This table summarizes the land use impacts for each of the four actions evaluated in this EIR. Municipal Services Review

3.1 Land Use, Agriculture, and Recreation Overview of Impacts The analytical approach taken by this Subsequent EIR is described in Section 3.0 (Introduction to Environmental Analysis). The following section provides a description of existing land use, agriculture, and recreation in the SSJID area, identifies land use plans and regulations applicable to the project, and assesses the potential impacts on land use, agriculture, and recreation. An analysis of cumulative impacts from other past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects is included in Section 5 (Cumulative Impacts) of this Subsequent EIR. Applicable goals and policies of local jurisdictions are also addressed in Section 8 (Consistency with Relevant Plans and Policies). This table summarizes the land use impacts for each of the four actions evaluated in this EIR. Land Use, Agriculture, and Recreation Impact 3.1-1: Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses Impact 3.1-2: Permanently convert Farmland to a non-agricultural use Impact 3.1-3: Conflict with Williamson Act contracts and/or zoning for agricultural use Impact 3.1-4: Result in the loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreation facilities 3.1.1 Existing Setting Municipal Services Review Expanded Sphere of Influence Proposed 80-acre Annexation No Impact No Impact Less than Significant No Impact No Impact Less than Significant No Impact No Impact Less than Significant No Impact No Impact Less than Significant Updated Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Less than Significant The Sphere Plan and MSR describe existing and planned services provided by SSJID, and these services are considered preexisting or previously approved for the purposes of this EIR. Section 2.0 describes the activities outlined in the Sphere Plan and MSR that are considered preexisting or previously approved activities rather than part of the proposed project. Activities supporting SSJID s existing services are either considered part of the baseline, to the extent that they have already been undertaken, or included in the cumulative impacts analysis as reasonably foreseeable projects, to the extent that they have yet to be implemented. Relevant to the analysis of land use impacts, SSJID is obligated to extend its services to anyone who requests service within the SSJID boundary, subject to standard terms and conditions. Infrastructure necessary to provide utility services occurs primarily at or adjacent to existing facilities. Linear facilities constructed to provide and extend SSJID services are sited along parcel edges, roads, or other existing public utility easements or rights of way (ROW) to avoid conflicting with parcel land uses. SSJID takes all practical steps to conduct construction activities entirely within the public ROW and adjacent to paved surface of roadways. At locations adjacent to agriculture, construction activities are conducted within the District s existing property interests, but some construction activities intrude into the agricultural fields. In general, projects involve limited disturbance of land not already devoted to public use or farming. November 2011 3.1 1 Draft Subsequent EIR

3.1.1.1 Land Use The SSJID territory covers approximately 113 square miles of essentially flat landscape. The area is primarily dominated by agricultural and open space features interspersed with single family residences in unincorporated San Joaquin County, and suburban and urban residential areas within the Cities of Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon. Manteca Planning Area. The City of Manteca is located 12 miles south of downtown Stockton, 14 miles northwest of the City of Modesto in Stanislaus County, and 75 miles southeast of the City and County of San Francisco. Originally the City of Manteca functioned as an agricultural service center for the county. Although Manteca is still surrounded by agricultural lands to the north, east, and south, there are industrial land uses just west of the city. Commercial uses are primarily situated along Yosemite Avenue east of Jessie Avenue and along Main Street. The western edge of the existing Manteca Substation is bordered by a Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line and the Tidewater Bikeway, a Class 1 (path separate from streets) bike and pedestrian trail. Trenching for new components of the project would occur in some of these streets and along the property lines of residences. Land in unincorporated San Joaquin County surrounding Manteca s city limits is devoted mainly to rural agricultural uses with a few rural subdivisions and scattered rural residences. The majority of land surrounding the city is Prime Farmland and Prime soils. Agricultural uses include fruit and nut orchards, field crops, vegetables, seed, and other row crops, vineyards, and pastures. A significant portion of the agricultural land is under Williamson Act contracts, particularly in the southern and eastern portion of the planning area. French Camp Road makes up the northern boundary of the SSJID territory, from Jack Tone Road west to the railroad intersection at the western edge of the SSJID territory (just east of the historic French Camp Community). Land use along the northern boundary is agricultural with orchards and single family residences interspersed. The Sphere Plan and MSR, and the SOI expansion would include upgrades and improvements to facilities within the City of Manteca and would expand SSJID s SOI to include all of Manteca s city limits. The proposed 80 acre annexation is located north of Manteca s city limits between Castle and Austin Roads to the west and east, respectively, and French Camp and Northland Roads to the north and south, respectively. The 80 acre area is bounded to the north and east by SSJID irrigation facilities. The proposed site for the Jack Tone Substation includes land supporting dairy operations to the west of Jack Tone Road, within the SSJID boundary. The proposed Jack Tone Substation site is within parcels covered by Williamson Act contracts. Ripon Planning Area. The City of Ripon is located approximately 20 miles southeast of Stockton and 4 miles north of the City of Modesto. The City of Ripon was originally developed along both sides of the UPRR. Highway 99 was constructed parallel to the railroad, dividing the city. Commercial development is concentrated on both sides of Highway 99 with residential development dispersed outside the commercial/industrial corridor parallel to the highway. A substantial amount of land in the southwest part of the city is designated industrial, although much of it has yet to be developed. Unincorporated San Joaquin County surrounding Ripon is agricultural with planted row crops and grapes, with scattered rural residences and roadside commercial uses. This entire planning area is agricultural Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 2 November 2011

