Kern Solar Ranch Project - Notice of Preparation

PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Lorelei H. Oviatt, AICP, Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2323 Phone: (661) 862-8600 FAX: (661) 862-8601 TTY Relay 1-800-735-2929 E-Mail: [email protected] Web Address: www.co.kern.ca.us/planning

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AGENCY Engineering, Surveying and Permit Services Planning and Community Development Roads

NOTICE OF PREPARATION DATE: January 25, 2013 To: See Attached Mailing List FROM: Kern County Planning & Community

Development Department Attn: Jaymie L. Brauer 2700 “M” Street, Suite 100 Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661) 862-8629

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The Kern County Planning and Community Development Department as Lead Agency (per the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Guidelines Section 15052) has required that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (per CEQA Guidelines Section 15161) be prepared for the project identified below. The Planning and Community Development Department solicits the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information, which is germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval of projects. Due to the limits mandated by State law, your response must be received by February 25, 2013 at 5 pm. In addition, comments can be submitted at a scoping meeting that will be held at the Kern County Planning and Community Development Department on Friday, February 15, 2013 at 1:30 pm at the address shown above. PROJECT TITLE: Kern Solar Ranch Project by Kern Solar, LLC (PP12315) (EIR 05-12 JLB )

The project includes: GPA 3/CUP 2, Map 50; GPA 3/CUP 7, Map 51; GPA 1/CUP 1, Map 73; and GPA 2/CUP 6, Map 74; Williamson Act Land Use Contract Cancellation 12-04

PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located about 2 miles south from the unincorporated community of Blackwells Corner, west of the towns of Lost Hills and Buttonwillow, and within unincorporated portions of Kern County. The project site is accessed by SR-46, just southwest of the intersection between SR-46 and SR-33. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Kern Solar Ranch Project (the project) by Kern Solar, LLC (project proponent) has requested 4 General Plan Amendments to amend the Circulation Element of the Kern County General Plans to eliminate future road reservations along section and midsection lines, as well as 4 Conditional Use Permits to allow for the construction and operation of a solar PV power-generating facility with a capacity of 1 GW (gigawatt) of electricity. The proposed project boundary is approximately 14,400 total acres; however PV solar panels will be constructed on about 6,100 acres, in unincorporated Kern County, California. The project properties are within the A (Exclusive Agriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture) zone districts. In addition, the project includes a petition to cancel a Williamson Act Land Use Contract (No. 12-04) for 965 acres of grazing land. Due to the size of the project site, for ease of review, the site has been divided into seven subareas. Additionally, an offsite Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) substation would be constructed as part of the proposed project, which would be located approximately 12 miles southeast of the project boundary. A 19 mile, 230-kilovolt (kV) generation tie-line (gen-tie) that would connect the facility to the utility grid is also proposed as part of the overall project. Signature: ________________________ Title: Jaymie L. Brauer, Planner III (661) 862-8629 [email protected]

Kern Solar Ranch (GPA #3, Map #50 & Map #51;& various) WO #PP12315 I:\WP\LABELS\eir05-12jlb.nop.doc Sc 01/16/13

Sierra Club/Kern Kaweah Chapter Arthur Unger ***PUT IN BUCKET***

City of Arvin P.O. Box 548 Arvin, CA 93203

Bakersfield City Planning Dept 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301

Bakersfield City Public Works Dept 1501 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301

Delano City Planning Dept P.O. Box 3010 Delano, CA 93216

City of Maricopa P.O. Box 548 Maricopa, CA 93252

City of McFarland 401 West Kern Avenue McFarland, CA 93250

City of Shafter 336 Pacific Avenue Shafter, CA 93263

City of Taft Planning & Building 209 East Kern Street Taft, CA 93268

City of Wasco 764 E Street Wasco, CA 93280

Inyo County Planning Dept P.O. Drawer "L" Independence, CA 93526

Kings County Planning Agency 1400 West Lacey Blvd, Bldg 6 Hanford, CA 93230

Los Angeles Co Reg Planning Dept 320 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012

San Bernardino Co Planning Dept 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 1st Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182

San Luis Obispo Co Planning Dept Planning and Building 976 Osos Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93408

Santa Barbara Co Resource Mgt Dept 123 East Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101

Tulare County Planning & Dev Dept 5961 South Mooney Boulevard Visalia, CA 93291

Ventura County RMA Planning Div 800 South Victoria Avenue, L1740 Ventura, CA 93009-1740

U.S. Bureau of Land Management Caliente/Bakersfield 3801 Pegasus Drive Bakersfield, CA 93308-6837

U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Ecological Services 2800 Cottage Way #W-2605 Sacramento, CA 95825-1846

Environmental Protection Agency Region IX Office 75 Hawthorn Street San Francisco, CA 94105

U.S. Dept of Agriculture/NRCS 5000 California Avenue, Ste 100 Bakersfield, CA 93309-0711

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 997 Lake Isabella, CA 93240

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division 1325 "J" Street, #1350 Sacramento, CA 95814-2920

State Air Resources Board Stationary Resource Division P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812

So. San Joaquin Valley Arch Info Ctr California State University of Bkfd 9001 Stockdale Highway Bakersfield, CA 93311

Caltrans/Dist 6 Planning/Land Bank Bldg. P.O. Box 12616 Fresno, CA 93778

State Dept of Conservation Director's Office 801 "K" Street, MS 24-01 Sacramento, CA 95814-3528

State Dept of Conservation Division of Oil & Gas 4800 Stockdale Highway, Ste 417 Bakersfield, CA 93309

State Dept of Conservation Office of Land Conservation 801 "K" Street, MS 18-01 Sacramento, CA 95814

California Energy Commission James W. Reede, Jr. 1516 Ninth Street Mail Stop 17 Sacramento, CA 95814

California Department of Fish & Wildlife 1234 East Shaw Avenue Fresno, CA 93710

California Highway Patrol Planning & Analysis Division P.O. Box 942898 Sacramento, CA 94298-0001

Integrated Waste Management P.O. Box 4025, MS #15 Sacramento, CA 95812-4025

Public Utilities Comm Energy Div 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102

California Regional Water Quality Control Board/Central Valley Region 1685 E Street Fresno, CA 93706-2020

State Dept of Toxic Substance Control Environmental Protection Agency 1515 Tollhouse Road Clovis, CA 93612

State Dept of Water Resources San Joaquin Dist. 3374 East Shields Avenue, Room A-7 Fresno, CA 93726

Kern County Agriculture Department

Kern County Engineering, Surveying, & Permit Svs/Floodplain

Kern County Engineering, Surveying, & Permit Svs/Survey

Kern County Env Health Services Department

Kern County Fire Dept Brian Marshall, Fire Chief

Kern County Fire Dept Benny Wofford

Kern County Fire Dept Dave Goodell

Kern County Library/Beale Local History Room

Kern County Library/Beale Sherry Gomez

Kern County Library Buttonwillow Branch 116 Buttonwillow Avenue Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Kern County Sheriff's Dept Administration

Kern County Roads Department

Kern County Waste Management Department

Lost Hills Union School Dist P.O. Box 158 Lost Hills, CA 93249

McKittrick School Dist P.O. Box 277 McKittrick, CA 93251

Belridge School Dist Star Route Box 900 McKittrick, CA 93251

Kern High School Dist 5801 Sundale Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93309

Kern County Superintendent of Schools Attention Mary Baker 1300 17th Street Bakersfield, CA 93301

KernCOG 1401 19th Street - Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301

Local Agency Formation Comm/LAFCO 5300 Lennox Avenue, Suite 303 Bakersfield, CA 93309

Berrenda Mesa Water Dist 14823 Highway 33 Lost Hills, CA 93249-9734

Kern County Water Agency P.O. Box 58 Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058

West Side Rec & Parks Dist P.O. Box 1406 Taft, CA 93268

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726

West Side Mosquito Abatement Dist. P.O. Box 205 Taft, CA 93268

Belridge Water Storage Dist 21908 Seventh Standard Road McKittrick, CA 93251

Adams, Broadwell, Joseph & Cardozo Attention: Janet M. Laurain 601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1000 South San Francisco, CA 94080

Kern Audubon Society P.O. Box 3581 Bakersfield, CA 93385

Los Angeles Audubon 926 Citrus Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90036-4929

Center on Race, Poverty & the Environmental 47 Kearny Street, Suite 804 San Francisco, CA 94108-5528

Center on Race, Poverty & the Environmental/ CA Rural Legal Assistance Foundation 1012 Jefferson Street Delano, CA 93215

Communities for a Better Environment 1904 Franklin Street, Suite 600 Oakland, CA 94612-2922

Defenders of Wildlife/ Cynthia Wilkerson, M.S. California Representative 1303 "J" Street, Suite 270 Sacramento, CA 95814

California Farm Bureau 2300 River Plaza Drive, NRED Sacramento, CA 95833

Native American Heritage Council of Kern County/Fay Van Horn P.O. Box 1507 Bakersfield, CA 93302

Pacific Gas & Electric Co Land Projects 650 "O" Street, First Floor Fresno, CA 93760-0001

PG&E Renewal Dev, T&D Intercon 77 Beal Street, Room 5361 San Francisco, CA 94105

Southern California Gas Co 1510 North Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308

Southern California Gas Co Transportation Dept 9400 Oakdale Avenue Chatsworth, CA 91313-6511

Verizon California, Inc. Attention Engineering Department 520 South China Lake Boulevard Ridgecrest, CA 93555

Chumash Council of Bakersfield P.O. Box 902 Bakersfield, CA 93302

David Laughing Horse Robinson P.O. Box 1547 Kernville, CA 93238

Vintage Production California, LLC 9600 Ming Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93311

Kern Valley Indian Council Attn: Bob Robinson P.O. Box 1010 Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Kern Valley Indian Council Historic Preservation Office P.O. Box 401 Weldon, CA 93283

Santa Rosa Rancheria Clarence Atwell, Chairperson P.O. Box 8 Lemoore, CA 93245

Tejon Indian Tribe Kathy Morgan, Chairperson 2234 4th Street Wasco, CA 93280

Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians Chairperson 981 North Virginia Corvina CA 91722

Tubatulabals of Kern County Attn: Robert Gomez P.O. Box 226 Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Tule River Indian Tribe Neal Peyron, Chairperson P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA 93258

Cuddy Valley Statistical 11667 Steinhoff Road Frazier Park, CA 93222

Western Wind Energy Corporation 3500 Glenrose Avenue Altadena, CA 91001

Kern County Farm Bureau

Renewal Resources Group Holding Company 5700 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 330 Los Angeles, CA 90036

Sempra Generation 101 Ash Street HQ-14A San Diego, CA 92101

Recurrent Energy Seth Israel 300 California Street, 8th Floor San Francisco, CA 92109

Aera Energy LLC 1000 Ming Ave PO Box 11164 Bakersfield CA 93389-1164

SunEdison 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2200 San Francisco, CA 94104

EDF Renewables Company 53 SW Yamhill Street Portland, OR 97204

Beyond Coal Campaign/Sierra Club Sarah K. Friedman 1417 Calumet Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90026

First Solar 18300 Von Karman Ave, Ste 930 Irvine, CA 92612

EDF, Director of Land and Title 5000 Executive Parkway, Suite 140 San Ramon, CA 94583

Tehachapi Area Assoc of Realtors Carol Lawhon, Assoc Exe, IOM 803 Tucker Road Tehachapi, CA 93561

Terra-Gen Power, LLC 565 - 5th Avenue, Floor 27 New York, NY 10017

Kelly Group Kate Kelly P.O. Box 868 Winters, CA 95694

U.S. Army Peter Rubin B790 5th Street Parks RFTA Dublin, CA 94568

U.S. Air Force Western Regional Environmental Officer 50 Fremont Street, Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA 94105-2230

U.S. Army Dir Public Works/Master Plan Div P.O. Box 105097 Fort Irwin, CA 92310-5097

U.S. Marine Corps Patrick Christman Building 1164/Box 555246 Camp Pendleton, CA 92055

U.S. Navy Steve Chung 1220 Pacific Highway, Bldg 127 San Diego, CA 92132

State Dept of Food & Agriculture 1220 "N" Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal Mail to: State Clearinghouse, P. O. Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 (916) 445-0613 For Hand Delivery/Street Address: 1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Project Title: Kern Solar Ranch Project by Kern Solar, LLC (PP12315); (EIR 05-12 JLB)

Lead Agency: Kern County Planning and Community Development Department Contact Person: Jaymie L. Brauer Mailing Address: 2700 M Street, Suite 100 Phone: (661) 862-8629 City: Bakersfield Zip: 93301-2323 County: Kern

Project Location: County: Kern City/Nearest Community: Blackwells Corner; Lost Hills Cross Streets: SR 33 and SR 46; Bitterwater Valley Road; Brown Material Road; Lerdo Hwy Zip Code: 93249 Lat. / Long: see attached Total Acres: 4,806 ac Assessor's Parcel No.: various, see attached various, see attached: Sections: Twp.: Range: Base: MDB&M Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: SR-33, SR-46 Waterways NA

Airports: N/A Railways: NA Schools: N/A

Document Type: CEQA: NOP Draft EIR NEPA: NOI Other: Joint Document Early Cons Supplement/Subsequent EIR EA Final Document Neg Dec (Prior SCH No.)

Draft EIS Other

Mit Neg Dec Other

FONSI

Local Action Type: General Plan Update Specific Plan Rezone Annexation General Plan Amendment Master Plan Prezone Redevelopment General Plan Element Planned Unit Development Use Permit Coastal Permit Community Plan Site Plan Land Division (Subdivision, etc.) Other WALUC

Development Type: Residential: Units

Acres

Water Facilities: Type Office: Sq.ft.

Acres

Employees

Transportation: Type

Commercial: Sq.ft.

Acres

Employees

Mining: Mineral Industrial: Sq.ft.

Acres

Employees

Power: Type Solar PV MW 1,000 MW Educational

Waste Treatment: Type

MGD

Recreational

Hazardous Waste: Type

Other:

Project Issues Discussed in Document: Aesthetic/Visual Fiscal Recreation/Parks Vegetation Agricultural Land Flood Plain/Flooding Schools/Universities Water Quality Air Quality Forest Land/Fire Hazard Septic Systems Water Supply/Groundwater Archeological/Historical Geologic/Seismic Sewer Capacity Wetland/Riparian Biological Resources Minerals Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading Wildlife Coastal Zone Noise Solid Waste Growth Inducing Drainage/Absorption Population/Housing Balance Toxic/Hazardous Land Use Economic/Jobs Public Services/Facilities Traffic/Circulation Cumulative Effects Other

Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Designation: See attached, Table 1

Project Description: (please use a separate page if necessary) The Kern Solar Ranch Project (the project) by Kern Solar, LLC (project proponent), proposes to construct and operate a 1-gigawatt (GW) solar photovoltaic (PV) power-generating facility, with approval of conditional use permits, on approximately 6,100 acres of approximately 14,400 total acres in unincorporated Kern County, California. The entire project is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Kern County General Plan. Additionally, an offsite Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) substation would be constructed as part of the proposed project; the facility would be located approximately 12 miles southeast of the project boundary. A 19-mile-long 230-kilovolt (kV) generation tie (gen-tie) line is also proposed. General Plan Amendments are proposed to amend the Circulation Element of the general plan and eliminate future road reservations along section and midsection lines. Four Conditional Use Permits are proposed to allow construction and operation of a solar PV power-generating facility within A (Exclusive Agriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture) zoning districts. In addition, the project includes a request to cancel a Williamson Act land use contract (No. 12-04) for four assessor’s parcel numbers (APNs) totaling 965 acres. The project site is located about 2 miles south of the unincorporated community of Blackwells Corner, west of the towns of Lost Hills and Buttonwillow and within unincorporated portions of Kern County.

