Greenhouse Gas Emissions · PDF filein the City of Santa Maria in order to manufacture and...

Appendix E Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment

City of Santa Maria

Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment March 2013

E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s

March 19, 2013 Rincon Project No. 12-00692 Thomas Reay Vice President, Director of Architecture Omni Design Group, Inc. 711 Tank Farm Road, Suite 100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project

Santa Maria, California Dear Mr. Reay: Rincon Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit the attached Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the proposed Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project in Santa Maria, California. Emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O were calculated for the proposed project and converted to carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2E). The calculations show that emissions of GHGs would be below the 10,000 metric tons CO2E/year threshold for stationary sources. In addition, the project includes closing the existing J.C. Carter testing facility in Santa Ana. The existing facility vents any methane gas that is generated during operations, and does not flare these methane emissions. Therefore, after accounting for the emissions from the existing testing facility that would be removed as part of the proposed project, the project would result in a overall reduction in statewide GHG emissions. As such, impacts resulting from the proposed project’s GHG emissions would be less than significant.

If you have any questions regarding this study or if we can provide you with other consulting services, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. Chris Bersbach, MESM Richard Daulton, MURP Environmental Planner Principal

Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment

Prepared for:

Omni Design Group, Inc. 711 Tank Farm Road, Suite 100

San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Prepared with the assistance of:

Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D

San Luis Obispo, California 93401

March 2013

This report is printed on 50% recycled paper.

Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment

Omni Design Group, Inc. i


Table of Contents

Page Cover Letter Project Description ................................................................................................................................ 1 Federal, State, and Local Regulations and Standards ...................................................................... 3 Methodology and Emissions Calculations ........................................................................................ 5 Impact Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 7 References ............................................................................................................................................. 11 List of Tables Table 1 SLOAPCD GHG Significance Determination Guidelines ............................... 7 Table 2 Estimated Construction GHG Emissions .......................................................... 7 Table 3 Estimated Operational GHG Emissions ............................................................ 8 Table 4 Combined Annual GHG Emissions ................................................................... 8 Table 5 Emissions from Existing JC Carter Facility (to be closed) ............................... 9 Appendices Appendix: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations


Omni Design Group, Inc. ii

This page intentionally left blank.


Omni Design Group, Inc.

1

ATLAS COPCO MAFI-TRENCH PROJECT SANTA MARIA, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project would consolidate two existing facilities at a new location in the City of Santa Maria in order to manufacture and test hydrocarbon expander-compressors used in natural gas refineries and large cryogenic pumps used in applications across the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) value chain in the chemical/petrochemical stream. The existing Mafi-Trench facility is located in Santa Maria, and designs and manufactures hydrocarbon expander-compressors. The existing J.C. Carter testing operation is located in Santa Ana, and manufactures and tests large cryogenic pumps. The project would involve construction of a 193,200 square foot manufacturing facility; a 1.5-acre test stand facility; and a 47,200 square foot office building for administration, sales, and engineering. The project would be located at 1310 Black Road, approximately 3.6 miles west of U.S. Highway 101 in the City of Santa Maria. The project site is on the 20-acre eastern portion of a 56-acre parcel identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number 117-820-002, and is currently under agricultural production.

Proposed Facility Operations. The test stand facility would utilize LNG or Liquefied Propane Gas (LPG) in a cooled liquid state as the test medium for the pumps. The LNG or LPG would be pumped by the pump being tested in a closed loop system at various flows, pressures and temperatures depending on the specific test parameters. In order to maintain desired system temperatures, Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) would also be utilized on site. Additional emissions would be generated from the use of solvents, paints, and sandblasting in the manufacturing process; however these operational components would not result in greenhouse gas emissions. APCD permits would be required for a number of project components. Sources of equipment/process emissions associated with the normal facility operations would include the following:

Unrecovered Process Vapor. During tests a portion of the test medium would transition from a liquid to a vapor state, and a vapor recovery system would be installed to capture this vapor, re-condense it, and return the liquid to the storage tanks. However, based upon industry research, it is anticipated that approximately 5% of the LNG used in each test would not be captured and would need to be combusted by the flare. The project proposal assumes a pump test schedule of approximately 100 tests per year. Based on the anticipated losses per test, the unrecovered methane vapor sent to the flare is estimated at 20,500 lb per year. Due to the relatively infrequent use of LPG for testing, all LPG test fluids would be flared. The amount of the LPG flared each year is estimated to be 15,000 gallons (72,600 lb).

Flare Pilot. The flare would have a pilot system that would utilize a small continuous supply of natural gas. The flare pilot system would consume approximately 50 standard cubic feet per hour (SCFH) (438,000 cubic feet) of natural gas per year. The flare would also act as a method to safely relieve and combust any vapors or liquids that result from a loss of power,



2

fire, or other process emergency. However, for the purposes of this analysis, normal (non-emergency) facility operations are evaluated.

Storage Tank Boil-Off. Industry-accepted boil off rate for a 15,000 gallon LNG cryogenic storage tank is 15 gallons per day. Over the course of a year, this would equate to approximately 20,500 lb/yr of methane that will be flared. Due to the low frequency of LPG pump tests, long time storage of LPG onsite is not planned, and boil off emissions of LPG are considered negligible.

Transportation of Materials. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that LNG, LPG, and LN2 would be delivered by distributors located in the Los Angeles area via truck. Although delivery could potentially occur via railcar, this assessment evaluates emissions from truck delivery trips as a reasonable worst-case scenario because truck trips would be expected to result in greater overall emissions than rail trips. Delivery trips for the supplies of LNG, LPG, and LN2 would be as follows:

LNG – Considering the proposed annual test schedule, associated consumption of LNG per test, and the delivery truck capacity, two truck deliveries per year are anticipated.

LPG – On average one LPG pump would be tested per year, requiring 1 truck delivery.

LN2 – Considering the large volume of LN2 required, deliveries are anticipated to be by truck. 500 truck deliveries would be anticipated per year.

Emergency Generator. On site emergency power would be included for critical loads.

Preliminary sizing of the emergency generator is 500 kVA. The emergency generators would need to be exercised every week for 30 minutes, once a month for an hour, and once a year for four hours. This would result in a total annual run time of approximately 42 hours per year.

Fire Water Pumps. The facility would have a complete fire protection system including fire water pumps to boost the pressure of the City’s water supply. Preliminary sizing of the fire protection system indicates that three 25 HP diesel driven firewater pumps would be required. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) requirements mandate that these diesel engines be exercised for 30 minutes per week, or a total of approximately 26 hours per year.

Fugitive Emissions. Fugitive emissions at flanges and other connections are assumed to occur only during a testing cycle, when the piping system would be filled with LNG/LPG and vapor. Fugitive emissions are estimated at 500 lb of methane to the atmosphere per year (i.e., fugitive emissions would not be flared).

Proposed Construction Schedule. The project would be developed in three phases:

1. Phase one would include construction of a 15,400 square foot assembly and warehouse building and a 3,867 square foot electrical equipment building. This phase would also include the construction of the test stand, liquefied gas storage tanks, utility infrastructure, and site improvements as necessitated by the initial construction. This phase would be limited to approximately four acres of the project site. The design of the building would be such that it would be incorporated into the phase two manufacturing building when completed.



3

2. Phase two would include constriction of a 133,200 square foot manufacturing facility

(including the initial 15,400 square foot building constructed in phase one) and a 37,175 square foot office building for administration, sales, and engineering. This phase would include the balance of the site improvements including low-impact development (LID) parking and circulation, landscaping, storm water retention, and additional utility infrastructure. All construction and site improvements are planned to be LEED certification eligible and to exceed the minimum requirements of the California Green Building Standards per the design requirements of Atlas Copco.

3. Phase three would include an additional 60,000 square foot of manufacturing area

and 25,000 square feet of office, and could potentially be added to the project as part of the final build out.

The project would begin construction no later than October 2013. Phase one would be complete and operational beginning September 2014 or earlier, and phase two would be complete in 2016. The approvals for phase three would be extended until 2020. Final total building size of all phases would be 259,242 square feet.

FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS

Federal Regulations. The U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule for mandatory reporting of GHG emissions in October 2009. This Final Rule applies to fossil fuel suppliers, industrial gas suppliers, direct GHG emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles and vehicle engines, and requires annual reporting of emissions. The first annual reports for these sources were due in March 2011. On May 13, 2010, the U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule that took effect on January 2, 2011, setting a threshold of 75,000 million tons (MT) CO2E per year for GHG emissions. New and existing industrial facilities that meet or exceed that threshold will require a permit after that date. On November 10, 2010, the U.S. EPA published the “PSD and Title V Permitting Guidance for Greenhouse Gases.” The U.S. EPA’s guidance document is directed at state agencies responsible for air pollution permits under the Federal Clean Air Act to help them understand how to implement GHG reduction requirements while mitigating costs for industry. It is expected that most states will use the U.S. EPA’s new guidelines when processing new air pollution permits for power plants, oil refineries, cement manufacturing, and other large pollution point sources. On January 2, 2011, the U.S. EPA implemented the first phase of the Tailoring Rule for GHG emissions Title V Permitting. Under the first phase of the Tailoring Rule, all new sources of emissions are subject to GHG Title V permitting if they are otherwise subject to Title V for another air pollutant and they emit at least 75,000 MT CO2E per year. Under Phase 1, no sources were required to obtain a Title V permit solely due to GHG emissions. Phase 2 of the Tailoring Rule went into effect July 1, 2011. At that time new sources were subject to GHG Title V permitting if the source emits 100,000 MT CO2E per year, or they are otherwise subject to Title V permitting for another pollutant and emit at least 75,000 MT CO2E per year.



4

California Regulations. In 2005, former Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, establishing statewide GHG emissions reduction targets. EO S-3-05 provides that by 2010, emissions shall be reduced to 2000 levels; by 2020, emissions shall be reduced to 1990 levels; and by 2050, emissions shall be reduced to 80 percent of 1990 levels (CalEPA, 2006). In response to EO S-3-05, CalEPA created the Climate Action Team (CAT), which in March 2006 published the Climate Action Team Report (the “2006 CAT Report”) (CalEPA, 2006). The 2006 CAT Report identified a recommended list of strategies that the state could pursue to reduce GHG emissions. These are strategies that could be implemented by various state agencies to ensure that the emission reduction targets in EO S-3-05 are met and can be met with existing authority of the state agencies. The strategies include the reduction of passenger and light duty truck emissions, the reduction of idling times for diesel trucks, an overhaul of shipping technology/infrastructure, increased use of alternative fuels, increased recycling, and landfill methane capture, etc. California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the Statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (essentially a 15% reduction below 2005 emission levels; the same requirement as under S-3-05), and requires ARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for reducing GHGs to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires ARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. After completing a comprehensive review and update process, the ARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG level and 2020 limit of 427 MMT CO2E. The Scoping Plan was approved by ARB on December 11, 2008, and includes measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among other measures. The Scoping Plan includes a range of GHG reduction actions that may include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms. ARB Resolution 07-54 establishes 25,000 metric tons of GHG emissions as the threshold for identifying the largest stationary emission sources in California for purposes of requiring the annual reporting of emissions. This threshold is just over 0.005 percent of California’s total inventory of GHG emissions for 2004. Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires analysis in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. In March 2010, the California Resources Agency (Resources Agency) adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts. For more information on the Senate and Assembly bills, Executive Orders, and reports discussed above, and to view reports and research referenced above, please refer to the following websites: www.climatechange.ca.gov and http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm.

California Environmental Quality Act. Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97, the Resources Agency has adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of

http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm



5

GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. As noted previously, the adopted CEQA Guidelines provide general regulatory guidance on the analysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents, while giving lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts. To date, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD), and the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) have adopted quantitative significance thresholds for GHGs. However, in March 2013 the Bay Area’s thresholds were overruled by the Alameda County Superior Court (California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District), on the basis that adoption of the thresholds constitutes a “project” under CEQA, but did not receive the appropriate environmental review. It is unclear whether BAAQMD will choose to appeal the decision or proceed with CEQA review of its thresholds.

METHODOLOGY AND EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS

Methodology. Calculations of CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO2, CH4, and N2O because these make up 98.9% of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by volume (IPCC, 2007) and are the GHG emissions that the project would emit in the largest quantities. Emissions of all GHGs are converted into their equivalent weight in CO2 (CO2E). Minimal amounts of other main GHGs (such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]) would be emitted, and these other GHG emissions would not substantially add to the total calculated CO2E amounts. Calculations are based on the methodologies discussed in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) CEQA and Climate Change white paper (January 2008) and included the use of the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) General Reporting Protocol (January 2009). GHG emissions from the project would result from construction activities, traffic generated by the proposed project and/or increased vehicle miles traveled, increases in on-site energy consumption, and point sources from proposed operational processes. Project construction would generate temporary GHG emissions while operational components of the project would generate long-term GHG emissions. The addition of GHGs to the region as a result of project construction, vehicle trips, electricity and natural gas use, water use, and solid waste generation was quantified using the California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) air emission calculation program (version 2011.1). The CalEEMod program accounts for fuel use associated with standard building operations, including boilers associated with regular heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) operation. The analysis of temporary construction impacts includes an estimate of GHG emissions associated with heavy construction equipment. Site preparation and grading typically generate the greatest amount of emissions due to the use of grading equipment and soil hauling. Construction emissions would be temporary; however, several air districts have recommended amortizing construction-related GHG emissions over a 30-year period in conjunction with the proposed project’s operational emissions. Vehicle use factors employed in the operational analysis were based on the project traffic study (Associated Transportation Engineers, February 2013). GHG emissions from truck transport of



6

project material were estimated using the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMission FACtors computer model (EMFAC2011). EMFAC2011 produces emissions factors for each mode of engine operation specific to various vehicle classes and emissions control technologies for a range of vehicle speeds. This analysis assumes that rail transport will not be used for material transport, and emissions from rail transport are not modeled; however, it should be noted that rail is generally a more efficient method of freight transportation on a per-pound basis; therefore, if rail were used for material transport, the resulting air pollutant emissions would be expected to be lower than estimated in this analysis. Additional emission factor data for equipment used for proposed operational process, including the proposed flare, emergency generators, and fire water pumps, were obtained from EPA AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors, Fifth Edition and any updates published on the EPA Technology Transfer Bulletin Board System. Since GHG emissions are a cumulative, global issue, emissions reductions that would result from closing the existing J.C. Carter testing facility in Santa Ana are compared to new emissions from the proposed facility. The existing facility vents methane gas that is generated during operations, which is substantial, and does not flare these methane emissions. According to operators, during a ‘typical’ test cycle, about 5,000 gallons of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is consumed (i.e., vaporized and vented to the atmosphere), which results in approximately 21,670 lb of methane gas being vented. When aggregated across approximately 80 tests per year, this would result in 1,733,600 lb/year of methane vented into the atmosphere. In addition, the existing LNG storage tanks are old and relatively inefficient. According to operators, they lose about 500 gallons per day in boil-off due to poor insulation, as compared to the proposed facility, which would feature newer tanks with an estimated daily boil-off of approximately 15 gallons per day. Over the course of a year, 500 gallons of boil-off per day would equate to approximately 683,333 lb/yr of methane vented into the atmosphere.

Significance Thresholds. Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, impacts associated with GHG emissions from the proposed project would be significant if the project would:

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

For future projects, the significance of GHG emissions may be evaluated based on whether projects are consistent with an adopted Climate Action Plan (or other GHG reduction plan). However, neither the City nor the SBCAPCD has developed or adopted permanent GHG significance thresholds. Until County-specific data becomes available and significance thresholds applicable to GHG emissions are developed and formally adopted, SBCAPCD currently recommends the use of the adopted San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) thresholds determining the significance of GHG emissions. The SLOAPCD thresholds are summarized in Table 1.



7

Table 1. SLOAPCD GHG Significance Determination Guidelines

GHG Emission Source Category Operational Emissions

Non-stationary Sources 1,100 MT of CO2E/year

OR 4.6 MT CO2E/SP/year (residents + employees)

Stationary Sources 10,000 MT/year

Plans 6.6 MT CO2E/SP/year (residents + employees)

Notes: SP = Service Population. Project emissions can be expressed on a per-capita basis as Metric tons of CO2E/Service Population/year, which represents the project’s total estimated annual GHG emissions divided by the estimated total number of new residents and employees that would result from development of a project. Neither BAAQMD nor Santa Barbara County includes any standards for construction-related emissions.

