Document Anaheim_doc_73770623af

Appendices Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Appendix C Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Technical Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E Contact: Nicole Vermilion Senior Planner NOVEMBER 2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TECHNICAL STUDY FOR: HONDA CENTER prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 [PHONE REDACTED] Contact: Susan Kim, AICP Senior Planner prepared by: THE PLANNING CENTERIDC&E 1580 Metro Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel: [PHONE REDACTED] • Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] E-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] Website: www.planningcenter.com Contact: Nicole Vermilion Senior Planner COA-56.0E NOVEMBER 2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page i Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 1.1 Project Location and Setting 1 1.2 Executive Summary 2 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3 2.1 South Coast Air Basin 3 2.2 Air Pollutants of Concern 4 3. REGULATORY SETTING 13 3.1 Regulatory Framework 13 3.2 Sensitive Receptors 21 3.3 Baseline Air Quality 21 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 23 4.1 Methodology 23 4.2 Thresholds of 24 4.3 Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory 27 4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory 30 5. MITIGATION MEASURES 34 5.1 Existing Regulations 34 5.2 Mitigation Measures 34 5.3 Level of Significance After Mitigation 35 6. REFERENCES 36 APPENDICES A. Summary of GHG and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions B. Transportation Emissions C. Natural Gas and Purchased Energy Emissions D. Water and Wastewater Emissions E. Waste Disposal Emissions F. SCAQMD Local Rules and Regulations ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Page ii • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 List of Tables Table Page Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event Population 1 Table 2 Honda Center Event Attendance 2 Table 3 Greenhouse Gases and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 8 Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants 13 Table 5 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin 16 Table 6 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Target 19 Table 7 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary 22 Table 8 Honda Center Operational Characteristics 23 Table 9 Service Population of Honda Center 24 Table 10 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 25 Table 11 Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions on an Event Day 27 Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory 30 Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction and Summary Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 1 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING Honda Center is located at 2695 East Katella Avenue in the City of Anaheim, east of State Route 57 (SR-57) freeway and west of the Santa Ana River. It is bound on the north by Cerritos Avenue and to the south by Katella Avenue. Honda Center is within a half mile northeast of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Anaheim Metrolink Station. Operational Characteristics The 650,000-square-foot Honda Center opened on June 19, 1993, after two years of construction. It can accommodate a maximum of 18,900 spectators depending on seating configuration, and the parking lots surrounding Honda Center have 4,500 parking spaces to accommodate visitors. Honda Center facilities are in operation on event days, although some functions ticket sales) are open on nonevent days. Maximum capacities for hockey, basketball, and other events concerts, circus, etc.) are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Honda Center Events and Event Population Event Type Seating Capacity Staff/ Employees Team Members/ Production1 Basketball Games2 18,336 950 200+3 Hockey Games4 17,174 950 200 Concerts and Other Events 18,325 – End Stage 1,000 (max) 200 18,900 – Center Stage Maximum Events Permitted 162 Nonevent Days 200 Source: Starkey 2011. 1 Team members and production staff include players, coaches, trainers, media, road crew, and others not included as spectators. 2 Basketball games include Lakers Preseason, the John Wooden Classic, the Big West Tournament, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Tournament, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), games. 3 For the purpose of this air quality and GHG technical report, up to 250 team members are assumed for a basketball game for a conservative modeling scenario. 4 The National Hockey League (NHL) has 41 home games during the regular season. During the Stanley Cup Playoffs and Stanley Cup, up to 20 additional games could occur. In 2010, Honda Center welcomed more than 1.3 million guests, of which over 600,000 attended the Ducks’ hockey games (Starkey 2011). Table 2 identifies a five-year snapshot of attendance, number of events, and the average number of visitors during an event based on the annual attendance. Average attendance per event was calculated based on the highest 3-year average of attendance in order to provide a conservative estimate of future annual attendance. Based on the attendance history of Honda Center over the last five years, there are, on average, 11,264 visitors per event and currently up to 153 events per year approximately three events per week). ---PAGE BREAK--- 1. Introduction and Summary Page 2 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 2 Honda Center Event Attendance Year Visitors Events Average Visitors per Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-year Average 153 11,264 Source: Starkey 2011. 1.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Technical Study has been prepared to analyze potential impacts from an increase in the number of permitted annual events at Honda Center. The 1990 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Honda Center (formerly the Arrowhead Pond) capped the number of annual events at 162 per year. Honda Center averages up to 153 events per year with average attendance at an event of up to 11,264 people. The proposed project seeks to increase the maximum number of events by 60 from the permitted 162 events for a total of 222 events per year. Currently, there are on average three events per week at Honda Center, and the proposed project would result in four events per week on average. The purpose of the project would be to accommodate a second sports franchise at Honda Center. If a second professional sports franchise is a National Basketball Association (NBA) franchise, there are 44 regular games during the NBA season and up to 16 postseason games. Seating capacity of a basketball game is 18,336, and the proposed project would not result in a change in the maximum seating capacity of current events (see Table Furthermore, no construction activities would be necessary in order to accommodate an increase of events at Honda Center. Criteria air pollutant emissions generated by events at Honda Center include emissions from vehicle trips and natural gas used for heating the building interior. Because the proposed project would not increase the capacity of the stadium, the project would not generate an increase in the maximum daily emissions generated by the facility. Consequently, no impacts would occur. Annual GHG emissions generated by Honda Center include vehicle trips and natural gas used for heating and cooling as well as indirect emissions from offsite energy use, waste disposal, and water use. Unlike criteria air pollutants, GHG emissions are evaluated on an annual basis. Therefore, an increase in the number of events per year would result in an increase in annual GHG emissions. As analyzed in this technical study, increasing the number of events at Honda Center would result in a substantial increase in GHG emissions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 3 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN The project site lies within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The SoCAB is in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant, with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semipermanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. As a result, the climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes. This usually mild weather pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. (SCAQMD 2005). 2.1.1 Temperature and Precipitation The annual average temperature varies little throughout the SoCAB, ranging from the low to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit With a more pronounced oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas. The climatological station nearest to the project site is the Santa Ana Station Monitoring Station (ID 049087). The average low is reported at 43.0°F in January while the average high is 84.7°F in August (WRCC 2011). In contrast to a very steady pattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonally and annually highly variable. Almost all rain falls from November through April. Summer rainfall is normally restricted to widely scattered thundershowers near the coast, with heavier shower activity in the east and over the mountains. Rainfall averages 13.79 inches per year in the project area (WRCC 2011). 2.1.2 Humidity Although the SoCAB has a semiarid climate, the air near the earth’s surface is typically moist because of the presence of a shallow marine layer. Except for infrequent periods when dry, continental air is brought into the SoCAB by offshore winds, the “ocean effect” is dominant. Periods of heavy fog, especially along the coast, are frequent. Low clouds, often referred to as high fog, are a characteristic climatic feature. Annual average humidity is 70 percent at the coast and 57 percent in the eastern portions of the SoCAB (SCAQMD 2005). 2.1.3 Wind Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly or southwesterly onshore winds during the day and by easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Wind speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season. Between periods of wind, periods of air stagnation may occur, both in the morning and evening hours. Air stagnation is one of the critical determinants of air quality conditions on any given day. During the winter and fall months, surface high-pressure systems over the SoCAB, combined with other meteorological conditions, can result in very strong, downslope Santa Ana winds. These winds normally continue a few days before predominant meteorological conditions are reestablished. The mountain ranges to the east affect the transport and diffusion of pollutants by inhibiting their eastward transport. Air quality in the SoCAB generally ranges from fair to poor and is similar to air quality in most of coastal southern California. The entire region experiences heavy concentrations of air pollutants during prolonged periods of stable atmospheric conditions (SCAQMD 2005). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 4 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 2.1.4 Inversions In conjunction with the two characteristic wind patterns that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal pollu- tant transport, there are two similarly distinct types of temperature inversions that control the vertical depth through which pollutants are mixed. These inversions are the marine/subsidence inversion and the radiation inversion. The height of the base of the inversion at any given time is known as the “mixing height.” The combination of winds and inversions are critical determinants in leading to the highly degraded air quality in summer and the generally good air quality in the winter in the project area (SCAQMD 2005). 2.2 AIR POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN 2.2.1 Criteria Air Pollutants The air pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by federal and state law. Air pollutants are categorized as primary or secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are those that are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, SO2, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 are “criteria air pollutants,” which means that ambient air quality standards (AAQS) have been established for them. VOC and NOx are criteria pollutant precursors that form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Ozone (O3) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. A description of each of the primary and secondary criteria air pollutants and their known health effects is presented below. Other pollutants, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), a natural by-product of animal respiration that is also produced in the combustion process, have been linked to phenomena such as global climate change. These emissions are unregulated and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has not yet adopted thresholds for them applicable to residential and commercial development projects. GHG emissions that affect global climate change, including CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases, are discussed in Section 2.2.3 of this technical study. Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas produced by incomplete combustion of carbon substances, such as gasoline or diesel fuel. CO is a primary criteria air pollutant. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during winter mornings with little to no wind, when surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion, engines and motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the SoCAB. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near traffic-congested corridors and intersections. The primary adverse health effect associated with CO is interference with normal oxygen transfer to the blood, which may result in tissue oxygen deprivation (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated under the California and National AAQS as being in attainment of CO criteria levels. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) are compounds composed primarily of atoms of hydrogen and carbon. Internal combustion associated with motor vehicle usage is the major source of hydrocarbons. Other sources of VOCs include evaporative emissions associated with the use of paints and solvents, the application of asphalt paving, and the use of household consumer products such as aerosols. Adverse effects on human health are not caused directly by VOCs, but rather by reactions of VOCs to forms of secondary pollutants such as ozone (SCAQMD 2005). There are no ambient air quality standards established for VOCs. However, because they contribute to the formation of O3, the SCAQMD has established a significance threshold for this pollutant (SCAQMD 2005). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 5 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are a byproduct of fuel combustion and contribute to the formation of O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The two major forms of NOx are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The principal form of NO2 produced by combustion is NO, but NO reacts with oxygen to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOx. NO2 acts as an acute irritant and, in equal concentrations, is more injurious than NO. At atmospheric concentrations, however, NO2 is only potentially irritating. There is some indication of a relationship between NO2 and chronic pulmonary fibrosis. Some increase in bronchitis in children (two and three years old) has also been observed at concentrations below 0.3 part per million (ppm). NO2 absorbs blue light; the result is a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated as an attainment area for NO2 under the National AAQS and nonattainment under the California AAQS. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent, irritating gas formed by the combustion of sulfurous fossil fuels. It enters the atmosphere as a result of burning high-sulfur-content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes at chemical plants and refineries. Gasoline and natural gas have very low sulfur content and do not release significant quantities of SO2 (SCAQMD 2005). When sulfur dioxide forms sulfates (SO4) in the atmosphere, together these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOx). Thus, SO2 is both a primary and secondary criteria air pollutant. At sufficiently high concentrations, SO2 may irritate the upper respiratory tract. At lower concentrations and when combined with particulates, SO2 may do greater harm by injuring lung tissue. The SoCAB is designated as attainment under the California and National AAQS. Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5 ) consists of finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulates are now recognized and regulated. Inhalable coarse particles, or PM10, include the particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns 10 millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Inhalable fine particles, or PM2.5, have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns 2.5 millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less. Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. However, wind action on arid landscapes also contributes substantially to local particulate loading fugitive dust). Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems (SCAQMD 2005). The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) scientific review concluded that PM2.5, which penetrates deeply into the lungs, is more likely than PM10 to contribute to health effects and at concentrations that extend well below those allowed by the current PM10 standards. These health effects include premature death and increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits (primarily the elderly and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease); increased respiratory and disease (children and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease such as asthma); decreased lung functions (particularly in children and individuals with asthma); and alterations in lung tissue and structure and in respiratory tract defense mechanisms. Diesel particulate matter (DPM) is classified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as a carcinogen. The SoCAB is a nonattainment area for PM2.5 and PM10 under California and National AAQS.1 Ozone (O3) is commonly referred to as “smog” and is a gas that is formed when VOCs and NOx, both by- products of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. O3 is a secondary criteria air pollutant. O3 concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light winds, and warm temperatures create favorable conditions for the formation of this pollutant. O3 poses a health threat to those who already suffer from respiratory diseases as well as to healthy people. Additionally, O3 has been tied to crop damage, typically in the form of stunted 1 CARB approved the SCAQMD’s request to redesignate the SoCAB from serious nonattainment for PM10 to attainment for PM10 under the National AAQS on March 25, 2010 because the SoCAB has not violated federal 24- hour PM10 standards during the period from 2004 to 2007. However, the USEPA has not yet approved this request. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 6 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 growth and premature death. O3 can also act as a corrosive, resulting in property damage such as the degradation of rubber products (SCAQMD 2005). The SoCAB is designated as extreme nonattainment under the California AAQS (1-hour and 8-hour) and National AAQS (8-hour). Lead (Pb) concentrations decades ago exceeded the state and federal AAQS by a wide margin, but have not exceeded state or federal air quality standards at any regular monitoring station since 1982 (SCAQMD 2005). However, in 2008 the USEPA and CARB adopted more strict lead standards and special monitoring sites immediately downwind of lead sources2 recorded very localized violations of the new state and federal standards. As a result of these localized violations, the Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB was designated in 2010 as nonattainment under the California and National AAQS for lead (SCAQMD 2010). The project is not characteristic of industrial-type projects that have the potential to emit lead. Therefore, lead is not a pollutant of concern for the project. 2.2.2 Toxic Air Contaminants The public’s exposure to air pollutants classified as toxic air contaminants (TACs) is a significant environmental health issue in California. In 1983, the California Legislature enacted a program to identify the health effects of TACs and to reduce exposure to these contaminants to protect the public health. The California Health and Safety Code defines a TAC as “an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP) pursuant to Section 112(b) of the federal Clean Air Act (42 United States Code §7412[b]) is a toxic air contaminant. Under state law, the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), acting through CARB, is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it determines that the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or to an increase in serious illness, or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. California regulates TACs primarily through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an “airborne toxics control measure” for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance a point below which there is no toxic effect), the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions. To date, CARB has established formal control measures for 11 TACs, all of which are identified as having no safe threshold. Air toxics from stationary sources are also regulated in California under the Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987. Under AB 2588, toxic air contaminant emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, are required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings. Since the last update to the TAC list in December 1999, CARB has designated 244 compounds as TACs (CARB 1999). Additionally, CARB has implemented control measures for a number of compounds that pose high risks and show potential for effective control. The majority of the estimated health risks from TACs can 2 Source-oriented monitors record concentrations of lead at lead-related industrial facilities in the SoCAB, which include Exide Technologies in the City of Commerce; Quemetco, Inc., in the City of Industry; Trojan Battery Company in Santa Fe Springs; and Exide Technologies in Vernon. Monitoring conducted between 2004 through 2007 identified that the Trojan Battery Company and Exide Technologies exceed the federal standards (SCAQMD 2010). