Appendix E Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment

Transcription

1 Appendix E Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment

2 City of Santa Maria Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment March 2013

3 March 19, 2013 Rincon Project No Thomas Reay Vice President, Director of Architecture Omni Design Group, Inc. 711 Tank Farm Road, Suite 100 San Luis Obispo, CA Dear Mr. Reay: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Santa Maria, California 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 CO 2, CH 4, and N 2O were calculated for the proposed project and converted to carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2E). The calculations show that emissions of GHGs would be below the 10,000 metric tons CO 2E/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 Environmental Planner Richard Daulton, MURP Principal 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

4 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 Prepared with the assistance of: Rincon Consultants, Inc Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, California March 2013

5 This report is printed on 50% recycled paper.

6 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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 List of Tables Appendices 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 Appendix: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations i Omni Design Group, Inc.

7 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment This page intentionally left blank. ii Omni Design Group, Inc.

8 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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 , 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 (LN 2) 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, 1 Omni Design Group, Inc.

9 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment fire, or other process emergency. However, for the purposes of this analysis, normal (nonemergency) 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 LN 2 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 LN 2 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 LN 2 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. Emissions. 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. 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. 2 Omni Design Group, Inc.

10 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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 Phase one would be complete and operational beginning September 2014 or earlier, and phase two would be complete in The approvals for phase three would be extended until 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 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 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) CO 2E 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 CO 2E 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, At that time new sources were subject to GHG Title V permitting if the source emits 100,000 MT CO 2E per year, or they are otherwise subject to Title V permitting for another pollutant and emit at least 75,000 MT CO 2E per year. 3 Omni Design Group, Inc.

11 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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 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 CO 2E. 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 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 percent of California s total inventory of GHG emissions for 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: and 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 4 Omni Design Group, Inc.

12 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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 CO 2, CH 4, and N 2O emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO 2, CH 4, and N 2O 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 CO 2 (CO 2E). 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 CO 2E 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 ). 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 5 Omni Design Group, Inc.

13 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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. 6 Omni Design Group, Inc.

14 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment Table 1. SLOAPCD GHG Significance Determination Guidelines GHG Emission Source Category Non-stationary Sources Stationary Sources Plans Operational Emissions 1,100 MT of CO 2 E/year OR 4.6 MT CO 2 E/SP/year (residents + employees) 10,000 MT/year 6.6 MT CO 2 E/SP/year (residents + employees) Notes: SP = Service Population. Project emissions can be expressed on a per-capita basis as Metric tons of CO 2E/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 CO 2E/year (MT CO 2E/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 CO 2E. Amortized over a 30-year period, construction of the proposed project would generate an estimated 62.7 metric tons of CO 2E per year. Table 2. Estimated Construction GHG Emissions (metric tons/year) CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O CO 2 E 2013 (metric tons) <0.1 < (metric tons) < (metric tons) <0.1 < (metric tons) <0.1 < (metric tons) 1, <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 (CO 2, CH 4, and N 2O) 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 7 Omni Design Group, Inc.

15 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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) CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O CO 2 E Phase I building operation Phase I mobile 57.3 <0.1 < Phase II building operation 2, ,964.5 Phase II mobile <0.1 < Phase III building operation 1, ,550.8 Phase III mobile <0.1 < Flare and Pilot < Transportation of materials Emergency generator Fire water pumps Emissions Annual Operational 4, , : "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. 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 CO 2E) 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 CO 2E. 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 CO 2 E) Operational 5,983.6 Amortized Construction 62.7 Project Annual 6,046.4 Threshold 1 10,000 Exceeds Threshold? 1: SBCAPCD recommends using SLOAPCD adopted thresholds. SLOAPCD's adopted stationary source threshold is 10,000 MT CO 2E/year. NO 8 Omni Design Group, Inc.

16 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment 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) CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O CO 2 E Venting of methane gas , Boil-off 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. 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 CO 2E/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 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. 9 Omni Design Group, Inc.

17 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment Green Building Executive Order, S (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. 10 Omni Design Group, Inc.

18 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment REFERENCES Association of Environmental Professionals. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and Guidelines Associated Transportation Engineers. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Project Traffic and Circulation Study. February California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). January California Air Resources Board. Mobile Source Emission Inventory (EMFAC2011). January California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) General Reporting Protocol, Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, January California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Climate Action Team Biennial Report. Final Report. April California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), March Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. 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, 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 United States Environmental Protection Agency. AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors, Fifth Edition. January Omni Design Group, Inc.

19 Annual GHG Emissions Construction (MT) CH4 (MT) N2O (MT) e (MT) , , Amortized over: 30 years Operational (MT/year) CH4 (MT/year) N2O (MT/year) e (MT/year) Phase I building operation Phase I mobile Phase II building operation 2, , Phase II mobile Phase III building operation 1, , Phase III mobile Flare and Pilot* Transportation of materials Emergency generator Fire water pumps Emissions Paints/solvents Sandblasting Annual Operational 4, , * "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. Operational 5, Amortized Construction Project Annual 6, Threshold** 10,000 Exceeds Threshold? NO ** SBCAPCD recommends using SLOAPCD adopted thresholds. SLOAPCD's adopted stationary source threshold is 10,000 MT e/year. Existing JC Carter Operation (to be closed) (MT/year) CH4 (MT/year) N2O (MT/year) e (MT/year) Venting of methane gas , Boil off emissions , , ,022.35

