentiginosus American bittern SC None NA Marshes and wetlands Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area Branta canadensis Aleutian Canada goose D None NA Does not nest in California. Winter Potential to occur in the Woodland- leucopareia habitat includes agricultural croplands Elverta transmission line study area and pastures. Known to winter in San Joaquin delta, Humboldt County, Merced and Stanislaus counties, Butte Sink, Colusa County. Buteo regalis Ferruginous hawk SC SC NA Undisturbed grassland and agricultural Potential to occur in the Woodland- areas (winter). Elverta transmission line study area and Willow Slough substation study area Buteo swainsoni Swainson’s hawk SC T NA Lower Sacramento and San Joaquin Potential to occur in the Woodland- Valleys, the Klamath Basin, and Butte Elverta transmission line study area Valley; highest nesting densities occur and North City interconnection study near Davis and Woodland, Yolo County. area Nests in oaks or cottonwoods in or near riparian habitats; forages in grasslands, irrigated pastures, and grain fields. Carduelis lawrencei Lawrence’s goldfinch SC None NA Valley foothill hardwood, valley foothill Not likely to occur hardwood-conifer Charadrius montanus Mountain plover PT SC NA Nests in Montana, New Mexico, Potential to forage in the Woodland- Oklahoma, Colorado, and Texas; winters Elverta transmission line study area primarily within the Central and Imperial and Willow Slough substation study Valleys of California within cultivated area fields and grasslands.

DRAFT IV-47 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Circus cyanena Northern Harrier None SC NA Marshes, grasslands, meadows, also Potential to occur in the Woodland- agricultural lands for foraging Elverta transmission line study area and Willow Slough substation study area Coccyzus americanus Western yellow-billed C E NA Large stands of valley-foothill riparian; Not likely to occur; out of range of occidentalis cuckoo breeds only along the Feather River in known breeding areas Sutter County, along the Sacramento River in Butte, Glenn, and Colusa Counties, and along the south fork of the Kern River Contopus cooperi Olive-sided flycatcher SC SC NA (Nesting) Habitats are mixed conifer, Not likely to occur montane hardwood-conifer, Douglas fir, redwood, red fir, and lodge pole pine. Most numerous in montane conifer forests where tall trees overlook canyons, meadows, lakes, or other open terrain. Dendroica patichia Yellow warbler None SC NA Riparian woodland for breeding; Potential to forage in the Woodland- widespread as a migrant. Elverta transmission line study area, Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area Elanus leucurus White-tailed kite SC FP NA Nests among dense-topped trees; forages Potential to occur in the Woodland- in open grasslands, meadows, or marshes Elverta transmission line study area, Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area

DRAFT IV-48 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Empidonax traillii Little willow flycatcher None E NA Riparian habitat, dense willow thickets Not likely to occur brewsteri edging wet meadows or ponds (not specific to subspecies). Historically, it was found in the Sierra Nevada, Central Valley, and central and northern Coast Ranges. Currently, it is found only in isolated populations in the Sierra Nevada and the Cascade Range and occasionally in the northern Coast Ranges Falco peregrinus American peregrine D E NA Cliff ledges, particularly near shores and Potential to forage in the Woodland- anatum falcon marshes Elverta transmission line study area Grus canadensis tabida Greater sandhill crane T None NA Shallow waters, freshwater margins. Potential to forage in the Woodland- Known to nest in Lassen, Modoc, Elverta transmission line study area Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, and Siskiyou Counties. Haliaeetus Bald eagle T E NA Seacoast, islands, sea cliffs, large lakes, Not likely to occur leucocephalus large rivers, coastal lagoons Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead shrike SC SC NA Open canopied valley and foothill Potential to occur in the Woodland- hardwood, riparian; urban areas Elverta transmission line study area, Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area, and North City interconnection study area Laterallus jamaicensis Black rail SC T NA Tidal salt marshes, freshwater and Potential to forage in the Woodland- coturniculus FP brackish marshes. Elverta transmission line study area Limosa fedoa Marbled godwit SC SC NA Coastal beaches, mudflats, salt marshes, Not likely to occur and tidal creeks. Does not breed in California.

DRAFT IV-49 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Melanerpes lewis Lewis’ woodpecker SC None NA Open pine-oak woodlands, coniferous Potential to occur in the Woodland- forests, and riparian woodlands. Prefers Elverta transmission line study area burned and logged woodlands. Important and the Willow Slough substation aspects of breeding habitat include an study area open canopy, a brushy understory offering ground cover and abundant insects, dead or downed woody material and available perches. Numenius americanus Long-billed curlew SC SC NA Intertidal mudflats of large estuaries, Potential to forage in the Woodland- upland herbaceous areas, and cropland Elverta transmission line study area (winter) and the Willow Slough substation study area Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel SC None NA Marshes, agricultural fields for forging Potential to forage in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and the Willow Slough substation study area Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested None SC NA Inland waters Not likely to occur cormorant Picoides nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker SLC None NA Resident from northern California to Potential to forage in the Woodland- Baja California. Found in canyon scrub Elverta transmission line study area oaks, oak woodlands, and riparian areas and North City interconnection study area Plegadis chihi White-faced ibis SC SC NA Nests in a few isolated areas within the Potential to forage in the Woodland- Central Valley; places nests within dense Elverta transmission line study area stands of fresh water emergent vegetation near shallow water or muddy fields for foraging; winters mainly in the San Joaquin Valley and Imperial Valley. Riparia riparia Bank swallow SC T NA Riparian vegetation, vertical banks or Potential to occur in the Woodland- cliffs near streams, rivers, lakes, and Elverta transmission line study area, oceans Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area

DRAFT IV-50 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Selasphorus rufus Rufous hummingbird SC None NA Valley and foothill woodland, hardwood- Potential to occur in the Woodland- conifer forest, riparian woodland, and Elverta transmission line study area, chaparral during migration Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area Selasphorus sasin Allen’s hummingbird SC None NA Brushy slopes, chaparral, thickets and Not likely to occur open coniferous forests Sphyrapicus rubber Red-breasted sapsucker SC SC NA Dense mixed and conifer forests often Potential to occur in the Woodland- found in mature and old growth forests, Elverta transmission line study area but will breed in second growth as long as some large nesting trees occur. Can also be found in riparian habitats with large cottonwoods. Strix occidentalis Northern spotted owl T SC NA Old-growth forests or mixed stands of Not likely to occur caurina old-growth and mature trees. Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher SC None NA Chaparral vegetation along coast and Not likely to occur foothills Reptiles Anniella pulchra Silvery legless lizard SC SC NA Found primarily in areas with sandy or Not likely to occur pulchra loose organic soils or where there is plenty of leaf litter Clemmys marmorata Northwestern pond SC SC NA Permanent or nearly permanent water Potential to occur in the Woodland- marmorata turtle with basking sites and upland for nest Elverta transmission line study area sites; can tolerate seawater for short periods of time, but prefer freshwater Masticophis flagellum San Joaquin coachwhip SC SC NA Dry, open areas in brushland and rocky Not likely to occur ruddocki hillsides. Phrynosoma coronatum California horned lizard SC SC NA Lowlands along sandy washes with Not likely to occur frontale scattered low bushes and open areas for sunning

DRAFT IV-51 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Thamnophis gigas Giant garter snake T T NA Dense emergent vegetation, deep and Potential to occur in the Woodland- shallow pools of water, open areas along Elverta transmission line study area the margins, and upland habitat. Rice and Willow Slough substation study fields are often used by this species. area Amphibians Ambystoma California tiger T SC NA Annual grassland and valley-foothill Potential to occur in the Woodland- californiense salamander hardwood habitats, vernal pools and Elverta transmission line study area other seasonal water sources adjacent to and the Power Inn Road to Hedge underground refuges substation transmission line reconstruction study area Rana aurora draytonii California red-legged E SC NA Lowlands and foothills with deep water Not likely to occur frog remaining for at least 11 weeks; water source is usually associated with abundant emergent and/or shoreline vegetation Rana boylii Foothill yellow-legged SC SC NA Partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles Not likely to occur frog with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Need at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg laying. Need at least 15 weeks of water to attain metamorphosis. Spea hammondii Western spadefoot toad SC SC NA Quiet streams and temporary pools in Potential to occur in the Woodland- grassland, open chaparral, and pine-oak Elverta transmission line study area woodlands Fish Acipenser medirostris Green sturgeon P SC NA Rivers and estuaries Not likely to occur Eucyclogobius Tidewater goby E SC NA Estuaries and lagoons of coastal creeks Not likely to occur newberryi with low salinity. Critical habitat for this species is present only in southern California. Hypomesus Delta smelt T T NA Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Suisun Not likely to occur transpacificus Bay, San Pablo Bay, river channels and sloughs

DRAFT IV-52 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Lampetra ayresi River lamprey SC SC NA Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and Not likely to occur Delta; estuaries, rivers and creeks with fine gravel substrates Lampetra hubbsi Kern Brook lamprey SC None NA Friant-Kern Canal, lower Merced, Not likely to occur Kaweah, Kings, and San Joaquin Rivers Lampetra tridentata Pacific lamprey SC None NA Estuaries, rivers and creeks with fine Not likely to occur gravel substrates Oncorhynchus kisutch Southern T SC NA Pacific Ocean, nearshore marine zone Not likely to occur Oregon/Northern and riverine and estuarine areas. Critical California coho salmon habitat has been withdrawn. Oncorhynchus mykiss Central Valley steelhead T None NA Pacific Ocean, spawn in coastal streams Not likely to occur and rivers, over gravel beds Oncorhynchus Central Valley fall/late- T None NA Pacific Ocean, spawn in large, permanent Not likely to occur tshawytscha fall-run chinook salmon coastal streams and rivers, over gravel beds Oncorhynchus Central Valley spring- T T NA Pacific Ocean, spawn in large, permanent Not likely to occur tshawytscha run chinook salmon coastal streams and rivers, over gravel beds Oncorhynchus Winter-run chinook T E NA Pacific Ocean, spawn in large, permanent Not likely to occur tshawytscha salmon coastal streams and rivers, over gravel beds Pogonichthys Sacramento splittail None SC NA Fresh water from lower Sacramento and Known to occur in the Woodland- macrolepidotus San Joaquin Rivers down to Montezuma Elverta transmission line study area Slough. Known to occur in the Sacramento River. Spirinchus thaleichthys Longfin smelt SC SC NA Moderately saline estuaries and lower Not likely to occur reaches of rivers Invertebrates Anthicus antiochensis Antioch Dunes anthicid SC None NA Sand deposits along waterways; riverine Not likely to occur beetle Anthicus sacramento Sacramento anthicid SC None NA Sand deposits along waterways; riverine Not likely to occur beetle

DRAFT IV-53 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Branchinecta Conservancy fairy E None NA Large, cool-water vernal pools Not likely to occur conservatio shrimp Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pool fairy shrimp T None NA Vernal pools Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Branchinecta Midvalley fairy shrimp SC None NA Vernal pools Potential to occur in the Woodland- mesovallensis Elverta transmission line study area and Hedge substation transmission line study area Coelus gracilis San Joaquin dune beetle SC None NA Inland sand dunes along the western edge Not likely to occur of the San Joaquin Valley Desmocerus Valley elderberry T None NA Valley-foothill riparian; elderberry shrub Potential to occur in the Woodland- californicus dimorphus longhorn beetle is the host plant Elverta transmission line study area, Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area Elaphrus viridis Delta green ground T None NA Margins of vernal pools in grassland Not likely to occur beetle areas between Jepson prairie and Travis Air Force Base Hygrotus curvipes Curved-foot hygrotus SC None NA Shallow water pools; known only from a Not likely to occur diving beetle shallow muddy pool in Oakley, Contra Costa County Lepidurus packardi Vernal pool tadpole E None NA Vernal pools Potential to occur in the Woodland- shrimp Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area

DRAFT IV-54 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Linderiella occidentalis California linderiella SC None NA Vernal pools Potential to occur in the Woodland- fairy shrimp Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Plants Amsinckia lunaris Bent-flowered None None 1B Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane Not likely to occur fiddleneck woodland and valley and foothill grassland, March-June Aster lentus Suisun Marsh aster SC None 1B Brackish and freshwater marshes and Potential to occur in the Woodland- swamps, May-November Elverta transmission line study area Astragalus rattanii var. Jepson’s milk-vetch SC None 1B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley Not likely to occur Jepsonianus and foothill grassland, often serpentinite; April-June Astragalus tener var. Ferris’s milk vetch SC None 1B Vernal meadows and seeps, subalkaline Potential to occur in the Woodland- Ferrisiae valley and foothill grassland; April-May Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Astragalus tener var. Alkali milk vetch SC None 1B Playas, adobe clay valley and foothill Potential to occur in the Willow Tener grassland, alkaline vernal pools; March- Slough substation study area June Atriplex cordulata Heartscale SC None 1B Chenopod scrub, meadows, and seeps, Not likely to occur sandy valley and foothill grassland, typically in saline or alkaline habitat; believed to be extirpated from Yolo county and has not been reported from Sacramento County; April-October Atriplex depressa Brittlescale SC None 1B Chenopod scrub, meadows, and seeps, Potential to occur in the Willow playas, valley and foothill grassland, Slough substation study area vernal pools, typically in alkaline or clay habitat; May-October

DRAFT IV-55 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Atriplex joaquiniana San Joaquin spearscale SC None 1B Chenopod scrub, meadows, and seeps, Potential to occur in the Willow playas, valley and foothill grassland; Slough substation study area typically in alkaline habitat; April- October Carex comosa Bristly sedge None None 2 Coastal prairie, marshes and swamps, Potential to occur in the Woodland- lake margins, valley and foothill Elverta transmission line study area grassland; May-September Cordylanthus palmatus Palmate-bracted bird’s E E 1B Chenopod scrub, alkaline valley and Potential to occur in the Willow beak foothill grassland; May-October Slough substation study area Delphinium recurvatum Recurved larkspur SC None 1B Chenopod scrub, cismontane woodland, Potential to occur in the Willow alkaline valley and foothill grassland; Slough substation study area March-May Downingia pusilla Dwarf downingia None None 2 Mesic soils in valley and foothill Potential to occur in the Woodland- grassland, vernal pools; March-May Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Eriogonum nervulosum Snow Mountain SC None 1B Serpentinite soils in chaparral; June- Not likely to occur buckwheat September Erodium macrophyllum Round-leaved filaree None None 2 Clay soils in cismontane woodland, Not likely to occur valley and foothill grassland; March-May Eryngium Tuolumne button-celery SC None 1B Mesic soils in cismontane woodland, Potential to occur in the Woodland- pinnatisectum lower montane coniferous forest, vernal Elverta transmission line study area pools; March-May and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Fritillaria agrestis Stinkbells SLC None 4 Clay and sometimes serpentinite soils in Not likely to occur chaparral, cismontane woodland, pinyon and juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland; March-June Fritillaria pluriflora Adobe-lily SC None 1B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, adobe Not likely to occur soils in valley and foothill grassland; February-April

DRAFT IV-56 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Gratiola heterosepala Boggs Lake hedge- SC E 1B Clay soils in marshes and swamps, lake Potential to occur in the Woodland- hyssop margins and vernal pools; March-June Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Harmonia hallii Hall’s harmonia None None 1B Serpentinite soils in chaparral; April-June Not likely to occur Helianthemum Bisbee Peak rush-rose SC None 3 Serpentinite, gabbroic or Ione soils in Not likely to occur suffrutescens chaparral; April-June Hesperolinon Drymaria-like western SC None 1B Serpentinite soils in closed-cone Not likely to occur drymarioides flax coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland; May-August Hibiscus lasiocarpus Rose-mallow None None 2 Freshwater marshes and swamps, Potential to occur in the Woodland- riparian areas; June-September Elverta transmission line study area and Willow Slough substation study area Juglans hindsii Black walnut None None 1B Riparian forest, riparian woodland; Potential to occur in the Woodland- April-May Elverta transmission line study area, Willow Slough substation study area, and North City interconnection study area Juncus leiospermus var. Ahart’s dwarf rush SC None 1B Mesic soils in valley and foothill Not likely to occur Ahartii grassland; June-September Juncus leiospermus var. Red Bluff dwarf rush SC None 1B Mesic soils in valley and foothill Not likely to occur leiospermus grassland; June-September Lathyrus jepsonii var. Delta tule pea SC None 1B Predominantly found in the Delta region Potential to occur in the Woodland- Jepsonii of the Central Valley, and in salt marshes Elverta transmission line study area and on tidal rivers; March-May Layia septentrionalis Colusa layia SC None 1B Sandy and serpentinite soils in chaparral, Not likely to occur cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland; April-May

DRAFT IV-57 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Legenere limosa Legenere SC None 1B Vernal pools; May-September Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Lepidium latipes var. Heckard’s pepper grass SC None 1B Alkaline valley and foothill grassland; Not likely to occur Heckardii March-May Lessingia hololeuca Woolly headed lessingia None None 3 Broadleafed upland forest, coastal scrub, Not likely to occur lower montane coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland, typically found in clay and serpentinite habitat; June- October Lilaeopsis masonii Mason’s lilaeopsis SC R 1B Brackish and freshwater marshes and Potential to occur in the Woodland- swamps and riparian scrub; April- Elverta transmission line study area November and the Willow Slough substation study area Limosella subulata Delta mudwort None None 2 Marshes and swamps; known from the Not likely to occur margins of channels and sloughs in the Delta area; May-August Madia hallii Hall’s madia SC None 1B Chaparral; April-June Not likely to occur (=Harmonia hallii) Navarretia myersii ssp. Pincushion navarretia SC None 1B Vernal pools; May Potential to occur in the Woodland- Myersii Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Neostapfia colusana Colusa grass T E 1B Vernal pools; May-August Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Oenothera deltoides Antioch Dunes evening E E 1B Inland dunes; March-September Not likely to occur ssp. howellii primrose

DRAFT IV-58 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2 (Continued)

Status Potential to Occur Within the Scientific Name Common Name Federala Stateb CNPSc Habitat/Blooming Period Program Components Orcuttia tenuis Slender Orcutt grass FT E 1B Vernal pools; May- October Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Orcuttia viscida Sacramento Orcutt grass FE E 1B Vernal pools; April-July Potential to occur in the Woodland- Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Sagittaria sanfordii Sanford’s arrowhead SC None 1B Shallow freshwater marshes or vernal Potential to occur in the Woodland- pools; May-August Elverta transmission line study area and Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area Tuctoria mucronata Solano grass E E 1B Valley and foothill grassland, vernal Not likely to occur pools; only known from three locations: the Yolo County population is owned by the Department of Defense. No land within the project components are owned by the Department of Defense; April- August

DRAFT IV-59 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.D-2: (Continued)

a Federal Status Codes: E = Endangered. Species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. T = Threatened. Species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. PE = Proposed for listing as endangered. PT = Proposed for listing as threatened. C = Candidate for listing. D = Delisted FE = Federally listed as endangered FT = Federally listed as threatened SC = Special concern species. SLC = Species of local concern b California Status Codes: E = Endangered. Species whose continued existence in California is in jeopardy. FP = Fully protected P = Proposed for listing. T = Threatened. Species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. R = Rare. Plant species, though not presently threatened with extinction, that may become endangered in the foreseeable future. SC = California Department of Fish and Game species of special concern. c California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Status Codes: 1A = Plants presumed extinct in California. 1B = Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2 = Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. 3 = Plants about which more information is needed. 4 = Limited distribution (Watch List) NA = not applicable

DRAFT IV-60 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

brackish marshes supporting bulrushes in association with pickleweed. In freshwater, it is usually found in bulrushes, cattails, and saltgrass. Black rails are most commonly found in immediate vicinity of tidal sloughs, in the high wetland zones near the upper limit of tidal flooding, not in low wetland areas with considerable annual and/or daily fluctuations in water levels.

No occurrences of California black rails have been recorded within the study area (CDFG, 2005).

California Tiger Salamander. The California tiger salamander is federally listed as threatened and is also a CDFG species of concern. The documented range of the tiger salamander includes the Central Valley from Yolo County south to Kern County, and coastal grasslands from the vicinity of San Francisco Bay south at least to Santa Barbara County (Zeiner et al., 1988). Tiger salamanders breed in vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands as well as stockponds where predatory fish and bullfrogs are absent. Aquatic habitat must hold water for two to three consecutive months to allow salamanders to complete their metamorphosis. Tiger salamanders aestivate in the summer in underground burrows, generally excavated by ground squirrels.

No occurrences of California tiger salamanders have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Giant Garter Snake. The giant garter snake is listed as threatened under the federal and state ESAs. This mostly aquatic snake is the largest of the garter snake genus, Thamnophis, and is endemic to the basins and floodplains of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys (USFWS, 2002). The giant garter snake is a year-round resident of the Yolo Bypass, occupying slow-moving streams and adjacent uplands characteristic of that area. Giant garter snakes are found in rice fields, canals, irrigation ditches, and cattail marshes. Giant garter snakes prey on small fish, tadpoles, and frogs throughout the year. From late October to late March, giant garter snakes hibernate above the high water line. Hibernaculae are often abandoned rodent burrows, but the snakes also can hibernate in other types of cracks or crevices that would provide them with adequate shelter. During this period, they are susceptible to harm from mechanized earth-moving activities.

Over one dozen occurrences of giant garter snakes have been recorded in the Elverta study area, east of the Sacramento River (CDFG, 2005).

Swainson’s Hawk. The Swainson’s hawk is listed as threatened under the state ESA. Swainson’s hawks are open-country birds that nest in the Central Valley of California and in the juniper woodlands of Modoc County. Nests are typically found in scattered trees or along riparian corridors adjacent to annual grasslands, pastures, alfalfa, and other crops that provide foraging habitat (CDFG, 1994). Swainson’s hawks also nest in urban areas, though the reproductive success of pairs in urban areas has been shown to be lower than that of birds that nest in rural

DRAFT IV-61 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

areas (England et al., 1995). Swainson’s hawks forage primarily on small rodents and reptiles during the breeding season and insects during the non-breeding period (England et al., 1997). Agricultural areas are most often used by foraging Swainson’s hawks just after harvest or irrigation, when prey populations become exposed or brought to the surface (Smallwood, 1995). The current population of nesting Swainson’s hawks in California is believed to be 10% of historic numbers as a result of the loss of breeding habitat in the state and wintering habitats in Mexico, Central America, and South America. Elimination of breeding habitat is the result of several land conversion activities, including the loss of small farms with shelterbelts and tree plantings to larger agribusiness, the increasing development of woody perennial crops (i.e., orchards and vineyards), and urban development (England et al., 1997).

Swainson’s hawks have been recorded along the Sacramento River and west of the Sacramento River in the Elverta study area. They also have been documented along Willow Slough in and adjacent to the Willow Slough substation study area (CDFG, 2005).

Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. The VELB is listed as a threatened species under the federal ESA. Elderberry beetles have been found only in association with their host plants, elderberry shrubs (Sambucus mexicana and S. racemosa var. microbotrys). This species is generally found within or close to riparian habitats along Central Valley rivers and their tributaries. Given the widespread reduction of riparian habitat throughout the state, supporting habitat for this species has been reduced drastically from historic levels (Biosystems, 1994).

This species depends on its host plant, the elderberry shrub, throughout its entire life cycle. Elderberry shrubs often occur in clumps that consist of several stems attached to a main truck. Beetles remain hidden within the stems and trunks of elderberry shrubs as larvae and pupae for one to two years. Beetles are rarely observed in the field, and generally the only sign of beetle occupancy is the exit hole created by the larva just before the pupal stage (USFWS, 1999).

VELB have been observed in the Elverta study area less than 0.5 mile south of the Sacramento River, near Gray’s bend. They have also been observed along the Sacramento River near the North City interconnection study area (CDFG, 2005).

Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp. The vernal pool fairy shrimp is listed as threatened under the federal ESA. Although widely distributed, vernal pool fairy shrimp are not abundant anywhere. The known range of this shrimp includes grasslands in the Central Valley and in the Central Coast and South Coast mountains. Distinct locations have been found from Tehama to Riverside Counties (Eng et al., 1990). Habitat for these shrimp have been reduced and degraded by the development of land for urban, agricultural, and other uses.

DRAFT IV-62 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

These animals are known to occupy several types of seasonal pools, which are generally grass-, or mud-bottomed pools embedded in swales, earth-slump pools, and basalt-flow depression pools. Sites occupied by these shrimp are seasonally inundated and are not subject to strong flow (Federal Register, 1992). This species also has been found in human-made pools with unvegetated bottoms and margins dominated by ruderal, upland, and marsh vegetation, such as rushes.

This species has been observed in the Hedge substation transmission line study area south of Elder Creek Road, between Power Inn Road and Florin Perkins Road. They also have been observed in the northeastern corner of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp. The vernal pool tadpole shrimp is listed as endangered under the federal ESA. This species of Lepidurus is found in California’s Central Valley. Tadpole shrimp also have been documented at the Jepson Prairie in Solano County (Federal Register, 1992).

Information on the biology of tadpole shrimp is limited. Adaptation of tadpole shrimp to their temporary, annual pool habitat is the result of high fecundity and the production of drought-resistant eggs that may remain unhatched in the pool sediment until favorable conditions occur, perhaps more than 1 year. Specimens of tadpole shrimp have been collected from early December until April or May (Ahl, 1991). These shrimp inhabit temporary pools of the following types: grass- bottomed pools in swales of unplowed grasslands underlain by hardpan, and mud- bottomed pools with highly turbid water (Federal Register, 1992).

This species has been observed in the Hedge substation study area south of Elder Creek Road between Power Inn Road and Florin Perkins Road, as well as 0.2 mile south of Elder Creek Road. They also have been observed in the northeastern corner of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Aleutian Canada Goose. The Aleutian Canada goose is a federal species of concern. This species breeds in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska and winters in California, in the Central Valley. During the migration, the Aleutian Canada goose rests and forages at known stopovers along the northwestern coast (CDFG, 2002). The preferred habitats of this species include inland lakes, fresh emergent wetlands, and moist grasslands, croplands, pastures, and meadows. In California, this goose species feeds primarily on green shoots and seeds of cultivated grains and wild grasses and forbs, by grazing and gleaning in moist fields. The Aleutian Canada goose will typically roost on open waters of lakes and ponds (CDFG, 2002).

No occurrences of Aleutian Canada geese have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

American Bittern. The American bittern is a federal species of concern. This bird is distributed widely during winter in freshwater marsh habitats, primarily

DRAFT IV-63 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

west of the Sierra Nevada. It typically hides, rests, and roosts amidst tall, dense, emergent vegetation, on the ground, or near the ground on a log or stump (CDFG, 2002).

No occurrences of American bitterns have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

American Peregrine Falcon. The American peregrine falcon, a state-listed endangered species and fully protected in California, was delisted as a federal endangered species. This bird breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal habitats. Riparian areas and coastal and inland wetlands are important yearlong habitats. This species breeds near water on high cliffs, banks, dunes, and mounds. This species will nest on human-made structures and occasionally uses tree or snag cavities or old nests of other raptors (CDFG, 2002).

No occurrences of American peregrine falcons have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Bat Species. The following special-status bat species have the potential to occur in the BSA:

• The long-legged myotis bat (Myotis volans) is a federal species of concern. Its range is widespread throughout California. This mammal is a colonial bat that is known for breeding in buildings and small crevices in rocky cliff ledges. No occurrences of this species are known in the project vicinity.

• The Yuma myotis bat (Myotis yumanensis) is widespread in California and can occur in a wide range of habitats, but optimal habitat consists of open forests and woodlands with sources of water in which to feed. The Yuma Myotis bat roosts in buildings, mines, caves, and crevices.

No occurrences of either species have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

California Linderiella. The California linderiella is designated as a species of concern by the USFWS. This California endemic fairy shrimp is commonly found in cool, soft-water pools of Central Valley grasslands (Eriksen and Belk, 1999).

Occurrences of this species were observed 0.5 and 0.4 mile south of Elder Creek Road, 0.7 mile north of Elder Creek Road, and 0.7 mile southeast of Fruitridge Road and South Watt, adjacent to the Hedge substation study area. Another occurrence was recorded north of Florin and Bradshaw Road, less than 1 mile from the study area. They also have been observed in the northeastern corner of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Ferruginous Hawk. The ferruginous hawk is a CDFG and USFWS species of concern. While common in southwestern California, it is an uncommon wintering

DRAFT IV-64 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

resident and migrant of the Modoc Plateau, Central Valley, and Coastal Ranges from September to mid-April. The hawk is found in lower elevation open grassland, scrubland, desert areas, and lower foothills. No breeding records are known from California. Prey consists of rabbits, hares, and other lagomorphs, rodents, snakes, reptiles, and amphibians. The ferruginous hawk searches for prey by gliding close to the ground, or by hovering, or from perches. They roost on poles or lone trees and nest on low cliffs, cut banks, shrubs, trees, or man-made structures in transition areas along the foothills or grassland.

No occurrences of ferruginous hawks have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Greater Sandhill Crane. The greater sandhill crane is a USFWS species of concern and is a state fully protected species. The breeding range of the greater sandhill crane has been reduced to northeastern California. The bird winters in the Central Valley in grassland, emergent wetland, and moist agriculture fields. The species feeds on grasses, forbs, cereal crops, roots, tubers, rodents, insects, snakes, small birds, frogs, and crayfish. The crane roosts in flocks at night and prefers treeless areas where predators can be seen.

No occurrences of greater sandhill cranes have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Lewis’ Woodpecker. The Lewis’ woodpecker is a federal species of concern. This bird uses open habitats dominated by oaks and other deciduous trees and conifers and nests in cavities of trees. It breeds along the eastern slopes of the Coast Range and in the Sierra Nevada, the Warner Mountains, and the Klamath and Cascade Ranges. Lewis’ woodpecker breeds from early May through July (CDFG, 2002).

No occurrences of Lewis’ woodpeckers have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Little Willow Flycatcher. The Little willow flycatcher is a federal species of special concern. Historically, this species nested throughout California wherever there was dense riparian habitat. In 1991, it was estimated that approximately 200 nesting pairs remained in the state isolated in five distinct populations: one along the Sierra Nevada mountains and four along river systems in Southern California (CDFG, 1991). Significant reductions of riparian nesting habitat throughout the state and nest parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds has been attributed to the decline of this species (Biosystems, 1994). Grazing practices that directly destroy nests and alter habitat also are believed to impact this species’ population in the state (Biosystems, 1994).

The little willow flycatcher closely resembles the other six flycatcher species found in the state. Little willow flycatchers nest from near sea level up to approximately 2,400 meters (8,000 feet) in elevation in open river valleys or large

DRAFT IV-65 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

mountain meadows where there is dense willow cover. The breeding season occurs between late May and June when adults return from wintering in South America. Fall migration for both juveniles and adults usually occurs during August (Zeiner et al., 1990).

No occurrences of little willow flycatchers have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Loggerhead Shrike. The loggerhead shrike is a federal species of concern. This species prefers open habitats with scattered shrubs, trees, posts, fences, utility lines, or other perches. It occurs in highest density in open-canopied valley foothill hardwood, valley foothill hardwood-conifer, valley foothill riparian, pinyon-juniper, juniper, desert riparian, and Joshua tree habitats. This species frequents open habitats with sparse shrubs and trees, other suitable perches, bare ground, and low or sparse herbaceous cover.

The loggerhead shrike feeds mostly on large insects, but it also eats small birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, carrion, and various other invertebrates. It usually flies directly to its prey on the ground or in a shrub and sometimes hovers. Frequently, loggerhead shrikes skewer their prey on a thorn, sharp twig, or barb wire or force it into the crotch of a tree or shrub to feed on, or to cache for feeding later.

In California, loggerhead shrikes lay their eggs from March into May, and their young become independent in July or August. A monogamous, solitary nester, the loggerhead shrike lays a clutch of four to eight eggs and may be double-brooded.

No occurrences of loggerhead shrikes have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Long-Billed Curlew. The long-billed curlew is a federal and CDFG species of special concern. This species breeds within the northeastern portion of the state in grassland or wet meadow habitats that are usually adjacent to lakes or marshes. Conversion of these breeding grounds to agricultural areas is believed to be the primary cause for the decline of this species in the state (Zeiner et al., 1990). Long-billed curlews commonly winter in the Central Valley, where they occupy seasonal wetland habitats. Smaller numbers of curlews also winter in the Bay.

No occurrences of long-billed curlews have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Midvalley Fairy Shrimp. The midvalley fairy shrimp has been petitioned for listing under the federal ESA. However, this species is not currently proposed for listing. USFWS has designated midvalley fairy shrimp as a species of concern.

The midvalley fairy shrimp was first described in June 2000 and has no formal listing status (Belk and Fugate, 2000). This species is known to occur in

DRAFT IV-66 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Sacramento, Solano, Contra Costa, Madera, Merced, and Fresno Counties. The north-south range of this species is less than any other species of fairy shrimp found in California, including two species listed as endangered by the USFWS. Vernal pools in the portion of California where this species occurs are threatened by human development. This species is jeopardized by conversion of its habitat to residential, commercial, and agricultural land uses within its limited range.

No occurrences of midvalley fairy shrimp have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Mountain Plover. The mountain plover is proposed for listing as federally threatened. Mountain plovers breed in the western Great Plains and winter in California, Arizona, Texas, and northern Mexico. Wintering mountain plovers are concentrated in the San Joaquin Valley and the Carrizo Plain area in San Luis Obispo County (CDFG, 2002). Mountain plovers forage and rest in grasslands and agricultural areas where the vegetation or crop cover is low and sparse.

A mountain plover was observed in the southwestern corner of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Northern Harrier. The northern harrier is listed as a California Special Concern species with a “demonstrably secure” population. Their nesting sites are of primary concern. Breeding usually occurs in shrubby vegetation within marshes, though nesting also may occur in grasslands or other dry habitats away from water. Harriers forage primarily on small mammals that inhabit a variety of wet and dry habitats.

No occurrences of northern harriers have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Northwestern Pond Turtle. The northwestern pond turtle is a federal and CDFG species of special concern. This species ranges throughout the state from southern coastal California and the Central Valley, east to the Cascade and Sierra Nevada mountains. Freshwater habitat alteration and competition and predation from introduced nonnative species, such as bullfrogs and predatory fish, continue to threaten this species’ population (Holland, 1991).

Northwestern pond turtles occur in a variety of permanent and intermittent aquatic habitats, such as ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and ephemeral pools. Northwestern pond turtles can be found up to 6,000 feet in elevation. These turtles also require an upland oviposition site in the vicinity of the aquatic site. Nests are typically dug in soils that are high in clay or silt fraction. Egg-laying usually takes place between March and August (Zeiner et al., 1988).

No occurrences of northwestern pond turtles have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

DRAFT IV-67 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Nuttall’s Woodpecker. The nuttall’s woodpecker is a federal species of local concern. The range of Nuttall’s woodpecker includes the Central Valley, the Coast Ranges, and lower portions of the Cascade Range. It forages in oak and riparian deciduous habitats and nests in cavities of riparian trees and oaks of adjacent habitat (CDFG, 2002).

No occurrences of Nuttall’s woodpeckers have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Oak Titmouse. The oak titmouse is a federal species of local concern. Its preferred habitat includes open mixed oak woodlands, including oak woodlands, streamside cottonwoods, forest edges, and oak-juniper woodlands. Although this species prefers oak habitats, some populations have adapted locally to warm, dry environments without oaks, such as the western juniper woodland in Northern California. The species has adapted to urban and suburban environments in wooded areas.

No occurrences of oak titmice have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Sacramento Splittail. Although the Sacramento splittail was removed from the federal list of threatened species, it is still a CDFG species of special concern. Splittail are medium to large minnows of the lower Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Channelization of much of the Delta and water allocation issues, coupled with low water years, are the major contributors to this species’ population decline (McGinnis, 1984).

This species generally occurs in backwater sloughs of the Delta, where it spawns over shoreline vegetation. During years of high water levels, splittail also may enter tributaries of larger rivers, where they spawn in slow-moving waters dominated by emergent and floating vegetation typical during periods of receding floodwaters (McGinnis, 1984).

Sacramento splittails have been observed in the Sacramento River in the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Short-Eared Owl. The short-eared owl is a California special concern species and a USFWS migratory nongame bird of management concern; their nesting sites are of primary concern. These owls inhabit freshwater and saltwater marshes and grasslands where there is tall vegetation. They feed on a variety of prey, including small mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and arthropods (Zeiner et al., 1990). Breeding occurs along the central and northern coast of California, including the Bay region, and in the northeastern portion of the state. Destruction of marsh and grassland habitat and grazing present the greatest threat to the species (Zeiner et al., 1990).

DRAFT IV-68 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

No occurrences of short-eared owls have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Tricolored Blackbird. The tricolored blackbird is a federal and CDFG species of special concern that is nearly endemic to California. Historically, this species nested throughout the Central Valley and along the coast from Sonoma County to Mexico. The state population of tricolored blackbirds has been reduced by an estimated 64% from its historic numbers because of the loss of freshwater wetland habitat, human disturbance, and competition for nesting space with red-winged blackbirds (San Francisco Estuary Project, 1992).

This species nests in dense colonies along freshwater wetlands, and other areas where there is a permanent water source and dense stands of cattails or tules (San Francisco Estuary Project, 1992). Tricolored blackbirds also have been observed nesting in riparian vegetation, such as willows, thistles, blackberry, and wild rose plants when freshwater emergent vegetation is not available. Nest sites are generally proximate to foraging areas, which often include flooded rice fields, pond margins, and other grassy sites (San Francisco Estuary Project, 1992).

No occurrences of tri-colored blackbirds have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Western Burrowing Owl. The western burrowing owl is fully protected against take, pursuant to Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, and is a CDFG species of special concern. Burrowing owls are small birds with the relatively unique habits of being active during the day as well as in the evening and nesting underground. They typically use burrow systems formerly occupied by ground squirrels or other large burrow-dwelling rodents. Their diet is usually dominated by insects but may include small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Burrowing owls generally forage in open fields with relatively sparse, short vegetation; their foraging ability is disrupted by dense, tall vegetation.

Western borrowing owls were observed in 1988 on the eastern side of the Willow Slough substation study area. This area is currently plowed for agriculture and is not likely to support this species. Burrowing owls also have been observed in the ditches surrounding the Sacramento Army Depot, approximately 500 feet from the Program area between Florin Perkins Road and the Central California Traction Railroad. An occurrence was recorded on the eastern end of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Western Spadefoot. The western spadefoot (Scaphiopus hammondii) is a federal and state species of concern. The western spadefoot occurs in the central and southern Coast Ranges, the Central Valley, and the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, primarily in grasslands, frequenting washes, floodplains of rivers, alluvial fans, playas, and alkali flats (Zeiner et al., 1988). The western spadefoot is rarely found on the surface, as most of the year is spent in underground burrows to 36 inches

DRAFT IV-69 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

deep, which they construct themselves. Some individuals also may use mammal burrows. The species is active on the surface nocturnally, during rains or periods of high humidity. Recently metamorphosed juveniles seek refuge in the immediate vicinities of breeding ponds for up to several days after transformation. They hide in drying mud cracks and under boards and other surface objects, including decomposing cow dung.

Breeding and egg laying occur almost exclusively in shallow, temporary pools formed by heavy winter rains. Breeding and egg laying normally occur from late winter to the end of March (Zeiner et al., 1988). Egg masses are attached to plant material or the upper surfaces of small submerged rocks. Eggs hatch rapidly, normally within 2 weeks. Breeding activities normally conclude by the end of March. Tadpoles transform during late spring and disperse after spending a few hours or days near the pond margins. Few movements occur during most of the year, but they will travel up to several meters on rainy nights.

No occurrences of the western spadefoot have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

White-Faced Ibis. The white-faced ibis is a federal and state species of concern. The ibis is a rare visitor to the Central Valley and an uncommon summer resident of southern California. The bird forages in emergent wetlands, shallow lakes, muddy ground in wet meadows, and wet irrigated cropland. The ibis feeds on worms, insects, crustaceans, and small fish by probing muddy soil with its long bill. Nesting is only known to occur in isolated areas throughout California in dense emergent wetlands. Formerly more common, especially in the San Joaquin Valley, this species no longer breeds regularly anywhere in California (Remsen, 1978). Pesticides and marsh clearing are suspected culprits for the decline in species numbers.

