10. EMF

The Commission has examined EMF impacts in several previous proceedings.¹¹  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.

However, recognizing that public concern remains, we do require, pursuant to GO 131-D, Section 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 four percent of the total budgeted project cost that results in an EMF reduction of at least 15 percent (as measured at the edge of the utility right-of-way).

The proposed project is designed to place its major substation electrical equipment (such as transformers, switchracks, buses, and underground duct banks) more than 1,250 feet from the nearest private property boundary. This design is consistent with the Commission's EMF policy for implementing no-cost and low-cost measures to reduce potential EMF impacts.

¹¹ See D.06-01-042 and D.93-11-013.