The proposed project is an industrial testing and manufacturing facility that would require operating permits from SBCAPCD for proposed equipment and processes. Therefore, the proposed project would have a potentially significant contribution to GHG emissions if it would result in greater than 10,000 metric tons of CO2E/year (MT CO2E/year).

IMPACT ANALYSIS

a. Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

An evaluation of both short-term and long-term GHG emissions is provided in the paragraphs below.

Short-Term Construction Impacts. Construction activity is assumed to occur over a period of approximately 4 years. As shown in Table 2, construction activity for the project would generate an estimated 1,882 metric tons of CO2E. Amortized over a 30-year period, construction of the proposed project would generate an estimated 62.7 metric tons of CO2E per year.

Table 2. Estimated Construction GHG Emissions (metric tons/year)

CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E

2013 (metric tons) 261.8 <0.1 <0.1 262.5

2014 (metric tons) 696.8 0.1 <0.1 698.3

2015 (metric tons) 455.3 <0.1 <0.1 456.2

2019 (metric tons) 464.7 <0.1 <0.1 465.3

Total (metric tons) 1,878.6 0.2 <0.1 1,882.2

Amortized over 30 years: 62.7

Long-Term Regional Impacts. The proposed facility would result in long-term

operational emissions of GHGs (CO2, CH4, and N2O) from proposed operations, which include building operation (e.g. energy and natural gas consumption), water use, and solid waste generation, employee vehicle trips, and on-site equipment operation. The CalEEMod program



8

estimated that the facility would consume approximately 2,345,177 kWH of electricity, 7,106,508 BTUs of natural gas, and 1,198 million gallons of water per year, and would general 2,632 tons of waste per year. These estimates are generally consistent with project-specific estimates provided by the project applicant based on the existing Santa Maria and Sana Ana facilities. The operational emissions calculations for project operation are available in the Appendix. Table 2 summarizes projected GHG emissions associated with operation of the project.

Table 3. Estimated Operational GHG Emissions (metric tons/year)

CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E

Phase I building operation 304.1 2.6 0.1 386.7

Phase I mobile 57.3 <0.1 <0.1 57.3

Phase II building operation 2,361.3 20.1 0.6 2,964.5

Phase II mobile 436.5 <0.1 <0.1 437.0

Phase III building operation 1,239.3 10.4 0.3 1,550.8

Phase III mobile 209.3 <0.1 <0.1 209.5

Flare and Pilot1 192.2 0.9 <0.1 211.8

Transportation of materials 150.8 150.8

Emergency generator 9.9 9.9

Fire water pumps 0.9 0.9

Fugitive Emissions 0.2 4.3

Total Annual Operational 4,961.6 34.2 1.0 5,983.6

1: "Flare" emissions include unrecovered methane vapor, LPG flaring, storage tank boil-off, and emissions from the flare pilot. Actual LPG flare emissions are likely to be lower than estimates shown b/c factors are for boiler versus a flare.

Combined GHG Emissions Total. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions,

during both construction and long-term operation. Table 4 combines the construction and operational GHG emissions associated with onsite development for the proposed project. Construction emissions associated with construction activity (approximately 1,882 metric tons CO2E) are amortized over 30 years (the anticipated life of the project). For the proposed project, the combined annual emissions would total approximately 6,046.4 metric tons per year of CO2E. Although development facilitated by proposed project would generate additional GHG emissions beyond existing conditions, the total amount of GHG emissions would be lower than the stationary source threshold of 10,000 metric tons per year.

Table 4. Combined Annual GHG Emissions (metric tons/year CO2E)

Total Operational 5,983.6

Amortized Construction 62.7

Total Project Annual 6,046.4

Threshold1 10,000

Exceeds Threshold? NO

1: SBCAPCD recommends using SLOAPCD adopted thresholds. SLOAPCD's adopted stationary source threshold is 10,000 MT CO2E/year.



9

In addition to the new emissions that would result from project construction and operations, the project would also close the existing J.C. Carter testing facility in Santa Ana. The existing facility vents any methane gas that is generated during operations, and does not flare these methane emissions. The emissions calculations for the existing testing facility are available in the Appendix. Table 5 summarizes the estimated emissions from these operations that would be removed as part of the proposed project.

Table 5. Emissions from Existing JC Carter Facility (to be closed) (metric tons/year)

CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E

Venting of methane gas 786.35 16,513.30

Boil-off emissions 309.95 6,509.05

Total 1,096.30 23,022.35

Therefore, after accounting for the emissions from the existing testing facility that would be removed as part of the proposed project, the project would result in a overall reduction in statewide GHG emissions. Impacts resulting from GHG emissions would be less than significant.

b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

CalEPA’s Climate Action Team (CAT) published the 2006 CAT Report which includes GHG emissions reduction strategies intended for projects emitting less than 10,000 tons CO2E/year. In addition, the California Attorney General’s Office has developed Global Warming Measures (2008) and OPR’s CEQA and Climate Change (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, 2008) document includes GHG reduction measures intended to reduce GHG emissions in order to achieve statewide emissions reduction goals. All of these measures aim to curb the GHG emissions through suggestions pertaining to land use, transportation, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. Several of these actions are already required by California regulations, such as:

AB 1493 (Pavley) requires the state to develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of climate change emissions emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks.

In 2004, ARB adopted a measure to limit diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicle idling.

The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, (AB 939, Sher, Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989) established a 50% waste diversion mandate for California.

Public Resources Code 25402 authorizes the CEC to adopt and periodically update its building energy efficiency standards (that apply to newly constructed buildings and additions to and alterations to existing buildings).

California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), established in 2002, requires that all load serving entities achieve a goal of 33 percent of retail electricity sales from renewable energy sources by 2020, within certain cost constraints.



10

Green Building Executive Order, S-20-04 (CA 2004), sets a goal of reducing energy use in public and private buildings by 20 percent by the year 2015, as compared with 2003 levels.

The proposed project would be required to comply with State and local regulations intended to reduce GHG emissions from new development. Consistency with these State regulations and goals illustrates that the project would not conflict with the State’s GHG-related legislation and would not contribute to the inability to meet reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant.



11

REFERENCES Association of Environmental Professionals. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute

and Guidelines. 2012 Associated Transportation Engineers. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Traffic and Circulation

Study. February 2013. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing

Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). January 2008. California Air Resources Board. Mobile Source Emission Inventory (EMFAC2011). January 2013. California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) General Reporting Protocol, Reporting Entity-Wide

Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, January 2009. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Climate Action Team Biennial Report.

Final Report. April 2010. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), March 2006. Climate Action Team Report

to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/2006-04-03_FINAL_CAT_REPORT_EXECSUMMARY.PDF

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National

Greenhouse Gas Inventories. [Kroeze, C.; Mosier, A.; Nevison, C.; Oenema, O.; Seitzinger, S.; Cleemput, O. van; Conrad, R.; Mitra, A.P.; H.U., Neue; Sass, R.]. Paris: OECD, 1997.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2007: Summary for Policymakers. In:

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). California Emission Estimator

Model (CalEEMod) Version 2011.1.1. 2011. United States Environmental Protection Agency. AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions

Factors, Fifth Edition. January 1995.