SCH #

Because of the size of the project site, for ease of review, the site has been divided into seven subareas (Subareas A through G). Although there are several parcels of Federal land in the vicinity of the project boundary, the project property is privately owned and does not include any Federal lands. The seven subareas are described as follows:

• Subarea A encompasses approximately 2,962 acres and is located south of State Route (SR) 46 and transected in the northwest corner by Bitterwater Valley Road. The northeast portion of the subarea is within the Shale Flats gas field;

• Subarea B encompasses approximately 2,400 acres and is located adjacent to Subarea A’s eastern border. The northern portion of the subarea is within the North Antelope Hills oil field;

• Subarea C encompasses approximately 2,907 acres and is located directly east of Subarea B. SR-33 is located northeast of the subarea. The southwest portion of the subarea is within the Antelope Hills oil field;

• Subarea D encompasses approximately 1,040 acres and is located directly south of Subarea B. The southwest portion of the subarea is within the McDonald Anticline oil field;

• Subarea E encompasses approximately 2,507 acres and shares its northern border with Subarea C and western border with Subarea D. The northern and southern portions of the subarea are within the Antelope Hills and McDonald Anticline oil fields;

• Subarea F encompasses approximately 2,638 acres and shares a portion of its northern border with Subarea C and a portion of its western border with Subarea E. State Route 33 and Lerdo Highway are located east of the subarea. The western and southwestern portions of the subarea are within the Antelope Hills and McDonald Anticline oil fields; and

• Subarea G (PG&E substation) encompasses approximately 65 areas of an 80-acre parcel and is approximately 9½ miles south of Subarea F. The entire subarea is within the Cymric oil field.

Table 1. Project APNs

Subarea

Characteristic A B C D E F G

Total Acres 2,962 2,400 2,907 1,040 2,507 2,638 80

Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs)

068-080-20 068-090-13 068-090-14 068-100-15 068-110-08 068-110-12

068-100-18 068-100-19 068-100-34 068-120-14 068-120-16 068-120-33 068-120-51 068-120-53

068-210-16 068-210-17 068-230-01 068-230-02 068-230-03 068-230-05 068-230-06 068-230-10

085-050-03 085-050-07 085-050-09 085-050-14 085-050-26 085-050-27 085-050-29 085-050-30

085-120-03 085-120-04 085-120-15 085-120-16 085-120-17 085-120-19 085-120-20 085-120-21 085-120-22 085-120-23 085-120-25 085-120-26 085-120-32 085-120-33 085-120-36 085-120-37 085-120-38 085-120-39 085-120-40 085-120-41 085-120-50

085-110-01 085-110-02 085-110-07 085-110-08 085-110-09 085-110-22 085-110-23 085-110-24 085-110-25 085-110-26 085-110-27 085-110-28 085-120-06 085-120-07 085-120-09 085-120-12 085-120-34 085-120-35 085-140-14 085-140-15 085-140-17 085-140-18

098-150-07

Total Number of Parcels

6 8 8 7 21 22 1

Townships (T) and Ranges (R)

27S 19E 27S 19E 27S 20E; 28S 20E

28S 19E 27S 20E; 28S 19E; 28S 20E

28S 20E 29S 21E

Table 2. Existing Land Use, General Plan Map Code Designations, and Zoning Classifications

Subarea


General Plan Land Use Designations

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4

8.3; 8.4 8.3, 8.4 8.3; 8.4 8.3; 8.4 8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8/3; 8.3/2.5

Surrounding Area General Plan Land Use Designations

1.1; 8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4;

8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

Zoning A A A; A-1 A A A; A-1 A

Surrounding Area Zoning

A, A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1; NR(5); NR(10)

A

Surrounding Area Land Uses

Site Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production






North Grazing Land


Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production



Grazing Land

South State/Federal Land Grazing

Land





Grazing Land Grazing Land

East Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land Oil and Gas Production



Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land

West Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production


Grazing Land

General Plan Land Use Designations: 1.1 – State or Federal Land 8.3 – Extensive Agriculture (min. 20-acre parcel size) 8.3/2.5 – Extensive Agriculture/Flood Hazard 8.4 – Mineral and Petroleum (min. 5-acre parcel size) 8.4/2.5 – Mineral and Petroleum/Flood Hazard

Zoning Classifications: A – Exclusive Agriculture A-1 – Limited Agriculture NR(5) – Natural Resources (min. 5-acre parcel size) NR(10) – Natural Resources (min. 10-acre parcel size)

Reviewing Agencies Checklist

Lead Agencies may recommend State Clearinghouse distribution by marking agencies below with and "X." If you have already sent your document to the agency, please denote that with an "S." S Air Resources Board Office of Emergency Services

Boating & Waterways, Department of Office of Historic Preservation

S California Highway Patrol Office of Public School Construction

CalFire Parks & Recreation

S Caltrans District # 6 Pesticide Regulation, Department of

Caltrans Division of Aeronautics S Public Utilities Commission

Caltrans Planning (Headquarters) S Regional WQCB # Central

Central Valley Flood Protection Board Resources Agency

Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission

Coastal Commission San Gabriel & Lower L.A. Rivers and Mtns Conservancy

Colorado River Board San Joaquin River Conservancy

S Conservation, Department of Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy

Corrections, Department of State Lands Commission

Delta Protection Commission SWRCB: Clean Water Grants

Education, Department of S SWRCB: Water Quality

S Energy Commission S SWRCB: Water Rights

S Fish & Game Region # Fresno Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

Food & Agriculture, Department of S Toxic Substances Control, Department of

General Services, Department of S Water Resources, Department of

Health Services, Department of

Housing & Community Development S Other U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

S Integrated Waste Management Board S Other CPUC

S Native American Heritage Commission

Local Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency)

Starting Date January 25, 2013 Ending Date February 25, 2013

Lead Agency (Complete if applicable):

Consulting Firm: Applicant: Address: Address: City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip: Contact: Phone: Phone:

Signature of Lead Agency Representative: Date: 1/25/13

Jaymie L. Brauer, Planner 3

Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21161, Public Resources Code.

INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION

Kern Solar Ranch Project by Kern Solar, LLC (PP 12315)

GPA 3/CUP 2, Map 50 GPA 3/CUP 7, Map 51 GPA 1/CUP 1, Map 73 GPA 2/CUP 6, Map 74

Williamson Act Land Use Contract Cancellation 12-04

LEAD AGENCY:

Kern County Planning and Community Development Department

2700 M Street, Suite 100 Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370

Contact: Jaymie L. Brauer, Planner

(661) 862-8629

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BY:

ICF International 5558 California Avenue, Suite 310

Bakersfield, CA 93309

January 2013

KERN COUNTY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT KERN SOLAR RANCH PROJECT

Initial Study/Notice of Preparation 1 January 2013

1. Project Description For its Kern Solar Ranch Project (the project), Kern Solar, LLC (project proponent), has requested General Plan Amendments (GPAs) (GPA 3, Map 50; GPA 3, Map 51; GPA 1, Map 73; and GPA 2, Map 74) to amend the Circulation Element of the Kern County General Plan and eliminate future road reservations along section and midsection lines as well as Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) (CUP 2, Map 50; CUP 7, Map 51; CUP 1, Map 73; and CUP 6, Map 74) to allow for the construction and operation of a solar photovoltaic (PV) power-generating facility with a capacity of 1 gigawatt (GW) of electricity. The project boundary encompasses approximately 14,400 acres; however, the PV solar panels would be constructed on about 6,100 acres in unincorporated Kern County, California. The project properties are within Exclusive Agriculture (A) and Limited Agriculture (A-1) zoning districts. In addition, the project includes a petition to cancel a Williamson Act land use contract (No. 12-04) for 976 acres of grazing land. The entire project is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Kern County General Plan.

Location

The project site is located about 2 miles south of the unincorporated community of Blackwells Corner, west of the towns of Lost Hills and Buttonwillow and within unincorporated portions of Kern County. Figures 1 and 2 show the regional location and project area vicinity, respectively. Figure 3 shows the project site’s boundaries. Because of the size of the project site, for ease of review, the site has been divided into seven subareas (Subareas A through G) (see Figures 1 through 4h).

An offsite Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) substation would also be constructed as part of the project. The substation would be located approximately 12 miles southeast of the project boundary. In addition, a 19-mile, 230-kilovolt (kV) generation tie (gen-tie) line that would connect the facility to the utility grid is also proposed as part of the overall project.

The seven subareas are described as follows:

• Subarea A encompasses approximately 2,962 acres and is located south of State Route (SR) 46 and transected in the northwest corner by Bitterwater Valley Road. The northeast portion of the subarea is within the Shale Flats gas field;

• Subarea B encompasses approximately 2,400 acres and is located adjacent to Subarea A’s eastern border. The northern portion of the subarea is within the North Antelope Hills oil field;

• Subarea C encompasses approximately 2,907 acres and is located directly east of Subarea B. SR-33 is located northeast of the subarea. The southwest portion of the subarea is within the Antelope Hills oil field;

• Subarea D encompasses approximately 1,040 acres and is located directly south of Subarea B. The southwest portion of the subarea is within the McDonald Anticline oil field;

• Subarea E encompasses approximately 2,507 acres and shares its northern border with Subarea C and western border with Subarea D. The northern and southern portions of the subarea are within the Antelope Hills and McDonald Anticline oil fields;

• Subarea F encompasses approximately 2,638 acres and shares a portion of its northern border with Subarea C and a portion of its western border with Subarea E. State Route 33 and Lerdo Highway are located east of the subarea. The western and southwestern portions of the subarea are within the Antelope Hills and McDonald Anticline oil fields; and

• Subarea G (PG&E substation) encompasses approximately 65 areas of an 80-acre parcel and is approximately 9½ miles south of Subarea F. The entire subarea is within the Cymric oil field.



Figure 4 provides a subarea index map and Figures 4a through 4h show each individual subarea’s boundaries. Table 1, below, summarizes the project site characteristics by subarea.

Table 1. Project Site Parcels

Subarea


Total Acres 2,962 2,400 2,907 1,040 2,507 2,638 80

Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs)

068-080-20 068-090-13 068-090-14 068-100-15 068-110-08 068-110-12

068-100-18 068-100-19 068-100-34 068-120-14 068-120-16 068-120-33 068-120-51 068-120-53

068-210-16 068-210-17 068-230-01 068-230-02 068-230-03 068-230-05 068-230-06 068-230-10

085-050-03 085-050-07 085-050-09 085-050-14 085-050-26 085-050-27 085-050-29 085-050-30

085-120-03 085-120-04 085-120-15 085-120-16 085-120-17 085-120-19 085-120-20 085-120-21 085-120-22 085-120-23 085-120-25 085-120-26 085-120-32 085-120-33 085-120-36 085-120-37 085-120-38 085-120-39 085-120-40 085-120-41 085-120-50

085-110-01 085-110-02 085-110-07 085-110-08 085-110-09 085-110-22 085-110-23 085-110-24 085-110-25 085-110-26 085-110-27 085-110-28 085-120-06 085-120-07 085-120-09 085-120-12 085-120-34 085-120-35 085-140-14 085-140-15 085-140-17 085-140-18

098-150-07

Total Number of Parcels

6 8 8 7 21 22 1

Townships (T) and Ranges (R)

27S 19E 27S 19E 27S 20E; 28S 20E

28S 19E 27S 20E; 28S 19E; 28S 20E

28S 20E 29S 21E

Environmental Setting

The project site, as well as the area for the 230 kV gen-tie transmission line and the offsite substation, is nearly flat and currently used for grazing or oil and gas production. The topography of the site slopes to the northeast at a rate of approximately 50 to 150 feet per mile, with an elevation of approximately 1,075 feet above sea level at the southwest project boundary and 750 feet at the northeast project boundary. The gen-tie line, which would be approximately 19 miles in length, would extend southeasterly from the center of Township 27 South, Range 19 East (in the northern portion of the project site), to the offsite 500 kV substation. In the area of the substation, the elevation of the site varies from approximately 880 feet above sea level at the southwest corner to approximately 790 feet at the northeast corner. In addition, ephemeral streams are found within the boundaries of the project site. In the vicinity of the project site, including the offsite substation, the subsurface structure is primarily a homocline that dips to the east and northeast. Quaternary deposits in the area, which generally lie flat or dip gently to the east and northeast, unconformably overlie marine Tertiary deposits. The marine Tertiary deposits are folded and faulted, forming the active or abandoned oil and gas fields that surround the project site as well as the offsite substation. Land uses on the surrounding properties consist predominantly of grazing and oil and gas production. Table 1 shows the APNs for the site and substation.

Figure 1Regional Location

Kern Solar Ranch Project

Project Location

Mettier

Kern SolarRanch Project

BlackwellsCorner

Taft

Lost Hills

Buttonwillow

Wasco

Valley Acres

Derby Acres

McKittrick

Ford City

Alpaugh

Fellows

Taft Heights

Figure 2Vicinity Map


Legend

Solar Project

County of Kern

0 3 61.5

Miles±

28 S 19 E

27 S 19 E 27 S 20 E

28 S 20 E

27 S 18 E

28 S 21 E

27 S 21 E

28 S 18 E

26 S 20 E26 S 19 E 26 S 21 E26 S 18 E

29 S 20 E 29 S 21 E

46 HWY

33 HWY

LERDO HWY

BITTERWAT ER VALLEY RD

BR

OW

N M

ATER

IAL

RD

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

WA

TE

RF

LO

OD

RD

POLE LIN

E R

D

SEVENTH STANDAR

D RD

Figure 3Project Boundary


Legend

Project Boundary

County of Kern

Townships

Sections

Source: County of Kern (2012)

Switchyard A

Switchyard B

Switchyard C

Switchyard D

Area A

Area F

Area CArea B

Area EArea D

Area G

33 HWY

46 HWY

LERDO HWY

58 HW

Y

LO

ST

HIL

LS

RD

G.P. RD

W LOKERN RD

HO

LLOW

AY

RD

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

BR

OW

N M

ATER

IAL

RD

BITTERWATER VALLEY RD

CONTRACTORS RD

LO

ST

HIL

LS

RD

LO

ST

HIL

LS

RD

POLE LIN

E R

D

SEVENTH STAND

ARD RD

MA

RT

IN A

V

Figure 4aSubarea Index Map


Legend

Access Road

Subareas

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B

Switching Substations

Substation

Switchyard

Source: WZI Inc. (2012),Kern County (2012)

0 21

Miles

±

Switchyard ASwitchyard B

46 HWY

BITTERWATER VALLEY R

D

Figure 4bSubarea A


Legend

Access Road

Subarea A

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

33 HWY

Figure 4cSubarea B


Legend

Access Road

Subarea B

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

Switchyard A

Switchyard B

Switchyard C

33 HWY

Figure 4dSubarea C


Legend

Access Road

Subarea C

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

Switchyard C

Switchyard D

Figure 4eSubarea D


Legend

Access Road

Subarea D

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

Switchyard C

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 4fSubarea E


Legend

Access Road

Subarea E

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

Switchyard C

Switchyard D

33 HWY

WA

TE

RF

LO

OD

RD

POLE LIN

E R

D

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 4gSubarea F


Legend

Access Road

Subarea F

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 10.5

Miles

±

Switchyard D

W LOKERN RD

Figure 4hSubarea G


Legend

Access Road

Subarea G

Project Boundary

Transmission Lines

500 KV

Route A

Route B


Substation

Switchyard


0 2,0001,000

Feet

±



Table 2 shows the Kern County General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications for the subareas and their surroundings. The table also identifies the existing land uses on the project site and the surrounding parcels. Figure 5 provides a subarea index map related to existing zoning classifications within and surrounding the project site. Figures 5a through 5g show the existing zoning within and surrounding the subareas. Figure 6 provides a subarea index map related to existing general plan land use designations within and surrounding the project site. Figures 6a through 6g shows the existing general plan land use designations.

