Item #5: IS/MND/MMRP and
Route Approval for the SVP
115kV Transmission Line
from NRS to KRS
RTC 24-1040
November 12, 2024
Key Items For Discussion
Agenda – Per October 8 and October 22 Council Meetings
• Introductions
• Project Need
• Summary of Routes
• Residential along Route C
• Preliminary EMF results on Route C
• EMF Presentation
Introductions
• SVP Staff
• ECI Staff – Engineers and EMF modeling
– Oliver Beres, Associate Engineer
• Aspen Staff – Environmental Consultants
– Hedy Koczwara, Vice President/Senior Environmental Scientist – Chuck Williams, Principal/Transmission Engineer
• Exponent – EMF Presentation
– Gary Johnson Ph.D.
• Ph.D., Electrical Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1979 • M.S., Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1976 • B.S., Engineering Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1974 – Gabor Mezei M.D., Ph.D.
• Ph.D., Epidemiology, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), 1995 • M.D., Medicine, Semmelweis University of Medicine, 1990 • Multidisciplinary scientific research program at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) for health effects associated with exposure to power frequency and radiofrequency EMF NR
S
K
R
S
S
R
S
NORTHERN
RECEIVING
STATION
Route A
Route B
Route C
LEGEND
KIFER
RECEIVING
STATION
George
Street
Duane
Avenue
115kV Transmission Line
Northern to Kifer Receiving Station
• Project Scope: Construct a new 115kV overhead
transmission line of approximately 2.24 miles between
Northern Receiving Station and Kifer Receiving Station. • Needed to accommodate approved and under construction load growth and reliability
• Transfer additional power and redistribute loads
• System Operating Limit will be limited to ~819MW if
transmission line is not constructed
• System Operating Limit with it ~ 1300MW
• Key Items: schedule, constructability, and power delivery • Construction is estimated to take approximately 14 months and be completed by early 2028.
Project Need
• Recorded a new peak load of 705MW in July 2024 and again 718MW and 720MW in October 2024
• 5 Key projects all with 2028 Completion dates:
– Kifer Receiving Station (KRS) Rebuild
– Scott Receiving Station (SRS) Rebuild
– Northern Receiving Station (NRS) Upgrades
– LS Power Transmission Line (CAISO Project)
– 115 kV Transmission Line
• Needed to accommodate approved and under construction load growth and reliability
– Includes large industrial users such as data centers and corporate headquarters
– Includes large residential
– With 115 kV line ~ capacity 1300 MW
– Without 115 kV line ~ capacity 819MW
– Approximately $500 million in sales annually
– $25 million General Fund annually
115 kV - Three Routes Considered
• Council Information Session March 2024
• An assessment was prepared to determine the preferred route for the Proposed Project.
• Route B (considered and eliminated)
• UPRR right of way is too narrow (concerns with
inductive interference on the rail lines and additional permitting and design review)
• Properties surrounding UPPR do not have sufficient
space to place structures
• Require extensive easement costs and coordination
• UPRR permits
• Even if it was feasible, it would not meet 2028 schedule NR
S
K
R
S
S
R
S
NORTHERN
RECEIVING
STATION
Route A
Route B
Route C
LEGEND
KIFER
RECEIVING
STATION
George
Street
Duane
Avenue
Three Routes Considered
• Route C (considered and eliminated)
• Majority within Creek boundaries
• Replace existing 60kV line where available
• Easements and permitting - unknown if
permits would even be feasible and if feasible
would not meet schedule due to extensive
permitting schedules
• Longest route
• Would not meet 2028 schedule
• Route A (Proposed Project) – Analyzed in IS/MND
NR
S
K
R
S
S
R
S
NORTHERN
RECEIVING
STATION
Route A
Route B
Route C
LEGEND
KIFER
RECEIVING
STATION
George
Street
Duane
Avenue
Three Routes Considered
Route A (Underground Option for Northern Segment)
• Constraints with constructability, schedule, and power deliverability
• 25 existing utilities crossing or conflicts with
underground alignment in Lafayette
• High water table and may require excavations greater
than 20’ deep
• Utility spacing requirements may not be met
• Requires relocation of 300 feet of two transmission gas mains for PG&E and DVR
• The DVR shutdown scheduled twice a year
• Will require extensive PG&E construction activities, on PG&E schedule, and will not meet 2028 schedule
Route A (Proposed Project) – Analyzed in IS/MND
Any ideas
for graphic
or
pictures?
