Western published a Notice of Intent (NOI) on Aug. 8, 2000 in the Federal Register (a publication that reports government announcements) to prepare the Sacramento Area Voltage Support (SVS) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The notice described Western’s mission and the current power situation in the Sacramento area. The notice also listed issues to be considered in the analysis.

Interested individuals and organizations were invited to submit comments on the scope of the SVS EIS during a scoping period that ran from August 8, 2000 through October 2, 2000, to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Comments were submitted in writing or recorded at the public scoping meetings. Four public scoping meetings were held:
Sept. 12 in Lodi; Sept. 20 in Folsom (1 p.m. and 7 p.m.); and Sept. 21 in Marysville.

Western requested comments from the public to better tailor the contents of the SVS EIS. The concerns of the public are taken into account when planning the extent of the analysis and discussion of individual topics. Sometimes, new topics are added to an EIS as a result of expressed public concerns. Issues identified in the comments were organized into 12 broad categories. The entire scoping summary follows:

Affected Environment—Request the SVS EIS document existing conditions, explaining the changes which have occurred (for instance, history of power generation and transmission and past impacts). Such an assessment is important in providing the historical and environmental context for current conditions and possible solutions for future voltage requirements for the Central Valley Project transmission system.

Air Quality—Request the SVS EIS address air quality. The SVS EIS include a description of current and proposed activities and their impacts on air quality (including cumulative and indirect impacts); demonstrate compliance with conformity requirements of the Clean Air Act; examine the effects of increased reliance on fossil fuels during periods of reduced hydroelectric power generation (as could occur during droughts); and address the effect on energy and commercial projects in the area if powerplants have bought available emission credits.

Alternatives—Evaluate a broad mix of alternatives, describing how each alternative was developed. Evaluate both generation and transmission. Alternatives should not adversely affect reliability. Alternatives should not affect autonomy. Consider near-term transmission solutions. Specific alternatives suggested include: demand-side management, distributed generation, potential upgrades to the existing transmission system, integration of the transmission grid in the greater Sacramento area, flexible AC transmission system design options, smarter use of electricity, obtaining power from outside California, new technologies, and use of backup emergency power during stage alerts. There were also numerous questions about whether Western already had specific projects in mind.

Biological Resources—The SVS EIS should indicate what measures will be taken to protect critical fish and wildlife habitat areas from potential adverse effects of proposed management actions, and fully disclose potential beneficial and/or adverse impacts to water quality, wetlands and aquatic ecosystems. Also, the SVS EIS should fully evaluate proposed alternatives in the context of the potential for habitat restoration, habitat fragmentation, loss of connectivity and the cumulative effects on species viability. The SVS EIS should consider the Endangered Species Act when examining the impacts of potential projects.

Cultural Resources—Request the analysis reflect concerns for cultural resources.

Document Preparation/Format—If the SVS EIS uses references to previous documents, it should provide a summary of critical issues, assumptions and decisions complete enough to stand alone without depending upon continued reference to the other documents. The SVS EIS should also include a section on potential effects on local, state and federal ordinances, regulations, legislation, and laws.

Environmental Justice—The SVS EIS should describe the measures taken by Western to fully analyze the environmental effects of the proposed federal action on minority communities, e.g. Indian Tribes and low-income populations, and present opportunities for affected communities to provide input into the NEPA process.

Human Health—Electrical system improvements should ensure human health and safety.

Methodologies—Suggestions on how the analysis of SVS EIS alternatives should be conducted included: focusing on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposal and alternatives in comparative form, thus defining the issues and providing a clear basis for choice among options for the decision maker and the public; describing the management constraints on the federal projects which generate the power (for instance, flood control requirements, water supply contracts and diversion obligations, Endangered Species Act water flow requirements and water quality standards requirements); full disclosure of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of all proposed actions; establishing a clear baseline to evaluate potential impacts; and determining compliance with the Federal Antidegradation Policy.

Public Involvement—The SVS EIS should include a separate section describing specific actions and techniques that were used to ensure public participation and interagency collaboration and coordination.

Socioeconomics—Lodi does not want financial impacts due to reliability; how will Western collect revenues necessary to recover the cost of project; and what actions can Western take to prevent rate increases.

Surface Water—The SVS EIS should describe the potential impacts of any proposed actions on the operations of Bureau of Reclamation, Corps of Engineers, and International Boundary and Water Commission facilities (the primary project purpose for many of these facilities is water supply, flood control, and instream beneficial uses); address the potential implications of the proposed power and transmission actions on water supply, flood protection, and endangered species actions related to dams. Discuss specific monitoring programs that will be implemented before and after proposed management actions to determine potential impacts on water quality and beneficial uses. Identify impacts to water, flood plains and wetlands. The proposed action should not violate state water quality standards, toxic effluent standards or cause significant degradation of waters.