V. Environmental Review of the Kirby Hills Facility

A. Overview of Environmental Issues

Although the proposed Kirby Hills Facility obviously entails a substantial amount of construction, LGS has asserted in its application that the proposed project will not have a significant effect upon the environment, because the gas storage field, pipeline, and remote monitoring/interconnection station will all be located in agricultural areas far away from residences, and that any potentially significant environmental effects can be mitigated. Before turning to a detailed consideration of the IS/MND prepared by our Energy Division, we summarize briefly the application's characterizations about where and how the proposed new facilities will be constructed, and why applicant expects no environmental effects that cannot be mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

With respect to the 128-acre gas storage field, LGS states that "there are no identified sensitive environmental areas impacted by [the] surface facilities," because the surface area "is predominantly non-native grassland currently used for cattle grazing." LGS also states that no sensitive environmental areas will be impacted by pipeline construction on this site, and that the pipeline will be installed through conventional trenching methods, as will the flowline connecting the proposed well pad sites with the compressor/dehydration station. (Id. at 8, 11.)

With respect to the compressor and dehydration station located at the eastern end of the gas storage field, LGS states that "the site is in a valley between Kirby Hill to the west and a low hill to the east and will generally be screened from view." LGS also notes that the closest residence is 0.83 miles away.

The biggest potential environmental effects with respect to the compressor and dehydration station are noise and air emissions, but LGS asserts that these effects are also less than significant. With respect to noise, LGS notes that under the 1977 Solano County General Plan, industrial facilities cannot exceed a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of 50 dbA as measured at the nearest residential property. LGS states that under a noise impact analysis performed for it by Hoover & Keith Inc. (which is attached as Appendix E to both the Draft and Final IS/MNDs), the compressor/dehydration station would be below this threshold even when operated at full load for gas injection. With respect to air emissions, the compressor/dehydration station will be designed to meet the standards set by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), which require use of the best available control technology.

With regard to the 5.9 mile pipeline, LGS notes that for much of its route, it will run along existing roads and rights of way. Accordingly, LGS states, "for most of the proposed route the pipeline will be installed using traditional trenching techniques. Horizontal boring will be used for the rail line and creek crossing, and in areas around sensitive seasonal wetland complexes." (Id.  at 11-12.)

The final portion of the proposed new Facility is the remote metering and interconnection site near PG&E's Line 400. The application notes that this 0.75-acre site is agricultural land used for cattle grazing, and that the various surface facilities located there will be "low lying." As noted previously, there will also be a radio tower of less than 13 feet to allow remote operation. (Id. at 12.)

B. The Draft IS/MND

As noted above, as the lead agency on the proposed Kirby Hills Facility, the Commission has the responsibility under CEQA to prepare an Initial Study (IS) of the Facility to determine whether a full-fledged Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is necessary, or whether potential environmental effects identified by the IS can reduced to less-than-significant levels through the adoption of conditions set forth in a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).

In this case, the Draft IS/MND was issued for 30 days of public review and comment on January 17, 2006. As explained below, only five sets of comments were submitted in response to the Draft IS/MND, none of which necessitated any changes to its conclusions or to the conditions it proposes to impose on the applicant. In the comments it submitted on February 1, 2006, LGS stated that it will accept without condition the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (which includes both the APMs proposed by LGS and additional Mitigation Measures proposed by our staff) set forth in Section C of the Draft IS/MND. The Final IS/MND was issued on February 24, 2006.

As indicated below, both the Draft and Final IS/MNDs agree with LGS's assertion that the proposed facility will have a limited number of potentially significant effects upon the environment, and that these effects can be reduced to less-than-significant levels by implementing the APMs proposed by LGS, as well as the additional Mitigation Measures specified in the Draft IS/MND.

Because the Draft and Final IS/MNDs are very lengthy documents, we discuss here only those sections outlining potentially significant environmental impacts that can be reduced to less-than-significant levels by implementing specified mitigation measures.

1. Air Quality

Even though the entire Kirby Hills Facility is located in Solano County, it falls under the jurisdiction of two air agencies. The western portion of the Facility, including the 128-acre gas storage field and the compressor/dehydration station, falls under the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD. The eastern portion, where the Facility will interconnect with PG&E's Line 400, falls under the jurisdiction of the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (Y-SAQMD). The two agencies have somewhat differing sets of standards. Most of the air emissions discussed in the Draft and Final IS/MNDs will occur during construction; the operating emissions from the compressor/dehydration station do not violate the applicable BAAQMD standards.