No occurrences of white-faced ibis have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

White-Tailed Kite. The white-tailed kite is a federal species of concern and a fully protected species in California. This bird is an uncommon year-long resident in coastal and valley lowlands and is rarely found away from agricultural areas. It makes a nest of loosely piled sticks and twigs and lines it with grass, straw, or rootlets. Typically, the nest is located near the top of dense oak, willow, or other tree stands. The white-tailed kite is mostly non-migratory in California. Typical prey of this raptor include voles and other small, diurnal mammals, although the whit-tailed kite occasionally preys on birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians. The white-tailed kite forages in undisturbed, open grasslands, meadows, farmlands, and emergent wetlands. This kite species breeds from February to October (CDFG, 2002).

DRAFT IV-70 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

White-tailed kites have been observed approximately 0.4 mile south of Elder Creek Road adjacent to the Hedge substation study area. It also has been observed approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

(4) Plant Species

Boggs Lake Hedge-Hyssop. Bogg’s Lake hedge-hyssop has no federal list status but it is protected as endangered under the California ESA. This species is a tiny member of the snapdragon family (Scrophulariaceae). Most plants are only 1 inch tall with a single 0.25-inch white and yellow flower (Jepson Prairie Docent Program, 1998). Bogg’s Lake hedge hyssop grows in vernal pools and along lake margins. It is widely distributed in central and northern California and is also known from one occurrence in Oregon. Agriculture, development, grazing, trampling, and vehicles threaten the known occurrences of this species.

This species has been recorded approximately 1.5 miles east of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Colusa Grass. Colusa grass is listed as threatened under the federal ESA and as endangered under the California ESA. This annual species is a member of the grass family (Poaceae). Colusa grass is seldom taller than 10 inches, with several stems of loosely folded, clasping leaves, and thick, cylindrical terminal spikes of flowers (Jepson Prairie Docent Program, 1998). The alternating arrangement of leaves on this species vaguely resembles a miniature stalk of corn. Foliage is pale green with sticky glands and a sharp acrid taste.

This grass occurs only on the mud of large or deep vernal pools in Merced, Stanislaus, Solano, and Yolo Counties. Associated species in some locations include state and federally listed hairy Orcutt grass (Orcuttia pilosa) and San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (O. inaequalis). Colusa grass occurs at elevations between 15 and 700 feet. This grass species flowers from May to August, depending upon the hydrology of the associated pool. Agriculture, development, overgrazing, flood control, and non-native plants threaten this species.

No occurrences of Colusa grass have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Palmate-Bracted Birds-Beak. Palmate-bracted birds-beak is state and federally listed as endangered; it is also a CNPS List 1B plant. This species of annual herb and hemiparisite is a member of the snapdragon family (Scrophulariaceae). It ranges in the San Joaquin Valley from San Joaquin County in the south to Colusa County in the north on chenopod scrub and alkaline valley and foothill grasslands. It is found between 16 and 500 feet and blooms from May to October.

The palmate-bracted birds-beak was recorded in the southwest corner of the Elverta study area in 1952 (CDFG, 2005).

DRAFT IV-71 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Sacramento Orcutt Grass. Sacramento Orcutt grass is listed as endangered under the federal ESA and California ESA. It is included on the CNPS List 1B. Sacramento Orcutt grass occurs in vernal pools in Sacramento County and blooms from May to June.

No occurrences of Sacramento Orcutt grass have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Slender Orcutt Grass. The slender orcutt grass is listed as threatened under the federal ESA. This species also is listed as endangered under the California ESA, and is included on the CNPS List 1B. Slender Orcutt grass is widespread but sparsely distributed in eastern Shasta County, Lake County, and the Sacramento Valley, from Sacramento to Shasta County. Usually, it is located at the bottom of vernal pools, mostly at sites underlain by volcanic substrates, and blooms from May to October.

No occurrences of slender Orcutt grasses have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Alkali Milk-Vetch. The alkali milk-vetch is a CNPS List 1B species. This inconspicuous, annual herb in the pea family (Fabaceae) is known from Central Valley and the Coast Ranges of central California from Merced and Monterey Counties north to Sonoma and Yolo Counties. Typical habitat for this milk-vetch includes playas, the margins of vernal pools, and other mesic sites with heavy clay soils. This species produces showy rose-colored blooms from March to June.

Habitat destruction is the primary threat to this species. Other threats, such as displacement by invasive non-native vegetation and build-up of grass thatch from fire suppression or lack of herbivory (including livestock grazing) are not well documented. Alkali milk-vetch was last documented in the Bay Area in 1959. The remaining occurrences are in five counties: Alameda, Merced, Napa, Solano, and Yolo.

No occurrences of the alkali milk vetch have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Brittlescale. Brittlescale is included on the CNPS List 1B. This annual herb in the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae) occurs in the Central Valley from Butte County south to Kern County. Typical habitats include chenopod scrub, playas, grasslands, vernal pools, meadows, and seeps on alkaline clay soils. This species occurs at elevations between 3 and 1,000 feet. Inconspicous blooms are present from May to October.

Development, grazing and trampling threaten this species. Extant occurrences are documented in Contra Costa, Solano, and Yolo Counties.

DRAFT IV-72 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

No occurrences of brittlescale have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Delta Tule Pea. The delta tule pea is a CNPS List 1B plant. It is a perennial herb found within freshwater and brackish marshes and swamps. It is a member of the pea family (Fabaceae) and has been recorded in Sacramento County but not in Yolo County. It blooms from May to September.

No occurrences of the delta tule pea have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Dwarf Downingia. The dwarf downingia is included on the CNPS List 2. This diminutive member of the bellflower family (Campanulaceae) is known to occur in the Central Valley from Tehama County south to Merced County. Except for Solano County, all of the known occurrences are located along the eastern side of the Central Valley. Dwarf downingia produces small white flowers approximately 0.2 inch in diameter between March and May. Typical habitat includes moist grassland areas and vernal pools. Urbanization, grazing, vehicles, and industrial forestry threaten this species (CNPS, 2001).

The dwarf downingia has been observed on the southeastern side of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Ferris’ Milk-Vetch. Ferris’ milk-vetch is included on the CNPS List 1B. This annual herb in the pea family (Fabaceae) is known from occurrences in Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Solano, Sutter, and Yolo Counties in the Sacramento Valley. Typical habitat for this species includes seasonally moist meadows and seeps on alkaline soils. Ferris’ milk-vetch occurs at elevations between 15 and 250 feet.

This species was rediscovered in 1989 at Butte Sink Wildlife Area (CNPS, 2001). It is known from only four extant occurrences (CNPS, 2001). Most of the historic occurrences have been extirpated by conversion to agriculture. No occurrences of Ferris’ milk-vetch have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Heartscale. Heartscale is a CNPS List 1B species. It is a gray-scaly annual herb in the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae). It is typically 0.4 to 2 inches tall. The flowers are inconspicuous, and the plant is most easily identified when it is in fruit.

Heartscale occurs in the Central Valley, from Kern County in the south to Butte and Glenn Counties in the north, and from Alameda County in the west to Madera and Tulare Counties in the east. It is believed to be extirpated from San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties and has not been reported from Sacramento County. Heartscale was observed approximately 1.3 miles south of the Willow Slough substation study area (CDFG, 2005).

DRAFT IV-73 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

It grows in sandy, saline, or alkaline flats or scalds, in chenopod scrub, meadows, and valley and foothill grassland, and frequently occurs in areas that are dominated by saltgrass and brittlescale. Atriplex species are relatively tolerant of disturbance. Heartscale blooms April through October. Habitat loss is responsible for the decline of heartscale.

Legenere. Legenere is included on the CNPS List 1B and is designated a species of concern by the USFWS. This annual member of the bellflower family (Campanulaceae) is endemic to vernal pool habitat in the Central Valley and the Coast Ranges. Legenere often lacks a corolla and can be difficult to distinguish from pre-blooming species of downingia. This species typically blooms from April to June.

Legenere was recorded approximately 2 miles southeast of the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Mason’s Lilaeopsis. The Mason’s lilaeopsis is a USFWS species of concern and is listed as rare under the California ESA. This tiny perennial in the carrot family (Apiaceae) is endemic to intertidal areas of rivers and streams in the Delta region. It spreads by rhizomes and produces narrow, jointed leaves. Mason’s lilaeopsis has tiny yellow flowers and blooms in the summer (April to November).

Typical habitats for this species include brackish or freshwater marshes, riparian scrub (CNPS, 2001). This species is semi-aquatic and is usually found on saturated clay soils that are regularly inundated by waves and tidal action. Its known distribution extends from the margins of the Napa River in Napa County east to the channels and sloughs of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in Contra Costa, Solano, Sacramento, Yolo, and San Joaquin Counties. This species grows at an elevation between 0 and 30 feet (CNPS, 2001). Erosion, channel stabilization, development, flood control projects, recreation, agriculture, and shading resulting from marsh succession threaten this species (CNPS, 2001). The non-native Eichhornia crassipes competes with Mason’s lilaeopsis in some places.

No occurrences of the Mason’s lilaeopsis have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Northern California Black Walnut. The northern California black walnut is a CNPS List 1B species. This medium sized tree in the walnut family (Juglandaceae) is known from only three native stands. Only two of these stands are extant (CNPS, 2001). However, this species is widely naturalized from plantings and rootstock grafted to cultivated walnuts.

No occurrences of black walnut have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

DRAFT IV-74 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Pincushion Navarretia. The pincushion navarretia is a CNPS List 1B species. The species is known from six locations statewide (CNPS, 2005) in the Sierra Nevada foothills and the Sacramento Valley (Amador, Lake, Merced, and Sacramento Counties). Pincushion navarretia occurs in vernal pools at elevations of 66 to 300 feet and blooms in May.

No occurrences of pincushion navarretia have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Recurved Larkspur. The recurved larkspur is a CNPS List 1B species in the buttercup family. This perennial herb typically blooms from March to May in alkaline soils of chenopod scrub, woodlands, and valley and foothill grasslands. Recurved larkspur is found in several counties of northern and central California.

No occurrences of the recurved larkspur have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Rose-Mallow. The rose mallow is included on the CNPS List 2 because it is rare in California, but it also occurs in eastern North America, where it is more widespread. This member of the mallow family (Malvaceae) is known to occur from Butte County south to San Joaquin County. Most of the known occurrences are very small (CNPS, 2001). Typical habitat is freshwater marsh along major rivers and streams. Rose-mallow blooms from June to September.

Development, agriculture, recreation, and river channelization threaten this species. Rose-mallow was recorded 0.3 mile south of the Sacramento River in the Elverta study area (CDFG, 2005).

Sanford’s Arrowhead. The Sanford’s arrowhead is included on the CNPS List 1B and it is designated a species of concern by the USFWS. This perennial herb in the water plantain family (Alismataceae) is widely distributed in California from Del Norte County on the northern coast to Ventura and Orange Counties in southern California. However, this species is now extirpated from southern California and many parts of the Central Valley. Typical habitat is shallow freshwater marsh at elevations between 0 and 2,000 feet. This species blooms from May to October.

The Sanford’s arrowhead was observed adjacent to the North City interconnection study area (CDFG, 2005).

San Joaquin Spearscale. The San Joaquin spearscale is included on the CNPS List 1B. This annual herb is in the goosefoot (Chenopodiaceae) family and occurs in the San Joaquin valley from San Luis Obispo in the south to Colusa and Glenn Counties in the north. Typical habitats include chenopod scrub, alkaline meadows and seeps, and alkaline valley and foothill grasslands. This species occurs at elevations between 1 and 2,700 feet. It blooms from April to October.

DRAFT IV-75 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

San Joaquin spearscale was observed approximately 0.4 mile east of the Willow Slough substation study area (CDFG, 2005).

Suisun Marsh Aster. The Suisun Marsh aster is included on the CNPS List 1B; it is also designated as a species of concern by the USFWS. This perennial herbaceous species in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) is found in Contra Costa, Napa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Solano Counties. Typical habitats include brackish and freshwater marsh. Suisun Marsh aster occurs at elevations between 0 and 10 feet. This species blooms from May to November.

No occurrences of Suisun Marsh aster have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Tuolumne Button-Celery. Tulumne button-celery is a CNPS List 1B plant and a member of the parsley family (Apiaceae). It is found in vernal pools, woodlands, and lower montane coniferous forests, and it blooms from June to August. It has been identified in Sacramento County but not in Yolo County. It is threatened by loss of habitat through the spread of agriculture.

No occurrences of the Tuolumne button-celery have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

Bristly Sedge. Bristly sedge is a CNPS List 2 plant in the sedge family (Cyperaceae). It occurs in coastal prairie, marshes and swamps, and lake margins. It is found in valley and foothill grasslands and blooms between May and September. It has been identified in Sacramento County but not in Yolo County. Threats to the taxon include changes in water regime and invasion of habitat by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). In addition, logging, and shoreline development are potential threats.

No occurrences of bristly sedge have been recorded within the Program study area (CDFG, 2005).

(5) Individual Program Component Settings

Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6). The Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area contains all of the vegetation communities listed in Table IV.D-2; however, no jurisdictional wetlands were found within the program component area. Focused surveys have not been conducted for rare plants. It is assumed that these species are present where suitable habitat occurs.

Four raptor nests were observed in the riparian woodlands within this study area. The grasslands and riparian woodlands in this area provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for raptors, including the special-status species, Swainson’s hawk.

DRAFT IV-76 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Multiple elderberry shrubs were found in the riparian woodlands. These could provide habitat for the federally listed VELB.

The following federal and state-listed species could occur in the study area:

• American peregrine falcon

• Bank swallow

• Black rail

• California tiger salamander

• Giant garter snake

• Greater sandhill crane

• Swainson’s hawk

• Valley elderberry longhorn beetle

• Vernal pool fairy shrimp

• Vernal pool tadpole shrimp

• Colusa grass

• Sacramento Orcutt grass

• Slender Orcutt grass

Other special-status species that could occur in the study area include the following:

• Aleutian Canada goose

• American bittern

• California linderiella fairy shrimp

• Ferruginous hawk

• Lewis’ woodpecker

• Loggerhead shrike

• Long-billed curlew

• Long-legged myotis bat

DRAFT IV-77 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Midvalley fairy shrimp

• Mountain plover

• Northern harrier

• Northwestern pond turtle

• Nuttall’s woodpecker

• Red-breasted sapsucker

• Rufous hummingbird

• Sacramento splittail

• Short-eared owl

• Tricolored blackbird

• Western spadefoot toad

• Whimbrel

• White-faced ibis

• White-tailed kite

• Yellow warbler

• Yuma myotis bat

• Black walnut

• Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop

• Bristly sedge

• Delta tule pea

• Dwarf downingia

• Ferris’s milk vetch

• Legenere

• Mason’s lilaeopsis

• Pincushion navarretia

DRAFT IV-78 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Rose-mallow

• Sanford’s arrowhead

• Suisun Marsh aster

• Tuolumne button-celery

Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4). The program component is in an urbanized area of southern Sacramento. A large portion of the land adjacent to this study area is urbanized and developed. However, the undeveloped areas in the corridor include vernal pools and annual grassland that may be used by special- status species.

Special-status species that could occur in the study area are listed hereafter. The study area is outside of the documented range of the California tiger salamander. However, portions of Elder Creek that are located approximately 0.6 mile southeast of the Hedge substation may provide suitable breeding habitat for this species.

The following federal and state-listed species could occur in the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line study area:

• California tiger salamander

• Vernal pool fairy shrimp

• Vernal pool tadpole shrimp

• Colusa grass

• Sacramento Orcutt grass

• Slender Orcutt grass

Other special-status species that could occur in Program Component 4 include the following:

• California linderiella fairy shrimp

• Midvalley fairy shrimp

• Western burrowing owl

• Western spadefoot toad

• Black walnut

DRAFT IV-79 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop

• Dwarf downingia

• Ferris’s milk vetch

• Legenere

• Pincushion navarretia

• Sanford’s arrowhead

• Tuolumne button-celery

Signs of potential burrowing owls were observed at one location within the program component, at the western terminus of the transmission line route near Power Inn Road.

One retention basin with a low cover of wetland plant species occurs within the 300-foot buffer of the transmission line route, east of Florin Perkins Road. This retention basin and surrounding ground squirrel burrows provide potential habitat for the California tiger salamander.

Potential habitat exists for listed vernal pool branchiopods in several areas. On the southern side of the Hedge substation, and within the right-of-way of Tokay Road, are several depressions that could pond water long enough to support vernal pool branchiopods. An additional depression exists in the transmission line route on the side of the Central California Traction Railroad tracks and within the SMUD South City substation. Both sites consist of shallow depressions with little to no vegetation. The retention basin east of Florin Perkins Road also provides potential habitat for vernal pool branchiopods.

One raptor nest was found in this study area within the transmission line route.

No jurisdictional wetlands were found within the transmission line route. The detention basin west of South Watt Road, within the 300-foot buffer, is excavated in uplands and therefore is not considered jurisdictional.

North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5). Vegetation communities in the North City interconnection study area include riparian areas and disturbed annual grasslands. Federal- and state-listed species that have the potential to occur in the study area include the VELB and the Swainson’s hawk

Other special-status species that have the potential to occur in the study area include the following:

• Long-legged myotis bat

DRAFT IV-80 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Nuttall’s woodpecker

• Rufous hummingbird

• Yellow warbler

• Yuma myotis bat

• Black walnut

Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 6). Agriculture is the dominant land use in the Willow Slough substation study area. The riparian corridor of Willow Slough is in the northwestern corner of the parcel. Pescadero soils are present in portions of the project area. These soils are alkaline and are known to support several special-status plant species, including alkali milk vetch, brittlescale, and San Joaquin spearscale. However, the area where the Pescadero soils occur is currently in active agricultural cultivation. Thus, a low potential exists for special-status plants to occur there. The drainage ditch located on the southern side of Road 27 could support special-status plants that occur in alkaline areas. Cultivated fields may be used by foraging raptors, including state-listed Swainson’s hawks that are known to nest in the vicinity.

The following several federal- and state-listed species have the potential to occur in the area of the proposed Willow Slough substation:

• Bank swallow

• Giant garter snake

• VELB

• Swainson’s hawk

• Palmate-bracted bird’s-beak

Other special-status species that have the potential to occur in the area of the proposed Willow Slough substation include the following:

• Ferruginous hawk

• Lewis’ woodpecker

• Long-billed curlew

• Mountain plover

• Northern harrier

DRAFT IV-81 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Rufous hummingbird

• Short-eared owl

• Western burrowing owl

• Whimbrel

• White-tailed kite

• Yellow warbler

• Alkali milk-vetch

• Black walnut

• Brittlescale

• Mason’s lilaeopsis

• Recurved larkspur

• Rose-mallow

• San Joaquin spearscale

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on biological resources if the project would cause any of the following effects:

(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS.

(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS.

(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including, but limited to, marsh, vernal pool,

DRAFT IV-82 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

The Program study area contains riparian, wetland, and woodland habitats and supports a variety of special-status species. The Natomas Basin HCP is also in place in the Program study area. LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that significant impacts relative to biological resources will result if the Program or any program component will:

(a) Have an adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on populations of any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS.

(b) Have an adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS.

(c) Have an adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

(d) Interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

DRAFT IV-83 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(3) Evaluation Methods

Potential impacts to biological resources were evaluated according to the standards of significance already defined. The CNDDB, the CNPS electronic database, and the official USFWS species list were reviewed to determine the occurrence or potential occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species and natural communities of special concern within Yolo and Sacramento Counties. This area was used to identify potential special-status species issues because it encompasses a sufficient distance to account for regional habitat diversity and to overcome the limitations of the CNDDB. In addition to a survey of the databases already described, a vehicular reconnaissance survey was conducted of the four project component areas on October 5, 2005.

A wetland delineation and general wildlife survey was conducted at Program Component 4 (Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area) on November 7, 2005. A formal wetland delineation was completed for the 50-foot-wide transmission line route, and an informal delineation was completed for a 300-foot buffer area surrounding the route. This buffer was included to address potential indirect impacts to listed vernal pool branchiopods that could occur in the area. The presence and extent of formally delineated wetlands in the Program Component 4 area is based on the technical criteria and procedures described in the USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual.

The suitability of habitat for special-status species was assessed along the transmission line route as well as in the 300-foot buffer. An informal survey was conducted for burrowing owls, and the Program Component 4 area was searched for raptor nests.

A general wildlife survey was conducted, and the suitability of habitat for special- status species also was assessed at Program Component 5, North City Intercon- nection Study Area, on November 21, 2005. A wetland delineation was not conducted at this site because no potential jurisdictional wetlands are present at this location.

d. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Potential Impacts

Potential impacts to special-status species may result from temporary and permanent loss of habitat. Temporary roads and construction laydown areas for the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) will disturb approximately 2.2 acres. Of this total, about 0.28 acre will be committed permanently to transmission facility foundations. The North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5) will disturb 800 square feet for the foundations of one or two power poles. Temporary roads and construction laydown areas for the Woodland-Elverta

DRAFT IV-84 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) will disturb approximately 12 acres. About 1.5 acres of this area will be committed permanently to the transmission facility foundations. The Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7) will require 1 to 3 acres for construction. This area also will be committed permanently to substation facilities. Other Distribution System Upgrades (Program Component 8) in the Annexation Territory and Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System (Program Component 9) also will disturb an unknown area of land temporarily. This program component will not result in the permanent disturbance of any land. In summary, the construction of Program facilities will disturb approximately 12.4 acres temporarily, at a minimum. The facilities will permanently commit 2.8 to 4.8 acres of land to transmission facilities.

The new Woodland-Elverta transmission line also may interfere with waterfowl migration. In addition, the new transmission line may impact the Swainson’s hawk.

(2) Impact BIO-1. Impacts to Special-Status Species

(a) Impact BIO-1a. Temporary Impacts to Special-Status Species that Use Vernal Pools and Swales

Reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line and construction of the North City interconnection will disturb about 2.2 acres of grasslands temporarily. Based on a field survey, these grasslands contain vernal pools and swales. Vernal pools and swales also are present within the study area for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line. These habitats support the following special-status plants and animals:

i. Plants

• Colusa grass

• Sacramento Orcutt grass

• Slender Orcutt grass

• Pincushion navarretia

• Legenere

• Tuolumne button-celery

• Ferris’s milk vetch

• Dwarf downingia

DRAFT IV-85 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop

ii. Animals

• California tiger salamander

• Western spadefoot toad

• Vernal pool fairy shrimp

• Midvalley fairy shrimp

• Vernal pool tadpole shrimp

• California linderiella fairy shrimp

Temporary disturbance of vernal pools and swales resulting from construction of the program components, reconductoring in the Annexation Territory, and O&M may result in the loss of individuals of the special-status species listed above. If all of the habitat temporarily impacted by construction consisted of vernal pools and swales, it still would be a relatively small area (a maximum of 12.4 acres plus disturbance from future reconductoring in the Annexation Territory and O&M activities). However, because of the limited habitat available for these species, this temporary loss is considered a significant impact. Based on observations made by biologists in the Sacramento Valley over the past several decades, vernal pools and swales have been known to recover within one to four seasons following disturbance, as long as the hardpan in the soil that allows their formation is not penetrated. Soil disturbance from temporary roads and laydown areas will not be deep enough to damage the impermeable soil layer that results in the formation of vernal pools and swales. Therefore, disturbed habitat is expected to recover following construction. After recovery, these habitats will be available again to special-status species.

BMP 2 will ensure that Program construction avoids damage to vernal pools and swales and the corresponding impact to the listed special-status species. SMUD has agreed, by implementing BMP 2, to meet a performance standard that avoids adverse effects to the maintenance of special-status species populations in the Program study area. Therefore, Program construction will have a less than significant impact to special- status species using vernal pools and swales. The following elements of BMP 2 will minimize these impacts.

• SMUD or its contractors will have a qualified biologist survey all areas that might be disturbed by access routes, laydown areas, and staging areas for the program components for all special-status species

DRAFT IV-86 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

and sensitive habitats before any disturbance occurs. If special-status animals or plants are present, SMUD will be required either to avoid impacts to such individuals (e.g., by rerouting an access route to avoid special-status plants or by limiting work to periods during the year when such special-status animals are not present) or implement compensatory mitigation, as described in Chapter II.

• SMUD or its contractors will be required to fence off or clearly mark sensitive habitats that may contain special-status species near Program construction areas.

• All construction personnel working in a biologically sensitive area will be required to attend environmental awareness training. At a minimum, the training will include: (1) an overview of the regulatory requirements for the Program; (2) descriptions of the special-status species in the Program area and the importance of these species and their habitats; (3) the general measures that are being implemented to minimize environmental impacts; and (4) the boundaries within which equipment and personnel will be allowed to work during construction.

• All construction debris will be removed from the Program area after completion of construction activities. All Program-related vehicle traffic will be restricted to established roads, designated access roads and routes, construction areas, storage areas, and staging and parking areas. Off-road traffic outside of designated access routes will be prohibited. A 10-mph speed limit will be enforced in the Program area when vehicles are not on paved roads.

• Construction will be limited to May 1 through September 30 to avoid impacting vernal pool special-status species.

(b) Impact BIO-1b. Temporary Impacts to Special-Status Species that Inhabit Grasslands and Agricultural Lands

As indicated, reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line and construction of the North City interconnection will disturb about 2.2 acres of grasslands temporarily. The Woodland-Elverta transmission line also crosses grasslands, and the study area for this transmission line is largely used for agriculture. These habitats support the following special-status species:

• Short-eared owl

• Western burrowing owl

• Ferruginous hawk

DRAFT IV-87 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Mountain plover

• Northern harrier

• White-tailed kite

• Long-billed curlew

• Whimbrel

• Swainson’s hawk

• Aleutian Canada goose

• Giant garter snake

Individual western burrowing owls or giant garter snakes could be lost during construction activities. The other special-status bird species listed are mobile enough to avoid construction activities. If construction takes place in the vicinity of active northern harrier nests, those nests may be abandoned. If all of the habitat temporarily impacted by construction consisted of grasslands or agriculture, it still would be a relatively small area (a maximum of 12.4 acres plus disturbance from future reconductoring in the Annexation Territory and O&M activities); however, because of the limited habitat available for these species, this temporary loss is considered a significant impact. Based on observations made by biologists in the Sacramento Valley over the past several decades, grassland and agricultural habitats can recover within one season following disturbance. After recovery, these habitats will again be available to the special-status species listed.

BMP 2 will ensure that Program construction minimizes impacts to the special-status species listed. SMUD has agreed, by implementing BMP 2, to meet a performance standard that avoids adverse effects to the maintenance of special-status species populations in the Program study area. Therefore, Program construction will have a less than significant impact on special-status species using grasslands and agricultural habitat. In addition to the BMP 2 elements listed under Impact BIO-1a, the following elements will ensure that impacts to special-status species using grasslands and agricultural lands are less than significant.

• Temporary erosion control devices will be installed on slopes where erosion or sedimentation may degrade sensitive biological resources.

• All temporary disturbance areas in annual grasslands will be revegetated with appropriate native species upon completion of construction.

DRAFT IV-88 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• All spilled substances will be cleaned up promptly and disposed of properly to avoid chronic or acute poisoning of wildlife.

• Preconstruction surveys in grasslands will be extended to suitable habitat for burrowing owls 500 feet from the Program footprint. The locations of all observed burrowing owls and active burrows will be marked on a map of the Program area at a scale sufficient to accurately show the distance of observed owls and active burrows to the limits of construction.

The Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area crosses the Sacramento River and other drainages that support some marsh habitat, riparian woodland, and elderberry savannah. These habitats can support the following special- status plant and animal species.

i. Plants

• Suisun Marsh aster

• Bristly sedge

• Rose-mallow

• Black walnut

• Delta tule pea

• Mason’s lilaeopsis

• Sanford’s arrowhead

ii. Animals

• Long-legged myotis bat

• Yuma myotis bat

• Tricolored blackbird

• American bittern

• Cuckoo

• Yellow warbler

• White-tailed kite

DRAFT IV-89 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Little willow flycatcher

• American peregrine falcon

• Greater sandhill crane

• Loggerhead shrike

• Black rail

• Lewis’ woodpecker

• Nuttall’s woodpecker

• White-faced ibis

• Bank swallow

• Rufous hummingbird

• Red-breasted sapsucker

• Northwest pond turtle

• Giant garter snake

• VELB

Individual special-status plants and individual giant garter snakes and VELB could be lost during construction activities. In addition, if construction took place in the vicinity of active nests of special-status bird species, such as the Swainson’s hawk, tricolored blackbird, yellow warbler, white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, black rail, Lewis’ woodpecker, Nuttall’s woodpecker, bank swallow, rufous hummingbird, or red-breasted sapsucker, those nests could be abandoned. If all of the habitat temporarily impacted by construction consisted of these habitats, it would still be a relatively small area (a maximum of 10.5 acres plus disturbance from future reconductoring in the Annexation Territory and O&M activities). However, because of the limited habitat available to these species, this temporary loss is considered a significant impact. Based on observations made by biologists in the Sacramento Valley over the past several decades, marshes can recover quickly, within one to four seasons. Woodland habitats will take a decade or more to recover. After recovery, these habitats will again be available to the special-status species listed above.

BMP 2 will ensure that Program construction minimizes impacts to the special-status species listed. SMUD has agreed, by implementing BMP 2,

DRAFT IV-90 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

to meet a performance standard that avoids adverse effects to the maintenance of special-status species populations in the program study area. Therefore, Program construction will have a less than significant impact on special-status species using marsh, riparian, and woodland habitats. In addition to the BMP 2 elements listed under Impacts BIO-1a and BIO-1b, the following elements will ensure that impacts to special- status species using marsh, riparian, and woodland habitats are less than significant.

• In the event that an active nest of a special-status species or a species protected under the Migratory Bird Act is discovered, clearing and construction within 150 feet of the nest will be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts.

• If construction begins after April 1, preconstruction surveys for nesting Swainson’s hawk will be conducted within 0.5 mile of construction sites. If nesting Swainson’s hawks are present, CDFG will be contacted. The nest will be monitored by a qualified biologist, and Program activities that disturb or agitate the nesting hawks will be delayed until the young have fledged (approximately July 31). If Swainson’s hawks are nesting within 0.5 mile of construction site, the nest tree will be marked clearly, and a 2,500-foot buffer around the nest tree will be avoided during the breeding season, or until the young are foraging independently.

(d) Impact BIO-1d. Permanent Loss of Habitat Used by Special-Status Species

Foundations for transmission line facilities will result in the permanent loss of about 0.3 acre for Program Components 4 and 5 and 1.5 acres for Program Component 6. Program Component 7 will require 1 to 3 acres of land.

Based on field surveys, the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation and North City interconnection facilities will be located in grassland. The Woodland- Elverta transmission line may permanently impact vernal pools or swales, grassland, agricultural land, or riparian woodland, or a combination of these habitats. Although the land that will be used for the Willow Slough substation is largely in agriculture, its construction could impact several special-status plant species that inhabit alkali soils, including alkali milk vetch, brittlescale, and San Joaquin spearscale. The total loss of habitat that could be used by special-status species would range from 2.8 to 4.8 acres, depending on the size of the Willow Slough substation. This permanent loss of habitat is considered a significant impact because of the habitat restrictions faced by these species. BMP 2 requires SMUD to mitigate for the loss of habitat that may be used by special-status species. SMUD may mitigate habitat loss by replacement in

DRAFT IV-91 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

kind adjacent to program components, or it may participate in the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Fund or one or more mitigation banks (e.g., Bryte Ranch Conservation Bank, Fitzgerald Conservation Bank, and Clay Station Conservation Bank), depending on the location and type of habitat impacted by the Program. This will reduce impacts of the permanent loss of habitat from Program components to less than significant.

(e) Impact BIO-1e. Loss of Special-Status Bird Species from Collisions with Transmission Lines

The new Woodland-Elverta transmission line could be positioned next to rice fields that may provide foraging and/or resting habitat for Aleutian Canada goose, Swainson’s hawk, white-faced ibis, and ferruginous hawk. These birds could collide with the new transmission line. Bird collisions with electric conducting wires occur when the birds are unable to see the lines, especially during fog and rain and when they are suddenly flushed from the ground. Raptors also will be at risk of electrocution when perching on power poles where conducting wires are closer together than their wingspans. These losses are not expected to be high enough to affect the long-term maintenance of populations of any of these special-status species. BMP 2 requires SMUD to install visual line enhancers and provide adequate spacing of the conductors to minimize the risk of avian collision and electrocution1. This will reduce impacts of bird collisions from the new Woodland-Elverta transmission line to less than significant.

(3) Impact BIO-2: Impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities

As discussed under Impact BIO-1, Program Components 4 through 9 could have temporary construction impacts to a variety of sensitive natural communities. These program components could impact vernal pools and swales, marsh, and woodland (riparian and elderberry savannah). The maximum area of sensitive natural communities that may be impacted during Program construction is 12.4 acres. The Woodland-Elverta transmission line and the Willow Slough substation may result in the permanent loss of up to 4.5 acres of these habitats. Based on a field survey, the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction and the North City interconnection will not result in the permanent loss of any sensitive natural communities. These project components will permanently impact approximately 0.3 acre of grassland habitat that does not contain vernal pools or swales. As described under Impact BIO-1d, BMP 2 requires SMUD to compensate for impacts to sensitive natural communities. This will reduce Program impacts to sensitive natural communities to less than significant.

1 Construction design standards can be found in APLIC and USFWS, 2005; APLIC, 1996; and APLIC, 1994. Avian Protection Plan Guidelines can be found online at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds.

DRAFT IV-92 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(4) Impact BIO-3: Impacts to Wetlands

Program Components 4 through 9 may have temporary impacts to wetlands, as defined under Section 404 of the CWA. Those wetlands include vernal pools and marsh. The Woodland-Elverta transmission line may have a permanent impact on up to 1.5 acres of wetlands. BMP 2 requires SMUD to prepare a wetland mitigation plan to compensate for any jurisdictional wetlands lost, at a ratio that has been determined in partnership with the USACE. The mitigation plan will include monitoring and performance standards to ensure successful mitigation. BMP 2 will reduce Program impacts to jurisdictional wetlands to less than significant.

(5) Impact BIO-4: Interference with Fish or Wildlife Movement

As discussed in Impact BIO-1e, the new Woodland-Elverta transmission line could be positioned next to rice fields that may provide foraging and resting habitat for migratory waterfowl during the winter. Migratory waterfowl will have the potential to collide with the new transmission line. Bird collisions with electric conducting wires occur when the birds are unable to see the lines, especially during fog and rain and when they are suddenly flushed from the ground. BMP 2 requires SMUD to install visual line enhancers and provide adequate spacing of the conductors to minimize the risk of avian collision and electrocution. This will reduce impacts of bird collisions from the new Woodland- Elverta transmission line to less than significant.

(6) Impact BIO-5: Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances

Both the Yolo and Sacramento County general plans call for no net loss of riparian habitat. The Sacramento County General Plan and the Tree Preservation Ordinance provide for protection of native oaks. The Woodland-Elverta transmission line may result in the loss of riparian habitat at the Sacramento River. Construction of this transmission line also may result in the removal of native oak trees. As described in Impact BIO-1a, BMP 2 requires SMUD or its contractor to require a qualified biologist to survey all areas that may be disturbed by access routes, laydown areas, and staging areas for the Program components for all special-status species and sensitive habitats before any disturbance occurs. This survey will include the identification of all native oaks and riparian habitat. If oaks or riparian habitat are present, SMUD will be required either to avoid impacts to oaks or riparian habitat (e.g., by rerouting an access route to avoid oak species or riparian habitat) or implement compensatory mitigation in accordance with the Yolo and Sacramento County general plan guidelines and the guidelines set forth in the Sacramento County Tree Preservation Ordinance. This will reduce potential conflict with local policies and ordinances to less than significant.

DRAFT IV-93 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(7) Impact BIO-6: Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans

The Natomas Basin HCP is the only adopted HCP in the Program area. Two other HCPs, the Yolo County HCP and the South Sacramento HCP, are still in draft form.

The Natomas Basin HCP has been established to promote biological conservation along with economic development and the continuation of agriculture in the Natomas Basin. The primary species it has been designed to protect are Swainson’s hawk and the giant garter snake. Secondarily, it is designed to protect a variety of wetland, upland, and vernal pool special-status species (http://www.natomasbasin.org). The Natomas Basin is within the study area for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line. In the event that the line crosses the basin, it will require the permanent use of less than 1 acre of land for transmission line foundations. This will not significantly restrict the use of land within the basin for wildlife habitat consistent with the goals of the Natomas Basin HCP. As discussed in Impact BIO-1e, BMP 2 requires SMUD to install visual line enhancers and provide adequate spacing of the conductors to minimize the risk of avian collision and electrocution. This will reduce impacts of bird collisions, including Swainson’s hawk, from the new Woodland-Elverta transmission line to less than significant. For these reasons, the Program will not conflict with the Natomas Basin HCP.

e. Indirect Effects on the Environment

Program components will occupy up to about 4.8 acres of land. The presence of the transmission facilities will not preclude the use of any other land crossed by Program transmission lines, or any land adjacent to those lines, as habitat for wildlife and plants. The presence of Program transmission facilities will not cause changes in land uses adjacent to those facilities that will affect the use of those lands as wildlife habitat. Therefore, the program will have no indirect effects on biological resources.

f. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in a substantial conversion of sensitive habitats and habitats used by special-status species to urban uses unable to support these sensitive habitats and special-status species. For example, relative to growth, the SACOG Blueprint (SACOG, 2005a) projects that 102 square miles (65,280 acres) to 166 square miles (106,240 acres) of agricultural land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from agricultural use to urban use by 2050. The Program will constitute about 4.8 acres of this total conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. The Program also will contribute indirectly to this projected conversion of agricultural land by reducing one constraint to growth: electrical utility costs in the Annexation Territory. Lowering electrical prices is just one factor among many that could encourage and fuel long-term growth.

DRAFT IV-94 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project are required to do so under local jurisdictional requirements as guided by CEQA. Because each project will be carried out under the aegis of CEQA, each project will require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to preserve and protect biological resources. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great to successfully provide the same level of habitat to support sensitive natural communities and special-status species as exists today. This will result in a significant adverse impact to these biological resources, and the Annexation Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact. If the growth projected by SACOG occurs in the region, it will require too much land to fully mitigate impacts to biological resources. Therefore, it will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse impact to sensitive natural communities and special-status species.

g. Monitoring and Reporting

SMUD will implement the following monitoring and reporting protocols for the potential impacts of the Program on biological resources.

(1) Before construction, a report will be prepared on the preconstruction biological survey, including:

• Survey methods;

• Maps of locations of wetlands (including vernal pools and swales), riparian habitat, and sensitive upland habitat such as elderberry savannah;

• Maps of the locations of special-status plant and animal species; and

• Maps of locations of Swainson’s hawk nests.

This report will be provided to LAFCo.

(2) A report on transmission line design features incorporated to minimize collision and electrocution hazards to birds will be prepared before construction and provided to LAFCo.

(3) Facility alignment maps showing routing to avoid sensitive habitats and known locations of special-status species will be provided to LAFCo before construction.

(4) Maps showing the locations of sensitive habitat and locations of special-status species that have been fenced or marked off before construction will be provided to LAFCo.

DRAFT IV-95 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(5) The construction crew training program syllabus and training sign-in sheets will be provided to LAFCo following construction.

(6) A report on the grassland revegetation program will be provided to LAFCo following construction.

(7) A wetland mitigation plan approved by USACE will be provided to LAFCo.

(8) A report on compensatory mitigation that has been implemented by SMUD will be provided to LAFCo following the implementation of mitigation.

