12. Electric and Magnetic Fields
The Commission has examined EMF impacts in several previous proceedings. (D.06-01-042; D.93-11-013.) We found the scientific evidence presented in those proceedings was uncertain as to the possible health effects of EMFs and we did not find it appropriate to adopt any related numerical standards. Because there is no agreement among scientists that exposure to EMF creates any potential health risk, and because CEQA does not define or adopt any standards to address the potential health risk impacts of possible exposure to EMFs, the Commission does not consider magnetic fields in the context of CEQA and determination of environmental impacts.
The Commission requires, pursuant to GO 131-D, Sec. X.A, that all requests for a PTC include a description of the measures taken or proposed by the utility to reduce the potential for exposure to EMFs generated by the Proposed Project. We developed an interim policy that requires utilities, among other things, to identify the no-cost measures undertaken, and the low-cost measures implemented, to reduce the potential EMF impacts. The benchmark established for low-cost measures is 4% of the total budgeted project cost that results in an EMF reduction of at least 15% (as measured at the edge of the utility right-of-way).
The Field Management Plan contained, as included at Appendix B in the Draft EIR, addresses the EMF measures that will be taken in connection with the Proposed Project.
The Proposed Project is designed to include the following no-cost and low-cost magnetic field reduction measures:
1. For Devers 115 kV system: Use taller poles; use double-circuit pole-head configurations (or similar); and phase the proposed subtransmission line with respect to the existing 115 kV subtransmission line: Devers-Farrell-Windland 115 kV: A-B-C (top to bottom) and Garnet-Farrell 115 kV: C-B-A (top to bottom).
2. For Mirage 115 kV System - from Calle Francisco to near Calle Tosca: Use taller poles; use double-circuit pole-head configuration; and phase the proposed subtransmission line with respect to the existing 115 kV subtransmission line: Mirage-Santa Rosa-Tamarisk 115 kV: A-B (top to bottom) on the west side and C o the right side; Mirage-Santa Rosa 115 KV: C-B-A (top to bottom); Mirage-Concho 115 kV:
A-B-C (top to bottom).3. Mirage 115 kV system - from Calle Tosca to South of I-10 Freeway: Use taller poles; use double-circuit pole-head configuration; and phase the proposed subtransmission line with respect to the existing 115 kV subtransmission line: Mirage-Santa Rose 115 kV: C-B-A (top to bottom); Mirage-Concho 115 kV: A-B-C (top to bottom).
4. For the 115 kV System Reconfiguration (know as area D) phase the proposed subtransmission line with respect to the existing 115 kV subtransmission line: Eisenhower-Farrell 115 kV: C-B-A (top to bottom); Devers-Eisenhower-Thornhill 115 kV: A-B-C (top to bottom).
5. For the 115 kV system Reconfiguration (know as area E) phase the proposed subtransmission line with respect to the existing 115 kV subtransmission line: Mirage-Capwind-Devers-Tamarisk 115 kV: C-B-A (top to bottom); Mirage-Santa Rosa-Tamarisk 115 kV: A-B-C (top to bottom).
6. For the 220 kV loop-in: Phase the newly created transmission line with respect to the existing 220 kV transmission lines: Devers-Mirage No. 2 220 kV: A-B-C (top to bottom); Devers-Mirage No. 1 220 kV: B-C-A (top to bottom).
We adopt the Field Management Plan (Appendix B, Draft EIR) for the Proposed Project and require SCE to comply with it.