Annual GHG Emissions

Construction

CO2 (MT) CH4 (MT) N2O (MT) CO2e (MT)

2013 261.82 0.03 0.00 262.46

2014 696.84 0.07 0.00 698.29

2015 455.26 0.04 0.00 456.15

2019 464.65 0.03 0.00 465.30

Total 1,878.57 0.17 0.00 1,882.20

Amortized over: 30 years 62.74

Operational

CO2 (MT/year) CH4 (MT/year) N2O (MT/year) CO2e (MT/year)

Phase I building operation 304.05 2.62 0.07 386.69

Phase I mobile 57.27 0.00 0.00 57.33

Phase II building operation 2,361.31 20.14 0.58 2,964.48

Phase II mobile 436.53 0.02 0.00 437.01

Phase III building operation 1,239.34 10.39 0.30 1,550.83

Phase III mobile 209.25 0.01 0.00 209.45

Flare and Pilot* 192.17 0.85 0.01 211.84

Transportation of materials 150.82 150.82

Emergency generator 9.94 9.94

Fire water pumps 0.92 0.92

Fugitive Emissions 0.21 4.32

Paints/solvents

Sandblasting

Total Annual Operational 4,961.60 34.24 0.96 5,983.63

Total Operational 5,983.63

Amortized Construction 62.74

Total Project Annual 6,046.37

Threshold** 10,000

Exceeds Threshold? NO

Existing JC Carter Operation (to be closed)

CO2 (MT/year) CH4 (MT/year) N2O (MT/year) CO2e (MT/year)

Venting of methane gas 786.35 16,513.30

Boil‐off emissions 309.95 6,509.05

Total 1,096.30 23,022.35

* "Flare" emissions include unrecovered methanevapor, LPG flaring, storage tank boil‐off, and

emissions from the flare pilot. Actual LPG flare emissions are likely to be lower than estimates

shown b/c factors are for boiler versus a flare.

** SBCAPCD recommends using SLOAPCD adopted thresholds. SLOAPCD's adopted stationary

source threshold is 10,000 MT CO2e/year.

Unrecovered Process Vapor

Inflow (from PD)

Unrecovered Methane Vapor (lbs/year) 84,000

Unrecovered Methane Vapor (scf/year) 1,866,667 0.045 lbs/scf = Density of methane at ambient temp/pressure * Unrecovered Methane Vapor (btu) 1.96E+09

Boil‐off Emissions (lbs/yearh) 20,500

Boil‐Off Emissions (scf/year) 455,556

Boil‐off Emissions (btu) 4.78E+08

Flare Pilot (scf/year) (see note below) 438,000

Flare Pilot (lbs/year) 19,710

Flare Pilot (btu) 4.60E+08

LPG Flared (gal/year) 15,000

THC** ROG NOx CO PM10 CO2 CH4 N2O

Flared Methane/Pilot Emfacs (lb/10E6 btu) 0.14 Note: CH4 not reactive 0.068 0.37 n/a n/a

(AP‐42 Table 13.5‐1)

Flared Methane/Pilot Emfacs (lb/lb CH4) 2.75 1

Flared Unrecovered Methan Vapor (lbs/year) 274.40 133.28 725.20 226,380.00 1,680.00

Flared Boil‐Off Emissions 66.97 32.53 176.98 55,247.50 410.00

Flare Pilot Emissions (lbs/year) 64.39 31.27 170.16 53,118.45 394.20

LPG Flared Emfacs (lb/1000 gal) 1 13 7.5 0.7 12500 0.2 0.9

(AP‐42 Table 1.5‐1) ***

LPG Flared Emissions (lbs/year) 15.00 195.00 112.50 10.50 187,500.00 3.00 13.50

Total lbs/year 338.79 15.00 359.55 1,007.86 10.50 466,998.45 2,077.20 13.50

lbs/day 0.93 0.04 0.99 2.76 0.03 1,279.45 5.69 0.04

tons/year 0.17 0.01 0.18 0.50 0.01 233.50 1.04 0.01

MT/year 211.83 0.94 0.01

Storage Tank Boil‐Off

LNG:

LPG:

Flare Pilot

consumes 50 SCFH = 438,000 ft^3 natural g(include in total flare emissions [unrecovered process vapor] above)

Transportation of Materials Distributors located in Los Angeles, assume 160 miles, each way. ROG NOx CO PM10 CO2

LNG = 2 deliveries/year Emissions factor (g/mi) 1.99E‐01 7.88E+00 6.31E‐01 1.83E‐01 1.03E+03

LPG = 1 delivery/year C2011, T6 instate heavy, 65mph)

LN2 = 500 deliveries/year Total grams 3.20E+04 1.27E+06 1.02E+05 2.95E+04 1.66E+08

Total trips/year = 503 Total lbs 70.59 2,797.64 223.87 65.08 366,529.70

Total VMT/year = 160,960 lbs/day 0.19 7.66 0.61 0.18 1,004.19

tons/year 0.04 1.40 0.11 0.03 183.26

MT/year 166.26

* http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/gas‐density‐d_158.html

Would result in 20,500 lbs/year of methane to be flared (see above).

LPG boil‐off emissions negligable (per PD).

** THC from flared methane (incl. pilot) would not include reactive hydrocarbons, and is therefore not included in criteria pollutant totals.

*** Actual LPG flare emissions are likely to be lower than estimates shown b/c factors are for external boiler versus a flare. AP‐42 emissions factor is TOC; calculations assume TOC approximates ROG.

Emergency Generator

ROG (TOC exhaust) NOx CO PM10 CO2

Emissions factor (lb‐hp/hr) 2.47E‐03 3.10E‐02 6.68E‐03 2.20E‐03 1.15E+00

(AP‐42 Table 3.3‐1)

Total lbs 51.87 651.00 140.28 46.20 24,150.00

lbs/day 0.14 1.78 0.38 0.13 66.16

tons/year 0.03 0.33 0.07 0.02 12.08

MT/year 10.95

Fire Water Pumps

ROG (TOC exhaust) NOx CO PM10 CO2

Emissions factor (lb‐hp/hr) 2.47E‐03 3.10E‐02 6.68E‐03 2.20E‐03 1.15E+00

(AP‐42 Table 3.3‐1)

Total lbs 4.82 60.45 13.03 4.29 2,242.50

lbs/day 0.01 0.17 0.04 0.01 6.14

tons/year 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 1.12

MT/year 1.02

Fugitive Emissions CH4

Annual Release estimate (lbs/year): 500.00

lbs/day 1.37

tons/year 0.25

MT/year 0.23

Paints Based on historical paint use at existing Atlas Copco Facility (2010)

ROC

January 175.41

February 167.91

March 177.50

April 100.29

May 130.54

June 139.00

July 132.74

August 185.14

September 166.10

October 119.17

November 114.94

December 210.66

annual (lbs) 1,819.40

max month (lbs) 210.66

tons/year 0.91

avg max daily* (lbs/day) 9.58

* calculated by dividing max month emissions by ~22 work days/month

25 HP diesel drive firewater pumps (x3) @ 30 min/week (~26 hrs/year)

500 kVa generator exercised 30 min/week = 42 hours/year

(approx. 540 hp, per http://www.dieselserviceandsupply.com/Power_Calculator.aspx)

Solvents

Historical solvent use gallons cf (0.133681 cf/gal) tons *

2011 165 22.06 0.88

2012 220 29.41 1.18

Nonmethane VOC

Emissions factor (lb/ton solvent consumed) 2,000

(AP‐42 Table 4.6‐2)

Total lbs 2,352.79

lbs/day 6.45

tons/year 1.18

Sandblasting

Historical sandblasting garnet use

2011 55 1,000 kgs

2012 85 1,000 kgs

PM10*

Emissions factor (lb/1,000 lb abrasive) 0.69

(AP‐42 Table 13.2.6‐1)

Total lbs 58.65

lbs/day 0.16

tons/year 0.03

* Assumed based on maximum annual historical abrasive use.

* estimated 80 lbs/cf from applicant

1 of 25

Trips and VMT - Building construction worker trips doubled to accomodate estimated construction schedule.

Off-road Equipment - Building construciton equipment doubled to accomodate estimated construction schedule.

Project Characteristics -

Land Use - Phase I: 15,400 sf Assembly and Manufacturing, 3,867 sf electrical equip bldg, and four acres for test stand.

Construction Phase - Default construction phase length, except building construction, shortened to 120 days accomodate August 2014 operational goal.

Santa Barbara-North of Santa Ynez County, Annual

Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase I

1.1 Land Usage

Manufacturing 3.9 1000sqft

Other Asphalt Surfaces 4 Acre


Land Uses Size Metric

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanization

Climate Zone

Rural

4

Wind Speed (m/s)

Precipitation Freq (Days)

3.1

37

1.3 User Entered Comments

1.0 Project Characteristics

Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company

Date: 3/14/2013CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1

2 of 25

Vehicle Trips - Trip rates consistent with ITE Land Use #220, per ATE Traffic Analysis (February 2013).

