BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

7.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter summarizes public and agency involvement activities undertaken by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USFS), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). These activities have been conducted for the Barren Ridge Renewable Transmission Project (BRRTP or Project) in order to satisfy California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements for public scoping and agency consultation and coordination. Federal agencies preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must “make diligent efforts to involve the public in preparing and implementing their NEPA procedures” (40 CFR 1506.6(a)). Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations provide guidance on the scoping process, including inviting participation of affected federal, state, and local agencies, Native American Tribes, as well as any other interested parties (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(1)). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15129 states that an “EIR [Environmental Impact Report] shall identify all federal, state, or local agencies, other organizations, and private individuals consulted in preparing the draft EIR.” USFS and BLM are the federal Lead Agencies pursuant to NEPA, and LADWP is the Lead Agency under CEQA. Appendix P of this Final EIS/EIR presents the distribution list that identifies the entities that received a copy of the Draft EIS/EIR.

Consistent with the NEPA and CEQA procedures, public participation and agency consultation for this Project have been accomplished through issuance of public notices, public scoping meetings, and formal and informal consultation with agencies, stakeholders, landowners, and Native American Tribes. The consultation and coordination process helped determine the scope of this Final EIS/EIR, identify a range of alternatives and mitigation measures, and define potential environmental impacts and impact significance. The Project team sought public and agency input on the Project by encouraging the review of the Draft EIS/EIR.

7.2 PRE-APPLICATION AND PRE-SCOPING ACTIVITIES

As a preliminary step in the environmental planning process, LADWP conducted pre-application meetings with the BLM and USFS in September 2006. On February 12, 2007, LADWP officially submitted a right-of-way application to the BLM and a Special Use Authorization Application to the USFS for the Proposed Action, then titled the Barren Ridge-Castaic Transmission Project. Later that same year on October 30, November 6 and November 10, LADWP, acting as the Project proponent, hosted a series of three informational public meetings in the communities of Mojave, Agua Dulce and Lake Elizabeth to share information about the Project and explain the forthcoming environmental review process and opportunities for public input. In March of 2008, prior to the initiation of the formal scoping process, LADWP changed the title of Proposed Action to its current name, the Barren Ridge Renewable Transmission Project.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-1 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

7.3 SCOPING PROCESS

Scoping is an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed, and identifying the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIS/EIR (40 CFR 1501.7). The public, affected agencies, Native American Tribes, and other interested parties are invited to participate in the environmental review process. USFS, BLM and LADWP conducted a 31-day public scoping period from April 7, 2008, through May 7, 2008. Below is a summary of the scoping process. Details regarding the scoping process are documented in the Scoping Report and may be viewed on the Project website at http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge.

7.3.1 NOTICE OF INTENT To comply with NEPA 40 CFR 1508.22, the USFS and BLM published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare a joint EIS/EIR for the BRRTP in the Federal Register (Volume 73, Number 67) on April 7, 2008. The NOI initiated the public scoping period for the Draft EIS/EIR and requested all comments be received by May 7, 2008. It described the Proposed Action and Alternatives, the agencies’ scoping and environmental review process, and contact information. It served as an invitation for other federal agencies to provide comments on the scope and content of the Draft EIS/EIR.

7.3.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was issued pursuant to 14 CFR 15082 and is similar to the NOI that initiated the public scoping period and summarized the Proposed Action, location, the significant effects on the environment, and time, date and place of public scoping meetings. The NOP was filed with the California State Clearinghouse on April 7, 2008 (SCH #2008041038) and the review period ended on May 7, 2008.

The USFS, BLM and LADWP distributed approximately 500 NOPs to federal, State, regional, and local agencies, elected officials, organizations and Native American groups. The mailing list included the following approximate distribution:

· 383 Agencies (65 city, 105 county, 106 State, 107 federal) · 12 Native American Tribes · 99 elected officials · 4 organizations

7.3.3 SCOPING MEETINGS USFS, BLM and LADWP conducted seven public scoping meetings from April 22 to May 1, 2008 within the Project area in the locations listed below in Table 7-1. The scoping meetings provided an opportunity to share information regarding the Proposed Action and the decision- making processes, and listen to public and agency views on the range of issues and alternatives to be considered during the preparation of the Draft EIS/EIR. All meetings were conducted in an “open house” format to allow participants to attend any time between 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. A

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-2 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION brief presentation video was shown by the Project team at 7 p.m. followed by a general Q&A session.

TABLE 7-1. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING LOCATIONS

Number of # comments Date Location people signed in Oral Written Tuesday, Santa Clarita Activity Center 14 20 9 April 22, 2008 20880 Centre Point Parkway, Santa Clarita Wednesday, Agua Dulce Women’s Club 32 12 8 April 23, 2008 33201 Agua Dulce Canyon, Agua Dulce Thursday, Castaic Middle School 3 0 0 April 24, 2008 28900 Hillcrest Parkway, Castaic Monday, Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union School 52 36 30 April 28, 2008 16633 Elizabeth Lake Road, Lake Hughes Tuesday, Frazier Mountain High School 2 0 1 April 29, 2008 700 Falcon Way, Lebec Wednesday. Hillview School 14 4 11 April 30, 2008 40525 Peonza Lane, Palmdale Thursday, California City Middle School 5 0 1 May 1, 2008 9736 Redwood Blvd, California City Totals 122 72 60

Notification Newsletters In addition to the distribution of the NOP and publication of the NOI, approximately 7,200 newsletters were sent to agency representatives, elected officials, Native American Tribes, interested parties and organizations, and property owners within 500 feet of both sides of the Proposed Action and preliminary Alternatives in Los Angeles and Kern Counties. The newsletters contained the Project description, purpose and need for the Project, a map, description of the environmental review process, an announcement of public scoping meetings, and contact information, along with a Spanish translation of the information.

Newspaper Advertisements The scoping meetings were also advertised in the eight local newspapers listed below in Table 7- 2. The advertisements provided a brief Project description and meeting locations, times, and dates, and encouraged the public to attend the meetings.

TABLE 7-2. NEWSPAPERS UTILIZED FOR ADVERTISEMENT OF THE 2008 SCOPING MEETINGS Publication Advertisement Dates Los Angeles Times April 7 and 14 La Opinion (Spanish) April 8 and 14 The Signal April 7 and 14 Antelope Valley Press April 8 and 14 The Daily Independent April 8 and 14 The News Review April 9 and 16 Mojave Desert News April 10 and 17 Agua Dulce/Acton County Journal April 12 and 19

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-3 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Agency and Elected Official Contacts As indicated above, agencies and elected officials were distributed an NOP for review and comment on the Project. Following the mailing of the NOP, all agencies—federal, State and local—were contacted via phone to provide information on the Project as well as to determine interest to meet and discuss the Project.

LADWP’s Legislative Affairs group also sent out letters to elected officials within the Project area, prior to the mailings of the NOP and Newsletters, to serve as an additional advance notification for the forthcoming NOP, Newsletters and Scoping Meetings. The letters also offered personal meetings with each representative, if they desired.

During the scoping period, LADWP’s Legislative Affairs group also sent letters to Town Councils within the Project area offering personal meetings with each group or representative. Four Town Councils requested briefings and members of LADWP attended the meetings (see Table 7-3).

TABLE 7-3. 2008 TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGS. Town Council Date and Time Location 47701 90th St Antelope Acres Town Council June 18, 6 p.m. Antelope Acres Association of Rural Town Councils June 26, 7 p.m. L.A. County Fire Station 129, Lancaster Lake Hughes Community Center Lakes Town Council July 12, 8:30 a.m. 17520 Elizabeth Lakes Road Lake Hughes Leona Valley Community Center Leona Valley Town Council July 14, 7:30 p.m. 8367 Elizabeth Lakes Road Leona Valley

7.3.4 OUTREACH USFS, BLM and LADWP provided different modes for the public and agencies to ask questions or leave comments regarding the BRRTP. A toll-free hotline, e-mail address, and website were established at the beginning of the scoping period.