land consisting largely of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance. In general, almonds, walnuts, and peaches are the main orchard crops and beans, alfalfa, and corn are the major field crops. Land uses around the Ripon Substation include an orchard located to the north and around the east side; one single family residence to the west/northwest. Highway 99 runs northwest southeast along the southwestern corner of the site; truck stops (Flying J, Love s, and Colony Plaza Truck Stops) are to the south and east. Electric utility ROWs extend to the southwest from the substation. Escalon Planning Area. The Escalon Planning Area is located in the southeast corner of San Joaquin County and includes the City of Escalon, its unincorporated urban fringe, and rural agricultural lands. The City of Escalon is located approximately 20 miles southeast of downtown Stockton and 10 miles north of downtown Modesto. Most of Escalon s growth has been west along First Street and to the east along Yosemite Avenue and Main Street. The city contains a distinct east and west side with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad and downtown area dividing the two sides. Industrial land uses are generally limited to the area south of the city along the west side of McHenry Avenue. Land in unincorporated San Joaquin County around the city limits is generally agricultural and is considered Prime agricultural land. Parcels to the northeast of the city are generally smaller than parcels to the southwest; all are designated and zoned by the County for agricultural use (San Joaquin County, 1992). MID s Clough Substation is located south of Clough Avenue in the City of Escalon. Land uses surrounding the Clough Substation include Clough Avenue and open space/agriculture to the north; a single family residence and orchard to the west; a parking lot then agriculture/open space to the south; and industrial (Eckert Cold Storage) to the east. All area roads are rural two lane roadways with adjacent orchards/ nursery/agriculture and scattered single family residences. 3.1.1.2 Agricultural Resources Much of the proposed construction activities would occur in the agricultural areas of San Joaquin County between Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon. San Joaquin County is one of the nation s top ten agricultural areas in productivity and market value and ranks seventh of the 58 counties in California with respect to production of agricultural goods, earning over $2 billion in 2007 (San Joaquin County, 2009; SJCOG, 2008). Cattle ranching and dairy farming and fruit and tree nut farming were the greatest producers, earning $1,066.7 million and $1,259.5 million, respectively in direct and indirect income (SJCOG, 2008). Agricultural land use accounts for 83 percent of all land use designations within San Joaquin County (San Joaquin County, 2009). One of the main factors contributing to agricultural productivity and abundance of important farmland (as classified by the State Department of Conservation) in the County is the availability of water. With an average annual rainfall of less than 13 inches per year, agriculture in the area depends almost entirely on irrigation. Irrigation began with the formation of SSJID in 1909. Today, 549,908 acres of farmland are irrigated in the County out of a total of 758,156 acres in agricultural production (DOC, 2008). Farming in the San Joaquin Valley is generally highly industrialized with most crops grown in parcels of 40 acres or larger (San Joaquin County, 2009). Pesticide application of vegetable and field crops is often performed via crop dusting airplanes. Some of the fruit and nut crops receive pesticide treatments by crop dusters and others by truck or tractor. The majority of agricultural land west of Highway 99 is November 2011 3.1 3 Draft Subsequent EIR