Grading - Cut/fill assumed to be balanced on-site.

2.0 Emissions Summary

2014 0.32 2.17 1.62 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 253.01 253.01 0.03 0.00 253.56

2013 0.60 2.52 1.74 0.00 0.07 0.16 0.24 0.04 0.16 0.20 0.00 261.82 261.82 0.03 0.00 262.46

Total 0.92 4.69 3.36 0.00 0.07 0.30 0.38 0.04 0.30 0.34 0.00 514.83 514.83 0.06 0.00 516.02

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

Year tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated Construction

2.1 Overall Construction

2014 0.32 2.17 1.62 0.00 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 253.01 253.01 0.03 0.00 253.56

2013 0.60 2.52 1.74 0.00 0.08 0.16 0.25 0.04 0.16 0.20 0.00 261.82 261.82 0.03 0.00 262.46

Total 0.92 4.69 3.36 0.00 0.09 0.30 0.39 0.04 0.30 0.34 0.00 514.83 514.83 0.06 0.00 516.02


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Year tons/yr MT/yr

Unmitigated Construction

3 of 25

2.2 Overall Operational

Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.31 0.00 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Mobile 0.06 0.11 0.61 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 57.27 57.27 0.00 0.00 57.33

Area 0.10 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

Energy 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.79 78.79 0.00 0.00 79.28

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 182.95 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Total 0.16 0.14 0.63 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.31 319.01 361.32 2.62 0.07 440.02


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Category tons/yr MT/yr

Unmitigated Operational

4 of 25


Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.31 0.00 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Mobile 0.06 0.11 0.61 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 57.27 57.27 0.00 0.00 57.33

Area 0.10 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

Energy 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.79 78.79 0.00 0.00 79.28

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 182.95 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Total 0.16 0.14 0.63 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.31 319.01 361.32 2.62 0.07 440.02


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

5 of 25

3.2 Paving - 2013

Paving 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.04 0.24 0.15 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 19.60 19.60 0.00 0.00 19.66

Total 0.05 0.24 0.15 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 19.60 19.60 0.00 0.00 19.66


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated Construction On-Site

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 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 0.00 1.54

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 0.00 1.54


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

6 of 25

3.2 Paving - 2013

Paving 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.04 0.24 0.15 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 19.60 19.60 0.00 0.00 19.66

Total 0.05 0.24 0.15 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 19.60 19.60 0.00 0.00 19.66


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated Construction On-Site

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 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 0.00 1.54

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 0.00 0.00 1.54


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated Construction Off-Site

7 of 25

3.3 Architectural Coating - 2013

Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.30 2.30 0.00 0.00 2.30

Archit. Coating 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.22 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.30 2.30 0.00 0.00 2.30


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




8 of 25


Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.30 2.30 0.00 0.00 2.30

Archit. Coating 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.22 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.30 2.30 0.00 0.00 2.30


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




9 of 25

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 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.39

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.39


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.4 Site Preparation - 2013

Off-Road 0.02 0.20 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 18.13 18.13 0.00 0.00 18.18

Fugitive Dust 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.02 0.20 0.11 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 18.13 18.13 0.00 0.00 18.18


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




10 of 25

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 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.39

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.39


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.02 0.20 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 18.13 18.13 0.00 0.00 18.18

Fugitive Dust 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.02 0.20 0.11 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 18.13 18.13 0.00 0.00 18.18


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




11 of 25

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 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.51

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.5 Grading - 2013

Off-Road 0.03 0.20 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 19.01 19.01 0.00 0.00 19.05

Fugitive Dust 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.03 0.20 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 19.01 19.01 0.00 0.00 19.05


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




12 of 25

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 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.51

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.5 Grading - 2013

Off-Road 0.03 0.20 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 19.01 19.01 0.00 0.00 19.05

Fugitive Dust 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.03 0.20 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 19.01 19.01 0.00 0.00 19.05


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




13 of 25

Vendor 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.36 2.36 0.00 0.00 2.36

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.62 3.62 0.00 0.00 3.63

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

Total 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.98 5.98 0.00 0.00 5.99


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.6 Building Construction - 2013

Off-Road 0.27 1.84 1.24 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 194.22 194.22 0.02 0.00 194.69

Total 0.27 1.84 1.24 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 194.22 194.22 0.02 0.00 194.69


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




14 of 25


Off-Road 0.27 1.84 1.24 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 194.22 194.22 0.02 0.00 194.69

Total 0.27 1.84 1.24 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.00 194.22 194.22 0.02 0.00 194.69


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




Vendor 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.36 2.36 0.00 0.00 2.36

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.62 3.62 0.00 0.00 3.63

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

Total 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.98 5.98 0.00 0.00 5.99


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




15 of 25


Off-Road 0.32 2.15 1.55 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 245.53 245.53 0.03 0.00 246.07

Total 0.32 2.15 1.55 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 245.53 245.53 0.03 0.00 246.07


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




Vendor 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00

Worker 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.49 4.49 0.00 0.00 4.49

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

Total 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.49 7.49 0.00 0.00 7.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




16 of 25

4.0 Mobile Detail

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

Vendor 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00

Worker 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.49 4.49 0.00 0.00 4.49

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

Total 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.49 7.49 0.00 0.00 7.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.32 2.15 1.55 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 245.53 245.53 0.03 0.00 246.07

Total 0.32 2.15 1.55 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 245.53 245.53 0.03 0.00 246.07


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




17 of 25

Unmitigated 0.06 0.11 0.61 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 57.27 57.27 0.00 0.00 57.33

Mitigated 0.06 0.11 0.61 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 57.27 57.27 0.00 0.00 57.33

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information

Manufacturing 14.90 5.81 2.42 28,403 28,403

Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 58.83 22.95 9.55 112,156 112,156

Total 73.73 28.76 11.97 140,559 140,559

Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated

Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT

Other Asphalt Surfaces 8.80 4.60 4.60 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Miles Trip %

Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW

18 of 25

5.0 Energy Detail

Electricity Mitigated

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.61 50.61 0.00 0.00 50.93

NaturalGas Mitigated

0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.18 28.18 0.00 0.00 28.35

Electricity Unmitigated

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.61 50.61 0.00 0.00 50.93

NaturalGas Unmitigated

0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.18 28.18 0.00 0.00 28.35



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

19 of 25

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

Manufacturing 422114 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.53 22.53 0.00 0.00 22.66

Other Asphalt Surfaces

0 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

Manufacturing 105994 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.66 5.66 0.00 0.00 5.69

Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.19 28.19 0.00 0.00 28.35

NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10

Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Land Use kBTU tons/yr MT/yr

Unmitigated

Manufacturing 422114 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.53 22.53 0.00 0.00 22.66


0 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

Manufacturing 105994 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.66 5.66 0.00 0.00 5.69

Total 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.19 28.19 0.00 0.00 28.35


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

20 of 25

6.0 Area Detail

Manufacturing 34919 10.16 0.00 0.00 10.22


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 139062 40.45 0.00 0.00 40.71

Total 50.61 0.00 0.00 50.93

Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Land Use kWh tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity

Manufacturing 34919 10.16 0.00 0.00 10.22


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 139062 40.45 0.00 0.00 40.71

Total 50.61 0.00 0.00 50.93



Unmitigated

21 of 25

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.2 Area by SubCategory

Consumer Products

0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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

Architectural Coating

0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.10 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr

Unmitigated

Unmitigated 0.10 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

Mitigated 0.10 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



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



22 of 25

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail


Consumer Products

0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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


0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.10 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

23 of 25

7.2 Water by Land Use


0 / 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 94.8969 / 0 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Total 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Indoor/Outdoor Use

ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr

Unmitigated

Unmitigated 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Mitigated 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA



24 of 25

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste



0 / 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 94.8969 / 0 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Total 182.95 0.12 0.07 208.59

Indoor/Outdoor Use



Mitigated

8.0 Waste Detail

Unmitigated 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Mitigated 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82



tons/yr MT/yr

Category/Year

25 of 25

9.0 Vegetation


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 208.44 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Total 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Waste Disposed


Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated

8.2 Waste by Land Use


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 208.44 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Total 42.31 2.50 0.00 94.82

Waste Disposed



Unmitigated

1 of 25

Trips and VMT -

Off-road Equipment -


Land Use - Phase II: 117,800 sf addition to Phase I manufacturing facility, 37,200 sf admin/engineering building, and parking/site improvements (acreages calculated from PD).