Table 2. Existing Land Use, General Plan Map Code Designations, and Zoning Classifications

Subarea


General Plan Land Use Designations

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4

8.3; 8.4 8.3, 8.4 8.3; 8.4 8.3; 8.4 8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8/3; 8.3/2.5

Surrounding Area General Plan Land Use Designations

1.1; 8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4;

8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

8.3; 8.3/2.5; 8.4; 8.4/2.5

Zoning A A A; A-1 A A A; A-1 A

Surrounding Area Zoning

A, A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1 A; A-1; NR(5); NR(10)

A

Surrounding Area Land Uses

Site Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production







North Grazing Land


Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production



Grazing Land

South State/Federal Land Grazing

Land





Grazing Land Grazing Land

East Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land Oil and Gas Production



Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land

West Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production

Grazing Land Grazing Land Grazing Land, Oil and Gas Production


Grazing Land

General Plan Land Use Designations: 1.1 – State or Federal Land 8.3 – Extensive Agriculture (min. 20-acre parcel size) 8.3/2.5 – Extensive Agriculture/Flood Hazard 8.4 – Mineral and Petroleum (min. 5-acre parcel size) 8.4/2.5 – Mineral and Petroleum/Flood Hazard

Zoning Classifications: A – Exclusive Agriculture A-1 – Limited Agriculture NR(5) – Natural Resources (min. 5-acre parcel size) NR(10) – Natural Resources (min. 10-acre parcel size)

Although there are several parcels with Federal land in the vicinity of the project boundary, the project is privately owned and does not include any Federal lands.

No schools or hospitals are located within the project area, nor are any located within 1 mile of the project site boundary. The nearest school is Belridge Elementary School, located approximately 3.9 miles south of the solar field site boundary. Lost Hills Elementary School, A. M. Thomas Middle School, Lost Hills Child Development and Head Start Center, and Lost Hills Union High School are located about 9 miles northeast of the project boundary in the community of Lost Hills. Delano Regional Medical Center is the closest emergency medical facility and is approximately 35 miles southeast of the project area. The Belridge Elementary School is located within 1,000 feet of the proposed gen-tie line.



Battalion 2 of the Kern County Fire Department (KCFD) provides fire suppression and emergency medical services for the project site, with Kern County Fire Station 26 providing primary service. Fire Station 26 is located approximately 11 miles east of the center of the project site at 14670 Lost Hills Road, just north of the intersection at SR-46, in the community of Lost Hills. Station 26 was constructed in 1989 and currently serves a response area of 35 square miles.

The Kern County Sheriff’s Department provides primary police protection for the project site and surrounding areas within unincorporated Kern County. The Kern County Sheriff’s Department, Wasco Substation, is located 30 miles east of the center of the project site at 748 F Street in the community of Wasco, just south of SR-46.

There are no public airports or landing strips within 2 miles of the project area, the proposed gen-tie routes, or the proposed substation location. However, there are several small private airstrips and local airports in the surrounding area, including Belridge Strip and Elk Hills-Buttonwillow Airport to the south and Blackwell Land Company Incorporated Airport, Paramount Farming Airport, and Lost Hills-Kern County Airport to the north.

Only small portions of the site are currently mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as flood zones. The majority of the project area is designated as Zone X (i.e., an area with minimal flood hazards). One area northwest of the project area (approximately 20 acres in Section 8, T27S, R19E) is located within the 100-year flood zone, as is one area in the southern portion of the project site (approximately 35 acres in Section 16, T28S, R20E). The substation is not located within a FEMA flood zone.

Proposed Project

The project includes four GPAs (GPA 3, Map 50; GPA 3, Map 51; GPA 1, Map 73; and GPA 2, Map 74) to amend the Circulation Element of the Kern County General Plan and eliminate future road reservations along section and midsection lines in Sections 8, 9, 10, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, and 36 of T27S R19E; Sections 19, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 of T27S R20E; Sections 1, 2, 11, 12 of T28S R19E; and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 16 of T28S R20E. Figure 7 shows the parcels in which existing road reservations would be eliminated as part of the project. There are no existing roads along the subject lines. Because of existing oil field infrastructure and related activities in the area, it is unlikely that roads would be developed along these lines. Therefore, the elimination of future road reservations would not affect area traffic patterns or regional transportation needs.

The project also includes four CUPs (CUP 2, Map 50; CUP 7, Map 51; CUP 1, Map 73; and CUP 6, Map 74) to allow for the construction and operation of a solar PV power-generating facility with a capacity of 1 GW of electricity on 6,100 acres of land out of the approximately 14,400 total acres of land within the A (Exclusive Agriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture) zoning districts. In addition, the project includes a request to cancel a Williamson Act land use contract (No. 12-04) for four APNs with a total of 976 acres of grazing land. The APNs are 085-050-07 (about 240 acres in Subarea D), 085-120-23 (about 456 acres in Subarea E), 085-110-09 (about 120 acres in Subarea F), and 085-110-22 (about 160 acres in Subarea F).

The site is intended to operate year-round and produce up to 1 GW of solar power. The proposed facility would generate electricity during daylight hours, which is when electricity demand is at its peak, and consist of some or all the following project components: (1) PV modules; (2) mounting structures; (3) inverters and transformers; (4) an electrical collection and distribution system; (5) offsite 230 kV gen-tie lines; (6) four switching substations, including 230 kV transformers; (7) an operations building/warehouse and a storage yard; (8) weather monitoring equipment; (9) fencing, which would be designed to comply with wildlife agency requirements; and (10) an offsite 500 kV substation. These project components are described in detail below.

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AA

AA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A-1

A-1 A-1

A-1

A-1

A

NR(5)

33 HWY B

RO

WN

MATE

RIA

L R

D

BITTERWATER VALLEY R

DPO

LE LINE R

D

Figure 5Existing Zoning Overview


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea

Project Boundary

Source: Kern County (2011)

0 10.5

Miles

±Zoning DesignationA (Exclusive Agriculture)A-1 (Limited Agriculture)

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

C-2C-2CO

C-246 HWY

33 HW

Y

BITTERWATER V

ALLEY RD

Figure 5aSubarea A Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea A

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

A

A A

A

A

A-1

C-2C-2CO

C-246 HWY

33 HWY

BITTERWATER V

ALLEY RD

Figure 5bSubarea B Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea B

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A-1

A-1

A-1

A-1

C-2C-2CO

C-2

NR(5)

33 HWY

BR

OW

N M

ATER

IAL

RD

PO

LE LINE RD

Figure 5cSubarea C Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea C

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

A

A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A-1

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 5dSubarea D Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea D

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A-1

A-1

A-1

A-1

A

33 HWY

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 5eSubarea E Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea E

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

AA

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A-1

A-1 A-1

R-1

A-1

A-1

A-1

A

NR(10)

NR(5)

33 HWY

CONTRACTORS RD

POLE LIN

E RD

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 5fSubarea F Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea F

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


A

Figure 5gSubarea G Existing Zoning


Legend

Existing Zoning

Subarea G

Project Boundary


0 1,000500

Feet


A

8.3

8.3

8.38.3

8.3

8.3

8.4

8.1

8.3/2.4

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.3

8.4

8.3/2.5 8.4/2.5

8.3/2.5

1.1

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4/2.5

8.3

8.4

1.1

8.4

8.3

8.3

1.1

1.1

8.4

1.1

8.3/2.4

8.3/2.4

1.1

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.3/2.4

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

8.3

8.4

1.1

8.3/2.5

1.1

8.3/2.54.1

8.1/2.5

8.3

8.3

33 HWY

BR

OW

N M

ATER

IAL

RD

POLE LIN

E RD

Figure 6Existing General Plan Overview


Legend

General Plan

Subarea

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles

±General Plan Designation1.1- State or Federal Land8.3 - Extensive Agriculture (Min. 20 Acre Parcel Size)8.3/2.5 - Extensive Agriculture/Flood Hazard8.4 - Mineral and Petroleum (Min. 5 Acre Parcel Size)8.4/2.5 - Mineral and Petroleum/Flood Hazard

8.3

8.3

8.1

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.3/2.5

1.1

1.1

1.18.3

8.3

8.4

1.1

1.1

8.4

8.3/2.4

8.41.1

1.11.1

8.3

8.4

8.3/2.4

8.3/2.4

8.3/2.4

8.16.26.2/2.5

46 HWY

33 HW

Y

BITTERWATER V

ALLEY RD

Figure 6aSubarea A General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea A

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3/2.4

8.3

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.1

8.3/2.5

1.1

8.4

8.41.1

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.38.1

6.26.2/2.5

46 HWY

33 HWY

BITTERWATER V

ALLEY RD

Figure 6bSubarea B General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea B

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.1

8.3/2.5

8.4/2.5

1.1

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.38.1

6.26.2/2.5

33 HWY

BR

OW

N M

ATER

IAL

RD

PO

LE LINE RD

Figure 6cSubarea C General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea C

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3/2.4

8.3

8.3/2.4

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

8.4

8.4

1.1

8.4

1.1

1.1

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.3

1.1

1.18.3

8.3

8.3

8.3/2.2

8.4

8.3

8.3/2.2

8.3/2.2

8.3/2.2

8.3/2.2

8.3

Figure 6dSubarea D General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea D

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

1.1

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.4

1.1

8.4

1.1

8.4

8.4

1.1

8.4

8.4

8.48.3

1.1

1.18.3

8.3

8.3/2.4

8.4

8.3/2.4

8.3

8.4/2.4

8.3/2.2

8.3/2.28.4/2.4

8.3

33 HWY

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 6eSubarea E General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea E

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.3

8.1

8.3

8.3

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4/2.5

8.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.4/2.5

5.38.4

8.3/2.5

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

1.1

8.4

8.3/2.4

8.4

8.3/2.48.4/2.4

8.3/2.2

8.3/2.28.4/2.4

33 HWY

WA

TE

RF

LO

OD

RD

POLE LIN

E RD

SEVENTH STANDARD RD

Figure 6fSubarea F General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea F

Project Boundary


0 10.5

Miles


8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4/2.5

8.3/2.5

1.1

8.3/2.5

8.3/2.4

Figure 6gSubarea G General Plan


Legend

General Plan

Subarea G

Project Boundary


0 1,000500

Feet


Figure 7Proposed Amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element




Project Facilities and Operations

Facilities and Operations

The major facilities and components of the project are described below.

PV Modules and Mounting Structures

The PV technology that would be used for this project has not been determined. However, final design will consider either a tracking system or fixed-tilt system for the mounting structures or a combination of both system types; therefore, both types of panel technology will be discussed in this document. The PV modules would be nonreflective and would convert sunlight into direct current (DC) electricity, which would supply the electrical grid. The modules would consume no fossil fuels and would emit no pollutants during operations.

The solar PV generating facilities would consist of PV panels mounted on steel and aluminum support structures.

• If fixed-tilt panels are used, the rows would be oriented east to west, with the panels facing south. The panels would be approximately 10 feet off the ground at their maximum height. In addition, the panels would provide adequate headspace for species to move about the arrays; and

• If tracker arrays are used, they would be arranged north to south and placed about 19 feet apart (centerline to centerline). The north/south ends of each tracker array would be about 10 feet apart, except in areas where inverter/transformer pads would be constructed. It is anticipated that 1-megawatt (MW) PV module arrays would be used; however, PV module arrays of up to 2 MW may be selected during final design.

The project is anticipated include a maximum of 6,121,350 solar panels, depending on the type of technology used and the final facility design.

Inverters and Transformers

Inverters and medium-voltage transformer units are typically mounted on concrete foundation pads. All electrical equipment would be either rated for outdoor use or mounted within electrical enclosures that would be designed specifically for outdoor installation. The equipment would pose no risk of electrical shock and would be safe for humans and wildlife to touch.

Electrical Collection and Distribution System

The DC output of multiple PV modules would be collected through one or more combiner boxes and associated electrical wiring, then delivered via aboveground lines. Inverters within electrical enclosures would convert DC power to alternating current (AC), and a medium-voltage transformer would step up the voltage to collection-level voltage. Multiple transformers would be connected in parallel to deliver AC power via aboveground lines to four switching substations. Each of the four switching substations would be located on approximately 10 acres and capable of transforming field voltage to 230 kV within the project boundary.

Gen-Tie Line

The gen-tie line, a 230 kV transmission line, would extend about 19 miles, from the northernmost switching substation in the solar field to a proposed 500 kV PG&E substation located offsite. At that point, the line would connect to an existing 500 kV PG&E line and, ultimately, to the utility grid. The transmission line would be located on private property within a mile-wide corridor. The single-pole steel



towers for the 230 kV transmission line would be 110 feet tall and have 7- to 8-foot-wide concrete bases. There would be five or six poles per mile (a total of about 114). Poles would be set in poured concrete foundations within holes that would be augured wherever feasible to a depth of 20 to 30 feet. The structures and conductor support hardware would be assembled at each pole location to minimize damage during transport.

Onsite Operations Building/Warehouse

The project would include an operations and maintenance (O&M) building/warehouse and fenced equipment yard in Subarea F. A minimum of five employees would be required to monitor facility performance and respond to requests for utility adjustments. Panel maintenance crews with two to four employees each would be available throughout the array, and the security staff would be available 24 hours a day.

The O&M building would measure 40 by 50 feet and be 12 feet high. A septic system would be installed for sewage disposal; potable water for the staff would be delivered to the building. The O&M building would provide the required number of parking spaces (i.e., a minimum of 20). The design and construction of the building would be consistent with Kern County building standards.

Offsite Substation

The 500 kV substation would be located on approximately 65 acres and include two 150-foot-tall towers that would connect the substation to the existing 500 kV PG&E line located just south of the proposed substation. The final ground grid design would be based on site-specific information, such as available fault information and local soil resistivity, and would meet all required specifications. Typical ground grids consist of direct buried copper but may include copper-clad ground rods arranged in a grid pattern up to 3 feet outside of the substation area.

Substation equipment and optional switchyard equipment would be between 15 and 35 feet tall, with the exception of the utility/substation dead-end structure and microwave tower, which would be 50 and 80 feet tall, respectively, at their highest points.

Facility and Switchyard Control System

The project would include a Supervisory, Control, and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system within the onsite O&M building area. The SCADA system would allow for remote monitoring and control of inverters and other project components. The system would be able to monitor project output and availability as well as run diagnostics on the equipment. The project site would also have a local overall process control system (PCS) that would monitor the solar field as well as the balance of facility systems. The microprocessor-based PCS would provide control, monitoring, alarm, and data storage functions for plant systems and communicate with the solar field SCADA systems. Redundant capability would be provided for critical PCS components so that no single component failure would cause a plant outage. All field instruments and controls would be hardwired to local electrical panels. Local panels would be hardwired to the plant PCS. Wireless technology would be considered as a potential alternative during final project design.