dedicated to industrial fruit and nut orchards and vineyards with some land used for field crop production. Agricultural land in the County is rapidly giving way to development. The County s affordable housing and suburban lifestyle attracts many people from the greater Bay Area. The County accommodates this growth and supports urban development where necessary as well as increased services to support the needs of an increasing population. The growth is evidenced in Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon, where housing developments occur in and around agricultural lands as cities continue to grow outward. Farmland maps produced by the California Department of Conservation s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) for San Joaquin County indicate that a majority of the land base in the project area would lie within an area considered Farmland of Statewide Importance. 1 Parcels of Prime Farmland 2 are also scattered throughout the project vicinity. These lands are considered valuable and any conversion of land within these categories is typically considered to be an adverse impact. Table 3.1 1 illustrates farmland conversion statistics for San Joaquin County from 2006 2008 and indicates that approximately 6,857 acres of agricultural land was converted to a different land use category. Approximately 2,698 acres of agricultural land was converted to urban or built up land between 2006 2008 (DOC, 2008). Table 3.1 1. Farmland Conversion from 2006 to 2008 in San Joaquin County Total Acres Inventoried 2006-2008 Acreage Changes Land Use Category 2006 2008 Acres Lost Acres Gained Net Change Prime Farmland 407,609 396,985 11,941 1,317-10,624 Farmland of Statewide Importance 89,274 86,299 3,517 542-2,975 Unique Farmland 63,232 66,624 1,658 5,050 3,392 Farmland of Local Importance 59,965 65,788 5,356 11,179 5,823 Grazing Land 144,933 142,460 2,709 236-2,473 Agricultural Land Subtotal 765,013 758,156 25,181 18,324-6,857 Source: DOC, 2008. 3.1.1.3 Recreation Land in the SSJID territory is primarily agricultural with urban centers that do not include major recreational attractions. Small parks are located within each of the Cities of Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon. The area along the Stanislaus River, the southern border of the SSJID territory, is maintained Open Space with regional recreational areas preserved along several miles of riverfront. The existing San Joaquin County Park System consists of 21 County, regional, and community and neighborhood parks that serve the unincorporated communities in San Joaquin County (San Joaquin County Parks and Recreation, 2010). The City of Ripon provides 20 community and neighborhood parks (City of Ripon, 2010). The City of Escalon has nine community parks throughout the town (City of Escalon, 2010). Finally, the City of Manteca maintains 58 parks and recreational facilities within its boundaries, including bikeways, swimming pools, golf courses, and tennis courts (City of Manteca, 2010). 1 2 Farmland of Statewide Importance is similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Prime Farmland includes lands with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long term agricultural production. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 4 November 2011

The Tidewater Bikeway, at the western edge of the Manteca Substation, is a 3.4 mile Class 1 bike and pedestrian path that parallels the UPRR right of way to the east. PG&E poles, as well as other underground utilities, are already located along this section of the path (SSJID, 2004). 3.1.2 Applicable Regulations and Policies The Williamson Act (drafted as the California Land Conservation Act of 1965) was enacted to protect valuable agricultural land throughout the State from urban encroachment. By entering into contracts to retain land in agricultural or related open space use, farmers receive property tax assessments well below market value. Under an additional provision added by the Open Space Subvention Act of 1971, the State has been partially compensating local jurisdictions for the reduced property tax revenues that result from Williamson Act contracts. The contracts have a minimum term of ten years, and renew automatically on the annual anniversary of the contract unless the property owner initiates a process of nonrenewal. Electric facilities are a recognized supporting use of agricultural lands, and Government Code Section 51238 states that the erection, construction, alteration, or maintenance of gas, electric, water, communication, or agricultural laborer housing facilities are hereby determined to be compatible uses within any agricultural preserve, with agricultural preserve referring to land under a Williamson Act contract. According to data produced by the California Department of Conservation s Division of Land Resource Protection for 2001, 537,439 acres in San Joaquin County are under the provisions of the Williamson Act contract (DOC, 2008). Much of the agricultural land within the SSJID territory is subject to Williamson Act contracts. Specific applicable city and county policies related to land use, recreation, and agricultural resources and the proposed project s consistency with those policies are discussed in Section 8, Policy Consistency. That said, SSJID is an independent governmental agency with its own governing structure. As such, SSJID public facilities are provided some immunities from certain local governmental regulations such as certain City and County building ordinances and zoning ordinances, as specified in the Government Code and Public Utilities Code (as summarized in Section 1.4.2 of this EIR). 3.1.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 3.1.3.1 Significance Criteria The following significance criteria were derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Potential conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations are discussed in Section 8, Policy Consistency, of this Subsequent EIR. The proposed project would have significant impacts if it would: Physically disrupt or preclude an existing or permitted land use, or create a disturbance that would diminish the function of a particular land use; November 2011 3.1 5 Draft Subsequent EIR

Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), 3 as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non agricultural use; 4 Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; or Cause loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreational facilities. 3.1.3.2 Impacts and Mitigation The following section analyzes the land use, agriculture, and recreation impacts of the four separate actions: Sphere Plan and Municipal Services Review, Proposed Expanded Sphere of Influence, Proposed 80 acre annexation, and Updated Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service. Sphere Plan and Municipal Services Review This analysis discusses the potential impacts associated with the Sphere Plan and MSR that can be identified during this programmatic review, and separate discussions follow disclosing the impacts related to the other adoption and approval actions: the proposed SOI expansion, proposed 80 acre annexation, and plan to provide retail electric service. Projects that would occur with or without the adoption and approval of the Sphere Plan and MSR, such as the Water Transfer Renewal Project, Phase II of the South County Water Supply Program (SCWSP), the supply of drinking water to Escalon and Ripon, and the Division 9 Project were subject to or will in the future be subject to separate environmental review. These infrastructure improvements are analyzed as part of this EIR as foreseeable projects for potential cumulative impacts (Section 5, Cumulative Impacts). Improvements associated with the proposed retail electric service plan that appear in the Sphere Plan and MSR are analyzed below as part of the Updated Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service. 3 4 Farmland of Statewide Importance, Prime Farmland, and Unique Farmland are collectively referred to in this analysis as Farmland. The California Department of Conservation (DOC) established the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) in 1982 in response to a critical need for assessing the location and quantity of agricultural lands and conversion of these lands to other uses. The resulting Important Farmland maps and related databases constitute the only statewide land use inventory conducted on a regular basis that identifies the conversion of agricultural land to urban and other uses. Following are procedures by which DOC determines the status of farmlands: DOC updates soil mapping every two years using infra red aerial photos provided by NASA at a scale of 1:130,000. Their most recent update is for 2008. Based on these maps, land is evaluated to determine its farmland designation. If a particular piece of land is fallow, it is then flagged. In order to qualify as Prime Farmland, rather than just Prime soil, the land must be irrigated as well as having prime soil attributes. DOC has a minimum mapping unit of 10 acres, with smaller than 10 acre parcels being absorbed into the surrounding classifications. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 6 November 2011