DRAFT IV-96 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

E. CULTURAL RESOURCES

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect cultural resources. Cultural resources include archaeological and historical objects, sites and districts, historic buildings and structures, cultural landscapes, and sites and resources of concern to local Native Americans and other ethnic groups. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible. Paleontological resources include paleontological site and fossil remains of prehistoric life.

Cultural resources data for this analysis were obtained from information centers of the California Historical Resources Information System, as well as from pedestrian cultural resources surveys of Program Components 4 and 5 performed by archaeologists and an architectural historian.

Paleontological assessment of the project area was undertaken on the basis of information provided on existing geologic maps and in paleontological and geological literature and museum records.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant environmental impact on cultural resources.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter and Sacramento Counties. Figure I-3 (provided at the end of Chapter I) shows the locations for these program components. The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts relative to cultural resources includes the entire Annexation Territory because Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System, Component 9, will take place throughout this area, and Component 8, which consists of possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. The analysis area also includes the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7), the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4), the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5), and the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Corridor (Program Component 6).

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impact is the same as the analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts. This area represents large portions of Yolo and Sacramento Counties and a portion of Sutter County where the Program, in combination with reasonably foreseeable projects, could have a combined effect on cultural resources.

DRAFT IV-97 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

Generally, under CEQA, a historical resource (including built-environment historic and prehistoric archaeological resources) is considered significant if it meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR. These criteria, which are set forth in CEQA Section 15064.5, are defined as any resource that:

• Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;

• Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

• Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

• Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

A cultural resource that is listed, or has been formally determined to be eligible for listing, on the NRHP is considered to be eligible for listing on the CRHR.

CEQA Section 15064.5 also assigns special importance to human remains and specifies procedures to be used when Native American remains are discovered. These procedures are detailed under California PRC Section 5097.98.

Impacts to “unique archaeological resources” and “unique paleontological resources” also are considered under CEQA, as described under PRC 21083.2. A unique archaeological resource implies an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be demonstrated clearly that – without merely adding to the current body of knowledge—a high probability exists that it meets one of the following criteria.

• The archaeological artifact, object, or site contains information needed to answer important scientific questions, and public interest in that information is demonstrable.

• The archaeological artifact, object, or site has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.

• The archaeological artifact, object, or site is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

A non-unique archaeological resource indicates an archaeological artifact, object, or site that does not meet these criteria. Impacts to non-unique archaeological resources and resources that do not qualify for listing on the CRHR receive no further consideration under CEQA.

DRAFT IV-98 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Section 7052 of the California Health and Safety Code states that the disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony. Section 7050.5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the California NAHC.

The California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act applied to both state and private lands in California. It requires that upon discovery of human remains, construction or excavation activity cease, and the county coroner be notified. If the remains are of a Native American, the coroner must notify the NAHC. The NAHC then notifies those persons most likely to be descended from the Native American remains. This act stipulates the procedures the descendants may follow for treating or disposing of the remains and associated grave goods.

PRC Section 5097 specifies the procedures to be followed in the event of the unexpected discovery of human remains on nonfederal land. The disposition of Native American burial falls within the jurisdiction of the NAHC. Section 5097.5 states:

No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

(1) Cultural Resources of the Sacramento Valley

The Sacramento Valley is characterized by a variety of land types, including grassland, timberland, woodland, and chaparral in the foothills of the Sierra and in the Coast Ranges (Baumhoff, 1978). This diversity of land supplied several food sources, including acorns (valley oaks), deer/antelope (grassland), and salmon (river/tributaries).

Common elements for all occupants of prehistoric California are found in hunting implements (atlatls and darts), the use of milling stones for grinding seeds, and the use of natural resources for subsistence and livelihood. The number of sites and the richness of artifact remains found in them suggest that the Sacramento Valley must have been an innovative center of cultural development (Elsasser, 1978).

The three cultural periods pertaining to the Sacramento Valley, as first defined by Lillard and Purves (1936) and Lillard, Heizer, and Fenega (1939) were the Early,

DRAFT IV-99 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Intermediate/Transitional, and Late Periods. They were based on changes observed within the mortuary patterns and grave furniture recovered from their sample sites. These early scholars believed that the sequence represented a single cultural progression, the Early Period evolving into the Transitional Period, and the Transitional Period evolving into the Late Period.

Since the 1930s, there have been numerous revisions for the cultural sequence of central California. The most significant of these revisions was Beardsley’s (1954) Temporal and Arial Relationships in Central California Archaeology, in which the Central California Taxonomic System was formally developed. David Fredrickson (1973 and 1974) re-examined the system and proposed a cultural classification scheme to address early cultures of the North Coast Ranges. Expanding on his earlier work at such sites as CCO-30, just south of the city of Walnut Creek, Fredrickson introduced the concept of patterns in his 1974 article “Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Range” (Frederickson, 1974). “Pattern” is a term for a chronological era. Frederickson defined three major cultural patterns, the Windmiller, the Berkeley, and the Augustine.

The Windmiller Pattern extended from about 3000 to 500 BC and is characterized by primarily stone tools, ground stone, baked clay, and shell items reflecting the exploitation of diverse subsistence resources and the acquisition of materials from distant geographic areas through trade. The cultural materials show a more advanced technology, in that greater attention was paid to finished products and to artistic elaboration, such as the highly polished charmstones (Wallace, 1978).

The Berkeley Pattern extended from about 500 BC to 500 AD. It was initially a San Francisco Bay region development that later spread to surrounding coastal and interior areas of Central California (Moratto, 1984). The transition to the Berkeley Pattern is thought to have been a gradual shift in economic and material traits and not a result of a separate migration into California. The use of acorns for food increased greatly from the Windmiller Pattern, as demonstrated in the abundance of mortars and pestles recovered from Berkeley Pattern sites. Houses were built more substantially, suggesting a greater degree of sedentism and the development of permanent settlements in areas that previously were occupied only seasonally (Chartkoff and Chartkoff, 1984: 116).

The Augustine Pattern is distinguished by intensive fishing, hunting, and gathering. Large dense populations, highly developed exchange systems, and social stratification, as indicated by variability in the grave goods (Moratto, 1984, p 211). The artifact assemblages of Augustine Pattern sites indicate an increased reliance on hunting, gathering, and fishing. Technologically, the Augustine Pattern exhibits shaped mortars and pestles, bone awls for making coiled baskets, and the bow and arrow (Frederickson, 1973, in Moratto, 1984).

DRAFT IV-100 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The Program study area lies within the territories of the Nisenan and Plains Miwok tribes. The Nisenan territory encompassed the drainages of the Yuba, Bear, and American Rivers and the lower drainages of the Feather River. The western boundary was the western bank of the Sacramento River, a few miles upstream from the mouth of the Feather River, southward to a few miles below the confluence of the American River, with a large area between the American and Cosumnes Rivers occupied by the Miwok to the south (Bennyhoff, 1977). The Plains Miwok inhabited the lower reaches of the Mokelumne and Cosumnes Rivers and both banks of the Sacramento River from Rio Vista to Freeport (Levy, 1978).

The Nisenan, sometimes referred to as the Southern Maidu, were the southern linguistic group of the Maidu tribe. The word “Nisenan” was used as a self- designation by the Nisenan, who occupied the Yuba and American River drainages (Wilson and Towne, 1978).

Relatively few villages are ethnographically recorded in the Program study area. Although many Indian tribes felt the influence of European contact, the tribes living in the Sacramento Valley seem to have been particularly affected. One of the early tragedies of contact was the malaria epidemic of 1833, which resulted in the abandonment/loss of many Plains Miwok villages, as well as those of other local tribes. From secularization in 1834 until the Gold Rush in 1849, boundaries between autonomous Indian villages and Mexican-controlled areas of California remained fairly stable, except on the northern frontier, including the Miwok and Nisenan areas (King, 1978). Most peoples living in these areas either moved to other areas or were killed; a few worked as ranchers for the Europeans who took over the land.

(2) History

In 1839, Captain John Augusta Sutter landed where the Sacramento and American Rivers converge and set up camp, intent on building an agricultural empire. In 1841, he received a land grant of nearly 97 square miles from Mexico. He established a fort and the town of New Helvetia, which later became known as Sutterville. On January 24, 1848, a contractor at Sutter’s lumber mill, James Wilson Marshall, discovered gold. Within a year, thousands of gold seekers had arrived in Sacramento, Sutter lost much of his workforce and, therefore, his businesses, to the pursuit of gold. To keep from losing everything, he deeded his remaining land to his son, John Sutter, Jr. The young Sutter began laying out the Sacramento town site in January 1849. By October 1849, Sacramento had a population of 2,000, and by 1850, the population had grown to 9,000 (www.frepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com).

Sacramento County has long been established as a center of commerce for the surrounding area. Trade and services, federal, state, and local government, and food processing are all-important economic sectors. Visitors are attracted to the

DRAFT IV-101 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

County by the state capitol and other historical attractions, such as Sutter’s Fort, as well as natural amenities.

(3) Cultural Resources in the Program Study Area

(a) Annexation Territory

There are 23 previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites within the Annexation Territory, mostly described as “mounds” and located near the Sacramento River. One of these sites has been evaluated formally and determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP.

Three historic archaeological sites are recorded in the Annexation Territory, none of which has been evaluated as eligible for listing on the NRHP. Two sites are domestic debris scatter, and the third is described as concrete pads or foundations.

Most of the historic built environment resources within the Annexation Territory are residences in Davis and Woodland. Other built environment resources include railroad alignments and associated features, historic groves of trees, commercial buildings, such as the Varsity Theatre in Davis, and industrial structures, such as the National Rice Mills complex. Many of the built environment features have been found to be eligible for listing on the NRHP, and thus are likely to qualify for inclusion on the CRHR, as well.

(b) Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area

Eleven cultural resource surveys have been identified by the North Central Information Center (NCIC) within the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area.

There are no previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites and one previously recorded historic archaeological site within 0.25 mile of this program component. The site includes the remnants of a concrete foundation and pathway and has been determined ineligible to the NRHP.

Information provided by the NCIC indicates that there are five recorded historic built environment resources within this program component. One of these sites, the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) tracks, has been determined NRHP eligible. The other sites have been determined to be ineligible for inclusion on the NRHP or CRHR.

Professional archaeologists with URS Corporation performed an intensive pedestrian survey of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line route on November 8, 2005. The surveyors walked under the existing power lines through private property, established businesses, paved areas, and

DRAFT IV-102 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

construction sites. No significant cultural resources were observed. Site KT- 69, a former residence located between the Central California Traction Company Railroad tracks and South Watt Avenue, south of Elder Creek Road, was recorded in the mid-1990s and noted during the current survey. Only the concrete foundation and pathway remain. It does not appear eligible for listing in the CRHR.

A URS architectural historian conducted a vehicular reconnaissance of this program component to identify other features of the built environment on October 5, 2005, followed by a field survey on November 9, 2005. This vehicular reconnaissance survey resulted in the identification of one property appearing to be 50 years old or older and, thus, potentially eligible for consideration as a historic resource. This property is located at 6501 Florin Perkins Road. Given the limited access, further research on this property would be necessary, should reconstruction of the transmission line require physical alterations of the structure.

Six cultural resource surveys have been identified by the NCIC within the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5). There are no previously recorded prehistoric or historic archaeological sites within 0.25 mile of this program component.

URS Corporation archaeologists also conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of this program component on November 8, 2005. Most of the ground around the existing transmission lines was covered with vegetation (long, dry grass and thistle), making ground visibility very poor in most areas. No artifacts were observed in the survey area.

Information provided by the NCIC indicates there are five recorded historic built environment resources within 0.25 mile of this program component (including bridges). The site of two converging railroad grades has been determined to be NRHP eligible and, therefore, likely to be eligible to the CRHR. The other sites are railway segments and a levee, neither of which has been evaluated for eligibility for inclusion on the NRHP or CRHR.

URS conducted a vehicular reconnaissance of the study area for this program component to identify other features of the built environment on October 5, 2005. In addition to those already listed, no other built environment features were observed as part of this survey.

(d) Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area

Within the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6), 39 cultural resource surveys have been identified, 12 in Sacramento County, 10 in Sutter County, and 17 in Yolo County.

DRAFT IV-103 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Five previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites are within this program component. None of these sites has been evaluated for NRHP or CRHR eligibility. Two of the sites are in Sacramento County, and the other three sites are in Yolo County. Of the three sites in Sacramento County, one is described as knoll in the middle of a field containing mortars and pestles, another is described as a concentration of lithic artifacts on a knoll, and a third is described as a leveled mound. Of the two sites in Yolo County, one is described as a site that extends well below the surface near Gray’s Bend, and the other is described as a prehistoric mound.

Seven historic archaeological sites are recorded in this program component, four within Sacramento County, two within Sutter County, and one within Yolo County. These sites have not been evaluated for NRHP or CRHR eligibility. Most of the sites are debris scatters consisting of domestic refuse.

One archeological site in Sacramento County contains both prehistoric and historic remains. The site is described as a leveled mound containing human remains and associated artifacts. The historic component is described as the remains of a home site with associated debris. The site has not been evaluated for NRHP or CRHR eligibility.

The half of the study area for this program component that is east of the Sacramento River has been subject to numerous cultural resource surveys. Reclamation District 1000, a National Register-listed historic landscape, encompasses the eastern half of the study corridor. Historic built environment resources within the eastern portion of the study corridor include a historic levee along a railroad alignment and a historic road along the current Sutter- Placer County line. Several unevaluated water conveyance features are located along the Tule Canal. Other features in Sutter include levees (two of which are National Register contributors to Reclamation District 1000) and an unevaluated World War I era feed mill site. Numerous other built environment features are scattered throughout the study corridor, many of which have not been evaluated for significance.

In addition to the information provide by the NCIC, an architectural historian with URS Corporation conducted a vehicular reconnaissance of the study area to identify other features of the built environment on October 5, 2005. This vehicular reconnaissance survey resulted in the identification of 11 properties appearing to be 50 years or older, and thus eligible for consideration as historic resources. In the portion of Program Component 6 to the east of the Sacramento River, these potentially eligible properties are located primarily along Rio Linda Boulevard and Pleasant Grove Road. In the portion that lies to the west of the Sacramento River, these potentially eligible properties are located primarily along County Roads 14 and 15, between County Roads 100 and 102.

DRAFT IV-104 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(e) Willow Slough Substation Study Area

There were no previous studies, previously recorded historic archaeological sites, or previously recorded historic built environment resources within the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7).

There is one previously recorded prehistoric archaeological site located just outside of this program component, described as a midden deposit. It is adjacent to Willow Slough.

An architectural historian with URS Corporation conducted a vehicular reconnaissance of the study area to identify other features of the built environment on October 5, 2005. Two potentially historic buildings were observed. Both are located within 1/8 mile of the intersection of County Roads 102 and 27.

(f) Native American Consultation

On September 26, 2005, the California Native American Heritage Commission was contacted with regard to the Annexation Program. The commission conducted a record search of the study area and found that it contained no known Native American cultural resources. The commission provided a list of 13 Native American consultants who could be contacted with regard to important Native American cultural sites in the Program area. Letters were sent to each of these consultants on October 10, 2005, informing them of the Program and requesting their input. No responses had been received as of January 5, 2006.

(4) Paleontological Resources

Paleontological resources are lithologically dependent; that is, deposition and preservation of paleontological resources is tied to the lithologic unit in which they occur. The potential for paleontological resources to be present is described as the paleontological sensitivity of a particular geological unit.

The criteria used to assess the paleontologic significance of a lithologic unit are based on the presence or possible presence of any fossils of the three major categories of organisms: vertebrates, invertebrates, and plants. These fossils are typically distributed on the earth’s surface within two general rock types, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks, with most being found within sedimentary rocks. As a result of this distribution, areas of higher or lower probability of fossil discovery can be identified by delineating the distribution of surface outcrops or exposures of these general rock types. Delineation of these rock types within a particular study area is integrated with information from geologic mapping, the interpretation of depositional environments and post-depositional environments, and the location of previously discovered fossils to assess the probability of the presence of fossils. Sediments, both lithified and unconsolidated, have the highest

DRAFT IV-105 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

potential for containing significant fossil resources, though not all sediments contain fossils, and not all fossils are found in sediments. Metamorphic rocks also contain significant numbers of fossils.

The significance of paleontological resources depends on several factors weighted differently by different investigators. As a result of this, several agencies and professional societies have developed criteria for categorizing the significance or probability of the occurrence of paleontological resources. The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) has developed the following categories to rank the paleontologic significance of geologic areas according to the probability of fossil occurrences.

High Potential Areas or geologic units that are known to contain vertebrate fossils, or significant occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils.

Undetermined Potential Areas with exposures of geologic units or settings that have a high potential of containing vertebrate fossils or significant occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils. The presence of geologic units in which fossils have been discovered elsewhere may require further assessment.

Low Potential Areas or geologic units that are unlikely to contain vertebrate fossils or significant occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils based on surface geology, the presence of igneous or metamorphic rocks, young alluvium, or undesirable depositional environments.

For the purposes of categorizing the Program study area, a preliminary site evaluation was performed. This evaluation consisted of determining the presence of favorable geological units within the study area and performing a preliminary evaluation of the fossil-containing potential of the units through a preliminary literature search. Three geologic maps were consulted (Helley, E.J., 1979a, Helley, E.J., 1979b and Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 1A Sacramento Quadrangle), and the units were compared to the area of investigation. Geologic units (mappable rock formations) of interest occurring within the Program area are presented in Table IV.E-1.

Table IV.E-1: Geologic Units Considered in Study

Geologic Unit Name Predominant Rock Type Age (Epoch) Quaternary Alluvium Alluvial Sediments Holocene Basin Sediments Alluvial/Fluvial Sediments Holocene Riverbank Formation Alluvial Sediments Pleistocene Modesto Formation Alluvial/Fluvial Sediments Pleistocene Tehama Formation Alluvial Sediments Pliocene

DRAFT IV-106 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

A paleontological assessment of the Program area was undertaken based on information provided on existing geologic maps and in paleontological and geological literature and museum records. Five different geologic units were identified in the literature search and evaluation. Of the five units identified, four were identified as containing vertebrate fossils within the study area (University of California Museum of Paleontology location search engine). These units included the Holocene Epoch Quaternary Alluvium and Basin sediments, and the Modesto and Tehama Formations. In addition, all five geologic units have records of fossil discoveries within their exposures.

The Holocene Epoch Quaternary Alluvium and Basin sediments are widespread across the study area and compose the largest percentage of the exposed surface geology. The undifferentiated Riverbank and Modesto Formations constitute the next most common surface exposures and are found predominantly in the western portion of the study area, along Putah Creek and Willow Slough. The Riverbank Formation is exposed in the northern portion of the study area adjacent to the Sacramento River and the Natomas East Main Drain. The Tehama Formation comprises only a small percentage of the surface exposures and is found at the extreme west of the study area, in the vicinity of the Yolo County Airport.

Based on the presence of vertebrate fossils within the Quaternary Alluvium and Basin sediments, and Modesto and Tehama Formations, and the presence of fossils within the remaining geologic units, the study area is classified either as having a high or an undetermined potential for containing significant paleontological resources.

2. Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on cultural or paleontological resources if the project would cause any of the following effects:

(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, as defined in §15064.5;

(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5;

(d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

DRAFT IV-107 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(2) Threshold(s) of Significance Adopted in This EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that Program- related impacts relative to cultural resources will result if the Program or any program component will:

(a) Directly or indirectly impact any archaeological, historic, or paleontological resources, such that its cultural significance would be adversely affected pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines; or

(b) Directly or indirectly impact “unique archaeological resources” as defined in Section 21083.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Known cultural and paleontological resources, as well as the potential for these resources in the Program study area, were compared to the criteria established in CEQA that defines significant or unique resources. The potential effect of Program activities on these significant or unique resources was then evaluated.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact CR-1. Construction-Related Impacts to Cultural Resources

All of the program components are separated by many miles. For this reason, construction-related cultural resource impacts of individual program components will not be additive. Consequently, construction-related impacts are described hereafter by program component.

(a) Impact CR-1a. Cultural Resource Impacts from the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction

Reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line will require either the modification of existing towers or the replacement of towers. Based on known data, including a cultural resources survey conducted for this program component, no significant archaeological resources have been identified in the area of potential effect of this component. Therefore, installation of new towers will not impact known significant cultural resources. However, there is still a potential for intact buried archaeological sites to be present in the study area. Excavation activity associated with this program component could impact a buried archaeological resource, if present. This would be a significant cultural resources impact.

A structure at 6501 Florin Perkins Road was identified as potentially eligible for consideration as a historic resource. However, the structure is in fair to poor condition and in a state of disuse. The residence would have to be

DRAFT IV-108 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

formally evaluated if reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line might physically alter the structure. Assuming that the structure is eligible for inclusion in the CRHR, alternation of the structure by this program component would be a significant cultural resources impact.

BMP 3 will be followed during the construction for all program components. This BMP includes:

• A qualified archaeologist and historian will survey the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area and Willow Slough substation study area, as well as associated access routes, laydown areas, and staging areas, prior to construction. Identified cultural resources that are eligible for or listed on the NRHP or the CRHR will be avoided in siting these facilities.

• Construction crews will be trained on the identification of cultural and paleontological resources.

• A paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activity at any program component.

• Any structures near construction sites, such as 6501 Florin Perkins Road, will be evaluated formally in the unlikely event that construction will physically affect the structure. If any such structure is found to be eligible for the CRHR, appropriate treatment measures will be taken, such as recordation to HAER and HABS standards, augmented by additional research, interpretation, and other measures required to reduce the level of impact to less than significant.

DRAFT IV-109 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The identification of potential transmission line routes or substation locations will attempt to avoid any areas that are particularly sensitive for prehistoric archaeological resources. Before a tentative route or site is identified, that area will be subjected to an intensive pedestrian survey for archaeological and built environment resources. Identified resources will be avoided by the selection of a route alternative or project footprint within the study area that avoids significant cultural resources and/or through careful consideration of tower placement. Access roads and construction staging areas also will be modified as needed to avoid resources. In the event that a significant archaeological resource cannot be avoided, a program of data recovery, guided by a research design, will be undertaken.

• If important paleontological resources are discovered during construction of any program component, the resources will be recovered and archived at an appropriate institution by a qualified paleontologist.

Application of BMP 3 will avoid known cultural resources and recover those resources that may be encountered accidentally during construction. Therefore, cultural resources impacts resulting from the construction of this program component will be less than significant.

(b) Impact CR-1b. Cultural Resources Impacts from Construction of the North City Interconnection

Based on known data, including a cultural resources survey conducted for this program component, no significant archaeological or built environment resources have been identified within the area of potential effect for the North City interconnection. There is no surficial evidence for historic or prehistoric archaeological sites, and none has been recorded within 0.25 mile of this program component. However, given the proximity to the American River, the potential for buried archaeological resources associated with this watercourse cannot be ruled out. Previous construction associated with the existing transmission lines and the well-delineated dirt roads may have disturbed the area. However, there is still a potential for intact buried archaeological sites. Excavation activity associated with this undertaking may impact a buried archaeological resource, if present, resulting in a significant cultural resources impact. This impact will be reduced to a less than significant level by the application of BMP 3.

Construction of a new transmission line within the study area will have the potential for significant direct impacts to either known, or previously unidentified, cultural resources. These potential impacts would be associated

DRAFT IV-110 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

with ground-disturbing activity related to transmission line construction and associated access roads and construction staging areas, if such activities were to physically disturb a cultural resource qualifying as a historic resource or unique archaeological site. Significant impacts also may occur as a result of changes in the setting of a significant built environment resource. This program component also encompasses Reclamation District 1000, a listed NRHP landscape. Impacts to any contributing elements to the District will be considered a significant impact. This impact will be reduced to a less than significant level by BMP 3.

(d) Impact CR-1d. Cultural Resources Impacts from Construction of the Willow Slough Substation

Based on known data, no significant archaeological resources have been identified within the area of potential effect of the Willow Slough substation. One prehistoric archeological site has been recorded outside of but proximate to this program component. However, the study area has not been subject to a formal archaeological survey. Should significant archaeological resources be present, ground-disturbing activity associated with the construction of the new substation could result in significant impacts to these archaeological resources.

Two unevaluated built environment resources are within, or adjacent to, the potential substation location. New construction might impact significant built environment resources directly if the resource were physically altered by new construction. A significant impact also could occur if a built environment resource’s significance were dependent on the integrity of setting, and the setting were sufficiently changed by changes in the transmission line tower height or location.

Implementation of BMP 3 will protect unknown cultural resources in the area of potential effect. Therefore, construction of the Willow Slough substation will result in a less than significant impact.

(e) Impact CR-1e. Cultural Resources Impacts from Reconductoring in the Annexation Territory

The replacement of wires on existing transmission towers will not impact cultural resources; however, ground-disturbing activity associated with reconductoring staging areas or pull stations may impact unanticipated archaeological resources, resulting in a significant archaeological impact. The reconductoring program will have no effect on built environment resources. Implementation of BMP 3 will protect unknown cultural resources in the area of potential effect of this program component. Therefore, reconductoring in the Annexation Territory will result in a less-than-significant impact to cultural resources.

DRAFT IV-111 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(2) Impact CR-2. Impacts to Paleontological Resources from the Construction of Program Components

As discussed under existing conditions above, all of the program components may be constructed in surficial geologic deposits that contain significant paleontological resources. The loss of these results during program construction will be a significant impact. This impact will be reduced to a less than significant level by BMP 3.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The presence of Program transmission facilities will not cause changes in land uses adjacent to those facilities that will affect the intensity of the use of those lands. Therefore, the Program will have no indirect effects on cultural resources.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

The foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in a substantial conversion to urban uses of previously undisturbed land and agricultural land that may contain significant cultural resources. That conversion may result in significant impacts to cultural resources through the loss of important cultural material that is currently unknown. For example, the SACOG Blueprint for growth (SACOG, 2005a) projects that 102 square miles (65,280 acres) to 166 square miles (106,240 acres) of agricultural land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from agricultural use to urban use by 2050. The Program will comprise about 4.8 acres of this total conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. The Program also will contribute indirectly to this projected conversion of agricultural land by reducing one constraint to growth: electrical utility costs in the Annexation Territory. Lowering electrical prices is just one factor among many that can encourage and fuel long-term growth.

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project are required to do so under local jurisdictional requirements, as guided by CEQA. Because each project will be carried out under the aegis of CEQA, each project will require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to preserve and protect cultural resources. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties is great enough that it is likely that significant cultural resources will be lost through ground disturbance of currently unknown cultural sites. This will result in a significant adverse impact, and the Program may contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-112 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

e. Monitoring and Reporting

SMUD will implement the following monitoring and reporting protocols for the potential impacts of the Program on cultural resources.

(1) New Ground-Disturbing Activity

Prior to Program construction, a cultural resources mitigation and monitoring plan (CRMMP) will be developed by SMUD to identify when and where a cultural resources survey will be conducted before construction. The CRMMP also will identify where a qualified cultural resources monitor will have to be present at a specific program component, and during which stage of construction activity. The CRMMP will be provided to LAFCo.

Cultural resource and paleontological monitors will maintain records of their monitoring activities. These records will be provided to LAFCo following Program construction.

(2) Discovery

Any discovery made during Program construction, and potential subsequent treatment, will be documented in a technical report. This technical report will be provided to LAFCo.

(3) Known Built Environment Resources

In the event a potentially historic built environment resource may be directly or indirectly impacted by any of the program components, the CRMMP will contain procedures for the recordation and evaluation of such resources. The CRMMP will outline procedures to reduce the impact to a less than significant level in the event the resource is found to be significant and cannot be avoided.

(4) Human Remains

The CRMMP will outline procedures for addressing human remains, should they be encountered during activities at any of the program components. If remains are found, the coroner’s report will be provided to LAFCo along with evidence of the notification of the NAHC.

DRAFT IV-113 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-114 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

This section describes potential hazard and hazardous materials effects of the Program. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible. Sources consulted for this discussion include the Cortese List and the California Department of Education.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15125 of the CEQA Guidelines. These existing environmental conditions are the baseline for determining the significance of Program impacts.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts includes the Annexation Territory in Yolo County and the study areas for the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction, the North City interconnection, the Woodland-Elverta transmission line, and the Willow Slough substation. These areas are shown in Figure I-3.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials is the same as described for potential direct and indirect impacts. This is because potential hazards created by the Program are limited to the immediate vicinity of Program facilities.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

(1) Hazards and Hazardous Materials

State and federal regulations establish the procedures and reporting requirements for handling hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Typically, these requirements are enforced by the local health departments, with oversight by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and EPA. All operations involving the use of hazardous materials must be performed in accordance with approved plans and permits, including operational plans and contingency plans in the case of upset. Hazardous wastes may not be stored longer than 90 days, and particular storage designs (such as segregating certain types of wastes and providing full secondary containment for liquid wastes) and monitoring requirements are required by state and federal regulations. All transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous wastes must be done only by properly licensed contractors, and records must be maintained to document the proper handling of wastes from “cradle to grave.”

DRAFT IV-115 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

On August 21, 3003, SMUD’s Board of Directors adopted Environmental Protection as a core value of the District (Resolution No. 03-08-13). In response, SMUD’s General Manager has established a SMUD-wide policy for the administration of environmental programs and management systems. The SMUD policy is included in District Safety, Health & Environmental Policies and Procedures (SMUD, 2000–2004). Pertinent sections of the policies and procedures are provided in Appendix I.

As part of the acquisition of PG&E facilities, SMUD will change the registered owner name and contacts from PG&E to SMUD on all applicable hazardous materials plans and permits. SMUD’s plans and coordination procedures will be extended to the newly acquired facilities with additional adaptation to Yolo County-specific ordinances, if necessary. SMUD will be responsible for maintaining the facilities, including removing failed equipment, reporting, and cleaning up any spilled material. SMUD has supervisors and crews on call at all times to respond to emergencies.

Like most industries complying with waste reduction regulations, SMUD continues to strive to use less hazardous materials by finding more benign substitutes, to use products that can be recycled at the end of their lives, and to emphasize spill prevention and cleanup in the event there is a spill.

(2) Electrical and Magnetic Fields

The School Site Selection and Approval Guide of the California Department of Education (http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sx/schoolsiteguide.asp), has requirements for the proximity of high-voltage power transmission lines to schools. Any part of a school site property line must be at least 100 feet from the edge of an easement for a 50-133 kV line and 150 feet from the edge of an easement for a 220-230 kV line.

(3) Aviation Hazards

Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 specifies notification and review procedures to identify and address potential safety hazards to airport operations from tall structures. Similar requirements in California are found in the Public Utilities Code (starting at section 21655), with review by the California Division of Aeronautics.

(4) Wildland Fires

Periodic inspection of facilities and coordination with local fire officials to ensure compliance with applicable fire codes serve to minimize the potential fire hazard associated with electrical transmission structures or equipment at substations. The regular inspection and maintenance activities along transmission lines, and control of vegetation within the rights of way, reduces the potential for wildland fires.

DRAFT IV-116 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

(1) Hazardous Materials and Wastes

The Annexation Territory includes approximately 212 square miles encompassing the cities of Woodland and West Sacramento, most of the City of Davis, and the unincorporated lands in Yolo County between the cities. Currently, existing electrical facilities within this area are owned by PG&E. Estimates performed as part of early Program planning and feasibility work cataloged thousands of transformers, capacitors, and other electrical equipment items throughout the area (R.W. Beck, Inc., et al., 2005). A partial list includes the following:

• Over 4,000 overhead distribution transformers;

• Over 2,500 subsurface or pad-mounted transformers;

• Over 1,000 switches; and

• Approximately 190 capacitor banks.

The precise inventory and location of all of this equipment is not known, but it is clear that this type of equipment is distributed throughout the Annexation Territory. Cooling and insulating oil used in some of this equipment may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) with traces of other toxic organic compounds. Fires in this type of equipment can cause accidental release of these compounds to the environment where the public may be exposed. This existing condition does not represent an extreme or even a unique hazard—it is common in all areas with electrical service. It is presumed that PG&E operates the existing facilities within the Annexation Territory in a safe way by handling, storing, transporting, and disposing of all such hazardous materials and wastes in a way that is consistent with all applicable laws and regulations.

The Cortese List was searched to determine whether any hazardous materials or hazardous waste sites are close to the proposed transmission and substation facilities. Twenty sites were identified, most in the City of Sacramento or the County of Sacramento. Table IV.F-1 summarizes known locations of hazardous waste within the analysis area.

Table IV.F-1: Known Locations of Hazardous Waste Within Analysis Area

City/County Address Site Name Sacramento 1324 A Street SP-Purity Oil Sacramento 1731 17th Street Orchard Supply Company Sacramento 1920 Front Street Sacramento Housing & Redevelopment Agency Sacramento 2000 Front Street PG&E – Sacramento Site Sacramento 2175 Perkins Way Sacramento Cable Sacramento 2809 S Street Sacramento Plating, Inc.

DRAFT IV-117 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.F-1: (Continued)

City/County Address Site Name Sacramento 3675 Western Pacific Avenue Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), Curtis Park Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Central Shops Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Ponds And Ditch Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Northern Shops / Drums Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Lagoon Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Car Shop Nine Sacramento 401 I Street UPRR, Downtown Sacramento – Central Corridor Sacramento 5,485 Acres; 12 miles east of Mather Air Force Base Sacramento Sacramento 5200 S Watt Avenue Former McClellan AFB – Area D Sacramento 8350 Fruitridge Road Sacramento Army Depot Sacramento Approximately 5200 Watt Former McClellan Air Force Base Avenue Sacramento Front & T Streets SMUD, Front & T Streets Sacramento I-5 Q Street Off-Ramp Caltrans, I-5 Q Street Off-Ramp Davis Second Street/Between Pena Frontier Fertilizer & Mace Boulevard

The locations of schools in the Program study area were identified using maps on the California Department of Education Web site (http://www.cde.ca.gov/). No schools were located within one-quarter mile of the study area.

(2) Electrical and Magnetic Fields

Whenever electricity is used or transmitted, electric and magnetic fields are created by the electric charges. Positive and negative charges attract each other, while those of the same charge repel each other. These forces of attraction and repulsion create electric fields. Magnetic fields are created only when there is current flowing through a conductor or device. For example, when a lamp is plugged into a wall, an electric field is created around the cord to the lamp. A magnetic field is present only when the lamp is turned on, and current flows through the light bulb. Electric fields are present around electrical appliances, electrical devices, and wiring located in buildings, as well as around electrical transmission lines and substations. Thus, they are common phenomena throughout the Annexation Territory, the component areas, rights of way, and throughout all urban and suburban areas.

The medical and scientific communities generally agree that the available research evidence has not demonstrated that electromagnetic fields (EMF) associated with electrical transmission facilities create a health risk. However, they also agree that the evidence has not precluded the possibility of such a risk.

DRAFT IV-118 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Thus, uncertainty continues regarding potential adverse health effects of electric and magnetic fields and the limits for safe exposure for the general public and for industry workers. While research into this matter continues, the CPUC has adopted policies and programs to address public concern and scientific uncertainty (CPUC Decision [D] 93-11-013). These include using no-cost or low- cost procedures to minimize or reduce potential public exposures whenever possible in the design and construction of new transmission lines and related facilities. CPUC does not regulate municipal utilities such as SMUD, but SMUD has adopted similar programs for the design and installation of new electrical facilities.

SMUD’s Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 91-04-18 on April 18, 1991, approving an EMF policy statement and authorizing the implementation of an EMF program. Since 1991, SMUD has followed studies on EMF; adopted practices where practicable to minimize potential EMF exposure from new transmission lines, sub-transmission, and distribution facilities; and practiced prudent avoidance in designing and building facilities. SMUD also has contributed funds to the National EMF Research Program and the California Department of Heath Services EMF Program (DHS completed an EMF Risk Assessment in October 2002).

(3) Aviation Hazards

Sacramento International Airport is adjacent to the southern boundary of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area. The current “overflight” zone, within which the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviews projects for compatibility with safety requirements at the airport, extends 10,000 feet northward from the airport. The Draft Airport Master Plan (Sacramento County Airport System, 2004), currently being updated, calls for the extension of one of the airport runways another 1,000 feet to the north. Several smaller private airstrips are located in the agricultural lands in or adjacent to the easterly half of this study area.

FAR part 77, found in 14CFR77, requires notification to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) before beginning the construction of any structure higher than 200 feet above ground level, or tall enough to protrude into an imaginary surface defined from the end of a nearby runway. The slope and distance of the imaginary surface vary, based on the type of airport and operations present.

(4) Wildland Fire

The largest areas of concern for fires associated with the Program are the study areas for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line and the Willow Slough substation. These areas are predominantly irrigated agricultural land. Fire danger in these areas is usually low, but extensive areas of dry stalks or grasses can accumulate and pose a seasonal fire hazard.

DRAFT IV-119 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The right of way for the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction contains vacant land and some outdoor parking and storage areas. The land beneath the North City interconnection site also is vacant, supporting a light cover of non-native grasses. The land is flat, and vegetation is sparse at both of these locations, so the potential for a significant wildland fire hazard is low.

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15126.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on hazards and hazardous materials if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;

• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;

• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;

• Be located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment;

• For a project located within an airport land-use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area;

• For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area;

• Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or

• Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands.

DRAFT IV-120 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that Program- related impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials will result if the Program or any program component will:

• Expose people or property to hazardous materials or conditions in a way that is not authorized by SMUD’s procedures and permits related to the use of hazardous materials and the disposition of hazardous wastes;

• Conflict with public safety policies or regulations in the Yolo County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan and/or the Sacramento International Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan;

• Conflict with implementation of the Sacramento County Multi-Hazard Emergency Operations Plan or the County of Yolo Emergency Plan; or

• Cause wildland fires.

(3) Evaluation Methods

(a) Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Records of existing permitted hazardous waste facilities and sites were reviewed to identify any within the analysis area. Procedures used by SMUD to manage hazardous material and wastes were reviewed. Particular attention was devoted to identifying the potential for any hazardous materials or wastes to be located near any schools or major population centers.

(b) Electrical and Magnetic Fields

Current policies and recent decisions by the CPUC were reviewed to identify any applicable constraints or regulations that will affect the facilities proposed for the Program. Maps and land uses along the rights of way for the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction and the North City interconnection were reviewed to identify any sensitive uses in the immediate area.

Maps, aerial photographs, and other records were reviewed to identify airports in the area that must be considered relative to the potential for towers to pose an aviation obstruction or hazard. In addition to the Sacramento International Airport, three private airstrips were identified in or near the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area. Because the exact alignment and height of poles for this facility are not known at this time, it is not possible to determine

DRAFT IV-121 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

whether any will constitute a hazard. The imaginary surface for an airport, such as Sacramento International Airport, starts at the nearest runway location (northern end) and extends for 20,000 feet with a 100:1 slope. Thus, a 200- foot pole can be located beyond this distance from the runway and shorter closer poles will have to be evaluated based on their height and location.

(d) Wildland Fires

Review of aerial photographs and brief field inspections confirmed the conditions and vegetation types within the Woodland-Elverta transmission line, Willow Slough substation, Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction, and North City interconnection study areas.

No specific Yolo County safety policies relate to fire protection and electrical facilities, but Policy S15 of the General Plan (Yolo County, 1983) requires the county to request review and comment from affected fire districts for all significant development proposals.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact HAZ-1: Expose People or Property to Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Conditions

(a) Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes

During construction, gasoline- and diesel-powered trucks will be used to deliver materials and workers to Program construction sites. The drill rig used to prepare borings for pole foundations will use diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, and other lubricants and solvents or cleaning materials. Cranes and similar vehicles and equipment used to install foundations, erect poles, and install conductors will use similar fuels, fluids, and solvents. These types of materials and their use in construction are common features for any building or development project. The regulations on handling, storing, using, and disposing of these materials apply to all contractors and entities involved in major construction. The effect of applying these regulations to such activities reduces the potential for the uncontrolled release of hazardous materials to the environment. These regulations also establish response and notification procedures in the event of a hazardous material spill so that it is promptly cleaned up. For these reasons, the potential impact of the construction of Program components, with regard to exposing people or property to hazardous materials, is less than significant.