Onsite Meteorological Station

The project site would have up to four onsite Solar Meteorological Stations, which would consist of four to eight solar energy (irradiance) meters as well as air temperature and wind meters. The equipment would be installed on either standalone poles or the PV module mounting structures (up to 12 feet in height).



Potential PG&E Network Upgrades

In addition to construction of the offsite 500 kV substation, two spans of 500 kV lattice tower supports, and the 230 kV inter-tie, potential PG&E network upgrades may include the following:

• Reliability Network Upgrades:

o Transmission line work, including looping in/out,

o PG&E Midway substation network upgrades,

o PG&E Diablo Canyon substation network upgrades,

o PG&E new switching station network upgrades,

o PG&E Gates substation special protection schemes,

o PG&E San Francisco control center remedial action scheme,

o PG&E Vacaville grid control center remedial action scheme,

o Replace circuit breakers – Gates 230 kV breakers,

o Replace circuit breakers – Midway 500 kV breakers,

o Increase bus capacity – Midway 500 kV bus,

o STATCOM at Q680,

• Deliverability Network Upgrades:

o Reconductor Panoche – 4/c678 #1 115 kV line (Panoche-Kamm),

o Reconductor Panoche – 4C678 #1 115 kV line (Panoche-Cantua),

o Reconductor 4C678 – Schindler #1 115 kV line (Schindler to Pole #28/134),

o Reconductor Panoche – 4C678 #2 115 kV line (Cheney Tap – S612 Tap) (Cheney Tap to Pole #6/29),

o Reconductor Panoche – 4C678 – Schindler #2 115 kV line (Schindler to Pole #28/134), and

o Reconductor S647SS – Oro Loma 115 kV line (Oro Loma to Pole #15/1).

Construction

Schedule

Construction is scheduled to begin in the first quarter of 2014 and be completed over a 5- to 10-year period. Major milestones in the construction schedule for the site are summarized in Table 3.

Site Preparation

Construction would require minimal vegetation removal for the panel structures. Parking areas and access roadways would be provided for construction workers, and laydown areas would be set up in the project area for construction materials. Appropriate measures would be taken to prevent trackout from the project site. A minimal amount of grading would be required, and any disturbed areas among the arrays that would not be needed for panel access would be revegetated with native grasses and wildflowers. The laydown areas and parking areas would be located in areas where the arrays would be constructed and relocated as the areas are built out.



Table 3. Construction Schedule—Major Milestones

Activity Date

Begin construction First quarter 2014

Install transmission line o onsite/switching substation o offsite substation and energize

2014–2016 2014–2024 Fourth quarter 2016

Commercial operation (first 250 MW) Fourth quarter 2016

Second 250 MW 2017–2019

Third 250 MW 2018–2020

Fourth 250 MW 2019–2024

Complete buildout (1,000 MW) 2019–2024

Because of the flat topography at the project site, a minimal amount of grading would be required for the PV modules and associated facilities. In addition, the PV generator pedestals allow for installation on uneven ground, thereby minimizing the need for grading. A minor amount of grading would be required for the O&M building, warehouse, and switching substation areas.

Areas disturbed by project construction activities would be stabilized during construction to minimize wind and water erosion, as well as fugitive dust, by watering and/or using approved dust palliatives or tackifiers. Temporary disturbances would be primarily due to construction activities in equipment staging and laydown areas, along temporary access roads, or within graded or disturbed areas, which would be restored following completion of construction. Permanent disturbances would be related to operations on permanent roadways and access roads, in switching substations, and at the O&M building and associated parking and the storage yard adjacent to the O&M building. Such disturbances would also be related to the use of equipment that would remain in place for the life of the project.

The O&M building area, the storage yard, and the switching substations would be secured with 6-foot-high chain link fencing topped with three strands of barbed wire, for a total height of 7 feet. The perimeter fencing would comply with wildlife agency requirements and consist of existing fencing and an additional length of four‐wire ranch fencing as necessary. The fencing would remain for the life of the project. Equipment and material staging areas would be established during the site preparation phase. Multiple temporary staging and laydown areas would be located throughout the project site to support final assembly and installation during different project phases. Finally, 40-acre PV blocks would be constructed. A 4-acre laydown/staging area would be located within each 40-acre block and then moved to the next 40-acre block as each PV block is constructed. Power from the PV module arrays and electrical enclosures would be delivered to the switching substations via aboveground lines.

Abandoned oil wells would be managed according to Department of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) procedures and in conformance with DOGGR requirements. Site plans indicating the location of all known wells would be provided to minimize accidental damage or ruptures during construction activities. Additionally, 5-acre exclusion zones would be place around existing and former oil wells or test hole locations. A 30-foot (minimum) exclusion zone would be established along pipelines and FEMA-identified flood zones. Mineral resource access would be provided, with 40-acre set-aside areas for each 640 acres of developed land, in addition to the 5-acre exclusion zones, as necessary.



Construction Workers, Hours, and Equipment

The construction workforce would consist of laborers, craftspeople, supervisory personnel, and support and management personnel. Over the 5- to 10-year construction period, the construction workforce is expected to peak at 175 (construction and field personnel).

Construction would generally occur between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. on a 5-day-per-week, 8-hour-per-day basis. Additional work hours and days may be necessary to make up for unanticipated delays or testing and checkout activities. All construction work performed outside of the normal work schedule would be coordinated with the appropriate agencies and conform to the Kern County Noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.36).

Nondaylight work hours may be necessary to make up for delays or complete critical construction activities, including activities that cannot be completed during daylight hours. For instance, during hot weather, it may be necessary to start work earlier to avoid pouring concrete during periods of high ambient temperatures.

Temporary Construction Services and Facilities

Temporary construction trailers and associated work facilities would be installed during site mobilization. It is expected that the majority of these temporary facilities would be located at the O&M building during the construction period.

Other construction details are summarized below.

Electrical Supply

Temporary power for construction is expected to be provided by mobile diesel-driven generator sets and/or the local power provider.

Water Usage

Water for construction would be imported by truck to the project site. The project proponent would receive water for construction from Aera Energy and/or Paramount Farms surface water supplies. It is anticipated that the project would require 20 acre-feet of water per year during construction.

Wastewater

Wastewater generated during construction would be composed primarily of sanitary waste, which would be managed through the use of portable toilets. Other sources of wastewater generated during construction may include stormwater runoff and equipment wash water. Construction would adhere to a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for runoff and erosion control. Site-specific BMPs would be designed by the contractor in compliance with the regulations and permit conditions of the SWPPP. The project would also comply with applicable post-construction water quality requirements adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley (RWQCB Central Valley).

Solid and Nonhazardous Waste

The project site would produce a small amount of solid waste from construction activities. This may include paper; wood; glass; plastics from packing material; waste lumber; insulation; scrap metal and concrete; empty, nonhazardous containers; and vegetation wastes. These wastes would be segregated, where practical, for recycling. Nonrecyclable wastes would be placed in covered dumpsters and removed on a regular basis by a certified waste-handling contractor for disposal at a Class III landfill. In the event vegetation wastes are generated by clearing and grubbing, they would be chipped/mulched and hauled offsite to an appropriate “green” waste facility.



Hazardous Materials

The hazardous materials used for construction would be typical of most construction projects of this type. Materials would include small quantities of gasoline, diesel fuel, oils, lubricants, solvents, detergents, degreasers, paints, ethylene glycol, and welding materials/supplies. A hazardous materials business plan would be provided to the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department/Hazardous Materials Section. The plan would include a complete list of all materials used onsite and information regarding how the materials would be transported and in what form they would be used. This information would be recorded to ensure safety and prevent possible environmental contamination or worker exposure. During project construction, material safety data sheets for all applicable materials present at the project site would be made readily available to onsite personnel.

Hazardous Waste

Small quantities of hazardous wastes would most likely be generated over the course of construction. These wastes may include waste paint, spent construction solvents, waste cleaners, waste oil, oily rags, waste batteries, and spent welding materials. Workers would be trained to identify and handle all hazardous materials properly. Hazardous waste would be either recycled or disposed of at a permitted and licensed treatment and/or disposal facility. All hazardous waste shipped offsite for recycling or disposal would be transported by a licensed and permitted hazardous waste hauler.

Operation

Once placed into service, the project site would operate during daylight hours when there is adequate sunlight to begin operation of the solar field. A minimum of five operating personnel would be required to monitor plant performance and respond to utility requests for adjustments. Panel maintenance crews of two to four employees each would be generally available throughout the array. Security staff would be available 24 hours per day. Spare equipment would be stored in the onsite warehouse.

No heavy equipment would be used during normal operation. Operation and maintenance vehicles would include trucks (pickups, flatbeds, and dump trucks), forklifts, loaders for routine and unscheduled maintenance, and water trucks for PV solar module washing. Large heavy-haul transport equipment may be brought to the project site occasionally for equipment repair or replacement.

Roads, Fencing, and Security

The project site would contain a network of access roads, parking areas, and buildings. To ensure the safety of the public and the facility, the O&M building, equipment yard, and switching substations would be secured with 6-foot-high chain link fencing topped with three strands of barbed wire, for a total height of 7 feet. The perimeter fencing would consist of existing fencing and an additional length of four‐wire ranch fencing as necessary. As noted above, the fencing would comply with wildlife agency requirements and give animals the ability to move through the site. Access to the site would be controlled by gates that would allow only approved vehicles to enter. The site would also have a closed-circuit TV system that would be monitored from the onsite O&M buildings.

An area of approximately 2.5 acres would be paved, including site access roads, parking areas, and portions of the area around the O&M building and equipment yard. Areas surrounding the switching substations would be surfaced with gravel. The internal roadway system would include perimeter dirt or gravel roads as well as a network of dirt roads between power blocks. Roads for maintenance staff access would consist of existing compacted materials.



Electrical Supply

Power for auxiliary plant facilities would be supplied by the site’s electrical generation system or the local power provider. The project would require power for electrical enclosures, switching substation equipment, switchgear buildings, the O&M building, and plant lighting and security. The switchgear building battery rooms would supply DC power for substation protection equipment.

Lighting

The site’s lighting systems would provide O&M personnel with illumination for both normal and emergency conditions. Lighting would be designed to provide the minimum illumination needed to achieve safety and security objectives. All lighting would be designed in accordance with applicable Kern County requirements. Lighting would be provided at the electrical enclosures, switchgear buildings, O&M building, and the entrance to the main access road. There would be no lighting in the PV field; therefore, light spillover on adjacent properties would be minimal. If lighting at individual solar modules or other equipment is needed for night maintenance, portable lighting would be used.

Water Usage

Water for operations would be imported by truck. Water for the project would be supplied by Aera Energy and/or Paramount Farms surface water supplies. Potable water for the O&M building would be bottled water that would be trucked to the site.

Water for operational activities would be primarily for PV panel washing, along with small quantities for dust control. The project would require 18.5 acre-feet of water per washing. At a rate of up to two wash events per year, it is anticipated that 37 acre-feet of water would be required per year for maintenance purposes.

Wastewater

Operational wastewater would be primarily sanitary waste. The project would include a septic system and/or leach field, which would conform to Kern County regulations. All onsite employees would use the facilities available at the O&M building.

Stormwater

Impervious areas of the solar PV power generating facility that could increase stormwater runoff would be constructed in compliance with stormwater quality management measures (e.g., measures pertaining to basins and infiltration areas). These measures would be designed to meet State and local stormwater management plan requirements. Paved areas would be maintained, and any vehicle leaks or spills would be periodically cleaned with sorbent materials to minimize the potential for contamination. All RWQCB Central Valley discharge requirements and Kern County water quality regulations would be adhered to during development and maintenance of the project site.

Fire Protection

The PV modules and ancillary equipment represent a negligible increase in fire potential. Fire protection measures would include the use of portable carbon dioxide (CO2) fire extinguishers, which would be mounted outside the electrical enclosures that contain the inverters and medium-voltage transformers. An FM200 fire suppression system, or equivalent, may be used in the switchgear building and the attached battery room. Additionally, fire protection for the solar arrays and the gen-tie line would incorporate vegetation management programs. Within the solar arrays, vegetation would be controlled to minimize fire risk using mechanical methods, as necessary. For the gen-tie line, clearances for vegetation would be



maintained in accordance with California Public Utility Code General Order 95 (Rules for Overhead Electric Line Construction). A water tank would be located at the O&M building for fire suppression use, as required.

Solid and Nonhazardous Waste

Project operations would produce a small amount of solid waste. During operations, workers would generate nonhazardous solid waste (e.g., rags, scrap metal, packing materials from deliveries, empty containers, sanitary wastewater solids, and other miscellaneous solid wastes) from activities associated with the warehouse, switchgear buildings, and O&M building.

Hazardous Materials

Limited quantities of hazardous materials may be used and stored onsite for operation and maintenance. These materials would include oils, lubricants, paints, solvents, degreasers and other cleaners, and transformer mineral oil.

The four-area 230 kV switchyard and generation step-up transformers would contain up to 8,000 gallons of dielectric fluid (mineral oil). All project generation step-up transformers would be located on concrete pads surrounded by 6-inch earthen, fiberglass, or concrete containment berms/curbs. Containment areas would be lined with an impermeable membrane covered with gravel.

Each of the medium-voltage transformers, which convert field voltage to gathering voltage, would contain up to 450 gallons of dielectric fluid. The transformers, which would be mounted on concrete pads and co-located with the inverter units, would be distributed throughout the site, including in the containment areas. In accordance with State and Federal regulations, all components would have a comprehensive Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan. Stormwater would be inspected for sheen prior to disposal. If sheen is observed, the stormwater would be removed by vacuum truck to an appropriate disposal site. If no sheen or contaminants are detected, the stormwater would be drained onsite.

Hazardous materials would be stored in appropriate storage locations and containers. Flammable materials, such as paints and solvents, would be stored in nonflammable storage cabinets with built-in containment sumps. A hazardous materials business plan would be provided to the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department/Hazardous Materials Section. The plan would include a complete list of all materials used onsite. A Hazardous Material Management Program (HMMP) would be developed for project operations prior to commencement of operations. At a minimum, the HMMP would include procedures for:

• Hazardous materials handling, use, and storage;

• Emergency response;

• Spill control and prevention;

• Employee training; and

• Recordkeeping and reporting.

Hazardous Waste

Hazardous waste generated during facility operation, if any, would be managed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Workers would be trained to identify and handle all hazardous materials properly. Hazardous wastes would be either recycled or disposed of at a permitted and licensed treatment and/or disposal facility. All hazardous wastes shipped offsite for recycling or disposal would be transported by a licensed and permitted hazardous waste hauler.



Health and Safety

All employees and contractors would be required to adhere to the appropriate health and safety plans and emergency response plans. All construction and operation contractors would be trained and required to operate under a health and safety program that meets industry and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards.

Project Objectives

The project proponent’s purpose is to develop and construct a PV power-generating facility at the site and then sell the project’s electricity and associated environmental attributes to an electric utility purchaser under a long-term contract that meets the goals of California’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS).

To meet the primary purpose of the project, the project proponent has identified the following objectives:

Establish a solar PV power-generating facility with the size and configuration required to produce up to 1 GW (1,000 MW) of clean electricity, thereby contributing renewable energy in accordance with the State’s RPS requirement, which calls for 33% of the electricity sold in California to be from renewable sources by 2020;

Increase the diversity and reliability of the State’s energy mix while addressing public and environmental health concerns;

Reduce California’s dependence on foreign sources of energy;

Insulate Californians from potential energy price spikes in future years;

Maximize the utilization of land with compatible land uses by integrating grazing, ranching, oil and gas exploration and extraction, and renewable energy production in one area;

Minimize environmental impacts on threatened and/or endangered species;

Minimize water use;

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

Use technology that is available, proven, efficient, easily maintained, recyclable, and environmentally sound; and

Provide employment opportunities for people within Kern County in the renewable energy field, with the creation of 175 construction and up to five permanent jobs.