The Sphere Plan and MSR describe a variety of infrastructure investments necessary to provide an adequate level of service within the SOI. The analysis of the Sphere Plan and MSR discusses the general types of site specific impacts that could occur. However, no construction activities or changes in operations are proposed for approval with the potential adoption of the Sphere Plan and MSR. Any construction related to these infrastructure investments would occur with or without the adoption and approval of the Sphere Plan and MSR. The MSR, technically, is not a plan that commits SSJID to any particular course of action; rather, it is a review of services provided within a particular area, with the idea that it will provide information useful to LAFCo as it makes decisions. The following presents a general discussion of whether the service requirements under the Sphere Plan and MSR would create an adverse effect on land use, agriculture, and recreation. The analysis of the Sphere Plan and MSR is a programmatic environmental assessment. Impact 3.1 1: Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses The Sphere Plan and MSR describe a variety of infrastructure improvements necessary to provide an adequate level of service within the SOI. While there would be linear infrastructure necessary under the Sphere Plan and MSR (e.g., water supply pipelines), these are unlikely to disrupt established communities in the long term. Where feasible, SSJID locates linear facilities along parcel edges, roads or other existing utility easements or rights of way to prevent division of communities or interference with agricultural operations. In the case of underground linear facilities, upon completion of construction, there would be no permanent above ground linear disruption. While the MSR describes these ongoing and previously planned activities, the activities will not be approved or in any way furthered by the adoption of the Sphere Plan and MSR. No construction proposal or change in action would occur with the adoption of the Sphere Plan and MSR. No impacts related to disruption of land uses would occur with adoption of the Sphere Plan and MSR. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-1 Impact 3.1 2: Permanently convert Farmland to a non agricultural use Providing public services under the Sphere Plan and MSR would cause a significant impact to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (collectively, Farmland) if the activity results in development that converts Farmland to other uses. As described above, SSJID locates linear facilities along parcel edges, roads or other existing utility easements or rights of way and off of Farmland. The proposed adoption and approval of the Sphere Plan and adoption of the MSR would not result in the conversion of Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to a non agricultural use. No impact would occur. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-2 Impact 3.1 3: Conflict with Williamson Act contracts and/or zoning for agricultural use SSJID locates linear facilities along parcel edges, roads or other existing utility easements or rights ofway and off of agricultural lands. Consequently, activities under the Sphere Plan and MSR analyzed here November 2011 3.1 7 Draft Subsequent EIR

would avoid lands under Williamson Act contracts. The Williamson Act restrictions, however, allow utility services as an approved use type. As such, no conflicts would occur. The proposed adoption and approval of the Sphere Plan and adoption of the MSR would not result in conflicts with Williamson Act contracts or agricultural zoning. No impacts are identified related to Williamson Act contracts or agricultural zoning in this programmatic assessment of the Sphere Plan and MSR. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-3 Impact 3.1 4: Result in the loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreation facilities SSJID locates linear facilities along parcel edges, roads or other existing utility easements or rights ofway, preventing effects on recreation facilities. In the case of underground linear facilities, upon completion of construction, there would be no permanent above ground linear disruption, avoiding loss or degradation of recreational facilities. No impacts related to degradation of recreational facilities would occur with adoption of the Sphere Plan and MSR. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-4 Proposed Expanded Sphere of Influence This analysis discusses the potential impacts associated with expanding the Sphere of Influence that can be identified during this programmatic review. Any future proposals for service improvements or annexations within the expanded SOI may need to undergo the project level environmental review process pursuant to CEQA should SSJID decide to pursue such an annexation or service expansion. Impact 3.1 1: Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses The proposed expansion of SSJID s SOI would utilize existing infrastructure within the Manteca city limits and would require no construction of improvements. No new operational staff would be necessary and no new operations or maintenance activities would occur. No impacts related to disruption of land uses would occur with adoption of the expanded SOI. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-1 Impact 3.1 2: Permanently convert Farmland to a non agricultural use As expansion of the SSJID SOI would require no new construction, expanded facilities, or changes to operation or maintenance activities, the proposed SOI expansion would not cause a loss of Farmland. If new infrastructure improvements are later determined necessary for the expansion of the SOI, SSJID would consider loss of Farmland associated with any proposed projects or facility improvements before acting on specific proposals. No significant impacts related to Farmland conversion would occur with adoption of the expanded SOI. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 8 November 2011