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 7 be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines. In 1998, CARB identified particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM) as a TAC. Previously, the individual chemical compounds in diesel exhaust were considered TACs. Almost all diesel exhaust particle mass is 10 microns or less in diameter. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung. In 2000, SCAQMD conducted a study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,400 in a million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for 71 percent of the air toxics risk. In 2008, the SCAQMD conducted its third update to its study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,200 in one million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for approximately 84 percent of the air toxics risk (SCAQMD 2008). In the vicinity of the project site, excess cancer risk is 1,034 in a million (SCAQMD 2011). 2.2.3 Greenhouse Gases Climate change is a term that refers to the variation of Earth’s climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activities. The climate system is interactive, consisting of five major components: the atmosphere, the hydrosphere (ocean, rivers, and lakes), the cryosphere (sea ice, ice sheets, and glaciers), the land surface, and the biosphere (flora and fauna). The atmosphere is the most unstable and rapidly changing part of the system. It is made up of 78.1 percent nitrogen (N2), 20.9 percent oxygen (O2), and 0.93 percent argon (Ar). These gases have only limited interaction with the incoming solar radiation and do not interact with infrared (long-wave) radiation emitted by the Earth. However, there are a number of trace gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3), that absorb and emit infrared radiation and therefore have an effect on climate. These are GHGs, and while they comprise less than 0.1 percent of the total volume mixing ratio in dry air, they play an essential role in influencing climate (IPCC 2001). Non-CO2 GHGs are those listed in the Kyoto Protocol3 (CH4, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons [HFC], perfluorocarbons [PFC], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6])and those listed under the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments4 (chlorofluorocarbons [CFC], hydrochlorofluorocarbons [HCFC], and halons). Table 3 lists a selection of some of the GHGs and their relative global warming potentials (GWP) as compared to CO2. Although not included in this table, water vapor (H2O) is the strongest GHG, also the most variable in its phases (vapor, cloud droplets, ice However, water vapor is not considered a pollutant in the atmosphere (IPCC 2001). The major GHGs are briefly described below the table. 3 Kyoto Protocol: Established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and signed by more than 160 countries (excluding the United States) stating that they commit to reduce their GHG emissions by 55 percent or engage in emissions trading. 4 Montreal Protocol and Amendments: International Treaty signed in 1987 and subsequently amended in 1990 and 1992. Stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete ozone in the stratosphere (CFC, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform) are to be phased out by 2000 (2005 for methyl chloroform). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 8 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 3 Greenhouse Gases and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 GHG Atmospheric Lifetime (years) Global Warming Potential Relative to CO2 1 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 50 to 200 1 Methane (CH4)2 12 21 Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 120 310 Hydrofluorocarbons: HFC-23 264 11,700 HFC-32 5.6 650 HFC-125 32.6 2,800 HFC-134a 14.6 1,300 HFC-143a 48.3 3,800 HFC-152a 1.5 140 HFC-227ea 36.5 2,900 HFC-236fa 209 6,300 HFC-4310mee 17.1 1,300 Perfluoromethane: CF4 50,000 6,500 Perfluoroethane: C2F6 10,000 9,200 Perfluorobutane: C4F10 2,600 7,000 C6F14 3,200 7,400 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900 Source: USEPA. 1 Based on 100-Year Time Horizon of the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of the air pollutant relative to CO2. 2 The methane GWP includes the direct effects and those indirect effects due to the production of tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapor. The indirect effect due to the production of CO2 is not included. • Carbon dioxide (CO2) enters the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), solid waste, trees and wood products, respiration, and also as a result of other chemical reactions manufacture of cement). Carbon dioxide is also removed from the atmosphere (sequestered) when it is absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle. • Methane (CH4) is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas, and oil. Methane emissions also result from livestock and other agricultural practices and by the decay of organic waste, including waste in solid waste landfills. • Nitrous oxide (N2O) is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste. • Fluorinated gases are strong greenhouse gases that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are sometimes used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances. These gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities, but because they are potent greenhouse gases, they are sometimes referred to as High GWP gases.  Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are greenhouse gases covered under the 1987 Montreal Protocol and used for refrigeration, air conditioning, packaging, insulation, solvents, or aerosol propellants. Since they are not destroyed in the lower atmosphere (troposphere, stratosphere), CFCs drift into the upper atmosphere where, given suitable conditions, they break down ozone. These gases are also ozone-depleting gases and are therefore being replaced by other compounds that are also GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 9  Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are a group of human-made chemicals composed of carbon and fluorine only. These chemicals (predominantly perfluoromethane [CF4] and perfluoroethane [C2F6]) were introduced as alternatives, along with HFCs, to the ozone-depleting substances. In addition, PFCs are emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing. PFCs do not harm the stratospheric ozone layer, but they have a high global warming potential.  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is a colorless gas that is soluble in alcohol and ether, and is soluble in water. SF6 is a strong greenhouse gas used primarily in electrical transmission and distribution systems as an insulator.  Hydrochlorofluorocarbons contain hydrogen, fluorine, chlorine, and carbon atoms. Although ozone-depleting substances, they are less potent at destroying stratospheric ozone than CFCs. They have been introduced as temporary replacements for CFCs and are also greenhouse gases.  Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) contain only hydrogen, fluorine, and carbon atoms. They were introduced as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances in serving many industrial, commercial, and personal needs. HFCs are emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing. While they do not significantly deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, they are strong greenhouse gases (USEPA 2008a, IPCC 2001, IPCC 2007). California’s GHG Sources and Relative Contribution California is the second largest emitter of GHG in the United States, only surpassed by Texas, and the tenth largest GHG emitter in the world (CEC 2005). This is due to both its physical land area and its population and employment base. However, because of more stringent air emission regulations, in 2001 California ranked fourth lowest in carbon emissions per capita and fifth lowest among states in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption per unit of Gross State Product (total economic output of goods and services) (CEC 2006). In 2004, California produced 492 million metric tons (MMTons) of CO2-equivalent (CO2e)5 GHG emissions. Of these emissions, 81 percent were CO2 emissions produced by the combustion of fossil fuels, 2.8 percent were from other sources of CO2, 5.7 percent were from methane, and 6.8 percent were from N2O (CEC 2006). The remaining 2.9 percent of GHG emissions were from high global warming potential gases, which include hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (CEC 2006). CO2 emissions from human activities make up 84 percent of the total GHG emissions (CEC 2006). California’s transportation sector is the single largest generator of GHG emissions, producing 40.7 percent of the state’s total emissions (CEC 2006). Electricity consumption is the second largest source, comprising 22.2 percent. While out-of-state electricity generation comprises 22 to 32 percent of California’s total electricity supply, it contributes 39 to 57 percent of the GHG emissions associated with electricity consumption in the state (CEC 2006). Industrial activities are California’s third largest source of GHG emissions, comprising 20.5 percent of state’s total emissions (CEC 2006). Other major sources of GHG emissions include mineral production, waste combustion and land use, and forestry changes. Agriculture, forestry, commercial, and residential activities compose the balance of California’s greenhouse gas emissions (CEC 2006). 5 CO2-equivalence is used to show the relative potential that different GHG have to retain infrared radiation in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. The global warming potential of a GHG is also dependent on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 10 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Human Influence on Climate Change For approximately 1,000 years before the Industrial Revolution, the amount of GHG in the atmosphere remained relatively constant (IPCC 2007). During the 20th century, however, scientists observed a rapid change in the climate and climate change pollutants that are attributable to human activities. The amount of CO2 has increased by more than 35 percent since preindustrial times and has increased at an average rate of 1.4 parts per million (ppm) per year since 1960, mainly due to combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation (IPCC 2007). These recent changes in climate change pollutants far exceed the extremes of the ice ages, and the global mean temperature is warming at a rate that cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Human activities are directly altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere through the buildup of climate change pollutants (CAT 2006). Climate-change scenarios are affected by varying degrees of uncertainty (IPCC 2007). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report projects that the global mean temperature increase from 1990 to 2100, under different climate-change scenarios, will range from 1.4 to 5.8 °C (2.5 to 10.4°F). In the past, gradual changes in the earth’s temperature changed the distribution of species, availability of water, etc. However, human activities are accelerating this process so that environmental impacts associated with climate change no longer occur in a geologic timeframe but within a human lifetime (IPCC 2007). Potential Climate Change Impacts for California Climate change is not a local environmental impact; it is a global impact. Unlike criteria pollutants, CO2 emissions cannot be attributed to a direct health effect. However, human-caused increases in GHG have been shown to be highly correlated with increases in the surface and ocean temperatures on Earth (IPCC 2007). What is not clear is the extent of the impact on environmental systems. Like the variability in the projections of the expected increase in global surface temperatures, the environmental consequences of gradual changes in the Earth’s temperature are also hard to predict. Likewise, there are varying degrees of uncertainty in environmental impact scenarios. Because of this uncertainty, the IPCC uses five different confidence levels to quantify climate change impacts on the environment: Very High Confidence (95 percent or greater), High Confidence (67 to 95 percent), Medium Confidence (33 to 67 percent), Low Confidence (5 to 33 percent), and Very Low Confidence (5 percent or less). In California and western North America, 1) observations in the climate have showed a trend toward warmer winter and spring temperatures, 2) a smaller fraction of precipitation is falling as snow, 3) there is a decrease in the amount of spring snow accumulation in the lower and middle elevation mountain zones, 4) there is an advance snowmelt of 5 to 30 days earlier in the spring, and 5) there is a similar shift (5 to 30 days earlier) in the timing of spring flower blooms (CAT 2006). According to the California Climate Action Team (CAT), even if actions could be taken to immediately curtail climate change emissions, the potency of emissions that have already built up, their long atmospheric lifetimes (see Table and the inertia of the Earth’s climate system could produce as much as 0.6°C (1.1°F) of additional warming. Consequently, some impacts from climate change are now considered unavoidable. CAT and Cal/EPA use the results from the recent analysis of global climate change impacts for California under three IPCC scenarios: lower emissions (B1), medium-high emissions (A2), and high emissions (A1F1); each is associated with an increasing rise in average global surface temperatures. According to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) 2006 report, “Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California,” global climate change risks to California include public health impacts (poor air quality made ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 11 worse and more severe heat), water resources impacts (decreasing Sierra Nevada snow pack, challenges in securing adequate water supply, potential reduction in hydropower, and loss of winter recreation), agricultural impacts (increasing temperatures, increasing threats from pests and pathogens, expanded ranges of agricultural weeds, and declining productivity), coast sea level impacts (rising coastal sea levels, increasing coastal floods, and shrinking beaches), forest and biological resource impacts (increasing wildfires, increasing threats from pest and pathogens, declining forest productivity, and shifting vegetation and species distribution), and electricity impacts (increased energy demand). Specific climate change impacts that could affect the project include health impacts from a reduction in air quality, water resources impacts from a reduction in water supply, and increased energy demand. 2.2.4 Other Effects of Air Pollution Air pollution creates numerous impacts to our economy, including lost workdays due to illness, a desire on the part of businesses to locate in areas with a healthy environment, and increased expenses from medical costs. Pollutants may also lower visibility and cause damage to property. Certain air pollutants are responsible for discoloring painted surfaces, eating away at stones used in buildings, dissolving the mortar that holds bricks together, and cracking tires and other items made from rubber. In conformance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments, the federal EPA has prepared a monetary cost/benefit analysis related to implementation requirements. By the year 2010, the EPA estimates that its emissions- reduction programs would cost approximately 27 billion dollars. The programs are estimated to result in a savings benefit of 110 billion dollars, for a net benefit of 83 billion dollars. While these values are for the nation as a whole, a net benefit ratio of about 4:1 is noted, and a similar ratio could be expected for the California and its residents. Another direct cost/benefit issue relates to federal funding. Areas that do not meet the federal air quality standards may lose eligibility for federal funding for road improvements and other projects that require federal or California Department of Transportation approval. Cleaner air also yields benefits to ecological systems. Just as humans are affected by air pollution, so are plants and animals. Animals must breathe the same air and are subject to the same types of negative health effects. Certain plants and trees may absorb air pollutants that can stunt their development or cause premature death. The benefits of Clean Air Act Amendments programs that can be quantified within the overall monetary benefits include increased agricultural and timber yields, reduced effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems, and reduced effects of nitrogen deposited to coastal estuaries. Many ecological benefits, however, remain difficult or impossible to quantify, or can only be quantified for a limited geographic area. The magnitude of quantified benefits and the wide range of unquantified benefits nonetheless suggest that as we learn more about ecological systems and can conduct more comprehensive ecological benefits assessments, estimates of these benefits could be substantially greater. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Environmental Setting Page 12 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 13 3. REGULATORY SETTING 3.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AAQS have been promulgated at the local, state, and federal levels for criteria pollutants. The project site is in the SoCAB and is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by the SCAQMD, as well as the California CAAQS adopted by CARB and federal NAAQS. 3.1.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards The Clean Air Act (CAA) was passed in 1963 by the US Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 Clean Air Act amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for the regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including nonattainment requirements for areas not meeting National AAQS and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 amendments represent the latest in a series of federal efforts to regulate the protection of air quality in the United States. The CAA allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollution species. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the California AAQS by the earliest practical date. The California AAQS tend to be more restrictive than the National AAQS, based on even greater health and welfare concerns. These National AAQS and California AAQS are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Both California and the federal government have established health-based AAQS for seven air pollutants. As shown in Table 4, these pollutants include O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead (Pb). In addition, the state has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Primary Standard Major Pollutant Sources Ozone (O3) 1 hour 0.09 ppm * Motor vehicles, paints, coatings, and solvents. 8 hours 0.070 ppm 0.075 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Internal combustion engines, primarily gasoline-powered motor vehicles. 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Average 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm Motor vehicles, petroleum-refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. 1 hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Annual Average * *1 Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing. 1 hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm1 24 hours 0.04 ppm *1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 14 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 4 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Primary Standard Major Pollutant Sources Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m3 * Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities wind- raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities wind- raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours * 35 µg/m3 Lead (Pb) 1.5 µg/m3 * Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing & recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of leaded gasoline. Quarterly * 1.5 µg/m3 3-Month Average * 0.15 µg/m3 Sulfates (SO4) 24 hours 25 µg/m3 * Industrial processes. Visibility Reducing Particles 8 hours ExCo =0.23/km visibility of 10≥ miles1 No Federal Standard Visibility-reducing particles consist of suspended particulate matter, which is a complex mixture of tiny particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust, and salt. Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm No Federal Standard Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with the odor of rotten eggs. It is formed during bacterial decomposition of sulfur- containing organic substances. Also, it can be present in sewer gas and some natural gas, and can be emitted as the result of geothermal energy exploitation. Vinyl Chloride 24 hour 0.01 ppm No Federal Standard Vinyl chloride (chloroethene), a chlorinated hydrocarbon, is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor. Most vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and vinyl products. Vinyl chloride has been detected near landfills, sewage plants, and hazardous waste sites, due to microbial breakdown of chlorinated solvents. Source: CARB 2010 ppm: parts per million; µg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter 1 When relative humidity is less than 70 percent. * Standard has not been established for this pollutant/duration by this entity. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 15 3.1.2 Air Quality Management Planning The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP) for the SoCAB. Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The most recent comprehensive plan was adopted on June 1, 2007, and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. The 2007 AQMP proposes attainment demonstration of the federal PM2.5 standards through a more focused control of SOx, directly emitted PM2.5, and focused control of NOx and VOC by 2015. The eight-hour ozone control strategy builds upon the PM2.5 strategy, augmented with additional NOx and VOC reductions to meet the standard by 2024, assuming an extended attainment date is obtained. 