Construction Phase - Default construction phase length, adjusted to accomodate 2016 operational goal.


Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase II

1.1 Land Usage


Parking Lot 7.7 Acre




Climate Zone

Rural

4

Wind Speed (m/s)


3.1

37





2 of 25


Grading - Cut/fill assumed to be balanced on-site.


2015 2.33 3.29 3.11 0.01 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.00 455.26 455.26 0.04 0.00 456.15

2014 0.53 3.71 2.79 0.00 0.22 0.20 0.42 0.11 0.20 0.31 0.00 443.83 443.83 0.04 0.00 444.72

Total 2.86 7.00 5.90 0.01 0.22 0.40 0.63 0.11 0.40 0.52 0.00 899.09 899.09 0.08 0.00 900.87


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Year tons/yr MT/yr



2015 2.33 3.29 3.11 0.01 0.09 0.20 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.00 455.26 455.26 0.04 0.00 456.15

2014 0.53 3.71 2.79 0.00 0.28 0.20 0.48 0.11 0.20 0.31 0.00 443.83 443.83 0.04 0.00 444.72

Total 2.86 7.00 5.90 0.01 0.37 0.40 0.77 0.11 0.40 0.52 0.00 899.09 899.09 0.08 0.00 900.87


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Year tons/yr MT/yr


3 of 25


Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 324.46 0.00 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Mobile 0.42 0.73 4.12 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.63 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 436.53 436.53 0.02 0.00 437.01

Area 0.78 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

Energy 0.02 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 633.89 633.89 0.02 0.01 637.82

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,402.96 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Total 1.22 0.94 4.29 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.65 0.02 0.03 0.07 324.46 2,473.38 2,797.84 20.16 0.58 3,401.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




4 of 25


Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 324.46 0.00 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Mobile 0.42 0.73 4.12 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.63 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 436.53 436.53 0.02 0.00 437.01

Area 0.78 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

Energy 0.02 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 633.89 633.89 0.02 0.01 637.82

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,402.96 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Total 1.22 0.94 4.29 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.65 0.02 0.03 0.07 324.46 2,473.38 2,797.84 20.16 0.58 3,401.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2






5 of 25


Off-Road 0.05 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35

Fugitive Dust 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.05 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.09 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




6 of 25


Off-Road 0.05 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35

Fugitive Dust 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.05 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.09 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




7 of 25

3.3 Grading - 2014

Off-Road 0.17 1.36 0.76 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.00 147.69 147.69 0.01 0.00 147.98

Fugitive Dust 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.17 1.36 0.76 0.00 0.13 0.06 0.19 0.05 0.06 0.11 0.00 147.69 147.69 0.01 0.00 147.98


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.51 2.51 0.00 0.00 2.51

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.51 2.51 0.00 0.00 2.51


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




8 of 25

3.3 Grading - 2014

Off-Road 0.17 1.36 0.76 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.00 147.69 147.69 0.01 0.00 147.98

Fugitive Dust 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.17 1.36 0.76 0.00 0.13 0.06 0.19 0.05 0.06 0.11 0.00 147.69 147.69 0.01 0.00 147.98


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.51 2.51 0.00 0.00 2.51

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.51 2.51 0.00 0.00 2.51


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




9 of 25

Vendor 0.02 0.12 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.24 20.24 0.00 0.00 20.26

Worker 0.03 0.04 0.30 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.31 29.31 0.00 0.00 29.36

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

Total 0.05 0.16 0.47 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.55 49.55 0.00 0.00 49.62


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.27 1.81 1.31 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 207.05 207.05 0.02 0.00 207.50

Total 0.27 1.81 1.31 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 207.05 207.05 0.02 0.00 207.50


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




10 of 25

Vendor 0.02 0.12 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.24 20.24 0.00 0.00 20.26

Worker 0.03 0.04 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.31 29.31 0.00 0.00 29.36

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

Total 0.05 0.16 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.55 49.55 0.00 0.00 49.62


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.27 1.81 1.31 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 207.05 207.05 0.02 0.00 207.50

Total 0.27 1.81 1.31 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 207.05 207.05 0.02 0.00 207.50


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




11 of 25

Vendor 0.03 0.19 0.26 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 33.71 33.71 0.00 0.00 33.74

Worker 0.04 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 47.68 47.68 0.00 0.00 47.75

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

Total 0.07 0.24 0.72 0.00 0.09 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 81.39 81.39 0.00 0.00 81.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.41 2.73 2.15 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 342.64 342.64 0.03 0.00 343.33

Total 0.41 2.73 2.15 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 342.64 342.64 0.03 0.00 343.33


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




12 of 25

Vendor 0.03 0.19 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 33.71 33.71 0.00 0.00 33.74

Worker 0.04 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 47.68 47.68 0.00 0.00 47.75

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

Total 0.07 0.24 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 81.39 81.39 0.00 0.00 81.49


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.41 2.73 2.15 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 342.64 342.64 0.03 0.00 343.33

Total 0.41 2.73 2.15 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 342.64 342.64 0.03 0.00 343.33


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




13 of 25

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 1.23 1.23 0.00 0.00 1.24

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 1.23 0.00 0.00 1.24


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.5 Paving - 2015

Paving 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.05 0.30 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.54

Total 0.06 0.30 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.54


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




14 of 25

3.5 Paving - 2015

Paving 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.05 0.30 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.54

Total 0.06 0.30 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.54


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 1.23 1.23 0.00 0.00 1.24

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 1.23 0.00 0.00 1.24


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




15 of 25


Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56

Archit. Coating 1.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1.79 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.99

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.99


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




16 of 25

4.0 Mobile Detail


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 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.99

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.99


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56

Archit. Coating 1.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1.79 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




17 of 25

Unmitigated 0.42 0.73 4.12 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.63 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 436.53 436.53 0.02 0.00 437.01

Mitigated 0.42 0.73 4.12 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.63 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 436.53 436.53 0.02 0.00 437.01



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Manufacturing 142.10 55.43 23.06 270,922 270,922

Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 450.00 175.52 73.04 857,919 857,919

Total 592.10 230.95 96.10 1,128,840 1,128,840



Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Miles Trip %


18 of 25

Parking Lot 8.80 4.60 4.60 0.00 0.00 0.00

Miles Trip %


5.0 Energy Detail


0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 407.17 407.17 0.02 0.01 409.73


0.02 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 226.72 226.72 0.00 0.00 228.10


0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 407.17 407.17 0.02 0.01 409.73


0.02 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 226.72 226.72 0.00 0.00 228.10



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




19 of 25


Manufacturing 3.2289e+006 0.02 0.16 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 172.31 172.31 0.00 0.00 173.35

Parking Lot 0 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

Manufacturing 1.01965e+006 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.41 54.41 0.00 0.00 54.74

Total 0.03 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 226.72 226.72 0.00 0.00 228.09


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated

Manufacturing 3.2289e+006 0.02 0.16 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 172.31 172.31 0.00 0.00 173.35

Parking Lot 0 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

Manufacturing 1.01965e+006 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.41 54.41 0.00 0.00 54.74

Total 0.03 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 226.72 226.72 0.00 0.00 228.09


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

20 of 25


6.0 Area Detail

Manufacturing 335916 97.72 0.00 0.00 98.33

Parking Lot 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 1.06373e+006 309.45 0.01 0.01 311.39

Total 407.17 0.01 0.01 409.72



Mitigated


Manufacturing 335916 97.72 0.00 0.00 98.33

Parking Lot 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 1.06373e+006 309.45 0.01 0.01 311.39

Total 407.17 0.01 0.01 409.72



Unmitigated

21 of 25


Consumer Products

0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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


0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.79 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated

Unmitigated 0.78 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

Mitigated 0.78 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



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



22 of 25


7.0 Water Detail


Consumer Products

0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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


0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.79 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

23 of 25


Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 727.707 / 0 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Total 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Indoor/Outdoor Use



Unmitigated

Unmitigated 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Mitigated 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52




24 of 25



Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 727.707 / 0 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Total 1,402.96 0.94 0.57 1,599.52

Indoor/Outdoor Use



Mitigated

8.0 Waste Detail

Unmitigated 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Mitigated 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14



tons/yr MT/yr

Category/Year

25 of 25

9.0 Vegetation

Parking Lot 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 1598.4 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Total 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Waste Disposed



Mitigated


Parking Lot 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Manufacturing 1598.4 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Total 324.46 19.18 0.00 727.14

Waste Disposed



Unmitigated

1 of 19

Trips and VMT -

Grading -

Off-road Equipment -


Land Use - Phase III: Additional 60,000 sf Future manufacturing Expansion and 25,000 sf of Future Admin/Engineering Wings (acreages calculated from PD).