Mitigation for Impact 3.1-2 Impact 3.1 3: Conflict with Williamson Act contracts and/or zoning for agricultural use As expansion of the SSJID SOI would require no new construction, expanded facilities, or changes to operation or maintenance activities, the proposed SOI expansion would not conflict with Williamson Act contracts or zoning. No impacts related to Williamson Act contracts would occur with adoption of the expanded SOI. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-3 Impact 3.1 4: Result in the loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreation facilities No new construction or facility improvements would be necessary for the expansion of the SOI. No adverse impacts on neighborhood parks and recreation would occur with adoption of the expanded SOI. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-4 Proposed 80 Acre Annexation This impact analysis discusses the potential project specific impacts associated with the proposed 80 acre annexation and identifies mitigation measures for significant impacts. This analysis is a project level environmental assessment of the annexation. This annexation has been proposed as a separate action wholly independent of and for distinctly different reasons than SSJID s proposed plan to provide retail electric services, and it is not dependent in any way upon SSJID s separate proposal to provide such electric services. Impact 3.1 1: Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses The proposed 80 acre annexation would not disrupt the physical arrangement to the existing land uses. The proposed new sprinkler sump structure included as part of the annexation would be located adjacent to the District s Lateral Q. Construction of the sprinkler sump structure by the property owner could potentially damage irrigation systems or interfere with operation of mechanical equipment during construction activities. Operation of the sprinkler sump structure, however, would not interfere with any agricultural operations. As construction of the sprinkler sump structure would be performed by the owner of the property, the timing and extent of construction and its effects on the owner s agricultural operations would be at their discretion and to their benefit to minimize disruptions, resulting in a less than significant impact. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-1 Impact 3.1 2: Permanently convert Farmland to a non agricultural use Installing the sprinkler sump structure would result in the permanent addition of irrigation infrastructure to agricultural land. The sprinkler sump structure site is classified as Prime Farmland which warrants November 2011 3.1 9 Draft Subsequent EIR

protection from unnecessary conversion. Adding the irrigation infrastructure would involve very limited land disturbance, and no real conversion to a non agricultural use. The effects would be incidental and/or temporary in nature. The loss of agricultural land for the footprint of the sprinkler sump structure itself would be adverse, but less than significant. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-2 Impact 3.1 3: Conflict with Williamson Act contracts and/or zoning for agricultural use The proposed 80 acre annexation, and the necessary sprinkler sump structure, would be located on land under a Williamson Act contract and zoned for agriculture. The sprinkler sump structure would be allowed under Williamson Act restrictions and agricultural zoning as an approved use to maintain agricultural use of the land. Therefore, the proposed annexation and construction would not impact this contract, and the impact would be less than significant. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-3 Impact 3.1 4: Result in the loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreation facilities Construction of the sprinkler sump structure associated with the proposed 80 acre annexation would be located away from neighborhood parks and recreation areas and would not generate population growth that would increase the demand for or use of existing parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of these facilities could occur or be accelerated. The annexation would not cause construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities. Consequently, impacts to recreational resources would be less than significant. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-4 Updated Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service This impact analysis discusses the potential project specific impacts associated with the plan to provide retail electric services and identifies mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts. This represents a project level assessment of the updated plan and also a programmatic level assessment of foreseeable consequences of the retail electric service plan such as the expansion of SSJID s retail electric service to Area D or Area E (see Figure 2 2 in Chapter 2, Project Description), which are outside SSJID s existing territory, but within its current and proposed SOI. However, SSJID has no immediate plans to annex areas within Area D or Area E or to provide retail electric service in these areas. If the current proposal for retail electric service is approved and the areas are annexed in the future, SSJID would likely expand this service to Area E within 10 years and to Area D within 30 years. Mitigation measures that apply to the proposal for retail electric service would likely also apply to the future expansion of electric service within the SOI. Approval of the proposed project, however, would not commit SSJID to exactly these mitigation measures for possible future annexations because considerations may arise within 30 years that would make the near term measures obsolete or outdated. Specific proposals for annexations or service beyond SSJID s existing territory may need to undergo the project level environmental review process and other required approvals should SSJID decide to pursue such an annexation or service expansion in the future. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 10 November 2011