Website Information regarding the Barren Ridge Renewable Transmission Project is available at http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge. The NOI, NOP, Newsletters, and all public review material are available on the website. The website will be updated throughout the environmental review period as information is made available. Additional information may also be available at http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/angeles and http://www.ca.blm.gov/ridgecrest.

E-mail Address An e-mail address was established for the Project ([email protected]) to provide another mode of receiving comments. All comments received via e-mail were added to the Project record and sent an automatic reply acknowledging receipt of the e-mail.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-4 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Toll-Free Hotline A toll-free Project Hotline, (877) 440-3592, was provided as another means for leaving comments and receiving more information on the Project. A call tree was established that gave callers the following options: 1) receive Project information, 2) meeting and event updates, 3) Project schedule, and 4) add callers to the mailing list or leave a question or comment. All messages were added to the Project record.

Press Releases On April 7, 2008 LADWP provided a press release announcing the launch of the environmental study for the BRRTP. A press release was also provided by BLM on April 24, 2008 announcing the Notice of Intent to prepare a joint EIS/EIR for the Barren Ridge Renewable Transmission Project. USFS published the start of the BRRTP’s scoping period in their Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) Report (March/June 2008).

7.3.5 SCOPING COMMENTS SUMMARY This section summarizes the comments received from the public and agencies during the scoping period for the BRRTP Draft EIS/EIR. The scoping review period was from April 7, 2008 to May 8, 2008; however, all comments received through July 2008 were incorporated into the Scoping Report. A total of 231 comments were received during the scoping period. The comments came from various sources as summarized in Table 7-4. The comments were received at the scoping meetings, via phone, e-mail, and mail. If multiple comments covering the same subject or concern were received, those comments were counted as one comment. The comments, summarized below, were utilized by USFS, BLM and LADWP to determine the scope and significant issues to be analyzed in the Draft EIS/EIR.

TABLE 7-4. SOURCE OF SCOPING COMMENTS

Number of Comments 132 Scoping Meeting Comments (oral and written) 59 Public 34 Agencies 2 Native American Tribes 4 Town Councils

Project Need and Objectives The public expressed concerns regarding the transmission of renewable energy to the Los Angeles basin and questioned the amount of renewable energy available to LADWP from the Tehachapi Mountains and Mojave Desert areas. Other utility companies, like San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) and Southern California Edison (SCE), have plans to use the same renewable resource areas. Some commenters suggested the City of Los Angeles generate renewable energy within the City and not in rural areas.

Alternatives A large number of comments provided alternatives to the Proposed Action. Many residents recommended the use of tubular steel mono poles, instead of lattice steel structures,

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-5 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION undergrounding of transmission lines, and use of only one tower-system (multi-circuits). Minor modifications to the Proposed Action and Alternatives that would minimize impacts to parcels were also suggested, such as a route along 110th Street connecting Segments F and H and modification around the community of Green Valley that would be located just over the ridge west of the community, along an existing fire road. Direct Current (DC) lines were recommended as an alternative to the proposed alternating current (AC), and the use of Niobium wire as an alternative to aluminum or copper wire was requested. Residents in the Project area also requested that the proposed transmission lines be located in designated utility corridors. Electrical generation within the City of Los Angeles was recommended to avoid additional transmission lines in rural communities. There was also an inquiry about upgrading the electrical transmission system to a 500 kV instead of 230 kV transmission system.

Human Environment Issues Air Quality The Air Quality Management District raised concerns regarding the potential air quality impacts from all phases of the Project, especially the construction of transmission lines and increased vehicular trips. Also of concern were wilderness areas, which are provided special consideration under the Clean Air Act. Pollution sources within 100 kilometers of wilderness areas should be summarized to help determine their potential impact. Additional summaries are needed where Project-related emissions are expected to occur within 10 km of a wilderness.

Cultural Resources Cultural resources have been reported at or near the Proposed Action, the Historic Cochems Ranch Homestead (Alternative H, since eliminated as an Alternative), R-Ranch in the unincorporated community of Leona Valley, and Old Ridge Route on Alternative 1. USFS also identified prehistoric habitation and historic mining sites on Alternatives 2 and 2a and prehistoric sites along Alternative 3 that could potentially be impacted.

EMF Many property owners were concerned about the increased EMF emissions, especially in corridors with existing high-voltage transmission lines.

Fire Safety Many residents in and adjacent to the Angeles National Forest were concerned that, during wildfires, additional above-ground transmission lines could adversely affect fire suppression efforts and compromise their safety. Concern was also expressed for fire suppression considerations, both on the ground and in the air, and for the Project’s possible impact on fire suppression flight paths and staging areas. They also noted that transmission lines have gone down in desert areas and started fires.

Land Use/Recreation and Wilderness Numerous property owners were concerned with the acquisition of private property, eminent domain, and the expansion of transmission line rights-of-way and easements. It was suggested that heavily used recreation areas and wildlife corridors be avoided and open space be preserved.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-6 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Recreational facilities and trails, including the Angeles National Forest, BLM-managed lands, State Parks, Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve, the eligible Wild and Scenic River, and Red Rock Canyon State Park, are all areas of concern. Another suggestion was that purchase of nature preserves be considered.

The agencies are concerned about the expansion of transmission line rights-of-way that may impact current and future projects and developments in the Project area. The Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve, Angeles National Forest, Pacific Crest Trail (PCT), and State, local, and city parks may be affected by the Proposed Action and its Alternatives. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) requested that the Project be consistent with its Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. USFS further expressed concern about the possibility of increased illegal off-highway vehicle use, and other unauthorized access, through the forest road systems due to increased access and improvements to existing roads.

Noise Property owners in close proximity to existing transmission lines, as well as PCT users, already experience noise. They are concerned that additional transmission lines would increase noise to unacceptable values. Construction and maintenance activities may also increase noise for residents and trail users.

Property Values Numerous property owners are concerned that the property values would decrease with additional transmission lines.

Public Health and Safety Residents are concerned about the possible impacts to public health and the environment, and access to emergency response and information. Also of concern is that the roads built to construct and maintain the transmission lines would invite illegal off-road activity along transmission easements that may pose a safety threat to adjacent residents.

Public Services and Utilities Comments recommended that effects of multiple siting of high-voltage transmission lines should be addressed. Coordination and sharing of transmission lines with other utility companies (like SCE and SDG&E) should be considered. Commenters also requested that new waste, hazardous waste generation, and increased traffic during construction be addressed in the Draft EIS/EIR.

Traffic The California Department of Transportation and City of Lancaster are concerned about the potential for encroachment upon State transportation facilities and local roads. The Department of Public Works was concerned with the expected increase in traffic due to construction activities in the area.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-7 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Visual Resources A significant concern from property owners in the Project area were visual impacts to homes, communities, and business. Also of concern were impacts to public spaces like parks, trails, the Angeles National Forest, PCT, Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve, and Red Rock Canyon State Park. A commenter was concerned that the additional lighting from the towers and turbines1 would adversely affect astronomy clubs. USFS expressed concern about possible impacts to Highway 2, which is a Scenic Byway. The agency further stated the desire for micro- pile construction.