All transformers or related equipment associated with the new electrical transmission facilities (or distribution lines that may emanate from it) will not contain PCBs. They will be filled with mineral oil or soy-based fluid. Mineral oil or soy-based fluid will be transported to installation sites in sealed transformer equipment; therefore, the risk of release will be minimal.

DRAFT IV-122 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The Willow Slough Substation backup battery system will contain liquid sulfuric acid. This will be transported to the site in sealed containers. Therefore, the potential for rupture of the battery is minimal. The potential for the release of any hazardous material at the Willow Slough substation is similar to that from any substation or similar industrial installation. The low potential for release, combined with the regular inspection and maintenance procedures, response plans, and regulatory oversight of the handling of hazardous materials, reduces the potential impact from such a release to a level that is less than significant.

Design features for the Willow Slough substation will include: installing remote alarming monitoring equipment to alert SMUD’s Energy Dispatch Operators in case of high temperatures or low oil levels and the construction of secondary containment within the substation to prevent any spilled oil from being discharged. SMUD will begin cleanup activities immediately if a release occurs. In addition, SMUD will implement BMPs through a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan to minimize the possibility of any spills or release from the transformers. To prevent public access to onsite electrical equipment, the proposed substation will be enclosed in a minimum 8-foot-high chain link fence topped with 3-pronged barbed wire. Access will be restricted with a locked gate. For these reasons, the Willow Slough substation will have a less than significant impact relative to hazards and hazardous materials.

Equipment that is changed out as a result of upgrading the system in the Annexation Territory will be handled in a way that is consistent with SMUD procedures and permits related to the use of hazardous materials and wastes. These procedures, coupled with regular inspections and maintenance, will reduce the potential for the release of any hazardous material to a level that is less than significant.

SMUD complies with the various regulations pertinent to electric system component handling. The SMUD Corporation Yard in Sacramento, at 59th Street and Highway 50, is central to handling new and old equipment. SMUD has a hazardous material handling facility in the Corporation Yard. It has an EPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) identification number and testing and interim storage facilities, and it processes items so that hazardous waste is not stored longer than 90 days. Hazardous wastes are shipped by SMUD to licensed storage or disposal facilities using licensed transporters.

If the proposed annexation is approved, SMUD will meet with PG&E to review its records for its facilities. If the records are not available, SMUD will perform field audits of the Annexation Territory facilities, including taking oil samples of the substation transformers for analysis. SMUD also will determine whether oil containment measures have been installed at the

DRAFT IV-123 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

appropriate locations within the Annexation Territory. SMUD will develop a remediation plan if necessary.

The Program may generate small quantities of universal wastes, including batteries, mercury-containing thermostats, lamps (fluorescent, high intensity discharge, neon, mercury vapor, high-pressure sodium, and metal halide), aerosol cans, and cathode ray tubes. These wastes will be segregated properly from other types of solid wastes and disposed of appropriately, in accordance with the procedures established in SMUD’s District Safety, Health & Environmental Policies and Procedures.

The Program will not increase the volume of hazardous materials handled by SMUD enough to require changes to SMUD’s hazardous materials handling facilities. The distance from the Corporation Yard to the farthest points of the Annexation Territory is no greater than from the Corporation Yard to the farthest points of the existing SMUD service area. Therefore, SMUD’s existing facility and procedures for handling hazardous materials are sufficient to handle the Annexation Territory’s minor additional demand.

(b) Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)

As already described, part of SMUD Resolution No. 91-04-18 calls for prudent avoidance of residences, schools, hospitals, and other facilities where people may reside for extended periods of time when siting and designing electrical transmission facilities. This policy reduces the potential exposure of people to electric and magnetic fields to a less-than-significant level.

The strength of electric and magnetic fields generally falls off rapidly with distance from the source. If currents are balanced, and conductors are closely spaced, fields related to transmission lines decrease at a rate of 1/r2 (where r is the radial distance from the conductor). Therefore, if the distance from the source is doubled and the transmission line is balanced in all three phases, the magnetic field will drop off by a factor of four. These factors are used in the design and construction of new transmission lines and substations to reduce the generation of electric and magnetic fields.

A double-circuit transmission line, such as the one proposed for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line, can be constructed to reduce the EMF field levels. A three-phase transmission line has an A, B, and C phase (three wires). If the wires on one side of the transmission line are installed in a vertical configuration with Phase A at the top, Phase B in the middle, and Phase C at the bottom, and the circuit on the wires on the other side of the structure is installed with Phase C at the top, Phase B in the middle, and Phase A at the bottom, the resultant transmission line configuration will provide the lowest EMF field levels. SMUD will adopt this configuration in the Woodland-Elverta transmission line.

DRAFT IV-124 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The proposed transmission line route selection also will comply with State of California Board of Education overhead power line siting requirements.

(2) Impact HAZ-2: Conflict with Airport Comprehensive Plans

Transmission lines already exist within the rights of way for the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction and the North City interconnection study areas. The height of any new transmission towers associated with these Program components will not differ from the height of existing towers. Therefore, these program components will have no impact on airports. The Willow Slough substation study area is not located near an airport; therefore, this program component will have no impact on airports. Other Distribution System Upgrades (Program Component 8) and Operations and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System (Program Component 9) will not alter the location or height of existing transmission facilities. Therefore, these program components will have no impact on airports.

The Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) will be north of the Sacramento International Airport, and it may be located in the vicinity of the Yolo County Airport. There are also private airstrips in the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area used by crop-dusting aircraft. SMUD will work cooperatively with the administrations of both public-use airports, the owners of private airstrips, and the FAA to ensure that the transmission line is sited outside of airspace protected for the safe operation of these airports and airstrips. In some cases, it may not be possible to avoid impacting private airstrips. In those cases, SMUD will pay for the relocation of aircraft operations from those airstrips to other nearby airstrips or pay for crop- dusting operations to take place at a new location. For these reasons, the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will have no impact on public-use airports and a less than significant impact on private airstrips.

(3) Impact HAZ-3: Conflict with Implementation of Emergency Response Plans

SMUD regularly coordinates with emergency response planning agencies to ensure that its operations are consistent with applicable plans and policies, including the Sacramento County Multi-Hazard Emergency Operations Plan. The Program will not alter this coordination or cause any other policy-related adverse effects.

(4) Impact HAZ-4: Cause Wildfires

All of the program components, except for the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area and the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Components 6 and 7) are in existing electrical transmission line rights of way and will not change transmission line operations. Therefore, these program components will not alter the potential to cause wildfires from existing conditions. Therefore, these components will have no impact with regard to wildfires.

DRAFT IV-125 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The Willow Slough substation study area is in irrigated agricultural land. Most of the study area for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line also is in irrigated agricultural land. These lands are not readily susceptible to wildfires. In addition, the agency coordination, inspection, and maintenance procedures used by SMUD will serve to minimize the potential for wildfire. Therefore, the Program will have a less than significant wildfire impact.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The presence of the transmission facilities will not alter land uses adjacent to the existing or proposed transmission lines or the proposed substations. Therefore, the Program will not have indirect effects relative to hazards and hazardous materials.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Foreseeable future projects in the study area include substantial development. In regard to growth, the SACOG Blueprint (SACOG, 2005a) envisions that an additional 304 to 661 square miles of land in the greater Sacramento area will be urbanized by 2050. This leads to the potential for substantially more use of hazardous materials and the increased generation of hazardous waste over existing conditions, with a significant increase in the potential for people to be exposed to hazardous materials or hazardous wastes. The Program would contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-126 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

G. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect hydrology and water quality. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant environmental impact on hydrology/water quality.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter, and Sacramento Counties. Figure I-3 (provided at the end of Chapter I) shows the locations of these program components. The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts relative to hydrology/water quality includes the entire Annexation Territory because Operation and Maintenance of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System, Program Component 9, will take place throughout this area, and Program Component 8, which consists of the possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. The analysis area also includes the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4), the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5), the Woodland- Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Project Component 6), and the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7).

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts is the same as the analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts. This area represents large portions of Yolo and Sacramento Counties as well as a portion of Sutter County where the Program, in combination with reasonably foreseeable projects, may have a combined effect on hydrology and water quality.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

(1) Federal

Sections 401 and 402 of the federal CWA establish requirements for the protection of the quality of the waters of the U.S. Section 401 requires that every applicant for a federal permit or license for any activity that may result in a discharge to a water body obtain water quality certification. The water quality certification affirms that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards. In the Program study area, the water quality certification program is administered by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB).

DRAFT IV-127 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Section 402 of the CWA prohibits the discharge of pollutants to waters of the U.S. from any point source unless the discharge is in compliance with a NPDES permit. An NPDES permit is required for the discharge of storm water from construction sites that disturb one acre or more. The CVRWQCB administers these permits, with oversight provided by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and EPA Region 9.

The SWRCB issued Order No. 99 08 DWQ, which is an NPDES General Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for discharges of storm water associated with construction activity (Construction Storm Water General Permit). Construction projects that disturb one or more acres are required to comply with this permit. The major provisions of the permit are the minimization or elimination of non- storm water discharges from the site; implementation of BMPs to control construction materials and wastes, erosion, and sediment; and monitoring to assure the maintenance and adequacy of the BMPs that are being implemented. Project construction activities must be conducted consistent with a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the associated Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MRP) developed in accordance with the provisions of the permit.

The federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), enacted in 1974 and significantly amended in 1986 and 1996, directed the EPA to set national standards for drinking water quality. It required the EPA to set maximum contaminant levels for a wide variety of constituents. Local water suppliers are required to monitor their water supplies to assure that regulatory standards are not exceeded.

(2) State

The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is California’s comprehensive water quality control law, and it is a complete regulatory program designed to protect water quality and beneficial uses of the state’s water. It requires the adoption of water quality control plans (basin plans) by the state’s nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) for watersheds within their regions.

In 1976, California enacted its own Safe Drinking Water Act, requiring the Department of Health Services (DHS) to regulate drinking water, including: setting and enforcing federal and state drinking water standards; administering water quality testing programs; and administering permits for public water system operations.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

(1) Surface Water Hydrology

The Sacramento River forms the eastern border of the Annexation Territory, which includes the Yolo Bypass, a major flood control facility for the Sacramento River, Cache Creek, and Willow Slough. The Willow Slough substation study

DRAFT IV-128 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

area borders Willow Slough. The North City interconnection study area is crossed by the American River.

The Sacramento River Hydrologic Region drains 27,246 square miles of California, from the Oregon border in the north to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in the south and from the crest of the Sierra Nevada in the east to the crest of the Coast Ranges in the west. The many rivers and streams that are tributary to the Sacramento River provide important riparian habitat that is critical for many aquatic and terrestrial species. The valley floor region of the river provides some of the most important wintering areas along the Pacific Flyway for many species of waterfowl (Department of Water Resources [DWR], 2005).

The southern portion of the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region is experiencing rapid population growth and urbanization. While California experienced a statewide population increase approaching 15% from 1990 to 2000, growth rates in the Sacramento metropolitan area have exceeded this trend. According to California Department of Finance projections, Sacramento County’s population increased by 17.5% between 1990 and 2000, and is projected to grow by 26% between 2000 and 2010, to more than 1.5 million people. The adjoining urban areas in Placer, El Dorado, and Yolo Counties are experiencing the same levels of extensive growth and urban expansion. This ongoing rapid rate of urbanization is expected to generate significant land and water use challenges for the entire southern portion of the Sacramento River region, including adequate drought- period water supplies, growth in flood plains, loss of productive farmland, and preservation of sensitive environmental habitats (DWR, 2005).

The DWR estimates that, in a year of normal precipitation, the total amount of water entering the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region is 58,217 acre-feet2. Of this total, approximately 24,192 acre-feet of water are lost through evaporation, evapotranspiration from natural vegetation, groundwater recharge, and runoff. Consumptive use of water for agriculture, urban uses, and wetland maintenance totals 5,532 acre-feet. Other demands for the water exceed the inflow to the region by 1,101 acre-feet (DWR, 2005). These excess demands are either met by water stored in reservoirs in the region, or, if the reservoirs are low as a result of several years of drought, the excess demand is not met.

(2) Surface Water Quality

Surface water quality in the Sacramento River watershed is generally good. However, turbidity, rice pesticides, and organophosphate pesticides, such as diazinon, can affect fisheries and drinking water supplies. For instance, the decline of fisheries in the Sacramento River is in part related to water quality problems on the river’s main stem: unsuitable water temperature, toxic heavy

2 An acre-foot is the volume of water required to cover one acre to the depth of 1 foot. It is equal to 325,851 gallons of water.

DRAFT IV-129 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

metals (such as mercury, copper, zinc, and cadmium) from acid mine drainage, pesticides, and fertilizer in agricultural runoff, and degraded spawning gravels. The holding of rice field drainage to allow the degradation of rice herbicides has addressed this water quality concern effectively among downstream water users, particularly the City of Sacramento. In the Cache Creek watershed, Clear Lake suffers from large mercury, sediment, and nutrient loadings, the latter leading to nuisance algae blooms (DWR, 2005).

(3) Groundwater Hydrology

The Annexation Program is located largely within the North American Subbasin of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin, as defined by DWR (DWR, 2004). The water-bearing materials of this subbasin are dominated by unconsolidated continental deposits of Lake Tertiary and Quaternary age. Alluvium constitutes the upper aquifer system, occupying the upper 200 to 300 feet below ground surface. The Mehrten and older geologic units constitute the lower aquifer system, occurring generally deeper than 300 feet toward the western side of the subbasin. The cumulative thickness of these deposits increases from a few hundred feet near the Sierra Nevada foothills on the east to over 2,000 feet along the western margin of the subbasin (DWR, 2004).

Groundwater levels in southwestern Placer County and northern Sacramento County generally have decreased, with many wells experiencing declines at a rate of about 1.5 feet per year for the last 40 years or more. Some of the largest decreases have occurred in the area of the former McClellan Air Force Base. Groundwater levels in Sutter and northern Placer Counties generally have remained stable, though some wells in southern Sutter County have experienced declines (DWR, 2004).

(4) Groundwater Quality

The three major water types in the subbasin are magnesium calcium bicarbonate (or calcium magnesium bicarbonate), magnesium sodium bicarbonate (or sodium magnesium bicarbonate), and sodium calcium bicarbonate (or calcium sodium bicarbonate). While many areas of good water quality exist in the North American subbasin, there are places with poor water quality. High total dissolved solids (TDS) are present in the groundwater along the Sacramento River from the Sacramento International Airport northward to the Bear River. The groundwater is this area also contains high levels of chloride, sodium, bicarbonate, manganese, and arsenic. The groundwater in the southern part of the basin generally is characterized as good quality, low in disinfection by-product precursor materials, and moderate in mineral content (DWR, 2004).

DRAFT IV-130 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;

• Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge so that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted);

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a way that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site;

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a way that would result in flooding on or off site;

• Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;

• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality;

• Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal flood hazard boundary or flood insurance rate map (FIRM) or other flood hazard delineation map;

• Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows;

• Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or

• Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

DRAFT IV-131 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The Program does not include any commercial or residential development. Therefore, it involves no waste discharges or housing. For these reasons, these environmental issues are not addressed further in this EIR.

A seiche is an underwater wave. A tsunami is a series of waves created when water in a lake or the sea is rapidly displaced on a massive scale. There are no physical features in the Program study area that would cause either of these phenomena, and the Program study area is too far inland from the ocean or San Francisco Bay to be subject to the effects of a tsunami. The Program study area also is relatively flat and not conducive to mudflows. Therefore, these issues are not addressed further in this EIR.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has adopted the following as thresholds of significance, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that Program- related impacts relative to hydrology/water quality will result if the Program or any program component will:

(a) Result in stormwater discharges that exceed the water quality criteria protective of the beneficial uses of receiving waters.

(b) Interfere with groundwater recharge or result in increased groundwater use to the point that the production rate of pre-existing wells will decrease to the point that they will not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted.

(d) Expose people or existing structures to increased risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding.

(e) Place sensitive equipment within an area subject to a 100-year flood.

(f) Conflict with drainage plans and grading ordinances of the affected city and county jurisdictions established to avoid impacts to water quality.

(3) Evaluation Methods

The CVRWQCB Basin Plan and FIRM prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) were reviewed to determine whether the proposed Program will impact surface water and groundwater hydrology and/or water quality.

DRAFT IV-132 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact H-1: Impacts on Storm Water Quality

As discussed in Chapter II, during the construction of Program facilities, SMUD and its contractors will comply with the statewide Construction Storm Water General NPDES Permit. SMUD and/or its contractors will prepare a SWPPP in accordance with the permit requirements. The SWPPP will identify specific BMPs to control construction materials and wastes, erosion, and sediment to prevent the pollution of storm water runoff. The SWPPP also will contain an MRP that will assure the maintenance and adequacy of the BMPs that are being implemented. BMP 2 calls for the revegetation of areas disturbed by Program construction. Therefore, there will be no excessive runoff or erosion from Program sites following the installation of transmission facilities. Implementation of the SWPPP and MRP, as well as the revegetation of disturbed areas, will ensure that the Program will result in a less than significant impact on surface water quality.

(2) Impact H-2: Impacts to Groundwater Hydrology

Program facilities will increase the area of impermeable surfaces in the Annexation Territory by a maximum of 4.5 acres. The largest of these areas will be the Willow Slough substation, at a maximum size of 3 acres. The remaining 1.5 acres will consist of the foundations of transmission towers, each covering up to 400 square feet. This is too small an area to measurably reduce the recharge area of the Annexation Territory, which covers 212 square miles.

The Program will reduce electrical rates in the Annexation Territory. This may reduce the cost of groundwater pumping to farmers within the Annexation Territory. This is not expected to increase the use of groundwater for irrigation to the extent that it will cause further drawdown of the aquifers in the North American Subbasin.

Based on a study of on-farm energy use characteristics (Brown and Elliott, 2005), energy expenditures account from 2% to 9% of the total production expenditures of farming, depending on the product. It is estimated that the Program may reduce electrical costs in the Annexation Territory by as much as 20%. Approximately 16% of the energy used nationwide for agricultural is electricity (Brown and Elliott, 2005). If it is conservatively assumed that 100% of the energy used in agriculture is electricity, then a 20% reduction in electricity costs to farmers in the Annexation Territory will reduce their production costs by 0.4% to 1.8%, or for every $100 expended to produce a crop, the cost will drop by $0.40 to $1.80. Since the actual use of electricity is less than 100%, the actual change in production costs will be much less, on the order of $0.06 to $0.28 for every $100 expended to produce a crop. In either case, these savings are not large enough to alter current water practices in the Annexation Territory.

DRAFT IV-133 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(3) Impact H-3: Conflict with City or County Drainage Design Standards

As indicated in Chapter II, SMUD and/or its contractors will obtain grading permits for Program facilities from the appropriate jurisdictions. Therefore, the Program will not conflict with city or county drainage design standards.

(4) Impact H-4: Increased Risk from Flooding

Based on FEMA flood insurance maps, all of the Program components except the Willow Slough substation study area will be at least partially located in the 100- year floodplain of the American River, Sacramento River, Yolo Bypass, or Cache Creek. Transmission towers may be on the order of about 3 feet in diameter and spaced as close as 600 feet apart. The 100-year floodplains crossed by the Program transmission facilities are a minimum of 1.75 miles wide. Because of the small diameter of the towers, they will not collect debris during a flood; thus, they will not increase their volume in floodwaters beyond the diameter of the tower and its foundation. As a result, the transmission towers will not occupy more than 0.5% of the cross-section of any of the floodplains. For these reasons, the area displaced by the transmission towers will not be great enough to measurably change the elevation of the 100-year flood. Therefore, the Program will not increase flood risks to people or property.

(5) Impact H-5: Place Sensitive Equipment in a 100-Year Floodplain

The design of transmission towers and their foundations will take into account forces generated by floodwaters. Therefore, the Program will not place sensitive equipment in a 100-year floodplain.

(6) Impact H-6: Conflict with Drainage Plans and Grading Ordinances

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The presence of Program transmission facilities will not cause changes in land uses adjacent to those facilities that will affect the current uses of those lands. Therefore, the Program will make no changes in the environment that can result in indirect effects to hydrology and water quality.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

DRAFT IV-134 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2005a) projects that 102 square miles (65,280 acres) to 166 square miles (106,240 acres) of agricultural land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from agricultural use to urban use by 2050. As indicated by DWR (2005), this will result in significant water use challenges for the entire southern portion of the Sacramento River region, including adequate drought-period water supplies and growth in floodplains. This will result in a significant cumulative hydrology and water quality impact. The Program will contribute to the growth of the region by reducing electrical costs, one of many factors influencing population growth.

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project are required to do so under local jurisdictional requirements as guided by CEQA. Because each project will be carried out under the aegis of CEQA, each project will require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to prevent or minimize hydrology and water quality impacts. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great to completely prevent such impacts. This will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse hydrology and water quality impact, and the Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

e. Monitoring and Reporting

Before construction begins, SMUD and/or its contractors will prepare a SWPPP and MRP. These documents will be provided to the CVRWQCB. SMUD will obtain grading permits from the appropriate county or city jurisdiction before Program construction. These permits will be provided to LAFCo.

DRAFT IV-135 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-136 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

H. LAND USE/PLANNING

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect land use and planning. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant environmental impact on land-use/planning.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts relative to land use and planning includes the study areas for Program facilities in Yolo, Sacramento, and Sutter Counties and the cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Woodland. These areas were selected to avoid inappropriate siting of proposed infrastructure where certain land uses (e.g., residential) exist.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts relative to land-use and planning includes the general plan areas for Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties and the cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Woodland. This area was selected based on the jurisdictional boundaries of the affected general plans.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

The general plans and zoning ordinances for Sacramento, Sutter and Yolo Counties and the cities of Davis, Woodland, Sacramento, and West Sacramento regulate land use through their respective policies and ordinances. The County of Sacramento has specific policies and a zoning ordinance addressing energy facilities. The City of Sacramento also has a zoning ordinance for high voltage transmission lines.

The Sacramento County General Plan public facilities element, Section VIII, addresses goals, objectives, and policies for energy facilities. The element establishes objectives and policies for electric transmission delivery systems and electrical transmission facility siting and design. The objective of the plan for electrical transmission delivery systems is to: “Ensure the provision of safe, reliable, efficient and economical electric service while minimizing potential land use conflicts, and health, safety, environmental, and aesthetic impacts of transmission facilities” (Sacramento County, 1993). The objective of the plan for electric transmission facility siting and design is to: “Plan and design transmission facilities to minimize visual impacts, preserve existing land uses, and avoid biological and cultural resources” (Sacramento County, 1993). Policies regarding these objectives are provided in the Sacramento County General Plan from PF-85 through PF-100.

DRAFT IV-137 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The County of Sacramento zoning ordinances include an ordinance (301-11) for siting transmission facilities. That ordinance states that electrical transmission lines of 100,000 volts or greater capacity may be located in any zone and will be located in easements or rights of way that permit access for maintenance with minimal disruption of surrounding properties. Preference will be given to the location of transmission lines in the rank order specified hereafter:

• Within existing SMUD transmission rights of way or those anticipated for other projects proposed subject to this zoning ordinance;

• Adjacent to railroads or adopted freeway routes;

• Along or adjacent to major arterial streets where existing or planned uses are commercial or industrial;

• Adjacent to or through existing or planned commercial, industrial, or agricultural uses;

• Along arterial streets where residential uses designated in an adopted plan are RD-20 or greater density;

• Through areas where land uses in an adopted plan are predominantly commercial but include residential uses; and

• Through residential areas, including side and rear yards, irrespective of density.

Every reasonable effort will be exerted to avoid siting transmission lines of 100,000 volts or greater capacity through established residential areas. In the event SMUD determines that it has no other alternative than to route such a transmission line through an established residential area, such lines will be installed underground, except when SMUD can demonstrate that it is infeasible to do so.

Substations may be located on sites in all zones, provided mitigation measures are instituted as provided in Section 301.12 of the zoning ordinances. Preference will be given to the location of substations in the following rank order:

• Areas designated for industrial or commercial land uses in an adopted plan;

• Undeveloped areas designated for residential use in an adopted plan;

• Areas designated “agricultural-urban reserve” in an adopted plan; and

• Sites designated for residential use in an adopted plan and surrounded by existing residential uses.

The City of Sacramento has adopted the same transmission line and substation siting criteria as the County of Sacramento. The city’s siting criteria are provided in Chapter

DRAFT IV-138 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

17.24.050, footnote 61, of the City of Sacramento’s zoning ordinance regarding high voltage transmission facilities.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

The Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) falls within the study area for the “Natomas Joint Vision,” as adopted by the Sacramento City Council and the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors. An MOU between the two jurisdictions, establishing that vision, was executed on December 10, 2002. The Natomas Joint Vision provides guiding principles for both jurisdictions to achieve. The guidelines implement the Vision’s goals to proactively guide future growth for more efficient land use, to improve air quality through efficient land use, and to protect future airport operations. To date, no communities have been established by either the City of Sacramento or Sacramento County in the area designated by the Natomas Joint Vision.

Measure M is another program affecting Program Component 6. This measure was an advisory measure intended to provide the Sutter County Board of Supervisors with an indication of how the citizens of Sutter County felt about the types and level of development in the area of the South Sutter County Industrial / Commercial Reserve. On November 2, 2004, Measure M was approved with 59% of the vote. The next step for this measure is a general plan amendment application, which will be submitted by the Measure M developer group to the Sutter County Planning Department. Based on a conversation with Doug Libby (Senior Planner, Sutter County Planning Department), as of December 19, 2005, an application for Measure M had not been submitted by the developer. On August 30, 2005, the Board of Supervisors held a study session with the developer group. During the study session, the developer group presented a conceptual land-use plan for development of the Measure M area. This measure calls for a mix of commercial, industrial, and residential development for the current South Sutter Industrial/Commercial Reserve. To date, no other plans have been presented to the county.

The study area for Program Component 6 also falls within the northern portion of the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan area, which is in Sacramento County. The Sacramento International Airport Master Plan proposes several improvements to the Sacramento International Airport for 2005-2020, including the extension of an existing runway, the addition of a third runway, the construction of a new terminal, and other improvements to other supporting facilities. An EIR is currently being prepared by Sacramento County to address this plan.

Finally, in northern Sacramento County and southern Sutter County, The Natomas Basin Conservancy (TNBC) serves as the plan operator for the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP). The TNBC acquires lands for the 22 special- status species that are identified in the NBHCP. Currently, Yolo County is proceeding with the Yolo County HCP (EIP Associates et al., 2001). A draft version that was

DRAFT IV-139 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

prepared in 2001 is currently available, but it has not yet been adopted. These plans are discussed in greater detail in Section IV.D (Biological Resources).

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on land use and planning if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Physically divide an established community;

• Conflict with any applicable land-use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or

• Conflict with any applicable HCP or natural community conservation plan.

As indicated, potential Program conflicts with HCPs are discussed in Section IV.D (Biological Resources); they are not addressed further in this section.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCO, as the Lead Agency, has determined that Program-related impacts relative to land-use/planning will result if the Program or any program component will:

• Directly or indirectly cause physical division of an established community;

• Conflict with electric generation policies PF-85 through PF-100 of the Sacramento County General Plan; or

• Conflict with the objectives of the Measure M advisory measure, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, and the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Policies found in the County of Sacramento and City of Sacramento general plans and ordinances that are directly related to the development of transmission and substation facilities were reviewed to determine whether the project will conflict with them. In addition, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, Measure M, and the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan were reviewed to determine whether any land-use/planning conflicts exist.

DRAFT IV-140 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact LU-1: Physical Division of Established Community

Program Components 4 and 5 are located within existing transmission line rights of way. Therefore, these components will not physically divide an established community. Since there are no established communities in the study areas for Program Components 6 and 7, these components will have no impact on land use/planning with regard to the physical division of a community.

(2) Impact LU-2: Conflict with Policies of Sacramento County General Plan

The transmission facilities proposed for Program Components 4 and 5 will be located within an established community where existing transmission line facilities already are located in their respective rights of way. Therefore, these components will specifically comply with PF-86 of the Sacramento County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance 301-11, which state that new transmission lines should use existing corridors whenever practical. As described in Appendix D of this Draft EIR (Siting of Transmission Electric Facilities), all of the transmission facilities proposed for the Program will meet Sacramento County electric generation policies PF-85 through PF-100. Therefore, the Program will not conflict with the Sacramento County General Plan.

(3) Impact LU-3: Conflict with Measure M, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, and the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan

The Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) includes areas covered by Measure M, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, or the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan. Measure M calls for a mix of commercial, industrial, and residential development for the current South Sutter Industrial/Commercial Reserve. This development will coincide with other planned land uses, including parks and open space. The main objective of the Natomas Joint Vision is to guide urban growth for more efficient use of land, while securing permanent preservation of open space/farmland. As described in Appendix D of this Draft EIR, BMP 1 for siting the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will use the siting criteria provided in Sacramento County zoning ordinance 301-11 and City of Sacramento zoning ordinance 17.24.050. SMUD also will work with the appropriate jurisdictions and landowners to attempt to ensure that the transmission line does not conflict with specific development plans. For these reasons, the Program will not conflict with Measure M or the Natomas Joint Vision Plan.

SMUD will work with the FAA to ensure that the Woodland-Elverta transmission line does not penetrate protected airspace for existing Sacramento International Airport facilities or future facilities included in the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan. Therefore, this component of the Program will conform with

DRAFT IV-141 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

the policies found in the Sacramento International Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan that pertain to airport safety areas.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The presence of Program transmission facilities will not cause changes in land uses adjacent to those facilities that will affect current or future uses of those lands. Therefore, the Program will make no changes in the environment that will result in indirect land-use impacts.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

WAPA plans to construct a new 230-kV transmission line from the O’Banion substation to Elverta substation to provide voltage support for the Sacramento area. This project will cross a portion of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area. Because the Woodland-Elverta transmission line will have no direct or indirect land-use impacts, it would not cumulatively contribute to potential land-use impacts associated with the proposed WAPA transmission line.

DRAFT IV-142 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

I. NOISE

This section describes how the Program will affect the noise environment. Where significant adverse effects on that environment are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

Several factors affect sound as it is perceived by the human ear: the actual level of sound (or noise), the frequencies involved, the period of exposure to the noise, and the changes or fluctuations in the noise levels during exposure. Levels of noise are measured in units called decibels. Because the human ear cannot perceive all pitches or frequencies equally well, measured sound levels are adjusted or weighted to correspond to human hearing. This adjusted unit is known as the “A-weighted” decibel (dBA). All references to noise in this report refer to dBA.

Few noises are constant. Most fluctuate in decibel level over short periods of time. One way of describing fluctuating sound is to present the fluctuating noise heard over a specific time period as if it had been a steady, unchanging sound. For this, a descriptor called the equivalent sound level, Leq, is computed. Leq is the constant sound level (A-weighted) that, for a given situation and time period (e.g., 1-hour Leq or 24-hour Leq), conveys the same sound energy as the actual time-varying sound.

The noise descriptors used in this report are day-night average noise level (Ldn) and community noise equivalent level (CNEL). These descriptors are used because they are the basis for local agency regulations to minimize or prevent noise impacts to people. Both of these descriptors are based on hourly equivalent noise levels during a 24-hour period, with penalties of added decibels during the evening (for CNEL) and/or nighttime period (both Ldn and CNEL) to represent the added sensitivity of most people to noise at these times. Values of Ldn and CNEL agree with one another within about 1 dBA, and the two frequently are used interchangeably.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides the baseline for determining the significance of Program impacts on noise.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

O&M of the Annexation Territory’s Electric System, Program Component 9, would take place throughout the Annexation Territory, and Program Component 8, which consists of possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. Because these two program components may occur throughout the Annexation Territory, and Program Component 7 (Willow Slough Substation Study Area) is located in the Annexation Territory, the analysis area for direct and indirect noise impacts includes the entire Annexation Territory. The noise analysis area also includes the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4), the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5), and the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6).

DRAFT IV-143 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

Noise from electrical system construction and O&M is relatively low and does not radiate far from the source. Therefore, the analysis area for cumulative noise effects is the same as that for direct and indirect effects already described.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

(1) Federal Regulations

No federal regulations specifically govern noise issues for the Program. There are several federal regulations regarding noise for land uses in the study area that establish noise standards for sensitive receptors, such as homes, churches, and schools. The FAA sets noise limits for commercial aircraft (14 CFR Part 36) and establishes procedures for airport noise studies and land-use compatibility evaluations (14 CFR Part 150). The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has site acceptability standards for HUD-financed or HUD-assisted projects. The FAA and HUD standards consider a site with an Ldn of 65 dBA or less as “acceptable” for residential uses, while sites with an Ldn greater than 75 dBA are considered “unacceptable” for residential uses.

(2) State Regulations

State laws and regulations provide the authority to state and local agencies to control the exposure of people to noise. The most important of these provisions are found in the Aviation Noise Standards set forth in Title 21 (Public Works) of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) (21 CCR5000), and the Noise Insulation Standards set forth in the State Building Code (24 CCR Section T25-28). These and other regulatory provisions are summarized in Table IV.I-1.

With respect to residential and other sensitive uses cited in 21 CCR5000 and 24 CCRT25-28, the exterior standard of 65 dBA CNEL is generally consistent with the interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL. This is because normal wood-frame residential construction usually provides from 12 to 18 dBA of reduction from exterior to interior areas, and 20 dBA or more is commonly achieved in new structures with insulation and components that meet current energy conservation standards (County of Sacramento, 1993; City of Sacramento, 1998).

(3) Local Regulations

The Program encompasses land under the authority of several different local governments. These are reviewed here, along with applicable noise standards or requirements from each.

DRAFT IV-144 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.I-1: Summary of California Noise Laws and Regulations

Code Section Provisions Title 21 (Public Works) CCR 5000 et Aviation Noise Standards. Basic requirement that CNEL not exceed 65 seq. dBA in exterior areas of residences, schools, hospitals, churches, and synagogues. Standards and procedures for defining noise impact areas, monitoring, resolving complaints. Title 24 (Building) CCR T25-28 Noise insulation standards. Maximum interior CNEL of 45 dBA for all multi-family residences. Requirement for acoustic report for multi- family structures in areas with exterior CNEL over 60 dBA. Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et Establishes and defines planning and review procedures for Airport seq. Land Use Commissions. Health and Safety Code Sections Establishes Office of Noise Control, guidelines for preparation of 17922.6, and 46000 et seq. Noise Elements and adoption of local standards and ordinances. Title 8 (Industrial Relations) CCR 5095 Establishes standards and procedures for occupational exposures to noise. Sliding scale, maximum of 90 dBA for 8-hour exposure. Higher noise levels are allowed for shorter periods of time, up to 115 dBA for 15 minutes. Title 13 (Motor Vehicles) CCR 602 and Establishes standards and procedures for motor vehicle exhaust noise. 1036 Maximum of 95 dBA at 20 inches for most passenger vehicles and light trucks)

(a) County of Sacramento

The applicable standards from the Sacramento County Noise Element (County of Sacramento, 1998, Table II-1) dealing with allowable noise limits in residential areas from non-transportation-related sources are summarized as follows.

• During the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), the median noise level (L50, or noise level exceeded 50% of the time) will not exceed 50 dBA, and the maximum noise level (Lmax) will not exceed 70 dBA.

• During the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), the L50 will not exceed 45 dBA, and the Lmax will not exceed 65 dBA.

If a non-transportation noise source is expected to cause noise levels in excess of these limits, then an acoustical analysis is required as part of the environmental review process for that project. For transportation noise sources, the County Noise Element standards for residential areas allow an Ldn or CNEL of 60 dBA, or a maximum of 65 dBA if all practical exterior noise reduction measures are applied (County of Sacramento, 1998, page 5).

The County Noise Control Ordinance (Chapter 6.68 of the County Code) exempts noise sources associated with construction, demolition, paving, and grading. These activities are not to take place after 8 p.m. or before 6 a.m. on weekdays and 7 a.m. on weekends.

DRAFT IV-145 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(b) City of Sacramento

Noise element standards and policies are contained in the public health and safety element (City of Sacramento, 1998) and summarized as follows for the residential land-use category:

• Less than 60 dB (Ldn or CNEL) normally acceptable; and

• 60 to 70 dB (Ldn or CNEL) conditionally acceptable.

Other standards exist for other land-use categories, and the public health and safety element contains a more detailed set of interior and exterior noise standards that are applicable to new development (City of Sacramento, 2004, pages 8-28). The City of Sacramento Municipal Code (Section 8.68.060) includes a noise ordinance that specifies acceptable noise limits for activities that affect properties zoned as agricultural and residential. The allowable limits are summarized as follows:

• From 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., the exterior noise standard is 55 dBA; and

• From 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., the exterior noise standard is 50 dBA.

Construction activities, however, are exempt from these limits as long as they meet certain conditions. All internal combustion engines on equipment must have suitable mufflers installed, and all construction activity must occur during specified daytime hours.

The Yolo County General Plan (1983) identifies the following acceptable noise ranges:

• Low-density residential uses – less than 60 dB, conditionally acceptable range of 55 to 70 dB;

• High-density residential uses – less than 65 dB, conditionally acceptable range of 60 to 70 dB;

• Educational and medical facilities – less than 70 dB, conditionally acceptable range of 60 to 70 dB; and

• Office and commercial – less than 70 dB, conditionally acceptable range of 67.5 to 77.5 dB.

The Sutter County General Plan (Sutter County, 1996) noise element noise level standards for residential areas (provided in Table 7 of the General Plan) are summarized as follows.

DRAFT IV-146 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• During the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), the hourly equivalent sound level (Leq) will not exceed 50 dB, and the maximum noise level will not exceed 70 dB.

• During the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), the Leq will not exceed 45 dB, and the maximum noise level will not exceed 65 dB.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

(1) Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area

The proposed reconstruction of the SMUD transmission line between SMUD’s Hedge Substation and Power Inn Road will result in the addition of three new wires. The existing line is located in a transmission line corridor with an existing SMUD 230-kV double-circuit transmission line. The corridor crosses from the southern portion of the City of Sacramento on the west into unincorporated land in Sacramento County on the east. Land uses in the area are varied, ranging from vacant land and some agricultural uses to industrial and commercial uses. For the most part, the only residential areas adjacent to the transmission line corridor are found near its eastern end. These include homes along Elder Creek Road (to the north) and Tokay Lane (to the south), east and west of Hedge Avenue. A distance of about 500 feet separates the homes to the north and south from the transmission line right of way. In both directions, the distances between the existing homes and the adjacent roadways are less than the distance from the homes to the transmission line right of way. There are some vacant and industrial or heavy commercial parcels interspersed in this area as well. From South Watt Avenue, westward along the transmission line corridor to Power Inn Road in the City of Sacramento, developed land uses are industrial or heavy commercial in nature, and about two-thirds of the land is vacant. West of Power Inn Road, the land is developed for mostly residential uses. Local traffic is the dominant noise source in the area. Elder Creek Road is approximately 600 feet to the north of the right of way for the transmission line reconstruction. Elder Creek Road is a two-lane road, currently carrying approximately 5,000 annual average daily traffic (AADT). Based on methods published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (FHWA, 2004), the daytime Leq at 50 feet from the center of Elder Creek Road is about 64 dBA, and the Ldn is about 67 dBA. In the vicinity of the transmission line right of way, approximately 500 feet to the south of Elder Creek Road, the daytime Leq values are about 54 dBA.

