disturb sensitive receptors or violate local rules, standards, and/or ordinances. Construction, operation and maintenance, and restoration could cause an adverse change to unknown buried prehistoric and historical archaeological sites or buried Native American human remains. Construction would result in visual contrast due to vegetation removal, and the long-term presence of the project would result in landscape changes that degrade existing visual character or quality. The proposed project would not have any other significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance and Reporting Plan. Project Alternatives An EIR must identify a reasonable range of alternatives to a proposed project that feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(a).) An EIR must also evaluate the environmental impacts of a project” alternative. (Guidelines § 15126.6(e).) “no The EIR fully analyzed three alternatives: the Tower Relocation Alternative, the Iowa Street 66 kV Underground Alternative, and the Phased Build Alternative. In addition, the EIR fully analyzed two project” “no alternatives: the No Project Alternative Option 1, which assumes the absence of an agreement with the Morongo and consequentially the removal of all SCE facilities from Morongo land and development of an alternate transmission path from the Devers Substation to the El Casco Substation, and the No Project Alternative Option 2, which assumes that the facilities on Morongo land would
disturb sensitive receptors or violate local rules, standards, and/or ordinances. Construction, operation and maintenance, and restoration could cause an adverse change to unknown buried prehistoric and historical archaeological sites or buried Native American human remains. Construction would result in visual contrast due to vegetation removal, and the long-term presence of the project would result in landscape changes that degrade existing visual character or quality. The proposed project would not have any other significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance and Reporting Plan. Project Alternatives An EIR must identify a reasonable range of alternatives to a proposed project that feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(a).) An EIR must also evaluate the environmental impacts of a “no project” alternative. (Guidelines § 15126.6(e).) The EIR fully analyzed three alternatives: the Tower Relocation Alternative, the Iowa Street 66 kV Underground Alternative, and the Phased Build Alternative. In addition, the EIR fully analyzed two “no project” alternatives: the No Project Alternative Option 1, which assumes the absence of an agreement with the Morongo and consequentially the removal of all SCE facilities from Morongo land and development of an alternate transmission path from the Devers Substation to the El Casco Substation, and the No Project Alternative Option 2, which assumes that the facilities on Morongo land would
165950267.docx