Proposed Discretionary Actions/Required Approvals

The Kern County Planning and Community Development Department, as lead agency for the project, has discretionary authority over the primary project proposal. To implement this project, the proponent would need to obtain the following discretionary permits/approvals.

Kern County

Consideration and certification of a final environmental impact report (EIR) with appropriate findings (15091), a statement of overriding considerations (15093), and a mitigation measures monitoring program by the Kern County Board of Supervisors;



Approval of GPAs:

o GPA 3, Map 50;

o GPA 3, Map 51;

o GPA 1, Map 73;

o GPA 2, Map 74;

Approval of CUPs:

o CUP 2, Map 50;

o CUP 7, Map 51;

o CUP 1, Map 73;

o CUP 6, Map 74;

Approval of Williamson Act Land Use Contract Cancellation Petition 12-04:

o Subarea D: APN 085-050-07 (about 240 acres);

o Subarea E: APN 085-120-23 (about 456 acres);

o Subarea F: APN 085-110-09 (about 120 acres) and APN 085-110-22 (about 160 acres);

Grading, building, and other construction-related permits/approvals;

Franchise agreements; and

Encroachment permits.

Other additional permits or approvals from Kern County may be required for the project.

Other Responsible Agencies

State Water Resources Control Board/RWQCB Central Valley—National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and Clean Water Act Section 401 permit;

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District—permit to construct/operate;

California Department of Conservation;

California Department of Fish and Wildlife—Section 2081(b) take permit and streambed alteration agreement;

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—Section 10 incidental take permit; and

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—Clean Water Act Section 404 permit.

The preceding are potentially required and do not necessarily represent a comprehensive list of all discretionary permits/approvals required.



KERN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected

The environmental factors checked below could be affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “potentially significant impact,” as indicated by the Kern County Environmental Checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest Resources Air Quality

Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality

Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise

Population and Housing Public Services Recreation

Transportation and Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance

Determination

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (a) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and (b) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required.

January 25, 2013

Signature

Date

Jaymie L. Brauer

Printed Name

For



Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “no impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “no impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “no impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially significant impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “potentially significant impact” entries when the determination is made, an environment impact report (EIR) is required.

4. Negative Declaration: “Less than significant with mitigation incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “potentially significant impact” to a “less-than-significant impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration, Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where it is available for review;

b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis; and

c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “less than significant with mitigation incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:

a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.



Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):

Potentially Significant

Impact

Less than Significant

with Mitigation

Incorporated

Less-than-Significant

Impact

No

Impact

AESTHETICS. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic

vista?

b. Substantially damage scenic resources,

including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual

character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare

that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Discussion:

a. The site is located in unincorporated Kern County, 2 miles south of the unincorporated community of Blackwells Corner and west of the towns of Lost Hills and Buttonwillow. The project includes a 40-acre substation approximately 12 miles south of the project site and an approximately 19-mile-long 230 kV gen-tie line. The project would develop 6,100 acres of land for a solar facility. The aesthetic features of the existing visual environment in the area are relatively uniform, with ranching operations/grazing as well as natural gas and oil production/extraction equipment dominating the landscape. The active or abandoned gas and oil fields in the vicinity of the project site include the Shale Flats and Shale Point gas fields and the Antelope Hills, North Antelope Hills, North Belridge, South Belridge, McDonald Anticline, Antelope Plains, Beer Nose, and Blackwells Corner oil fields. As such, there are no unique aesthetic features, identified scenic vistas, or designated scenic highways in the project vicinity (see also Item [b], below). The placement of PV solar panels, the gen-tie line, and associated facilities on the site would alter views, and motorists on adjacent roads would observe the alterations. However, views of the solar facility would be limited because of the level terrain and the relatively low height of the panels. Because no scenic vistas have been identified, less-than-significant impacts on scenic vistas are expected to occur; however, further discussion is warranted in the EIR.

b. Areas surrounding the site are used mainly for grazing or oil and gas production. Construction of the solar facility and placement of the gen-tie would alter views from public roads. However, according to the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans’) California Scenic Highway Mapping System, there are no State Scenic Highways or scenic resources in the project area. The closest section of highway that would be eligible for State Scenic Highway designation is SR-41, approximately 17 miles northwest of the site. Therefore, less-than-significant impacts on scenic resources or a State scenic vista are anticipated to result from the project; however, further discussion is warranted in the EIR.



c. Surrounding land uses include grazing or oil and gas production/extraction. Development of the solar facility, the gen-tie line, and offsite substation would alter views in the project vicinity. Furthermore, motorists on nearby roads would observe alterations to the existing landscape. The project would develop 6,100 acres of land for a solar facility. Significant changes to visual quality at the project site may occur. Therefore, potential visual impacts will be evaluated further in the EIR.

d. Because the project site is currently used for grazing or oil and gas production/extraction, no permanent lighting exists on the site. The PV modules would be designed to absorb sunlight to maximize electrical output. They are not expected to have reflective surfaces that would increase the potential for glare during the day.

The site’s lighting systems would provide O&M personnel with illumination for both normal and emergency conditions. The lighting would be designed to provide the minimum illumination needed to achieve safety and security objectives. Lighting would be directed downward and shielded to focus it on desired areas only and minimize trespass. There would be no lighting in the solar field; therefore, light spillover on surrounding areas would be minimal. Night lighting for short-term, task-specific purposes during construction may be necessary. If lighting at individual solar modules or other equipment is needed for night maintenance, portable lighting would be used. This type of lighting is regulated by the Kern County Zoning Ordinance, which also covers screening and the prevention of offsite spillage. Further analysis of specific lighting requirements, nighttime lighting, and glare is warranted; these impacts will be evaluated further in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated

Less-than- Significant

Impact

No Impact

AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts on forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State’s inventory of forestland, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project, and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in the forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricul-tural use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use

or a Williamson Act contract?

c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause

rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned for timberland production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?

d. Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of

forestland to nonforest use?

e. Involve other changes in the existing

environment that, because of their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to nonforest use?





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

f. Result in the cancellation of an open space

contract made pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 or Farmland Security Zone Contract for any parcel of 100 or more acres (Section 15206(b)(3) Public Resources Code)?

Discussion:

a. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, land within the boundary of the project site has been classified as Grazing Land. The project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. However, the site is within Agricultural Preserve Nos. 1 and 5. Impacts related to the conversion of farmland are anticipated to be less than significant; however, potential impacts will be analyzed further in the EIR.

b. The site is zoned A (Exclusive Agriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture) by the Kern County Zoning Ordinance. The project proponent is requesting approval of four CUPs to develop a solar facility on the site under the existing zone classifications. According to the Kern County Zoning Ordinance, a solar facility is a compatible use in agricultural districts. The A and A-1 zoning districts would allow construction and operation of a solar energy facility with approval of the CUPs. Therefore, impacts related to agricultural zoning are not anticipated and are considered less than significant. However, portions of the site are under Williamson Act land use contracts. Therefore, impacts are potentially significant and will be analyzed in the EIR.

c. As discussed above, the project site, which is zoned for agricultural use, and surrounding lands are used for oil and natural gas exploration and extraction. No forestlands exist on the project site. Accordingly, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for or cause the rezoning of forestland, timberland, or timberland that has been zoned for timberland production. Therefore, no impacts on forestland would occur, and no further discussion is warranted in the EIR.

d. The project site and surrounding properties do not contain forestland. Impacts resulting from a loss of forestland or a conversion of forestland to nonforest use are not expected to occur; therefore, the EIR will not discuss this issue.

e. The project involves construction and operation of a solar PV power-generating facility on the project site. The project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, the project would not convert land that has been placed under these designations. Furthermore, the project site does not contain forestland. The project would, however, result in the conversion of land zoned for agriculture to a nonagricultural use. Therefore, impacts on agricultural resources are potentially significant and will be analyzed further in the EIR.

f. The project would result in the cancellation of an open space contract made pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 or a Farmland Security Zone Contract for any parcel of 100 or more acres (Public Resources Code Section 15206(b)(3)). Although several parcels within the project site are under Williamson Act land use contracts, only lands that are proposed for solar development are subject to cancellation at this time, a total of about 976 acres. Therefore, potentially significant impacts on lands that are under Williamson Act land use contracts are anticipated and will be analyzed in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No

Impact AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the

applicable air quality plan?

b. Violate any air quality standard as adopted in

(c)i or (c)ii, or as established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the air district, or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net

increase in any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment status under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Specifically, would implementation of the project exceed any of the following adopted thresholds:

i. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control

District (SJVAPCD):

Operational and Area Sources

Reactive organic gases (ROG),

10 tons per year

Oxides of nitrogen (NOX), 10 tons per year

Particulate matter (PM10), 15 tons per year

Stationary Sources, as Determined by District

Rules

Severe nonattainment,

25 tons per year

Extreme nonattainment, 10 tons per year





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No

Impact

ii. Kern County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD):

Operational and Area Sources

ROG, 25 tons per year

NOX, 10 tons per year

PM10, 15 tons per year

Stationary Sources, as Determined by District Rules

25 tons per year

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial

pollutant concentrations?

e. Create objectionable odors, affecting a

substantial number of people?

Discussion:

a. The project would be located within the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). The SJVAB is classified by the State as a severe nonattainment area with respect to the 1-hour ozone standard as well as a nonattainment area for the State standards pertaining to particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10) and particulate matter less than 2½ microns (PM2.5). In addition, the SJVAB is classified as an extreme nonattainment area for the Federal 8-hour ozone standard, a nonattainment area for the Federal PM2.5 standard, and an attainment/maintenance area for the Federal carbon monoxide (CO) and PM10 standards. Project construction activities would generate ozone precursor (i.e., oxides of nitrogen [NOX] and reactive organic compounds [ROC]) emissions as well as CO, PM2.5, and PM10 emissions that could result in significant impacts on regional air quality. Emissions sources would include heavy equipment used to excavate and grade the array pads and access areas, cranes, and on-road motor vehicles for equipment and material deliveries as well as construction workers who commute to and from the site. Long-term maintenance and operational activities are other emissions sources. Grading and activities on unpaved roads and in laydown areas would contribute to fugitive PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. This impact is potentially significant. Further analysis of air quality impacts is warranted to determine whether the project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable plans for attainment and, if so, the reasonable and feasible mitigation measures that could be adopted to reduce such impacts. These issues will be evaluated in the EIR.

b. Short-term construction emissions could contribute significantly to an existing or projected SJVAPCD air quality violation of CO, PM10, PM2.5, or ozone standards, requiring the consideration of mitigation measures. This impact is potentially significant and will be evaluated further in the EIR.



c. The project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of SJVAPCD; it is not under the jurisdiction of the Kern County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD). The SJVAB is classified by the State as a severe nonattainment area with respect to the 1-hour ozone standard as well as a nonattainment area for the State standards pertaining to PM10 and PM2.5. In addition, the SJVAB is classified as an extreme nonattainment area for the Federal 8-hour ozone standard, a nonattainment area for the Federal PM2.5 standard, and an attainment/maintenance area for the Federal CO and PM10 standards. SJVAPCD rules and regulations would apply to all project activities. Construction and operational emissions will be analyzed in the EIR, including emissions from truck trips (e.g., when delivering panels or transporting employees to the project site) as well as long-term operational emissions generated by the solar facility. Some construction personnel may commute from outside the SJVAB; therefore, an impact related to emissions from workers’ vehicles may occur. However, this would be a less-than-significant impact because of the temporary and speculative nature of the impact. Cumulative contributions of emissions to the SJVAB are considered potentially significant. Therefore, construction and operational emissions will be evaluated in the EIR.

d. The closest school to the site is the Belridge Elementary School, located approximately 3.9 miles south of the project boundary for the solar array. Other nearby schools include the A. M. Thomas Middle School, Lost Hills Elementary School, Lost Hills Child Development and Head Start Center, and the Lost Hills Union High School, which are located about 9 miles northeast of the project boundary in the community of Lost Hills. Additionally, Belridge Elementary School is located within 1,000 feet of the proposed transmission line. Delano Regional Medical Center, which is the nearest emergency medical facility, is approximately 35 miles southeast of the project area. No residential buildings have been identified on the site. The nearest residence is located approximately 2 miles north of the project boundary at Blackwells Corner. There are no other sensitive receptors, such as retirement homes, in the vicinity of the site. Construction-related activities would result in diesel exhaust and fugitive dust emissions that could adversely affect air quality for the nearest sensitive receptors. Mitigation measures recommended by SJVAPCD for diesel equipment and dust control will be evaluated as part of the EIR to avoid or reduce impacts on construction workers and occupants of nearby residences. It is anticipated that a less-than-significant impact would occur because it would be only temporary and construction related. However, this impact will be evaluated further in the EIR.

e. Aside from odors associated with vehicle/equipment exhaust and fueling, no odors would result from operation of the project. Construction layout areas for the project would be located within the site. The nearest residences are anticipated to experience a minimal level of objectionable odors (if any) during construction. Therefore, potential impacts related to odors are considered less than significant; however, further analysis is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly

or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian

habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by CDFG or USFWS?

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally

protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any

native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances to

protect biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted

habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?

Discussion:

a. The project site is used for grazing as well as oil and gas production. The results of field surveys for special-status plant and animal species, as well as species listed by State or Federal government as either threatened or endangered, will be included in the EIR. Literature searches identified numerous plant species (e.g., oval-leaved snapdragon [Antirrhinum ovatum], Temblor buckwheat [Eriogonum temblorense], and Hoover’s woolly-star [Eriastrum hooveri]) and wildlife species (e.g., San Joaquin kit fox [Vulpes macrotis mutica], blunt-nosed leopard lizard [Gambelia sila], San Joaquin antelope squirrel [Ammospermophilus nelsoni], and burrowing owl [Athene cunicularia]) that have the potential to occur on the site and/or in surrounding areas. Impacts on biological resources are considered potentially significant and will be analyzed in the EIR.



b. A qualitative aerial analysis indicated that natural communities and riparian areas are not present on the site. However, the subareas are crossed by 17 ephemeral drainages, with an additional drainage crossing the proposed substation location. The transmission line route is also crossed by ephemeral drainages (12 for Route A and seven for Route B). Some or all of the drainages may be under the jurisdiction of CDFG, RWQCB Central Valley, and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The project site is currently used for grazing or oil and gas production, as is the majority of land surrounding the site. Although it is expected that the project would not affect any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, the EIR will include a comprehensive biological resources analysis.

c. A qualitative aerial analysis indicated that wetlands and waters of the United States are not present on the site. However, the subareas are crossed by 17 ephemeral drainages, with an additional drainage crossing the proposed substation location. The transmission line route is also crossed by ephemeral drainages (12 for Route A and seven for Route B). Some or all of the drainages may be under the jurisdiction of CDFG, RWQCB Central Valley, and/or USACE. Although it is anticipated that the project would not significantly affect any federally protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the EIR will include a comprehensive biological resources analysis.

d. The project site and surrounding area may be used for migration or dispersal by some avian species as well as mammals such as San Joaquin kit fox. Project construction and operation could also remove foraging habitat. This impact is potentially significant and will be evaluated in the EIR.

e. The project site is currently devoid of any trees. Accordingly, the project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances to protect biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. No impacts are anticipated to occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

f. The project site is within the boundaries of the draft Kern County Valley Floor Habitat Conservation Plan, which has not yet been approved. However, solar development is not a covered activity under the plan; therefore, the project would not conflict with an applicable conservation plan. No impacts are anticipated to occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the

significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the

significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique

paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

d. Disturb any human remains, including those

interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Discussion:

a. The sites for the proposed solar facility, transmission line, and offsite substation are used for grazing or oil and gas production. Because historical resources may exist and development of the project would require some ground disturbance, cultural resources surveys will be conducted for the project site. Further evaluation, which will be provided in the EIR, is warranted to identify potential impacts and formulate avoidance or mitigation measures, if applicable.

b. Development of the project would require some ground disturbance. Because archaeological resources may exist on the project site, archaeological surveys of the project site are being completed. Further evaluation, which will be provided in the EIR, is necessary to identify potential impacts and formulate avoidance or mitigation measures, if applicable.

c. The site is mapped as being underlain by Quaternary alluvium deposits. As such, paleontologically sensitive older Quaternary alluvium may be present at an unknown depth. Alluvium has proven to yield scientifically significant vertebrate fossils. During construction activities, including installation of the gen-tie and 500 kV transmission poles, paleontological resources may be unearthed. Therefore, further evaluation, which will be provided in the EIR, is warranted to identify potential impacts and formulate avoidance or mitigation measures, if necessary.

d. There is no evidence that the project site is located within an area that is likely to contain human remains, and the discovery of human remains during earthmoving activities is not anticipated. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. However, the potential for human remains to be encountered will be evaluated further in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:

a. Expose people or structures to potential

substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as

delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismically related ground failure, including

liquefaction?

iv. Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of

topsoil?

c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is

unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in

Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

e. Have soils that are incapable of adequately

supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?