Natural Environment Issues Biological Resources Significant concerns from many agencies, organizations, and the public were raised regarding the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to rare, threatened, endangered and special- status species and habitats. Of particular concern were wildlife movements and migration paths such as the San Andreas Rift Zone Significant Ecological Area (SEA). USFS has considerable concern for Riparian Conservation Areas throughout the forest lands, the potential impacts of long-term maintenance plans for the access roads on these and other sensitive areas, and potential spread of invasive plant species (including noxious weeds) during the construction process of the Project. BLM expressed some concern regarding potential increased raptor predation of sensitive species due to the use of lattice towers.

Cumulative Impacts A number of agencies were concerned about the cumulative impacts of past, present and future projects in the Project area, such as transmission line projects, renewable energy projects, air force base, highways, and pipelines. Cumulative impacts to biological resources and parks would also be addressed.

Earth Resources USFS and BLM have both expressed concern with potential impacts on paleontological and mineralogical resources throughout the Project area, including sedimentary rocks on the Ridge Route Basin and fossils along the Garlock Fault.

Hydrology and Water Quality The Regional Water Quality Control Board raised concerns regarding stormwater run-off prevention and impacts to drainages, wetlands, Waters of the State, Waters of the U.S., and blue- line (intermittent and ephemeral) streams. The California Department of Fish and Game opposed elimination of watercourses and/or the canalization of natural and manmade drainages or conversion of subsurface drains. Segment H, since eliminated as an Alternative, would have been located in a drainage basin/area of the Amargosa and watershed of the San Andreas (Leona) Rift Zone. SCAG encourages “watershed management” programs and strategies and water reclamation. BLM was concerned about grading and sub-grading roads for maintenance causing a channeling effect for water direction by building up berms.

1 A comment was received regarding wind turbines; however, no turbines are proposed as part of the Project.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-8 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Other Comments Property owners in the Project area had a number of suggestions. The Cities of Lancaster, Antelope Acres, Agua Dulce, and Saugus requested meetings in their communities. An extension of the public comment and review period was recommended. Increased notification to property owners to a half mile of the Proposed Action and Alternatives was also requested. A publication in the Mountain Yodeler was suggested to inform residents in the Project area. To gain more public interest for the Project, it was suggested that public mailings contain captions (i.e. “in your backyard”) and pictures of transmission line towers.

7.4 INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS

LADWP conducted five informational public meetings from February 17 through 26, 2009 to update the public on scoping results, study results, and the evaluation of alternative transmission line routes. See Table 7-5 for dates, locations, attendance, and number of comments received. All meetings were conducted in an “open house” format to allow participants to attend any time between 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. A brief video presentation was shown by the Project team at 7 p.m., followed by a general question and answer session.

TABLE 7-5. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS

Number of People Number of Comments Date Location Signed In Written Oral Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union School Feb. 17, 2009 28 5 11 16633 Elizabeth Lake Road, Lake Hughes Mojave Veterans Building Feb. 18, 2009 8 7 1 15580 “O” Street, Mojave Agua Dulce Elementary School Feb. 24, 2009 20 4 27 11311 W. Frascati Street, Agua Dulce Mountainview School Feb. 25, 2009 8 6 12 22201 W. Cypress Place, Saugus Leona Valley Community Center Feb. 27, 2009 53 12 31 8367 Elizabeth Lake Road, Leona Valley TOTAL 117 34 82

7.4.1 NOTIFICATION Newsletters In December 2008, approximately 6,300 newsletters (Newsletter #2) were distributed to agency representatives, elected officials, Native American Tribes, interested parties and organizations, and property owners within 500 feet of both sides of the Proposed Action and preliminary Alternatives in Los Angeles and Kern Counties. Newsletter #2 provided a summary about the scoping process, environmental studies being conducted, and upcoming public involvement opportunities.

In February 2008, Newsletter #3 (postcard) announced the informational public meetings. Over 6,300 postcards and 600 electronic copies were mailed to agency representatives, elected officials, Native American Tribes, interested parties and organizations, and property owners

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-9 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION within 500 feet of both sides of the Proposed Action and preliminary Alternatives in Los Angeles and Kern Counties.

Newspaper Advertisements The informational public meetings were announced in thirteen local newspapers. The advertisements provided a brief Project description and meeting locations, times, and dates, and encouraged the public to attend the meetings. A Spanish translation of the advertisement was published in La Opinion newspaper.

TABLE 7-6. NEWSPAPERS UTILIZED FOR ADVERTISEMENT OF THE INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS.

Newspaper Area Covered Publication Date Los Angeles Times Los Angeles communities Feb. 2, 2009 Antelope Valley Press Antelope Valley Feb. 2, 2009 The Signal Santa Clarita Feb. 2, 2009 Jan. 31,2009 Agua Dulce/Acton Country Journal Agua Dulce/Acton Feb. 7, 2009 Jan. 29, 2009 Mojave Desert News California City Feb. 5, 2009 Ridgecrest Daily Independent Mojave to Olancha Feb. 3 & 10, 2009 News Review Ridgecrest, China Lake and Inyokern Feb. 4, 2009 La Opinion (Spanish) Los Angeles communities Feb. 2, 2009 Mountain Yodeler Elizabeth Lakes, Green Valley, Leona Valley Feb 2009 Cherry Chapters: the Leona Valley Newsletter Leona Valley Feb 2009 Acton/Agua Dulce News Acton/Agua Dulce area Feb. 9, 2009 Rosamond News Rosamond/Kern County Area Feb. 9, 2009 Lake Los Angeles News Lake Los Angeles Area Feb. 9, 2009

Other Notification LADWP also updated the Project website (http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge) and toll-free Project hotline with the informational public meeting information, as well as publishing a press release on February 17, 2009.

7.4.2 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED AFTER SCOPING AND PRIOR TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE DRAFT EIS/EIR One hundred fifty-nine comments were received from July 2008 to March 2009 in a number of ways—during the informational public meetings and via Project hotline, e-mail, and mail. Below is a summary of the issues and comments that were raised by the public and agencies and that was added to the Project record.

Alternatives Many of the same alternatives that were suggested during the scoping period were also expressed at the informational public meetings, such as in-basin generation of renewable resources, utilization of a 500 kV transmission line system, multi-circuit towers, tubular steel poles, and undergrounding. In addition to those alternatives, the public also suggested:

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-10 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

· Consideration of moving the 110th Street Modification to 115th Street so that it follows the SCE Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project’s proposed alignments through the area. · Reconsideration of Segment D for further study in the Draft EIS/EIR (especially residents in the unincorporated communities of Green Valley, Elizabeth Lakes, Leona Valley and Agua Dulce.)

Human Environment Issues Cultural Resources The public wanted possible impacts to La Casa de Miguel Ortiz (an adobe home built in the late 1800s that was once part of Edward Beale’s Rancho La Liebre) and Native Chumash resources in the Project area to be considered.

Fire Safety Many residents in and adjacent to the Angeles National Forest expressed concern for fire suppression operations, both on the ground and in the air, and the Project’s possible impact on fire suppression flight paths, staging areas, and the Bouquet Canyon Reservoir. The County of Los Angeles Fire Department requested that potential impacts to fuel modification for Fire Zone 4 be addressed in the Draft EIS/EIR.

Land Use/Recreation and Wilderness A majority of the commenters raised questions regarding the acquisition of private property, eminent domain, and the expansion of transmission line rights-of-way and easements. Residents were concerned about impacts to residences, agricultural farms, communities, and rural areas being traversed by transmission lines. Comments also addressed the potential impacts of the Proposed Action on current and future projects and developments in the Project area.

Property Values Property owners inquired about the affect additional transmission lines may have on property values.

Public Services, Health and Safety Residents are inquired about the adequacy of police and fire services and the potential for an increased risk of cancer along transmission lines, and requested that these issues be evaluated in the environmental analysis.