3.1.3 Area Designations The AQMP provides the framework for air quality basins to achieve attainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards through the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Areas are classified as attainment or nonattainment areas for particular pollutants, depending on whether they meet ambient air quality standards. Severity classifications for ozone nonattainment range in magnitude from marginal, moderate, and serious to severe and extreme. Attainment classifications apply to individual pollutants: • Unclassified: the data are incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment for a pollutant • Attainment: the California AAQS were not violated at any site in the area during a three-year period for that pollutant • Nonattainment: there was at least one violation of a state AAQS for that pollutant in the area • Nonattainment/Transitional: a subcategory of the nonattainment designation; signifies that the area is close to attaining the AAQS for that pollutant The attainment status for the SoCAB is shown in Table 5. The SoCAB is also designated as attainment of the California AAQS for sulfates. According to the 2007 AQMP, the SoCAB will have to meet the new federal 8- hour O3 standard by 2024, PM2.5 standards by 2015, and the recently revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2020. The SCAQMD has recently designated the SoCAB as nonattainment for NO2 (entire basin) and lead (Los Angeles County only) under the California AAQS. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 16 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 5 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant State Federal Ozone – 1-hour Extreme Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment1 Ozone – 8-hour Extreme Nonattainment Severe-17 Nonattainment2 PM10 Serious Nonattainment Nonattainment3 PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment4 NO2 Nonattainment5 Attainment/Maintenance SO2 Attainment Attainment Lead Nonattainment6 Nonattainment6 All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source: CARB 2010. 1 Under prior standard. 2 SCAQMD may petition for Extreme Nonattainment designation. 3 Annual standard revoked September 2006. CARB approved the SCAQMD’s request to redesignate the SoCAB from serious nonattainment for PM10 to attainment for PM10 under the National AAQS on March 25, 2010, because the SoCAB has not violated federal 24-hour PM10 standards from 2004 to 2007. However, the EPA has not yet approved this request. 4 The EPA granted the request to redesignate the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment for the CO National AAQS on May 11, 2007 (Federal Register Volume 71, No. 91), which became effective June 11, 2007. 5 The state NO2 standard was made more stringent in 2007 from 0.25 ppm to 0.18 ppm. Under the revised standards, the entire SoCAB was designated nonattainment on March 25, 2010. In addition, the EPA adopted a new 1-hour NOx standard of 0.100 ppm on January 22, 2010. 6 The Los Angeles portion of the SoCAB was designated nonattainment for lead under the new federal and existing state AAQS as a result of large industrial emitters. Remaining areas within the SoCAB are unclassified. 3.1.4 Regulatory Framework for Global Climate Change Regulation of GHG Emissions on a National Level Currently there are no adopted regulations to combat global climate change on a national level. However, recent statutory authority has been granted to the EPA that may change the voluntary approach taken under our current administration to address this issue. On April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the Federal Clean Air Act. After a thorough examination of the scientific evidence and careful consideration of public comments, the EPA announced on December 7, 2009, that GHG emissions threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. The EPA also finds that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat. The EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHG emissions fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements, but allows the EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed in 2009 for new light- duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation. The EPA’s endangerment finding covers emissions of six key greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride—that have been the subject of scrutiny and intense analysis for decades by scientists in the United States and around the world. In response to the endangerment finding, the EPA issued the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule that requires substantial emitters of GHG emissions large sta-tionary sources, etc.) to report GHG emissions data. Facilities that emit more the 25,000 metric tons (MTons) or more per year are required to submit annual report. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 17 Regulation of GHG Emissions on a State Level Current State of California guidance and goals for reductions in GHG emissions are generally embodied in AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, and Executive Order S-03-05. AB 32 was passed by the California state legislature on August 31, 2006, to place the state on a course toward reducing its contribution of GHG emissions. AB 32 follows the 2020 tier of emissions reduction targets established in Executive Order S-3-05, signed June 1, 2005. The Executive Order S-03-05 set the following GHG reduction targets for the State: • 2000 levels by 2010 • 1990 levels by 2020 • 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 AB 32 directed CARB to adopt discrete early action measures to reduce GHG emissions and outline additional reduction measures to meet the 2020 target. Based on the GHG emissions inventory conducted for the Scoping Plan by CARB, it is projected that GHG emissions in California by 2020 will be approximately 596 million metric tons (MMTons) of CO2e by 2020 (CARB 2008). In December 2007, CARB approved a 2020 emissions limit of 427 MMTons (471 million tons) of CO2e for the state (CARB 2008). The 2020 target requires emissions reductions of 169 MMTons, 28.5 percent of the projected emissions compared to business-as- usual (BAU) in year 2020 28.5 percent of 596 MMTons) (CARB 2008). CARB defines BAU in its Scoping Plan as emissions levels that would occur if California continued to grow and add new GHG emissions but did not adopt any measures to reduce emissions. Projections for each emission-generating sector were compiled and used to estimate emissions for 2020 based on 2002–2004 emissions intensities. Under CARB’s definition of BAU, new growth is assumed to have the same carbon intensities as was typical in 2002 through 2004. In order to effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directed CARB to establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor global warming emissions levels for large stationary sources that generate more than 25,000 metric tons (MTons) per year, prepare a plan demonstrating how the 2020 deadline can be met, and develop appropriate regulations and programs to implement the plan by 2012. The Climate Action Registry Reporting Online Tool was established through the Climate Action Registry to track GHG emissions. In June 2008, CARB released a draft of the Climate Change Scoping Plan, which was revised in October 2008. The final Scoping Plan was adopted by CARB on December 11, 2008. Key elements of CARB’s GHG reduction plan are: • Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards; • Increases the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to 33 percent by 2020. Retail sellers of electricity are required to increase the portion of electricity they provide each year by renewable energy to achieve the 33 percent goal; • Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system for large stationary sources (however, as of the date of this DSEIR, implementation of this cap-and-trade portion of the Scoping Plan has been enjoined); • Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 18 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to state laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; • Creating target fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the state’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation. Table 6, Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Targets, shows the proposed reductions from regulations and programs outlined in the Scoping Plan. While local government operations were not accounted for in achieving the 2020 emissions reduction, CARB estimates that land use changes implemented by local governments that integrate jobs, housing, and services are estimated to result in a reduction of 5 MMTons of CO2e, which is approximately 3 percent of the 2020 GHG emissions reduction goal. In recognition of the critical role local government plays in successful implementation of AB 32, CARB is recommending GHG reduction goals of 15 percent of today’s levels by 2020 to ensure that municipal and community-wide emissions match the state’s reduction target. Measures that local governments take to support shifts in land use patterns are anticipated to emphasize infill and re-fill, compact, low-impact development over growth on undeveloped, greenfields areas, resulting in fewer vehicle miles traveled. According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles travelled by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 MMTons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). SB 97 In addition to the requirements under AB 32 to address GHG emissions and global climate change in general plans and CEQA documents, Senate Bill 97 (Chapter 185, 2007) required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines for addressing global warming emissions and mitigating project-generated GHG emissions. OPR transmitted the proposed guidelines to the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) and the guidelines were adopted on December 30, 2009. The amended CEQA Guidelines became effective on March 18, 2010. The new CEQA Guidelines concerning GHG emissions do not include or recommend any particular threshold of significance; instead, they leave that decision to the discretion of the lead agency. However, with respect to adopting thresholds of significance, newly added CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(c) provides:[A] lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence. The new CEQA Guidelines also do not suggest or recommend the use of any specific GHG emission mitigation measures. Instead, newly added CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(c) provides that lead agencies shall consider feasible means, supported by substantial evidence and subject to monitoring or reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Among other things, CNRA noted in its public notice for these changes to the CEQA Guidelines that the impacts of GHG emissions should be considered in the context of a cumulative impact, rather than a project impact. The public notice states: While the Proposed Amendments do not foreclose the possibility that a single project may result in greenhouse gas emissions with a direct impact on the environment, the evidence before [CNRA] indicates that in most cases, the impact will be cumulative. Therefore, the Proposed Amendments emphasize that the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions should ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 19 center on whether a project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions is cumulatively considerable. Table 6 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures and Reductions toward 2020 Target Recommended Reduction Measures Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target of 169 MMT CO2e Percentage of Statewide 2020 Target Cap and Trade Program and Associated Measures California Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards 31.7 19% Energy Efficiency 26.3 16% Renewable Portfolio Standard (33 percent by 2020) 21.3 13% Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 9% Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets1 5 3% Vehicle Efficiency Measures 4.5 3% Goods Movement 3.7 2% Million Solar Roofs 2.1 1% Medium/Heavy Duty Vehicles 1.4 1% High Speed Rail 1.0 1% Industrial Measures 0.3 0% Additional Reduction Necessary to Achieve Cap 34.4 20% Total Cap and Trade Program Reductions 146.7 87% Uncapped Sources/Sectors Measures High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures 20.2 12% Sustainable Forests 5 3% Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap and trade program) 1.1 1% Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture) 1 1% Total Uncapped Sources/Sectors Reductions 27.3 16% Total Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target 174 100% Other Recommended Measures – Not Counted toward 2020 Target State Government Operations 1.0 to 2.0 1% Local Government Operations To Be Determined NA Green Buildings 26 15% Recycling and Waste 9 5% Water Sector Measures 4.8 3% Methane Capture at Large Dairies 1 1% Total Other Recommended Measures – Not Counted toward 2020 Target 42.8 NA Source: CARB 2008. Note: the percentages in the right-hand column add up to more than 100 percent because the emissions reduction goal is 169 MMTons and the Scoping Plan identifies 174 MMTons of emissions reductions strategies. MMTCO2e: million metric tons of CO2e 1 Reductions represent an estimate of what may be achieved from local land use changes. It is not the SB 375 regional target. 2 According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 million metric tons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). However, these reductions were not included in the Scoping Plan reductions to achieve the 2020 target. Energy Conservation Standards Energy conservation standards for new residential and nonresidential buildings were adopted by the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in June 1977 and most recently ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 20 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 revised in 2008 (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]).6 Title 24 requires the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2006 Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608) were adopted by the California Energy Commission on October 11, 2006, and approved by the California Office of Administrative Law on December 14, 2006. The regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and nonfederally regulated appliances. On July 17, 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations). The green building standards that became mandatory in the 2010 edition of the code established voluntary standards on planning and design for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. The mandatory provisions of the California Green Building Code Standards became effective January 1, 2011. Renewable Power Requirements A major component of California’s Renewable Energy Program is the renewable portfolio standard (RPS) established under Senate Bills (SBs) 1078 (Sher) and 107 (Simitian). Under the RPS, certain retail sellers of electricity are required to increase the amount of renewable energy each year by at least 1 percent in order to reach at least 20 percent by December 30, 2010. CARB has now approved an even higher goal of 33 percent by 2020. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. The increase in renewable sources for electricity production will decrease indirect GHG emissions from development projects because electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral. In addition to the States RPS, Senate Bill 1368 limits long-term investments in baseload generation by utility power plants to meet emissions performance standard established by CEC and the California Public Utilities Commission. New, or capital investment in, electricity generating facilities owned by or under contract to publically owned utilities are required to achieve an emissions standard of 1,100 lbs per megawatt-hour (MWh). Vehicle Emission Standards/Improved Fuel Economy Vehicle GHG emission standards were enacted under AB 1493 (Pavley I) and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). Pavley I is a clean-car standard that reduces GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles (light duty auto to medium duty vehicles) from 2009 through 2016 and is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles by 30 percent in 2016. The LCFS requires a reduction of 2.5 percent in the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by 2015 and a reduction of at least 10 percent by 2020.7 Regulation of GHG Emissions on a Regional Level In 2008, SB 375 was adopted and was intended to represent the implementation mechanism necessary to achieve the GHG emissions reductions targets established in the Scoping Plan for the transportation sector as it relates to local land use decisions that affect travel behavior. Implementation is intended to reduce GHG 6 Although new building energy efficiency standards were adopted in April 2008, these standards did not go into effect until 2009. 7 CARB’s user guide for the Pavley I + Low Carbon Fuel Standard Postprocessor provides more detail. Available at: (accessed August 2010). ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 21 emissions from light-duty trucks and automobiles (excludes emissions associated with goods movement) by aligning regional long-range transportation plans, investments, and housing allocations with local land use planning to reduce vehicle miles traveled and vehicle trips. Specifically, SB 375 requires CARB to establish GHG emissions reduction targets for each of the 17 regions in California managed by a metropolitan planning organization (MPO). Pursuant to the recommendations of the Regional Transportation Advisory Committee, CARB adopted per-capita reduction targets for each of the MPOs rather than a total magnitude reduction target. SCAG is the MPO for the southern California region, which includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino County, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. SCAG's targets are an 8 percent per capita reduction from 2005 GHG emission levels by 2020 and a 13 percent per capita reduction from 2005 GHG emission levels by 2035. The 2020 targets are smaller than the 2035 targets because a significant portion of the built environment in 2020 has been defined by decisions that have already been made. In general, the 2020 scenarios reflect that more time is needed for large land use and transportation infrastructure changes. Most of the reductions in the interim are anticipated to come from improving the efficiency of the region's existing transportation network. The proposed targets would result in 3 MMTons of GHG reductions by 2020 and 15 MMTons of GHG reductions by 2035. Based on these reductions, the passenger vehicle target in CARB's Scoping Plan (for AB 32) would be met (CARB 2010). SB 375 requires the MPOs to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plan. For the SCAG region, the first SCS is anticipated by May 2012. The SCS will set forth a development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, would reduce GHG emissions from transportation (excluding goods movement). The SCS is meant to provide growth strategies that will achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets. However, the SCS does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers. If the SCS is unable to achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets, the MPO is required to prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy that shows how the GHG emissions reduction target could be achieved through other development patterns, infrastructure, and/or transportation measures. 3.2 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiorespiratory diseases. Residential areas are also considered to be sensitive receptors to air pollution because residents (including children and the elderly) tend to be at home for extended periods of time, resulting in sustained exposure to any pollutants present. Other sensitive receptors include retirement facilities, hospitals, and schools. Recreational land uses are considered moderately sensitive to air pollution. Although exposure periods are generally short, exercise places a high demand on respiratory functions, which can be impaired by air pollution. In addition, noticeable air pollution can detract from the enjoyment of recreation. Industrial, commercial, retail, and office areas are considered the least sensitive to air pollution. Exposure periods are relatively short and intermittent, as the majority of the workers tend to stay indoors most of the time. In addition, the working population is generally the healthiest segment of the public. 3.3 BASELINE AIR QUALITY Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the vicinity of the project site and project area are best documented by measurements made by SCAQMD. The project site is located within ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Regulatory Setting Page 22 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Source Receptor Area (SRA) 17 – Central Orange County (Inland Orange County). The air quality monitoring station closest to the project is the Anaheim Monitoring Station. However, this station does not monitor SOx. Consequently, data was obtained from the Costa Mesa Monitoring Station for this criteria pollutant. Data from these stations are summarized in Table 7. The data show that the area occasionally exceeds the state and federal one-hour and eight-hour O3 standards and regularly exceeds the state PM10 and federal PM2.5 standards. The CO, SO2, and NO2 standards have not been exceeded in the last five years in the project vicinity. Table 7 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary Pollutant/Standard Number of Days Threshold Were Exceeded and Maximum Levels during Such Violations 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Ozone (O3)1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.09 ppm State 8-hour ≥ 0.07 ppm Federal 8-Hour > 0.075 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 6 5 3 0.113 0.089 2 7 1 0.127 0.100 2 10 5 0.105 0.086 0 2 1 0.093 0.077 0 0 0 0.063 0.056 Carbon Monoxide (CO)1 State 8-Hour > 9.0 ppm Federal 8-Hour ≥ 9.0 ppm Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0 2.90 0 0 2.91 0 0 3.44 0 0 2.73 0 0 0.191 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.18 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0.114 0 0.086 0 0.093 0 0.068 0.066 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)2 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.04 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0.005 0 0.004 0 0.003 0 0.004 0 0.002 Coarse Particulates (PM10)1 State 24-Hour > 50 µg/m3 Federal 24-Hour > 150 µg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (µg/m3) 7 0 104.0 6 13 489.03 3 0 61.0 1 0 63.0 NA 0 37.2 Fine Particulates (PM2.5)1 Federal 24-Hour > 35 µg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (µg/m3) 7 56.2 14 79.4 5 67.8 4 64.5 0 NA Source: CARB 2010. ppm: parts per million; µg/m3: or micrograms per cubic meter. 