Northern Segment
Southern Segment
LEGEND
NORTHERN
RECEIVING
STATION
KIFER
RECEIVING
STATION
Route A – Northern Segment
Route A – Southern Segment
LEGEND
George
Street
Duane
Avenue
Comparison of Northern Segment
Overhead Underground
Ability to meet 2028 schedule. Can not meet 2028 schedule • Relying on PG&E for utility relocation
• DVR shut-down
Maximum transmission capacity Reduced transmission capacity Ability to accommodate future growth Lack of provisions for future growth Reduces construction disruption to the public Extended construction timelines with extended lane closures and traffic control
Ease of maintaining the system Longer restoration times in emergency situations Northern Segment Costs: ~$9.5 Million
Total Project Costs: ~$36 Million
Northern Segment Costs: ~$19 Million
Total Project Costs: ~$45.5 Million
Lafayette Street Renderings
Facing North near Eisenhower Drive Facing South near Hope Drive Residential Considerations
Residential Addresses within 450 ft of
New Transmission Line
Total Addresses
Route C 653
Route A 1,000
Route C – Would also expect similar feedback
• Assumes construction on farthest side of the creek -
residential numbers on Route C would increase
• Route C numbers do not include the planned residential development for Freedom Circle
Route C Preliminary EMF Study
Route A
Route C
Residential Existing 2024 Future 2028
Segment Approx.
Distance (ft) *
Normal – Peak
Load (mG)
Normal – Peak
Load (mG)
1C 100-110 0.0 – 1.4 5.9 – 8.7
2C 210-220 21.2 – 31.9 21.6 – 32.4
3C 40-50 4.9 – 12.8 18.0 – 29.1
4C 170-180 0.0 – 0.9 2.1 – 2.9
Residential Existing 2024 Future 2028
Segment Approx.
Distance (ft) *
Normal – Peak
Load (mG)
Normal – Peak
Load (mG)
2 60 6.4 – 8.0 14.3 – 17.9
3 60 0.9 – 1.1 14.2 – 17.7
• Approximate distance to nearest residential building
• Values would increase if constructed on opposite side of creek Schedule
Task Timeframe
Design Feb. 2023 – May 2026
Easement Acquisition Jan. 2024 – May 2026
CEQA Process
Identify Project Need Jan. 2024
Preparation of conceptual design and start of CEQA Jan. 2024 – Mar. 2024 CEQA Community Outreach (Scoping) April 8 – May 29, 2024 Publication of Draft IS/MND and 30-day Public
Review Period
July 31, 2024 – August 30, 2024
Publish Final IS/MND September 24, 2024
City Council Consideration October 8, 2024, November 12, 2024 Permits Feb. 2024 – Nov. 2025
Material Procurements Oct. 2024 – Nov. 2026
Anticipated Construction Nov. 2026 – Mar. 2028
142410256.000 - 8629
142410256.000 - 8629
Overview of Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF)
November 12, 2024
Gary Johnson, Ph.D.
Gabor Mezei, M.D., Ph.D.
2410256.000 - 8629
Speakers
Senior Managing Scientist
Electrical Engineer & Computer
Science Practice
Gary Johnson, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist
Health Science Practice
Gabor Mezei, M.D., Ph.D.
15 2410256.000 - 8629
Who We Are
Exponent is a multi-disciplinary engineering and scientific firm dedicated to solving important science, engineering, and regulatory issues for clients.
1 6
172410256.000 - 8629
Nature and Sources of EMF
2410256.000 - 8629
What are Electric and Magnetic Fields
• Electric and magnetic fields are produced by anything that:
– Generates
– Transmits, or
– Uses electricity
18 2410256.000 - 8629
Electromagnetic fields
• Key Characteristic is FREQUENCY
• Frequency refers to the number of times per second that the field changes direction – Measured in units of Hertz (Hz)
Low Frequency High Frequency 19 2410256.000 - 8629
Electromagnetic Spectrum
20 Source: National Cancer Institute (https://www.cancer.gov) Focus of our presentation: Extremely low frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fields (EMF) – 50-60 Hertz (Hz), Alternating current (AC)
– Also referred to as power frequency EMF
2410256.000 - 8629
Properties of Power Frequency EMF
Electric Fields
• Produced by voltage
• Measured in units of volts per meter
(V/m) or kilovolts per meter (kV/m)
• Strength decreases quickly with
distance from the source
• Blocked by conductive objects (e.g.,
trees, buildings, and fences
Magnetic Fields
• Produced by the flow of electric
current
• Measured in units of milligauss (mG)
or gauss (G); also microtesla (µT)
or tesla (T)
• Strength decreases quickly with
distance from the source
• Unlike electric fields, not blocked by
common conductive objects
21 2410256.000 - 8629
Typical Profile of Magnetic Field Levels from a Transmission Line 22 2410256.000 - 8629
Common Sources of Power Frequency EMF
– Electrical appliances
– Power tools
– Building wiring
– Grounding systems (e.g., water pipes)
– Nearby distribution and transmission lines
23 2410256.000 - 8629
Household Sources of Magnetic Fields
• Indoors, the primary sources of magnetic fields in most homes and buildings are the electrical wiring and appliances
AC Magnetic-field levels (mG) in the Home*
Distance from Source
Source 6 inches 1 foot 2 feet
Hair dryer 300 1 --
Electric shaver 100 20 --
Blender 70 10 2
Can Opener 600 150 20
Electric range 30 8 2
Vacuum cleaner 300 60 10
Power saw 200 40 5