The retail electric service plan was the subject of a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by San Joaquin County in June 2006 (the 2006 Final EIR). 5 This Subsequent EIR uses the information from the 2006 Final EIR and expands on it by considering the updated plan for providing retail electric service, and evaluating new information and changed circumstances that have come into existence since 2006. Where mitigation measures identified in the 2006 Final EIR would still apply to the project, they are identified and updated here. Impact 3.1 1: Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses Construction of the overhead and underground distribution feeders and the proposed Jack Tone Substation would generate noise, dust, and diesel exhaust odors that could adversely affect land uses adjacent to or in proximity to the alignments and substation property. Temporary impacts would result from clearing and grading at the substation site and with the installation of new poles and the underground cables. Dust generation in the vicinity of nearby residences would be limited, because no new access roads or large areas of clearing would be required in any area of dwellings. Noise levels and diesel odors would vary by construction activity and equipment in use, ranging from light trucks to heavy groundworking equipment. Although the noise, dust, and odors generated during construction could irritate neighboring residents, the construction at each location would be of short duration, and transient construction effects are commonly acceptable by products of the growing urban development in the project area. This impact would therefore be adverse, but with appropriate advance notification and providing a public liaison (in Section 3.8, Noise), noise controls (in Section 3.8, Noise), and emission controls (in Section 3.2, Air Quality), the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. The impacts of dust, odors, and noise are also specifically addressed in Section 3.2 (Air Quality) and Section 3.8 (Noise) of this EIR. Section 3.10 (Transportation and Traffic) discusses the impacts and mitigation related to restriction of property access and increased traffic related to construction. With these measures along with SSJID s planned notification procedures, potential nuisances and disruptions caused by general construction activities would be less than significant. The placement of the new poles within and adjacent to agricultural land could potentially damage irrigation systems, interfere with operation of mechanical equipment, and restrict crop dusting. Poles could be placed within or adjacent to land currently being farmed as cropland. These poles can be located to avoid significant impacts to above and below ground agricultural water delivery systems and to reduce the interference with harvesting, planting, and other ground mechanization. At the locations adjacent to fields, some construction activities may intrude into the agricultural fields, but in general the project would involve very limited land disturbance, and the effects would be incidental and/or temporary in nature. Conductor stringing can be performed from the existing public and private roads. Additional temporary disturbance to adjacent fields would occur from installing guy wires at the severance points. In addition, after the poles are installed, farm equipment would be able to operate within inches of the poles. Mitigation would address the adverse effects of soil compaction should construction work intrude into agricultural fields. Implementing Mitigation Measure 3.1 1a, below, to re till agricultural lands ensures that the temporary impacts of construction would be less than significant. The proposed distribution lines could interfere with the aerial application of pesticides, a widespread practice in the project area. Some farmers in the area may employ aerial crop dusting, usually in the 5 Final Environmental Impact Report, No. PA 0500291, SSJID Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service. Lead Agency: San Joaquin County, Community Development Department, 1810 East Hazelton Avenue, Stockton, California. SCH No. 2005102018. May 2006. November 2011 3.1 11 Draft Subsequent EIR

winter and early spring months, when wet soil conditions hinder on ground mechanization and application of chemicals. Distribution lines would typically reach a height of 35 to 40 feet on 45 and 60 foot poles. Crop dusters fly at very low elevations, with the top of the plane often 25 to 30 feet above ground. The applicators fly parallel to crop and orchard rows. Installing electrical lines along routes that are perpendicular to crop rows would require the pilots to alter their normal flight patterns and spray parallel to the proposed lines for several passes. This change in flight patterns would decrease crop dusting efficiency and may affect the practicality of flying small fields adjacent to the lines. Little impact would occur along fields that run parallel to the proposed lines. To address significant impacts due to disruptions to crop dusting, Mitigation Measures 3.1 1b and 3.1 1c would require consultation with land owners over line siting with regard to farming operations and flight patterns, which would reduce this impact to less than significant levels. The impacts of the possible future expansion of SSJID s retail electric service to Area D or Area E (Figure 2 2 in Chapter 2, Project Description), if the areas are annexed in the future, would be similar to these impacts described for the proposed project; however, there are no plans for this possible expansion currently under consideration. Mitigation measures that apply to the current proposed project would likely also apply to these future, programmatic impacts. However, approval of the proposed project would not commit SSJID to exactly these mitigation measures for possible future annexations because considerations may arise within 30 years that would make the near term measures obsolete or outdated. Specific proposals for annexations or service beyond SSJID s existing territory may need to undergo the project level environmental review process and other required approvals should SSJID decide to pursue such an annexation or service expansion in the future. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-1 3.1 1a 3.1 1b 3.1 1c Re till agricultural lands following construction. If requested by the landowner, SSJID shall re till agricultural land used for laydown activities and pole placement to offset compaction caused by heavy material storage and construction activities. [From 2006 Final EIR Mitigation Measure 3.1 6b] Consult with landowners. Where proposed electrical facilities would be located adjacent to or through agricultural lands, SSJID shall consult with the landowners concerning the placement of poles in cultivated land and site new poles to produce the least disturbance to irrigation equipment and farming practices. [Updated from 2006 Final EIR Mitigation Measure 3.1 7a] Adjust location of lines for agricultural operations and flight patterns. SSJID shall site poles in locations that minimize impacts to active agricultural operations. Specifically, SSJID shall align poles adjacent to field boundaries and parallel to rows (if located in row crops), and shall avoid diagonal orientations and angular alignments within agricultural land. SSJID shall construct poles with heights and spacing to minimize safety hazards to aerial applicators. [Updated from 2006 Final EIR Mitigation Measure 3.1 7b] Impact 3.1 2: Permanently convert Farmland to a non agricultural use Permanent impacts would occur with the development of the 1.89 acre Jack Tone Substation and would result in the permanent loss of agricultural land. The proposed Jack Tone Substation site is classified as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, which warrant protection from unnecessary conversion. Additionally, as electricity demand grows, SSJID would be obligated to expand its distribu Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 12 November 2011

