7. Environmental Review
The Commission is required by CEQA to consider the environmental consequences before acting on the CVGS Project.37 Under CEQA, the Commission must act as either the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency. The Lead Agency is the public agency with the most responsibility for supervising or approving the project as a whole.38 Here, the Commission is the Lead Agency.
7.1. Proponent's Environmental Assessment
A.09-08-008 included a PEA pursuant to Rule 2.4(b). The PEA provided a description of the proposed CVGS Project, an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the Project, and measures to mitigate the potentially significant environmental impacts.39 The PEA concluded that with mitigation, the proposed
CVGS Project would have either a less than significant impact or no impact on every resource category for which CEQA requires an analysis.
We consider all of the PEA-proposed mitigation measures to be a part of the proposed CVGS Project. Our approval of the CVGS Project in today's decision incorporates by reference every mitigation measure in the PEA.
7.2. Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Staff reviewed the PEA and prepared an Initial Study (IS) to address environmental issues related to the CVGS Project. The IS determined the Project would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment if specific, feasible mitigation measures were taken in addition to those proposed in the PEA.
Based on the IS, Staff prepared a Draft IS/MND and released the Draft IS/MND for public review on April 22, 2010.40 The Draft IS/MND found that the CVGS Project would have either no environmental impact or a less than significant environmental impact in the following areas: geology and soils; land use and planning; mineral resources; population and housing; public services; and recreation.
The Draft IS/MND also found that with mitigation incorporated, the CVGS Project would result in less than significant impacts in the following areas: aesthetics; agricultural resources; air quality and climate change; biological resources; cultural resources; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; noise; transportation and traffic; and utilities and service systems.
7.3. Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance, and Reporting Program
As required by CEQA, the Draft IS/MND included a Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance, and Reporting Program (MMCRP) that describes the mitigation measures CVGS must implement for the proposed CVGS Project, the actions required to implement each mitigation measure, how implementation will be monitored, and the timing of each mitigation measure. The Commission uses the MMCRP as a guide for expected performance and requires Commission-designated environmental monitors to record such performance. CVGS has agreed to each mitigation measure in the MMCRP. Consistent with CEQA, we adopt the final MMCRP as part of our approval of the proposed CVGS Project.
7.4. Public Notice and Review
On April 22 , 2010, Staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Office of Planning and Research; published a Notice of Intent to Adopt an MND; and released the Draft IS/MND for a 30-day public review and comment period.
The Draft IS/MND was distributed to federal, state, and local agencies; property owners within 300 feet of the CVGS Project; and other interested parties listed in the Draft IS/MND. A Public Notice of the Project was also published in the local newspaper announcing the availability of the Draft IS/MND.
The 30-day comment period was subsequently extended by two weeks in response to requests received from the attendees of the public workshop regarding the Draft IS/MND that was held on May 5, 2010, in Princeton. The extended comment period ended on June 7, 2010.
7.5. Comments on Draft IS/MND
Comments letters on the Draft IS/MND were received from the Native American Heritage Commission, California State Senate, County of Colusa Department of Planning and Building Administration, Department of Conservation - Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources, Princeton Fire Department, Princeton Volunteer Fire Department, Colusa Basin Drainage District, Colusa County Fair, Nossaman, LLP, Hogan Lovells, Lucas Law, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and Chris Torres.41 Those comments and the Commission's responses to those, comments are contained in the Final MND.
7.6. Final MND
A Final MND was prepared pursuant to CEQA guidelines and released by Staff on July 28, 2010.42 The Final MND addresses all aspects of the Draft IS/MND; includes comments received on the Draft IS/MND and the Lead Agency's (i.e., the Commission's) responses to those comments; corrects errors in the Draft IS/MND; and includes the Final MMCRP.
The Final MND does not identify any new significant environmental impacts and does not omit any existing mitigation measures identified in the Draft IS/MND. The Final MND concludes that the CVGS Project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment because the mitigation measures described therein, which CVGS has agreed to incorporate into the proposed CVGS Project, will ensure that any potentially significant impacts that have been identified for the Project will remain at less-than-significant levels.
Before granting A.09-08-008, we must consider the Final MND.43 We have done so and find that the Final MND (which incorporates the Draft IS/MND and the MMCRP) was prepared in compliance with CEQA and meets the requirements of CEQA. We further find that there is no substantial evidence in the record of this proceeding that the proposed CVGS Project, as mitigated in accordance with the Final MMCRP, will have a significant effect on the environment.
The Final MND reflects the Commission's independent judgment and analysis.44 Our order today adopts the Final MND for the CVGS Project, subject to all the conditions therein. Before starting construction of the CVGS Project, CVGS must secure all required permits, easements, and any other legal authorization to develop the Project.
The Final MND is available for inspection at the Commission's website at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/environment/info/dudek/cvgs/CVGS_HOME.htm.
37 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, (CEQA Guidelines), Section 15050(b).
38 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15050(b).
39 PEA, Chapter 1, Table ES-1.
40 The August 3, 2010 ALJ ruling identified, marked, and received into the record the Draft IS/MND as Exhibit 1.
41 The Central Valley Flood Protection Board sent a late comment letter dated August 2, 2010. In addition, the following members of the public commented during the public meeting on May 5, 2010, but did not submit written comments letters: Gary Teragawa, Family Water Alliance, Henry Rodegerdts, Colusa County Counsel; Scott Hansen; Kim Dolbow-Vann, Chair, Colusa County Board of Supervisors; Tim Crews, Sacramento Valley Mirror; Mark Spannagel, Representing Assemblyman Nielsen.
42 The August 3, 2010 ALJ ruling identified, marked, and received into the record the Final MND as Exhibit 2.
43 CEQA Guidelines Section 15004(a).
44 CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b).