*Values represent median magnetic field levels, measured in units of milligauss ( mG) Source: Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of Electric Power, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and National Institutes of Health, June 2002 24 252410256.000 - 8629
EMF Health Research
2410256.000 - 8629
Research on Health Effects of Power Frequency EMF
• Research on the possible health effects of power frequency EMF has been on-going since the late 1970s
• Since that time, thousands of studies have been published in this area
• Research has been regularly and repeatedly reviewed by many national and international public health and scientific agencies – Assemble panels of experts to comprehensively review the literature – Results of relevant studies are assessed together to form a conclusion 26 2410256.000 - 8629
Overview of the Scientific Review Process
• All research studies have strengths and limitations
• Scientific process involves consideration of all the evidence – Human studies (epidemiology studies)
– Animal studies (in vivo)
– Laboratory studies of cells and tissues (in vitro)
• Each study can be considered a piece of the puzzle
– When examined all together, provides a more complete picture of the exposure- disease relationship
27 Cannot draw a valid scientific conclusion from a single study! 2410256.000 - 8629
Agency Reviews of Power Frequency EMF
Scientific Organization Country / Agency Publication Dates Federal-Provincial-Territorial Radiation Protection
Committee (FPTRPC) Canada 1998, 2005
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP) International 1998, 2010
National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS) United States 1998
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) United Nations 2002 National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) United Kingdom 2004 Swedish Radiation Protection Authority (SSI) Sweden 2007, 2008 World Health Organization (WHO) United Nations 2007
Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly
Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) European Commission 2007, 2009, 2015, 2023 Health Council of the Netherlands (HCN) Netherlands 2009 Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Sweden 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2024
The European Health Risk Assessment Network on
Electromagnetic Fields (EFHRAN) European Commission 2010, 2012 28 2410256.000 - 8629
Summary of Scientific Consensus
• None of the reviewing agencies have concluded that power frequency EMF, at the levels we typically encounter in our daily lives, cause or contribute to adverse health effects
29 “Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals.” “Despite extensive research, to date there is no evidence to conclude that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health.” – World Health Organization (2024)
https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/radiation-electromagnetic-fields 302410256.000 - 8629
EMF Exposure Guidelines
2410256.000 - 8629
Limits on Exposure to Power Frequency EMF
• No federal standards or guidelines for
limiting exposure to power frequency
electric and magnetic fields
• No exposure limits set in the State of
California
• Several states have developed limits
for electric fields and/or magnetic fields
– Not based upon health-based risk
assessments
• Two international scientific
organizations developed limits to
protect workers and the public
– Based on review of the health research
• Limits are set to be much lower than
the lowest levels for which there are
known effects of exposure
– Acute effects that occur at very high
exposure levels
– No established effects of long-term
exposure
31 2410256.000 - 8629
International Exposure Guidelines for General Public
Exposure to Magnetic Fields
32 Organization Magnetic Field Limit
(mG)
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)1 2,000
International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES)2 9,040 1 International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1 Hz to 100 kHz). Health Phys 99: 818-36, 2010.
2 International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES). IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields, 0 Hz to 300 GHz (IEEE Std. C95.1): Corrigenda 2. New York: IEEE, 2020. 332410256.000 - 8629
Summary
2410256.000 - 8629
Summary
• EMF are present nearly everywhere in our modern society • Research on power frequency EMF has been on-going since the 1970s, resulting in thousands of published studies in this area • Agency reviews of this large body of research have not concluded that exposure to power frequency EMF are a source of adverse health effects • Health-based exposure guideline limits have been developed for power frequency EMF
– These limits are protective against the only established effects from exposure (i.e., acute effects that occur at very high field levels)
34 35
Thank You!
© 2024 Exponent, Inc.
Item #5: IS/MND/MMRP and
Route Approval for the SVP
115kV Transmission Line
from NRS to KRS
RTC 24-1040
November 12, 2024