(2) North City Interconnection Study Area

The location for this interconnection is a small area, north of the American River and east of SR 160 and a Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) river crossing, where existing 115-kV lines of SMUD and PG&E cross one another. The area where the transmission line right of ways cross is about 1,000 feet south of SR 160, which is

DRAFT IV-147 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

the dominant noise source in the area. Based on an AADT of 53,000 (Caltrans, 2004), the Ldn at 50 feet from SR 160 is about 77 dBA, and the daytime Leq is about 75 dBA. At the site of the proposed interconnection, the traffic noise is reduced to a daytime Leq of about 62 dBA. Other noise sources in the area include other surface streets, the two railroad lines that cross the river in this vicinity (UPRR and Burlington Northern Santa Fe [BNSF] Railroad), and smaller contributions from distant traffic and aircraft operations. The land under and adjacent to the utility right of ways is a large vacant grassy field. Bicycle and hiking trails cross the area and generally are oriented toward the main channel of the American River, though they do cross under the utility lines in the area.

(3) Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area

The Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area includes portions of Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties. The dominant land use in this study area is agriculture, and the land is zoned A1 (Agricultural-General) and AP (Agricultural-Preserve). Noise levels in this area are generally low; they originate from aircraft operations at the Sacramento International Airport adjacent to and south of the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area, local and distant roadway traffic, and agricultural operations, including crop dusting and the operation of large agricultural equipment. SR 99/70 passes north-south across the easterly portion of this study area. Based on an AADT of 38,500 (Caltrans, 2003), the Ldn at 50 feet from SR 99 is about 81 dBA, and the daytime Leq is 78 dBA. Areas within about 2,000 feet of the highway would have Ldn values of 65 dBA or higher and Leq values of 62 dBA. This result is somewhat higher than that shown in the Sacramento County General Plan noise element (Sacramento County, 1993, Table II-4), which shows that the distance from the roadway centerline to the 60- dB noise contour would be 2,000 feet.

Noise contours associated with the Sacramento International Airport are ellipses that generally extend north-south and around the two runways, with an additional ellipse further to the west (Figure IV-1). The 70-CNEL line from the airport noise contours extends into the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area along Power Line Road and the Sacramento River (Airport Land Use Commission, 1994).

Other than the Sacramento International Airport, no noise contours have been generated for Yolo County within the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area, and only roadway noise data have been provided in the General Plan. Based on similarly traveled roadways in Yolo County, the 60-Ldn contour for surface roadways in the interior portions of the study area (remote from SR 99) would average 80 feet from the roadway centerline (Yolo County, 1983).

DRAFT IV-148 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(4) Willow Slough Substation Study Area

The Willow Slough substation study area is centered on the intersection of Roads 27 and 102, approximately midway between the Cities of Woodland and Davis. As with the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area, agriculture is the dominant land use in the Willow Slough study area. About 12 homes are within or in the vicinity of this study area; most are located in the quadrant to the southwest of the intersection of County Roads 102 and 27. Noise levels are generally low; they are associated with roadway traffic and distant aircraft operations. Based on a traffic volume of about 3,000 AADT on these roadways, the Ldn at 50 feet would be about 62 dBA. The typical daytime Leq in these areas near the existing roadways would be about 60 dBA. A daytime Leq of 50 dBA or less would occur about 500 feet from the nearest roadway.

(5) General Annexation Territory

Noise levels throughout the area proposed to be served by SMUD vary between the urban areas in the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland and the rural agricultural areas in unincorporated Yolo County. These areas are currently served by PG&E, and the existing noise levels associated with the PG&E electrical facilities are part of the background noise environment in these areas. Noise levels from electrical facilities are typically very low when compared to those from roadways, airports, mechanical equipment operation, and other sources. When a transmission line is in operation, an electric field is generated in the air surrounding the overhead conductor. When the intensity of the electric field at the conductor surface exceeds the breakdown strength of the surrounding air, a corona discharge occurs at the conductor surface. During this process, electrical energy from the conductors is released and manifested as audible noise and radio and television interference. The audible noise associated with a transmission line is most often perceived as a buzz, hum, or crackling sound. The noise level can increase when the overhead conductors are wet.

A different phenomenon, known as gap-type noise, is caused by an oxidized film on the surface of two hardware pieces in contact. The film acts as an insulator between the surfaces, and small electric arcs, which produce noise and radio or television interference, are created.

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has conducted several transmission line studies (EPRI, 1982). These studies measured sound levels at the ground level beneath several power line sizes with wet conductors; the results are shown in Table IV.I-2.

DRAFT IV-149 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Table IV.I-2: Typical Transmission Line Noise Levels

CORONA DISCHARGE Line Voltage Noise Level 138kV 33.5 dbA 240kV 40.4 dbA 356kV 51.0 dbA

These noise levels are at or below ambient noise levels that are typical of urban and most rural areas. While the human ear may be able to distinguish the noise by its characteristics, measurements of the noise from corona discharge are within one or two dBA of ambient noise levels.

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project can have a significant impact on noise if the project causes any of the following effects:

• Exposure of persons to, or generation of noise levels in excess of, standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;

• Exposure of persons to, or generation of excessive, groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels;

• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project;

• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; and

• For a project located within an airport land-use plan, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, the project exposes people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Instances where groundborne vibration or noise is substantial enough to be felt or heard are usually associated with activities such as blasting or pile driving or with the movement of very heavy equipment, such as railroads or mining equipment (Federal Transit Administration, 1995, page 7-1). The perceptible vibrations from typical construction activities are limited to the immediate construction site. The construction and operation of electrical transmission lines and a substation will

DRAFT IV-150 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

not involve blasting, pile driving, or the use of any equipment likely to generate groundborne vibrations or noise that can be perceived off of the immediate construction site. For these reasons, this issue is not analyzed further here.

The Program will not expose people residing or working within the vicinity of Sacramento International Airport to excessive noise levels. The Program does not involve any residential development; therefore, it will not create a situation in which new residences are exposed to excessive aircraft noise. The Program will necessitate placing some workers in the general vicinity of the Sacramento International Airport. This could occur during the construction of the Woodland- Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) or during service and maintenance trips by SMUD employees related to operations after the annexation has been completed (Program Component 9). Whether the exposure to noise occurs from aircraft operations, the use of construction equipment, or any other source, SMUD and its contractors must comply with the California law that governs occupational noise exposure. These requirements are identified in Table IV.I-1 and are in 8 CCR 5095. For an 8-hour duration, workers may not be exposed to noise in excess of 90 dBA. For shorter periods, higher exposures are allowed, up to a maximum of 115 dBA for 15 minutes. All employers, including SMUD and any contractors that SMUD uses (including PG&E), are required to prepare and implement hearing conservation plans for workers in noisy environments. Typical measures that are identified in such plans include scheduling and changing assignments to provide respite from continuous noise exposures, installing mufflers and other noise control measures on mechanical equipment, providing ear plugs or similar personal protective equipment, and monitoring noise levels with personal noise dosimeters designed to measure compliance with the applicable exposure standards. These measures, which are required by state law, serve to avoid excessive worker exposure to high noise levels. This issue, therefore, is not analyzed further in this EIR.

(2) Threshold(s) of Significance Adopted in This EIR

For permanent noise levels caused by the operation of the various program components, the standards set forth in the local governments’ noise elements and ordinances were reviewed. These noise standards provide appropriate significance thresholds for this impact because they are intended to protect public health and welfare and reflect community standards and concerns within each jurisdiction.

Of these standards, the most conservative or protective of the environment are found in the Sacramento County noise element, related to allowable noise levels from non-transportation noise sources, and in the Sutter County noise element standards for residential uses. Both specify allowable noise levels based on the time of day. In Sacramento County, for non-transportation noise sources, the limits are summarized as follows.

DRAFT IV-151 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• During the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), the median noise level (L50, or noise level exceeded 50% of the time) will not exceed 50 dBA, and the Lmax will not exceed 70 dBA.

• During the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), the L50 will not exceed 45 dBA, and the Lmax will not exceed 65 dBA.

In Sutter County, the noise level standards for residential areas are summarized as follows.

• During the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), the hourly equivalent sound level (Leq) will not exceed 50 dB, and the Lmax will not exceed 70 dB.

• During the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), the Leq will not exceed 45 dB and the maximum noise level will not exceed 65 dB.

To compare these standards with one another, or with those from other jurisdictions (and used in the Sacramento County noise element for transportation sources), the statistical measurement of L50 must be related to the energy- equivalent measurement of Leq. For time-symmetrical noise events, the L50 noise metric is the same as the Leq that is used as the basis for the 24-hour Ldn or CNEL standards (Everbach, 2001). Assuming a daytime Leq of 50 dBA and a nighttime Leq of 45 dBA, which are consistent with the Sacramento and Sutter County standards, leads to an Ldn value of about 53 dBA. This Ldn level is less than (more stringent than) the 60 dBA or 65 dBA Ldn standard that is used in other noise elements. Therefore, permanent noise levels associated with the proposed program greater than 53 dBA Ldn were considered to result in a significant impact.

A threshold of significance concerning marginal increases in noise levels is frequently considered when ambient noise is well below applicable standards. For example, if the ambient noise level in a rural area is 50 dBA Ldn, it would be possible for a new source to increase noise levels by over 10 dBA without exceeding a typical 65 dBA standard. In this instance, agencies may recommend an additional standard that specifies an allowable increase. The City of Sacramento (City of Sacramento, 1998) states:

When evaluating changes in community noise levels, or Ldn, a difference of 3 dBA is a barely perceptible increase to most people. A 5 dBA increase is readily noticeable, while a difference of 10 dBA would be perceived as a doubling of loudness.

For this analysis, in areas where ambient noise levels are below an applicable standard, a permanent increase that either causes the standard to be exceeded or that increases noise levels by 3 dBA was considered to be a significant impact.

Temporary increases in noise levels will be associated with program construction activities. Of the local jurisdictions that will be affected by construction, the two

DRAFT IV-152 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

with noise ordinances addressing activities creating short-term noise increases both exempt construction activities. The exemptions and other language in the ordinances create a performance standard that defines allowable limits for construction activity—that is, construction activity must occur during normal work hours and days. This limitation is already incorporated in the program description as BMP 4. For assessment purposes, the daytime Leq (or L50) standard used for evaluating the significance of long-term noise changes also was used as the significance threshold for short-term construction effects.

In summary, two general noise criteria were used for this impact analysis. Program-related noise that exceeds one of the community criteria already described is considered a significant impact. Where Program-related noise, in combination with ambient noise, does not exceed the criteria but does increase ambient noise by 3 dBA or more, the Program-related noise is considered a significant impact. An increase of 3 dBA was used for this criterion because most people do not perceive that there is a change in noise level when that change is less than 3 dBA.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Two major issues regarding noise are evaluated in this EIR. These are the effects of the Program on permanent noise levels, and the effects of infrastructure construction on short-term noise levels. The evaluation methods used in each involve obtaining literature values for the anticipated noise levels and comparing the values with the thresholds already noted. Literature or computed values for source noise are given for specified reference distances from the source. For example, roadway noise levels are frequently specified at a reference distance of 50 feet from the centerline of the roadway. Equipment noise levels are commonly specified at a reference distance of 50 feet for mobile equipment. For some areas, adjustments were made to the literature values to account for varying distances from the noise source. Distance attenuation of noise levels was estimated based on a 6 dBA reduction for each doubling of distance for point sources and a 3 dBA reduction for each doubling of distance for line sources. For example, if the noise level at 50 feet from the centerline of a given roadway (a line source) is 70 dBA, then doubling the distance to 100 feet will reduce the noise level by 3 dBA to 67 dBA.

Noise is perceived over an extremely wide range of actual sound pressure levels (e.g., Newtons per square meter or pounds per square inch). Because of this, noise levels are normally expressed in an easier-to-use, unitless value, called a decibel. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale. The conversion of a pressure level to a decibel actually involves taking the base-ten logarithm of the pressure level (after dividing by a reference level). To add noise levels expressed in decibels, one cannot add the decibels together because they are logarithms of actual pressure levels, and adding logarithms will result in multiplying actual pressure levels together. Because of this, the addition of noise levels in decibels cannot be

DRAFT IV-153 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

done directly; rather, the decibels must be converted mathematically back into actual pressure levels, then added, and then the logarithm of that addition yields a result in decibels. This is why the exposure to two 50 decibel noise levels at the same time results in an exposure to about 53 decibels, rather than 100 decibels, as one might otherwise expect. (In fact, 100 decibels would indicate a pressure level some 1,000 times the real pressure level of two simultaneous 50-decibel exposures.)

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Potential Impacts

(a) Impact NOI-1: Construction Noise

As described hereafter, noise from the equipment used to construct program components will average about 88 dBA at 50 feet from the source. Therefore, based on noise attenuation with distance, construction noise will be less than 50 dBA at about 4,000 feet from the construction site. All of the program components are separated by many miles. For this reason, construction noise from program components will not be additive at any receptor in the study area. Construction noise impacts are described hereafter for each program component.

i. Impact NOI-1a: Noise from Reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line. Construction operations for the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) may involve minor grading to provide access to the locations for each support pole, drilling and pouring concrete for foundations, erection of poles, and installation of conductors. At the location of each pole, the disturbance area would be approximately 3,200 square feet. Typical noise levels for construction equipment anticipated to be used for program construction are listed in Table IV.I-3, along with other common equipment types. Most homes in the study area are located about 500 feet from the right of way for this transmission line.

The total duration of construction for the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line will be about nine weeks. Construction activities will occur during daytime periods and at varying positions along the transmission line route as work progresses. Thus, the noise effects will occur at a single location for a period of a few days, as foundations are constructed in that vicinity, and then for another short period, as poles are erected, and finally for another short period, as the conductors are installed. Although the local jurisdictions with noise ordinances specifically exempt construction activities from numerical noise level limits, the anticipated construction noise levels still will exceed the 50- dBA Leq significance threshold. Therefore, construction of the Power Inn

DRAFT IV-154 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Road to Hedge substation transmission line will result in a short-term significant impact.

The City of Sacramento noise ordinance exempts construction noise from its restrictions for as long as construction occurs during daytime hours. BMP 4 requires SMUD or its contractors to conduct all construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. This is consistent with Sacramento Municipal Code Section 8.68.080.E. While implementation of this BMP will comply with community standards regarding noise, it will not reduce short-term noise levels at adjacent properties during the daytime.

Table IV.I-3: Noise Levels from Construction Equipment

Range in Noise Level Equipment Type Expected Use in Component* (dBA at 50 feet) Front Loader 72-84 Backhoes WS 72-93 Tractors 77-96 Scrapers 80-93 Graders WS 80-93 Pavers 86-89 Trucks PI Rd-Hedge, NC Int. Woodl.-Elv., WS 82-94 Concrete Mixers PI Rd-Hedge, NC Int. Woodl.-Elv., WS 75-88 Concrete Pumps 81-84 Cranes, movable PI Rd-Hedge, NC Int. Woodl.-Elv., WS 75-88 Cranes, derrick 86-89 Pumps 68-72 Generators PI Rd-Hedge, NC Int. Woodl.-Elv., WS 71-82 (line tensioner is similar) Compressors 74-87 Mounted breakers 76-94 (hoerams) Pneumatic wrenches 82-89 Jackhammers and rock 81-98 drills Boring or drill rigs PI Rd-Hedge, NC Int. Woodl.-Elv., 85-90 Impact drivers (peak) 95-106 Vibrator 69-81 Saws 72-82

PI Rd-Hedge = Power Inn Rd. to Hedge Transmission Line Reconstruction NC Int. = North City Substation Interconnection Woodl-Elv. = Woodland to Elverta Transmission Line WS = Willow Slough Substation

DRAFT IV-155 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: SMUD will incorporate the following measures into its plans, contracts, and specifications for work on each of the infrastructure components of this Program.

• Stationary construction equipment, such as generators, that generate noise exceeding 50 dBA at the project boundaries will be located as far as possible from existing residences in the vicinity of any infrastructure component.

• Access routes for all construction traffic and equipment involved will be located along existing public or private roads to minimize construction traffic volumes passing existing residences in the vicinity of any infrastructure component.

• All vehicles and equipment not in use will be turned off and not allowed to idle for more than 10 minutes at a time.

These measures will help to reduce the vehicle and other construction noise that may affect residents in the vicinity of the infrastructure components, but it is likely that they will not reduce Leq values to below 50 dBA at the edge of the right of way or property where construction is occurring.

Significance of Impact NOI-1 After Mitigation. Because the implementation of BMP 4 and Mitigation NOI-1 may not reduce short- term noise levels at adjacent properties to below 50 dBA Leq, the short- term construction noise impacts for Program Component 4 will remain significant.

ii. Impact NOI-1b: Noise from Construction of the North City Interconnection. Construction operations for the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5) will involve a brief period of drilling for the foundations of one or two poles, placing concrete to form the foundation(s), erecting the poles, and connecting the conductors. The total duration of construction for the North City interconnection will be about one week. Construction activities will occur during daytime periods and will remain within or adjacent to the point where the PG&E and SMUD right of ways cross.

No homes are in the immediate vicinity, and nearby offices are about 1,000 feet to the northeast on the northern side of the northern levee along the American River. At this distance, construction noise will be attenuated by about 26 dBA. The barrier provided by the American River levee provides approximately 10 dBA in additional noise reduction. Thus, the maximum exterior noise levels anticipated at the nearest offices will be about 59 dBA. This value is far below the Lmax limit of 70 dBA, which is part of the threshold of significance used in this EIR. Non-residential uses,

DRAFT IV-156 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

such as offices, have a higher threshold for noise in community noise standards, typically on the order of 65 to 70 dBA Ldn or CNEL. Construction noise at these offices will not approach those levels.

Recreational users on the American River Parkway trails in the vicinity of the North City Interconnection will experience high noise levels that may be disruptive, up to 80 or 90 dBA, for very short periods as they pass by the construction site. Given the very short duration of the construction period for this component, and that distance and barrier noise reductions will reduce the noise levels at the nearest permanent land uses to below the threshold of significance, the noise impact of construction for the North City interconnection will be less than significant.

iii. Impact NOI-1c: Noise from Construction of the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line. While the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) is not extensively developed, there are a few farm residences in the area and future development is planned generally along Elverta Road in Sacramento County, which is the easterly portion of the study area. Depending on the exact future location of construction activities for this component, and how they relate to the nearest residences, it is possible that homes may be exposed to temporary noise levels in excess of the daytime Lmax of 70 dBA. This will result in a significant short-term impact. BMP 4 described above under NOI-1a will ensure that this noise impact does not exceed community standards, and mitigation measure NOI-1 will ensure that construction noise is minimized; however, this short-term noise impact will remain significant if the transmission line is located near existing homes.

iv. Impact NOI-1d: Noise from Construction of the Willow Slough Substation. While the study area for the Willow Slough Substation is generally rural and agricultural in nature, approximately 12 homes are in the vicinity. Depending on the exact future location of construction activities for this component and how they relate to the nearest residences, it is possible that homes may be exposed to temporary noise levels in excess of either the 50 dBA Leq or the 70 dBA Lmax. This will result in a significant short-term impact. BMP 4 described above under NOI-1a will ensure that this noise impact does not exceed community standards, and mitigation measure NOI-1 will ensure that construction noise is minimized; however, this short-term noise impact will remain significant.

v. Impact NOI-1e: Noise from Reconductoring in the Annexation Territory. The noise levels associated with Other Distribution System Upgrades (Program Component 8) will range up to about 88 dBA at 50 feet because the types of activities in this program component will not involve heavy equipment, though they may involve trucks and cranes (Table IV.I-3). Depending on the exact future location of activities in this

DRAFT IV-157 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

component and how they relate to the nearest residences, it is possible that homes may be exposed to temporary noise levels in excess of either the 50 dBA Leq or the 70 dBA Lmax thresholds. This will result in a significant short-term impact. BMP 4 described above under NOI-1a will ensure that this noise impact does not exceed community standards, and mitigation measure NOI-1 will ensure that construction noise is minimized; however, this short-term noise impact will remain significant.

(b) Impact NOI-2: Operational Noise

i. Impact NOI-2a: Noise from Operations and Maintenance. Program Component 9 consists of normal O&M activities for the electrical system in the Annexation Territory. These activities are currently being conducted by PG&E. O&M under the Program will be the same as it currently is from the standpoint of noise generation. Therefore, Program Component 9 will have no impact on the noise environment.

ii. Impact NOI-2b: Noise from New Transmission Lines. Operational noise for the new power transmission lines proposed under Program Components 4, 5, and 6 will consist of the occasional cracking sounds associated with corona discharge from high voltage power lines. As indicated in Table IV.I-2, noise from the transmission line will be about 40 dBA. This noise level is at or below ambient noise levels typical of urban and most rural areas. Therefore, this noise will be less than significant.

The current daytime Leq value from Elder Creek Road in the vicinity of the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) is approximately 54 dBA. From Table IV.I-1, the existing 230-kV transmission lines in this right of way may be expected to cause Leq values up to about 40 dBA at ground level under these lines, and the existing 115-kV lines will contribute slightly less than 33 dBA. Because of the large differences between the transmission line noise and the roadway noise, their logarithmic sum is only about 54.2 dBA. From Table IV.I-1, the corona discharge noise from the new 115-kV transmission line is expected to be below 33 dBA. Adding this new 33 dBA to the previous sum of 54.2 dBA yields a new logarithmic sum of 54.2 dBA. At the sites of the homes nearest to the right of way for this program component, the roadway noise levels are even higher (daytime Leq of about 64 dBA), and the transmission line noise will be even lower (about 30 dBA). The relative effect of the new transmission line at these homes will be even less than the effect directly under the lines—or indiscernible, for all practical purposes.

The current daytime Leq value from SR 160 is approximately 62 dBA in the vicinity of the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5). From Table IV.I-1, the existing 115-kV transmission lines

DRAFT IV-158 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

in this right of way may be expected to cause Leq values up to about 33 dBA at ground level under these lines. Because of the large differences between the transmission line noise and the roadway noise, their logarithmic sum is only about 62 dBA. No new transmission lines will be added at this location—this component will involve only the addition of two poles and short lengths of conductor to interconnect the two systems. Because of this, there will be no effects on the noise environment at this location.

The current daytime Leq value from SR 99 in the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) is approximately 78 dBA at 50 feet from the highway and 62 dBA out to a distance of 2,000 feet. It would be necessary to travel 30,000 feet from this highway, or about one-third of the way across the length of the study area for Program Component 6, for the noise from this highway to fall below the 50 dBA daytime Leq used as the threshold of significance for evaluating noise effects. In addition, much of the study area is affected by aircraft operations that raise the Ldn values to over 60 dBA, and traffic on local roadways may contribute additional noise. From Table IV.I-1, the new 115-kV transmission lines proposed for the program in this study area may be expected to cause Leq values up to about 33 dBA at ground level under the lines. Even in the quietest portions of the study area, the addition of 33 dBA to an existing Leq of 50 dBA will result in a logarithmic sum of 50 dBA. Thus, the new 115-kV transmission line through this area will have no impact on the noise environment.

iii. Impact NOI-2c: Noise from Willow Slough Substation. Transformers operating within the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7) will emit a continuous hum at a frequency of 60 cycles per second, and cooling fans associated with transformers may emit additional noise. There also will be some occasional corona discharge noise from the 115-kV lines in and adjacent to the substation, which currently run north- south along County Road 102 through the study area. The resulting noise levels at the property line of the substation will be a function of the number of transformers operating, the distance between the transformers and the property line, and the type of security (fence or wall) used at the property line. Based on the design of similar substations, the following assumptions were used to compute the Leq from the substation operation at the substation property line.

Number of transformers 4 Transformer source noise 60 dBA each at 3 feet Total transformer source noise 66 dBA at 3 feet Area of substation 2 acres Distance from transformers to property line 147 feet Perimeter type fence (no noise barrier)

DRAFT IV-159 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

With these assumptions, the resulting Leq at the substation boundary will be about 33 dBA. The substation probably will be close to County Road 102, since that is where the existing 115-kV transmission line is. In this area, the daytime Leq is about 60 dBA. The addition of 33 dBA from the substation to this existing noise level will result in a logarithmic sum of 60 dBA, or no change. Even at locations more distant from the roads, where the existing daytime Leq values are 50 dBA, adding the substation noise will result in a logarithmic sum of 50 dBA. If added to a nighttime Leq of 45 dBA, the substation still will result in a logarithmic sum of 45 dBA. (The actual result will be 45.3 dBA.) Thus, under most circumstances, the substation contribution to permanent noise levels will not be significant.

If the substation were to occupy a much smaller area than the assumed two acres, or if the transformers were not centrally located within the substation property but were just inside its perimeter, then the resulting noise levels at the property line might be sufficiently high to influence long-term noise levels. For example, using the above assumptions but reducing the distance between the transformers and the property line to 50 feet results in a substation noise of 42 dBA. Added to a daytime Leq of 50 dBA, this will lead to a logarithmic sum of 51 dBA—a small increase, but sufficient to exceed the threshold for a significant impact in this EIR. If considered with a nighttime Leq limit of 45 dBA, the resulting sum is 47 dBA, which exceeds the threshold of significance. For this reason, the effect of the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7) on permanent noise levels is considered a potentially significant impact. No BMPs are proposed for the Program that will reduce this noise impact.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2: In determining the final location and in developing the final designs for the Willow Slough substation, SMUD will ensure that transformer noise at the property line will not exceed 40 dBA Leq.

Significance of Impact NOI-2c Following Mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2 will ensure that the contribution of the substation noise to the existing daytime Leq of 50 dBA and nighttime Leq of 45 dBA are less than 0.5 dBA. This will reduce the effect of the substation operation on existing noise levels to less than significant.

3. Indirect Effects on the Environment

With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2, noise from Program facilities will not exceed 33 dBA Leq below the transmission lines or beyond the substation property line. This noise level is at or below ambient noise throughout the Program study area; therefore, Program noise will not increase ambient noise in the region. The presence of transmission lines and a substation will not attract noise-generating activities to the area. For these reasons, the Program will have no indirect noise impacts.

DRAFT IV-160 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

4. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Construction noise effects of the program will be superimposed on existing noise levels originating from roadway traffic, aircraft operations, agricultural work, and other sources in the various component areas. Noise levels are variable, but generally low, in the areas that will be affected by the Program. Periodic short-term construction and its related noise are common occurrences in urban and rural areas, particularly areas experiencing population growth and development similar to what is experienced in northern Sacramento and Yolo Counties. The proposed annexation and construction of facilities necessary for SMUD to serve the Annexation Territory will not significantly alter land- use patterns or activities within the areas to be served or the areas where proposed facilities will be located. For these reasons, cumulative noise effects in the areas affected by the Program are not expected to be significant, and the Program’s contribution to these cumulative noise levels will be minor and also not significant.

5. Monitoring and Reporting

SMUD will implement two monitoring and reporting protocols for the potential Program noise impacts. SMUD construction inspectors will monitor work hours to ensure noise- generating equipment is not operated outside the hours specified by BMP 3. Any violations of this policy will be recorded, and the records will be provided to LAFCo quarterly during the construction period. SMUD will prepare a report showing the location of the transformers for the Willow Slough substation relative to the property boundary before construction of the substation. This report will be provided to LAFCo.

DRAFT IV-161 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-162 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

J. POPULATION/HOUSING

This section describes how the Program will affect population and housing in the Annexation Territory and the Sacramento municipal area. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant environmental impact on population/housing.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct impacts relative to population/housing includes all of the jurisdictions covered by SACOG. This area was selected because employment associated with the Program could affect people from Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, El Dorado, Placer, and Yuba Counties and all incorporated cities within those counties.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts relative to population and housing is the same as the analysis area for direct and indirect impacts because this area covers the entire region that could be influenced economically by the Program.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

There are no regulatory policies regarding population and housing relevant to the Program.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

Based on the 2000 Census, the population of the Sacramento-Yolo County area was 1,796,857. The median age of this population is relatively high, at 34.5 years, with the 35- to 44-year-old age group representing 16.3% of the population. About 70% of the population is white, with Asians representing the next largest ethnic group in the population, at 9%. The median household income of the Sacramento-Yolo County area is $46,106, and the per capita income is $22,302.

The 2000 Census recorded 714,981 housing units in the Sacramento-Yolo County area. There were a total of 49,683 vacant housing units. Of this total of vacant units, 21,374 units are for seasonal, recreational, or other occasional uses.

DRAFT IV-163 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2. Consideration and Discussion of Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on population/housing, if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure);

• Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; or

• Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

The Program is not a development project. Therefore, none of the CEQA guidance applies directly.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCO, as the Lead Agency, has determined that Program-related impacts relative to population/housing will result if the Program or any program component will:

(a) Increase population growth beyond that forecast by SACOG within the Program study area;

(b) Increase housing demand beyond the available housing stock; or

(3) Evaluation Methods

SACOG provides population forecasts for Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, El Dorado, Placer, and Yuba Counties and all incorporated cities within these counties. Each of the jurisdictions provides input into these growth forecasts, based on the local planning staff’s knowledge of their particular jurisdiction. These data and 2000 Census data were used, in addition to expected employment requirements of the Program, to evaluate potential impacts.

DRAFT IV-164 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact PH-1: Increase Population Growth

There are contractors and workers in the Sacramento metropolitan area with experience in constructing power transmission lines and substations. Program components are relatively small, requiring the construction of one substation and approximately 20 miles of transmission line. Therefore, it is not expected that the construction of program components will result in in-migration of construction workers to the Program study area.

The Program will create 79 new positions with SMUD. SMUD has determined that the skill and knowledge required for these new jobs are available within the labor pool in the Program study area. SMUD also has committed to hire any qualified PG&E employees displaced by the Program. Based on the population size of the region and the small number of new jobs required, it is not expected that anyone will migrate to the region specifically for these jobs. Therefore, the Program is not expected to cause any increase in regional population.

If it were assumed that all Program jobs would be filled by people from outside the region, the Program still would have only a minor effect on population growth. The average household size in the Program study area used by SACOG in its estimates of population growth is 2.76. Assuming that all of the people filling these SMUD jobs were married with families, this would result in regional population growth of 218 people. SACOG estimates that regional population will grow to 2,326,308 by 2010 and 2,864,387 by 2025. The population increase associated with the Program, even if every new job brought a family to the region, would have a less than significant impact on projected population growth.

(2) Impact PH-2: Increase Housing Demand

As discussed under Impact PH-1, the Program will create no demand for housing. Even if it were assumed that all of the new jobs created by the Program generated the need for housing units, this would only total 79 units. Based on the census, there were 28,309 vacant housing units that were not used for part-time or recreational occupancy in the Sacramento-Yolo County area in 2000. The housing stock in this region has continued to grow. Therefore, even if the Program resulted in the need for housing, the demand would be substantially less than the available vacant housing stock. For this reason, the Program will have a less than significant impact on housing.

(3) Impact PH-3: Preempt Housing on Land Planned for Housing Development

Measure M passed by the voters of Sutter County calls for the development of a new community in southern Sutter County on the border of Sacramento County. The Natomas Joint Vision Area located in northern Sacramento County also includes residential and commercial development. The Woodland-Elverta

DRAFT IV-165 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

transmission line may pass through these areas. The specific alignment of the transmission line has not yet been determined, and there is no specific plan for new communities in southern Sutter County or northern Sacramento County. Therefore, it is not possible, at this time, to determine the effect of the Woodland- Elverta transmission line on future community development.

The presence of a transmission line does not preclude residential or commercial development on adjacent lands or under the transmission lines. The transmission line right of way also can be used for recreation in urban areas, such as parks and walking and bicycle trails.

As part of BMP 1, SMUD will work cooperatively with city and county jurisdictions and landowners to attempt to avoid conflicts in siting the Woodland- Elverta transmission line. This will minimize any potential impact to future housing in Sutter and Sacramento Counties to a less than significant level.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Annexation of Yolo County territory into SMUD’s service area may be viewed in the context of Yolo County’s comprehensive update to its general plan. Yolo County planning staff, in response to the Program’s NOP, has not identified any conflicts between SMUD’s proposal and the County’s general plan update. Therefore, LAFCo anticipates that, upon adoption of the new Yolo County General Plan, the Yolo County Board of Supervisors will continue to control the rate and direction of population growth in the Annexation Territory.

Foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments. Relative to growth, SACOG’s Blueprint (SACOG, 2005a) projects that 304 square miles (194,560 acres) to 661 square miles (423,040 acres) of land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from existing rural uses to urban use by 2050. The Program will contribute to the growth of the region by reducing electrical costs in the Annexation Territory; electrical costs is one of many factors influencing population growth in western Yolo County.

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. SACOG and its member jurisdictions recognize that the region can expect substantial future growth and are planning for that growth.

DRAFT IV-166 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

The SACOG Blueprint is a visioning/planning effort for orderly development in the greater Sacramento metropolitan area that includes portions of Sacramento, Placer, Yolo, Yuba, El Dorado, and Sutter Counties. This region is anticipated to add over 1.7 million people, growing to 3.6 million people, and to more than double the number of homes, from 713,000 to 1.5 million, by 2050. Assessments show that existing general plans do not accommodate future population, housing, or job growth adequately. The Blueprint uses the planning principles of housing options, compact development, transportation choices, mixed land uses, conservation of natural resources, use of existing assets, and quality design to address the anticipated future need. The SACOG Board of Directors adopted the Preferred Blueprint Scenario in December of 2005. The scenario proposes shifts in the allocation of housing and jobs in the region in a way that encourages less dependence on single-driver commutes. The scenario encourages increased residential development near transit, smaller single-family lots, and increased mixed-use developments while seeking to preserve open space and improve commute times and air quality in the region. The Blueprint also measures the impacts and benefits of the adopted scenario on existing conditions. Some cities and counties in the region have begun to incorporate the Blueprint’s smart growth principles.

e. Monitoring and Reporting

The results of the siting study that will determine the alignment for the Woodland- Elverta transmission line will be provided to LAFCo for review before construction of the transmission line begins.

DRAFT IV-167 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-168 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

K. PUBLIC SERVICES

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect public services. Where significant adverse effects on the environment are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce these impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15125 of the CEQA Guidelines. This environmental setting is the baseline for determining whether the Program will have significant environmental impacts on public services.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts includes the service district areas affected by implementation of the Program in Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties and the cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Woodland. This area was selected based on the Program’s potential to result in a decline in existing public services or the need to construct new facilities elsewhere in the affected city or county.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts is the same as the analysis area for direct and indirect impacts because impacts to service areas associated with the Program will not extend outside of this area.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

No regulatory policies related to public services apply to the analysis area.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

Fire protection services associated with the program components are provided by the city fire departments in Davis, West Sacramento, and Woodland, and by fire districts in Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties. Police protection services are provided by the city police departments in Davis, West Sacramento, and Woodland and by the sheriff departments in Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties. SMUD also operates its own Asset Protection group that provides security for its facilities. Existing parks located in the study area are operated and maintained by the Yolo County Parks and Natural Resources Division, the Sacramento County Department of Regional Parks, Recreation and Open Space, the Sutter County Public Works Department, City of Davis Parks and Community Services Department, City of Woodland Parks, Recreation & Community Services Department, and City of Sacramento Department of Parks and Recreation. A multiple number of school districts serve the cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Woodland and the counties of Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter.

DRAFT IV-169 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on public service if the component would cause any of the following effects:

(a) The project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

• Fire protection;

• Police protection;

• Schools;

• Parks; and

• Other public facilities.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in This EIR

LAFCo, as Lead Agency, has determined that Program-related impacts relative to public services will be significant if the program or any program component will directly or indirectly restrict the ability of jurisdictions (cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento and Woodland, and Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo Counties) to provide adequate public services, as judged by the following:

(a) Prevent affected jurisdictions from meeting the desired police response time;

(b) Prevent affected jurisdictions from meeting the desired fire response time;

(d) Prevent affected jurisdictions from providing desired park land.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Police and sheriff departments, fire departments, and fire districts were contacted to determine their current service levels. The general plans for the cities of West

DRAFT IV-170 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Sacramento and Woodland and for Sacramento and Yolo Counties were reviewed to identify any fire or police stations that will be physically affected by the development of the proposed transmission and substation facilities, given their present locations. Maps available on Web sites for the school districts that have jurisdiction over the program component areas were reviewed to determine the presence of existing schools. In addition, maps available on Web sites for the municipal parks and recreation departments that have jurisdiction over the program component areas were reviewed to determine the presence of existing parks.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact PS-1: Impacts on Police and Fire Service Response Times

No program component will require the modification of any existing roads or the creation of any permanent new roads. During construction of the program components, vehicles will be parked off of roadways to ensure that they do not interfere with the provision of services in the area. Therefore, the Program will have no effects on the response times of police and fire services.

The Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area and the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Components 4 and 5) will either reconstruct or slightly modify existing electrical transmission facilities. Therefore, these program components will not require any additional fire or police protection services beyond what is required for the existing facilities, and these program components will not interfere with existing response times.

Program Component 6 will be located primarily in irrigated agricultural land, and Program Component 7 is in irrigated agricultural land. Therefore, these program components will not substantially increase fire hazards. In the event of theft, vandalism, or unauthorized climbing or entry of Program facilities, SMUD’s Asset Protection security force generally will be the first responder. Therefore, rapid police response typically will not be necessary for the SMUD facilities. Based on the operations of existing SMUD facilities, it is estimated that there will be an average of approximately 1 call for police protection services every 6 months for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line and Willow Slough substation, and this will be a non-emergency call. Fire protection services will be needed, at an average, no more often than once very 10 years. Therefore, these program components will not place substantial additional demands on existing police and fire services in the study area. For these reasons, Program Components 6 and 7 will have a less than significant impact on police and fire services.

Program Component 8 involves reconductoring in the Annexation Territory and consists of the replacement of existing overhead wires with new, slightly larger diameter, overhead wires. The use of a larger wire does not change the risk of fire

DRAFT IV-171 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

in a transmission line. Therefore, this program component will not require any additional fire protection service beyond what has been required previously for these existing facilities. During Program construction, there may be a short-term need for police and fire protection services. Police services may be necessary in the event of theft or vandalism of construction materials or equipment. Fire protection services may be necessary if construction activities result in a fire or medical emergency. BMP 5 will ensure that this demand on police and fire service will be less than significant. BMP 5 includes the following.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written security plan to minimize the potential for vandalism or theft from construction, storage, or lay-down sites used for construction or reconstruction components of the Program. The objective of this BMP is to reduce or eliminate the need for police or sheriff responses and to prevent the loss of building materials, tools, and equipment.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written Injury and Illness Prevention Plan and Safety Plan in compliance with minimum OSHA/Cal OSHA requirements to minimize the potential injury and illness of workers or any site visitors for the program components. The objective of this BMP is to reduce or eliminate the need for emergency medical responses and to reduce injury or illness of any severity.

• SMUD and its contractors will have and implement a written fire protection plan to minimize potential fires at construction, storage, or laydown sites used for construction or reconstruction components of the Program. SMUD will plan for, and have available at each construction site, appropriate fire prevention and suppression equipment, from fire extinguishers to on-site water tanks or a tanker truck, as appropriate for the work being performed, the weather, and the adjacent environmental conditions. The objective of this BMP is to reduce or eliminate the need for fire department response.

(2) Impact PS-2: Impacts to Schools

No schools are located within one-quarter mile of any of the program components. As discussed in Section J (Population/Housing), it is expected that the 79 permanent jobs created by the Program will be filled by former PG&E personnel or from the existing labor pool in the Sacramento area. Therefore, it is unlikely that workers will move to the Sacramento area for these jobs or increase the number of school children. However, if it were assumed that all 79 jobs were taken by people moving to the area for those jobs, that each new employee represented a new household in the region, and that those households had two school-aged children, then the total increase in school children in the Sacramento area related to the Program would be only 158. This is a small number, well within the annual turnover rate of children whose families move into or out of

DRAFT IV-172 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

school districts in a metropolitan area the size of Sacramento. Therefore, the Program will have a less than significant impact on schools.

(3) Impact PS-3: Impacts to Parks

All of the program components except for the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area and Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Components 6 and 7) involve minor modifications or refurbishment of existing electrical transmission facilities. Therefore, Program Components 4, 5, and 8 will have no impact on planned or existing park lands.