Construction Phase - Default construction phase length, adjusted to accomodate 2020 operational goal.


Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase III

1.1 Land Usage

Manufacturing 25 1000sqft

Manufacturing 60 1000sqft



Climate Zone

Rural

4

Wind Speed (m/s)


3.1

37





2 of 19



2019 1.37 2.38 2.87 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.13 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 464.65 464.65 0.03 0.00 465.30

Total 1.37 2.38 2.87 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.13 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 464.65 464.65 0.03 0.00 465.30


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Year tons/yr MT/yr



2019 1.37 2.38 2.87 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 464.65 464.65 0.03 0.00 465.30

Total 1.37 2.38 2.87 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 464.65 464.65 0.03 0.00 465.30


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2


Year tons/yr MT/yr


3 of 19


Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 167.49 0.00 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Mobile 0.18 0.29 1.62 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 209.25 209.25 0.01 0.00 209.45

Area 0.43 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

Energy 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 347.62 347.62 0.01 0.01 349.77

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 724.23 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Total 0.62 0.40 1.72 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.35 0.01 0.01 0.03 167.49 1,281.10 1,448.59 10.40 0.30 1,760.28


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




4 of 19


Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 167.49 0.00 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Mobile 0.18 0.29 1.62 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 209.25 209.25 0.01 0.00 209.45

Area 0.43 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

Energy 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 347.62 347.62 0.01 0.01 349.77

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 724.23 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Total 0.62 0.40 1.72 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.35 0.01 0.01 0.03 167.49 1,281.10 1,448.59 10.40 0.30 1,760.28


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2






5 of 19

Vendor 0.01 0.09 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.95 21.95 0.00 0.00 21.96

Worker 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.49

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

Total 0.03 0.11 0.32 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.41 48.41 0.00 0.00 48.45


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.34 2.17 2.46 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 403.10 403.10 0.03 0.00 403.68

Total 0.34 2.17 2.46 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 403.10 403.10 0.03 0.00 403.68


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




6 of 19

Vendor 0.01 0.09 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.95 21.95 0.00 0.00 21.96

Worker 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.49

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

Total 0.03 0.11 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.41 48.41 0.00 0.00 48.45


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.34 2.17 2.46 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 403.10 403.10 0.03 0.00 403.68

Total 0.34 2.17 2.46 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 403.10 403.10 0.03 0.00 403.68


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




7 of 19

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 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




3.3 Paving - 2019

Paving 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 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 10.89 10.89 0.00 0.00 10.91

Total 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 10.89 10.89 0.00 0.00 10.91


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




8 of 19

3.3 Paving - 2019

Paving 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 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 10.89 10.89 0.00 0.00 10.91

Total 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 10.89 10.89 0.00 0.00 10.91


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




9 of 19


Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 1.28

Archit. Coating 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.98 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 1.28


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




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 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.23

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.23


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




10 of 19

4.0 Mobile Detail


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 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.23

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

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.23


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 1.28

Archit. Coating 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.98 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 1.28


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




11 of 19

Unmitigated 0.18 0.29 1.62 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 209.25 209.25 0.01 0.00 209.45

Mitigated 0.18 0.29 1.62 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 209.25 209.25 0.01 0.00 209.45



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2





Manufacturing 95.50 37.25 15.50 182,071 182,071

Manufacturing 229.20 89.40 37.20 436,970 436,970

Total 324.70 126.65 52.70 619,041 619,041



Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Manufacturing 8.80 4.60 4.60 59.00 28.00 13.00

Miles Trip %


12 of 19

5.0 Energy Detail


0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 223.29 223.29 0.01 0.00 224.69


0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 124.33 124.33 0.00 0.00 125.09


0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 223.29 223.29 0.01 0.00 224.69


0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 124.33 124.33 0.00 0.00 125.09



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2




13 of 19


Manufacturing 1.6446e+006 0.01 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 87.76 87.76 0.00 0.00 88.30

Manufacturing 685250 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.57 36.57 0.00 0.00 36.79

Total 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 124.33 124.33 0.00 0.00 125.09


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated

Manufacturing 685250 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.57 36.57 0.00 0.00 36.79

Manufacturing 1.6446e+006 0.01 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 87.76 87.76 0.00 0.00 88.30

Total 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 124.33 124.33 0.00 0.00 125.09


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

14 of 19


6.0 Area Detail

Manufacturing 541800 157.62 0.01 0.00 158.60

Manufacturing 225750 65.67 0.00 0.00 66.08

Total 223.29 0.01 0.00 224.68



Mitigated


Manufacturing 541800 157.62 0.01 0.00 158.60

Manufacturing 225750 65.67 0.00 0.00 66.08

Total 223.29 0.01 0.00 224.68



Unmitigated

15 of 19


Consumer Products

0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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


0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.43 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Unmitigated

Unmitigated 0.43 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

Mitigated 0.43 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



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



16 of 19


7.0 Water Detail


Consumer Products

0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 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


0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.43 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


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2



Mitigated

17 of 19


Manufacturing 375.654 / 0 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Total 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Indoor/Outdoor Use



Unmitigated

Unmitigated 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Mitigated 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70




18 of 19



Manufacturing 375.654 / 0 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Total 724.23 0.48 0.29 825.70

Indoor/Outdoor Use



Mitigated

8.0 Waste Detail

Unmitigated 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Mitigated 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36



tons/yr MT/yr

Category/Year

19 of 19

9.0 Vegetation

Manufacturing 825.12 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Total 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Waste Disposed



Mitigated


Manufacturing 825.12 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Total 167.49 9.90 0.00 375.36

Waste Disposed



Unmitigated

Emissions from Existing JC Carter Facility

THC ROG NOx CO PM10 CO2 CH4 N2O

Venting of methane gas (lbs/year) 1,733,600.0

Boil‐off Emissions (lbs/year) 683,333.0

Total lbs/year 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,416,933.0 0.0

lbs/day 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,621.7 0.0

tons/year 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,208.5 0.0

MT/year 0.0 1,096.3 0.0

Appendix F

Sound Level Assessment

Sound Level Assessment for

Atlas Copco Mafi -TrenchManufacturing Plant and Offi ce

Santa Maria, CA

requested byOmni Design Group

San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

February 4, 2013

4 5 d B . c o mDavid Lord, PH.D.Acoustics Consulting

P. O . B o x 1 4 0 6S a n L u i s O b i s p oC a l i f o r n i a 9 3 4 0 6t e l . 8 0 5 . 7 0 4 . 8 0 4 6email: [email protected]

Atlas Copco Mafi -Trench page 2 2/04/13

Table of Contents

1.0 Description ..................... ...........................................................................................................3

2.0 Sound Level Assessment............................. ...........................................................................3

3.0 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................4

4.0 APPENDIX I: Notes, Defi nitions ............................................................................................11

5.0 Acoustical Modeling Method .............................................................................................12

6.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................13

List of Figures

Figure 1. Site Plan .........................................................................................................................5

Figure 2. No Project Sound Levels ................................................................................................6

Figure 3. Phase One Sound Levels ................................................................................................7

Figure 4. Phase Two Sound Levels .................................................................................................8

Figure 5. Phase Three Sound Levels ................................................................................................9

Figure 6. Interior and Exterior Noise Standards .............................................................................10


Sound Level Assessment forAtlas Copco Mafi -Trench

Manufacturing Plant and Offi ceSanta Maria, CA

1.0 Description

This is a report on an acoustical assessment of activities and operations associated with the proposed Atlas Copco Mafi -Trench Manufacturing Plant and Offi ce development with regard to potential sound level impact at the boundary / property line shared with adjacent or nearby potentially sensitive receptors. The goal of this report is to analyze the sound levels associated with transportation and with stationary and operational equipment for No Project and for Phase One, Phase Two and Phase Three of the proposed development.