Socioeconomics Residents inquired if the Project would increase jobs and future development in Kern County and in the Project area.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-11 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Traffic Residents in the Project area inquired about the potential for increased traffic along Agua Dulce Road and Sierra Highway and private service roads in Haskell Canyon, and requested that the issue be analyzed in the Draft EIS/EIR.

Visual Resources Many unincorporated communities, such as Elizabeth Lake, Green Valley, Leona Valley, Agua Dulce, and Holiday Valley Estates, were concerned about visual impacts to their homes, communities, and businesses. They inquired about impacts to Johnson Hill, San Francisquito Creek, and Mt. Pinos.

Natural Environment Issues Biological Resources The public inquired about the potential avian risk of electrocution from towers and impacts to migratory birds, wildlife, and raptor nests and owls. Some areas of concern were Lake Elizabeth, riparian areas along San Francisquito Creek, and Leona Valley.

Hydrology and Water Quality A property owner was concerned about possible impacts to an existing well in close proximity to the existing transmission lines. Residents in the Project area requested that impacts to watersheds and marshes, San Francisquito Creek, and Lake Elizabeth and environs be considered.

Cumulative Impacts Residents inquired about cumulative impacts from transmission lines and renewable resource developments in the Project area and segmentation of transmission line projects. Residents questioned if LADWP would be proposing additional transmission lines in the near future.

Other Comments It was suggested that the public notices be advertised in adjudicated newspapers in the Project area, such as the Acton and Agua Dulce News, and Vanguard News. As mitigation for the Proposed Action, it was suggested that LADWP purchase an environmental mitigation bank in the Project area.

7.5 AGENCY CONTACTS

In compliance with NEPA procedures 40 CFR 1506.6 (a), 40 CFR 1501.7(a)(1), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15129, Table 7-7 below identifies federal, State, or local agencies, other organizations, and private individuals contacted in preparation of the Draft EIS/EIR and Final EIS/EIR.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-12 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

1 TABLE 7-7. AGENCY CONTACT SUMMARY FIRST AGENCY DEPARTMENT LAST NAME TITLE NAME Federal Agencies USDI Bureau of Land Management Ridgecrest Field Office Villalobos Hector Field Office Manager USDI Bureau of Land Management Ridgecrest Field Office Gum Linn Supervisory Geologist USDI Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office Elser Lynnette NEPA Coordinator USDI Bureau of Land Management Ridgecrest Field Office Rodriguez Paul Realty Specialist USDA Forest Service Angeles National Forest Dumpis Martin Deputy Forest Supervisor USDA Forest Service Angeles National Forest Hawkins Robert Project Manager USDA Forest Service Angeles National Forest Seastrand Justin Special Use Coordinator USDA Forest Service Angeles National Forest Contreras Thomas A. Forest Supervisor Angeles National Forest, Santa Clara USDA Forest Service Blount Bob District Ranger Mojave Rivers Ranger District U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Office Snyder-Velto Della Fire Ecologist Department of Defense Edwards Air Force Base Rigol Hank Sustainability Officer Col. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District Magness, IV District Commander Thomas H. Federal Aviation Administration Western-Pacific Region Withycombe William C. Regional Administrator Federal Highway Administration Resource Office Randall Lisa Planning Technical Service Team Leader Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Office of Federal Agency Programs Reid Nelson Director State Agencies California Energy Commission Bartridge Jim California Department of Transportation District 6 Bowen Carrie Environmental Division Chief California Department of Transportation District 7 Kosinski Ron Environmental Planning District Director California Department of Conservation Division of Land Resources Protection Leahy Brian R. Assistant Director California Department of Fish and Game Bailey Craig Environmental Scientist California Department of Fish and Game South Coast Region Wilson Erinn Environmental Scientist California Native American Heritage Commission Myers Larry Executive Secretary Assistant Division Chief, Environmental California State Lands Brand Marina Planning Deputy Director, Water Resources California Department of Water Resources Johns Jerry Planning & Management California Public Utilities Commission Barnsdale Andrew Environmental Project Manager California Department of Forestry and Fire Snyder Bill Deputy Director, Resource Management Protection

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-13 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

FIRST AGENCY DEPARTMENT LAST NAME TITLE NAME California Department of Parks and Recreation Tehachapi District Coleman Ruth Director State Historic Preservation Office Wayne Donaldson Regional Agencies Southern California Association of Governments Planning and Policy Department Gosnell Jim Deputy Executive Director Kern Council of Governments Brummett Ronald Executive director Kern Council of Governments Hildebrand Darrel Assistant Director Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Heaston Eldon Executive Director South Coast Air Quality Management District Chang Elaine C. Deputy Executive Officer Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board Mitton Cindi Senior Water Resources Control Engineer Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Carrillo Valarie 401 Certification Board County Agencies Kern County Kern County Planning Department James Ted Director Kern County Planning Department Oviat Lorelei H. Division Chief Kern County Roads Department Pope Craig M. Road Commissioner Kern County Office of Education Reider Dr. Larry Superintendent Kern County Department of Parks and Recreation Lerude Robert Director County Agencies L.A. County Los Angeles County Office of Education Robles Darline P. Superintendent County of Los Angeles Department of Parks and Recreation Guiney Russ Director Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Wolfe Donald L. Director/Road Commissioner Los Angeles County Fire Department Todd John R. Chief, Forestry Division Los Angeles County Fire Department Cosey Gerald Assistant Fire Chief Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning McClendon Bruce Planning Director City/Local Agencies (Kern County) City of California City Planning Terneuzen Roger Commissioner Mojave Unified School District Phelps Larry Superintendent Southern Kern Unified School District Van Norman Rodney Superintendent City/Local Agencies (L.A. County) Los Angeles Department of City Planning Howe Con Director Los Angeles Department of City Planning Sutton Robert A. Deputy Director

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-14 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

FIRST AGENCY DEPARTMENT LAST NAME TITLE NAME Los Angeles Department of City Planning Hamilton Gordon Deputy Director Los Angeles Department of City Planning Eberhard Franklin P. Deputy Director City of Santa Clarita Planning Follstal Fred L. Senior Planner City of Santa Clarita Community Development Brotzman Paul Director City of Santa Clarita Planning Pulskamp Kenneth City Manager City of Lancaster Swain Jocelyn Assistant Planner City of Palmdale Planning Laurie Lile Laurie Director City of Palmdale Planning Carrillo Juan Assistant Planner City of Lancaster Planning Commissioner Macpherson Bruce Commissioner City of Lancaster Community Development Ludicke Brian Director City of Lancaster La Sala Robert City Manager City of Lancaster Planning Swain Jocelyn Associate Planner Green Valley County Water District Vernitti Laura Lancaster Cemetery District Little Barbara Newhall County Water District Russell Karin J. Quartz Hill Water District Reed Chad West Valley County Water District Jimenez Sharon Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District Rodrigues Steve Director Newhall Ranch High country Recreation and Hensley Larry Conservation Authority Los Angeles World Airports Day Kim Los Angeles City-County Native American Indian Andrade Ron Commission Antelope Valley Healthcare District Wong Les Antelope Valley Mosquito and Vector Control Kratz Cei District Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency Fuller Russel E. Castaic Lake Water Agency Ward Marcia

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-15 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-16 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

7.5.1 ELECTED OFFICIAL CONTACTS The elected officials listed below were sent a certified copy of the NOP for review and comment. LADWP’s Legislative Affairs group also sent out letters to elected officials within the Project area, prior to the mailings of the NOP and Newsletters, to serve as an additional advance notification for the forthcoming NOP, Newsletters and Scoping Meetings. The letters also offered personal meetings with each representative, if they desired.