1 Data obtained from the Anaheim Monitoring Station. 2 Data obtained from the Costa Mesa Monitoring Station. 3 Statistic includes an exceptional event, such as a wildfire. The second-highest concentration reported is 75.0 ppm. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 23 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4.1 METHODOLOGY This air quality and GHG technical study has been prepared to analyze potential operational phase impacts related to an increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center to accommodate a second professional sports franchise. Honda Center is permitted to host up to 162 events per year. Over the last five years, Honda Center has averaged 11,264 visitors during an event and 153 events per year (see Table To estimate air quality and GHG emissions from increasing the number of events in a year, information on operation of the event center was obtained from Honda Center during surveys and follow-up conversations in June through July 2011, and is shown in Table 8. Table 8 Honda Center Operational Characteristics Source Information Energy Use • Winter: 1,217,583.90 kWH • Summer: 1,974,389.70 kWH Natural Gas Use • Winter: 16,666 Therms • Summer: 5,100 Therms Water Use1 • Winter: 1,530,000 gallons • Summer: 1,860,000 gallons Waste • 1.5 Tons of garbage per event • 0.5 Tons of recycling per event Transportation • Average one-way travel distance for event patrons is 31.1 miles based on Ticketmaster sales (main customer base is Orange, Riverside, and north San Diego counties)2 • Average 4,000 cars, 5 buses, and between 4 and 20 trucks per event.2 Source: Starkey 2011. 1 Modeling assumes 95 percent of water use is indoor water use because of the amount of surface parking and limited landscaping. 2 While cash sales and season ticket holders distance is unknown, it is probable that these purchases occur in a similar service area, close to Honda Center. Therefore, tickets purchased at will-call, via cash, or season tickets sales, which represent approximately 30 percent of ticket sales, are assumed to occur at a similar distance as Ticketmaster the 90th percentile distance. Based on Ticketmaster sales, over 90 percent of the ticket sales occur within 28.7 miles of Honda Center. Assumes ticket sales in locations farther than 4 hours away are “visitors” to the southern California region vacation trips which may coincide with other destinations in southern California) and trips were calculated from the Los Angeles International Airport. Therefore, a 31.1 mile trip length is considered a conservative estimate of average trip length for patrons of Honda Center. 3 Modeling assumes a conservative fleet mix of 98.4% passenger vehicles (62.7% LDA, 8.5% LDT1, 27.2% LDT2 based on EMFAC2007), 1% medium duty trucks, 0.5% heavy duty trucks, and 0.1% urban buses based on estimates provided by Honda Center of parked vehicles during an event. Assumes a similar fleet mix for both event and nonevent days. SCAQMD has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Handbook) as well as updates included on SCAQMD’s website, which are intended to provide local governments with guidance for analyzing and mitigating project-specific air quality impacts. This Handbook provides standards, methodologies, and procedures for conducting air quality analyses in environmental impact reports and was used extensively in the preparation of this analysis. Modeling was conducted using emission factors and methodologies in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2011.1.1 and CalEEMod user’s guide (SCAQMD 2011). Criteria air pollutant and GHG modeling files are included as an appendix to this technical study. The following assumptions were utilized in the analysis: • Average attendance per event is assumed to be similar to historic levels (see Table 2) for future events held in Honda Center (11,264 visitors), based on the highest 3 years of attendance from 2006 to 2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 24 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 • Transportation emissions were modeled using CARB’s EMFAC2007 for year 2011. Both existing and project emissions are modeled for year 2011 because no construction is necessary for Honda Center to accommodate a second professional sports franchise and would result in a worst-case emissions inventory. Assumes a 5 percent reduction in trips as a result of proximity to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), transit service provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and location within the Platinum Triangle mixed-use area. Additional assumptions on transportation emissions, including trip generation during an event, are included as Appendix A to this technical study. • While operation of Honda Center on nonevent days generates water and energy demand, the demand for these services is assumed to be proportional to the average annual population of the facility. Consequently, the increase in water demand and energy use (natural gas and purchased energy) is assumed to be proportional to the increase in the number of events. • The increase in waste disposal is based on existing estimates of waste disposal after an event and increased proportionately. • Service population is based on an average annual population at Honda Center. The traditional metric for service population is typically characterized as people who live or work at the project site residents and employees). However, defining the service population metric in this manner excludes other users of the facility who drive to the event, use water, generate waste, and contribute to the energy demand. Consequently, for an entertainment land use, the service population has been defined as staff/employees, team members/production members, and visitors to Honda Center (see Table Table 9 Service Population of Honda Center Existing Project Average Annual Visitors 1,723,333 2,500,523 Average Annual Employees/Staff and Team/Production Members 343,619 465,663 Average Number of People Onsite Per Day per year (Service Population) 5,663 8,127 Increase in the average number of people onsite per day per year 2,464 Source: Starkey 2011. Based on average annual attendance during an event and employees on nonevent days. 4.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Criteria Air Pollutants According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would: AQ-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. AQ-2 Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 25 AQ-3 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). AQ-4 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. AQ-5 Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Greenhouse Gas Emissions According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would: GHG-1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. GHG-2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 4.2.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District Significance Criteria The analysis of the proposed project’s air quality impacts follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook and the significance thresholds on SCAQMD’s website.8 CEQA allows the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess impacts of a project on air quality. SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for regional air quality emissions for construction activities and project operation. In addition to the daily thresholds listed above, projects are also subject to the AAQS. These are addressed though an analysis of localized CO impacts and localized significance thresholds (LSTs). Regional Significance Thresholds SCAQMD has adopted regional construction and operational emissions thresholds to determine a project’s cumulative impact on air quality in the SoCAB. Table 10 lists SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds. Table 10 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds Air Pollutant Construction Phase Operational Phase Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Coarse Inhalable Particulates (PM10) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Fine Inhalable Particulates (PM2.5) 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 8 SCAQMD’s Air Quality Significance Thresholds are current as of March 2011 and can be found here: http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 26 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Localized Significance Thresholds SCAQMD developed LSTs for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at the project site (offsite mobile-source emissions are not included the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions at a project site that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent federal or state AAQS. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project SRA and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST analyses are applicable for all projects of five acres and less; however, they can be used as screening criteria for larger projects to determine whether or not dispersion modeling may be required. Projects larger than five acres can determine the localized significance for construction by performing dispersion modeling based on the AAQS. Because the project is not an industrial project that has the potential to emit substantial sources of stationary emissions and because construction activities would not occur, LSTs are not an air quality impact of concern associated with the project. CO Hotspots Localized CO impacts are determined based on the presence of congested intersections. The significance of localized project impacts depends on whether the project would cause substantial concentrations of CO. A project is considered to have significant impacts if project-related mobile-source emissions result in an exceedance the California one-hour and eight-hour CO standards. Draft GHG Thresholds To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, SCAQMD has convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group). Based on the last Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency: Tier 1 If a project is exempt from CEQA, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. Tier 2 If the project complies with a GHG emissions reduction plan or mitigation program that avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions in the project’s geographic area city or county), project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment of GHG emissions. SCAQMD is proposing a screening-level threshold of 3,000 MTons annually for all land use types or the following land-use-specific thresholds: 1,400 MTons for commercial projects, 3,500 MTons for residential projects, or 3,000 MTons for mixed-use projects. This bright-line threshold is based on a review of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review of 711 CEQA projects, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed the bright-line thresholds identified above. Therefore, projects that do not exceed the bright-line threshold would have a nominal, and therefore, less than cumulatively considerable impact on GHG emissions: Tier 3 If GHG emissions are less than the screening-level threshold, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. Tier 4 If emissions exceed the screening threshold, a more detailed review of the project’s GHG emissions is warranted. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 27 SCAQMD is proposing to adopt an efficiency target for projects that exceed the screening threshold. The current recommended approach is per capita efficiency targets. SCAQMD is not recommending use of a percent emissions reduction target. Instead, SCAQMD proposes a 2020 efficiency target of 4.8 MTons per year per service population (MTons/year/SP) for project-level analyses and 6.6 MTons/year/SP for plan level projects program-level projects such as specific plans and general plans).9 If projects exceed these per capita efficiency targets, GHG emissions would be considered potentially significant in the absence of mitigation measures. 4.3 CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INVENTORY An inventory of Honda Center’s maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions are shown in Table 11. Project-related air pollutants come from area-, energy-, and mobile-source emissions. It should be noted that the maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions are based on a single event in a day at Honda Center. In the past 18 years of Honda Center a “double” two events on one day) has only occurred twice (Starkey 2011). Therefore, a scenario where there would be two events on one day may occur, but would be an extremely rare because a minimum of five to eight hours is needed to change over from an event (Starkey 2011). On these rare occasions where there would be two events in a day maximum daily criteria air pollutant emissions would be approximately double what is shown in Table 11. Table 11 Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions on an Event Day (in pounds per day) Operations Phase VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Full Capacity Honda Center Event Natural Gas <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Transportation 301 359 3,021 4 39 39 Maximum Daily Emissions on an Event Day 301 363 3,024 4 39 39 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Average Attendance Honda Center Event Natural Gas <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Transportation 222 264 2,226 3 29 28 Maximum Daily Emissions on an Event Day 222 268 2,229 3 29 28 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Comparison of Sell Out and Average Attendance Events at Honda Center Difference Between a Sell Out Event & Average Attendance Event at Honda Center 79 95 795 1 10 11 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds1 55 55 550 150 150 55 Difference Exceeds SCAQMD’s Threshold? Yes Yes Yes No No No Source: EMFAC2007 and SCAQMD 2011. 1 The project would not result in a net increase in the maximum daily emissions at Honda Center. However, for the purposes of this environmental assessment, impacts are based on the incremental increase between sold out events and average attendance events. 9 It should be noted that the Working Group also considered efficiency targets for 2035 for the first time in this Working Group meeting. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 28 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Regional Operational Impacts The project would not require construction activities to accommodate an increase in the number of events held at Honda Center. Consequently, construction-related regional significance thresholds are not applicable. Likewise, the proposed project would not increase seating capacity at Honda Center. Therefore, maximum daily emissions generated by events at Honda Center would not increase from baseline conditions as a result of the project. Although Honda Center currently generates both average attendance events and sell out events, for the purpose of the environmental assessment impacts are based on the incremental increase caused by sell out events at Honda Center. Significance is based on the comparison of Sell Out Honda Center Events vs. Average Attendance Honda Center Events. As shown in Table 11, sell out events generate substantially more traffic than average attendance events at Honda Center. As a result, these emissions exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, and CO and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. Localized Operational Impacts The project would not require construction activities to accommodate an increase in the number of events held at Honda Center. Consequently, construction-related LSTs are not applicable. For operational phase LSTs, SCAQMD only considers onsite stationary sources and mobile equipment. While regional daily emissions generated by operation of Honda Center are substantial, onsite emissions generation by stationary sources represent a fraction of total operational emissions. Operation of Honda Center does not generate substantial quantities of onsite, stationary-sources emissions. Land uses that have the potential to generate substantial stationary sources of emissions include industrial land uses, such as chemical processing. While not considered a “stationary” source of emissions, cars idling at Honda Center parking generate exhaust emissions after an event. The proposed project would not increase seating capacity at Honda Center nor cars generated by events. Therefore, the project would not result in an increase in emissions generated onsite. On site emissions generated at full event days and average event days would be similar. Consequently, no localized impacts would occur. Localized CO Hotspots Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hot spots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hot spots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. Typically, for an intersection to exhibit a significant CO concentration, it would operate at level of service (LOS) E or worse without improvements (Caltrans 1997). The 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook includes methodology to conduct localized CO modeling for traffic generated by a project. At the time of the 1993 Handbook, the SoCAB was designated as nonattainment under the California AAQS and National AAQS for CO. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the SoCAB and in the state have steadily declined. In 2007, the SCAQMD was designated as in attainment for CO under both the California AAQS and National AAQS. As identified within SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SoCAB were a result of unusual ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 29 meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of congestion at a particular intersection. A CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles10 at the peak morning and afternoon time periods and did not predict a violation of CO standards. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a significant CO impact (BAAQMD 2011). Event traffic at Honda Center does not accommodate this volume of traffic in a one-hour period; therefore, the project would not have the potential to substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project would not increase stadium capacity and would not increase air pollutant emissions at intersections in the vicinity of the project site. No localized air quality impacts related to mobile-source emissions would occur as a result of the project. AQMP Consistency A project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would conflict with or obstruct implementation of an air quality management plan. Review of project compliance with the AQMP provides the lead agency information for determining how individual projects fit into the local planning effort; informs decision makers about project-related environmental efforts under consideration at an early enough stage to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed; and project compliance with clean air goals contained in the AQMP. The regional emissions inventory for the SoCAB is compiled by the SCAQMD and the SCAG. Regional population, housing, and employment projections used by SCAG are based on the City’s General Plan land use designations and planned developments. The emissions inventory in the AQMP is based on these projections. These demographic trends are incorporated into the Regional Transportation Plan compiled by SCAG, to determine priority transportation projects determine the future efficiency of the transportation system within the SCAG region. If a project results in changes that affect the existing population, housing, or employment growth patterns and therefore SCAG’s demographic projections, it could affect the assumptions in SCAQMD’s AQMP. The proposed project is considered a regionally significant project because of the size of the facility and the extent of the proposed increase use of the facility. However, the Proposed Project would not increase capacity of Honda Center. Consequently, the project would not affect the southern California region’s demographic projections. Increasing the number of events held at Honda Center and the increase in emissions on sold out vs. average attendance event days would not conflict with the AQMP. Odors Current operations at Honda Center do not result in objectionable odors. The threshold for odor is if a project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states: A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. 10 The four intersections were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue; Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard. The busiest intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day and LOS E in the morning peak hour and LOS F in the evening peak hour. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 30 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities (SCAQMD 1993). Existing operational odor sources associated with Honda Center would be kitchen or waste management activities. Proper maintenance and compliance with established waste management practices reduces the potential for objectionable odors during project operations. Any odors produced by Honda Center are not significant or highly objectionable and would be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Increasing the number of events per year would likewise not result in odor impacts. No significant impacts would occur. 4.