BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 5: CUMULATIVE EFFECTS CHAPTER 5: CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 5.1 INTRODUCTION Cumulative effects are those effects that would result from incremental impacts of the Proposed Action when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions (40 CFR 1508.7). Analysis of cumulative effects places project-specific impacts into a broader context that takes into account the full range of impacts of actions taking place over a given space and time. Cumulative effects may be considered a significant impact to the environment, as degradation of important resources may result from the combined, incremental effects of actions. Cumulative effects may result from individually minor or insignificant actions, which collectively may be considered significant as they accumulate over time and space from one or more actions or sources. Cumulative effects analysis is required under NEPA, and similarly an analysis of cumulative impacts is required under CEQA. The BRRTP cumulative effects/impacts analysis focuses on the natural resources, ecosystems, and social or human communities that could be affected by the incremental impacts of the Project Alternatives. This analysis builds on the direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action and Alternatives described in Chapter 2 of this Final EIS/EIR. The approach to the cumulative effects analysis follows the principles outlined in the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) “Considering Cumulative Impacts” (1997), the guidance developed in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Federal Activities’ “Consideration of Cumulative Impacts in EPA Review of NEPA Documents” (1999), and CEQA Statutes and Guidelines (as amended). 5.1.1 METHODOLOGY The development of the cumulative effects assessment presented in this Chapter generally followed the methodological steps outlined below: Step 1: Define alternatives for the EIS/EIR. The Proposed Action and Alternatives are described in Chapter 2 of this Final EIS/EIR. Step 2: Define Impact Areas. Impact Areas are defined and evaluated with respect to each of the resources. Impact areas vary from one resource to another, as the affected region under each resource is likely to be different in spatial extent. In some cases, the Impact Area corresponds with the impact corridor, generally a 500-foot corridor, as defined for individual resources in Chapter 4. Step 3: Define Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions. A list of present and reasonably foreseeable actions is developed from consultations with government agencies and nongovernmental organizations, through public scoping, and in consultation with knowledgeable private entities. These actions include projects, activities, and trends that could impact the human and environmental resources within each impact area. FINAL EIS/EIR 5-1 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 5: CUMULATIVE EFFECTS In order to understand the contribution of past actions to the cumulative effects of the Proposed Action and Alternatives, this analysis relies on current environmental conditions as a proxy for the impacts of past actions. This is because existing conditions reflect the aggregate impact of all prior human actions and natural events that have affected the environment and might contribute to cumulative effects. This cumulative effects analysis does not attempt to quantify the effects of past human actions by adding up all prior actions on an action-by-action basis. There are several reasons for not taking this approach. First, a catalog and analysis of all past actions would be impractical to compile and unduly costly to obtain. Current conditions have been impacted by innumerable actions over the last century (and beyond), and trying to isolate the individual actions that continue to have residual impacts would be nearly impossible. Second, providing the details of past actions on an individual basis would not be useful to predict the cumulative effects of the Proposed Action or Alternatives. In fact, focusing on individual actions would be less accurate than looking at existing conditions, because there is limited information on the environmental impacts of individual past actions, and one cannot reasonably identify each and every action over the last century that has contributed to current conditions. Additionally, focusing on the impacts of past human actions risks ignoring the important residual effects of past natural events, which may contribute to cumulative effects just as much as human actions. By looking at current conditions, we are sure to capture all the residual effects of past human actions and natural events, regardless of which particular action or event contributed those effects. Third, public scoping for this Project did not identify any public interest or need for detailed information on individual past actions. For these reasons, the analysis of past actions in this section is based on current environmental conditions, as described for each resource in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS/EIR, and the developed lists of actions are limited to present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Step 4: Incorporate the Direct and Indirect Impacts. Direct and indirect impacts developed and evaluated elsewhere in this Final EIS/EIR are incorporated into the cumulative effects assessment. Direct impacts are caused by implementing the Proposed Action or an Alternative, and occur at the same time and place as the proposed Project. Indirect impacts are caused by the Proposed Action or an Alternative, but occur later in time or farther removed in distance and are still reasonably foreseeable. Step 5: Determine the Potential Impacting Factors of Each Present or Reasonably Foreseeable Action or Activity. For each action identified in Step 3, a description of the potential impacting factors is developed. Impacting factors are the mechanisms by which an action affects a given resource. Each impacting factor may be a component of more than one action or activity. Step 6: Evaluate Cumulative Effects. An evaluation of the cumulative effects is conducted for each resource. The individual evaluations consider the unique impacting factors for the various resources and the incremental contribution of the Proposed Action to the cumulative effect. The following factors are used to judge the cumulative impact on a resource: · Nature of the impact, · Geographic or spatial extent of the potential impacting factor, FINAL EIS/EIR 5-2 BARREN RIDGE RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CHAPTER 5: CUMULATIVE EFFECTS · Geographic or spatial extent of the resource, · Temporal extent of the potential impacting factor, · Regulatory considerations (e.g., Threatened and Endangered Species), · Potential for effective mitigation of the impact, and · Potential for recovery of the resource after removal of the impacting factor. Step 7: Present the Cumulative Effects Analysis. The cumulative effects for each resource are described in Section 5.3 of this Chapter. Conclusions presented in the cumulative effects analysis discussions regarding the significance of identified impacts are provided for the purposes of CEQA only, as significance conclusions are not required for compliance with NEPA. A “cumulatively considerable” impact would occur when the incremental impacts of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the impacts of past, current, and probable future projects pursuant to CEQA. 5.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST – MAJOR PRESENT AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE ACTIONS The cumulative projects list is used to provide a general context for the cumulative effects analysis and as a basis for the development of resource-specific lists of present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. This list includes present and reasonably foreseeable future actions in the vicinity of the Project that have the potential to combine with the Proposed Action or Alternatives. April 2008, the commencement of environmental review under CEQA or NEPA, has been utilized as the threshold for a given action to be considered a present or reasonably foreseeable future action. While a distinct impact area for cumulative impacts, and specific present and reasonably foreseeable actions, is determined individually for each resource, as detailed in Section 5.3 of this Final EIS/EIR, collectively, the projects listed below represent the major known and anticipated activities that may occur in the general Project area, and are current as of March 2012. The Cumulative Projects Map (Figure 5-1) illustrates the location of energy infrastructure and other major projects in reference to the Proposed Action and Alternatives. As the project list comprises projects in various stages of planning and development, it is likely that some of these projects would be completed as currently proposed while others would not. To be conservative, the cumulative analysis assumes that all projects listed would be built and in operation during the operating lifetime of the proposed Project. The list was developed in consultation with the following agencies: USFS – Angeles National Forest (ANF) BLM – Ridgecrest Field Office BLM – Palm Springs Field Office United States Air Force – Edwards Air Force Base Los Angeles