According to the Yolo County Parks and Open Space Master Plan, and based on available information for Sacramento and Sutter County, no parks are proposed within the study areas for the Woodland-Elverta transmission line or Willow Slough substation. As a result, these components will have no impact on the ability of Sacramento, Sutter, or Yolo Counties to achieve the desired parkland for their jurisdictions.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in substantial growth. For example, relative to growth, the SACOG Blueprint (SACOG, 2005a) envisions that an additional 304 to 661 square miles of land in the greater Sacramento area will be urbanized by 2050. Population projections by SACOG estimate a regional population of about 2.8 million by 2025. This growth will place substantial demands on police and fire services in the region as well as on schools and parks.

The Program will reduce electrical costs in the Annexation Territory. This is one factor that may influence growth in the region. The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Project proponents who want to undertake a specific project often are required to provide compensation for the increased demand on public services. In addition, as an area urbanizes, tax revenues to support fire and police services, schools, and parks typically increase. Often, however, there can be a lag between demand and the funding of public services.

The expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great to completely prevent this type of impact on public

DRAFT IV-173 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

services. This will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse impact to fire and police services, schools, and parks, and the Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-174 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

L. RECREATION

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect recreation. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The program components are located in the southern part of the Sacramento Valley in Yolo, Sutter and Sacramento Counties. Figure I-3 (provided at the end of Chapter I) shows the locations of these program components. The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts includes the entire Annexation Territory because the O&M activities involved in Program Component 9 will take place throughout this area, and Program Component 8, which consists of the possible reconductoring of existing overhead wires, also may occur along any of the 12-kV lines in the Annexation Territory. The analysis area also includes the Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4), the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5), the Woodland- Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Project Component 6), and the Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7).

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for cumulative impacts for recreation is the same as the analysis area for direct and indirect impacts because recreation at local parks associated with the Program will not extend outside of this area.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

The Quimby Act (California Government Code §66477) authorizes cities and counties to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. However, the revenue generated cannot be used for park O&M purposes. This Act applies to all jurisdictions affected by the Program.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

Existing parks in the study area are operated and maintained by the Yolo County Parks and Natural Resources Division; Sacramento County Department of Regional Parks, Recreation and Open Space; Sutter County Public Works Department; City of Davis Parks and Community Services Department; City of Woodland Parks;

DRAFT IV-175 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Recreation & Community Services Department; and City of Sacramento Department of Parks and Recreation. According to the Draft Yolo County Parks and Open Space Master Plan (Yolo County, 2005b), the County has a total of 1,800 acres of parks and open space land. According to the Sacramento County Department of Regional Parks, Recreation and Open Space, a total of over 14,000 acres of recreational land and facilities are operated by Sacramento County, which includes the American River Parkway, 18 parks, recreation, and river access points, and 4 golf courses. According to the County of Sutter General Plan (Sutter County, 1996), there are 9 parks in Sutter County, including 2 boat ramps.

SMUD owns and operates the Upper American River Project (UARP), a hydroelectric facility on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada. The UARP lies within El Dorado and Sacramento Counties, primarily within the lands of the Eldorado National Forest. It consists of 11 reservoirs and 8 powerhouses and generates enough electricity (688 MW) to meet about 20% of SMUD’s customer demand. In a normal water year, the UARP provides roughly 1.8 billion kilowatt- hours of electricity, which is enough energy to power about 180,000 homes. This abundant energy resource firmly establishes the UARP as an important component of the SMUD-owned generation that serves the needs of the 1.2 million residents of SMUD’s service territory.

In 1957, the Federal Power Commission, the predecessor to the FERC, granted a 50- year license to SMUD for the construction and operation of the UARP. The present project configuration of 11 dams and 8 powerhouses was constructed over a period of approximately 50 years, culminating in 1985 with the addition of the Jones Fork Powerhouse. That initial license, subsequent amendments, and other agreements set the parameters within which SMUD may operate the UARP. Those parameters balance biological factors, recreation, and generation with provisions for dry years and wet years.

The current license (FERC No. 2101) for the UARP expires on July 31, 2007. An application for a new license was filed on July 15, 2005. Pending settlement negotiation discussions with federal and state agencies, it is anticipated that a new license for the UARP will be issued by FERC and accepted by SMUD in 2007. This process is governed by a complex set of laws and regulations that, in total, require multiple years of planning, including environmental studies, agency consultation, and public involvement. FERC will make a final determination as to the operating parameters of the new license.

The operation of the UARP has contributed to whitewater rafting on the South Fork of the American River. By storing a portion of flows from spring run-off and releasing it during low-flow summer months, SMUD helps to provide a higher than natural flow regime during popular boating months, such as July and August.

DRAFT IV-176 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on recreation if the project would cause any of the following effects:

• Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated

• Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment

The second effect was dismissed as a threshold because none of the program components will include recreation facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreation facilities. Recreation facilities will not be expanded or constructed because of the Program because program components will not directly take any existing or planned recreational land. In addition, as described in Section IV.J, Population/Housing, the Program will not result in workers moving to the region.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in this EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has determined that impacts regarding recreation will be significant if the Program either substantially interferes with the use of neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities or substantially increases the use of these public recreational facilities so that the deterioration of their physical condition is accelerated. This significance threshold is consistent with the guidance provided in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

(3) Evaluation Methods

Maps available on Web sites for the municipal parks and recreation departments that have jurisdiction in the study area were reviewed to determine the presence of existing parks. This information was used to evaluate the impacts of program components on those facilities.

DRAFT IV-177 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact REC-1: Direct Impacts to Public Recreational Facilities

No existing or planned public recreational facilities are within one-half mile of the Power Inn Road to Hedge substation transmission line reconstruction study area, Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area, or Willow Slough substation study area. Reconductoring in the Annexation Territory and Program O&M will not take place outside of existing or planned Program facilities. Therefore, Program Components 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 will not impact public recreational facilities directly.

The North City Interconnection involves facilities already located in the American River Parkway. The interconnection may involve the construction of one or two new foundations for one or two steel poles in the parkway. Existing access roads will be used for construction and maintenance. Construction of this program component will take approximately 10 days. Therefore, it is not anticipated that construction will result in significant interference with the recreational use of the American River Parkway. As a result, Program Component 5 will have a less than significant impact on the provision of adequate recreational facilities and services for the City of Sacramento.

The SMUD Board of Directors has resolved that the low cost UARP power will be preserved for SMUD’s existing customers. The proposed annexation will not result in the use of, or need to operate, the UARP in a way that differs significantly from the present day or anticipated re-licensed operation regimen. In addition, the expected new FERC license will provide SMUD with the operating criteria for the UARP that can only be modified by FERC.

It is expected that sometime after the Annexation Territory customers have completed payment for the cost of annexation, the new SMUD customers will share in all SMUD resources. However, as stated in L.1.d, any changes in UARP operating criteria will require FERC approval after extensive study and analysis, which generally will require several years. Therefore, it is expected that the Program will not change water flows on the South Fork American River that will impact rafting.

(2) Impact REC-2: Accelerated Deterioration of Recreational Facilities

As discussed in Section IV.J, Population/Housing, the Program will create approximately 79 new permanent jobs. SMUD will hire all qualified PG&E employees displaced by the Program. The labor pool in the Sacramento area also has the appropriate skills to fill these jobs. Therefore, no population increase will be related directly to the Program. However, if it were assumed that all 79 new jobs were filled by people moving to the area for those jobs, the Program would cause a maximum population increase of about 218 people. The 2000 Census recorded a population of about 1.8 million people in the Sacramento area. The

DRAFT IV-178 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

maximum population increase that could be created by the Program, hypothetically, is too small relative to the regional population to have a measurable impact on recreational facilities.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

The foreseeable future projects in the study area include numerous commercial and residential developments that will result in substantial growth. Projections by SACOG (2005) estimate a regional population of about 2.8 million by 2025. This growth will place substantial demands on recreational facilities in the region. However, as already discussed, the Quimby Act authorizes cities and counties to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. It is expected that this process will ensure that adequate recreational facilities are provided in the future, as the region grows. Therefore, it is projected that cumulative impacts on recreational facilities will be less than significant.

DRAFT IV-179 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-180 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

M. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC

This section describes how development associated with the Program will affect transportation and traffic. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

This subsection provides a baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant environmental impact on transportation/traffic.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts related to transportation includes Sacramento, Yolo, and Sutter Counties and the incorporated cities of Davis, Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Woodland. These areas were selected since Program improvements will be constructed within these counties and cities, and local roadways will be used to access Program improvements.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts for transportation will be the same as the analysis area for direct and indirect impacts because traffic associated with the Program will not extend outside of this area.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

No transportation or traffic regulatory policies apply to the analysis area.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

The City of Sacramento is at the junction of Interstate 5 (I-5), the major north-south interstate freeway that traverses California, and Interstate 80 (I-80), the major east- west interstate crossing the northern part of California. These two freeways cross the entire study area. Other major freeways in the study area include SR 113 connecting Davis and Woodland, SR 99, the major highway connecting the communities of the Central Valley, and SR 50. The Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) and the North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5) are in the urban portion of greater Sacramento, where there are numerous major arterials and secondary roads. The Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) is located primarily in rural parts of Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo counties where most roads other than the freeways already mentioned are two-lane rural highways and secondary roads. The Willow Slough Substation Study Area (Program Component 7) is located near the intersection of County Roads 27 and 102 in rural Yolo County.

DRAFT IV-181 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

2. Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on transportation/traffic if the project would cause any of the following effects: • An increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections); • Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways; • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); • Result in inadequate emergency access; • Result in inadequate parking capacity; or • Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks).

The Program consists of annexing a portion of Yolo County into the SMUD service system and connecting the existing electrical system in the Annexation Territory to the SMUD system. The Program does not include the construction of new roads or housing and/or commercial development that will generate traffic. For this reason, none of the guidance provided by CEQA is relevant to this Program.

(2) Thresholds of Significance Adopted in This EIR

The direct and indirect transportation issue associated with the Program is traffic congestion caused by Program construction activities and O&M. Generally, traffic congestion is evaluated in terms of level of service (LOS). LOS is an indicator of operating conditions on a roadway or at an intersection and is defined in categories ranging from A to F. These categories can be viewed much like school grades, with A representing the best traffic flow conditions and F representing poor conditions. LOS A indicates free-flowing traffic and LOS F indicates substantial congestion, with stop-and-go traffic and long delays at intersections. Table IV.M-1 provides definitions of LOS for signalized intersections as specified in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation

DRAFT IV-182 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Research Board of the National Academies, 2000). In urban areas, because intersections are spaced relatively close together, intersection capacities generally control traffic operations on the arterials. Therefore, the LOS at signalized intersections gives a good indication of the overall operating conditions throughout the transportation network.

Table IV.M-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria Highway Capacity Manual, Operational Analysis Method

Level of Control Delay per Service Vehicle (seconds/vehicle) Operational Characteristics LOS A ≤10 Very low delay. Progression is extremely favorable. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase and do not stop at all. LOS B >10 and ≤20 More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. LOS C >20 and ≤35 The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping. LOS D >35 and ≤55 At LOS D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. LOS E >55 and ≤80 There is generally a high ratio of traffic volume to roadway capacity at this level. LOS F >80 This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over saturation; that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection.

Source: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 2000.

Acceptable LOS in the study area for roadways and intersections are an LOS of D for rural areas and an LOS of E for urban areas. This is based on community standards used by Sacramento County. The Program will result in a significant impact if construction generates traffic that results in the following, relative to LOS standards:

• Result in a roadway or a signalized intersection operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS;

• Increase the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio by more than 0.05 at a roadway or at a signalized intersection that is operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project;

• Result in an unsignalized intersection movement/approach operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS, and also cause the intersection to meet a traffic signal warrant;

DRAFT IV-183 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

• Increase the delay of an unsignalized intersection that meets a signal warrant by more than 5 seconds at a movement/approach that is operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project;

• Result in freeway ramps operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS, according to the LOS threshold defined by Caltrans;

• Result in freeway segments operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS, according to the LOS threshold defined in the Caltrans Route Concept Report for that facility;

• Result in a residential street operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS; or

• Increase the V/C ratio by more than 0.05 at a residential street that is operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project.

An increase in the V/C ratio greater than 0.05 was selected as the threshold of significance for roadways and intersections not operating at an acceptable LOS because this level of increase will be noticeable to drivers. A change in the V/C ratio equal to or less than 0.5 is within the day-to-day variability of traffic during the peak hour. When the increase in the V/C ratio exceeds 0.05, most drivers perceive an increase in traffic congestion. Both the City of Sacramento and Sacramento County use this threshold of significance.

(3) Evaluation Methods

The evaluation of construction and operational impacts assumed that all trips will originate from SMUD’s Corporate Yard at 59th Street and S Street in Sacramento. Highway 50 and I-80 were assumed to be the major highways that will be used to access the Program construction sites and the Annexation Territory. As no two program components will be built at the same time, Program Component 6 was used for the construction traffic analysis because it will have the maximum number of trips. The following worst-case assumptions are made in this analysis.

• Peak hour trips will be 25% of the total daily trips. • Construction trucks are equivalent to three passenger cars. • The possibility of the trips in the peak day will be 25% of the number of trips for any program component that occur in the overall construction period or in a week.

The analysis of signalized intersections was based on the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) practices. Existing conditions and existing conditions with the Program were analyzed. Existing lane configuration and traffic volume data were obtained from the Caltrans and City of Sacramento traffic Web sites.

DRAFT IV-184 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact TR-1: Construction Traffic Impacts

Estimated construction traffic for each program component is provided in Table IV.M-2. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that all construction traffic will initiate at SMUD’s Corporate Yard. In actuality, independent contractors may be used for Program construction, and their equipment may come from anywhere in the greater Sacramento area. Therefore, actual construction traffic will be more dispersed than provided in this analysis, resulting in less of a traffic impact than is presented here.

Table IV.M-2: Estimated Daily and Weekly Trips for Construction, by Program Component

Number of Individual Vehicle Type Vehicle Trips Total Number of Vehicle Trips Program Component 4 (Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area) Drill Rig (2) 1 trip per week 2 trips per week Pick-Up Trucks (9) 2 trips per day 18 trips per day Concrete Trucks (2) 4 trips per day 8 trips per day General-Use Flat Bed Truck (4) 2 trips per day 8 trips per day Cranes (3) 1 trip for overall project 3 trips for overall project Line Tensioner (1) 1 trip for overall project 1 trip for overall project Program Component 5 (North City Interconnection Study Area) Drill Rig (1) 1 trip per week 1 trip per week Pick-Up Trucks (8) 2 trips per day 16 trips per day Concrete Trucks (2) 4 trips per day 8 trips per day General-Use Flat Bed Trucks (3) 2 trips per day 6 trips per day Crane (2) 1 trip for overall project 2 trips for overall project Line Tensioner (1) 1 trip for overall project 1 trip for overall project Program Component 6 (Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area) Drill Rig (2) 1 trip per week 2 trips per week Pick-Up Trucks (12) 2 trips per day 24 trips per day Concrete Trucks (5) 4 trips per day 20 trips per day General-Use Flat Bed Trucks (8) 2 trips per day 16 trips per day Cranes (4) 1 trip for overall project 4 trips for overall project Line Tensioner (2) 1 trip for overall project 2 trips for overall project Program Component 7 (Willow Slough Substation Study Area) Drill Rig (1) 1 trip per week 1 trip per week Pick-Up Trucks (12) 2 trips per day 24 trips per day Concrete Trucks (7) 4 trips per day 28 trips per day General-Use Flatbed Trucks (4) 2 trips per day 8 trips per day Compacter (1) 1 trip for overall project 1 trip for overall project Backhoe (2) 1 trip for overall project 2 trips for overall project D6 Tractor (1) 1 trip for overall project 1 trip for overall project Crane (1) 1 trip for overall project 1 trip for overall project

DRAFT IV-185 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

Based on the traffic information provided in Table IV.M-2, the maximum daily trips resulting from construction of program components are provided in Table IV.M-3. Potential impacts were analyzed only for the a.m. peak hour because construction trips are most likely to be concentrated during a single time period at the start of the day.

Table IV.M-3: Maximum Daily Construction Traffic

Daily Trips Peak Hours Trip (a.m. peak) Drill Rig 2 1 Pick-Up Trucks 72 18 Concrete Trucks 60 15 General-Use Flat Bed Trucks 48 12 Cranes 3 1 Line Tensioner 2 1 Total 187 48

The 59th Street and Highway 50 interchange is the primary intersection in the vicinity of the SMUD Corporate Yard. All other intersections surrounding this area have lower volumes of traffic. Based on lane configuration and traffic data from Caltrans and the City of Sacramento (Table IV.M-4), this interchange has an existing V/C ratio of approximately 0.414, with an LOS B. With the addition of the trips generated during Program construction provided in Table IV.M-3, the V/C will increase to 0.438, and the LOS will remain B. Therefore, Program construction will have a less than significant impact on traffic.

Table IV.M-4: Existing Traffic Volume at SR 50 and 59th Street

Average Daily Peak Hour Volume Location Traffic (a.m.) Eastbound traffic off SR 50 to 59th Street 6,440 640 Westbound traffic onto SR 50 from 59th Street 6,910 690 59th Street 5,623 451 TOTAL 1,781

(2) Impact TR-2: Operation and Maintenance Traffic Impacts

During Program O&M, all trips to the Annexation Territory will be from SMUD’s Corporate Yard in Sacramento. Table IV.M-5 shows the estimated total number of trips that will be generated on a daily and weekly basis for O&M in the Annexation Territory. As indicated in the analysis of impact TR-1, 48 peak-hour trips will have a less than significant impact on the major interchange that will be most impacted by Program construction. Program O&M will generate less than half of the number of trips (21.2) in a given day than will be generated by Program construction. Even if all of these O&M trips occur during the a.m. peak hour, they will have a less than significant impact on traffic. As O&M traffic

DRAFT IV-186 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

disperses throughout the Annexation Territory, its effect on the transportation system will decrease because fewer and fewer vehicles will pass through a given intersection or interchange in the Annexation Territory. Therefore, Program O&M will have a less than significant impact on traffic.

Table IV.M-5: Daily and Weekly Trips for Operation and Maintenance

Number of Vehicle Number of Vehicle Vehicle Type Miles Per Day Trips Per Day Daily Heavy Line Truck (2) 83 4 Foreman Truck (2) 83 4 Troubleshooter Van (2) 93 4 Meter Reader (3) 129.5 6 Weekly (1 trip per week) Substation Truck (1) 18.8 0.4 Foreman Truck (1) 27.3 0.4 Substation Technician Van (1) 18.8 0.4 Substation Reader Van (1) 18.8 0.4 Weekly (2 trips per week) Designers (2) 49.2 1.6 TOTAL 521.6 21.2

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

Foreseeable future projects in the Program study area include substantial development. The SACOG Blueprint for growth (SACOG, 2005a) envisions that an additional 304 to 661 square miles of land in the greater Sacramento area will be urbanized by 2050. Population projections by SACOG estimate a regional population of about 2.8 million by 2025. At present, approximately 92% of the trips taken by people in the study area are by car, and SACOG estimates that this may grow to 93.7% by 2050. By the use of smart growth principals, SACOG believes that the number of trips by car can be reduced by about 10%. However, with the substantial growth projected for the region, cumulative traffic congestion is going to increase significantly. O&M trips associated with the Annexation Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact.

DRAFT IV-187 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-188 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

N. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS/ENERGY CONSERVATION

This section describes how development associated with the Project will affect utilities and service systems. In addition, this section describes the impacts of the Program relative to energy conservation. Where significant effects are identified, mitigation measures are provided to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Existing Environmental Conditions

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15125 of the CEQA Guidelines. This subsection provides the baseline for determining whether the Program will have a significant impact on the environment.

a. Analysis Area for Direct and Indirect Impacts

The analysis area for potential direct and indirect impacts relative to utilities/service systems/energy conservation includes the Annexation Territory, the portion of Sutter County included in the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area, and SMUD’s existing service area. The Annexation Territory was selected because the completion of the program components and the replacement of PG&E with SMUD as the provider of electric service could affect utilities/service systems/energy conservation in the Annexation Territory. The SMUD service area was selected because analysis of this area may provide an indication of what changes can be expected by SMUD customers if the Program is approved.

b. Analysis Area for Cumulative Impacts

The analysis area for potential cumulative impacts relative to utilities/service systems/energy conservation includes the Annexation Territory. The cumulative impacts of the replacement of PG&E with SMUD as the electric service provider in the Annexation Territory, in combination with the foreseeable future projects described in Chapter V, Cumulative Impacts, may affect utilities/service systems/ energy conservation in the Annexation Territory.

c. Existing Regulatory Policies Applying to the Analysis Area

The California Integrated Waste Management Board oversees the permitting of solid waste and recycling facilities and manages several programs to implement Integrated Waste Management Act. A fundamental principle of that act is the diversion of 50% of California city and county waste from landfills.

Title 14, Division 7, of the CCR establishes minimum standards for solid waste handling and disposal. These regulations contain provisions for enforcing solid waste standards and administering solid waste facility permits. They also set out planning guidelines and procedures for preparing, revising, and amending countywide or regional integrated waste management plans. Both Yolo and Sacramento Counties

DRAFT IV-189 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

have approved integrated waste management plans that are reviewed and updated, as necessary, on a 5-year basis, in accordance with regulations.

Title 27, Division 2 of the CCR establishes regulations for landfills and disposal sites. These regulations address siting and design criteria, water monitoring, operating criteria for landfills and disposal sites, and closure and post-closure maintenance.

d. Existing Conditions in the Analysis Area

PG&E currently provides electric service to the Annexation Territory. PG&E’s activities are regulated by the CPUC. PG&E generates and disposes of solid waste as part of the normal operation and maintenance of the electric system in the Annexation Territory. PG&E also conducts demand response, energy efficiency, and renewable energy programs pursuant to legislative and CPUC mandate.

SMUD provides electric service within its existing service area (which includes Sacramento County, a small portion of Placer County and a site in Yolo County). SMUD also generates and disposes of solid waste as part of the normal operation of the electric system in its service area. SMUD’s customers, through SMUD’s Board of Directors, govern its policies and activities. SMUD voluntarily implements certain demand response, energy efficiency, and renewable energy programs.

The report on 5-year review of Sacramento County’s Integrated Waste Management Plan was completed in 2003 (Sacramento County Department of Waste Management & Recycling, 2003). The report indicated that waste generation quantities had increased in the county and that while reported disposal tonnages increased modestly countywide, diversion performance increased notably. The City of Isleton and the County/City of Citrus Heights Regional Agency met or exceeded their goals of 50% diversion of solid waste from landfills, while the cities of Folsom, Galt, and Sacramento had realized diversion rates of 49, 41, and 45%, respectively.

The Kiefer Landfill continues to have disposal capacity available for the municipal solid waste generated but not diverted in Sacramento County. In its 2001 annual report, the County reported 44 years of available disposal capacity (Department of Waste Management & Recycling, 2003).

Unincorporated Yolo County and the cities of Davis, West Sacramento, Winters, and Woodland exceeded the 50% goal of diverting solid waste from landfills by 2002 (Sullivan, 2002). The Yolo County Central Landfill continues to have adequate disposal capacity. As the County reported in the 2000 annual report, the landfill has 20 years of available capacity (Sullivan, 2002).

2. Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 15126.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.

DRAFT IV-190 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

a. Thresholds of Significance

(1) Environmental Guidance Provided by CEQA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines suggests that a development project could have a significant impact on utilities and service systems, if the project would:

(a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board;

(b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects;

(c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects;

(d) Require new or expanded water entitlements;

(e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;

(f) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs; or

(g) Would not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

The Program consists of changing the electric service provider in the Annexation Territory and connecting that Annexation Territory to the SMUD service area. The Program does not include development that will impact wastewater treatment facilities, storm water drainage facilities, or water supplies. Therefore, these issues are not addressed further.

Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines suggests a project would have a significant impact with regard to energy conservation if it would:

• Increase overall per capita energy consumption;

• Increase reliance on natural gas and oil; or

• Decrease reliance on renewable energy sources.

DRAFT IV-191 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(2) Threshold(s) of Significance Adopted in This EIR

LAFCo, as the Lead Agency, has determined that impacts to utilities, service systems, and energy conservation will be significant if the Program or any program components will:

(a) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Program’s solid waste disposal needs;

(b) Result in non-compliance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste;

(d) Increase reliance on natural gas and oil; or

(e) Decrease reliance on renewable energy sources.

(3) Evaluation Methods

The expected volume of solid waste generated by the Program was compared to existing landfill capacity to evaluate potential impacts. Energy use in the Annexataion Territory was evaluated with and without the Program to evaluate energy efficiency.

b. Direct Effects on the Environment

(1) Impact UT-1: Impacts on Solid Waste Disposal Facilities

Environmental protection is a core SMUD value. One of the metrics SMUD uses to ensure adherence to this value is waste diversion through recycling. As of November, SMUD had generated 12,692 cubic yards of solid waste in 2005, of which 7,180 cubic yards (57%) has been recycled.

Construction of program components will generate solid waste, including packaging, wooden wire spools, and concrete rubble. Most of this material will be recycled, and a small volume will be sent to the Kiefer Landfill and/or Yolo County Central Landfill. While the specific volume of landfill material cannot be determined at this time, it will be relatively small and, as indicated in N.1.d, there is substantial existing capacity in both landfills. Therefore, the impact of Program construction on solid waste disposal facilities will be less than significant.

The Program will increase permanent employment at SMUD by about 79 people. Based on solid waste disposal data for Yolo and Sacramento Counties (Sullivan, 2002; Sacramento County Department of Waste Management & Recycling, 2003), individuals may generate about 8 lb/day of solid waste. Assuming that half of this waste is generated at work, the Program may increase the volume of solid

DRAFT IV-192 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

waste generated by SMUD employees by about five tons per month. More than half of this waste is expected to be recycled, as is the current practice at SMUD. A component of the Program is to upgrade electrical transmission and distribution facilities in the Annexation Territory. This will generate more solid waste than will be generated if service in the Annexation Territory continues to be provided by PG&E. The waste generated will include packaging, concrete rubble, wooden wire spools, and wire. Most of this material will be recycled. Because of the small volume of solid waste that will go to landfills and the large remaining capacity of those landfills, the Program will result in a less than significant impact to solid waste disposal facilities.

(2) Impact UT-2: Compliance with Statutes and Regulations Related to Solid Waste

SMUD’s Board Policy on Environmental Protection states:

“Environmental protection is a core value of the District. The Board is committed to pollution prevention, continuous environmental improvement, and compliance with all applicable environmental protection laws and regulations.”

As described under Impact UT-1, SMUD currently diverts more than 50% of its solid waste from landfills. This exceeds the goals of the Integrated Waste Management Act. SMUD received an Environmental Recognition Award from the Sacramento Environmental Commission and the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors in April 2005 for voluntarily exceeding environmental regulatory requirements and adding new measures in 2004 to reduce waste and increase the use of environmentally friendly materials. SMUD’s environmental policies and procedures will be extended to the Program; therefore, it will be in compliance with statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

(3) Impact UT-3: Increase Overall Per Capita Energy Consumption

Changes in the overall per capita energy consumption in the Annexation Territory associated with the Program will be directly related to the proposed changes in demand response, energy efficiency, and energy conservation resulting from SMUD’s replacement of PG&E as the electric service provider. Each of these factors is discussed hereafter.

(a) Demand Response

Demand response consists of an electric service provider’s capability to reduce energy usage of residential and commercial customers to provide electric load relief in the event of energy shortages or local or regional system emergencies. Both PG&E and SMUD have active demand response programs designed to curtail energy use. Each program has different terms and conditions. Some programs are voluntary, with limited incentive. Other

DRAFT IV-193 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

programs provide financial incentives to participating customers. Some of the programs also include charging penalties to the customer if curtailment obligations are not met.

The CPUC believes the potential demand responses reported by PG&E and other investor-owned utilities (IOUs) in California are currently inaccurate, based primarily on the assumptions made by the utilities about the amount of actual customer participation in voluntary programs. The CPUC has directed these utilities to meet with the CEC and CUPC to determine a more realistic method of estimating their demand response capabilities.

As reported by PG&E to the CPUC, its demand response capabilities in 2005 are estimated to be approximately 1,100 MW. If this amount is accurate, it represents the capability of reducing PG&E’s peak load by approximately 6%. Based on the CPUC concern that the assumptions used to predict the curtailment from voluntary demand response programs are too high, PG&E’s peak load curtailment is probably considerably less than 6% of the peak load.

SMUD operates several load management programs designed to help curtail load. These programs can reduce energy usage by residential and commercial customers to provide load relief. The Peak Corps Program is one of SMUD’s oldest and most reliable programs. Customers in this program have cycling devices installed on their air conditioners that allow SMUD to cycle their compressors during the summer months in exchange for a nominal bill credit. This program includes approximately 100,000 customers. Given the climate conditions of the Sacramento region, SMUD’s peak load periods are coincidental with high temperatures and air conditioner usage. The amount of load curtailment that this program provides is currently approximately 156 MW. This amount was recently validated by a test of the system. SMUD plans to extend the Peak Corps Program to the proposed Annexation Territory.

SMUD also currently contracts with three industrial companies in Sacramento to allow SMUD to order load curtailment from these companies up to 12 times per year. The total curtailment capability for these contracts is 24 MW. SMUD also has a voluntary load-curtailment program with a large group of commercial customers. This program is estimated to have a curtailment capability of 45 MW.

SMUD’s total load curtailment capability is estimated at 225 MW. This represents the capability of reducing SMUD’s peak load by approximately 7.6%. Excluding SMUD’s voluntary curtailment program, SMUD’s load curtailment potential represents 6% of its peak load.

If the annexation is approved, SMUD has more potential than PG&E currently has to provide predictable peak demand reduction for the proposed Annexation Territory. This will be accomplished primarily through the rollout

DRAFT IV-194 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

of SMUD’s Peak Corps Program. SMUD estimates this program has the potential to curtail approximately 13 MW in the Annexation Territory. This represents 5% of the peak load for the Annexation Territory.

(b) Energy Efficiency

Energy efficiency programs are designed to assist homeowners, business owners, and builders in providing more energy efficient work and living spaces and more energy efficient electrical equipment. Both SMUD and PG&E have active energy efficiency programs. Both utilities are currently going through a significant transition phase.

PG&E and the other IOUs are projecting a significant increase in spending in 2006 to comply with recent CEC and CPUC decisions. Based on current projections for 2006, PG&E spending per capita will exceed SMUD spending by 16%. However, no current data are available on the timetable and type of programs that will be implemented by PG&E. In early 2006, the SMUD Board of Directors is expected to begin a public process to re-evaluate SMUD’s energy efficiency commitments and consider new energy efficiency opportunities.

Until more detail is available for future years from both electric service providers, the best available information for forecasting the impact on energy efficiency in the Annexation Territory is historical data. Acting voluntarily, SMUD’s per capita spending on energy efficiency has exceeded that of California’s IOUs for over two decades. The per capita spending of SMUD and the IOUs for the past 15 years is compared in Table IV.M-6.

Table IV.M-6: Per Capita Spending, SMUD and IOUs

SPENDING ($) PER CAPITA Year SMUD IOU(s) 1991–1996 33 10 1997–2003 17 9 2004–2005 16 12

SMUD has almost 30 years of experience in developing and implementing energy efficiency programs. SMUD received the 2005 Climate Action Champion Award from the California Climate Action Registry for leadership on climate change issues and innovative energy programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. SMUD received the 2004 Flex Your Power Award in the Innovative Implementation Actions category from the State of California for SMUD’s partnership in testing a new product that achieved significant energy savings.

One of SMUD’s most popular and successful energy efficiency programs is its Shade Tree Program. This program provides free shade trees to customers

DRAFT IV-195 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

to plant in locations that directly shade homes and reduce summer air conditioning loads. Since 1990, SMUD, in collaboration with the Sacramento Tree Foundation, has planted more than 350,000 trees in the Sacramento area. These trees create an urban forest that helps mitigate the summer heat-island effect and provide air quality benefits. This program received the U.S. Department of Forestry’s Tree Line USA Award in 2004 for the fourth consecutive year. Other SMUD programs to promote energy efficiency include: low interest financing for the replacement of older heat pump and air conditioning equipment with newer energy efficient equipment; cool roof incentive program that offers rebates for the installation of specialized roofing materials that reduce the amount of heat absorbed into a building through the roof; and, the aeroseal duct sealing program that provides testing and sealing of heating and air conditioning systems, which increases the efficiency of the system.

Although current projections show that PG&E may outspend SMUD in energy efficiency in 2006, it is difficult to analyze this impact without details on how this additional spending will affect customers in the Annexation Territory. What is known is that the types of energy efficiency programs that SMUD offers will be highly applicable to customers in the Annexation Territory who have needs similar to those of existing SMUD customers. Based on SMUD’s award-winning reputation and history for energy efficiency, the Program is expected to improve energy efficiency in the Annexation Territory.

SMUD is guaranteeing that when it begins providing electric service in the Annexation Territory, customer rates in the Annexation Territory will be at least 2% lower than PG&E’s rates. SMUD expects the difference between SMUD’s rates in the Annexation Territory and PG&E’s rates to continue to grow over time, as the costs of annexation are recovered.

It is possible that, overall, customers in the Annexation Territory will consume more power after annexation because of SMUD’s lower rates. However, it is also possible that, overall, customers in the Annexation Territory will choose to save any energy savings, or spend them in other ways. During a recent LAFCo meeting, commercial customers and school district personnel stated the expected savings from the expected rate decrease will be used for other needs. Further, in light of the success of SMUD’s demand response and energy efficiency programs, it is possible that, overall, customers in the Annexation Territory may consume less power after annexation than they do at present, even with SMUD’s lower rates. Without sufficient data, it would be speculative to conclude that the proposed annexation would result in a decrease in energy conservation that will cause increased per capita energy consumption.

DRAFT IV-196 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

(4) Impact UT-4: Increased Reliance on Natural Gas and Oil

Most of the electricity generated or purchased by PG&E comes from hydroelectric, nuclear, and natural gas-fired power plants. SMUD’s generation and power purchases are made primarily from hydroelectric and natural gas-fired power plants. Because neither SMUD nor PG&E uses significant oil-fired energy resources, this analysis focuses on natural gas impacts only.

SMUD will be reserving its existing low-cost energy resources for its existing customers. It will procure new energy resources to supply electricity to customers in the Annexation Territory. These new resources will be a combination of new short- and long-term power purchase contracts, spot market purchases, customer- owned generation, new renewable power supplies, and possible surplus output from SMUD’s natural-gas fired CPP, which is expected to come on line in early 2006. It is expected that most of SMUD’s new energy resources for the Annexation Territory will come from natural gas-fired power plants.

With the change in electric service proposed by the Program, PG&E will be able to lower its power generation requirements accordingly. PG&E’s highest cost power resource is currently natural gas-fired power plants. Therefore, it is likely that PG&E will reduce its energy resources currently provided by natural gas- fired power plants and that SMUD will offset this reduction with its proposed new natural gas-fired resources for the Annexation Territory. Consequently, there will be no overall change in reliance on natural gas as a result of annexation.

(5) Impact UT-5: Decreased Reliance on Renewable Energy Sources

PG&E’s and SMUD’s projected 2005 percentage of renewable energy resources, compared to their total energy resource mix, is 13% and 12%, respectively. Both utilities have set goals of reaching a level of 20%. PG&E plans to reach this level in 2010 and SMUD has set its goal for 2011.

SMUD’s renewable procurement standard (RPS) policy is comparable to the statutory and CPUC-approved RPS requirements applicable to the IOUs. For purposes of determining compliance with these goals, SMUD uses the definition of renewable resources applicable to the IOUs (Public Utilities Code Section 399.12 and PRC Section 25741). SMUD reports its resource mix to the CEC annually, in accordance with CCR Title 20, Sections 1390-1394.

In addition to the renewable goals established by its Board of Directors, SMUD has an award-winning3 Greenergy® program that allows residential and commercial customers to purchase additional renewable energy (as defined in PRC Section 25741). The Greenergy® program allows customers to pay an additional monthly charge for SMUD to buy energy that is produced from clean,

3 Green Power Beacon Award from the U.S. Department of Energy presented for SMUD’s Greenergy® program.

DRAFT IV-197 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

renewable, energy resources. SMUD commits 40% of the premium paid by Greenergy® customers to investment in new renewable power plants. Almost 30,000 residential customers, and over 1,200 businesses, have signed up for this program, making this program the fourth largest green-pricing program in the U.S., based on enrollment.

SMUD expects Greenergy® participation to reach 2% of total SMUD sales in 2006 and 3% of total sales by 2011. With Greenergy® participation, SMUD expects to have 15% of its energy from renewables in 2006 (13% RPS and 2% Greenergy®) and 23% of its energy from renewables in 2011.

SMUD also is committed to expanding the application of solar technology. Over the past two decades, SMUD has achieved one of the highest annual installation rates for solar energy of any utility in the country in relation to its size. Nearly 10 MW of grid-connected solar systems have been installed, representing approximately 10% of all grid-connected photovoltare systems in California.

As with its demand response and energy efficiency programs, SMUD is proposing to extend its renewable programs to the Annexation Territory. Based on the success of SMUD’s current programs, in particular its Greenergy Program®, it is expected that reliance on renewable energy sources will increase in the Annexation Territory.

c. Indirect Effects on the Environment

The purpose of the Program is to change electric service providers in the Annexation Territory. This will not increase the amount of electrical power available in SMUD’s system or have any other indirect effect on utilities.

d. Cumulative Effects on the Environment

The Sacramento area currently has a population of about 1.8 million people. Projections by SACOG (2005a) estimate a regional population of about 2.8 million by 2025. SACOG (2005a) projects that 304 square miles (194,560 acres) to 661 square miles (423,040 acres) of land in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties will be converted from existing rural uses to urban use by 2050. This rapid growth will place substantial cumulative demands on all utilities, including wastewater treatment, water supply, and solid waste disposal. The Program will contribute to the increased demand for solid waste disposal in the region. Lowering electrical prices is just one factor among many that could encourage and fuel long- term growth.

The other factors influencing the development of foreseeable future projects are beyond the purview of SMUD or LAFCo. SMUD and LAFCo have no control over land-use development in local jurisdictions. Utilities will be expanded to address increased demand as growth occurs. However, the expected amount of growth in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, and western Placer Counties appears to be too great for

DRAFT IV-198 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

wastewater treatment, water supply, and solid waste disposal facilities to keep up with demand. This will result in a significant, unavoidable adverse impact to utilities, and the Program will contribute to this significant cumulative impact with regard to solid waste disposal.

DRAFT IV-199 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-200 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

O. MINERAL RESOURCES

1. Potential Environmental Effects

The Program may result in the loss of valuable mineral resources.

2. Reasons Why Effect Not Found Significant

According to the Yolo County General Plan Update Background Report (Yolo County, 2005a) and the Mineral Land Classification: Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the Sacramento-Fairfield Production-Consumption Region (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1988), no Mineral Resources Zones, as designated by the State Mining and Geology Board, are in the Annexation Territory or Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area.

According to Mineral Land Classification: Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate and Kaolin Clay Resources in Sacramento County, California (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1999), there are MRZ-1 and MRZ-3 zones in the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area. An MRZ-1 zone is an area where no significant mineral deposits are present or there is little likelihood of their presence, and an MRZ-3 zone is an area where the mineral resource significance is undetermined. The existing Hedge substation and a portion of its existing transmission line fall within an MRZ-2 zone (an area where known significant mineral resources are present). However, the proposed transmission line that will replace the existing transmission line for this program component will be sited in the existing right of way and is not expected to result in a substantial amount of soil disturbance.

The Program will not have any impacts related to mineral resources because all reconductoring and construction will take place in existing rights of way. In addition, if unexpected mineral deposits are encountered during implementation of any program component, it will be feasible to relocate such construction to a different location.

DRAFT IV-201 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-202 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

P. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Potential Environmental Effects

The Program may expose people or structures to potentially adverse effects as a result of geologic hazards. In addition, it may cause substantial erosion.

