SU0015801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5 Comparison of Comparison of Alternatives Impacts to agriculture would occur due to the Williamson Act contract on the property, and cancellation of the Williamson Act under Mitigation Measure AGR-1 would be implemented, similar to the proposed Project. The Northern Site Alternative would have increased impacts to aesthetics, biological, cultural, hydrology and water quality, and tribal cultural resources due to the site's greater distance from the point of interconnection identified by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) at the southwest corner of the Tesla Substation and the associated additional ground disturbance and Project footprint associated with a longer gen-tie line. The Northern Site Alternative would meet the Project Objectives to provide 400 MW of energy storage in San Joaquin County in a cost-effective manner (Project Objective 1). It is unknown if the landowner would be amenable to the Project, such that it may not be commercially financeable. It would also result in greater impacts to aesthetics, biological, cultural, hydrology and water quality, and tribal cultural resources, such that it would not be the most efficient and environmentally beneficial use of the site's limited agricultural capacity (Project Objective 4). The gen-tie line to the Tesla Substation would also be approximately 3,000 feet longer and would require crossing West Patterson Pass Road, such that the alternative would not achieve Project Objective 5 to minimize gen-tie length. 5.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE The CEQA Guidelines define the environmentally superior alternative as that alternative with the least adverse impacts to the project area and its surrounding environment. The No Project Alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative for CEQA purposes because it would not create any of the localized impacts of the Project, even though it would have less beneficial impacts than that of the Project on energy and GHG emissions. The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the basic objectives of the Project, including constructing and operating a 400-MW BESS in San Joaquin County with an interconnection at the Tesla Substation in a cost-competitive manner (Project Objective 1); assisting California utilities in meeting their obligations under California's Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, SB 100, and SB 1020 (Project Objective 2); assisting California utilities in meeting their obligations under CPUC's Energy Storage Framework and Design Program (Project Objective 3); providing for the economically viable, commercially financeable, and environmentally beneficial use of the site's limited agricultural capacity (Project Objective 4); developing a site in proximity to transmission infrastructure to minimize environmental impacts (Project Objective 5); and supporting the economy by investing in the local community, creating local construction jobs, and increasing tax and fee revenue to the County (Project Objective 6). Because the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires the EIR also "identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives."The County preliminarily has identified the proposed Project as the environmentally superior alternative because of the beneficial effects of energy reliability and associated reduced GHGs of the Project while minimizing environmental impacts compared to the other alternatives. County decision-makers may weigh the relative benefits of the alternatives differently and could identify another alternative as preferred and environmentally superior. Griffith Energy Storage Project 5-15 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023