Dust emissions during construction are a concern in both air districts. The western portion of the Facility subject to BAAQMD is located in a windy area (near the Shilog I Wind Plant); there, the IS/MND will require the use of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel and off-road equipment during construction. In the eastern portion of the Facility subject to Y-SAQMD (where the remote monitoring and interconnection station will be built), the IS/MND requires implementation of all of the following measures:

a. During high winds (i.e., sustained gusts of over 25 mph), construction areas with visible dust emissions will be watered at least hourly, and construction activity within one-half mile of any downwind residence will be discontinued when dust plumes remain visible for more than 50 feet past their point of origin.

b. All diesel construction equipment will use fuel meeting the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel specifications (15 ppm max) of the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

c. All diesel-fueled off-road construction equipment with engines of 50 hp or larger will be required to meet USEPA/CARB Tier I engine standards, unless the equipment has been permitted by the applicable local air quality district or is certified through CARB's statewide portable equipment registration program.

d. In the eastern area subject to Y-SAQMD jurisdiction, pipeline construction, metering station construction and overhead power line construction shall be completed so that no more than one of these types of construction is active on the same day. (Final IS/MND, p. B-68.)

2. Biological Resources

As noted above, the proposed Facility is located in an agricultural area now used mainly for dry farming and cattle grazing. However, a large number of plants and animals can occur in this area, and some of them are so-called "special status" species. Among the special-status animal species with a moderate or high potential for occurrence in the area are the San Joaquin pocket mouse, the white-tailed kite, the Northern Harrier, the Ferruginous Hawk, the California horned lark, the Loggerhead Shrike, and the Conservancy, Midvalley and vernal pool fairy shrimps.7 (Id., pp. B-75 to B-87.) The Final IS/MND concludes that implementation of APMs B-1 through B-6 proposed by LGS would reduce any potential impacts to these species to less-than-significant levels. (Id. at B-87-88.)

The main concern with respect to biological resources in the area is the potential impact on wetlands. The Draft IS/MND noted that the proposed mile pipeline when it runs along Shiloh Road would cross an unnamed seasonal drainage area that the Army Corps of Engineers would consider waters of the United States. In addition, some potential wetland features were observed near the pipeline route and the Kirby Hills access road. To protect these areas and reduce the impact of construction to a less-than-significant level, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 specifies that the construction specifications must require that a qualified biologist trained to conduct wetland delineations identify sensitive biological habitat on site and identify areas to avoid during construction. (Id. at B-88.)

3. Geology and Soils

The site for the Kirby Hills Facility lies within the San Francisco Bay Area region, which is seismically active. Nine active faults are considered to be within the vicinity of the project, including the Kirby Hills-Montezuma Hills Fault (which passes through the proposed well field) and the Rio Vista Fault (which is six miles east of the metering station site). The Final IS/MND summarizes the risks posed by the proximity of these faults as follows:

"[T]he compressor station would be located approximately one mile east of the seismically active Kirby Hills-Montezuma Hills Fault, which passes through the project well field. Other active and historically active faults within 25 miles of the project area have a history of surface rupture associated with large earthquakes . . . Surface fault rupture in the well field and flow line area is possible. If project facilities are compromised by fault rupture, an uncontrolled release of flammable natural gas could result. Ignition of released gases could further damage project facilities and threaten personnel safety.

"Modern buried welded steel pipelines constructed in accordance with [Title] 49 [Code of Federal Regulations, Part] 192 have generally performed well during seismic events. At fault crossings, however, pipeline ruptures have occurred where the pipeline has been placed in compression. Where the pipe has crossed the fault, placing the pipe in tension, significant displacements have been experienced without rupture. Mitigation Measure HZ-1 is proposed . . . , which would ensure proper pipeline design at any fault crossings, areas subject to liquefaction, and adequate pipe wall design to withstand the combined pipe stresses, including those caused by ground shaking. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HZ-1 would reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels." (Id. at B-97.)

Mitigation Measure HZ-1 requires that there be an independent, third-party review of LGS's construction drawings and specifications, and that project construction also be independently monitored to ensure compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations and standards. (Id. at B-103-104.) Footnote 5 of the Initial Study also suggests that this Commission may want to consider the CEC's practice of hiring (at the applicant's expense) an independent third party to act as the Commission's Deputy Chief Building Official to conduct the plan checks and perform the construction inspections. (Id. at B-104.) 8

4. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

As part of its application, LGS submitted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the Kirby Hills property it is leasing. This assessment demonstrated that there are a number of "Recognized Environmental Conditions," or RECs, that may have resulted from the gas drilling and production operations previously conducted in the Kirby Hill Gas Field. These RECs include the presence of unknown hydrocarbons in the soil and several potential sumps. The Phase I ESA recommended that a Phase II ESA be conducted prior to construction to document whether releases of hazardous materials into the soil have occurred, so as to better protect construction workers and the public during construction of the Facility. Mitigation Measure HZ-2 (MM HZ-2) requires that this Phase II study be conducted "within the portion of the land west of Shiloh Road leased by LGS that will be disturbed by construction activity." MM HZ-2 also requires that samples be taken at the locations identified in the Phase I study and analyzed for VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons following standard EPA protocols. MM HZ-2 also states:

"If the Phase II investigation sampling program finds environmental impacts on the LGS leased land, additional research shall be conducted to verify if other unrecorded sumps were used within the particular impacted LGS leased land. If other sumps are discovered within the particular LGS leased land, additional Phase II soil sampling activities shall be conducted to delineate the extent of contamination and recommend appropriate action." (Id. at B-104.)

5. Transportation and Traffic

LGS has stated that about 90 people will be working in the project area during peak periods of construction, and that about 27 daily truck trips and 120 vehicle trips per day can be expected during these peak periods. The Final IS/MND notes that even with the county permits LGS will be required to obtain and the Construction Traffic Plan it has promised to prepare pursuant to APM T-1, there is a potential for significant traffic congestion in the area. Although "local roadways in the project area have relatively low traffic volumes," so that congestion on them caused by construction would be minimal and limited to the duration of construction, there is a potential for congestion on other area roads:

"However, the roadways in the area that provide regional access (e.g., [State Route, or SR] 12) are often congested with traffic during peak commute hours. Therefore, project related trips that would occur during the peak commute hours along SR 12 could result in additional traffic congestion of SR 12. This would result in a potentially significant impact." (Id. at B-133.)

To alleviate this impact and reduce it to less-than-significant levels, the Final IS/MND recommends Mitigation Measure TRA-1, which requires LGS and its construction contractor to schedule all construction traffic to avoid peak commute hours along SR 12. The measure also requires LGS and its contractor to encourage carpooling among construction workers.

6. Mandatory Findings of Significance

The Final IS/MND points out that the portion of the Kirby Hills Facility west of Shiloh Road is within the Secondary Management Area (SMA) for the Suisun Marsh. The SMA is intended to serve as a buffer between the Primary Management Area (PMA) for Suisun Marsh and developed land. The Suisun Marsh Protection Plan permits natural gas production, storage and transportation within the SMA provided facilities are designed and constructed to avoid impacts to the PMA. The Final IS/MND concludes that by incorporating Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (which requires that a qualified biologist trained to conduct wetland delineations must be on site and identify areas to avoid during construction), the impacts on wetlands can be reduced to less-than-significant levels. The Final IS/MND also concludes that implementation of the APMs set forth in Table B.1 on Cultural Resources will ensure that impacts on archaeological resources are less than significant. (Id. at B-138-139.)

C. Comments on the Draft IS/MND

As noted above, the Draft IS/MND was issued for 30 days of public review and comment on January 17, 2006. The following six parties submitted comments on or before the February 16, 2006 due date:

With one exception, these comments pointed out minor technical or typographical errors in the Draft IS/MND, such as failure to note certain agencies that must also issue permits in connection with the proposed construction. The Final IS/MND issued on February 24, 2006 sets forth the comments and responses thereto in Section D and makes the necessary minor corrections to the text.

The one exception is a comment submitted by Solano County that raises the issue whether undergrounding should be required of a distribution power line that would extend less than one-quarter mile from an existing PG&E line to the northern edge of the compressor station boundary. The Final IS/MND notes that this new line would be within the Suisun March SMA, that a Marsh Development Permit would be required in connection with it, and that Solano County's policies in connection with Suisun Marsh require that new distribution lines be installed underground "unless undergrounding would have a greater adverse environmental effect on the Marsh than above-grounded construction."

The Final IS/MND concludes that requiring undergrounding in this instance would have a greater adverse environmental effect, because it would result in more ground disturbance than above-ground construction, with consequent effects on surface water runoff and groundwater flow. In addition, the Final IS/MND concludes that constructing the new distribution line above ground does not raise a significant bird strike issue, because bird strikes tend to happen where there are large, tall transmission towers with multiple lines. (Final IS/MND, p. D-20.)

7 Among plant species, Parry's Tarweed and the bearded popcorn-flower have a high potential for occurrence in the area.

8 Mitigation Measure HZ-1 also provides that "these design review and construction observation services shall not in any way relieve the applicant of its responsibility and liability for the design, construction, operation, maintenance, and emergency response for these facilities."

Previous PageTop Of PageNext PageGo To First Page