2.0 Sound Level Assessment

Sound sources external to the site include transportation along Stowell Road and the adjacent API existing building. Atlas Copco Mafi -Trench will have vehicle access and parking on site along with transportation for commercial deliveries along the east and south side of the proposed development. There is a rail spur entering the site along the south side. The most signifi cant sound from manufacturing and operation of stationary equipment is shown along the east side of the facility, labeled “J.C. Carter Test Stand.”

Sound level data for this assessment was gathered from similar and related equipment at the existing Atlas Copco Mafi -Trench, LLC manufacturing facility located at 3037 Industrial Parkway, Santa Maria, CA.

There is an assumption for this analysis that the operation of the proposed facility includes the potential of intermittent operation throughout the 24-hour day as production schedules require. This may include the intermittent running of air compressors and a sand-blasting booth.

An acoustic simulation of the potential noise generators was performed for each of the three phases of development. The zoning for this site is manufacturing / industrial, therefore the maximum permitted sound level at the boundary of the site is 70 dBA CNEL without a requirement for mitigation. This analysis determined that the projected sound level for the three-phase development at the boundary nearest the J.C. Carter Test Stand is 62 dBA CNEL.

The results of the acoustic simulations are shown as sound level contours in “Figure 3. Phase One Sound Levels” on page 7 to “Figure 5. Phase Three Sound Levels” on page 9.

Locations of sound sources are indicated in each fi gure caption and description. Terms are defi ned in “4.0 APPENDIX I: Notes, Defi nitions” on page 11.


3.0 Conclusion

City of Santa Maria allowable CNEL noise exposure is shown in “Figure 6. Interior and Exterior Noise Standards” on page 10. No additional noise mitigation is required in order to insure that sound levels do not exceed 70 dBA CNEL at the property line.


Figure 1. Site Plan

Site Plan for Phase One of proposed facility, showing Stowell Road to the north of the site and Atlas Performance Industries existing building to the east of teh site. There will be employee traffi c and commercial truck traffi c serving the proposed facility.


Figure 2. No Project Sound Levels

Sound levels from adjacent transportation source, Stowell Road, and employee parking at adjecent API existing building. Contours are dBA CNEL.


Figure 3. Phase One Sound Levels

Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. A signifi cant source of sound is the J.C. Carter Test Stand, resulting in a sound level near the east boundary of 62 dBA CNEL. All sound level contours are dBA CNEL.


Figure 4. Phase Two Sound Levels

Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. Additional employee parking and commercial traffi c adds a small increment to generation of sound. All sound level contours are dBA CNEL.


Figure 5. Phase Three Sound Levels

Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. Employee parking and commercial traffi c add a small increment to on-site generation of sound. All sound level contours are dBA CNEL.


Figure 6. Interior and Exterior Noise Standards

Table N-4 from City of Santa Maria General Plan, Noise Element.


4.0 APPENDIX I: Notes, Defi nitions

TERM DEFINITIONAmbient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level

of environmental noise or sound at a given location. The ambient level is typically defi ned by the LEQ level.

Background Noise Level The underlying, ever-present lower level noise that remains in the absence of intrusive or intermittent sounds. Distant sources, such as traffi c, typically make up the background. The background level is generally defi ned by the L90 percentile noise level.

Sound Level, dB Sound Level. Ten times the common logarithm of the ratio of the square of the measured A-weighted sound pressure to the square of the standard reference pressure of 20 micropascals, SLOW time response, in accordance with ANSI S1.4-1971 (R1976) Unit: decibels(dB).

dBA or dB(A): A-weighted sound level. The ear does not respond equally to all frequencies, but is less sensitive at low and high frequencies than it is at medium or speech range frequencies. Thus, to obtain a single number representing the sound level of a noise containing a wide range of frequencies in a manner representative of the ear’s response, it is necessary to reduce the effects of the low and high frequencies with respect to the medium frequencies. The resultant sound level is said to be A-weighted, and the units are dBA. The A-weighted sound level is also called the noise level.

LEQ, Equivalent Sound Level

Because sound levels can vary markedly in intensity over a short period of time, some method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statis-tical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, one describes ambient sounds in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called LEQ. In this report, both a 15 minute and an hourly period is used.

CNEL, Community Noise Equivalent Level

CNEL represents a time-weighted, 24-hour average noise level. “Time weighted” refers to the fact that noise occurring during certain sensitive time periods is penalized. Therefore, there is an additional 5-dBA penalty for events occurring in the evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) and a 10-dBA penalty for events occurring in late evening and early morning hours (between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.).

Percentile Sound Level (Ln)

The noise level exceeded during n percent of the measurement period, where n is a number between 0 and 100 (e.g., L90)

Subjective Loudness Changes.

In addition to precision measurement of sound level changes, there is a subjective characteristic which describes how most people respond to sound: •A change in sound level of 3 dBA is barely perceptible by most listeners. •A change in level of 6 dBA is clearly perceptible.•A change of 10 dBA is perceived by most people as being twice (or half) as loud.

Time weighting Different, internationally recognized, meter damping characteristics are available on sound level measuring instruments: Slow (S), Fast (F) and Impulse (I). In this community sound level measurement, the Fast (F) response time is used.


5.0 Acoustical Modeling Method

Noise contours incorporating measured sound level values were generated using an acoustical modeling program which was developed to predict instantaneous and hourly Leq values for point-source and linear sound sources. This computer modeling tool is an interna-tionally accepted acoustical modeling software program, used by many acoustics and noise control professional offi ces in the U.S. and abroad. The software has been successfully validated by comparison with actual sound level values in many different settings, and the results published.

The acoustical modeling program has a high level of reliability and follows methods specifi ed by the International Standards Organization in their ISO 9613-2 standard, “Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 2: General Method of Calculation.” The standard states that, “this part of ISO 9613 specifi es an engineering method for calculating the attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors in order to predict the levels of environmental noise at a distance from a variety of sources. The method predicts the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level … under meteorological conditions favorable to propagation from sources of known sound emissions. These conditions are for downwind propagation … under a well-developed moderate ground-based temperature inversion, such as commonly occurs at night.”

The computer modeling software takes into account source sound power levels, surface refl ection and absorption, atmospheric absorption, geometric divergence, meteorological condi-tions, walls, barriers, berms, and terrain variations. The acoustic modeling software uses a grid of receivers covering the project site, with accurate sound levels indicated by contours and labels.


6.0 REFERENCES

1. American National Standards Institute, Inc. 2004. ANSI 1994 American National Standard Acoustical Terminology. ANSI S.1.-1994, (R2004) , New York, NY.

2. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2004. ASTM E 1014 - 84 (Reapproved 2000) Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels.

3. Bolt, Beranek and Newman. 1973. Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffi c Noise, Report No. PB-222-703. Prepared for Federal Highway Administration.

4. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1982. Caltrans Transportation Laboratory Manual.

5. ______. 1998. Caltrans Traffi c Noise Analysis Protocol For New Highway Construction and Highway Reconstruction Projects.

6. ______. 2006. California Transportation Plan 2025, chapter 6.

7. California Resources Agency. 2007. Title 14. California Code of Regulations Chapter 3. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act Article 5. Preliminary Review of Projects and Conduct of Initial Study, Sections 15060 to 15065.

8. Harris, Cyril.M., editor. 1979 Handbook of Noise Control.

9. City of Santa Maria. 1997, amended 2009. Noise Element of the General Plan. City of Santa Maria, CA.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions · PDF filein the City of Santa Maria in order to manufacture and...

Documents

Transcript of Greenhouse Gas Emissions · PDF filein the City of Santa Maria in order to manufacture and...