SU0015801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Report Griffith Energy Storage Project cumulative emissions associated with the Project would not be considerable as the emissions would fall below SJVAPCD thresholds. Under this condition, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution during construction or operations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, the Project would not conflict with the SJVAPCD Os, PM10 or PM2.5 attainment plans, which address cumulative emissions in the SJVAB and account for emissions associated with construction activity. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 2.5.4 Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project consists of construction of a battery energy storage facility that may have the potential to affect nearby sensitive receptors. As stated previously, the closest residences are located between 300 and 650 feet west of the Project boundary. However, these residences are owned by landowners who are participating in the Project and, therefore, are not considered in the analysis of impacts. The nearest rural residences on land not owned by the current property owner are located approximately 1,000 feet north of the Project site on the other side of West Patterson Pass and 1,000 feet southwest of the Project site at the southern terminus of Midway Road to the west of the on-site substation, to the east of Midway Road. As described previously, construction and operation of the Project would not result in emissions of criteria pollutants in excess of established thresholds. In addition to the significance thresholds for criteria pollutants, SJVPACD has established significance thresholds for TAC emissions. The use of combustion equipment in Project construction activities could result in elevated concentrations of DPM, which could lead to an increase in cancer risk or chronic health impacts. The greatest potential for exposure to air pollutants would occur during construction. The primary TAC from the Project is DPM from construction equipment. PM10 and PM2.5 are surrogates for DPM. Tables 8 and 9 provide a summary of total PM,o and PM2.5 emissions during construction (including fugitive dust) on an annual and daily basis, respectively. Tables 10 and 11 provide a summary of total PM,o and PM2.5 emissions during operation (including fugitive dust) on an annual and daily basis, respectively. Both construction and operational emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 are a small fraction of the significance thresholds. Because of the relatively small levels of DPM emissions during Project construction and operation, DPM emissions from Project construction would disperse to negligible levels, and therefore, the health impacts associated with exposure to DPM from Project construction and operation are not expected to be significant. As previously noted, SJVAPCD also provides significance thresholds for TACs: 30 Exposes sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, including those resulting in: o A cancer risk greater than or equal to 20 in a million and/or o A Hazard Index (non-cancerous) greater than or equal to 1. Exposure to emissions would vary throughout construction and would depend on the staging of the work being conducted, location of work relative to receptors, and weather conditions. A HRA was not conducted for this Project due to the low level of emissions. To obtain an order of magnitude risk estimate, a DPM risk assessment conducted for a similar project in the SJVAPCD, Luna Valley Solar Project(Luna Valley), was reviewed for comparison to the Project. In the case of Luna Valley, while the nearest sensitive receptor(residence)was located 1,500 feet from the project, the HRA analysis conservatively assessed maximum impacts at the project property line. The CARB HARP2 OTETRA TECH 27 July 2023