During the scoping period, LADWP’s Legislative Affairs group also sent letters to Town Councils within the Project area offering personal meetings with each group or representative. Four Town Councils requested briefings, and LADWP representatives attended the meetings. In March 2009, LADWP’s Legislative Affairs group sent update letters to the 28 Town Councils, homeowners associations, City Agencies, and other groups listed below offering to provide updates on the BRRTP at their regular standing meetings.

TABLE 7-8. ELECTED OFFICIAL CONTACTS

Organization First Name Last Name Title U.S. House of Representatives Howard “Buck“ McKeon Congressman U.S. House of Representatives Kevin McCarthy Congressman U.S. House of Representatives, District 22 Bill Thomas United States Senate Dianne Feinstein Senator California Assembly Sharon Runner Assemblyperson California Assembly Cameron Smyth Assemblyperson California Assembly Audra Strickland Assemblyperson California State Senate George Runner Los Angeles County Supervisor David Antonovich City of California City David Evans Mayor City of Santa Clarita Bob Kellar Mayor Mayor Pro Tem City Of Ridgecrest Steven Morgan Acton Town Council Michael Hughes President Agua Dulce Town Council Don Henry President Antelope Acres Town Council Vicki Nelson President Association of Rural Town Councils Wayne Argo Castaic Area Town Council Robert Kelly President Green Valley Town Council Dale Kimmel President Juniper Hills Town Council Vance Pomeroy President Lake Los Angeles Town Council Scott Lezak President Lakes Town Council James Walker President Leona Valley Town Council Suzy Love President Littlerock Town Council Jude Aoun President Littlerock Town Council Bill Guild President Mojave Town Council Bill Dever President Quartz Hill Town Council Loretta Berry President Quartz Hill Town Council Randy Wolfe President Roosevelt Town Council Barbara Firsick President Sun Village Town Council James Brooks President Three Points/Liebre Mountain Town Council Larry L. Myers President West Ranch Town Council Ron Mechsner President

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-17 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

LADWP, with assistance from USFS and BLM, attended the following town council meetings listed in Table 7-9 below.

TABLE 7-9. TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGS Association of Rural Town Councils June 26, 2008 July 14, 2008 Leona Valley Town Council May 11, 2009 Canyon Country Advisory Committee May 20, 2009 West Ranch Town Council June 3, 2009 July 12, 2008 Lakes Town Council June 6, 2009 June 10, 2009 Green Valley Town Council May 12, 2010 August 11, 2010 Quartz Hill Town Council June 16, 2009 June 18, 2008 Antelope Acres Town Council June 17, 2009

7.6 FORMAL CONSULTATION

7.6.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Section 7(a)(2) of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 USC 1536(a)(2), requires every federal agency, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary of the Interior, to ensure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. A federal agency will use a Biological Assessment (BA) to determine whether formal consultation is required.

A BA was prepared to address the ESA and California State Endangered Species Act and the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCPA) consultation requirements of federal and State agencies. In accordance with the BA requirements, the document focuses on issues specific to the Federal Agency Preferred Alternative (the Proposed Action). The BA is included as Appendix H to this Final EIS/EIR.

In April 2008, a letter was sent to the USFWS requesting lists of all species that are listed, proposed, or candidates for listing as threatened or endangered under the ESA that could occur within the Project area. The USFWS provided a list of species fulfilling the requirements under Section 7(c) of the ESA. In compliance with 50 CFR Part 402 regulations, federal agencies must review their actions and determine whether the action may affect federally listed species or designated critical habitat (50 CFR 402.14; 50 CFR 402.10).

USFS, BLM, and USFWS conducted a number of in-person meetings (some members attended via conference call) to discuss the requirements of the Section 7 Consultation, the Biological Assessment, biological surveys, the Biological Resources Technical Report, and the schedule.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-18 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

7.6.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended) requires federal agencies to evaluate the effects of federal undertakings on historical, archaeological, and cultural resources, and to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) concerning potential effects of federal actions on historic properties. Before federal funds are approved for a particular project or prior to the issuance of any license, the effect of the project on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register must be evaluated.

In accordance with federal regulations implementing the NHPA (36 CFR Part 800), the USFS sent a letter to the SHPO on February 5, 2009, requesting consultation for the BRRTP. The letter also requested concurrence with a determination of the area of potential effects (APE) as defined at 36 CFR 800.16(d).

The ANF, BLM, and California SHPO have prepared a Programmatic Agreement (PA) for BRRTP that identifies procedures for identifying historical, archaeological, and cultural resources; evaluating their eligibility to the National Register; assessing effects; and implementing measures to avoid or mitigate adverse effects. On August 4, 2009, the ANF inquired about the ACHP’s willingness to participate in the PA per 36 CFR 800.6(a)(1)(iii). In a letter dated September 23, 2009, the ACHP elected not to participate in development of the PA. The Final PA is included as Appendix O to this Final EIS/EIR.

Tribal Consultation Various federal statutes and regulations, including NEPA and the NHPA, require that agencies consult with American Indians. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, was issued in 2000 in order to establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Tribal officials in the development of federal policies that have Tribal implications, to strengthen the United States government-to-government relationships with Indian Tribes, and to reduce the imposition of unfunded mandates upon Indian Tribes.

Regulations for Section 106 require that federal agencies identify potentially affected Indian Tribes that might have knowledge of sites of religious and cultural significance in the APE (36 CFR 800.3(f)(2)). If any such properties exist, the regulations require that federal agencies invite Indian Tribes to participate in the Section 106 process as consulting parties. For BRRTP, the USFS is responsible for Section 106 consultation with Native American Tribes.

In spring 2008, the CEQA Notice of Preparation (NOP) for BRRTP was sent to 12 Native American Tribes, and comments from two Tribes were received during the scoping process for the Draft EIS/EIR (see Sections 7.2.2 and 7.2.5). These were the Seven Feathers Corporation/San Fernando Band of Mission Indians and the Tribal Elders Council of the Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians. In addition, a list of Tribes and Most Likely Descendents (MLDs) was received from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in June 2008.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-19 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

As required by the NHPA (36 CFR 800.2(c)(2); 36 CFR 800.3(f)(2); 36 CFR 800.14(b)(2); and 36 CFR 800.14(f)), the USFS has consulted the federally recognized San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, and Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians/Tribal Elders Council, as well as the Gabrieliño Group, Seven Feathers Corp/San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, Owl Clan Consultants and other interested parties (per 36 CFR 800.2(c)(5)).

Several Tribes responded to initial consultation letters sent by the USFS describing the proposed Project and requesting Tribal participation in the development of the PA. Concerns raised by federally recognized Tribes and non-recognized Native American groups and individuals included:

· On May 12, 2008, the Seven Feathers Corporation/San Fernando Band of Mission Indians provided information regarding the availability of monitors during the construction phase of the Project. Additional concerns were expressed in October 2008. · On June 9, 2008, the Morongo Band of Mission Indians commented to the ANF on aspects of the Project and requested updates as the project moves forward. · On June 3, 2009, The Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians/Tribal Elders Council requested that they be informed of the undertaking and to suggest that a Native American monitor be present during ground disturbing activities. Once it was confirmed that local Tribes had been contacted regarding BRRTP, the Santa Ynez Band asked to be removed from further consultation. · On June 30, 2009, the Owl Clan Consultants expressed concern about the Project and requested updates for the duration of the Project. · The Chairperson of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians was contacted on September 24, 2009. To date, he has not responded. However, several other Tribal representatives expressed interest in the Project or requested the presence of a Native American representative during construction monitoring. · On September 30, 2009, a representative of the Gabrieliño Group expressed interest in the Project and requested updates as the Project moved forward. · On November 4, 2011, a letter was received from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians stating that they had no concerns regarding the Project.

