L&B - LAMB & BAUTE LLP
L&B-1.
There is no basis for concluding that the project may have a significant impact on the occupants of the Aradon property that is of concern to the commentor. See responses to L&B-2, L&B-3, and L&B-5.
As noted in the Environmental Checklists Section of the Initial Study (4.1 through 4.16), the CPUC determined that the project will have no impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. Being the lead agency conducting the CEQA review of the proposed project, the CPUC determined that under CEQA Guidelines § 15070(b)(1), the appropriate action was to issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The Sandpiper Housing Project was fully considered in the Initial Study, as were all projects located within one mile of the Ellwood facility (as shown in Table 4.16.1). The Ellwood facility is already limited to only 200 hours of operation per year by the Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District (SBAPCD) permit. A change in ownership of the plant would not change the permitted limit of 200 hours of operation per year. As detailed in Sections 4.1 through 4.16 of the Initial Study, the CPUC determined that the project would not have a significant impact on residents or occupants near the Ellwood facility.
Please see responses to L&B-2, L&B-3 and L&B-5.
Many more studies of the health effects of EMF exposure have been completed since the County conducted its EIR for the Sandpiper development in 1995; none of those provided conclusive evidence that EMF exposure causes any health effects. L&B is incorrect in stating that the Initial Study found "that if the Ellwood facility is sold it will likely be run at maximum capacity." As noted on page 3.6 of the Initial Study, "This Initial Study evaluates the impacts associated with the tendency of new owners of the divested plants to operate at higher levels than Edison would operate the plants under restructuring without divestiture. The maximum levels at which new owners could operate are those presented as the technically feasible maximum capacity factors. However, ... it is not expected that operations would reach these levels at each plant, and operations may not reach such levels at any particular plant. It is merely the possibility that operations could increase within this range of capacity factors that is evaluated in this Initial Study." In addition, as described on page 4.9.11 of the Initial Study, the CPUC has expressly declined to adopt a CEQA threshold for EMF exposure, and is not bound by the Santa Barbara County threshold.
Please see responses to L&B-2, L&B-3 and L&B-5. The commentor is incorrect that the CPUC's approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would constitute a taking (under the U.S. Constitution) of Aradon's property. To begin with, there is no substantial evidence that the sale of the Ellwood plant would result in a significant impact. Second, Edison has the right currently to operate the Ellwood Plant to its permitted capacity as would a new owner. Third, it is not clear that any information in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study would cause Aradon to lose the opportunity to build certain housing units. Even if that were to occur, it would not be due to action by the CPUC, but would stem from regulations and decisions of the County of Santa Barbara. Thus, the appropriate body from which to seek relief, if any were warranted, would be Santa Barbara County and not the CPUC. Finally however, and most importantly, any loss of units by Aradon clearly would not constitute a taking of property since Aradon would not be precluded from all use of its property, and would continue to enjoy an economically viable use of its land.
Please see responses to L&B-3 and L&B-5
Please see responses to L&B-2, L&B-3, L&B-5 and L&B-6.
Please see responses to L&B-2, L&B-3 and L&B-5.