Compliance Enforcement FRONTLINES argues that the EIR is legally deficient because it fails to require SCE to operate its construction activities in a manner consistent with the EIR’s assumptions. To the contrary, the EIR’s analysis is properly based on SCE’s expectations for its construction activities. If SCE requires a “Minor Project Refinement” to conduct greater activity than is assumed in the EIR, the Commission will review and approve it if there is no increase in the severity of the impact, or conduct additional environmental review if the impact would be severely increased. Indeed, SCE’s petition to modify D.1008009 to allow it to use helicopters in construction is an example of that process. Infeasibility Where construction of a project alternative would have significant environmental effects, the Commission may not approve the project without the mitigation identified to reduce or avoid those effects unless the Commission finds that the identified mitigation or project alternative is infeasible for specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations. (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3).) No party asserts that the environmentally superior project alternatives and associated mitigation measures are infeasible, and we find that they are not infeasible. Overriding Considerations, Including Project Need for Alberhill Project Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15093, the Commission may approve a project that results in significant and unavoidable impacts only upon a finding that there are overriding considerations. Section 15093(a) describes the analysis as follows: CEQA requires the decisionmaking agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including
Compliance Enforcement FRONTLINES argues that the EIR is legally deficient because it fails to require SCE to operate its construction activities in a manner consistent with the EIR’s assumptions. To the contrary, the EIR’s analysis is properly based on SCE’s expectations for its construction activities. If SCE requires a “Minor Project Refinement” to conduct greater activity than is assumed in the EIR, the Commission will review and approve it if there is no increase in the severity of the impact, or conduct additional environmental review if the impact would be severely increased. Indeed, SCE’s petition to modify D.1008009 to allow it to use helicopters in construction is an example of that process. Infeasibility Where construction of a project alternative would have significant environmental effects, the Commission may not approve the project without the mitigation identified to reduce or avoid those effects unless the Commission finds that the identified mitigation or project alternative is infeasible for specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations. (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3).) No party asserts that the environmentally superior project alternatives and associated mitigation measures are infeasible, and we find that they are not infeasible. Overriding Considerations, Including Project Need for Alberhill Project Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15093, the Commission may approve a project that results in significant and unavoidable impacts only upon a finding that there are overriding considerations. Section 15093(a) describes the analysis as follows: CEQA requires the decisionmaking agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including
218534562.docx