In addition to the consultation letters sent by the ANF, the agency’s Tribal Liaison also held a meeting on April 18, 2009, for all members of local Native American Tribes to discuss a variety of issues, including BRRTP. In April 2012, the draft PA was submitted for formal review by SHPO staff. At the same time it was submitted to the SHPO, the draft PA was provided to participating Tribes, Native American contacts listed by the NAHC, and other interested Native American organizations, groups, and individuals for comment.

7.7 OTHER COORDINATION EFFORTS

7.7.1 ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION LINES CONSISTENCY MEETINGS A number of transmission line projects were proposed on the Angeles National Forest. The USFS requested that CPUC, LADWP, SCE, and any additional utility companies conduct working group meetings to evaluate environmental and application processing consistency

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-20 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION among proposed transmission line projects crossing National Forest System lands. The consistency meetings were held on April 16, 2008, and May 13, 2009, and USFS distributed agendas, facilitated the meetings, and communicated with utility companies and their consultants.

7.8 PUBLIC REVIEW OF DRAFT EIS/EIR

7.8.1 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15085, the Notice of Completion (NOC) was filed with the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research as soon as the Draft EIR was completed. LADWP also provided public notice of availability of the Draft EIR at the same time it sent the NOC to the State Clearinghouse (CEQA Guidelines Section 15087). In addition to the information disclosed in the NOC, the notice of availability also included details for the scheduled public meetings (dates, times, and places); a list of significant environmental effects; and whether the Project site is listed under Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (hazardous waste facilities).

7.8.2 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY In compliance with NEPA (40 CFR 1506.6(b)(2)), a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIS/EIR was published on August 26, 2011, in the Federal Register, thus beginning the public comment period.

7.8.3 PUBLIC REVIEW In accordance with CEQA and NEPA requirements, the Draft EIS/EIR was circulated for public and agency review and comment for a 60-day period following the publication of the NOA of the Draft EIS/EIR by the EPA and filing of the NOC with the California State Clearinghouse. During the review period, five public meetings were held in the unincorporated communities of Mojave, Lake Hughes, Leona Valley, and Agua Dulce and the City of Santa Clarita to receive public input on the Draft EIS/EIR.

Comments received at the meetings are addressed in this Final EIS/EIR in Appendix R. Comments were accepted at the public meetings, on the Project phone line, by fax, email, interactive GIS website, and by writing to the BRRTP Project Team.

Draft EIS/EIR Notification The Project mailing list contains 8,057 entries and includes agencies, elected officials, Native American Tribes, property owners within 500 feet of the Proposed Action and Alternative routes, and interested individuals and organizations. Everyone on the mailing list was sent a copy of the NOA notifying them of the availability of the Draft EIS/EIR, and dates, times, and locations of the public meetings. The NOA was also emailed to the 630 addresses on the BRRTP email mailing list comprising individuals who requested to be added to this list. The Project website was updated with an electronic copy of the document and appendices. Newspaper advertisements also announced the availability of the Draft EIS/EIR.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-21 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Document Repository Sites Both NEPA (40 CFR 1506.6(f)) and CEQA Guidelines (Section 15087(c)(5) and Section 15087(g)) require lead agencies to make project documents available to the public for review. NEPA and CEQA documents prepared as part of the BRRTP, which include the Draft EIS/EIR and appendices, were made available at the public repository sites listed in Table 7-11 and on the Project website (http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge).

TABLE 7-11. DOCUMENT REPOSITORY SITES

Repository Site Address Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 111 N. Hope Street, Room 1044, Los Angeles, CA 90012 Angeles National Forest, Supervisor’s Office 701 N. Santa Anita Ave., Arcadia, CA 91006 BLM, Ridgecrest Field Office 300 S. Richmond Road, Ridgecrest, CA 93555 Mojave Public Library 16916 State Highway 14 # D2, Mojave, CA 93501 Quartz Hill Library 42018 N. 50th St. W., Quartz Hill, CA 93536 Palmdale City Library 700 East Palmdale Blvd., Palmdale, CA 93550 Valencia Library 23743 W. Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Acton-Agua Dulce Library 33792 Crown Valley Rd. Acton, CA 93510 Tehachapi Branch 1001 West Tehachapi Blvd., Suite A-400 Tehachapi, CA 93561

7.8.4 DRAFT EIS/EIR DISTRIBUTION LIST The distribution list for copies of the Draft EIS/EIR can be found at http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge. The distribution list for copies of this Final EIS/EIR is found in Appendix P of this Final EIS/EIR.

7.8.5 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIS/EIR The sixty-day formal public review period for the Draft EIS/EIR extended from August 26, 2011, to October 25, 2011. Opportunities to submit comments during the review period were provided via mail, Project email, web-based GIS portal, Project phone hotline, and through a series of five public meetings conducted throughout the Project area. Comments were received from agencies, Tribes, organizations, and individuals via all comment modes provided. Four late comment letters and one email were received from agencies and a Tribe during the three weeks following the close of the public review period; these sets of comments have been considered and are included in the comment totals. Additional comments from individuals and organizations received after the close of the public review period were treated as normal correspondence outside of the NEPA and CEQA processes and responded to as appropriate; they are not included in comment totals. See Table 7-12 for a summary of the sources, modes, and totals of sets of comments received. Duplicated sets of comments, i.e., identical sets of comments sent from a single source multiple times, were only counted once.

TABLE 7-12. SOURCES, MODES, AND TOTALS OF DRAFT EIS/EIR COMMENTS Comment Source Submission Mode Submission Count Submission Total Public Meetings 30 GIS Station 21 Informal Oral 7 Comment Form 2

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-22 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Comment Source Submission Mode Submission Count Submission Total Agencies, Tribes, and Organizations* 31 Letter 26 Project Email 5 Individuals** 57 Letter 50 Project Email 1 Project Hotline 5 Comment Form (mailed) 1 Combined Total 118 *Five agencies emailed copies of their comment letters: Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, Agua Dulce Town Council, California Department of Water Resources, County of Los Angeles Department of Parks and Recreation, and South Coast Air Quality Management District. ** One individual emailed a copy of their comment letter: Wright, G. & M.

Comments Received at Public Meetings LADWP conducted five public meetings from September 20 through September 29, 2011, during the review period for the Draft EIS/EIR to inform the public about the Draft EIS/EIR document and solicit comments. See Table 7-13 for dates, locations and attendance at the meetings. All meetings were conducted in an “open house” format to allow participants to attend any time between 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. A brief video presentation was shown by the Project team at 7 p.m., followed by a general question and answer session. Two GIS comment stations staffed by GIS technicians were available at each meeting for individuals to review maps of the Project area and provide site specific comments.

TABLE 7-13. PUBLIC MEETINGS DURING THE REVIEW OF THE DRAFT EIS/EIR

Number of Date Location people signed in Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union School Tuesday, September 20, 2011 16633 Elizabeth Lake Road 21 Lake Hughes, CA 93532 Mojave Veterans Building Wednesday, September 21, 2011 15580 O Street 9 Mojave, CA 93501 Agua Dulce Elementary School Tuesday, September 27, 2011 11311 W. Frascati Street 6 Agua Dulce, CA 91390 Santa Clarita Activity Center Wednesday, September 28, 2011 20880 Centre Pointe Parkway 9 Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Leona Valley Elementary Thursday, September 29, 2011 9063 West Leona Avenue 29 Leona Valley, CA 93551 Totals 74

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-23 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Notification Newsletters Public meeting locations, dates, and times were included in the NOA, which was distributed in August 2011 to everyone on the BRRTP mailing list and email mailing list. These mailing lists included agency representatives, elected officials, Native American Tribes, interested individuals, parties and organizations, and property owners within 500 feet of both sides of the Proposed Action and Alternatives.