2. Reasons Why Effect Not Found Significant

According to the Yolo County General Plan Update Background Report (Yolo County, 2005a), no seismically active faults are in the Annexation Territory. Furthermore, the Sacramento County General Plan (Sacramento County, 1993) indicates that no seismically active faults are in Sacramento County, where the Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area exists. According to the Sacramento County General Plan, the areas of the county most vulnerable to seismic and geologic hazards are those areas subject to liquefaction, expansive soils, and subsidence. The Yolo County General Plan (Yolo County, 1983) indicates that landslides are not a significant hazard in the Annexation Territory, but the risk of liquefaction is expected to be higher in the floodplain and stream areas than in the Coastal Ranges of Yolo County. The Annexation Territory does contain floodplain and stream areas that may have this potential. Since the proposed Woodland-Elverta transmission line and Willow Slough substation will occupy a relatively small footprint, substantial soil erosion is not expected to occur in the Annexation Territory or Woodland-Elverta transmission line study area.

Given existing utility design standards and practices, no impacts are expected on geology or soils. In addition, it is not expected that the local geology or soils will impact the proposed electric facilities.

DRAFT IV-203 Chapter IV Discussion of Environmental Impacts

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IV-204

CHAPTER V CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

According to Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, “An EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined in Section 15065(c)” (California, State of, 2005). In addition, “The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as provided for the effects attributable to the project alone” (Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines) (California, State of, 2005).

For air quality and traffic, the analysis in this Draft EIR is based on regional models (respectively, SMAQMD’s Air Quality Plan [SMAQMD, 1994] and SACOG’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan [MTP] [SACOG, 2005b]). For other potentially affected resource areas, the analysis is based on several reasonably foreseeable future projects.

A. REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE PROJECTS

1. Sacramento Region Blueprint Transportation and Land Use Study

The Sacramento Region Blueprint is a visioning/planning effort that includes Sacramento, Placer, Yolo, Yuba, El Dorado, and Sutter Counties. By 2050, the region is anticipated to add over 1.7 million people, growing to 3.6 million people, and to more than double the number of homes, from 713,000 to 1.5 million. Assessments show that existing general plans do not adequately accommodate future population, housing, and job growth. The Blueprint uses the planning principles of housing options, compact development, transportation choices, mixed land uses, conservation of natural resources, use of existing assets, and quality design to address the anticipated future need. SACOG’s Board of Directors adopted the Preferred Blueprint Scenario (Blueprint Scenario) in December of 2005. The Blueprint Scenario proposes shifts in the allocation of housing and jobs in the region in a way that encourages less dependence on single- driver commutes. The Blueprint Scenario encourages increased residential development near transit, smaller single-family lots, and increased mixed-use developments while seeking to preserve open space and improve commute times and air quality in the region. The Blueprint Scenario also measures the impacts and benefits of the adopted scenario on existing conditions. Some cities and counties in the region have begun to incorporate the Blueprint Scenario smart growth principles.

The Blueprint Scenario’s principles and data also will be incorporated into SACOG’s MTP for 2030. The MTP allocates federal transportation funding for transportation projects included in the MTP for the 6-county, 22-city SACOG region. In combination, these documents show existing conditions, proposed projects, and potential future land- use patterns in the Program area. Detailed impacts will be analyzed on a project-by- project basis as potentially affected communities grow over the next 20 to 30 years.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/sacregionblueprint/the_project/implementation.cfm

DRAFT V-1 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

2. Sacramento International Airport Master Plan

The Sacramento International Airport is 12 miles northwest of downtown Sacramento. The airport serves approximately 8.5 million passengers annually and has more than 150 scheduled daily departures. As of December 2005, the airport master plan was being updated to lay out the development of the facility for 2005-2020. It will incorporate the vision of various interested parties, inventory and assess existing facilities, and forecast future airport activities, such as passenger levels and changes in freight and mail served through the facility. Alternatives will be developed to address future demand, and a preferred alternative will be selected for the Master Plan for the ongoing development of Sacramento International Airport. Specific improvements proposed among its alternatives include the extension and widening of an existing runway, the construction of a new terminal, and other improvements to support airfield facilities. On February 2004, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors authorized the Department of Environmental Review and Assessment (DERA) to prepare an EIR on the draft Master Plan. The NOP for the Master Plan EIR/EIS was prepared and sent out for public review in August 2005, and the EIR/EIS is currently in preparation.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web sites: http://www.sacairports.org/int/planning/master_plan.html and http://www.sacairports.org/int/planning/construction.html

3. Yuba-Sutter Natural Communities Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP)

The NCCP/HCP is a current 3- to 5-year cooperative planning effort that was initiated by Yuba and Sutter Counties in connection with improvements to Highways 99 and 70 and development associated with those areas. The goals of the NCCP/HCP include preserving plant and wildlife communities; protecting threatened and endangered species; simplifying and expediting land-use and conservation planning in the plan area; maintaining recreation, hunting, fishing, and other public open space uses; and continuing economic growth and community development.

The habitat area covered encompasses over 198,000 acres along Highway 99 and 70. Approximately 140,000 acres are in the County of Yuba, and 58,000 acres of habitat are in Sutter County. In addition to the joint effort of these two counties, Caltrans, USFWS, and the CDFG are working together proactively with the affected communities on this project.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.yubasutternccp.org/

DRAFT V-2 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

4. Sacramento County General Plan Update

The Sacramento County General Plan sets policies and programs that are intended to guide the physical development of Sacramento County through the year 2025. The unincorporated county is home to approximately 600,000 residents. The general plan is undergoing its first update since it was last adopted in 1993. In addition to the general plan’s existing elements, which include land use, circulation, open space, safety, noise, air quality, plan administration, public facilities, hazardous materials, agriculture, conservation, and housing, the general plan update also will include a new economic development element to address tax base expansion, business creation and retention, business expansion, and corridor redevelopment. Other topics on which this update will focus include the revitalization of commercial corridors, continued improvements for well-established suburban communities, holding capacity to accommodate future growth, and incorporation of smart growth principles. Aspects of the Sacramento Region Blueprint may be included in the final document as well.

As of December 6, 2005, 10 Board of Supervisors workshops have been held for the general plan update to assist in the overall visioning process for the general plan.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.saccounty.net/planning/gpupdate/gpu-index.html

5. Natomas Joint Vision

The Natomas Joint Vision is a collaborative effort between the City and County of Sacramento to plan for future growth and provide for revenue sharing between the city and the county. The plan provides guiding principles for both jurisdictions to achieve. The guiding principles implement the plan’s goals to proactively guide future growth for more efficient land use, improve air quality through efficient land use, and protect future airport operations. An MOU between the City and County of Sacramento, establishing the Vision, was executed on December 10, 2002. To date, no communities have been established by either the City of Sacramento or Sacramento County as a result of the plan.

The planning area for the Natomas Joint Vision encompasses approximately 25,000 acres. The planning area is located to the west and north of the City of Sacramento, and it includes Sacramento International Airport; it extends north of the city’s SOI into the southern portion of Sutter County.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.saccounty.net/planning/longrange/city-county.html

DRAFT V-3 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

6. Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan

The NBHCP establishes a conservation program to mitigate the loss of biological resources that is expected to result from urban development, the operation of irrigation and drainage systems, and rice farming. The overall goals of the NBHCP include biological protection, economic development, and conservation of agricultural uses. The NBHCP covers 53,341 acres of the interior of the Natomas Basin in the northern portion of Sacramento County and the southern portion of Sutter County. The basin encompasses both incorporated and unincorporated areas. Most of the basin is in Sacramento County and borders the City of West Sacramento and the city’s proposed SOI to the north. A portion of the Woodland-Elverta Transmission Line Study Area (Program Component 6) lies within the Natomas Basin. The proposed Power Inn Road to Hedge Substation Transmission Line Reconstruction Study Area (Program Component 4) and the proposed North City Interconnection Study Area (Program Component 5) are within the City of Sacramento and are outside of the Natomas Basin. The NBHCP was approved by the USFWS in 2003.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.natomasbasin.org/index.php

7. City of Sacramento General Plan Update

The City of Sacramento is home to over 440,000 residents, and population projections show an increase to over 530,000 by 2025. The City of Sacramento General Plan is undergoing its first update since it was last adopted in 1988. The existing general plan contains elements for residential land use, housing, commerce and industry land use, circulation, conservation and open space, public facilities and services, health and safety, and preservation, which meet state requirements for general plans. In addition to these elements, the general plan update will include a community design element.

Currently, the general plan update process is in the visioning and principles stage. At this early stage, several of the concepts included in the Sacramento Region Blueprint are being discussed and may appear in the final document. Following are some of the main objectives of the general plan update:

• Incorporate smart growth principles;

• Update demographic projections through 2030;

• Re-evaluate and revise current traffic LOS standards to reflect existing conditions;

• Revise EIR thresholds of significance for infill and selected new growth areas to reflect existing conditions;

DRAFT V-4 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

• Streamline project-level CEQA reviews through a program that updates critical environmental data (e.g., traffic data) in specific areas of the city; and

• Re-evaluate land uses within areas where there are opportunities for reuse.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/planning/projects/generalplanupdate/

8. Yolo County General Plan Update

The Yolo County General Plan is undergoing its first major update since it was last adopted in 1983. The existing general plan includes elements for land use, circulation, safety and seismic safety, noise, open space, conservation, scenic highways, recreation, historical preservation, housing, energy, and administration. The Yolo County General Plan will involve the update of five of the required seven elements. The housing and open space elements are not included in this project because they were updated recently.

Historically, Yolo County has been a county with its roots in agriculture. Yolo County’s vision for the general plan is to provide an active buffer of agricultural land and open space that separates the San Francisco Bay area from Sacramento. At the same time that new growth is occurring in the county, infill and increased density for older, developed communities is planned. The alternatives under review for the current general plan update propose various scenarios to balance the rapid growth that is expected in the region with its rural and agricultural roots. Alternatives vary allocations of anticipated future growth primarily to the existing incorporated cities of Davis, West Sacramento, Winters, and Woodland.

The general plan discusses the following three alternatives, which address growth patterns for the county between 2005 and 2025.

• Alternative 1 will result in an additional 2,700 housing units, 5,800 jobs, and 7,200 residents for the county. Approximately 60% of this growth will occur throughout rural agricultural areas, and the remainder will occur within existing unincorporated communities.

• Alternative 2 will allow more growth within the unincorporated communities than Alternative 1. This alternative will result in approximately 5,525 additional housing units and 9,215 additional residents.

• Alternative 3 will create twice as much growth as is planned under Alternative 1 and approximately 50% more growth than is planned under Alternative 2. A total of an additional 26,800 residents and 10,000 new housing units is expected to occur in the county as a result of this alternative. Most of this growth, 7,000 housing units, will occur in the community of Dunnigan.

DRAFT V-5 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.yolocountygeneralplan.org/

9. WAPA Sierra Nevada Region Sacramento Area Voltage Support

The WAPA Central Valley Project transmission system is integral to the interconnected Sacramento area transmission grid. The purpose of this project is to fulfill a need for short-term transmission line enhancements to maintain transmission security and reliability for the Central Valley Project. This project involves the reconductoring of a 73.2-mile, 230-kV transmission line from the Elverta substation to the Tracy substation, construction of a new 26.6-mile 230-kV transmission line from the O’Banion substation to the Elverta substation, and the realignment of the transmission line near Pleasant Grove Cemetery, between the O’Banion substation and the Elverta substation. Overall, the project will disturb a total of 672 acres and involve 29 miles of new access roads and 175 new structures. The project area is northwest of West Sacramento and falls within the proposed study area of Program Component 6.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.wapa.gov/default.htm

10. South Sutter Specific Plan

The specific plan is a precise development plan for a portion of southern Sutter County to be developed in three phases. Phases I and II are south of Riego Road and run parallel with the northern boarder of Sacramento County, between Powerline Road to the west and Natomas Road to the east. Phase III is north of Phases I and II, bordered by Pacific Avenue on the west, Natomas Road on the east, and Sankey Road to the north. The specific plan area overlaps with the northernmost portion of the Natomas Joint Vision Planning area. The effort is an outgrowth of Measure M, an advisory measure intended to provide the Board of Supervisors with an indication of how the citizens of Sutter County felt about the types and level of development in the area of the South Sutter County Industrial / Commercial Reserve. Measure M was approved by 59% of the voters on November 2, 2004. In accordance with this measure, in August 2005, the Sutter County Board of Supervisors reviewed a concept plan for the development of approximately 7,500 acres, which will include 2,900 acres devoted to residential uses, 3,600 acres for industrial and commercial parks, and 1,000 acres for public facility (e.g., schools, parks, open space, libraries) uses. As of December 2005, no formal application has been received for this master planned project.

This project was selected because it may have cumulative effects on the resource areas discussed in Chapter IV.

DRAFT V-6 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

For more information, please refer to the following Web site: http://www.co.sutter.ca.us/pdf/cs/ps/measureM/south_sutter_08_30_05.pdf

B. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF REASONABLY FORESEEABLE PROJECTS AND THE PROGRAM

LAFCo has decided that these projects could all have cumulative effects in combination with the proposed Program because each of these projects could have an effect on the same resources that could be affected by the Program. LAFCo selected these projects from myriad other development projects occurring in the Sacramento metropolitan region because they are currently either approved or under consideration for approval, and they all represent large-scale planning efforts that could involve the construction of physical improvements, including infrastructure, in the northern Sacramento County, southern Sutter County, and Yolo County areas. By incorporating these large-scale planning efforts, this cumulative impacts analysis includes each of the projects authorized by these planning efforts. For example, because the cumulative impacts analysis includes the growth authorized, but not built, under the existing general plans for the counties of Sacramento, Sutter, and Yolo, as well as the City of Sacramento, there is no need for separate analysis of the cumulative effect of each specific planning area or each individual development project.

This Draft EIR anticipates cumulative effects from the combination of the Program and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in all resource areas except geology/soils and mineral resources. The reason for this conclusion, in general, is that the Sacramento metropolitan area has been growing and is anticipated to continue to grow in a sustained way throughout the implementation of the Program. For instance, from 1990 to 2001, population in the six-county SACOG area grew from 1.56 million to 2.1 million (SACOG, 2005b). Population in that area is expected to increase by 2025 to 2.86 million (SACOG, 2005b). More than 35,000 acres of agricultural lands were converted to urban and built-up uses between 1990 and 2000 (Valley Vision et al., 2004). Traffic in the Sacramento region, measured in terms of vehicle miles traveled, increased from 44.9 million miles to 50.8 million miles during the period 1996 to 2000 (Valley Vision et al., 2004) and is expected to increase more through 2025.

Some of the key indicators of the cumulative effect of growth on the Sacramento metropolitan region, as identified by the Sacramento Region Quality of Life Report (Valley Vision et al, 2004) can be applied to the Program. These key indicators are described hereafter.

• Economic Engine. This indicator addresses issues such as regional employment growth, the distribution of employment, and agricultural productivity. These issues relate to land use, agriculture resources, and growth inducement in the Program study area.

• Education. This indicator addresses K-12 enrollment for public schools, which directly relates to the public services aspect in the Program study area.

• Family Well-Being and Public Safety. This indicator addresses several issues pertaining to family well-being and public safety. Crime rate is one of the subtopics, which is measured by the number of 911 calls reported to police and sheriff departments. This indicator directly relates to police protection services (public services) provided in the Program study area.

DRAFT V-7 Chapter V Cumulative Impacts

• Land Use and Housing. This indicator addresses issues such as urbanization and farmland conversion, jobs and housing balance, and housing development, all of which relate to the agricultural resources and land-use aspects for the Program study area.

• Transportation and Mobility. This indicator addresses issues such as traffic congestion and public transit, which are measured by annual hours of vehicle delay, service miles, and ridership. These issues apply directly to the transportation aspect of the Program study area.

• Environment. This indicator addresses issues such as the health of rivers and streams, existing parks, air quality, and protected lands. These issues apply directly to several of the resource areas for the Program study area, including biological resources, hydrology/water quality, land use, and recreation.

Because the Sacramento metropolitan area is experiencing long-term sustained growth, LAFCo has decided that, in analyzing the cumulative effects of the Program, it will treat any direct or indirect effect as a significant cumulative effect. Of course, if the Program does not have any effect on the environment in a given resource area, the lack of any effect is less than significant cumulatively. In other words, this EIR treats each and every environmental effect of the Program as cumulatively significant, even if the direct and indirect effects of the Program in a specific resource area are less than significant after implementation of the BMPs and any appropriate mitigation measures. This is the most conservative (i.e., protective of the environment) standard possible for the evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the Program. LAFCo is adopting this conservative standard to ensure that this EIR fully discloses to the residents of the Sacramento metropolitan area the cumulative effects of the proposed Program.

Chapter IV contains the analyses of the cumulative effects of the Program in each resource category. Consistent with LAFCo’s conservative standard for evaluating cumulative impacts of the Program on the environment, each effect of the Program on the environment is deemed to be significant. Further, because neither SMUD nor LAFCo has authority to control the long-term growth that fuels these cumulative effects, and because LAFCo already has mandated that SMUD take advantage of all regional efforts to mitigate the effects of growth in mitigating for the effects of the Program, the EIR concludes that each of these effects is significant and unavoidable.

DRAFT V-8

CHAPTER VI GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS

Chapter VI Growth-Inducing Impacts

In accordance with Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must “discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.” In addition, when discussing growth-inducing impacts of a proposed project, “it must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment” (CEQA Guidelines §15126.2(d)). Effects of the Program related to growth are discussed in this chapter, rather than in Chapter IV, because of the large number of variables that contribute to growth (e.g., the economic climate of California and the Sacramento region, housing affordability, immigration, etc.); uncertainty about the nature, extent, and location of growth; and the potential contributions to growth from projects other than the Program.

Two key goals of the Program—lower rates and better reliability—are likely, by their nature, to support economic growth within the Annexation Territory. Therefore, by definition under CEQA, the Program may induce growth. In fact, one of the reasons for the support for the annexation proposal from the Yolo Communities may be an expectation that the Program will lead to improved economic conditions in the Annexation Territory. Even though the Program does not actually extend public service infrastructure into areas lacking services, it removes an obstacle to growth by improving reliability, lowering rates for electric service, and improving the electric service distribution infrastructure in the Annexation Territory.

An unreliable electric service provider can serve as an obstacle to growth for businesses considering relocation to the Annexation Territory. For example, PG&E’s reported average outage duration in 2003 was 280 minutes, compared to SMUD’s 97 minutes. For businesses that require a continuous power supply for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, this discrepancy may be a significant factor in the decision whether to relocate or expand into the Annexation Territory, all other factors being equal. Even businesses that do not require a constant power supply are increasingly reliant on computer networks being constantly available to employees or customers. More reliable electric service may give these businesses a competitive advantage in the market, making them more likely to relocate to the Annexation Territory. Such relocation drives population growth, housing and economic growth in the area.

High rates also can present an obstacle to growth. Energy costs can be a significant cost of doing business; reducing these rates by over 25% will give a business located in the Annexation Territory a long-term competitive advantage over a business located in PG&E’s service territory. In this way, lower rates, like improved reliability, can remove an obstacle to growth, resulting in increased economic activity, more jobs, more need for workers, and, thus, more housing, with all of the attendant consequences on the environment (e.g., traffic, noise, energy consumption, etc.).

For instance, though a transfer of responsibility for electric service from PG&E to SMUD will not actually increase the amount of available commercial or industrial land, a 2004 study of business trends by Area Development lists energy availability and costs as one of the top five priorities for businesses making site selection decisions. Over 85% of the businesses surveyed by Area Development ranked energy availability and costs an important or a very important factor. Given the importance of affordable energy to businesses, it is not surprising that SMUD’s Economic Development Group collaborates in economic development efforts with cities and counties in its service area to attract new businesses and employment opportunities into those

DRAFT VI-1 Chapter VI Growth-Inducing Impacts jurisdictions. Based on SMUD’s experience, businesses seeking to relocate generally are looking for advantages in labor cost, availability of skilled labor, availability of transportation, and state and local incentives ahead of energy costs and reliability. These priorities vary, of course, depending on the contribution they play in the profitability of each business.

In summary, the Program is expected to remove obstacles to growth created by low electric system reliability and high electric rates and to support economic growth by attracting new industrial and commercial customers. Any growth induced by the Program will, of course, be consistent with applicable general plans and other land-use policies and regulations. Therefore, Program impacts on growth inducement are determined to be significant and unavoidable.

DRAFT VI-2

CHAPTER VII IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES: IMPACTS THAT C ANNOT BE FULLY MITIGATED OR AVOIDED

Irreversible Changes: Impacts that Cannot Chapter VII Be Fully Mitigated or Avoided

Under Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must include a description of significant irreversible environmental changes that will be caused by the proposed action. An EIR also must describe impacts identified as significant and unavoidable, as provided in Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. For the purposes of this EIR, Table VII-1 fulfills the requirements of both CEQA sections. The impacts listed in the table are discussed in greater detail in Chapters IV, V, and VI of this EIR.

Table VII-1: Significant and Unavoidable Impacts

Significance After Potential Impacts Mitigation I. DIRECT EFFECTS Aesthetics (Chapter IV, Section A) Impact AES-1 Visual Impact to Scenic Corridors Designated in Yolo County Significant and unavoidable General Plan Air Quality (Chapter IV, Section C) Impact AQ-2 Construction emissions of diesel particulate Significant and unavoidable Impact AQ-4 Operation and maintenance emissions of diesel particulate Significant and unavoidable Noise (Chapter IV, Section I) Impact NOI-1a Noise from reconstruction of the Power Inn Road to Hedge Significant and unavoidable Substation Transmission Line Impact NOI-1c Noise from construction of the Woodland to Elverta Significant and unavoidable Transmission Line Impact NOI-1d Noise from construction of the Willow Slough Substation Significant and unavoidable Impact NOI-e Noise from reconductoring in the Annexation Territory Significant and unavoidable II. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS (Chapter VI) Growth Inducing Impacts (Chapter VI) Impacts Economic growth caused by lowering rates and improved Significant and unavoidable reliability III. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS (Chapters IV and V) Aesthetics (Chapter IV, Section A) Impact AES-1 Visual Impact to Scenic Corridors Designated in Yolo County Significant and unavoidable General Plan Impact AES-2 Conflict with Scenic Policies of the Yolo County and Significant and unavoidable Sacramento County General Plans Agricultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section B) Impact AG-2 Acquisition or Easement Across Adopted Agricultural Preserve Significant and unavoidable or Williamson Act Contract Land Impact AG-3 Conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland Significant and unavoidable of Statewide Importance to Non-Agricultural Uses Impact AG-4 Conflict with Existing Zoning for Agricultural Use or a Significant and unavoidable Williamson Act Contract

DRAFT VII-1 Irreversible Changes: Impacts that Cannot Chapter VII Be Fully Mitigated or Avoided

Table VII-1: (Continued)

Significance After Potential Impacts Mitigation Air Quality (Chapter IV, Section C) Impact AQ-1 Change existing power plant operations Significant and unavoidable Impact AQ-3 Construction emissions Significant and unavoidable Impact AQ-4 Operation and maintenance emissions Significant and unavoidable Biological Resources (Chapter IV, Section D) Impact BIO-1a Temporary Impacts to Special-Status Species that Use Vernal Significant and unavoidable Pools and Swales Impact BIO-1b Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit Significant and unavoidable grasslands and agricultural lands Impact BIO-1c Temporary impacts to special-status species that inhabit marsh, Significant and unavoidable riparian areas, and woodland Impact BIO-1d Permanent loss of habitat used by special-status species Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-1e Loss of special-status bird species from collisions with Significant and unavoidable transmission lines Impact BIO-2 Impacts to sensitive natural communities Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-3 Impacts to wetlands Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-4 Interference with fish or wildlife movement Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-5 Conflict with local policies or ordinances Significant and unavoidable Impact BIO-6 Conflict with habitat conservation plans Significant and unavoidable Cultural Resources (Chapter IV, Section E) Impact CR-1a Cultural resource impacts from reconstruction of the Power Inn Significant and unavoidable Road to Hedge Substation transmission line Impact CR-1b Cultural resources impacts from construction of the North City Significant and unavoidable Interconnection Impact CR-1c Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Woodland Significant and unavoidable to Elverta transmission line Impact CR-1d Cultural resources impacts from construction of the Willow Significant and unavoidable Slough Substation Impact CR-1e Cultural resources impacts from reconductoring in the Significant and unavoidable Annexation Territory Impact CR-2 Impacts to paleontological resources from construction of Significant and unavoidable program components Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Chapter IV, Section F) Impact HAZ-1 Expose people or property to hazardous materials or conditions Significant and unavoidable Impact HAZ-2 Conflict with Airport Comprehensive Plans Significant and unavoidable Impact HAZ-4 Cause wildfire Significant and unavoidable Hydrology/Water Quality (Chapter IV, Section G) Impact H-1 Impacts on storm water quality Significant and unavoidable Impact H-2 Impacts to groundwater hydrology Significant and unavoidable Land Use/Planning (Chapter IV, Section H) Impact LU-3 Conflict with Measure M, the Natomas Joint Vision Plan, and Significant and unavoidable the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan

DRAFT VII-2 Irreversible Changes: Impacts that Cannot Chapter VII Be Fully Mitigated or Avoided

Table VII-1: (Continued)

Significance After Potential Impacts Mitigation Noise (Chapter IV, Section I) Impact NOI-2b Noise from New Transmission Lines. Significant and unavoidable Impact NOI-2c Noise from Willow Slough Substation. Significant and unavoidable Population/Housing (Chapter IV, Section J) Impact PH-1 Increase Population Growth Significant and unavoidable Impact PH-2 Increase Housing Demand Significant and unavoidable Impact PH-3 Preempt housing on land planned for housing development Significant and unavoidable Public Services (Chapter IV, Section K) Impact PS-1 Desired Fire and Police Response Times Significant and unavoidable Recreation (Chapter IV, Section L) Impact REC-1 Direct impacts to public recreational facilities Significant and unavoidable Transportation/Traffic (Chapter IV, Section M) Impact TR-1 Construction traffic impacts Significant and unavoidable Impact TR-2 Operation and maintenance traffic impacts Significant and unavoidable Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation (Chapter IV, Section N) Impact UT-1 Increase overall per capita energy consumption Significant and unavoidable Utilities/Service Systems/Energy Conservation (Chapter IV, Section N) Impact UT-1 Impacts on solid waste disposal facilities Significant and unavoidable Growth Inducing Impacts (Chapter VI) Impacts Economic growth caused by lowering rates and improved Significant and unavoidable reliability

DRAFT VII-3 Irreversible Changes: Impacts that Cannot Chapter VII Be Fully Mitigated or Avoided

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT VII-4

CHAPTER VIII ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROGRAM

Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

This section presents and analyzes five alternatives to the Program, in addition to a No Program Alternative. CEQA requires that EIRs describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Program or location of the Program that feasibly may attain most of the basic objectives of the Program but will avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of the Program (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a)). The EIR must explain the rationale for selecting the alternatives and identify any alternatives that have been considered by the Lead Agency but rejected as infeasible (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(c)). The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a rule of reason that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f)). The EIR must then evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives selected; for each alternative, the EIR must include sufficient information to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a), (d)).

Potential alternatives were screened to develop a reasonable range of alternatives. The screening process typically involves determining whether preliminary alternatives may (1) avoid or substantially lessen the Program’s direct significant effects while not adding new significant impacts; (2) meet most of the Program’s objectives; and (3) be feasible to implement (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a), (b)). The Program’s environmental impacts are limited to significant and unavoidable impacts on aesthetics, short-term construction emissions, short-term and long- term emissions of diesel particulates, short-term noise impacts from construction activities, and cumulative and growth-inducement impacts.

The alternatives examined in this chapter were selected because they represent potential solutions to the fundamental policy question facing LAFCo in connection with the Program: which type of governmental (or quasi-governmental) agency will best serve the public interest in providing electric service to the Annexation Territory? This chapter analyzes several different, alternative forms of governmental organization and several different providers (including SMUD and PG&E). The alternatives chosen were analyzed and deemed feasible in the Annexation Feasibility Study performed by R.W. Beck et al.

In addition to the No Program Alternative, the following five alternatives to the Program were evaluated:

• Alternative 1: City/County Individual Provision of Service (Section B.1);

• Alternative 2: Joint Powers Authority (Section C.1);

• Alternative 3: PG&E Upgraded/Improved Service (Section C.2);

• Alternative 4: Community Choice Aggregation (Section C.3); and

• Alternative 5: SMUD Annexation with the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) Service (Section C.4).

At the end of the discussion, Table VIII-1 presents a qualitative comparison of the environmental impacts of each alternative and the Program (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(d)). Table VIII-2 summarizes the achievement of the Program’s goals and objectives under each alternative.

DRAFT VIII-1 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

A. NO PROGRAM ALTERNATIVE

CEQA requires that the EIR discuss a No Program Alternative to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed Program with the impacts of not approving the proposed Program (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(1)). The No Program Alternative analysis must discuss the existing conditions at the time the NOP is published and what can be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the Program is not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(2)).

1. Description

The No Program Alternative reflects the physical environment in the event that either LAFCo or the voters do not approve SMUD’s annexation plan. In that event, none of the projects listed in the Program Description of this EIR will occur, and PG&E will remain the provider of electric service in the Annexation Territory.

For the purpose of the No Program Alternative, the existing condition is the provision of electric service by PG&E to residents of the proposed Annexation Territory. Specifically, this includes PG&E’s current levels of reliability and customer service, PG&E’s electric service rates, and its form of organization.

a. PG&E Reliability

Typically, reliability is measured by the average duration and frequency of outages. As part of PG&E’s 2003 General Rate Case filing to the CPUC, PG&E reported the average outage duration for its Sacramento Division4 was 280 minutes, and the average outage frequency was 1.7 outages per year, including major events. By contrast, SMUD’s average outage duration for the same time period was 97 minutes, and the average outage frequency was 1.3.

In March 2005 and July 2005, J.D. Power and Associates conducted commercial and residential customer satisfaction surveys for the largest electric utilities located in the Western Region of the United States (J.D. Power and Associates, 2005a and 2005b). PG&E scored 98 points on the commercial customer survey and 91 points on the residential customer survey, which was 2 points below the Western Region average score for commercial customers and 6 points below the Western Region average score for residential customers. By comparison, SMUD scored above the Western Region averages, achieving 102 and 108 points for commercial and residential customers, respectively. (In these surveys, higher numbers represent better customer satisfaction.)

4 PG&E’s Sacramento Division includes Sacramento County, Yolo County, Solano County, Colusa County, and portions of Sutter County.

DRAFT VIII-2 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

b. PG&E Rates

Another component of the existing condition is the rates paid by PG&E customers for electric service in the Annexation Territory. In 2006, approved rate changes will result in approximately a 10.8% rate increase for PG&E’s residential customers and a 3.5% increase for mid-size commercial customers (PG&E, 2005a, and CPUC Resolution No. E-3956). In addition to recovering the costs of providing electric service in its rates, PG&E also must maintain rates at a level that provides a return on investment for existing stockholders and attracts future investors. In contrast, SMUD is owned by its ratepayers and, therefore, is not required to pay a dividend to stockholders. Over the past 15 years, PG&E’s electric rates have been on average approximately 20% higher than SMUD’s rates. It is expected that this differential will grow to approximately 28% by early 2006. Based on PG&E and SMUD rate projections, this rate differential is expected to continue over the long run.

PG&E has proposed transmission "reinforcement" projects for the 2000 through 2010 timeframe that may improve transmission system reliability and capacity in and around the Annexation Territory (PG&E, 2005b). The projects PG&E has identified for implementation between now and 2010 include the following transmission system improvements:

• Reconductor 12 miles of the 115-kV West Sacramento-Davis line (May 2006);

• Convert 60-kV lines to 115-kV lines in the Davis-U.C. Davis transmission system (May 2006);

• Install a second 115/60-kV transformer in the Vaca Dixon 115/60-kV system (May 2006);

• Replace Brighton 230/115-kV transformer No. 9 with a 420 megavolt amperes (MVA) unit (May 2009); and

• Reconductor the West Sacramento-Brighton 115-kV line (May 2009).

Historically, PG&E has deferred planned upgrades. Therefore, while PG&E’s proposed schedule is included for reference, it could be delayed.

c. PG&E’s Form of Organization

Finally, PG&E’s form of organization is a relevant existing condition. PG&E is a private corporation governed by a Board of Directors elected by PG&E shareholders. Many decisions are made in closed Board of Directors meetings not open to the public. PG&E’s ratepayers do not have a say in the management or operation of the organization. In addition, PG&E is regulated by the CPUC. If customers desire to participate in CPUC regulatory proceedings affecting PG&E’s electric rates, they must become parties in those cases and appear before the CPUC in San Francisco. In comparison, SMUD is governed by a Board of Directors elected by SMUD’s

DRAFT VIII-3 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

customers. SMUD business is conducted by that Board, primarily in open meetings accessible to the public.

2. Feasibility

Under the No Program Alternative, PG&E will continue to provide electric service at PG&E’s rates and under current levels of reliability and customer service. This alternative maintains the status quo; therefore, it is feasible.

3. Reliability

The No Program Alternative does not meet the goal of improved reliability in the Annexation Territory because it will not provide the electric system improvements or a commitment to an improvement in reliability that is comparable to the Program. PG&E’s existing system reliability in the Sacramento Division is significantly lower than SMUD’s, as evidenced by the measurements of average outage duration and frequency for the two systems.

The difference in system reliability between SMUD and PG&E is the result of the basic configuration of the transmission and distribution systems used by SMUD. SMUD uses two-terminal transmission lines within its service area, and PG&E uses multi-terminal transmission lines in the Annexation Territory. In general, in an outage, a two-terminal line usually affects fewer customers and requires less time to restore to service than a multi-terminal line. In addition, SMUD’s distribution lines are shorter in length and have a larger electric current carrying capacity than a comparable PG&E distribution line. Distribution lines that are shorter in length have less voltage drop at the end of the line and affect fewer customers during an outage. In addition, the SMUD system generally has more looped lines than a comparable PG&E system. Looped lines provide the capability to serve customers from alternative directions by opening and closing switches. The shorter, higher capacity, looped lines allow SMUD to isolate a problem area during an outage and restore service more quickly to affected customers. The No Program Alternative will not provide for a new substation in the Annexation Territory. A new substation will provide additional capacity and flexibility to minimize the interruption of electric service in the event of an outage, and it will serve load growth.

PG&E has not provided any commitments to the Annexation Territory customers, LAFCo, or the CPUC to make any significant changes in the configuration of the existing electric system that will result in improvements in the reliability of the existing electric system. PG&E plans to construct some transmission system upgrades in the Annexation Territory region. However, according to PG&E records, most of the outages contributing to its current reliability levels are within the distribution system.

In comparison, SMUD has committed to reducing the average outage duration time in the Annexation Territory to 140 minutes within the first five years after replacing PG&E as the service provider, which represents a 50% reduction, compared to PG&E’s 2003 record. SMUD also has committed to reducing the average outage frequency in the Annexation Territory to 1.4 outages per year within the first five years, which represents

DRAFT VIII-4 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

a 15% improvement in outage frequency compared to PG&E’s 2003 record. SMUD’s eventual goal is to lower outage duration and outage frequency in the Annexation Territory to the levels enjoyed in the existing SMUD service area. The Program calls for the investment of $20 million in system improvements before the expected provision of service by SMUD in late 2008 and an additional $28 million in the first five years after SMUD becomes the service provider. These funds will be provided by the customers of the Annexation Territory through the rate differential between SMUD’s existing system rates and the proposed Annexation Territory rates. Under PG&E’s current rate structure (i.e., the No Program Alternative), it is unlikely that PG&E will be able to fund a comparable investment in system improvements in the Annexation Territory.

For these reasons, it is expected that electric system reliability will not improve under the No Program Alternative.

4. Customer Service

The No Program Alternative does not meet the goal of improved customer service in the Annexation Territory. For residential customers, PG&E has consistently ranked fourth of the five major utilities measured in California over the last 5 years. In 2005, it ranked fifth in California. In contrast, the residential customer survey has ranked SMUD first in California for 5 of the previous 6 years and third or better in the Western Region for the same period. SMUD was the highest-ranked electric utility in California for both residential and commercial customers in the 2004 J.D. Power and Associates surveys (J.D. Power and Associates, 2005a and 2005b).

As part of a 2004 California customer survey conducted for the California Municipal Utilities Association, RKS Research & Consulting reported that "[c]ustomers award SMUD customer service representatives high scores for their performance, rating them above statewide municipal utility and IOU averages on all measures."5 Recently, in a survey of 105 utilities across the nation, PG&E’s Internet Web site was ranked 57th in the nation for serving its residential customers. In comparison, SMUD’s internet Web site was named the best in California and fourth best in the nation.

SMUD will be extending its customer service programs to the Annexation Territory and has committed to improving customer satisfaction in the Annexation Territory to at least the Western Region average, as measured by the J.D. Power and Associates surveys, within 2 years after taking over as the service provider and to eventually matching the levels of customer satisfaction enjoyed by the existing SMUD customers.

Absent significant changes in PG&E’s customer service, it is expected that historical customer service levels in the Annexation Territory will continue under the No Program Alternative.

5 PG&E is a California IOU (investor-owned utility).

DRAFT VIII-5 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

5. Rates

The No Program alternative will not achieve the Program goal of lower electric rates in the Annexation Territory. SMUD’s current rates in its existing service area are at least 19% lower than PG&E’s current rates, even including a 2004 SMUD rate increase.6 SMUD raised rates for only the second time in 15 years in March 2004. This change resulted in a rate increase of approximately 6.2% for residential customers and 5% to 6% for mid-size commercial customers. From 1990 to 2005, SMUD’s electric rates have, on average been approximately 20% below PG&E rates (including the 2004 SMUD increase). Based on SMUD and PG&E projections, this rate differential is expected to continue over the long run. In 2006, the rate differential will be approximately 28%. Under the Program, the rate differential between PG&E rates and SMUD rates in the Annexation Territory will be at least 2% during the early years following annexation, when the costs of annexation are being recovered. Over time, the differential in the Annexation Territory is expected to increase as annexation costs are recovered and rates transition to near SMUD’s standard lower rates.

6. Local Control

Finally, the No Program Alternative does not meet the goal of local control because PG&E, a private, investor-owned utility, will continue to provide service to the proposed Annexation Territory. PG&E is a private corporation, governed by a Board of Directors elected by PG&E shareholders. Many decisions are made in closed Board of Directors meetings that are not open to the public. PG&E’s ratepayers do not have a say in the management and operation of the organization. In addition, PG&E is regulated by the CPUC. If customers desire to participate in CPUC regulatory proceedings affecting PG&E’s electric rates, they must become parties in those cases and appear before the CPUC in San Francisco. In comparison, SMUD is governed by a 7-member Board of Directors elected by SMUD customers in each of 7 wards. The SMUD Board’s discussions and decision-making are conducted during publicly noticed meetings held at SMUD’s Sacramento headquarters. Members of the public are invited to participate in these meetings, which also are televised and Web cast. If LAFCo and voters approve SMUD’s annexation and electric service proposal, the SMUD Board of Directors will adjust SMUD’s ward boundaries to incorporate the Annexation Territory, thereby ensuring representation of Annexation Territory customers.

7. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers

SMUD will not participate in this alternative; therefore, it will have no impact on existing SMUD customers.

6 See http://www.smud.org/about/rate_action/index.html.

DRAFT VIII-6 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

8. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to PG&E Ratepayers

Under the No Program Alternative, PG&E will continue to provide electric service at PG&E’s rates and under current levels of reliability and service. This alternative maintains the status quo; accordingly, it will have no impact on PG&E ratepayers.

9. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

The No Program Alternative will result in fewer direct and indirect impacts on the environment than the Program because the transmission line, substation, and distribution system upgrades will not be constructed. It is expected that the No Program Alternative will have no cumulative impacts on the environment because PG&E will not be installing the facilities or adding any additional workforce, as will be required under the Program. Because the No Program Alternative will not improve reliability or reduce rates in the Annexation Territory, it is not expected to induce growth. See Table VIII-1 for a comparison of the impacts of this alternative to the Program’s impacts.