Discussion:

a. i. Primary ground rupture is ground deformation that occurs along the surface trace of the causative fault during an earthquake. According to the geotechnical data available, no active faults are known to exist within the site. The San Andreas fault, which is located approximately 7 miles southwest of the project site, is the major tectonic boundary between



the Pacific and North American plates. Other major faults within the San Joaquin Valley include the Pond Poso fault and the White Wolf fault. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the project area or at the offsite substation site. Although it is anticipated that the project site would not be adversely affected, fault rupture will be evaluated in the EIR.

ii. The project site is in a seismically active region that could be subject to future seismic shaking during earthquakes generated by any of several surrounding active faults. The San Andreas fault, which is located approximately 7 miles southwest of the project site, is the major tectonic boundary between the Pacific and North American plates. Other major faults within the San Joaquin Valley include the Pond Poso fault and the White Wolf fault. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the project area or at the offsite substation. The entire County is located in Seismic Zone 4, which is a designation previously used in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) to denote areas with the highest risks from earthquake ground motion. As a result, the project could be subject to future seismic shaking and strong ground motion resulting from seismic activity, and damage to the PV modules and ancillary facilities could result. However, because the site is not close to an established population, damage to onsite structures would not expose substantial numbers of people to potential adverse effects.

The project would be required to comply with applicable building codes and structural improvement requirements to withstand strong seismic ground shaking. Construction of the project would be subject to all applicable ordinances of the Kern County Building Code (Chapter 17.08), which would require adherence to all modern earthquake standards. Kern County has adopted the California Building Standards Code, 2007 Edition (California Code of Regulations Title 24), which imposes substantially the same requirements as the International Building Code (IBC), 2006 Edition, with some modifications and amendments. Adherence to all applicable regulations would mitigate potential impacts associated with the project. As a result, impacts related to exposing people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death from strong seismic ground shaking, are anticipated to be less than significant; however, the EIR will include an evaluation of potential impacts related to seismic ground shaking

iii. Liquefaction is a phenomenon whereby, during periods of oscillatory ground motion caused by an event such as an earthquake, the pore water pressure in a loose, saturated granular soil and some fine-grained soils increases to the point where the effective stress in the soil is zero and the soil loses a portion of its shear strength (initial liquefaction). Structures built on or above potentially liquefiable soils may experience bearing-capacity failures, vertical settlement (both total and differential), and lateral displacement (due to lateral spreading of the ground). The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil characteristics (particle-size distribution, plasticity, water content), relative density, presence or absence of groundwater, stress tensor (effective confining stresses, shear stress), and the intensity and duration of the seismic ground shaking. The granular soils most susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated sands and nonplastic silty soils located below the water table.

According to the 2010 Geologic Map of California prepared by the Department of Conservation, soils located on the project site are considered to be unconsolidated and semi-consolidated younger Quaternary alluvium, lake, playa, and terrace deposits. Such deposits are generally characterized as nonmarine deposits because the site is not located near the coast. Groundwater in the project area occurs at a depth of approximately 135 to 150 feet below ground surface, except in areas where oil field production has disposed of water through evaporation and percolation in surface ponds. Therefore, because of the nature of the soil and the assumed depth to groundwater, the potential for liquefaction at the site is considered to be low. Seismically induced settlement may occur as a result of liquefaction and when relatively



soft or loose soils are made dense during earthquake shaking. Subsurface conditions that are susceptible to this hazard occur where loose or porous poorly cemented soils or soft bedrock occur near the ground surface. The project site is underlain by alluvial materials. Accordingly, the potential for differential seismically induced settlement is low at the site. Impacts related to seismically related ground failure would be less than significant; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

iv. The site is relatively level, with a gradual slope to the northeast. In addition, the site is in the relatively flat-lying plain of the valley floor, an area where landslides would not be expected to occur. Therefore, no impacts related to landslides are anticipated to occur or pose a hazard for the project or surrounding area. Further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

b. Limited vegetation removal and excavation would be required for building and equipment foundations at the site. However, project construction has the potential to result in erosion and sedimentation or discharge construction debris from the site. Vegetation clearing and grading could, for example, result in exposed or stockpiled soils that would be susceptible to peak stormwater runoff flows and wind forces, although stockpiling is not anticipated onsite. In addition, the presence of large amounts of raw materials for construction may lead to stormwater runoff contamination. The project proponent would be required to request a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit because the project would disturb more than 1 acre of soil. To conform to the requirements of the NPDES General Construction Permit, a SWPPP would need to be prepared. The SWPPP would specify BMPs to prevent construction pollutants, including eroded soils (such as topsoil), from moving offsite. Implementation of permit and BMP requirements would mitigate impacts related to soil erosion during construction.

Because of the low profile of the PV modules, larger vegetation, such as bushes and shrubs, would be removed during initial site preparation and maintained at a minimal size during project operation. In addition, the project proponent would prepare a drainage plan for the site to ensure that existing drainage patterns are maintained during operation of the project and that substantial erosion or a loss of topsoil does not occur. Although impacts are anticipated to be less than significant with implementation of the above requirements, analysis of potentially significant impacts will be included in the EIR.

c. As discussed above, the site is in a relatively flat-lying plain where landslides are not expected to occur. Therefore, impacts related to landslides are not anticipated to occur or pose a hazard for the project or surrounding area, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR. Also, as discussed above, the potential for liquefaction at the project site is considered to be low. Although impacts related to liquefaction are anticipated to be less than significant, further analysis of this issue will be included in the EIR.

Collapsible soils are those that undergo settlement upon wetting, even without the application of additional load. The process of collapse with the addition of water is known as hydrocompaction. Hydrocompaction occurs when water weakens or destroys the bonds between soil particles and severely reduces the bearing capacity of the soil. Typical collapsible soils are lightly colored and low in plasticity. They also have relatively low densities. Collapsible soils are typically associated with alluvial fans, windblown materials, or colluvium. Because the site is located on alluvium, there is some potential for collapsible soils. However, the project would be designed to comply with applicable building codes and structural improvement requirements to withstand the effects of collapsible soils. Although impacts related to collapsible soils are anticipated to be less than significant, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.



The extraction of water or petroleum from sedimentary source rocks can cause the pore space to collapse. The compaction of subsurface sediments as a result of fluid withdrawal could cause subsidence on the surface. If the volume of removed water or petroleum is large enough, the resulting subsidence could damage nearby structures. Significant quantities of petroleum are being extracted within the project boundaries through directional drilling. Therefore, impacts related to subsidence may occur or pose a significant hazard for the site or surrounding area. This issue will be further discussed in the EIR.

d. Expansive soils are fine-grained soils (generally high plasticity clays) that can undergo a significant increase in volume with an increase in water content or, conversely, a significant decrease in volume with a decrease in water content. Changes in the water content of a highly expansive soil can result in severe distress to structures constructed on or against the soil. The project would be designed to comply with applicable building codes and structural improvement requirements to withstand the effects of expansive soils. Therefore, impacts related to expansive soils are not expected to occur; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

e. A septic system would be installed at the O&M building to dispose of sewage. Construction personnel would use portable toilets. Waste and wastewater would be removed from the site by qualified contractors and disposed of in accordance with applicable codes and regulations pertaining to portable toilets. However, during operation, the staff would rely on a septic system to dispose of sanitary waste. Because soils on the project site could be inadequate with respect to supporting the use of septic tanks, potentially significant impacts may occur. These impacts will be analyzed further in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact No

Impact GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either

directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or

regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Discussion:

a. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change or global warming. The principal GHGs are CO2, methane, NOX, ozone, water vapor, and fluorinated gases. The transportation sector (e.g., on-road motor vehicles, off-highway vehicles, aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions and accounts for one-half of GHG emissions globally. Construction activities associated with the operation of heavy equipment as well as truck deliveries and commuting workers would temporarily generate GHGs; however, it is anticipated that operation of the project would not generate new GHG emissions. Nevertheless, potentially significant impacts related to GHG emissions will be evaluated further in the EIR.

b. California has passed several bills and at least three executive orders have been signed regarding GHGs. Assembly Bill 32 (the Global Warming Solutions Act) was passed by the California legislature on August 31, 2006. It requires the State’s global warming emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. The reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that will be phased in.

In 2002, California established its RPS program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of renewable energy in the State’s electricity mix to 20% by 2017. In 2006, under Senate Bill 107, the RPS program codified the 20% goal. The RPS program requires electric utilities and providers to increase procurements from eligible renewable energy resources by at least 1% of their retail sales annually until they reach 20%. On November 17, 2008, then-governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S 14-08, requiring California utilities to reach a renewable goal of 33% by 2020.

The project is intended to (1) reduce the importation of power from fossil fuel power plants and (2) contribute to a reduction in GHGs. Thus, the project is expected to be consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted to reduce GHGs. Nevertheless, GHG emissions and the project’s consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted to reduce GHGs will be evaluated in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the

environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the

environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling

hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school?

d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of

hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

e. If located within the area covered by the adopted

Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

f. If located within the vicinity of a private airstrip,

result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

g. Impair implementation of, or physically

interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk

of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

i. Generate vectors (flies, mosquitoes, rodents,

etc.) or have a component that includes agricultural waste? Specifically, would the project exceed the following qualitative threshold: The presence of domestic flies, mosquitoes, cockroaches, rodents, and/or any other vectors associated with the project is significant when the applicable enforcement agency determines that any of the vectors:

i. Occur as immature stages and adults in

numbers considerably in excess of those found in the surrounding environment;

ii. Are associated with the design, layout, and

management of project operations;

iii. Disseminate widely from the property; and iv. Cause detrimental effects on the public health

or the well being of the majority of the surrounding population.

Discussion:

a. The project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Furthermore, the project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as defined by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act. However, construction activities would require the transport, storage, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels and greases for the fueling/servicing of construction equipment. These substances would be stored in temporary storage tanks/sheds that would be located at the site. Although these types of materials are not acutely hazardous, they are classified as hazardous materials and create the potential for accidental spillage, which could expose workers. All use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with construction of the facilities would be in strict accordance with Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations.

The project would be subject to all local, State, and Federal laws pertaining to the use of hazardous materials onsite and subject to review by the Kern County Environmental Health Services Division. During the review process, the project would be required to submit a complete list of all materials used onsite and describe how the materials would be transported and in what form they would be used to maintain safety and prevent possible environmental contamination or worker exposure. During construction of the project, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all applicable materials present at the site would be made readily available to onsite personnel. During construction of the solar PV power-generating facility, nonhazardous construction debris would be generated and disposed of at approved facilities. Also during construction, sanitary waste would be managed



through the use of portable toilets located at reasonably accessible onsite locations. Therefore, project construction would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mineral oil would be found within each enclosed transformer; however, secondary containment would be required as a condition of approval. Normally, mineral oil within a transformer does not need to be replaced. Mineral oil disposal, if necessary, would be in accordance with all applicable regulations. The PV panels and inverters would produce no waste products during operation. A Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan that covers any hazardous/nonhazardous materials used during operations would be prepared and implemented at the site.

The PV panels may include solid materials that are considered hazardous, such as cadmium telluride. The project would rely on the manufacturer’s collection and recycling program, as needed, to ensure proper handling of the PV panels. Solar panels are normally found in a solid and nonleachable state; broken PV panels would not be a source of pollution to stormwater.