Newspaper Advertisements The NOA was published in thirteen local newspapers. A Spanish translation of the advertisement was published in La Opinion newspaper. See Table 7-14 for a complete list of all publications.

TABLE 7-14. NEWSPAPERS UTILIZED FOR ADVERTISEMENT OF THE NOA AND PUBLIC MEETINGS.

Newspaper Area Covered Publication Date Los Angeles Times Los Angeles communities 8/12/11, 9/5/11 Antelope Valley Press Antelope Valley 8/12/11, 9/5/11 The Signal Santa Clarita 8/12/11, 9/5/11 Agua Dulce/Acton Country Journal Agua Dulce/Acton 8/13/11, 9/3/11 Mojave Desert News California City 8/25/11, 9/8/11 Ridgecrest Daily Independent Mojave to Olancha 8/18/11, 9/8/11 News Review Ridgecrest, China Lake and Inyokern 8/17/11, 9/7/11 La Opinion Los Angeles communities 8/15/11, 9/5/11 Mountain Yodeler Elizabeth Lake, Green Valley, Leona Valley 9/1/11 Cherry Chapters: the Leona Valley Newsletter Leona Valley 9/9/11 Acton/Agua Dulce News Acton/Agua Dulce area 8/22/11, 9/5/11 Rosamond News Rosamond/Kern County Area 8/22/11, 9/5/11 Lake Los Angeles News Lake Los Angeles Area 8/22/11, 9/5/11

Other Notification LADWP also updated the Project website (http://www.ladwp.com/barrenridge) and toll-free Project hotline with the public meeting information.

Comments A total of 33 sets of comments were received at the public meetings through GIS stations, informal oral comments during the question and answer session, and comment forms. See Table 7-15 for a list of individual commenters. Copies of each substantive comment and the response from the lead agencies is provided in Appendix R, Section 1. A summary of issues raised in the comments received is provided in Section 7.8.6 below.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-24 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

TABLE 7-15. COMMENTS RECEIVED AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS Commenter Submission Mode Lake Hughes Ajax, D. GIS (2 comments) Charlton, J. Comment Form Kevwhich, C. Comment Form Kimmel, D. GIS Palmer, F. GIS Troupe, P. GIS Mojave Brewer-Anderson, A. Informal Oral Edgeworth, J. GIS and Informal Oral Agua Dulce Godde, J. GIS (2 comments) Johnson, M. Informal Oral Smith, L. Informal Oral Santa Clarita Bloch, H. GIS Finetti, A. GIS and Informal Oral Leona Valley Benoit, A. Informal Oral Brownfield, R. GIS Dahl, D. and K. GIS Elliot, W. GIS and Informal Oral Finetti Informal Oral Fuller, P. GIS Green, R. and D. GIS Griggs, D. and C. GIS (2 comments) Kennedy Informal Oral Kimmel, D. GIS Pearcy Informal Oral Reitano, R. Informal Oral Upton-Knittle, A. and L. GIS (2 comments) Wright, G. and M. GIS

Comments Received from Agencies, Tribes and Organizations A total of 26 sets of comments were received from agencies, Tribes, and organizations on the Draft EIS/EIR. Four of the sets of comments were received after the close of the formal public review period: · California Department of Fish and Game letter on October 27, 2011; · State Water Resources Control Board letter on October 31, 2011; · California Department of Water Resources letter on November 7, 2011; and · Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians letter on November 7, 2011.

See Table 7-16 for a complete list of agencies that submitted comments on the Draft EIS/EIR. Copies of each substantive comment and the response from the lead agencies is provided in Appendix R, Section 2. A summary of issues raised in the comments received is provided in Section 7.8.6 below.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-25 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

TABLE 7-16. COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM AGENCIES, TRIBES AND ORGANIZATIONS

Commenter Submission Mode Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Letter Agua Dulce Town Council Letter Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Letter California Department of Fish and Game Letter California Department of Water Resources 3 Letters California State Water Resources Control Board Letter Center for Biological Diversity Letter City of Palmdale Letter County of Kern, Roads Department Letter County of Los Angeles, Department of Parks and Recreation Letter County of Los Angeles, Department of Regional Planning Letter County of Los Angeles, Fire Department Letter Desert and Mountain Conservation Authority Letter Green Valley Town Council 2 Letters Leona Valley Town Council 2 Letter Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce Letter Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Letter Native American Heritage Commission Letter South Coast Air Quality Management District Letter Southern California Edison Letter United States Environmental Protection Agency Letter United States Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance Letter

Four agencies sent five Project-related inquiries to the Project email during the public review period that were responded to by email: City of Santa Clarita, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, LA County Fire Department, and Leona Valley Town Council (two emails). These emails did not contain substantive comments on the Draft EIS/EIR and are not included.

Comments Received from Individuals A total of 57 sets of comments were received from individuals on the Draft EIS/EIR. See Table 7-17 for a complete list of individuals who submitted comments on the Draft EIS/EIR. Copies of each substantive comment and the response from the lead agencies is provided in Appendix R, Section 3. A summary of issues raised in the comments received is provided in Section 7.8.6 below.

TABLE 7-17. COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM INDIVIDUALS Commenter Submission Mode Commenter Submission Mode Ajax, D. Letter Klegman, D. Letter Ambrose, N. Letter Lawrence, C. Project Hotline Anderson, K. Letter Lye, J. R. Letter Bale, L. Letter Matthews, S. Letter Ball, W. Letter McConnell, B.L. Letter Beeler, J. Letter McConnell, G. Letter Beeler, J. Letter McCracken, M. Letter Bistline, A. Letter Millard, D. Letter Bistline, F. Letter Miller, W. B. Letter Block, H. Project Hotline Mobin, H. Project Hotline Brar, S. Letter Monedleman, M. Project Hotline

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-26 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Commenter Submission Mode Commenter Submission Mode Brownfield, B. Letter Mooradian, W. Project Hotline Brownfield, R. Letter Palmer, F. Comment Form C, D. Letter Piper, T. Letter Case, R. B. Letter Randles, G. Letter Clark, J. Letter Rapella, B. Letter Cremeans, C. Letter Robertson, A. Letter Cremeans, G. Letter Steele, M. J. Letter Gallagher, M. D. Letter Tilch, J 2 letters Giron, L. Letter Trowell, C. Letter Given, R. Letter Tuszynski, J. Email Goetschel, L. Letter Waidner, B. and P. 2 letters Hatton, J. Letter Ward, J. Letter Irwin, S. Letter Wong, J. Letter Jacques, D. Letter Wong, P. Letter Johnson, M. Letter Wright G. Letter Kimmel, D. Letter Wright G. and M Letter Kimmel, J. Letter

Seven individuals sent eight Project-related inquiries to the Project email during the public review period that were responded to by email: JG; Flores, J.; Dahl, D. (two emails); Randall, J.; Mazziotti, P.; Bloch, H.; and Johnson, M. These emails did not contain substantive comments on the Draft EIS/EIR and are not included.

7.8.6 ISSUES RAISED IN COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIS/EIR This section contains a summary of the issues raised by commenters on the Draft EIS/EIR during the formal public review period and through November 2011. Please refer to Appendix R for a complete set of all substantive comments received and their responses by the lead agencies. As noted in individual responses, the Final EIS/EIR has been revised where appropriate in response to comments received. All changes made to the text of the Draft EIS/EIR are documented in Chapter 12, Changes Between the Draft and the Final EIS/EIR, of this Final EIS/EIR.