tion system as needed to provide services and basic infrastructure for new customers and growth in the customer base over the long term. This may include a potential future new substation south of Manteca to serve anticipated demand after 2026. Such a substation would potentially be located on agriculture land and require conversion of approximately two acres of agriculture land. To address the conversion of Farmland due to construction of the Jack Tone Substation, mitigation from the 2006 Final EIR (Mitigation Measure 3.1 6a) is expanded below as Mitigation Measure 3.1 2a to account for the permanent conversion of all Farmland resulting from construction activities associated with the Updated Plan to Provide Retail Electric Service. While the location of the Jack Tone Substation has been identified, the location of a future substation south of Manteca that may be needed after 2026 has not. However, Mitigation Measure 3.1 2a (Preserve farmland to offset permanent losses) would offset the loss of agricultural land, including that of the proposed Jack Tone Substation site, at a one to one ratio for permanent Farmland conversion. Implementation of the electric service plan would result in construction activities in agricultural areas. The temporary impacts to agricultural lands would occur as a result of activities related to the construction of new distribution lines along agricultural roads, the work at the severance points adjacent to agricultural fields, and the construction of the proposed Jack Tone Substation. Placing electrical poles in the ground requires space to lay down the poles and operate the construction equipment. As described above, SSJID takes all practical steps to conduct construction activities entirely within the public ROW and adjacent to paved surface of roadways. The impacts of the possible future expansion of SSJID s retail electric service to Area D or Area E (Figure 2 2 in Chapter 2, Project Description), if the areas are annexed in the future, would be similar to these impacts described for the proposed project; however, there are no plans for this possible expansion currently under consideration. Mitigation measures that apply to the current proposed project would likely also apply to these future, programmatic impacts. However, approval of the proposed project would not commit SSJID to exactly these mitigation measures for possible future annexations because considerations may arise within 30 years that would make the near term measures obsolete or outdated. Specific proposals for annexations or service beyond SSJID s existing territory may need to undergo the project level environmental review process and other required approvals should SSJID decide to pursue such an annexation or service expansion in the future. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-2 3.1 2a Preserve farmland to offset permanent losses. Loss of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance shall be offset with comparable quality farmland at a ratio of one to one (1:1) with regard to the acreage of land removed from the capability for agricultural use. The one to one ratio is consistent with the required compensation ratio for agriculture lands identified in the San Joaquin County Multi Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (Nov. 2000). This could be accomplished through the direct purchase of a voluntary conservation easement on productive farmland or payment of an in lieu fee to a Farmland Trust within San Joaquin County. Fees collected would be used to purchase voluntary agricultural conservation easements within the County. A fee payment receipt must be obtained and documentation of the land purchase must be demonstrated prior to construction at the affected site. Mitigation lands shall be of comparable productivity based on the Department of Conservation criteria and shall meet all of the following criteria to qualify as agricultural mitigation: November 2011 3.1 13 Draft Subsequent EIR

The mitigation land shall be designated as lands identified by the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland; The mitigation land shall have an adequate water supply for the purposes of irrigation. The water supply shall be comparable to, or better than, the land that is the subject of a change in zoning classification, and shall be sufficient to support ongoing agricultural uses. The water supply shall be protected through legal instrument, where applicable, to ensure that water rights permanently remain with the mitigation land; and The mitigation land shall be located within the County of San Joaquin. The mitigation land may overlap partially with existing habitat easement areas, as determined by the SSJID in consultation with the County and the California Department of Fish and Game; however, land previously encumbered by any other agricultural conservation easement shall not qualify, or be used for agricultural mitigation. [Updated from 2006 Final EIR Mitigation Measure 3.1 6a] Impact 3.1 3: Conflict with Williamson Act contracts and/or zoning for agricultural use Much of the agricultural land within the project area is subject to Williamson Act contracts. The installation of utility lines along the periphery of agricultural lands would not have a substantial effect on productivity of the land and would not require contract cancellation. Therefore, the proposed distribution system modifications would not impact these contracts. The proposed Jack Tone Substation would be located on land subject to a Williamson Act contract. As discussed above, use of an approximate 2 acre parcel for the Jack Tone Substation would not significantly compromise the long term productive agricultural capability of the covered Williamson Act parcels, nor would it significantly displace or impair current or reasonably foreseeable agricultural operations. Because Government Code Section 51238 specifies that new electric facilities would be compatible with any agricultural preserve, including parcels covered under Williamson Act contracts, this impact would be less than significant. The impacts of the possible future expansion of SSJID s retail electric service to Area D or Area E (Figure 2 2 in Chapter 2, Project Description) would be similar to these impacts described for the proposed project; however, there are no plans for this possible expansion currently under consideration. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-3 Impact 3.1 4: Result in the loss or degradation of federal, State, or local recreation facilities Construction of the proposed distribution facilities in the City of Manteca would occur around the Manteca Substation near the Tidewater Bikeway. This work could cause temporary disturbance to the recreational quality in Manteca, but this disturbance would be minor and would not substantially interfere with foot or cycle traffic along the bikeway or impede access to parks. The project would not include the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities. Consequently, the proposed project would not be expected to interfere with recreational facilities, and impacts to recreational resources would be less than significant. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 14 November 2011