Dust palliative and herbicides, if used, may be transported to and stored at the site. These materials would be stored in appropriate containers that would prevent an accidental release. The designated routes for the transport of hazardous materials near the site include SR-46, SR-33, and Interstate 5. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant; however, the EIR will include an evaluation of potential hazardous material impacts.

b. According to DOGGR, the site contains portions of active or abandoned gas and oil fields, including the Shale Flats and Shale Point gas fields and the Antelope Hills, North Antelope Hills, North Belridge, South Belridge, McDonald Anticline, Antelope Plains, Beer Nose, and the Blackwells Corner oil fields. The project site also contains active or abandoned oil wells, and numerous active or abandoned oil wells surround the site. Because of the proximity of the site to several oil fields and the presence of active or abandoned oil wells onsite, project personnel, equipment, or the environment may be exposed to a significant hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions. By design, the project will avoid all active or abandoned oil wells within its boundaries by placing a 5-acre exclusion zone around the wells. This issue will be discussed further in the EIR. Additionally, construction and operation of the project may result in the accidental release of materials such as cleaning fluids and petroleum products, including lubricants, fuels, and solvents. The use of minor amounts of these products during operation of the facility is not anticipated to result in a significant hazard. Electrical transformer equipment that would be installed as part of the project may include various hazardous substances. The toxicity of a potential release of these materials would depend on the quantity, type of storage container, safety protocols used onsite, the location and/or proximity to schools and residences, the frequency and duration of spills or leaks, and the reactivity of hazardous substances with other materials. The project would be subject to all local, State, and Federal laws pertaining to the use of hazardous materials and review by the Kern County Environmental Health Services Division. During the review process, the project would be required to submit a complete list of all materials used onsite and describe how the materials would be transported and in what form they would be used. This information would be recorded to maintain safety and prevent possible environmental contamination or worker exposure, and MSDS would be submitted for all applicable materials present at the site. The MSDS would be made readily available to onsite personnel. It is anticipated that adherence to regulations and standard protocols during storage, transportation, and use of hazardous materials would avoid significant impacts. Potential impacts will be evaluated in the EIR.



c. The project site is located in a predominantly rural area of Kern County. The nearest school is Belridge Elementary School, located approximately 3.9 miles south of the project site. In addition, A. M. Thomas Middle School, Lost Hills Elementary School, Lost Hills Child Development and Head Start Center, and Lost Hills Union High School are located about 9 miles northeast of the project boundary in the community of Lost Hills. Belridge Elementary School is located within 1,000 feet of the proposed transmission line The project would construct a power-generating facility that would use PV panels to generate electricity. Project-related infrastructure would not emit hazardous materials or require handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

d. The project site is not identified in any of the California hazardous materials databases. A search of addresses for the subject parcel in the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) Cortese List, compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, for California Department of Toxic Substances and Control hazardous waste sites; the Envirostor database of sites where hazardous substances have been released; and GeoTracker, the California database of leaking underground storage tanks, was negative. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated, and further analysis is not warranted in the EIR.

e. There are no public or public-use airports or landing strips within 2 miles of the project area, the proposed transmission line routes, or the proposed substation location. The project would be subject to Section 19.08.160 (height of structures) of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance and the Military Aviation section of the Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The site is located in a “Green Zone,” which requires no military review. In addition, because the project would not require a substantial number of workers, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated, and further analysis is not warranted in the EIR.

f. There are several small private airstrips and local airports in the surrounding area, including Belridge Strip and Elk Hills-Buttonwillow Airport to the south and Blackwell Land Company Incorporated Airport and Paramount Farming Airport, which are more than 2 miles from the project site. The private airstrips, which have no towers, have been permitted for crop dusting, agricultural use, and the personal use of the property owner. Lost Hills-Kern County Airport is located about 12 miles to the north. Because the project would not require a large number of permanent workers, the project is not anticipated to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area. However, hazards related to private airstrips will be evaluated further in the EIR.

g. Development of the project would not physically impede access to the site by emergency response providers, emergency vehicles, or personnel. The site is located in a rural area with several roads (e.g., Bitterwater Valley Road and Brown Material Road) that would provide access to the project site in the event of an emergency. Access would be maintained throughout construction, and appropriate detours would be provided in the event of road closures. Therefore, no significant impacts related to impairment of or physical interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would occur. However, analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

h. According to the maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the site is within a moderate fire hazard severity zone. The site is used for grazing or oil and gas production. Similarly, the surrounding land is within a moderate fire hazard severity zone and used primarily for grazing or oil and gas production. However, construction and operation of the project would not increase the risk for wildfires in the area. Furthermore, the project would comply with all applicable wildland fire management plans and policies established by CAL FIRE and the Kern County Fire Department. Accordingly, the project is not expected to expose people or



structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Therefore, impacts are expected to be less than significant; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

i. Project-related infrastructure is not expected to create features or conditions (e.g., standing water, agricultural products, agricultural waste, human waste) that would provide habitat for vectors such as mosquitoes, flies, cockroaches, or rodents. Workers would generate small quantities of solid waste (i.e., trash) that would be appropriately stored for removal and permanent disposal. Therefore, impacts are expected to be less than significant; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste

discharge requirements?

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or

interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern

of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite?

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern

of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding onsite or offsite?

e. Create or contribute runoff water that would

exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard

area as mapped on a Federal flood hazard boundary or flood insurance rate map or other flood hazard delineation map?

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area

structures that would impede or redirect flood flows?





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk

of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or

mudflow?

Discussion:

a. The project site is within the RWQCB Central Valley region. The project does not call for waste discharge requirements. As discussed in the Geology and Soils section, above, project construction has the potential to result in erosion and sedimentation or discharge construction debris from the project site. It is anticipated that implementation of appropriate BMPs and compliance with applicable regulations would reduce potential water quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. Soil stabilization measures would be used to prevent soil erosion caused by stormwater runoff. The project contractor would apply for coverage under the State’s General Construction Permit for stormwater discharges from construction activities and prepare a SWPPP that would include BMP erosion-control measures to control stormwater runoff. Site-specific BMPs would be designed by the contractor in compliance with regulations and permit conditions. Additionally, an SPCC Plan that covers hazardous/nonhazardous materials used during operations would be prepared and implemented. Therefore, impacts related to water quality would be considered less than significant. Nevertheless, a comprehensive hydrology and water quality impact analysis will be included in the EIR.

b. No water wells would be drilled for the project. During construction, water would be trucked to the site for dust control, panel washing, and sanitary use. It is anticipated that the site would require approximately 20 acre-feet of water per year during construction. Foundations for power equipment would be excavated to a maximum depth of 4 feet; groundwater would not be encountered at that depth. A typical support pile for the solar modules would be set in a hole that has been dug to a depth of 10 to 15 feet below the ground surface; groundwater is not anticipated to be encountered at that depth. No other construction activities have the potential to affect groundwater supplies.

Water for maintenance, including infrequent PV modular washing, would be trucked to the site. The project would require 18.5 acre-feet of water per washing. At a rate of up to two wash events per year, it is anticipated that 37 acre-feet of water would be required per year for operations at the site.

Water for construction and long-term operations would be provided by Aera Energy and/or Paramount Farms surface water supplies. A letter signifying this agreement will be obtained for the project. No groundwater will be used by the project. Although, the project would not affect the existing water table, this issue will be analyzed in the EIR.



c. As with much of the surrounding area, the project site is generally flat and crossed by ephemeral streams. Construction of the solar panels and associated facilities would require limited grading onsite; however, existing onsite vegetation would be removed. The inverters, four switching substations, and the offsite substation would require concrete pads to be constructed. Removal of existing vegetation and construction of concrete pads or other types of foundational supports could alter the existing drainage patterns of the site or nearby areas.

The project proponent would be required to prepare a drainage plan to ensure that the existing drainage patterns of the site or nearby areas would be maintained and that erosion or siltation would not occur. The drainage plan would incorporate design measures that would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level by employing appropriate design techniques and BMPs. These design techniques would have to be approved by the Kern County Engineering, Survey, and Permit Services Department. As discussed in the Geology and Soils section, Item (b), the project would conform to the requirements of the NPDES General Construction Permit, and a SWPPP would be prepared that specifies BMPs to prevent drainage patterns from being adversely affected. Potentially significant impacts on drainage patterns as well as the potential for increased erosion and/or siltation will be evaluated in the EIR.

d. The site is generally flat and crossed by ephemeral streams. Stormwater runoff from the site may increase during construction and operation of the project. However, it is anticipated that most of the stormwater would infiltrate onsite soils, similar to the existing condition. Only minor portions of the site are currently mapped by FEMA as being in a flood zone. The majority of the project area is designated as Zone X (i.e., an area with minimal flood hazards). One area northwest of the project area (approximately 20 acres) is located within the 100-year flood zone, as is one area in the southern portion of the project site (approximately 35 acres). Construction of the offsite substation would alter an ephemeral stream. is considered potentially significant. Potentially significant impacts related to alterations of drainage patterns will be evaluated further in the EIR.

e. During construction and following installation of the solar arrays, the vast majority of the site’s surface area would be pervious soil. The solar arrays would be designed so that stormwater would be able to infiltrate the pervious ground surface, similar to the existing condition. No component of the project would concentrate runoff or result in a condition that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Similarly, no component of the project is considered a substantial source of polluted runoff. The construction-period SWPPP and compliance with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board 2009 General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity would ensure proper control and treatment, if necessary, of any stormwater prior to discharge. With adherence to site-specific BMPs, potential pollutants would be minimized to the extent practicable and would not exceed numeric thresholds for water quality protection. Impacts would be less than significant. Although no significant impacts related to stormwater drainage are anticipated, a comprehensive hydrology and water quality impact analysis will be prepared. This topic will be analyzed further in the EIR.

f. Project construction activities, such as grading, could degrade water quality through erosion and the subsequent sedimentation of ephemeral streams. Additionally, an accidental release of potentially harmful materials, such as engine oil, diesel fuel, lubricant, and cement slurry, could degrade water quality. However, implementation of BMPs, compliance with a SWPPP, and adherence to a standard condition of approval that requires a site drainage plan would reduce the impact of project activities on surrounding water quality to less than significant. Therefore, construction and operation of the project is not anticipated to degrade water quality substantially. Nevertheless, this impact will be discussed further in the EIR.



g. Approximately 35 acres on the site are mapped by FEMA as being within a flood zone; however, the project does not include the construction of housing. Therefore, the project would result in no housing-related flood impacts. No further analysis is warranted in the EIR.

h. Although there are mapped 100-year flood zones within the project boundary, no structures or new roads would be constructed within such areas. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in, impede, or redirect flood flows. However, this issue will be further evaluated in the EIR.

i. Lake Isabella Dam, which is located 75 miles east of the site, has a capacity of 570,000 acre-feet of water. If an earthquake were to occur in the vicinity, it could result in a break in the dam. This could, under certain conditions, cause the entire reservoir to be released, which would flood 60 square miles of metropolitan Bakersfield. However, the project site would be outside of the inundation areas. Construction and operation of the project would not have the potential to cause a dam failure because the project site is not located within a dam hazard zone. Only minor portions of the site are currently mapped by FEMA as being in a flood zone. Drainage control features would be installed where appropriate, as would stormwater protection measures included as part of the SWPPP. No significant impacts are anticipated; therefore, further analysis in the EIR is not warranted.

j. The project is not located near an ocean or enclosed body of water and would not be subject to inundation by seiche or tsunami. A mudflow is a type of mass wasting or landslide where earth and surface materials are rapidly transported downhill under the force of gravity. The project site is generally flat and not located on or near any hills or mountains that are subject to mudflows. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated to occur, and no further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated

Less-than-Significant

Impact

No Impact

LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:

a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan,

policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

c. Conflict with any applicable habitat

conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

Discussion:

a. The project would be developed on a site that is currently used for grazing or oil and gas production, as is the surrounding area. The nearest residence is located approximately 2 miles north of the project site in the unincorporated community of Blackwells Corner, near the intersection of SR-46 and SR-33. The project location is remote and would not restrict access to this residence or any residence in Blackwells Corner. Therefore, no impacts related to the physical division of an established community would occur. This issue will not be discussed further in the EIR.

b. The site has general plan map code designations of 8.3 (Extensive Agriculture [minimum 20-acre parcel size]), 8.3/2.5 (Extensive Agriculture/Flood Hazard), 8.4 (Mineral and Petroleum [minimum 5-acre parcel size]), and 8.4/2.5 (Mineral and Petroleum/Flood Hazard). The site is zoned A (Exclusive Agriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture). Additionally, the project site is within Agricultural Preserve Nos. 1 and 5. Some of the parcels are under Williamson Act land use contracts. The surrounding area is zoned A (Exclusive Agriculture), A-1 (Limited Agriculture), NR(5) (Natural Resources [minimum 5-acre parcel size]), and NR(10) (Natural Resources [minimum 10-acre parcel size].

The project proponent is requesting four GPAs to amend the Circulation Element of the Kern County General Plan. This would eliminate future road reservations along the midsection lines that extend through the project site and remove the required setbacks on the subject parcels. The project proponent is also requesting approval of four CUPs to construct and operate a solar facility within A and A-1 zoning districts. In addition, petitions for the cancellation of Williamson Act land use contracts are included. The contracts cover four parcels, approximately 976 acres.

The lead agency notes that with the implementation of numerous renewable energy projects and the cumulative effects of utility-sized solar power facilities, there is the potential for outside factors, such as the development of newer technology, changes in State or national policy that encourages the construction of such facilities, or other economical factors, to result in the abandonment of the proposed facility by the project proponent. Potential impacts associated with the abandonment of a



solar facility will be discussed in the EIR. Additionally, the military has identified potential conflicts involving users of the radio frequency spectrum located both on and off military installations as an area to be reviewed to determine compatibility issues. Unmanned radio-controlled aircraft can encounter electronic interference from telemetry equipment, such as that associated with solar facilities. The project’s consistency with the Kern County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance is a potentially significant impact and will be discussed further in the EIR.

c. As noted in the Biological Resources section, Item (f), the project site is within the boundaries of the draft Kern County Valley Floor Habitat Conservation Plan. Because the plan has not yet been approved, the project would not conflict with an applicable conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. Further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Result in the loss of availability of a known

mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally

important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

Discussion:

a. The site is located within an area of known mineral resources. All subareas, with the exception of Subarea G, contain land that is designated in the Kern County General Plan as 8.4 (Mineral and Petroleum), which indicates an area with producing or potentially productive petroleum fields, natural gas fields, geothermal resources, and mineral deposits of regional and statewide significance. The project site contains active and abandoned oil wells, and numerous active or abandoned oil wells surround the site. These include the Shale Flats and Shale Point gas fields and the Antelope Hills, North Antelope Hills, North Belridge, South Belridge, McDonald Anticline, Antelope Plains, Beer Nose and Blackwells Corner oil fields. Active oil production areas would be avoided by the project, and access to potential mineral resources would be provided from a 40-acre set-aside area within each 640-acre solar field. In addition, a 5-acre exclusion zone would be placed around abandoned wells, thereby maintaining access for any future drilling activity. Although construction and operation of the project is not anticipated to result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the State, less-than-significant impacts may occur. Therefore, further analysis will be provided in the EIR.

b. As discussed above, the project site is located in an area that has been delineated in the Kern County General Plan as one with mineral resources. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant; however, this issue will be analyzed further in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

NOISE. Would the project:

a. Expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in

excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies?

b. Expose persons to or generate excessive

groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in

ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic

increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

e. Be located within the area covered by the Kern

County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

f. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip

and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Discussion:

a. Land uses determined to be sensitive to noise, as defined by the Kern County General Plan, include residential areas, schools, convalescent and acute care hospitals, parks and recreational areas, and churches. The nearest residence is located approximately 2 miles northeast of the project site in the Blackwells Corner community. No residences, schools or hospitals are located within the project area, nor are any located within 1 mile of the project boundary. Belridge Elementary School is located within 1,000 feet of the transmission line and approximately 4 miles south of the southern boundary of the solar project.

