SU0015801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5 Comparison of Comparison of Alternatives heavy equipment would be required for construction. Compared to the Project, the air quality impacts of the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would be greater. 5.4.1.4 Biological Resources Under the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative, potential impacts to special status species during construction and to migratory birds during operation and maintenance of the Project would remain. Mitigation Measures 113I0-1 through 113I0-3 would be required. Impacts would be similar to the Project. 5.4.1.5 Cultural Resources Under the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative, potential impacts to cultural resources during construction would be greater than the Project due to the additional earthwork required. Mitigation Measures CULA and CUL-2 would be required. Impacts would be greater than the Project. 5.4.1.6 Energy Compared to the Project, the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would result in more earth work, requiring greater consumption of fuel resources. Overall,the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would result impacts greater than those identified for the Project. 5.4.1.7 Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources The Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would result in more earthwork than the Project, such that there would be greater likelihood of an inadvertent discovery of paleontological resources during construction. Accordingly, the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-3 would be required for the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative. Existing regulatory requirements, including the Construction General Permit and the CBC, would still apply. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would require preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and incorporation of best management practices (BMPs) during construction and decommissioning, consistent with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit Program. Mitigation Measures GEO-2 and GEO-3 would reduce this alternative's potential to damage significant paleontological resources. Because of the greater amount of earthwork, impacts related to geology, soils, and paleontological resources would greater than the Project. 5.4.1.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would develop battery energy storage facilities on the Project site, but with an alternative site layout that would require three terraces and additional grading. Site preparation would require 472,822 cubic yards of cut (65,898 cubic yards more than the Project) and 476,911 cubic yards of fill (71,270 cubic yards more than the Project). The Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would proportionately increase use of GHG equipment during construction and decommissioning. Compared to the Project, the Three- Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would have greater impacts to GHG emissions. 5.4.1.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Compared to the Project, the Three-Terrace Southeast Corner Alternative would consist of the same facility equipment in an alternate site layout. Overall, there would be a similar amount of hazardous materials required for construction and operation, although the use of hazardous Griffith Energy Storage Project 5-9 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023