7. Environmental Review

Before we can finally assess the merits of the Amended Settlement, we must consider the results of environmental review of SoCalGas' application. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Pub. Resources Code §§ 21000-21176, requires the Commission, as the designated lead agency, to assess the potential environmental impact of a project in order that adverse effects are avoided, alternatives are investigated, and environmental quality is restored or enhanced to the fullest extent possible. The Commission uses the PEA, required by Rule 17.1, to focus on environmental impacts and to prepare an initial study to determine whether the project will need a Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report.

In compliance with CEQA, staff of the Environmental Projects Unit of the Commission's Energy Division (staff), commenced review of SoCalGas' application/PEA and conducted on-site inspections of Montebello. On December 4, 2000, staff were able to determine that the application is complete. Based on their review, staff have prepared a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), entitled "Mitigated Negative Declaration, Initial Study, and Mitigation Program for Decommissioning and Sale of Southern California Gas Company's Montebello Gas Storage Facility, Montebello California", which describes the project and its potential environmental effects. Though SoCalGas initially proposed auctioning the site for future use as a gas storage facility, the approach embraced in the Amended Settlement (i.e. withdrawal of cushion gas and decommissioning of the site) is the default scenario set out in the application and PEA. Thus, pursuing that approach does not require redefinition of the "project" for the purposes of review under CEQA.

7.1 MND

The draft environmental document is considered to be a mitigated negative declaration because, although the initial study identified potentially significant impacts, staff have determined that implementation of specific mitigation measures will reduce any impacts to a less than significant level. (Pub. Resources Code § 21080(c)(2).)

In compliance with CEQA, staff prepared a Notice of Publication of Mitigated Negative Declaration and distributed it to various city and county planning agencies and to public libraries throughout the state; the notice ran in newspapers throughout California, as well. Staff also submitted copies of the draft MND to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research for circulation to affected state agencies for review and comment. The public comment period closed on April 18, 2001.

Staff received written comments from the following federal, state and local agencies and from one individual:

Staff have reviewed these comments and included written responses in the Final MND which was issued on May 14,  2001 and posted on the Commission's website. Several areas of textual discussion, as well as identified draft mitigation measures, have been amended as appropriate to respond to specific concerns. Because of the volume of the Final MND, the entirety of this document is not appended to this decision, but the "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" is included as part of Attachment A. By ruling on May 14, 2001, the ALJ directed staff to file a complete copy of the Final MND in the formal files of this proceeding.

7.2 Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures generally are designed to protect resource categories such as biology, hydrology and water quality, cultural resources, air quality, etc. The MND examines the three phases of the project: recovery and sale of cushion gas; decommissioning of the Montebello facilities; and sale of the remaining Montebello assets. The environmental analysis concludes that the proposed project would have less-than significant effects or no impacts in the following areas only: agriculture; land uses and planning; population and housing; public services (other than parks and recreation); recreation; and utilities and services. Potentially significant impacts, all of which could be mitigated, may occur in the following areas: aesthetics; air resources; biological resources; cultural resources; geology and soils; hazards and hazardous substances; mineral resources; noise; and transportation. Of particular note, the coastal California gnatcatcher has been confirmed to exist on the East site. This bird is listed as endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Other plant and wildlife species with "special status" under California and federal law may exist on the Montebello properties.

The "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" in Attachment A lists, in a summary fashion, each of the mitigation measures which are necessary to avoid or to reduce to less-than-significant levels any potentially significant environmental impacts resulting each phase of the proposed abandonment and sale. The implementation or monitoring method is described, the responsible party is identified, and the implementation schedule is defined. SoCalGas has committed to undertake the abandonment and sale in full compliance with all mitigation measures. Though Attachment A lists all required measures, we highlight the following, which have been modified substantially to address concerns registered by United States Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game:

In addition to these highlighted measures, all other biological measures in the "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" require coordination with United States Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, and other relevant federal, state and local agencies.

Based upon their independent environmental review, staff have concluded that SoCalGas' proposed abandonment of Montebello will not have significant effects on the environment, provided SoCalGas complies with all mitigation measures identified in the Final MND.

Previous PageTop Of PageGo To First PageNext Page