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. The analysis below provides the conclusions on the project-specific impact toward the cumulative impact of global climate change. The State of California, through its governor and its legislature, has established a comprehensive framework for the substantial reduction of GHG emissions over the next 10+ years. This will occur primarily through the implementation of AB 32 and SB 375, which address GHG emissions on a statewide cumulative basis. The proposed project would result in an increase in GHG emissions from transportation sources, offsite energy production required for onsite activities, natural gas used on site for heating and cooking, water use, and waste disposal. Life cycle emissions are not included in this analysis because not enough information is available for the proposed project, and therefore life cycle GHG emissions would be speculative.11 Project- related GHG emissions are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Source GHG Emissions MTons/Year Existing Project Net Increase Transportation 23,755 32,926 9,171 Purchased Energy 12,342 17,712 5,370 Natural Gas 693 994 301 Total Energy 13,035 18,706 5,671 Water and Wastewater 151 220 68 Waste Disposal 126 183 57 Total All Sectors 37,068 52,035 14,967 GHG Emissions per Service Population1 6.5 6.4 -0.1 Notes: MTons: metric tons Sources: 1 Because of the type of regional event services provided by Honda Center, the traditional definition of Service Population is not directly applicable to Honda Center operations. Consequently, for the purpose of the GHG assessment. Service population is based on historical average daily spectators, 11 Life cycle emissions include indirect emissions associated with materials manufacture. However, these indirect emissions involve numerous parties, each of which is responsible for GHG emissions of their particular activity. Because the amount of materials consumed during the operation or construction of the proposed project is not known, the origin of the raw materials purchased is not known, and manufacturing information for those raw materials are also not known, calculation of life cycle emissions would be speculative. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). A life-cycle analysis is not warranted (OPR 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 31 Table 12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Source GHG Emissions MTons/Year Existing Project Net Increase staff/employee, and team/production member provided by Honda Center. GHG Emissions Impacts The proposed project would generate a net increase of 14,967 MTons of GHG per year compared to existing conditions. The total increase in GHG emissions onsite from the project would exceed SCAQMD’s proposed screening threshold of 3,000 MTons for all land use types.12 When the proposed screening threshold is exceeded, SCAQMD provides another tier of evaluation with the per capita threshold of 4.8 MTons per service population. The increase in GHG emissions cited above does not include gradual reductions in GHG emissions from an increase in fuel efficiency and higher utilization of renewable power in the local energy grid by year 2020 in accordance with AB 32, which is the efficiency target year. Table 13 presents GHG emissions of the project with Scoping Plan emission reductions and a comparison of total project emissions in comparison to SCAQMD’s proposed efficiency target of 4.8 MTons in 2020. For the purpose of this assessment, service population includes average daily employees and average daily visitors based on historic annual attendance at Honda Center (see Table The proposed project would result in annual emissions of 5.0 MTons per service population with the project. The project would result in a decrease in per capita emissions at Honda Center compared to existing conditions because the project would increase the use of the existing facility rather than construct a new sports arena to host basketball events. However, GHG emissions associated with the project would exceed SCAQMD’s proposed per capita significance threshold; and therefore, the proposed project’s cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be potentially significant. A total of 1,819 MTons would need to be reduced in order to achieve a per capita efficiency goal of 4.8 MTons per service population in accordance with SCAQMD’s proposed efficiency metric. Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions Source Year 2020 GHG Emissions MTons/Year Project Percent of Inventory Transportation1 24,126 59% Purchased Energy2 15,303 37% Natural Gas 994 2% Total Energy 16,297 40% Water and Wastewater 220 Waste Disposal 183 Total All Sectors 40,826 100% GHG Emissions Per Service Population3 5.0 NA Notes: MTons: metric tons; Emissions may not add to 100% due to rounding. 1 Based on the EMFAC2007 Pavley I + LCFS Postprocessor Version 1.0. 2 SCE derives approximately 19.4 percent of its energy from renewable energy sources (SCE 2011). Assumes a similar percentage increase in renewable power for Anaheim Public Utilities between 2011 and 2020, in accordance with the state’s 33 percent RPS goal. 3 Because of the type of regional event services provided by Honda Center, the traditional definition of service population is not directly applicable to 12 This threshold is based on SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTons combined threshold proposed by SCAQMD’s Working Group, which is based on a survey of the GHG emissions inventory of CEQA projects. Approximately 90 percent of CEQA projects GHG emissions inventories exceed 3,000 MTons, which is based on a potential threshold approach cited in CAPCOA’s white paper, “CEQA and Climate Change.” ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Page 32 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 Table 13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory with Scoping Plan Reductions Source Year 2020 GHG Emissions MTons/Year Project Percent of Inventory Honda Center operations. Consequently, for the purpose of the GHG assessment, service population is based on historical average daily spectators, staff/employee, and team/production member provided by Honda Center. Consistency with GHG Reduction Goals and Policies A project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. While actions taken in California alone cannot stabilize the climate, the state’s actions set an example and help to drive the global progress toward reduction of GHG. If the industrialized world were to follow the emission reduction targets established by California, and industrializing nations reduced emissions according to the lower emissions path (lower emissions IPPC scenario B1), medium or higher warming ranges of global temperature increases might be avoided, along with the most severe consequences of global warming (IPCC 2007). In 2007, the CEC published “The Role of Land Use in Meeting California’s Energy and Climate Change Goals” (CEC 2007). In this publication, the CEC acknowledged that California’s land use patterns shape energy use and the production of GHG. Transportation contributes a large percentage of the state’s GHG emissions, and research shows that increasing a community or development’s density and accessibility to job centers are the two most significant factors for reducing vehicle miles traveled through design (CEC 2007). In accordance with AB 32, CARB developed the Scoping Plan to outline the state’s strategy to achieve 1990 level emissions by year 2020. To estimate the reductions necessary, CARB projected statewide year 2020 BAU GHG emissions GHG emissions in the absence of statewide emission reduction measures). CARB identified that the state as a whole would be required to reduce GHG emissions by 28.5 percent from year 2020 BAU. Compliance with the federal and statewide GHG emissions reduction measures that are being implemented over the next 10 years, as outlined above, would reduce Honda Center’s GHG emissions. In addition, increasing the number of annual events results in a decrease in per capita GHG emissions since the building generates emissions regardless of whether it is in use or not (see Table 12). Thus, increase the number of events per year increases the intensity and efficiency and the existing land use. In addition, several modes of public transportation provide access to Honda Center, including passenger rail and bus service. The Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station is at the north end of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim parking lot 0.4 mile southwest of Honda Center. Two passenger rail services serve the station. The Amtrak Pacific Surfliner operates between San Diego and San Luis Obispo seven days per week. Eleven trains in each direction, northbound and southbound, stop at Anaheim on weekdays (Amtrak 2011). Metrolink is a commuter rail service. One Metrolink line, the Orange County line, serves the Anaheim station seven days per week; on weekdays 13 northbound and 12 southbound trains stop at Anaheim (Metrolink 2011). Honda Center is a 0.5 mile walk from the Amtrak/Metrolink Station and a 0.5 walk from the proposed ARTIC Station. Public bus service is provided in Orange County by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). OCTA Route 50 operates on Katella Avenue past Honda Center. Route 50 provides east-west service between the City of Orange and Long Beach seven days per week; peak hour weekday frequency is about 30 minutes (OCTA 2011a). OCTA Route 153 operates on Katella Avenue between Struck Avenue and Main Street, providing north-south service between Anaheim and Brea seven days per week with hourly frequency (OCTA 2011b). The southern terminus of this route, on Katella Avenue, is approximately 0.3 mile east of Honda Center and is walkable using sidewalks. Routes 50 and 135 include regular bus service and station- link bus service. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Environmental Impacts Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 33 The project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, and for this reason the project would have a less than significant impact under this second threshold. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Mitigation Measures Page 34 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 5. MITIGATION MEASURES 5.1 EXISTING REGULATIONS • CARB Rule 2485 – Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) • SCAQMD Rule 201 – Permit to Construct • SCAQMD Rule 402 – Nuisance Odors • SCAQMD Rule 403 – Fugitive Dust • City of San Juan Capistrano Municipal Code, Section 9-3.513. • SCAQMD Rule 1108 – Cutback Asphalt • SCAQMD Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings • SCAQMD Rule 1301 – New Source Review • SCAQMD Rule 1403 – Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities • 40 CFR Part 85 – Control of Air Pollution from Mobile Sources • 40 CFR Part 89 – Control of Emissions from New and In-Use Nonroad Compression-Ignition Engines • Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) • Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20) • Motor Vehicle Standards (AB 1493) 5.2 MITIGATION MEASURES Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Mitigation measures described below for GHG emissions would also reduce criteria air pollutant emissions generated on a day with a sold out Honda Center event. Greenhouse Gases GHG-1 Honda Center shall request a Comprehensive Energy Audit by the Anaheim Public Utilities, which is a free service offered by the utility. According to the Anaheim Public Utilities, customers can reduce energy by as much as 10 to 25 percent of month through efficiency reductions. Energy reductions can be accomplished through retrofits and/or offsets provided by renewable energy generation onsite. Potential combination of measures that could be taken to achieve a reduction in energy demand includes: a. Replacement of indoor and outdoor lighting fixtures with LED or compact fluorescent fixtures. b. Retrofitting air conditioning, heating, and ventilation systems and/or calibrating systems for efficiency increasing average indoor temperature settings in summer and during hockey events). c. Replacing restaurant refrigerators, freezers, and other appliances with Energy Star rated appliances to reduce plug-load. d. Installation of photovoltaic system carports with solar panels or rooftop-mounted solar panels) or wind-energy-system at Honda Center to offset energy use generated during an event. For example, a 750 kW-ac photovoltaic system is estimated to produce 1,242,163 kWh per year based on the California Public Utilities Commission’s Clean Power Estimator. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Mitigation Measures Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 35 GHG-2 The City of Anaheim shall continue coordinating with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), which operates Metrolink service on Orange County Line in conjunction with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The City of Anaheim shall coordinate with SCRRA to discuss the potential for providing special event service to Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim on weekends and during the week. A list of events, including the day or the event, time of the event, and duration of the event at Honda Center and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim shall be provided to SCRRA to initiate these discussions. Barriers to implement Special Event Service on the Orange County Line shall be discussed. Potential funding options to overcoming barriers to implement special event Service on the Orange County line should be indentified and considered, including funding for additional train operators and trains that coincide with commuter service. GHG-3 To encourage use of transit by visitors to Honda Center, ticket holders shall be provided information on the Metrolink and Amtrak services available on the day of the event, including Metrolink and Amtrak scheduling. 5.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Measure GHG-1 through GHG-3 would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, the effectiveness of these mitigation measures is uncertain and cannot be quantified. Therefore, regional criteria air pollutant emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions As described previously, Honda Center would need to reduce GHG emissions by 1,819 MTons in order to achieve an efficiency metric of 4.8 MTons per service population. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 through GHG-3 would reduce GHG emissions to the extent feasible. However, these mitigation measures do not yield quantifiable reductions as the degree of effectiveness is uncertain. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 36 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 6. REFERENCES Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2011, Updated May. California Environmental Quality Act, Air Quality Guidelines. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2009, June. Proposed Regulation to Implement the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Volume I, Initial Statement of Reasons. 2008a, October. Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan, a Framework for Change. 2008b January. Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions under CAFE Standards and ARB Regulations Adopted Pursuant to AB1493. 2008c February. Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions for the United States and Canada Under US CAFÉ Standards and California Air Resources Board Greenhouse Gas Regulations. 2005, April. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. 1999, December. Final Staff Report: Update to the Toxic Air Contaminant List. California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA). 2010, August. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. California Climate Action Team (CAT). 2007, April 20. CAT Proposed Early Actions to Mitigate Climate Change in California. 2006, March. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1997, December. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. UCD-ITS-RR-97-21. Prepared by Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2007. The Role of Land Use in Meeting California’s Energy and Climate Change Goals. Report CEC-600-2007-008-SD. 2006a, December. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 to 2004. Report CEC-600-2006-013-SF. 2006b. Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California, 2006 Biennial Report. California Climate Change Center, California Energy Commission Staff Paper, Sacramento, California, Report CEC-500-2006-077. 2005a, June. Climate Change Emissions Estimates from Bemis, Gerry and Jennifer Allen, Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2002 Update. California Energy Commission Staff Paper CEC-600-2005-025. Sacramento, California. 2005b, November. California's Water-Energy Relationship. CEC-700.2005-011-SF. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2008, June. Technical Advisory, CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through CEQA Review Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 37 2001. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. New York: Cambridge University Press. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User’s Guide. 2008, September. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES III). 2007, June. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. 2006, October. Final Methodology to Calculate PM2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds. 2003, June. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 1993, April. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. State Water Resources Control Board 2010, February. Final 20X2020 Water Conservation Plan. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Personal Communications Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer, Honda Center. 2011, September. Personal Communications. Tanya S. La Soya, Convention, Sports & Entertainment Manager, Anaheim. 2011, June. Personal Communications. Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations, Honda Center. 2011, June. Personal Communications and Honda Center Operational Survey. Merit Tully, Director of Media & Communications, Honda Center. 2011, September. Personal Communications. Websites Amtrak. 2011, July 15. Timetables. http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer/Page/1237405732505/1237405732505. Anaheim Regional Transit (ART). 2011. Route 15 Schedule. http://www.rideart.org/schedules/route-15/ California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011. Air Pollution Data Monitoring Cards (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010). http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/index.html 2010, August. Ambient Air Quality Standards. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. 2010, March. Area Designations: Activities and Maps. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 38 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 California Integrated Waste Management Board (now CalRecycle). Revised 2008. Contractor's Report to the Board, California 2008 Statewide Waste Characterization Study. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1346 California Public Utilities Commission. 2011. Clean Power Estimator. http://www.gosolarcalifornia.org/tools/clean_power_estimator.php Metrolink. 2011, July 5. Schedules: Orange County Line. http://www.metrolinktrains.com/schedules/html.php?id=1111. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 2011, June 12. Route 50 Schedule. http://www.octa.net/pdf/pdf/feb2011/route050.pdf. 2011b, June 12. Route 153 Schedule. http://www.octa.net/pdf/pdf/june2011/route153.pdf. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). South Coast AQMD List of Current Rules. California Air Resources Board. http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/sc/cur.htm. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES III) Model Estimated Carcinogenic Risk. http://www2.aqmd.gov/webappl/matesiii/. Accessed 2011. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Air Quality Analysis Handbook. Updates to CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html. Southern California Edison (SCE). 2011. Renewable Energy. http://www.sce.com/powerandenvironment/renewables/default.htm Office of the California Attorney General (AG). 2008, May. The California Environmental Quality Act Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level. http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/pdf/GW_mitigation_measures.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009. Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes. Non CO2 Gases Economic Analysis and Inventory. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#GWP 2008, April. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html 2008. Criteria Pollutants. Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). Western U.S. Climate Historical Summaries. Santa Ana Monitoring Station (ID No. ID 049087). Accessed June 2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim • Page 39 Models California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2006, November 1. EMFAC2007 Computer Model. Version 2.3. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. References Page 40 • The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix A. Summary of GHG and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- SUMMARY - GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY Tier 3 Analysis - Screening Threshold Without Project With Project Net Increase Category MTons/Year MTons/Year MTons/Year Transportation 23,755 64% 32,926 63% 9,171 61% Purchased Energy 12,342 33% 17,712 34% 5,370 36% Natural Gas 693 2% 994 2% 301 2% Total Energy 13,035 35% 18,706 36% 5,671 38% Water/Wastewater 151 0.4% 220 0.4% 68 0% Waste Disposal 126 0.3% 183 0.4% 57 0.4% Total 37,068 100% 52,035 100% 14,967 100% Percent increase in events: 45% [PHONE REDACTED] With Project GHG Reductions Tier 4 (Total Inventory w/Reductions) MTons/Year NEEDED for 4.8 Transportation 24,126 59% Purchased Energy 15,303 37% Natural Gas 994 2% Total Energy 16,297 40% Water/Wastewater 220 0.5% Waste Disposal 183 0.4% Total 40,826 100% -1,819 Tier 4 Analysis - Efficiency Target Without Project With Project 2020 With Project 2020 w/ Mitigation 2011 Increase Average Daily Service Population 5,663 8,127 8,127 2,464 MTons/Service Population 6.5 6.4 5.0 4.8 6.1 Average Annual Service Population Existing Project Average Annual visitors 1,723,333 2,500,523 Average Annual Employees & Team 343,619 465,663 Average People Onsite Per Year 2,066,952 2,966,185 Increase Average Population Per Day 5,663 8,127 2,464 Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Percent of Inventory Assumes the project would increase the number of events by 45% and annual emissions for non-transportation sectors (natural gas, purchased electricity, water/wastewater, and waste disposal) are increased proportionately. See transportation assumptions for the trip generation with and without the proposed project. See per-capita generation for natural gas and purchased energy forecasts. Transportation - Based on Pavley I + LCFS Post-Processor. SCE has derives approximately 19.4 percent of its energy from renewable energy sources (SCE 2011). The Scoping Plan calls for a 33 percent RPS by 2020. In the absence of data from Anaheim Public Utilities, assumes a similar percent increase in renewable energy generation for Anaheim Public Utilities 13.6 percent reduction in fossil fuel use) for 33 RPS. ---PAGE BREAK--- SUMMARY - CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INVENTORY Full Capacity Events ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Transportation 301 359 3,021 4 39 39 Summary 301 363 3,024 4 39 39 Average Attendance Events ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Transportation 222 264 2,226 3 29 28 Summary 222 268 2,229 3 29 28 Diff Btwn Sell Out & Avg Attendance Event 79 95 795 1 10 11 SCAQMD's Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 lbs/day lbs/day ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix B. Transportation Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Traffic Emission Factors See EMFAC2007 Model run for year 2011 Average Daily Vistors Year Vistors Events Average Daily Visitors/Event 2006 1,600,000 154 10,390 2007 1,760,000 144 12,222 2008 1,590,000 162 9,815 2009 1,460,000 136 10,735 2010 1,300,000 120 10,833 Highest 3-years averaged 153 11,264 Source: Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations Events by Type 2010 Percent Basketball 15 13% Hockey 45 38% Other (Concerts) 60 50% 120 100% Source: Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations Traffic Data Provided by The Honda Center Event Days 153 Staff Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 950 1.2 2 1,583 Hockey: 950 1.2 2 1,583 Concerts: 1,000 1.2 2 1,667 Team Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 250 1.2 2 417 Hockey: 200 1.2 2 333 Concerts: 200 1.2 2 333 Spectator Seats Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips basketball: 18,336 3.0 2 12,224 Hockey: 17,174 3.0 2 11,449 Concerts: 18,900 3.0 2 12,600 Trips by type Trips basketball: 14,224 Hockey: 13,366 Concerts: 14,600 Maximum Trips 14,600 With Trip Reductions 13,743 Maximum Event Trips ---PAGE BREAK--- Average Visitors Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips Average Visitors 11,264 3.0 2 7,509 Average Staff 1,625 1.2 2 2,708 Average Team 344 1.2 2 573 Average Daily Event Trips 10,790 With Trip Reductions (see assumptions below) 10,124 Non-Event Days 212 Staff Occupants per Vehicle Trip Rate Trips Employees (when dark) 200 1.2 4 667 Trip rate for non-event days 1.026 Fleet Mix Fleet Mix Percent * Passenger Vehicles 4,000 98.4% * Charter Buses 5 0.1% Medium Duty Trucks (assume 1% for food service) 1.0% * Heavy Duty Trucks 20 0.5% 4,025 * Source: Starkey 2011 Trip Reductions CHARTER BUSES. Assumes 40 occupants per bus and 5 buses: 200 133 trip reduction 723 trip reduction peak day 533 trip reduction average day Average Distance Average Distance One-Way: 31.1 miles Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Average Daily Event Trips Based on TicketMaster Ticket Sales by Zip Code provided by the Honda Center. Assumed will-call, season ticketholder and cash sales occur within a similar distance of the 90th percentile of sales. Assumes 1.2 occupants per vehicle for staff and team and 3.0 occupants per vehicle for spectators (Honda Center). Assumes 2 trips per vehicle for events (home-to-other [event] and other-to-home). Note: because of retail/restaurant onsite and duration of events, no "dinner/lunch" trips are assumed for employees. Assumes 1.2 occupants per vehicle for staff. Assumes 4 trips per vehicle (home-to-work, work-to-other [lunch], other-to-work, work-to-home) TRANSIT RIDERSHIP: Assumes a 5% trip reduction in trips for proximity to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) or other transit options provided by the Orange County Transporation Authority (OCTA) and location within the Platinum Triangle mixed-use area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Opening Year Without LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Average Attendan ce Trip Length 314,856 10,124 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT lbs/day CO 1,254 211 689 31 33 7 2,226 PM10 14 2 9 0 2 0 29 PM2.5 14 2 9 0 2 0 28 NOx 101 18 81 4 50 10 264 ROG 131 20 63 3 5 1 222 CO2 174,801 29,181 94,486 4,734 6,349 1,507 311,058 SO2 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix F. SCAQMD Local Rules and Regulations ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- HondaCenterburden2.xls Pavley Page 2 Vehicle Category Vehicle Population Weekday VMT from EMFAC (VMT/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions from EMFAC (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emission Reduction from Pavley I (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I (tons/day) % CO2 Emission Reduction from LCFS Weekday CO2 Emission Reduction from LCFS (tons/day) Weekday CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I & LCFS (tons/day) Annual CO2 Emissions after adopting Pavley I & LCFS (MMTCO2/year) LDA 1,349,516 43,002,112 18,634.82 3,846.20 14,788.62 10.00% 1,478.86 13,309.76 4.19 LDT1 182,793 6,258,834 3,395.40 633.21 2,762.19 10.00% 276.22 2,485.97 0.78 LDT2 604,613 20,590,234 11,340.18 1,515.23 9,824.95 10.00% 982.49 8,842.45 2.78 MDV 273,795 9,668,478 7,244.62 909.08 6,335.54 10.00% 633.55 5,701.98 1.79 Total 2,410,717 79,519,658 40,615.02 6,903.72 33,711.30 10.00% 3,371.13 30,340.17 9.55 CO2 Emission Reductions from the Pavley I Regulation & the Low Carbon Fuel Standard for Orange - 2020 (OC2020Burden) ---PAGE BREAK--- Opening Year Without LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Max Event Trips Trip Length 427,407 13,743 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT lbs/day CO 1,703 286 936 42 44 10 3,021 PM10 20 3 13 0 3 0 39 PM2.5 19 3 13 0 3 0 39 NOx 138 24 110 5 67 14 359 ROG 177 27 85 4 7 1 301 CO2 237,286 39,612 128,262 6,427 8,619 2,046 422,252 SO2 2 0 1 0 0 0 4 Annual VMT Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 52,570,694 10,124 153 667 212 31.1 Based on EMFAC2007, using 2030 emission rates Total Emissions LDA-TOT LDT1- TOT LDT2- TOT MDV-TOT HHDT- TOT UB-TOT MTons/year CO 95 16 52 2 2 1 169 PM10 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 PM2.5 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 NOx 8 1 6 0 4 1 20 ROG 10 2 5 0 0 0 17 CO2 13,239 2,210 7,156 359 481 114 23,558 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 CO2e 23,755 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- Annual VMT w/Project Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 72,864,470 10,124 222 667 143 31.1 MTons/Year MTons/year CO 132 22 72 3 3 1 234 PM10 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 PM2.5 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 NOx 11 2 9 0 5 1 28 ROG 14 2 7 0 1 0 23 CO2 18,349 3,063 9,918 497 666 158 32,652 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 CO2e 32,926 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- 2020 With LCFS and Pavley Based on EMFAC2007 + LCFS/Pavley PostProcessor assumes PM2.5 is 99 percent of PM10 for mobile sources. SCAQMD 2006. Daily VMT Max Event Trips Trip Length 427,407 13,743 31.1 Total Emissions LDA-TOT lbs/day CO 774 134 563 26 18 7 1,522 PM10 20 3 14 1 1 0 39 PM2.5 20 3 14 1 1 0 38 NOx 57 11 56 3 26 11 163 ROG 99 17 71 3 3 1 194 CO2 165,979 28,734 99,864 5,042 8,847 1,928 310,394 N2O 2 0 2 0 1 0 5 CO2e 312,000 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual VMT w/Project Average Event Trips Event Days NonEvent Trips Non Event Days Trip Length 72,864,470 10,124 222 667 143 31.1 MTons/Year MTons/year CO 60 10 44 2 1 1 118 PM10 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 PM2.5 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 NOx 4 1 4 0 2 1 13 ROG 8 1 6 0 0 0 15 CO2 12,835 2,222 7,722 390 684 149 24,002 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO2e 24,126 SO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) N2O emissions were calculated using an off-model adjustment provided by CARB in AB 32 Technical Appendices. The off- model adjustment uses a linear regression correlating N2O with NOx. (N2O = 0.0167 + 0.0318 x NOx) ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OrangeCounty2011 Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/06/30 09:40:24 Scen Year: 2011 All model years in the range 1967 to 2011 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1230350 165981 533516 [PHONE REDACTED] 1073 2328030 Honda Center 1230350 165981 533516 1929847 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.00% 0.50% 0.10% 100.0% VMT/1000 40408 5899 19272 8978 848 117 79536 VMT 40,408,000 5,899,000 19,272,000 8,978,000 848,000 117,000 79,536,000 Trips 7731650 1040560 3366570 1508660 53503 4290 15858600 Percent VMT 51% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Reactive Organic Gas Emissions Run Exh 2.67 0.6 1.49 1.11 1.07 0.15 9.58 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.17 Start Ex 3.33 0.43 1.67 1.05 0.15 0.01 8.04 Total Ex 6.01 1.04 3.16 2.15 1.32 0.15 17.79 Diurnal 0.99 0.12 0.39 0.16 0 0 1.81 Hot Soak 1.51 0.2 0.59 0.24 0 0 2.68 Running 4.2 0.8 2.65 1.06 0.03 0.01 10.1 Resting 0.64 0.08 0.26 0.11 0 0 1.18 Total 13.35 2.24 7.05 3.72 1.35 0.16 33.56 lbs/day 26700 4480 14100 7440 2700 320 lbs/VMT 6.61E-04 7.59E-04 7.32E-04 8.29E-04 3.18E-03 2.74E-03 corrected for %Fleet 4.15E-04 6.43E-05 1.99E-04 8.29E-06 1.59E-05 2.74E-06 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Run Exh 89.7 17.63 56.23 32.35 6.28 1.25 235.02 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.4 0 0.87 Start Ex 38.6 5.73 21.32 11.56 2.12 0.1 94.53 Total Ex 128.3 23.36 77.56 43.91 8.81 1.35 330.41 lbs/day 256600 46720 155120 87820 17620 2700 lbs/VMT 6.35E-03 7.92E-03 8.05E-03 9.78E-03 2.08E-02 2.31E-02 corrected for %Fleet 3.98E-03 6.70E-04 2.19E-03 9.78E-05 1.04E-04 2.31E-05 Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions Run Exh 7.66 1.6 7 4.39 12.18 1.89 49.28 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.95 0 1.18 Start Ex 2.71 0.38 2.14 1.16 0.24 0.01 9.48 Total Ex 10.37 1.98 9.14 5.56 13.37 1.9 59.95 lbs/day 20740 3960 18280 11120 26740 3800 lbs/VMT 5.13E-04 6.71E-04 9.49E-04 1.24E-03 3.15E-02 3.25E-02 corrected for %Fleet 3.22E-04 5.68E-05 2.58E-04 1.24E-05 1.58E-04 3.25E-05 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OrangeCounty2011 Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/06/30 09:40:24 Scen Year: 2011 All model years in the range 1967 to 2011 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1230350 165981 533516 [PHONE REDACTED] 1073 2328030 Honda Center 1230350 165981 533516 1929847 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.00% 0.50% 0.10% 100.0% VMT/1000 40408 5899 19272 8978 848 117 79536 VMT 40,408,000 5,899,000 19,272,000 8,978,000 848,000 117,000 79,536,000 Trips 7731650 1040560 3366570 1508660 53503 4290 15858600 Percent VMT 51% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Carbon Dioxide Emissions (000) Run Exh 17.26 3.13 10.3 6.55 1.66 0.28 42.71 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0.08 Start Ex 0.62 0.1 0.33 0.21 0 0 1.33 Total Ex 17.88 3.23 10.63 6.75 1.71 0.28 44.13 lbs day 35760000 6460000 21260000 13500000 3420000 560000 lbs/VMT 8.85E-01 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.50E+00 4.03E+00 4.79E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.55E-01 9.27E-02 3.00E-01 1.50E-02 2.02E-02 4.79E-03 PM10 Emissions Run Exh 0.51 0.09 0.58 0.27 0.53 0.03 2.31 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.02 Start Ex 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.02 0 0 0.14 Total Ex 0.56 0.1 0.63 0.29 0.55 0.03 2.47 TireWear 0.36 0.05 0.17 0.08 0.03 0 0.74 BrakeWr 0.56 0.08 0.27 0.12 0.03 0 1.11 Total 1.48 0.23 1.06 0.5 0.61 0.03 4.32 lbds/day 2960 460 2120 1000 1220 60 lbs/VMT 7.33E-05 7.80E-05 1.10E-04 1.11E-04 1.44E-03 5.13E-04 corrected for %Fleet 4.60E-05 6.60E-06 2.99E-05 1.11E-06 7.19E-06 5.13E-07 Lead 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOx 0.17 0.03 0.1 0.07 0.02 0 0.43 lbds/day 340 60 200 140 40 0 lbs/VMT 8.41E-06 1.02E-05 1.04E-05 1.56E-05 4.72E-05 0.00E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.28E-06 8.61E-07 2.82E-06 1.56E-07 2.36E-07 0.00E+00 Fuel Consumption (000 gallons) Gasoline 1850.81 329.59 1101.64 698.45 4.8 2.14 4157.14 Diesel 2.02 4.52 0.57 0.78 150.91 23.94 367.75 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OC2020Burden Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/09/19 10:10:10 Scen Year: 2020 All model years in the range 1976 to 2020 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1,349,520 182,793 604,613 273,795 5,834 1,218 2,596,980 Honda Center from 2011 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.1% 100.0% VMT/1000 43,002 6,259 20,590 9,668 1,087 133 85,272 VMT 43,002,000 6,259,000 20,590,000 9,668,000 1,087,000 133,000 85,272,000 Trips 8,398,070 1,131,140 3,738,980 1,693,450 45,309 4,873 17,591,600 Percent VMT 50% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Reactive Organic Gas Emissions Run Exh 1.43 0.26 1.2 0.86 0.58 0.15 6.82 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.19 Start Ex 1.46 0.22 1.03 0.69 0.07 0.01 4.58 Total Ex 2.89 0.48 2.24 1.55 0.75 0.16 11.59 Diurnal 0.64 0.09 0.39 0.18 0 0 1.45 Hot Soak 1.26 0.19 0.71 0.32 0 0 2.6 Running 2.62 0.67 2.62 1.16 0.01 0.01 8.32 Resting 0.53 0.08 0.35 0.16 0 0 1.2 Total 7.93 1.49 6.3 3.36 0.76 0.16 25.17 lbs/day 15860 2980 12600 6720 1520 320 50340 lbs/VMT 3.69E-04 4.76E-04 6.12E-04 6.95E-04 1.40E-03 2.41E-03 5.90E-04 corrected for %Fleet 2.31E-04 4.03E-05 1.66E-04 6.95E-06 6.99E-06 2.41E-06 5.90E-04 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Run Exh 43.25 8.41 36.07 21.83 3.09 0.94 134.74 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.43 0 0.96 Start Ex 18.79 3.2 13.81 8.03 0.94 0.1 55.55 Total Ex 62.05 11.61 49.88 29.87 4.47 1.04 191.25 lbs/day 124100 23220 99760 59740 8940 2080 382500 lbs/VMT 2.89E-03 3.71E-03 4.85E-03 6.18E-03 8.22E-03 1.56E-02 4.49E-03 corrected for %Fleet 1.81E-03 3.14E-04 1.32E-03 6.18E-05 4.11E-05 1.56E-05 4.49E-03 Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions Run Exh 3.38 0.73 3.74 2.4 5.25 1.66 25.2 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 1.23 0 1.5 Start Ex 1.17 0.2 1.23 0.72 0.13 0.01 6.3 Total Ex 4.54 0.93 4.97 3.12 6.6 1.67 33 lbs/day 9080 1860 9940 6240 13200 3340 66000 lbs/VMT 2.11E-04 2.97E-04 4.83E-04 6.45E-04 1.21E-02 2.51E-02 7.74E-04 corrected for %Fleet 1.32E-04 2.52E-05 1.31E-04 6.45E-06 6.07E-05 2.51E-05 7.74E-04 ---PAGE BREAK--- Title : OC2020Burden Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 2011/09/19 10:10:10 Scen Year: 2020 All model years in the range 1976 to 2020 selected Season : Annual Area : Orange County I/M Stat : Enhanced Interim (2005) Emissions: Tons Per Day LDA-TOT LDT1-TOT LDT2-TOT MDV-TOT HHDT-TOT UB-TOT ALL-TOT Vehicles 1,349,520 182,793 604,613 273,795 5,834 1,218 2,596,980 Honda Center from 2011 62.7% 8.5% 27.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.1% 100.0% VMT/1000 43,002 6,259 20,590 9,668 1,087 133 85,272 VMT 43,002,000 6,259,000 20,590,000 9,668,000 1,087,000 133,000 85,272,000 Trips 8,398,070 1,131,140 3,738,980 1,693,450 45,309 4,873 17,591,600 Percent VMT 50% 7% 24% 11% 1% 0% 100% Carbon Dioxide Emissions (000) Run Exh 17.98 3.29 10.97 7.02 2.18 0.3 45.72 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.07 0 0.1 Start Ex 0.65 0.11 0.37 0.23 0 0 1.45 Total Ex 18.63 3.4 11.34 7.24 2.25 0.3 47.27 lbs day 37260000 6800000 22680000 14480000 4500000 600000 94540000 lbs/VMT 8.66E-01 1.09E+00 1.10E+00 1.50E+00 4.14E+00 4.51E+00 1.11E+00 corrected for %Fleet 5.44E-01 9.19E-02 3.00E-01 1.50E-02 2.07E-02 4.51E-03 1.11E+00 PAVLEY POST PROCESSOR Total Ex 1.33E+04 2.49E+03 8.84E+03 5.70E+03 lbs day 26619522.98 4971943.107 17684904.87 11403967.64 4.50E+06 6.00E+05 9.45E+07 lbs/VMT 6.19E-01 7.94E-01 8.59E-01 1.18E+00 4.14E+00 4.51E+00 1.11E+00 corrected for %Fleet 3.88E-01 6.72E-02 2.34E-01 1.18E-02 2.07E-02 4.51E-03 1.11E+00 PM10 Emissions Run Exh 0.56 0.1 0.7 0.35 0.24 0.03 2.22 Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.01 Start Ex 0.06 0.01 0.07 0.03 0 0 0.18 Total Ex 0.62 0.11 0.77 0.38 0.24 0.03 2.41 TireWear 0.38 0.06 0.18 0.09 0.04 0 0.8 BrakeWr 0.59 0.09 0.28 0.13 0.03 0 1.19 Total 1.59 0.25 1.24 0.6 0.32 0.03 4.4 lbds/day 3180 500 2480 1200 640 60 8800 lbs/VMT 7.40E-05 7.99E-05 1.20E-04 1.24E-04 5.89E-04 4.51E-04 1.03E-04 corrected for %Fleet 4.64E-05 6.76E-06 3.28E-05 1.24E-06 2.94E-06 4.51E-07 1.03E-04 Lead 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOx 0.18 0.03 0.11 0.07 0.02 0 0.46 lbds/day 360 60 220 140 40 0 920 lbs/VMT 8.37E-06 9.59E-06 1.07E-05 1.45E-05 3.68E-05 0.00E+00 1.08E-05 corrected for %Fleet 5.25E-06 8.11E-07 2.91E-06 1.45E-07 1.84E-07 0.00E+00 1.08E-05 Fuel Consumption (000 gallons) Gasoline 1918.02 347.53 1169.42 746.49 2 3.17 4377.25 Diesel 0.5 1.83 0.2 0.39 200.9 24.01 435.19 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix C. Natural Gas and Purchased Energy Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES - Emission Factors lbs/MWH lbs/KWH CO2 1416.74 1.41674 CH4 0.029 0.000029 N2O 0.011 0.000011 Global Warming Potentials (GWP) Anaheim Public Utilities (lbs/KWH) CO2 1 1.41674 CH4 21 0.00061 N2O 310 0.00341 Total CO2e 1.420759 lbs to Tons 2000 Tons to Mton 0.9071847 Energy Use Provided by The Honda Center Size of the Honda Center: 650,000 sqft Winter 1,217,583.90 KwH/Month Winter Summer 1,974,389.70 KwH/Month Summer Average Annual 19,151,841.60 KwH - Average Annual 29.46 kwh/sqft Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer 2011 GHG Emissions from Purchased Energy Use lbs CO2e MTons Summer Month 1,729,893 785 Winter Month 2,805,132 1,272 Average Annual 27,210,151 12,342 CPUC - Clean Power Estimator 1,764,814 801 Existing W/Project MTons/Average Population 2.2 17,712 *Increse in emissions based on increase in annual average per capita emissions Intensity factor Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Local Government Operations Protocol (LGO) for CO2 and E-Grid values for CH4 and N2O. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 1.2, Electrical Utility Emission Factors of GHGs. Souce: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2011. Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors ---PAGE BREAK--- GHG Emissions Reductions from Energy Retrofits or Offsets GHG Reductions Needed Annual -1,819 Coorelates to KwH Reductions: Annual -2,822,138 Percent Energy Reduction from Existing -14.7% Percent Energy Reduction from Future Increase (estimate) -10.3% Residential Per-Capita 2,379 kwh/year* Single Family 3.3 Persons/Dwelling** Energy per Dwelling in Anaheim 7,851 kwh/year/house GHG Reductions Equivalent to Energy from: 359 houses *California Energy Commission. 2009. Energy Aware Planning Guide. CEC-600-2009-013. City of Anaheim. 2004. General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Natural Gas Emission Factors Heat Content Carbon Content Per Unit Energy Fraction Oxidized kg of CO2/MMBtU MTons of CO2/MMBtU Weighted US Average 1,029 14.47 1 53.06 0.053 Therm to BTU 100000 British Thermal Unit Therm to MMBTU 0.1 million Btu kg to MTons 0.001 metric Tons Natural Gas Use Provided by The Honda Center Therms MMBtu KBtu Winter 16,666 1,667 1,666,600 Summer 5,100 510 510,000 CalEEmod check Average Annual 130,596 13,060 13,059,600 10.05 35,780 average daily Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer 2011 GHG Emissions from Onsite Natural Gas Use Per-Capita MTons Existing W/Project Summer Month 88 Winter Month 27 Average Annual 693 0.12 994 *Increse in emissions based on increase in annual average per capita emissions 2011 Criteria Air Pollutants - Natural Gas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Non-Residential 0.01078431 0.09803922 0.08235294 0.00058824 0.00745098 0.00745098 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Honda Center 0.39 3.51 2.95 0.02 0.27 0.27 Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix G, Default Emission Factors Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Table 8.2 Natural Gas Emission Factors lbs/MBTu ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix D. Water and Wastewater Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Orange County Water and Wastewater Energy Intensity Water Supply Treatment Distribution Wastewater Treatment Total Orange County 9,727 111 1,272 1,911 13,021 Excluding wastewater treatment 11,110 Orange County Wastewater Direct Emissions Septic Aerobic Anaerobic (Lagoons) Anaerobic (Gas) Anaerobic (Cogeneration) Orange County 10.00% 84.69% 2.14% 3.17% 0.00% ajdusted 0.00% 84.69% 2.14% 3.17% 0.00% Modified 0.00% 94.10% 2.38% 3.52% 0.00% Southern California Edison - Emission Factors lbs/MWH lbs/KWH CO2 641.26 0.64126 CH4 0.29 0.00029 N2O 0.011 0.000011 Note: CalEEMod uses Anaheim Public Utilities Intensity Factors. SCE Intensity factors are for water used since OCSD is within their jurisdiction Global Warming Potentials (GWP) Anaheim Public Utilities (lbs/KWH) CO2 1 0.64126 CH4 21 0.00609 N2O 310 0.00341 Total CO2e 0.65076 lbs to Tons 2000 Tons to Mton 0.9071847 Intensity factor Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Local Government Operations Protocol (LGO) for CO2 and E-Grid values for CH4 and N2O. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 1.2, Electrical Utility Emission Factors of GHGs. Souce: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2011. Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Local Government Operations Protocol. Appendix F, Standard Conversion Factors Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 9.3 Percent of Wastewater Distribution Types (assumes no septic). Aesrobic digestion, no methane or nitrous ocide emissions would occur (CARB's 2008 LGOP). Assumes no N2O emissions as treated wastewater is outfalled to ocean and not a river or estuary by the Orange County Sanitation District. Assumes no cogeneration. kWhr/million gallons Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 9.2 Water and Wastewater Electricity Intensity ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Use Provided by The Honda Center Total Gallons Millon Gallons Indoor (Mgallons) Outdoor (Mgallons) Indoor (Liters) Winter Month 1,530,000 1.53 1.45 0.08 5,501,514 Summer Month 1,860,000 1.86 1.77 0.09 6,688,115 Average Annual 31,500,000 31.50 29.93 1.58 113,266,465 Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Based on 650,000 sqft stadium (average annual) 48,462 1000 sqft gallons to Liters 3.785 2011 GHG Emissions from Water Use Energy from Water Use Indoor Outdoor Total Winter Month 18,926 850 19,776 Summer Month 23,008 1033 24,041 Average Annual 389,653 17,498 407,152 Indirect GHG Emissions lbs CO2e MTons Summer Month 12,869 5.84 Winter Month 15,645 7.10 Average Annual 264,958 120 Direct Emissions: Anaerobic Digestion (Lagoons) CH4 = wastewater = 2,693,225 Liters BOD5load = 200.00 mg/L of Wastewater 10^-6 = 0.00 conversion factor; kg/mg Fp = 0.00 assumes no primary treatment Bo = 0.60 kg//CH4/kg BOD5 removed MCFanaerobic = 0.80 correction factor from LGOP Fremoved = 1.00 from LGOP 10^-3 = 0.00 conversion factor: MTons/kg CH4 = 0 MTons of CH4 CO2e = 5 MTons of CO2e Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. User's Manual Wastewater x BOD5load x 10^-6 x(1-Fp) x Bo X MCFanaerobic x Fremoved x 10-3 Assumption: 95% of water is for indoor use as there is very little outdoor landscaping kWH ---PAGE BREAK--- Direct Emissions: Anaerobic Digesters (Gas) CH4 = Wastewater x Digester Gas x FCH4 x pCH4 x (1-DE) x 0.0283 x 10^-3 wastewater = 1,054,025 Gallons digester gas = 0.01 ft3 biogas/gallon wastewater F CH4 = 0.65 fraction of CH4 in biogas p CH4 = 622.00 g/m3 (density) DE = 0.99 CH4 desctruction from LGOP 0.0283 = 0.0283 conversion factor: m3/ft3 10^-3 = 0.00 conversion factor: MTons/kg CH4 = 1 MTons of CH4 CO2e = 25 MTons of CO2e CO2 = digerster Gas x FCH4 x EF / 2204.623 digester gas = 10540.25 0.1 ft3 per gallon of wastewater F CH4 = 0.65 fraction of CH4 in biogas EF = 0.12 lbs CO2/ft CH4 2204.623 2204.623 conversion factor: lbs/MTons CO2 0.373 MTons of CO2 Annual: 31 MTons of CO2e Indirect (energy intensity) Direct (wastewater) Total GHG Emissions Summer Month 6 2 8 Winter Month 7 3 10 Average Annual 120 31 151 MTons Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. User's Manual ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices Honda Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Study City of Anaheim Appendix E. Waste Disposal Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning CenterIDC&E November 2011 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Biogenic Waste Disposal Emission Factos CO2e Mass CO2 0.13006 Emission Factors Collection Efficiency Destruction Efficiency Oxidation CO2 CH4 Total LFG Collect & Combust 0.75 0.98 0.1 0.229 0.011 0.467 Waste Generation Provided by The Honda Center 1.5 tons of garbage per event 0.5 tons of recycling per event Email Correspondence (June 2011): The Honda Center Kevin Starkey, Vice President of Operations The Honda Center Dion Beckton, Senior Building Engineer Waste Recycling Events Future Events per year 240 360 120 Existing Events per year 180 270 90 additional events 60 2011 GHG Emissions from Waste Generation (Biogenic) MTons Average Annual 126 Tons/Year Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User's Guide. Appendix D, Default Data Tables. Table 10.2 Support for Solid Waste Emission Factors ---PAGE BREAK--- SCAQMD LOCAL RULES AND REGULATIONS In addition to federal and state requirements, new construction and operation in the SoCAB are governed by the rules and regulations of SCAQMD. SCAQMD Rule 201: Permit to Construct SCAQMD requires developers who build, erect, install, alter, or replace any equipment or agricultural permit unit, the use of which may cause the issuance of air contaminants or the use of which may eliminate, reduce, or control the issuance of air contaminants, to obtain a permit to construct from the Executive Officer. A permit to construct shall remain in effect until the permit to operate the equipment or agricultural permit unit for which the application was filed is granted or denied, or the application is canceled. SCAQMD Rule 402: Nuisance Odors SCAQMD prohibits quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property to be emitted within the SoCAB. SCAQMD Rule 1403: Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities The purpose of this rule is to specify work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos-containing materials. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, removal procedures, and time schedules; handling and cleanup procedures; and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos-containing waste materials. All operators are required to maintain records, including waste shipment records, and are required to use appropriate warning labels, signs, and markings. SCAQMD Rule 403: Fugitive Dust According to SCAQMD, no person shall cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area such that: a) the dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source; or b) the dust emission exceeds 20 percent opacity (as determined by the appropriate test method included in the Rule 403 Implementation Handbook), if the dust emission is the result of movement of a motorized vehicle. No person shall conduct active operations without utilizing the applicable best available control measures shown in Table 1 to minimize fugitive dust emissions from each fugitive dust source type within the active operation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Backfilling 01-1 Stabilize backfill material when not actively handling; and 01-2 Stabilize backfill material during handling; and 01-3 Stabilize soil at completion of activity. Mix backfill soil with water prior to moving. Dedicate water truck or high capacity hose to backfilling equipment. Empty loader bucket slowly so that no dust plumes are generated. Minimize drop height from loader bucket. Clearing and grubbing 02-1 Maintain stability of soil through pre-watering of site prior to clearing and grubbing; and 02-2 Stabilize soil during clearing and grubbing activities; and 02-3 Stabilize soil immediately after clearing and grubbing activities. Maintain live perennial vegetation where possible. Apply water in sufficient quantity to prevent generation of dust plumes. Clearing forms 03-1 Use water spray to clear forms; or 03-2 Use sweeping and water spray to clear forms; or 03-3 Use vacuum system to clear forms. Use of high-pressure air to clear forms may cause exceedance of Rule requirements. Crushing 04-1 Stabilize surface soils prior to operation of support equipment; and 04-2 Stabilize material after crushing. Follow permit conditions for crushing equipment. Prewater material prior to loading into crusher. Monitor crusher emissions opacity. Apply water to crushed material to prevent dust plumes. Cut and fill 05-1 Prewater soils prior to cut and fill activities; and 05-2 Stabilize soil during and after cut and fill activities. For large site, prewater with sprinklers or water trucks and allow time for penetration. Use water trucks/pull to water soils to depth of cut prior to subsequent cuts. Demolition – mechanical/ manual 06-1 Stabilize wind erodible surfaces to reduce dust; and 06-2 Stabilize surface soil where support equipment and vehicles will operate; and 06-3 Stabilize loose soil and demolition debris; and 06-4 Comply with AQMD Rule 1403. Apply water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. Disturbed Soil 07-1 Stabilize disturbed soil throughout the construction site; and 07-2 Stabilize disturbed soil between structures. Limit vehicular traffic and disturbances on soils where possible. If interior block walls are planned, install as early as possible. Apply water or a stabilizing agent in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. Earth-moving activities 08-1 Preapply water to depth of proposed cuts; and 08-2 Reapply water as necessary to maintain soils in a damp condition and to ensure that visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction; and 08-3 Stabilize soils once earth-moving activities are complete Grade each project phase separately, times to coincide with construction phase. Upwind fencing can prevent material movement on site. Apply water or a stabilizing agent in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Importing/ exporting of bulk materials 09-1 Stabilize material while loading to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-2 Maintain at least six inches of freeboard on haul vehicles; and 09-3 Stabilize material while transporting to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-4 Stabilize material while unloading to reduce fugitive dust emissions; and 09-5 Comply with Vehicle Code Section 23114. Use tarps or other suitable enclosures on haul trucks. Check belly-dump truck seals regularly and remove and trapped rocks to prevent spillage. Comply with track-out prevention/ mitigation requirements. Provide water while loading and unloading to reduce visible dust plumes. Landscaping 10-1 Stabilize soils, materials, slopes. Apply water to materials to stabilize. Maintain materials in a crusted condition. Maintain effective cover over materials. Stabilize sloping surfaces using soil binders until vegetation or ground cover can effectively stabilize the slopes. Hydroseed prior to rain season. Road shoulder maintenance 11-1 Apply water to unpaved shoulders prior to clearing; and 11-2 Apply chemical dust suppressants and/or washed gravel to maintain a stabilized surface after completing road shoulder maintenance. Installation of curbing and/or paving road shoulders can reduce recurring maintenance costs. Use of chemical dust suppressants can inhibit vegetation growth and reduce future road shoulder maintenance costs. Screening 12-1 Prewater material prior to screening; and 12-2 Limit fugitive dust emissions to opacity and plum length standards; and 12-3 Stabilize material immediately after screening. Dedicate water truck or high capacity hose to screening operation. Drop material through the screen slowly and minimize drop height. Install wind barrier with a porosity of no more than 50% upwind of screen to the height of the drop point. Staging areas 13-1 Stabilize staging areas during use; and 13-2 Stabilize staging area soils at project completion. Limit size of staging area. Limit vehicle speeds of 15 miles per hour Limit number and size of staging area entrances/exits. Stockpiles/ bulk material handling 14-1 Stabilize stockpiled materials. 14-2 Stockpiles within 100 yards of off-site occupied buildings must not be greater than eight feet in height; or must have a road bladed to the top to allow water truck access or must have an operational water irrigation system that is capable of complete stockpile coverage. Add or remove material from the downwind portion of the storage pile. Maintain storage piles to avoid steep sides or faces. Traffic areas for construction sites 15-1 Stabilize all off-road traffic and parking areas; and 15-2 Stabilize all haul routes; and 15-3 Direct construction traffic over established haul routes. Apply gravel/paving to all haul routes as soon as possible to all future roadway areas. Barriers can be used to ensure vehicles are only used on established parking areas/haul routes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Best Available Control Measures (Applicable to All Construction Activity Sources) Source Category Control Measure Guidance Trenching 16-1 Stabilize surface soils where trencher or excavator and support equipment will operate; and 16-2 Stabilize soils at the completion of trenching activities. Pre-watering of soils prior to trenching is an effective preventive measure. For deep trenching activities, pre-trench to 18-inches soak soils via the pre- trench and resuming trenching. Washing mud and soils from equipment at the conclusion of trenching activities can prevent crusting and drying of soil on equipment. Truck loading 17-1 Prewater material prior to loading; and 17-2 Ensure that freeboard exceeds six inches (CVC 23114). Empty loader bucket such that no visible dust plumes are created. Ensure that the loader bucket is closer to the truck to minimize drop height while loading. Turf overseeding 18-1 Apply sufficient water immediately prior to conducting turf vacuuming activities to meet opacity and plum length standards; and 18-2 Cover haul vehicles prior to exiting the site. Haul waste material immediately off-site. Unpaved roads/ parking lots 19-1 Stabilize soils to meet the applicable performance standards; and 19-2 Limit vehicular travel to established unpaved roads (haul routes) and unpaved parking lots. Restricting vehicular access to established unpaved travel path and parking lots can reduce stabilization requirements. Vacant land 20-1 In instances where vacant lots are 0.10 acre or larger and have a cumulative area of 500 square feet or more that are driven over and/or used by motor vehicles and/or off-road vehicles, prevent motor vehicles and/or off-road vehicle trespassing, parking and/or access by installing barriers curbs, fences, gates, posts, signs, shrubs, trees, or other effective control measures. Source: SCAQMD 2007. Additional Requirements for Large Operations Large operations are defined as project sites that are 50 acres or more or have earth-moving operations of 5,000 cubic yards or more per day three times in the most recent 365-day period. Any person who conducts or authorizes the conducting of a large operation subject to Rule 403 shall implement the applicable actions specified in Table 2 at all times and shall implement the applicable control measures specified in Table 3 when the applicable performance standards cannot be met through use of Table 2 actions. Due to the scale of grading activities associated with the proposed project, it is anticipated that grading activities would be subject to those measures listed in Tables 2 and 3. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 Fugitive Dust Control Measures for Large Operations Fugitive Dust Source Category Control Actions Earth-moving (except construction cutting and filling area, and mining operations) 1a Maintain soil moisture content at a minimum of 12 percent, as determined by ASTM method D-2216, or equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer, CARB, and the USEPA. Two soil moisture evaluations must be conducted during the first three hours or active operations during a calendar day, and two such evaluations each subsequent four-hour period of active operations; or 1a-1 For any earth-moving which is more than 100 feet from all property lines, conduct watering as necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in length in any direction. Earth-moving: Construction fill areas 1b Maintain soil moisture content at a minimum of 12 percent, as determined by ASTM method D-2216, or other equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer, the California Air Resources Board, and the U.S. EPA. For areas which have an optimum moisture content for compaction of less than 12 percent, as determined by ASTM Method 1557 or other equivalent method approved by the Executive Officer and the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. EPA, complete the compaction process as expeditiously as possible after achieving at least 70 percent of the optimum soil moisture content. Two soil moisture evaluations must be conducted during the first three hours of active operations during a calendar day, and two such evaluations during each subsequent four hour period of active operations. Earth-moving: Construction cut areas and mining operations 1c Conduct watering as necessary to prevent visible emissions from extending more than 100 feet beyond the active cut or mining area unless the area is inaccessible to watering vehicles due to slope conditions or other safety factors. Disturbed surface areas (except completed grading areas) 2a/b Apply dust suppression in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface. Any areas which cannot be stabilized, as evidenced by wind-driven fugitive dust, must have an application of water at least twice per day to at least 80 percent of the unstabilized area. Disturbed surface areas: Completed grading areas 2c Apply chemical stabilizers within five working days of grading completion; or 2d Take actions (3a) or (3c) specified for inactive disturbed surface areas. Inactive disturbed surface areas 3a Apply water to at least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind driven fugitive dust, excluding any areas which are inaccessible to watering vehicles due to excessive slope or other safety conditions; or 3b Apply dust suppressants in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface; or 3c Establish a vegetative ground cover within 21 days after active operations have ceased. Ground cover must be of sufficient density to expose less than 30 percent of unstabilized ground within 90 days of planting, and at all times thereafter; or 3d Utilize any combination of control actions (3a), (3b), and (3c) such that, in total, these actions apply to all inactive disturbed surface areas. Unpaved Roads 4a Water all roads used for any vehicular traffic at least once per every two hours of active operations [3 times per normal 8 hour work day]; or 4b Water all roads used for any vehicular traffic once daily and restrict vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour; or 4c Apply a chemical stabilizer to all unpaved road surfaces in sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface. Open storage piles 5a Apply chemical stabilizers; or 5b Apply water to at least 80 percent of the surface area of all open storage piles on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind driven fugitive dust; or 5c Install temporary coverings; or 5d Install a three-sided enclosure with walls with no more than 50 percent porosity which extend, at a minimum, to the top of the pile. This option may only be used at aggregate-related plants or at cement manufacturing facilities. All Categories 6a Any other control measures approved by the Executive Officer and the USEPA as equivalent to the methods specified in this Table may be used. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 Fugitive Dust Contingency Control Measures for Large Operations Fugitive Dust Source Category Control Measures Earth-moving 1A Cease all active operations; or 2A Apply water to soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving such soil. Disturbed surface areas 0B On the last day of active operations prior to a weekend, holiday, or any other period when active operations will not occur for not more than four consecutive days: apply water with a mixture of chemical stabilizer diluted to not less than 1/20 of the concentration required to maintain a stabilized surface for a period of six months; or 1B Apply chemical stabilizers prior to wind event; or 2B Apply water to all unstabilized disturbed areas 3 times per day. If there is any evidence of wind-driven fugitive dust, watering frequency is increased to a minimum of four times per day; or 3B Take the actions specified in this Table, Item (3c); or 4B Utilize any combination of control actions (1B), (2B), and (3B) such that, in total, these actions apply to all disturbed surface areas. Unpaved roads 1C Apply chemical stabilizers prior to wind event; or 2C Apply water twice per hour during active operation; or 3C Stop all vehicular traffic. Open storage piles 1D Apply water twice per hour; or 2D Install temporary coverings. Paved road track-out 1E Cover all haul vehicles; or 2E Comply with the vehicle freeboard requirements of Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code for both public and private roads. All Categories 1F Any other control measures approved by the Executive Officer and the USEPA as equivalent to the methods specified in this Table may be used. Source: SCAQMD 2007. ---PAGE BREAK--- SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record General Climate Summary - Temperature Table updated on Mar 24, 2011 For and annual means, thresholds, and sums: Months with 5 or more missing days are not considered Years with 1 or more missing months are not considered Seasons are climatological not calendar seasons Station:(047888) SANTA ANA FIRE STN From Year=1906 To Year=2010 Averages Daily Extremes Extremes Max. Temp. Max. Min. Mean High Date Low Date Highest Mean Year Lowest Mean Year 90 F 32 F F F F dd/yyyy or F dd/yyyy or F - F - # Days # Day January 68.0 43.0 55.7 96 31/2003 22 01/1919 64.2 2003 45.0 1949 0.1 0 February 68.9 44.9 56.9 95 20/1995 25 14/1949 63.5 1995 48.8 1949 0.2 0 March 70.6 46.6 58.6 98 25/1988 29 02/1939 65.8 2004 51.8 1952 0.4 0 April 73.0 49.9 61.5 104 05/1989 31 11/1953 67.9 1992 55.1 1967 1.0 0 May 75.2 53.9 64.6 105 03/2004 35 04/1950 71.4 1997 58.9 1917 1.3 0 June 78.6 57.4 68.0 112 14/1917 39 08/1950 74.1 1981 63.7 1952 1.3 0 July 83.5 60.8 72.2 110 01/1985 39 05/1923 80.0 2006 67.0 1918 4.1 0 August 84.7 61.6 73.1 105 10/1935 45 17/1918 77.6 1983 67.4 1918 5.5 0 September 83.9 59.2 71.5 111 21/1939 40 09/1917 80.0 1984 65.7 1933 6.2 0 October 79.4 54.5 66.9 106 16/1958 34 12/1924 72.4 2008 58.9 1920 3.5 0 November 74.2 47.4 60.8 101 01/1966 24 28/1919 67.8 2008 55.0 1919 1.0 0 December 68.8 43.6 56.2 95 03/1958 22 31/1918 61.0 1977 50.5 1918 0.1 0 Annual 75.7 51.9 63.8 112 19170614 22 19181231 67.2 1997 60.7 1949 24.7 0 Winter 68.6 43.8 56.3 96 20030131 22 19181231 60.7 1986 50.9 1917 0.4 0 Spring 72.9 50.2 61.6 105 20040503 29 19390302 67.1 2004 57.2 1922 2.7 0 Summer 82.3 59.9 71.1 112 19170614 39 19230705 76.2 2006 67.1 1918 10.9 0 Fall 79.2 53.7 66.4 111 19390921 24 19191128 71.5 2008 60.2 1920 10.7 0 Winter = Dec., Jan., and Feb. Spring = Mar., Apr., and May Summer = Jun., Jul., and Aug. Fall = Sep., Oct., and Nov. Page 1 of 2 SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record General Climate Summary - 6/30/2011 ---PAGE BREAK--- SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA (047888) Period of Record Climate Summary Period of Record : 4/ 1/1906 to 12/31/2010 Percent of possible observations for period of record. Max. Temp.: 97.9% Min. Temp.: 97.6% Precipitation: 99.6% Snowfall: 99.6% Snow Depth: 99.6% Check Station Metadata or Metadata graphics for more detail about data completeness. Western Regional Climate Center, [EMAIL REDACTED] Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average Max. Temperature 68.0 68.9 70.6 73.0 75.2 78.6 83.5 84.7 83.9 79.4 74.2 68.8 75.7 Average Min. Temperature 43.0 44.9 46.6 49.9 53.9 57.4 60.8 61.6 59.2 54.5 47.4 43.6 51.9 Average Total Precipitation (in.) 2.76 3.09 2.23 1.04 0.25 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.23 0.48 1.27 2.30 13.79 Average Total SnowFall (in.) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Average Snow Depth (in.) