SR0082985_SSNL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4.1 – Air Quality Draft Environmental Impact Report February 2021 14800 W. Schulte Road Logistics Center 4.1-38 CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. The associated potential for CO hotspots was discussed previously and was determined to be a less-than-significant impact. Furthermore, the existing CO concentrations in the area are well below the NAAQS and CAAQS standards. Thus, the Project’s CO emissions would not contribute to significant health effects associated with this pollutant. Construction and operation of the Project would also not exceed thresholds for PM10 or PM2.5 and would not contribute to exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for PM or obstruct the SJVAB from coming into attainment for these pollutants. The Project would also not result in substantial DPM emissions during construction and operation, and therefore, would not result in significant health effects related to DPM exposure. Additionally, the Project would implement dust control strategies and be required to comply with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII, which would limit the amount of fugitive dust generated during construction. Pursuant to Regulation VIII, Rule 8021, Section 6.3, the Project would be required to develop, prepare, submit, obtain approval of, and implement a dust control plan, which would reduce fugitive dust impacts. Due to the minimal contribution of PM during construction and operation, the Project is not anticipated to result in health effects associated with PM10 or PM2.5. In summary, because operation of the Project could result in exceedances of the SJVAPCD significance thresholds for NOx during operation, the potential health effects associated with criteria air pollutants, specifically O3, are potentially significant. Notably, there are numerous scientific and technological complexities associated with correlating criteria air pollutant emissions from an individual project to specific health effects or potential additional nonattainment days, and there are currently no modeling tools that could provide reliable and meaningful additional information regarding health effects from criteria air pollutants generated by individual projects. Implementation of MM-AQ-1 through MM-AQ-3, listed under Threshold A above, would result in mitigated operational emissions. Due to the lack of Project-specific information, the effectiveness from MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ- 2 could not be quantified. The mitigated operational emissions are summarized in Table 4.1-11. Details of the emission calculations are provided in Appendix B. Table 4.1-11. Estimated Annual Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Mitigated Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Tons per Year Area 3.12 <0.01 0.01 0.00 <0.01 <0.01 Energy 0.02 0.22 0.19 <0.01 0.02 0.02 Mobile 0.73 20.32 7.88 0.09 11.95 3.10 Stationary 0.01 0.03 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Fuel Storage Tank <0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.16 0.32 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Total 3.89 20.73 8.43 0.09 11.97 3.12 SJVAPCD Threshold 10 10 100 27 15 15 Threshold Exceeded? No Yes No No No No Notes: ROG = reactive organic gas; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SJVAPCD = San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District; PDF = project design feature; <0.01 = reported value less than 0.01. These emissions reflect CalEEMod “mitigated” output, which accounts for implementation of MM-AQ-3, implementation of Tier 4 interim yard truck and electric forklifts. See Appendix B for complete results. Totals may not sum due to rounding.