Project Need and Objectives Commenters suggested that a discussion detailing energy conservation and generation capacity within LADWP’s service area is necessary to show that capacity has been exhausted. Inter- agency coordination was recommended to ensure renewable energy projects connect to the proposed Project to ensure purpose and need are met. It was also suggested that application processes for connection permits are discussed in the Final EIS/EIR. Other comments stated that the lead agencies’ purpose and need were too narrowly drawn to the proposed Project.

Alternatives Alternative technologies, such as distributed generation, were suggested. Undergrounding was another alternative option suggested. The utilization of tubular steel poles was recommended for the entire length of the Project or, at the very minimum, for natural settings near recreation areas and residences in close proximity to the Project.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-27 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Project alternatives not impacting habitat outside of Desert Wildlife Management Areas were favored. Approaches to substantially reduce the width of the additional ROW, and evaluate associated environmental impacts, were recommended. Concerns were raised about impacts to biology and aquatic resources, and impacts to community of Agua Dulce for Alternatives 2 and 3, respectively.

Human Environment Issues Air Quality Concerns were raised about the impacts associated with global climate change, dust control, and health effects of air emissions to sensitive receptors; additional mitigation strategies were recommended. In addition to the production of a Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan, revisions to mitigation measures were recommended to address issues such as significant regional and cumulative air quality impacts and the supplemental use of watering trucks for potential fire-fighting purposes at any given time. Advance notification to sensitive receptors of potential emission health risks and any exposure avoidance measures they should consider during construction was recommended. It was also recommended that estimates of direct and indirect emissions attributed to the Proposed Action, for general conformity purposes, be consistent with the definitions in 40 CFR 93.152.

Cultural Resources Full documentation of cultural resource concerns raised by Tribes, along with tribal coordination regarding the Programmatic Agreement, was recommended. Concerns were raised regarding human remains found during a separate nearby project and the potential for similar discoveries for the proposed Project. Specifics as to how to avoid adversely affecting the integrity, accessibility, or use of sacred sites, if they exist, was suggested.

EMF Many residents and property owners were concerned with the health effects associated with EMF impacts from the transmission lines on all Project alternatives. Concerns about animal health impacts were also prevalent.

Fire Safety The Project is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and fire risk from the potential creation of transmission line-bounded islands and subsequent risk to vicinity homes and residents was a concern. Suggestions, such as placing the new and existing transmission lines along the lower mountain ridge of the forest and the undergrounding of proposed switching station fuel storage tanks, were made.

It was recommended that all biological mitigation measures, as appropriate, be implemented during any fire prevention activities. Suggestions for mitigation measure modification included the supplemental use of watering trucks for firefighting purposes, the termination of construction when a Red Flag Alert is declared by the Los Angeles County Fire Department, and the installation of a camera security system to monitor for hazards.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-28 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Land Use/Recreation Numerous property owners were concerned with the acquisition of private property, eminent domain, and the expansion of transmission line ROW and easements. Other concerns relating to eminent domain were raised, including anticipated future housing market values, relocation expenses, and potential loss of business “goodwill.”

A general concern was raised over BLM and USFS’s ability to protect and manage public lands given what appears to be an inadequate inventory of resources and environmental review. The appropriateness of industrial-scale projects within the California Desert Conservation Area was questioned. Concerns were also raised regarding impacts to the Ritter Ranch and City Ranch Specific Plans, recreational equestrian properties, Castaic Lake State Recreation Area, and Pyramid and Castaic Lakes.

Noise Concerns were raised about corona noise from the new transmission line and the number of sensitive receptors, mainly residences, within 1,000 feet of the Alternative 3 alignment. Mitigation measure modifications were suggested, including avoidance of construction activities during the peak springtime viewing season and revising mitigation to include the reduction or screening of mobile equipment noise.

Property Values Numerous property owners are concerned that property values would decrease with additional transmission lines. It was also recommended that an inventory of all public lands and their resource(s) and other values be compiled.

Public Health and Safety Residents are concerned about the possible impacts to public health and the environment. Concerns were raised over vandalism and the potential for homeland security threats for the proposed Project. In addition, concerns of safety hazards, such as changes in air traffic patterns, were raised regarding portions of the Project in the vicinity of Agua Dulce Airport. Concerns over impacts to other airports, Mojave Airport, and Edwards Air Force Base were also raised.

Public Services and Utilities Numerous suggestions were made for the relocation of the transmission line to lower mountain ridges for more efficient emergency and scheduled maintenance access, and agency coordination for the over- or under-crossing of transmission lines with the Project. Other concerns were raised such as impacts to the Foothill Feeder Pipeline, the closure of Leona Valley School due to reduced student population if residences are lost, the potential adverse impacts on the Control- Inyo SCE-LADWP system tie, and the storage and disposal of construction spoils.

Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice Concerns were raised over potential industries and income-generating uses, such as film backdrop locations, and potential health effects; such impacts could unfairly affect existing minority communities and lower income communities in the vicinity of the Project, commenters

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-29 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION stated. Economic resources were also of concern for communities reviewing the Project, and review cost reimbursement was suggested. A dedication of funds to train a local workforce was also suggested. Some concerns were also raised about the cost of the Project being passed on to the customer.

Traffic Increased traffic, potential road damage from Project-related activities, impacts to Off Highway Vehicles, and construction traffic conflicts with neighboring projects were of concern.

Visual Resources Concerns raised included the obstruction of landscape and mountain views by the new transmission lines and the potential violation of community lighting zones by tower aviation lights and off-site construction illumination.

Natural Environment Issues Biological Resources Significant concerns were raised regarding the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to rare, threatened, endangered, and special-status species and habitats. A number of clarifications to biology mitigation measures were suggested, including providing for conservation easement protection of additional land along ROW located outside the ANF.

Cumulative Impacts There were many concerns about the cumulative impacts of other projects in the Project area including multiple renewable energy projects, substations, and additional transmission lines. There were also specific concerns about potential sprawl development in the area and the undermining of planning in renewable energy industrial zones. It was suggested that future projects in LADWP’s queue, and those solicitations not yet in the queue, be considered under cumulative impacts. There is concern of “piecemealing” the Project from other proposed renewable energy projects in LADWP’s queue. Concerns were also raised regarding future disturbance if and when LADWP upgrades its system or constructs a similar project.

Earth Resources Commenters were concerned about Alternative 3 being located on the San Andreas Fault.

Hydrology and Water Quality Concerns were raised regarding impacts from construction spoils. Impacts to groundwater supplies and groundwater recharge; Pyramid Lake and Castaic Lake; stream crossings; and ephemeral washes, flood flows, and hydrologic connectivity were also of concern. A jurisdictional delineation of the Clean Water Act jurisdictional waters, including wetlands and other special aquatic sites, that could be filled by Project activities was recommended, along with appropriate consultation. An analysis of how the Project would impact the beneficial uses applicable for each water body was also suggested. Subsequently, identification of the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative was suggested.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-30 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

Other Comments There were growth-inducing concerns that construction of a transmission line could drive industrial energy development into remote locations such as the Mojave Desert. In addition, there was a request for an extension of the Draft EIS/EIR public comment period. Concern was also raised over the fact that all of the resource impact categories were weighted evenly; the sentiment was that resource categories impacting people, as opposed to environmental resources, should be more important.

7.9 ADDITIONAL STEPS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

USFS, BLM, and LADWP will use the Final EIS/EIR when considering approval of the Proposed Action or an Alternative. If the Proposed Action or an Alternative is approved, LADWP will accept CEQA findings and issue a Notice of Determination (NOD), and USFS and BLM will issue a Record of Decision (ROD) to document that decision.

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-31 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 7: COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

FINAL EIS/EIR 7-32