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 1 of 1 SANTA ANA FIRE STN, CALIFORNIA Period of Record Climate Summary 7/6/2011 http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliRECtM.pl?ca7888 ---PAGE BREAK--- DATE September 2011 TO CONTACT FROM Nicole Vermilion, Senior Planner SUBJECT The Honda Center PROJECT NO. COA-56.0E Construction Emissions Construction activities generate criteria air pollutant emissions from use of off-road construction equipment, on- road vehicles associated with construction employees and material deliveries, fugitive dust generated during grading, and off-gas emissions during application of architectural coatings and paving. Construction emissions associated with the proposed project would occur during construction of the 12,000 square foot exterior grand terrace. Interior renovations would not require use of large off-road construction equipment and therefore are not included in the modeling below. Construction phasing and equipment was provided by The Honda Center and modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2011.1.1. As shown in the following tables, construction activities would not result in emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regional (Table 1) or localized (Table 2) significance thresholds. No significant impacts would occur. Table 1 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions SOURCE POLLUTANTS (LB/DAY) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 20 12 9 <1 2 1 SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod Version 2011.1.1. Equipment list and phasing provided by the Honda Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- September 2011 Page 2 Table 2 Localized Offsite Construction Emissions SOURCE POLLUTANTS (LB/DAY) NO2 1 CO PM10 PM2.5 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 8 8 1 1 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold 103 1,313 161 87 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Source: CalEEMod Version 2011.1.1. SCAQMD 2003, and SCAQMD 2006: Equipment list and phasing provided by the Honda Center. Based on LSTs for a project site in SRA 17 for a 1-acre site with sensitive receptors located at a distance of 1,675 feet for PM10 and PM2.5 and non-receptors at 390 feet for NOx and CO. Only onsite air pollutant emissions as per SCAQMD guidance. 1 The two principle NOx species are NO and NO2 with the vast majority (95 percent) of NOx emissions being NO. Adverse health effects are associated with NO2 and not NO. ---PAGE BREAK--- Attachment – Construction Modeling Files ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 12 1000sqft 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) Climate Zone 8 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 1.3 User Entered Comments 30 Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction model run includes exterior construction only = 12,000 sqft exterior grand terrace Construction Phase - Construction Schedule provided by the Honda Center Off-road Equipment - Construction equipment provided by the Honda Center. CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007 Grading - Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Vehicle Trips - Construction only Water And Wastewater - Construction only Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Solid Waste - construction only Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rule 403 2.0 Emissions Summary PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 19.56 12.06 8.58 0.01 0.65 0.95 1.52 0.01 0.95 0.95 0.00 1,339.26 0.00 0.16 0.00 1,342.67 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total NA NA PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 19.56 12.06 8.58 0.01 0.35 0.95 1.22 0.01 0.95 0.95 0.00 1,339.26 0.00 0.16 0.00 1,342.67 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads 3.2 1Grading - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.53 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 1,158.93 0.15 1,162.19 Total 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.53 0.87 1.40 0.00 1,162.19 0.87 0.87 1,158.93 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.15 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 99.62 Total 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 99.62 0.00 0.01 99.50 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.01 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.00 1,158.93 0.15 1,162.19 Total 1.73 11.45 7.62 0.15 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,158.93 0.01 0.23 0.87 1.10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 1,162.19 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 99.62 Total 0.05 0.05 0.58 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 99.62 0.00 0.01 99.50 0.01 2 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.3 2Trenching - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 895.84 0.09 897.74 Total 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 897.74 0.45 0.45 895.84 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.09 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 Total 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.00 895.84 0.09 897.74 Total 1.01 7.58 5.31 0.01 0.45 0.45 897.74 0.45 0.45 0.00 895.84 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.09 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 Total 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 3 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.4 3Paving - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 680.84 0.09 682.63 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.09 0.46 0.46 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 680.84 0.01 0.46 0.46 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 682.63 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 186.79 Total 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 186.79 0.01 0.02 186.56 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.00 680.84 0.09 682.63 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.95 6.37 4.33 0.09 0.46 0.46 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 680.84 0.01 0.46 0.46 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 682.63 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 186.79 Total 0.09 0.10 1.09 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 186.79 0.01 0.02 186.56 0.01 4 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.5 4Concrete - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1,223.40 0.16 1,226.69 Total 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 1,226.69 0.94 0.94 1,223.40 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.16 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 1,223.40 0.16 1,226.69 Total 1.75 11.69 7.99 0.01 0.94 0.94 1,226.69 0.94 0.94 0.00 1,223.40 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.16 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 5 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.6 5Structural - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 525.83 0.05 526.85 Total 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 526.85 0.21 0.21 525.83 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.05 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 525.83 0.05 526.85 Total 0.54 4.73 2.15 0.01 0.21 0.21 526.85 0.21 0.21 0.00 525.83 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.05 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 6 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.7 6Framing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 500.19 0.12 502.77 Total 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 502.77 0.38 0.38 500.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.12 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 500.19 0.12 502.77 Total 1.36 4.64 4.33 0.01 0.38 0.38 502.77 0.38 0.38 0.00 500.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.12 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 7 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.8 7Architectural Coating & Plaster - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 18.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.03 6.68 4.37 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 673.33 0.09 675.27 Total 19.55 6.68 4.37 0.09 0.53 0.53 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 673.33 0.01 0.53 0.53 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 675.27 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 12.45 Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 12.45 0.00 0.00 12.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 18.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 1.03 6.68 4.37 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.00 673.33 0.09 675.27 Total 19.55 6.68 4.37 0.09 0.53 0.53 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 673.33 0.01 0.53 0.53 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 675.27 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 12.45 Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 12.45 0.00 0.00 12.44 0.00 8 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Summer Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.9 8Roofing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 821.44 0.10 823.64 Total 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 823.64 0.54 0.54 821.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 115.97 0.01 0.02 115.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.00 821.44 0.10 823.64 Total 1.17 8.47 4.32 0.01 0.54 0.54 823.64 0.54 0.54 0.00 821.44 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.03 0.34 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.68 0.00 53.71 Worker 0.03 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 62.19 0.00 62.26 Total 0.06 0.37 0.58 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.02 115.87 0.00 115.97 9 of 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 August/September 2010 Workshop Series September 3, 2010 Workshops on Information Regarding the Off-Road, Truck and Bus and Drayage Truck Regulations California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Air Resources Board ---PAGE BREAK--- 50 Load Factor  Load varies by equipment type and usage  Collected engine load data from ARB testing programs and manufacturer provided data  Analysis indicates that OFFROAD load factors are 25-50% too high  Staff concluded load factors should be reduced 33% for the updated inventory  Consistent with findings for other off-road equipment. Off-Road Rule Inventory ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Modifications to Construction Defaults - Load Factors CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Default Equipment Mix PhaseName OffRoadEquip mentUnitAmo unt UsageHours HorsePower LoadFactor Modified Load Factor 1Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8 81 0.73 0.49 1Grading Crawler Tractors 1 8 82 0.64 0.43 1Grading Excavators 1 8 157 0.57 0.38 1Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 1 358 0.59 0.40 1Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6 75 0.55 0.37 2Trenching Excavators 1 8 157 0.57 0.38 2Trenching Forklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 3Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6 9 0.56 0.38 3Paving Forklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 3Paving Pavers 0 7 89 0.62 0.42 3Paving Rollers 1 7 84 0.56 0.38 3Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 7 75 0.55 0.37 4Concrete Cranes 0 4 208 0.43 0.29 4Concrete Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 4Concrete Plate Compactors 1 8 8 0.43 0.29 4Concrete Pumps 1 8 84 0.74 0.50 4Concrete Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 75 0.55 0.37 5Structural Cranes 1 4 208 0.43 0.29 5Structural Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 5Structural Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 6Framing Cranes 0 4 208 0.43 0.29 6Framing Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 6Framing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 6Framing Welders 2 8 46 0.45 0.30 7Architectural Coating & PlastAir Compressors 2 6 78 0.48 0.32 7Architectural Coating & PlastForklifts 1 8 149 0.3 0.20 8Roofing Cranes 1 4 208 0.43 0.29 8Roofing Forklifts 1 6 149 0.3 0.20 8Roofing Paving Equipment 1 8 82 0.53 0.36 8Roofing Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 75 0.55 0.37 Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2010, September. Workshops on Information Regarding the Off-Road, Truck and Bus, Drayage Truck Regulations. ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 12 1000sqft 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) Climate Zone 8 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 1.3 User Entered Comments 30 Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction model run includes exterior construction only = 12,000 sqft exterior grand terrace Construction Phase - Construction Schedule provided by the Honda Center Off-road Equipment - Construction equipment provided by the Honda Center. CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007 Grading - Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Off-road Equipment - CARB Staff concluded that load factors in OFFROAD are 33% too high. CalEEMod based on OFFROAD2007. Vehicle Trips - Construction only Water And Wastewater - Construction only Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Solid Waste - construction only Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rule 403 2.0 Emissions Summary PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 0.00 60.35 Total 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 60.35 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 60.19 0.01 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2012 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 0.00 60.35 Total 0.23 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 60.35 0.04 0.04 0.00 60.19 60.19 0.01 1 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads 3.2 1Grading - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 7.88 0.00 0.00 7.91 Total 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 7.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 7.88 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.65 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.09 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 7.88 7.88 0.00 0.00 7.91 Total 0.01 0.09 0.06 7.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 7.88 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 7.91 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.00 2 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.3 2Trenching - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 8.12 0.00 0.00 8.14 Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 8.12 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.01 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 8.12 0.00 0.00 8.14 Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.12 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 8.12 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 3 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.4 3Paving - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.09 3.09 0.00 0.00 3.10 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 3.10 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.81 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.09 3.09 0.00 0.00 3.10 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 3.10 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 4 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.5 4Concrete - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 13.87 0.00 0.00 13.91 Total 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 13.87 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.28 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 13.87 0.00 0.00 13.91 Total 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.91 0.01 0.01 0.00 13.87 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 13.87 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 5 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.6 5Structural - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 5.96 0.00 0.00 5.97 Total 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 5.96 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.28 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 5.96 0.00 0.00 5.97 Total 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 5.96 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.61 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 6 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.7 6Framing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 6.80 0.00 0.00 6.84 Total 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.84 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 6.80 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.73 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 1.54 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 6.80 0.00 0.00 6.84 Total 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.84 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.80 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 6.80 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.73 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81 Total 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 7 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.8 7Architectural Coating & Plaster - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.58 4.58 0.00 0.00 4.59 Total 0.15 0.05 0.03 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.59 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.08 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Archit. Coating 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-Road 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.58 4.58 0.00 0.00 4.59 Total 0.15 0.05 0.03 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.59 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10 Total Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 8 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 9/26/2011 HondaCenterConstruction Orange County, Annual Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.9 8Roofing - 2012 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 3.72 0.00 0.00 3.73 Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 3.72 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 0.51 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 3.72 0.00 0.00 3.73 Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 3.72 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.24 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.27 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.51 9 of 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- GHG Summary MTons/Year Total Construction 60 Amortized Construction Emissions 2 Total construction emissions are amortized over 30 years pursuant to draft SCAQMD methodology. ---PAGE BREAK--- LST Worksheet Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Fugitive Dust 0.23 0 Off-Road 11.45 7.62 0.87 0.87 Total 11.45 7.62 1.1 0.87 Trenching NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 7.58 5.31 0.45 0.45 Total 7.58 5.31 0.45 0.45 Paving NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 6.37 4.33 0.46 0.46 Paving 0 0 Total 6.37 4.33 0.46 0.46 Concrete NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 11.69 7.99 0.94 0.94 Total 11.69 7.99 0.94 0.94 Structural NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 4.73 2.15 0.21 0.21 Total 4.73 2.15 0.21 0.21 Framing NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 4.64 4.33 0.38 0.38 Total 4.64 4.33 0.38 0.38 Coating & Plaster NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Archit. Coating 0 0 Off-Road 6.68 4.37 0.53 0.53 Total 6.7 4.37 0.53 0.53 Roofing NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Category Off-Road 8.47 4.32 0.54 0.54 Total 8.47 4.32 0.54 0.54 Maximum 11.69 7.99 1.1 0.94 NOx to NO2 conversion 2.4 LST Threshold 103 1,313 161.4 87.2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Construction Localized Significance Thresholds - Non-Sensitive Land Uses SRA No. Acres Source Receptor Distance (meters) Source Receptor Distance (Feet) 17 1.00 119 390 Source Receptor Central Orange County Equipment Acres/8-hr Day Equipment Used Acres Distance (meters) 119 Tractors 0.5 2 1 NOx 103 Graders 0.5 0 0 CO 1313 Dozers 0.5 0 0 PM10 34.0 Scrapers 1 0 PM2.5 11.5 Acres 1 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 1 81 83 98 123 192 1 81 83 98 123 192 81 83 98 123 192 CO 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 1 4 12 28 60 158 1 4 12 28 60 158 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 1 3 4 9 22 85 1 3 4 9 22 85 3 4 9 22 85 Central Orange County 1.00 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 81 83 98 123 192 CO [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 3 4 9 22 85 Acre Below Acre Above SRA No. Acres SRA No. Acres 17 1 17 1 Distance Increment Below 100 Distance Increment Above 200 Updated: 10/21/2009 - Table C-1. 2006 – 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- NOx to NO2 Conversion Table 2-4: NO2-to-NOx Ratios as a Function of Downwind Distance Downwind Distance (Meters) NO2/NOx Ratio 20 0.053 50 0.059 70 0.064 100 0.074 200 0.114 500 0.258 1000 0.467 2000 0.75 3000 0.9 4000 0.978 5000 1 Interpolated for within 25 Meters: 390 0.2052 Source: SCAQMD 2003. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2003, June (Revised July 2008). Final Localized Significance Methodology. The two principle NOx species are NO and NO2 with the vast majority (95 percent) of NOx emissions being NO. Adverse health effects are associated with NO2 and not NO. ---PAGE BREAK--- Construction Localized Significance Thresholds - Sensitive Land Uses SRA No. Acres Source Receptor Distance (meters) Source Receptor Distance (Feet) 17 1.00 511 1675 Source Receptor Central Orange County Equipment Acres/8-hr Day Equipment Used Acres Distance (meters) 511 Tractors 0.5 2 1 NOx 194 Graders 0.5 0 0 CO 7007 Dozers 0.5 0 0 PM10 161.4 Scrapers 1 0 PM2.5 87.2 Acres 1 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 1 81 83 98 123 192 1 81 83 98 123 192 81 83 98 123 192 CO 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 1 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 1 4 12 28 60 158 1 4 12 28 60 158 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 1 3 4 9 22 85 1 3 4 9 22 85 3 4 9 22 85 Central Orange County 1.00 Acres 25 50 100 200 500 NOx 81 83 98 123 192 CO [PHONE REDACTED] 2109 6841 PM10 4 12 28 60 158 PM2.5 3 4 9 22 85 Acre Below Acre Above SRA No. Acres SRA No. Acres 17 1 17 1 Distance Increment Below 500 Distance Increment Above 500 Updated: 10/21/2009 - Table C-1. 2006 – 2008