The impacts of the possible future expansion of SSJID s retail electric service to Area D or Area E (Figure 2 2 in Chapter 2, Project Description) would be similar to these impacts described for the proposed project; however, there are no plans for this possible expansion currently under consideration. Mitigation for Impact 3.1-4 3.1.4 Conclusion The Sphere Plan and MSR would have no significant impact from disruptions to existing land uses, conflicts with Williamson Act contracts and zoning, or loss or degradation to recreational facilities. Similarly, the Sphere Plan and MSR would not result in a loss of important farmland. Analysis found no land use impacts resulting from the expansion of SSJID s Sphere of Influence, and no mitigation is necessary for this portion of the project. The proposed 80 acre annexation would require the installation of a sprinkler sump structure, which could potentially disrupt agricultural operations, but all impacts to agricultural and recreational resources would be less than significant. For the planned expansion to the provision of electrical service, agricultural operations and important farmland would experience potentially significant impacts due to construction of distribution system facilities and poles, but implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.1 1a (Re till agricultural lands following construction), 3.1 1b (Consult with landowners), 3.1 1c (Adjust location of lines for agricultural operations and flight patterns), and 3.1 2a (Preserve farmland to offset permanent losses) would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Impacts to Williamson Act contracts and zoning and recreational facilities would be less than significant. November 2011 3.1 15 Draft Subsequent EIR

3.1.5 Mitigation Monitoring Program Table 3.1 2 shows the mitigation monitoring, compliance, and reporting program for Land Use, Agriculture, and Recreation. Table 3.1 2. Mitigation Monitoring Program Land Use, Agriculture, and Recreation IMPACT 3.1-1 MITIGATION MEASURES Location Monitoring / Reporting Action Effectiveness Criteria Responsible Agency Timing IMPACT 3.1-2 MITIGATION MEASURES Location Monitoring / Reporting Action Effectiveness Criteria Responsible Agency Timing Physically disrupt, preclude, or disturb existing or permitted land uses 3.1-1a: Re-till agricultural lands following construction 3.1-1b: Consult with landowners 3.1-1c: Adjust location of lines for agricultural operations and flight patterns Affected agricultural lands Obtain a copy of agreement(s) with affected property owner(s) Property owners satisfied South San Joaquin Irrigation District Prior, during, and after construction Permanently convert Farmland to a non-agricultural use 3.1-2a: Preserve farmland to offset permanent losses Affected agricultural lands including proposed Jack Tone Substation Obtain a copy of fee payment receipt for agricultural conservation easements Permanently lost protected farmland is offset at specified ratio South San Joaquin Irrigation District Prior to construction 3.1.6 References City of Escalon. 2010. City of Escalon General Plan. http://www.cityofescalon.org/parks_.htm. Accessed August 23. City of Manteca. 2010. Park Facilities List & Map. Online at http://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/parks/docs/ Parks_Listing_&_Map2010.pdf. Accessed August 23.. 2008. City of Manteca Sphere of Influence. http://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/communitydevelopment/ planningdivisionmaps.html. Accessed October 2010. City of Ripon. 2010. City of Ripon. Online at http://www.cityofripon.org. Accessed August 23.. 2004. Draft General Plan 2040. Submitted October 4. Update in progress. DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2008. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resources Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: San Joaquin County 2006 2008 Land Use Conversion. Online at http://redirect.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/county_ info_results.asp. Accessed August 24. San Joaquin County. 2009. San Joaquin County General Plan Background Report, Public Review Draft. Online at: http://sjcgpu.com/docs.html. Accessed April 15, 2011.. 1992. San Joaquin County General Plan 2010: Volume II: Community Plans. Online at http://elib. cs.berkeley.edu/cgi bin/doc_home?elib_id=929. Published July 1992 and accessed May 3, 2005. Draft Subsequent EIR 3.1 16 November 2011