10. Comparison with the Program Goals and Objectives

Under the Program, SMUD has committed to substantial improvements in reliability and customer service within the first five years of providing service in the Annexation Territory. SMUD has set the eventual goal of providing service at the same reliability and customer service levels as in SMUD’s existing service area. PG&E has not provided any details during the public workshops, or to the CPUC or LAFCo, of its plan for improving electric system reliability or customer satisfaction. If the Program described in this EIR is not approved, it is reasonable to expect that the existing conditions already described will continue. Further, PG&E’s rates will be significantly higher than SMUD’s in 2006 and are projected to remain higher over the long-term.

As described, the No Program Alternative will not meet the following Program goals or objectives:

• Improved reliability of electric service and customer service in Annexation Territory;

• Lower rates; and

• Local control by Annexation Territory ratepayers over their electric utility.

See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

DRAFT VIII-7 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

B. ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED EVALUATION

1. Alternative 1: City/County Individual Provision of Service

a. Description

Under this alternative, SMUD will annex one or two but not all three of the cities. This, in turn, will affect whether (and which) portions of unincorporated Yolo County will be annexed to SMUD. Under this alternative, the city or cities and portions of Yolo County not annexed by SMUD will continue to receive electric service from PG&E.

b. Feasibility

If SMUD were to annex only part of the proposed Annexation Territory, the separation of the smaller Annexation Territory from PG&E’s existing system and the subsequent interconnection to SMUD’s electric system will present significant challenges. If SMUD were to annex only one or two of the cities, it would need to acquire from PG&E the existing substation or substations located in the relevant city or cities. Because these substations also serve customers in Yolo County currently, PG&E will have to install new substation capacity and distribution lines to replace the loss of the existing substations. In addition, SMUD will have to install new transmission line connections from its existing system to the substations in the smaller Annexation Territory. For example, if SMUD were to annex West Sacramento and Davis only, PG&E would lose the existing interconnections between Woodland and Davis. Therefore, it would have to construct a new transmission line from its remaining system to the Woodland substation to maintain reliability. Similarly, SMUD would have to construct a transmission line from the Davis substation to its existing system to replace the lost interconnection with the Woodland substation. It is likely that portions of these new transmission lines would have to be installed through existing communities. Combinations of cities and portions of the county other than the combination proposed in the Program pose similar challenges. Although this alternative is technically feasible, the installation of new transmission lines within established communities may not be politically feasible.

The SMUD annexation feasibility study (R.W. Beck, Inc., et al., 2005) analyzes the potential economic costs and benefits of serving the Yolo Communities individually and collectively. The study determined that the greatest savings to Yolo consumers will occur if SMUD provides electric service to the entire Annexation Territory. Lesser savings will occur if certain unincorporated areas of Yolo County and/or one or two of the cities are excluded from the area to be annexed by SMUD. The study also determined that the costs associated with providing electric service to a smaller area will be substantial. Spreading those costs over one or two of the cities will result in electric rates that are approximately equal to the rates associated with service by PG&E.

DRAFT VIII-8 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

c. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

As discussed, a reduced Annexation Territory will change the configuration of the electric system fundamentally. To effectively provide service under this alternative, both SMUD and PG&E may have to install transmission lines and substations in locations that may differ from those proposed under the Program. The SMUD and PG&E facility additions necessary for this alternative, including PG&E’s proposed transmission system improvements (see discussion under No Program Alternative), will have direct and indirect impacts and cumulative impacts on the environment comparable to the Program because this alternative will require the construction of transmission lines and substations and additions to SMUD’s workforce. It is expected that this alternative will improve the reliability of the area(s) annexed by SMUD; however, rates in such an area or areas are expected to stay near PG&E’s rates, as discussed. While this alternative may result in some growth inducement because of reliability improvements, this impact will be less than under the Program, because SMUD rates in the Annexation Territory will not be significantly lower than PG&E rates.

d. Comparison with the Program Goals and Objectives

This alternative will not reduce the cost of electric service or provide local control to the areas not included in the reduced Annexation Territory. In addition, electric system reliability and customer service will remain the same in areas where PG&E continues to provide service. Although existing SMUD customers will have the same protections under the Program, PG&E will be required to continue to serve the Annexation Territory load and to complete costly upgrades. Under these conditions, LAFCo has determined that Alternative 1 will not satisfy most of the goals and objectives of the Program, and it has eliminated Alternative 1 from further consideration.

See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FOR DETAILED EVALUATION

1. Alternative 2: Joint Powers Authority

a. Description

DRAFT VIII-9 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

municipal electric utility and to acquire PG&E’s facilities by exercising the power of eminent domain.

A JPA will coordinate the efforts of the Cities to supply and distribute electric power within their boundaries. This analysis assumes that a JPA will provide service at reliability and customer service levels equal to that of the Program to ensure an “apples to apples” comparison.

b. Feasibility

Unlike the cities, Yolo County does not have the authority to sell and distribute electricity. Because Yolo County does not share this common power, Yolo County cannot participate in a JPA unless it forms a publicly owned utility authorized to provide electric service. Formation of a publicly owned utility may be infeasible for financial or political reasons. Similarly, the cities will have to take the steps necessary to municipalize the provision of electric service, which also may be infeasible for financial or political reasons. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the cities and Yolo County will take the steps necessary to provide electric service, and that the JPA will consist of the cities and Yolo County.

This alternative is subject to the additional challenges of developing a new utility organization capable of providing electric service at reliability and customer service levels comparable to those available under the Program. In addition to acquiring PG&E’s distribution system in the Annexation Territory, the JPA will have to either contract part or all of the operation, maintenance, customer service, and administration needed to provide electricity in the Annexation Territory or undertake these activities itself. If the JPA self-performs these responsibilities, it will have to hire and maintain an experienced qualified workforce and either acquire an operations center, maintenance facilities, customer service centers, information technology, and material warehouses or construct facilities of its own. Both options will be costly. The JPA will have to install metering facilities at each of the interconnection points with CAISO and establish an interconnection agreement.

Under this alternative, PG&E, in conjunction with CAISO and regulators, will determine the appropriate level of transmission reliability for the Annexation Territory. PG&E also will decide when and how to upgrade the transmission facilities serving the Annexation Territory. The JPA will have limited influence on transmission system reliability and capacity and will be subject to PG&E’s and CAISO’s transmission planning standards, which may be more focused on regional, rather than local, issues. Historically, PG&E has identified necessary transmission improvement projects in the Annexation Territory only to defer upgrades in favor of re-rating lines.

Although this alternative is technically feasible, it will be extremely costly to create a new electric service provider, and it may be some time before the JPA will be able to

DRAFT VIII-10 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

provide the level of reliability, customer service, energy efficiency, and demand response programs that are provided with the Program.

c. Reliability and Customer Service

As stated, it is assumed that the JPA will install all of the necessary electric facilities and either contract or self-perform all of the necessary services to provide reliability and customer service comparable to that provided by the Program. However, it is likely to take many years for the JPA to reach these reliability and customer service levels. The Annexation Territory also will be subject to CAISO initiated load shed plan, regardless of the JPA’s ability to procure and provide energy for the Annexation Territory.

d. Rates

The cost of providing service will be greater under this alternative than under the Program because the JPA will have to expend significant monies to acquire, establish, and maintain the infrastructure and organization necessary to function as an electric service provider like SMUD. Because the JPA will not generate any power, the cost of the JPA’s power supply will be fully subject to market price fluctuations, resulting in significant rate uncertainty for customers under this alternative. The JPA may be able to mitigate such fluctuations through long-term contracts. However, given the relatively small power needs of the Annexation Territory (i.e., approximately 250 MW), the JPA will not benefit from significant economies of scale and might end up with long-term contracts at higher prices than those a larger utility could negotiate. In addition, the JPA will have to pay CAISO tariffs. PG&E is currently proposing to increase transmission rates significantly. According to the R.W. Beck Report (2005), based on these factors, it is not likely that a JPA can, ultimately, provide electric service at rates substantially below PG&E’s rates, as proposed under the Program.

e. Local Control

The JPA alternative will include a Board of Directors consisting of designated members of the elected bodies of the cities and Yolo County. Because customers in the Annexation Territory will not elect the JPA Board directly, the JPA will not provide the same measure of local control as provided under the Program.

f. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers

Because SMUD will not be a participant in the JPA, this alternative will have no impact on existing SMUD customers.

g. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to PG&E Ratepayers

This alternative will not provide the same benefits to the remaining PG&E customers as the Program. In particular, under the JPA alternative, the PG&E transmission

DRAFT VIII-11 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

system still will be required to serve the Annexation Territory load and, therefore, will require costly transmission system upgrades.

h. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

The direct and indirect effects on aesthetics, agricultural, biological, cultural, hazards and hazardous materials, land-use/planning, and recreation are expected to be less than under the Program because the proposed transmission lines will not be constructed. It also is expected that the direct and indirect impacts on hydrology/water quality, noise, and public services will be equal to the Program because the JPA will construct the substation and distribution system upgrades proposed by the Program, and PG&E will complete the transmission system upgrades described under the No Program Alternative. However, the JPA alternative is expected to have a greater impact on air quality, population/housing, transportation/ traffic, and utilities/service systems/energy conservation based on the need for a new utility work force beyond what is required by the Program and because it will take many years to establish energy efficiency and renewable energy programs comparable to those under the Program. The JPA alternative is expected to have no cumulatively significant impacts on aesthetics, land use/planning, or recreation because the transmission lines required by the Program will not be constructed. This alternative is expected to have cumulatively significant impacts on agricultural, biological, cultural, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation/traffic, and utilities/service systems/energy conservation because the substation and distribution system upgrades proposed by the Program will be constructed, and this alternative requires the creation of a new workforce. While this alternative may result in some growth inducement because of reliability improvements, that growth inducement will be less than under the Program because JPA rates will not be significantly lower than PG&E rates.

i. Comparison with the Program Goals and Objectives

Over time, this alternative will provide improvements in reliability and customer service that are similar to those provided by the Program. The JPA will afford an opportunity for local control, though not to the same extent as the Program. It will not impact existing SMUD or remaining PG&E customers. The JPA alternative will not achieve the Program goal of reducing the cost of electric service for Annexation Territory customers. See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

2. Alternative 3: PG&E Upgraded/Improved Service

a. Description

Under this alternative, PG&E will continue to provide service to residents in the Annexation Territory, but it will make significant changes to its infrastructure and

DRAFT VIII-12 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

services to bring its level of customer service and reliability up to the level proposed by SMUD under the Program.

PG&E will be required to make the following changes in the Annexation Territory under this alternative:

(1) Complete the transmission upgrade projects recommended by PG&E

(2) Shorten the length and increase the capacity of existing distribution lines

(3) Increase substation capacity

(4) Increase the number of looped distribution lines

(5) Reduce the number of multi-terminal transmission lines

(6) Provide the infrastructure and programs to improve customer satisfaction

b. Feasibility

Assuming PG&E collects sufficient revenues through rates to make the necessary upgrades and improvements, and PG&E commits to improving reliability and customer service, it is feasible to implement this alternative over time.

c. Reliability

This alternative will require PG&E to make significant distribution and transmission facility upgrades and additions to the electric system in the Annexation Territory. These changes, along with a strong commitment from PG&E to the Annexation Territory customers, will improve system reliability in the Annexation Territory.

d. Customer Service

This alternative will require that PG&E make significant changes to improve customer satisfaction in the Annexation Territory. These changes will be aimed at improving power quality and reliability, customer service, company image, billing and payment, pricing, and communications, as measured by the J.D. Power and Associates surveys (J.D. Power and Associates, 2005a and 2005b). Improvements also are necessary in PG&E’s contact center and customer Web site. These improvements, along with a commitment from PG&E, will improve customer satisfaction in the Annexation Territory.

e. Rates

This alternative will not achieve the Program goal of lower electric rates in the Annexation Territory for the same reasons outlined in the No Program Alternative.

DRAFT VIII-13 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

f. Local Control

Since PG&E will continue as the electric service provider in the Annexation Territory, this alternative will not achieve the Program goal of providing local control.

g. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers

Because SMUD will not participate in this alternative, it will have no impact on existing SMUD customers.

h. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to PG&E Ratepayers

It is unclear whether existing PG&E ratepayers will shoulder the cost of PG&E’s necessary facility upgrades and any other necessary administrative costs under this alternative. However, in light of standard PG&E rate practice, which spreads the costs of infrastructure improvements across all PG&E ratepayers, it is likely that PG&E ratepayers within and outside of the Annexation Territory will bear the costs of this alternative in their rates.

Under this alternative, PG&E will not implement improvements in reliability and customer service outside of the Annexation Territory. Thus, while existing PG&E ratepayers outside of the Annexation Territory are not likely to see a reduction in reliability or customer service, both will be significantly lower when compared to the Annexation Territory, where improvements are made.

i. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

It is expected that this alternative will result in fewer direct and indirect effects on aesthetics, agriculture, air quality, biological, cultural, hazards and hazardous materials, land-use/planning, population/housing, recreation, and transportation/ traffic than under the Program because the proposed transmission lines will not be constructed, and it also is assumed that no significant additional PG&E workforce will be required. It is expected that the direct and indirect impacts on hydrology/water quality, noise, public services, and utilities/service systems/energy conservation will be equal to the Program because it is assumed that PG&E will construct the substation and distribution system upgrades proposed by the Program, and that PG&E will complete the transmission system upgrades described in the No Program Alternative. Alternative 3 is expected to have no cumulative impacts on aesthetics, air quality, land use/planning, population and housing, recreation, transportation/traffic, or utilities/service systems/energy conservation because the transmission lines proposed by the Program will not be constructed, and it is assumed that PG&E will not add to its workforce. This alternative is expected to have cumulatively significant impacts on agricultural, biological, cultural, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and public services because the substation and distribution system upgrades proposed by the Program will be constructed. While this

DRAFT VIII-14 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

alternative may result in some growth inducement because of reliability improvements, this impact will be less than under the Program because customers will continue to be charged PG&E rates.

j. Comparison with the Program Goal and Objectives

• Lower rates;

• Local control by Annexation Territory ratepayers over their electrical utility; and

• Provision of service to the Annexation Territory at no financial cost and no reduction in service quality/reliability to existing PG&E ratepayers outside of the Annexation Territory.

See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

3. Alternative 4: Community Choice Aggregation

a. Description

DRAFT VIII-15 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

Regardless of who furnishes the power to the customers in the Annexation Territory, PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute the power to all of the Yolo Communities under this alternative.

Because PG&E will continue to provide transmission and distribution services in the Annexation Territory, it is assumed that reliability and customer service levels will remain the same as described under the No Program Alternative.

b. Feasibility

If Yolo County serves as a community choice aggregator, it will be required to offer the opportunity to purchase electricity to all residential customers within its jurisdiction. At present, it is proposed that only customers in the unincorporated areas of Yolo County near the cities will depart from PG&E electric service. Thus, unless Yolo County is willing to make power available to all of its residents, Yolo County may not, by law, act as a community choice aggregator or participate in a group with one or more of the cities.

c. Reliability and Customer Service

Because PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute power under this alternative, no improvements are expected in current levels of reliability and customer service.

d. Rates

Under Alternative 4, the participating Yolo Communities will own no generation resources and will enter into contracts for electricity with various suppliers for various terms, with the result that rates in the Annexation Territory will be extremely sensitive to market price fluctuations. PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute electricity. Thus, under this alternative, the Yolo Communities will assume responsibility for the riskiest component of power supply, exposing customers to significant rate uncertainty. Further, as under Alternative 2, given the relatively small power needs of the Annexation Territory (i.e., approximately 250 MW), community choice aggregation will not benefit from significant economies of scale, with the result that power purchase contracts are likely to be for prices higher than those a larger utility will be able to negotiate. Customers who depart PG&E to purchase energy from a community choice aggregator may be subject to certain non- bypassable charges that PG&E is authorized to collect in addition to non-bypassable charges assumed under the Program. This alternative also will require payment of CAISO fees for delivery of power to the Annexation Territory. These fees may increase by an additional 25%, as requested by PG&E in a recent advice letter concerning transmission tariff rates. In addition, this alternative will require contracting with, or creating an organization to function as, an aggregator, which will increase overhead costs. Given these variables, it is not likely that a community choice aggregator can, ultimately, provide electric service at rates substantially below PG&E’s, as proposed under the Program.

DRAFT VIII-16 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

e. Local Control

Under Alternative 4, customers may have some input relative to the choice of a power supplier and the setting of rates. However, as the entity responsible for transmission and distribution, PG&E will retain control over substantial electric service decision making.

f. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers

SMUD will not participate in this alternative, therefore it will have no impact on existing SMUD customers.

g. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to PG&E Ratepayers

Under this alternative, PG&E will be replaced as the supplier of the electric commodity in the Yolo Communities that participate in a community choice aggregation program. Unlike the Program, PG&E will continue to provide electric delivery services. With regard to the Program, where SMUD will replace PG&E with respect to the provision of both the supply and delivery of electricity throughout the Annexation Territory, the CPUC determined in Resolution E-3952 that the provision of electric service by SMUD will not substantially impair PG&E’s ability to provide adequate service at reasonable rates to its remaining customers. The same result is likely to apply here, where fewer PG&E services will be replaced. However, this alternative will not provide the same benefits to the remaining PG&E customers as the Program. In particular, PG&E’s transmission system still will be required to serve the Annexation Territory load and, therefore, will require costly transmission system upgrades.

h. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

Alternative 4 is expected to have direct and indirect impacts less than under the Program in all resource areas except for utilities/service systems/energy conservation. The direct and indirect impacts on this resource area are similar to those under the Program because this alternative requires the creation of a small workforce that will generate solid waste. It is expected that this alternative will have no cumulatively significant impacts on any of the resource areas except for utilities/service systems/energy conservation. Because this alternative will require a small workforce, it is expected that there will be a cumulatively significant impact on this resource area. Because this alternative will not improve reliability or reduce rates in the Annexation Territory, it is not expected to induce growth. See Table VIII-1 for a comparison of this alternative to the Program’s impacts.

i. Comparison with the Program Goals and Objectives

Alternative 4 will not improve reliability or customer service because PG&E will continue to transmit and distribute electricity in the Annexation Territory. The only

DRAFT VIII-17 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

change will be who supplies the electric commodity. This alternative will not guarantee lower rates because aggregation covers only the riskiest element of power supply, which will be subject to market price fluctuations, non-bypassable charges, and CAISO fees.

Under this alternative, most of the benefits of the Program will not be realized. The alternative will not meet the following Program goals:

• Improved reliability of electric service and customer service in the Annexation Territory;

• Lower rates; and

• Local control over utility decision making.

See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

4. Alternative 5: SMUD Annexation with the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) Service

a. Description

Currently, there are three existing PG&E/CAISO-SMUD interconnections. This alternative may triple the number of interconnections. The new interconnections will require changes at substation facilities and to the energy management systems to enable coordinated and reliable operation of the electrical grid. In addition, the existing interconnection contracts between SMUD and PG&E may have to be updated, or new agreement(s) may have to be put in place to reflect the new interconnections. Additional contracts and operational coordination will be required with the CAISO to enable the provision of services under this alternative.

PG&E, in conjunction with the CAISO and regulators, will determine the appropriate level of transmission reliability for the Annexation Territory. PG&E also will decide when and how to upgrade the transmission facilities serving the Annexation Territory. SMUD will have limited influence on transmission system reliability and capacity and will be subject to PG&E’s and CAISO’s transmission planning standards, which

DRAFT VIII-18 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

may be more focused on regional rather than local issues. Historically, PG&E has identified necessary transmission improvement projects in the Annexation Territory only to defer upgrades.

SMUD will complete all program components necessary to improve distribution system reliability and customer service comparable to the Program, except for Program Components 4, 5, and 6. The transmission system improvements will be limited to the transmission system upgrades planned and completed by PG&E. SMUD will have to install metering facilities (at substantial cost) at each of the CAISO interconnection points and provide CAISO with real-time interconnection data.

b. Feasibility

Although this alternative is technically feasible, it will increase the complexity of SMUD and CAISO control area operations. Additional interconnection points will have to be established, and modifications will be required to make this alternative work. This alternative will establish a SMUD service island in the CAISO control area that will fragment the SMUD service territory and create the need for multiple rate structures and separate operation processes and procedures for the Annexation Territory and the existing SMUD service area. The new interconnection points will require new metering facilities and equipment control arrangements with CAISO. SMUD also will be required to schedule energy through the CAISO system and will be subject to CAISO settlement processes for Annexation Territory related transactions. This alternative will require modification of the SMUD control area because of the additional interconnection points with CAISO.

c. Reliability and Customer Service

As under the Program, distribution reliability and customer service is expected to improve when SMUD replaces PG&E as the electric service provider; this will be as a direct result of improvement in the design and operation of the electric distribution system. Similarly, customers in the Annexation Territory will receive the same high level of customer service as is received in the existing SMUD service area. The existing SMUD energy efficiency, renewable energy, and customer programs will be extended to the Annexation Territory. However, the transmission reliability improvements, as envisioned under the Program, will not occur because this alternative does not reduce multi-terminal lines. Further, the transmission system will be subject to CAISO tariff structures and congestion management. The Annexation Territory also will be subject to CAISO initiated load-shed plan, regardless of SMUD’s ability to procure and provide energy for the Annexation Territory.

d. Rates

All load served through the CAISO option will be subject to CAISO tariffs. Costs and fees paid to CAISO will impact and reduce the benefits of annexation substantially. Annexation Territory customers will have relatively little or no benefit of SMUD’s

DRAFT VIII-19 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

own control area operations and will not benefit from available capacity on SMUD’s existing transmission system. The Annexation Territory customers will be subject to CAISO tariffs without significant influence on CAISO policies or rate structures. PG&E is currently proposing to increase transmission rates significantly, which will increase Annexation Territory transmission rates.

The R.W. Beck Annexation Feasibility Study Final Report (R.W. Beck, Inc., 2005) analyzed the potential economic costs and benefits if SMUD were to obtain transmission service from CAISO. It determined that CAISO fees will increase the cost of providing service to the Annexation Territory customers relative to the Program. With CAISO fees, Annexation Territory rates will be higher than proposed under the Program. Because of these cost increases, it will also take longer to pay off the annexation costs. Therefore, under this alternative, it is likely the Annexation Territory customers always will be on a separate rate structure from existing SMUD customers.

e. Local Control

Since SMUD will be the electric service provider for this alternative, the Annexation Territory customers will have the same level of local control provided under the Program. However, SMUD will have less control over transmission planning, control area, and load-shedding policies, compared to its existing service area, because PG&E/CAISO will continue to own and operate the transmission system in the Annexation Territory.

f. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to Existing SMUD Customers.

This alternative will include the same commitments by SMUD as those included in the Program to ensure that there is no financial cost or reduction in service or reliability to existing SMUD customers.

g. No Financial Cost or Reduction in Service or Reliability to PG&E Ratepayers

This alternative will not provide the same benefits to the remaining PG&E customers as the Program. In particular, the PG&E transmission system still will be required to serve the Annexation Territory load and, therefore, will require costly transmission system upgrades.

h. Comparison with Program Impacts on the Environment

The direct and indirect effects on aesthetics, agriculture resources, air quality, biological, cultural, hazards and hazardous materials, land-use/planning, and recreation are expected to be less than under the Program because the proposed transmission line will not be constructed. It is also expected that the direct impacts on hydrology/water quality, noise, population/housing, public services, transportation/ traffic and utilities/service systems/energy conservation will be equal to the Program.

DRAFT VIII-20 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Program

This is because SMUD will construct the substation and distribution system upgrades proposed by the Program, extend its energy efficiency, demand response, and renewable energy programs to the Annexation Territory, and add to its workforce, and PG&E will complete the transmission system upgrades described in the No Program Alternative. While this alternative may result in some growth inducement because of reliability improvements, the impact will be less than under the Program because the expected rates for this alternative will not be significantly lower than PG&E rates.

i. Comparison with the Program Goals and Objectives

This alternative is significantly more complex than the proposed Program because the Annexation Territory will not be integrated with the existing SMUD service area. The Annexation Territory customer will continue to be subject to CAISO tariffs, rules and regulations at significantly higher cost relative to the Program. This alternative significantly increases the amount of coordination with CAISO and the operational complexity of the SMUD control area. In addition, this alternative does not meet the following Program objectives:

• Improved transmission system reliability;

• Lower rates; and

• Local Control.

See Table VIII-2 for a comparison of this alternative’s achievement of the Program goals and objectives.

D. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

Table VIII-2 compares each alternative in terms of achieving the goals of the Program. All of the alternatives excamined in Section C of this chapter meet at least some of the Program’s goals and have been determined to be potentially feasible. However, only the Program meets all of the goals enumerated by LAFCo. In particular, only the Program provides lower rates, improved reliability and customer service, and local control.

See Table VIII-1 for a summary comparison of each alternative to the Program’s environmental impacts.

See Table VIII-2 for a summary comparison of each alternative to the Program’s goals and objectives.

DRAFT VIII-21 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Project

Table VIII-1: Comparison of Environmental Impacts of the Program and All Alternatives

Alternative 1 – Alternative 5 City/County Alternative Alternative 4 – – SMUD Individual 2 – Joint Alternative 3 – Community Annexation No Program Provision of Powers PG&E Upgraded/ Choice with CAISO Resource Area Alternative Service Authority Improved Service Aggregation Service Aesthetics — = — — — — Agriculture — West Sacramento — — — — Only – Woodland/West Sacramento or Davis = Davis/ West Sacramento = Woodland = Davis = Air Quality — = — — — — Biological — West Sacramento — — — — Resources Only – Woodland/ West Sacramento or Davis = Davis/ West Sacramento = Woodland = Davis = Cultural Resources — = — — — — Hazards and — = — — — — Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water — = = = — = Quality Land-Use/Planning — = — — — — Noise — = = = — = Population/Housing — = + — — = Public Services — = = = — = Recreation — = — — — — Transportation/ — = + — — — Traffic Utilities/Service — Short Term + + = = = Systems/ Energy Long Term = Conservation Cumulative Impacts — = — — — — Growth Inducement — — — — — —

Notes: + Impacts of alternative greater than impacts of Program = Impacts of alternative equal to impacts of Program — Impacts of alternative less than impacts of Program

DRAFT VIII-22 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Project

Table VIII-2: Comparison of Achievement of Program Goals/Objectives Under Program and All Alternatives

Yes: Alternative meets Program goal and objective No: Alternative does not meet Program goal and objective Partial: Alternative provides a portion of the Program goal and objective

DRAFT VIII-23 Chapter VIII Alternatives to the Proposed Project

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT VIII-24

CHAPTER IX PREPARERS OF THIS REPORT

Chapter IX Preparers of this Report

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (Lead Agency)

Peter Brundage, Executive Officer Donald Lockhart, AICP, Assistant Executive Officer Nancy Miller, Commission Counsel

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (Applicant)

Michael Deis, Senior Project Manager Ronald Knierim, Environmental Specialist

URS Corporation (Consultant to Sacramento LAFCo)

Joseph Trapasso, Principal in Charge Brian Smith, AICP, Project Senior Environmental Planner Thomas Baily, Project Senior Environmental Planner Nicholas Trifiro, AICP, Project Environmental Planner Anja Kelsey, Environmental Scientist John Larson, Project Environmental Planner Victor Auvinen, Environmental Scientist Robert Rusby, AICP, Project Environmental Planner Christine Stora, Project Environmental Planner Roxanne Yonn, Public Outreach/Facilitation Stephen Leach, Senior Biologist Corinna Lu, Biological Resources Brian Hatoff, Cultural Resources Jason Jones, Cultural Resources Vivian Gaddie, Graphics Carolyn Knight, GIS mapping Michael Schindler, GIS mapping Karyl Hendrick, Technical Writer/Editor

DRAFT IX-1 Chapter IX Preparers of this Report

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT IX-2

CHAPTER X REFERENCES CITED

Chapter X References Cited

Ahl, J., 1991. Factors Affecting Contributions of the Tadpole Shrimp (Lepiduris packard) to Its Oversummering Egg Reserves. Hydrobiology, 212:137-43.

Airport Land Use Commission, 1994. Sacramento International Airport (formerly Sacramento Metropolitan Airport) Comprehensive Land Use Plan. January.

Airport Land Use Commission, forthcoming. Airport Master Plan.

Airport Land Use Commission for Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties, 1999. Yolo County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC), 1994. Mitigating Bird Collisions with Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1994. Edison Electric Institute.

APLIC, 1996. Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1996. Edison Electric Institute.

APLIC and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2005. Avian Protection Plan Guidelines.

Baumhoff, M., 1978. Environmental Background. In California, R. Heizer, ed., pp. 16-24. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Beardsley, R., 1954. Temporal and Arial Relationship in Central California Archaeology. Two Parts. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 24-25. Berkeley, California.

Belk, D., and M. Fugate, 2000. Two new Branchinecta (Crustacea: Anostraca) from the southwestern United States. The Southwestern Naturalist 45:111-117.

Bennyhoff, J., 1977. Ethnogeography of the Plains Miwok. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, Publication 5.

Biosystem Analysis, Inc., 1994. Life on the Edge. Santa Cruz, California.

Brown, E., and R. Elliott, 2005. On-Farm Energy Use Characteristics. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. Report #1E052.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1994. Visual Resource Management System.

Burt, C., D. Howes, and G. Wilson, 2003. California Agricultural Water Electrical Energy Requirements. Prepared by the Irrigation Training and Research Center, California Polytechnic University, for the Public Interest Energy Research Program, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California. December.

California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2000. Diesel Risk Reduction Program.

DRAFT X-1 Chapter X References Cited

California Department of Conservation, 2004. Williamson Act Program Enrollment Statistics.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1988. Mineral Land Classification: Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the Sacramento-Fairfield Production Consumption Region. January.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1999. Mineral Land Classification: Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate and Kaolin Clay Resources in Sacramento County, California.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 1991. Annual Report on the Status of California State Listed Threatened and Endangered Animals and Plants.

CDFG, 1994. Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California. Sacramento, California. November.

CDFG, 1995. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

CDFG, 2002. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships – Version 8.0. Sacramento, California.

CDFG, 2005. California Natural Diversity Database. Rarefied – Version 3.0.5. Sacramento, California.

California Department of Health Services, 2002. EMF Risk Assessment. EMF Program. October.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1999. Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Located at: www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/

Caltrans, 2004. Annual Average Daily Vehicular and Truck Traffic on the California State Highway System. Compiled by State of California Vehicle and Traffic Data Systems.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2004. California’s Groundwater. Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin. North American Subbasin. Bulletin 118.

DWR, 2005. California Water Plan 2005 Update. Sacramento River Hydrologic Region. Vol. 3, Chapter 6. Sacramento, California.

California Energy Commission (CEC), 2003. Consumnes Power Plant Project: Commission Decision. AFC No. 01-AFC-19. Sacramento, California. September.

California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES), 2005. Located at: http://ceres.ca.gov/geo area/counties/Yolo/landmarks.html

California Native Plant Society (CNPS), 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (sixth edition). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, D. Tibor, convening ed. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.

DRAFT X-2 Chapter X References Cited

California, State of, 2005. Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 through 21178, California Environmental Quality Act: CEQA Guidelines.

Chartkoff, J., and K. Chartkoff, 1984. The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press.

Davis City Council, 2001. Resolution No. 01-74, Series 2001.

Davis, City of, 2001. City of Davis General Plan. May.

EIP Associates and Yolo County HCP Steering Committee, in association with Economic and Planning Systems, 2001. Yolo County Habitat Conservation Plan: A Plan to Mitigate Biological Impacts from Urban Development in Yolo County. Preliminary Draft. January. Located at: http://www.yolocounty.org/HCP/hcp.htm

Elsasser, A., 1978. Development of Regional Prehistoric Cultures. In California, R. Heizer, ed., pp. 37-57. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC.

Eng, L., D. Belk, and C. Eriksen, 1990. Californian Anostraca: Distribution, Habitat, and Status. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 10(2):247-277.

England, A., J. Estep, W. Holt, 1995. Nest-Site Selection and Reproductive Performance of Urban-Nesting Swainson’s Hawks in the Central Valley of California. Journal of Raptor Research, 29(3):179-186.

England, A., M. Bechard, and C. Houston, 1997. Swainson’s Hawk (Bueo swainsoni). In The Birds of North America, No. 265, A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and the American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.

EPRI, 1982. Transmission Line Reference Book: 345 kV and Above. Report EL-2500-R1, Second Edition, Revised. December.

Erickson, C., and D. Belk, 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California Puddles, Pools, and Playas. Mad River Press, Inc.

Everbach, E., 2001. Noise Quantification and Monitoring: An Overview. Science Project User’s Group, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA. July. Located at: (http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/sciproject/noise/noisequant.html)

Federal Highway Administration, 2004. Traffic Noise Model (FHWATNM), Version 2.0. Washington, D.C. December.

Federal Register, 1992. Proposal to Determine Endangered Status for Four Fairy Shrimp and the Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp in California. Vol. 57, No. 90. May 8.

Federal Transit Administration, 1995. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Prepared by Harris, Miller, Miller, and Hanson, Inc. Washington, D.C. April.

DRAFT X-3 Chapter X References Cited

Fredrickson, D., 1973. Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Manuscript in Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Fredrickson, D., 1974. Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges. Journal of California Anthropology 1(1): 41-53.

Holland, D., 1991. A Synopsis of the Ecology and Status of the Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) in 1991. Report to the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Ecology Research Center, San Simeon Field Station. San Simeon, California.

J.D. Power and Associates, 2005a. Electrical Utility Commercial Customer Satisfaction Survey. March.

J.D. Power and Associates, 2005b. Electrical Utility Residential Customer Satisfaction Survey. July.

Jepson Prairie Docent Program, 1998. Jepson Prairie Preserve Handbook, Second Edition. Solano County Farmlands and Open Space Foundation, Fairfield, California.

King, C., 1978. Protohistoric and Historic Archaeology. In California, R. Heizer, ed., pp. 58-68. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Laymon, S., B. Garrison, and J. Humphrey, 1988. Historic and Current Status of the Bank Swallow in California, 1987. State of California Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Division, Administrative Report 88-2.

Levy, R., 1978. Eastern Miwok. In California, R. Heizer, ed., pp. 398-413. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Lillard, J., and W. Purves, 1939. The Archaeology of the Deer Creek Cosumnes Area, Sacramento County, California. Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology Bulletin 1. Sacramento, California.

Lillard, J., R. Heizer, and F. Fenenga, 1939. An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California. Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology Bulletin 2. Sacramento.

McGinnis, S., 1984. Freshwater Fishes of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.

Moratto, M., 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Natomas Basin Conservancy, 2002. Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan.

DRAFT X-4 Chapter X References Cited

Navigant Consulting, Inc., 2002. Municipal Electric Utility Options Analysis, Phase I Report. September.

P.B. Aviation, 2004. Sacramento International Airport Master Plan. February

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), 2005a. Advice Letter 2706-E, filed September 1, 2005, and CPUC Resolution No. E-3956.

PG&E, 2005b. Letter from R. Litteneker/PG&E to G. Kahlon/CPUC Energy Division, pg. 5. October 13.

Remsen, J., Jr., 1978. Bird Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. Wildlife Management Administrative Report 78-1.

R.K.S. Research & Consulting, 2004. California customer survey conducted for the California Municipal Utilities Association.

R.W. Beck, Inc., et al., 2005. Annexation Feasibility Study Final Report.

Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), 2005a. Sacramento Region Blueprint Transportation/Land Use Study, Preferred Blueprint Alternative. January.

SACOG, 2005b. Metropolitan Transportation Plan 2027. July.

Sacramento, City of, 1988. The Sacramento City General Plan. Sacramento Development Services Department, Sacramento, California.

Sacramento, City of, 2002. Natomas Joint Vision.

Sacramento County Airport System, 2004. Sacramento International Airport Master Plan. Draft. February.

Sacramento County, 1993. Sacramento County General Plan.

Sacramento County, 1998. Sacramento County General Plan. County of Sacramento Planning Department, Sacramento, California. June 24.

Sacramento County, 2004. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County. July.

Sacramento County, 2005. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Lakes at Antelope. Project No. 03-GPB-CZB-SDP-SPP-AHS-0388, prepared by Sacramento County Department of Environmental Review and Assessment, Sacramento, California. August.

Sacramento County Department of Waste Management & Recycling, 2003. Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan Five-Year Review Report. July.

DRAFT X-5 Chapter X References Cited

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), 1994. Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan. Prepared by SMAQMD and four other air districts. Sacramento, California. November.

SMAQMD, 2003. Sacramento Area Regional 2002 Milestone Report. Prepared by SMAQMD and four other air districts. Sacramento, California.

SMAQMD, 2004. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County. Sacramento, California. July.

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), 2000-2004. District Safety, Health & Environmental Policies and Procedures.

SMUD, 2005a. Staff Analysis. May.

SMUD, 2005b. Application for Annexation of the Cities of West Sacramento, Davis, and Woodland, and Unincorporated Areas of Yolo County and Related Sphere of Influence Amendment. August.

SMUD, 2005c. Yolo Annexation Feasibility Study. Final Report. April.

San Francisco Estuary Project, 1992. Status and Trends Report on Wildlife of the San Francisco Estuary. Prepared under EPA Cooperative Agreement CE-009519-01-0 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Sacramento, California. January.

Skinner, M., and B. Pavlik, 1994. California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California.

Smallwood, K., 1995. Scaling Swainson’s Hawk Population Densities for Assessing Habitat Use Across an Agricultural Landscape. Journal of Raptor Research, 29(3):172-178.

Sullivan, C., 2002. Yolo County Integrated Waste Management Plan Five-Year Review Analysis. Agenda Item 41, Attachment 2, Yolo County Board of Supervisors Meeting, May 14-15.

Sutter County, 1996. County of Sutter General Plan.

Sutter County, 2005. Sutter County Background Report. Located at: http://ceres.ca.gov/planning/genplan/sutter.

Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 2000. Highway Capacity Manual 2000, TRB Special Report 209.

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1987. Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report 6-87-1, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1999. Conservation Guidelines for the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. Prepared by the Sacramento Field Office. Sacramento, California. July.

DRAFT X-6 Chapter X References Cited

USFWS, 2002. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Critical Habitat Designation for Four Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants in California and Southern Oregon; Proposed Rule. Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 185. September 24.

Valley Vision, with Community Services Planning Council and Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2004. Sacramento Region Quality of Life. August.

Varshney, S., 2005. Independent Consultant Review of Annexation Feasibility Study Findings by Sanjay Varshney, Ph.D., CFA. May.

West Sacramento, City of, 1990. City of West Sacramento General Plan.

Western Regional Climate Center, 2005. Monthly Precipitation Data for Yolo and Sacramento Counties. Located at: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/climsmnca.html

Wilson, N., and A. Towne, 1978. Nisensan. In California, R. Heizer, ed., pp. 387-397. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Woodland, City of, 1996. City of Woodland General Plan. Prepared by J. Lawrence Mintier & Associates.

Yolo County, 1983. Yolo County General Plan.

Yolo County, 2004. Yolo County General Plan Vision Statement.

Yolo County, 2005a. Yolo County General Plan Update Background Report.

Yolo County, 2005b. Yolo County Parks and Open Space Master Plan, Draft 2. November.

Yolo County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), 2005a. Yolo County LAFCo Agricultural Conservation Policy. September.

Yolo County LAFCo, 2005b. NOP Response Letter. September 19.

Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1996. Air Quality Handbook. May.

Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslyer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White, 1988. California’s Wildlife Volume I: Amphibians and Reptiles. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

Zeiner, D., W. Laudenslyer, Jr., K. Mayer, and M. White, 1990. California’s Wildlife Volume II: Birds and Volume II: Mammals. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

DRAFT X-7 Chapter X References Cited

This page intentionally left blank

DRAFT X-8