Noise would be generated during construction by vehicles and equipment on the site, including heavy equipment (e.g., graders, dozers, excavators, backhoes). The Kern County General Plan Noise Element sets a 65-decibel limit on exterior noise levels from stationary sources (i.e., nontransportation sources) at sensitive receptors. The Noise Control Ordinance in the Kern County Code (Section 8.36.020 et seq.) prohibits a variety of nuisance noises. Construction-related noise is regulated by means of a limitation on the hours of construction activity for projects located within



1,000 feet of an occupied residential dwelling. In such cases, construction is prohibited between the hours of 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. on weekdays and 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. on weekends. The project proponent would adhere to the provisions of Kern County Ordinance Section 8.36.020. Nonetheless, the project could expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of established standards. This impact is considered potentially significant and will be discussed further in the EIR.

b. Groundborne vibration and groundborne noise could originate from earth movement during the construction phase of the project. The project would comply with all applicable requirements for long-term operation as well as measures to reduce excessive groundborne vibration and noise. This would ensure that the project would not expose persons or structures to excessive groundborne vibration. However, an acoustical analysis for the project is being prepared, and further analysis of groundborne vibration and groundborne noise will be included in the EIR. The impact is considered less than significant.

c. Construction activity would increase ambient noise levels above existing levels for a period of 5 to 10 years. This could expose residential receptors to elevated noise levels at the site. However, operation of the project would not require regular vehicle trips or result in constant or regular noise from other sources (e.g., equipment). Operation of the PV panels would not generate a significant noise level, and vehicle trips during operation, which would be minimal, would not significantly increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. As a result, the project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise in the project vicinity. Therefore, impacts are expected to be less than significant, and no further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

d. Heavy equipment used during construction would cause a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. However, such noise could be reduced with the incorporation of mitigation measures. The project would also result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during operations. These would result from the use of vehicles for general maintenance and the transport of large pieces of equipment when repair or replacement is necessary. This impact is considered potentially significant and will be analyzed further in the EIR.

e. As previously discussed, the project is not located within 2 miles of an airport or an area covered by the Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Furthermore, the project would not introduce new residences that would be exposed to excessive noise levels. No impacts would occur, and no further analysis related to public airports is warranted in the EIR.

f. As noted in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, Item (f), there are several small private airstrips and local airports in the surrounding area (i.e., more than 2 miles from the project boundary), including Belridge Strip and Elk Hills-Buttonwillow Airport to the south and Blackwell Land Company Incorporated Airport, Paramount Farming Airport, and Lost Hills-Kern County Airport to the north. The private airstrips, which have no towers, have been permitted for crop dusting, agricultural use, and the personal use of the property owner. The Lost Hills-Kern County Airport is located about 12 miles to the north. Although the project is not expected to be exposed to excessive noise levels, further analysis is warranted in the EIR. This impact is considered less than significant.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in an

area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing

housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

c. Displace substantial numbers of people,

necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Discussion:

a. Although the project would provide new employment consistent with adopted Kern County General Plan goals, plans, and policies, long-term employment opportunities would be minimal. Over the 5- to 10-year construction period, the construction workforce is expected to peak at 175 (construction and field personnel). Construction workers would travel to the site from various locations in the region; the number of workers expected to relocate to the surrounding area would not be substantial. If temporary housing should be necessary, it is expected that accommodations would be available in the nearby communities of Taft, Lost Hills, and Buttonwillow. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly induce the development of any new housing or businesses. A minimum of five employees would be required to monitor plant performance and respond to utility requests for adjustments. Panel maintenance crews of two to four each would be available throughout the array. The security staff would be available 24 hours per day. Further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

Typical established local thresholds of significance for housing and population growth made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15064.7, pertain to effects that would induce substantial growth; alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the population beyond that projected in the Kern County General Plan Housing Element; result in a substantial increase in demand for additional housing; or create a development that significantly reduces the ability of the County to meet the housing objectives set forth in the Housing Element. The project would not result in the need for additional housing or affect Kern County’s housing objectives, as provided in the Housing Element allocation plan. No impacts would occur.

Although the project would produce additional electricity, it would be used to meet the already-projected demand for energy. That projection is based on growth patterns in communities around California. As such, the generation of electricity by the project would be considered growth-accommodating rather than growth-inducing. In addition, State law requires utility companies to produce a certain percentage of electricity from “green” or renewable sources. Solar electricity is considered a renewable product. In addition, it would help utility companies meet this new State law.



The project’s electricity would replace electricity generated by fossil fuels, thereby contributing to California’s renewable energy goals. Te project would not induce growth. No impacts related to population are expected from the project, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

b., c. The project would be sited on land that was historically used for grazing as well as oil and gas production. No residences would be condemned or demolished, nor would any people be displaced. No impacts are expected from the project, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts

associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities?

Discussion:

a. Fire Protection. The Kern County Fire Department provides fire suppression and emergency medical services in the project area. Battalion 2 services the project site, with Kern County Fire Station 26 providing primary service. Fire Station 26 is located approximately 11 miles east of the project center at 14670 Lost Hills Road, just north of the intersection of SR-46 in the community of Lost Hills. Construction and operation activities would not be likely to result in increased risk of wildfire; however, the project is located within a moderate fire severity hazard zone, as discussed in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, Item (h), above. Furthermore, given the remote location of the project site and Kern County Fire Department’s obligation to respond to all structure fires in its jurisdiction, fire-fighting capacity in the project area could be affected by the project. This is considered a potentially significant impact. Therefore, fire protection will be evaluated in the EIR.

Police Protection. Police protection services in the project area are provided by the Kern County Sheriff’s Department. The department’s Wasco Substation is located 30 miles east of the center of the project site at 748 F Street in the community of Wasco, just south of SR-46. Although the potential is low, the project may attract vandals or create other security risks. Furthermore, construction activities could increase traffic volumes on nearby roads, which could increase demand on law enforcement services. Permanent security measures, including security personnel, security fencing, and lighting, would be provided, and access to the project site during construction and operation would be limited, thereby minimizing the need for law enforcement surveillance and response. However, the project’s impact on police services is considered potentially significant and will be evaluated in the EIR.



Schools. Over the 5 to 10-year construction period, the construction workforce is expected to peak at 175. Any population increase that would be experienced during the construction phase of the project would be temporary in nature. It is expected that most of these workers would commute to the project site from surrounding communities where their children are already enrolled in school and accounted for and where their contributions to local taxes already fund the schooling of their children. Even if workers come from outside the area, they would most likely return to their out-of-town residences once the facility is built and not take their children out of school to relocate to the project area temporarily. Therefore, substantial temporary increases in population that would adversely affect local school populations would not occur. Likewise, the workforce during operation of the facility would be limited to a part-time maintenance staff. A minimum of five employees would be required to monitor plant performance and respond to utility requests for adjustments. Panel maintenance crews of two to four each would be available throughout the array. The security staff would be available 24 hours per day. Therefore, the project would not generate a permanent increase in population that would affect school populations. No significant impacts on schools are anticipated to occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

Parks. The population increase that would be experienced during the construction phase of the project would be temporary and would not result in additional demand for park facilities. Therefore, no significant impacts on parks are anticipated to occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

Other Public Facilities. Over the 5- to 10-year construction period, the construction workforce is expected to peak at 175. However, it is expected that most of these workers would commute to the project site from surrounding communities. Therefore, substantial temporary increases in population that would adversely affect local public facilities, such as the post office and library, are not expected. The project would not result in an appreciable use of other public facilities, such as courts, that would result in a significant impact. The project would employ only a part-time maintenance staff during the operational period. The staff would be located offsite and would come to site only when needed. The project would have a less-than-significant impact on public services; however, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

RECREATION. Would the project:

a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and

regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

b. Include recreational facilities or require the

construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Discussion:

a., b. The project would not include new recreational facilities. The temporary increase in population that might result from an influx of workers during construction would be minimal. Therefore, a detectable increase in the use of parks or recreational facilities would not occur. There would be no impacts, and no further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC. Would the project:

a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or

policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including mass transit and nonmotorized travel, and relevant components of the circulation system, including intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

b. Conflict with an applicable congestion

management program, including level of service standards and travel demand measures or other standards established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Specifically, would implementation of the project cause the level of service (LOS) for roadways and/or intersections to decline below the following thresholds or further degrade already degraded segment(s):

i. Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan,

LOS C?

ii. Kern County General Plan, LOS D? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns,

including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks?

d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design

feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

e. Result in inadequate emergency access?

f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or

programs regarding public transit or bicycle or pedestrian facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?



Discussion:

a. The project site is located west of SR-33, between Lerdo Highway and SR-46, approximately 45 miles northwest of the city of Bakersfield and 10 miles southwest of the unincorporated community of Lost Hills. It is anticipated that traffic would access the project site primarily from the east via SR-33 and Lerdo Highway. A network of existing roadways and new earthen or gravel roadways (to be constructed as part of the project) would provide access to the site. Construction is planned to begin in the first quarter of 2014 and expected to be completed within 5 to 10 years. In addition to vehicle trips generated by construction workers traveling to the site, construction of the project would add vehicle trips to the area roadway system during delivery of construction equipment and materials. Construction material deliveries may require a number of trips by oversized vehicles, which may travel at slower speeds than other traffic and, because of their size, intrude into adjacent travel lanes. These trips may decrease the existing level of service on area roadways and at intersections. Additionally, the total number of vehicle trips associated with all construction-related traffic (including construction workers’ trips) could temporarily increase daily traffic volumes on local roadways and at intersections. Furthermore, stringing activities required for transmission line infrastructure may require temporary lane closures, which may result in temporary traffic delays on affected roadways. Impacts on the local roadway system from construction-related vehicle trips are considered potentially significant and will be evaluated in the EIR.

b. The proposal includes an amendment to the Circulation Element of the Kern County General Plan to eliminate future road reservations along section and midsection lines within the project boundary. There are no existing roads along the subject lines. Because of the existing oil field infrastructure and other activities in the area, it is unlikely that roads would be developed along these lines. Therefore, the elimination of the future road reservations would not affect area traffic patterns. Once constructed, a minimum of five employees would be required to monitor plant performance and respond to utility requests for adjustments. Panel maintenance crews of two to four each would be available throughout the array. The security staff would be available 24 hours per day. Therefore, potential impacts from project operational traffic on the area roadway system would be less than significant given the low number of employees who would use the local roadways.

i. The site is outside the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. Construction and operation of the project would result in an increased number of vehicle trips on roadways in the project area; however, construction workers would be expected to travel to the site from various locations throughout central and Southern California. Therefore, the project would not be expected to result in a substantial number of trips on roadways in the metropolitan Bakersfield area. For these reasons, the project’s impacts on the metropolitan Bakersfield area traffic/circulation system are considered less than significant and will not be discussed in the EIR.

ii. As detailed in Item (a), above, construction of the project would generate construction trips and may require roadway lane closures, which could temporarily increase daily traffic volumes on local roadways and at intersections in Kern County. The employees required for operation and maintenance of the project would come from the local area and would not result in a substantial number of trips on roadways in the metropolitan Bakersfield area or in other parts of Kern County. Therefore, the project’s impacts on Kern County’s traffic/circulation system are anticipated to be less than significant; nevertheless, this issue will be analyzed further in the EIR.



c. The project is subject to Section 19.08.160 (height of structures) of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance and the Military Aviation section of the Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The site is located in a “Green Zone,” which requires no military review. Furthermore, there are no airports or landing strips within 2 miles of the project area, the proposed transmission line routes, or the proposed substation location. However, there are several small private airstrips and local airports in the surrounding area (i.e., more than 2 miles from the site), including Belridge Strip and Elk Hills-Buttonwillow Airport to the south and Blackwell Land Company Incorporated Airport, Paramount Farming Airport, and Lost Hills-Kern County Airport to the north. The site is not within an adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan area. Because the poles for the project transmission line would be 110 feet high and the additional 500 kV poles would be approximately 150 feet high, the project would not create features that would extend into air space or result in a change in air traffic patterns. Therefore, no impacts related to air traffic are anticipated to occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

d. It is anticipated that traffic would access the project site primarily from the east via SR-33 and Lerdo Highway. A network of existing roadways and new earthen or gravel roadways (to be constructed as part of the project) would provide access to the site. No design features would be introduced that would result in transportation-related hazards or safety concerns. Therefore, less-than-significant impacts related to increased hazards are anticipated to occur. However, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

e. As described above, construction of the project would generate construction trips and potential roadway lane closures, which could temporarily increase the daily traffic volumes on local roadways and at intersections. However, emergency access would be maintained at all times, and appropriate detours would be provided, as necessary. Although less-than-significant impacts related to emergency access are anticipated to occur, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

f. As described above, construction of the project would generate construction trips and potential roadway lane closures, which could temporarily disrupt any bicycle traffic on local roadways. However, because of the rural nature of the area, no bus stops or designated bicycle lanes exist on the roadways. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impacts would occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the

applicable regional water quality control board?

b. Require or result in the construction of new

water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

c. Require or result in the construction of new

stormwater drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

d. Have sufficient water supplies available to

serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed?

e. Result in a determination by the wastewater

treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient

permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

g. Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes

and regulations related to solid waste?

Discussion:

a., b. The project would generate a minimal amount of wastewater. Over the 5- to 10-year construction period, the construction workforce is expected to peak at 175. Wastewater would be contained within portable toilet facilities and disposed of at an approved facility. The Kern County Environmental Health Services Division is responsible for monitoring the use of portable toilet facilities, and a condition of approval would require the proponent to provide documentation of a portable toilet pumping contract.

During operation, the project would include the construction of a leach field and/or septic tank at the O&M building. This wastewater disposal system would conform to Kern County regulations, which take into account wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB Central Valley. Although potential impacts would be less than significant, further analysis is warranted in the EIR.



c. Although the project would add a small amount of impervious surfaces and may require a small amount of imported water for dust suppression during construction and panel washing, these changes would not substantially increase the amount of stormwater runoff. During construction and following installation of the solar arrays, the vast majority of the site’s surface area would be pervious soil. A drainage study will be performed for the offsite substation to determine if stormwater drainage features will be required. The solar array area would not rely on constructed stormwater drainage systems. As previously stated, the project must comply with NPDES through a SWPPP or other means to contain water onsite during construction. The construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities would not occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

d. See Hydrology and Water Quality Item (b). A water demand report will be prepared and discussed in the EIR. Impacts are considered potentially significant and will be analyzed further in the EIR.

e. Construction personnel would use portable toilets. During construction, wastewater generation would be short term and temporary. Wastewater would be removed from the project site by qualified contractors and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and codes related to portable toilets. During operation, wastewater generated from the O&M building would be disposed of via a leach field and/or septic system. The development of a septic system and/or leach field would require adherence to Kern County regulations regarding septic systems and leach field design. Consequently, there is no wastewater treatment provider. No impacts on existing wastewater treatment facilities would occur, and further analysis of this issue is not warranted in the EIR.

f. The project is not expected to generate a significant amount of waste or exceed the capacity of local landfills. Materials brought to the project site would be used to construct facilities, and few residual materials are expected. Nonhazardous construction refuse and solid waste would either be collected and recycled or disposed of at a local landfill, while any hazardous waste generated during construction would be disposed of at an approved location. It is not anticipated that the amount of solid waste generated by the project would exceed the capacity of the local landfills needed to accommodate the waste. Although impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.

g. The project would generate solid waste during construction and operation, thus requiring the consideration of waste reduction and recycling measures. Construction and operational activities are not expected to generate a significant amount of waste or exceed the capacity of local landfills. Materials brought to the project site would be used to construct facilities, and few residual materials are expected. Nonhazardous construction refuse and solid waste would either be collected and recycled or disposed of at a local landfill, while any hazardous waste generated during construction would be disposed of at an approved location. It is not anticipated that the amount of solid waste generated by the project would exceed the capacity of the local landfills needed to accommodate the waste. The 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) requires Kern County to attain specific waste diversion goals. In addition, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, as amended, requires expanded or new development projects to incorporate storage areas for recycling bins into the project design. The project would comply with the 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act and the 1991 California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, as amended. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, but further analysis of this issue is warranted in the EIR.





Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.

a. Does the project have the potential to degrade

the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to elimi-nate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods in California history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are individ-

ually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)

c. Does the project have environmental effects

that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Discussion:

a. The EIR’s biological resources section will discuss specific project impacts on plants and wildlife, including avian species. The EIR will also evaluate the project’s potential impacts on important examples of major periods in California history and prehistory. Finally, the EIR will evaluate the project’s contribution to cumulative biological and cultural resources impacts and propose feasible mitigation, as appropriate, that would reduce the impacts to less-than-significant levels.

b. The project has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. The EIR will evaluate the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts in these areas as well as other areas as further impacts are identified.

c. Although there may be significant air quality impacts during construction, the long-term air quality impacts could be beneficial if fossil fuel usage is reduced. Health impacts from the project’s short-term cumulative contribution to air quality impacts will be evaluated in the EIR.

Kern Solar Ranch Project - Notice of Preparation

Documents

Transcript of Kern Solar Ranch Project - Notice of Preparation