20 Unrecovered Process Vapor Inflow (from PD) Unrecovered Methane Vapor (lbs/year) 84,000 Unrecovered Methane Vapor (scf/year) 1,866, 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 CH4 N2O Flared Methane/Pilot Emfacs (lb/10e6 btu) 0.14 Note: CH4 not reactive n/a n/a (AP 42 Table ) Flared Methane/Pilot Emfacs (lb/lb CH4) Flared Unrecovered Methan Vapor (lbs/year) , , Flared Boil Off Emissions , Flare Pilot Emissions (lbs/year) , LPG Flared Emfacs (lb/1000 gal) (AP 42 Table 1.5 1) *** LPG Flared Emissions (lbs/year) , lbs/year , , , lbs/day , tons/year MT/year * density d_158.html ** 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. Storage Tank Boil Off Flare Pilot LNG: Would result in 20,500 lbs/year of methane to be flared (see above). LPG: LPG boil off emissions negligable (per PD). 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 LNG = 2 deliveries/year Emissions factor (g/mi) 1.99E E E E E+03 LPG = 1 delivery/year C2011, T6 instate heavy, 65mph) LN2 = 500 deliveries/year grams 3.20E E E E E+08 trips/year = 503 lbs , , VMT/year = 160,960 lbs/day , tons/year MT/year

21 Emergency Generator 500 kva generator exercised 30 min/week = 42 hours/year (approx. 540 hp, per ROG (TOC exhaust) NOx CO Emissions factor (lb hp/hr) 2.47E E E E E+00 (AP 42 Table 3.3 1) lbs , lbs/day tons/year MT/year Fire Water Pumps Emissions 25 HP diesel drive firewater pumps 30 min/week (~26 hrs/year) ROG (TOC exhaust) NOx CO Emissions factor (lb hp/hr) 2.47E E E E E+00 (AP 42 Table 3.3 1) lbs , lbs/day tons/year MT/year 1.02 CH4 Annual Release estimate (lbs/year): 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 February March April May June July August September October November December annual (lbs) 1, max month (lbs) tons/year 0.91 avg max daily* (lbs/day) 9.58 * calculated by dividing max month emissions by ~22 work days/month

22 Solvents Historical solvent use gallons cf ( cf/gal) tons * * estimated 80 lbs/cf from applicant Sandblasting Nonmethane VOC Emissions factor (lb/ton solvent consumed) 2,000 (AP 42 Table 4.6 2) lbs 2, lbs/day 6.45 tons/year 1.18 Historical sandblasting garnet use ,000 kgs ,000 kgs * Emissions factor (lb/1,000 lb abrasive) 0.69 (AP 42 Table ) lbs lbs/day 0.16 tons/year 0.03 * Assumed based on maximum annual historical abrasive use.

23 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Date: 3/14/2013 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase I Santa Barbara-North of Santa Ynez County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Manufacturing sqft Manufacturing sqft Other Asphalt Surfaces 4 Acre 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 3.1 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company Climate Zone 4 Precipitation Freq (Days) User Entered Comments 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. Off-road Equipment - Building construciton equipment doubled to accomodate estimated construction schedule. Trips and VMT - Building construction worker trips doubled to accomodate estimated construction schedule. 1 of 25

24 Grading - Cut/fill assumed to be balanced on-site. Vehicle Trips - Trip rates consistent with ITE Land Use #220, per ATE Traffic Analysis (February 2013). 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr of 25

25 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water of 25

26 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 4 of 25

27 3.2 Paving Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

28 3.2 Paving Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

29 3.3 Architectural Coating Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

30 3.3 Architectural Coating Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

31 3.4 Site Preparation Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

32 3.4 Site Preparation Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

33 3.5 Grading Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

34 3.5 Grading Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

35 3.6 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

36 3.6 Building Construction Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

37 3.6 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

38 3.6 Building Construction Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker Mobile Detail 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 16 of 25

39 ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Manufacturing , ,156 Manufacturing ,403 28,403 Other Asphalt Surfaces , , Trip Type Information 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 Manufacturing Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces of 25

40 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Electricity Mitigated Electricity Unmitigated NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGas Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 18 of 25

41 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces Mitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces of 25

42 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces Mitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces Area Detail 20 of 25

43 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping of 25

44 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 22 of 25

45 ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / of 25

46 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 24 of 25

47 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces Mitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Other Asphalt Surfaces Vegetation 25 of 25

48 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Date: 3/15/2013 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase II Santa Barbara-North of Santa Ynez County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Manufacturing sqft Manufacturing sqft Parking Lot 7.7 Acre 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 3.1 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company Climate Zone 4 Precipitation Freq (Days) User Entered Comments Project Characteristics - 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. Off-road Equipment - Trips and VMT - 1 of 25

49 Grading - Cut/fill assumed to be balanced on-site. Vehicle Trips - Trip rates consistent with ITE Land Use #220, per ATE Traffic Analysis (February 2013). 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr of 25

50 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water , , , , , , of 25

51 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water , , , , , , Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 4 of 25

52 3.2 Site Preparation Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

53 3.2 Site Preparation Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

54 3.3 Grading Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

55 3.3 Grading Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Dust Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

56 3.4 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

57 3.4 Building Construction Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

58 3.4 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

59 3.4 Building Construction Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

60 3.5 Paving Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

61 3.5 Paving Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

62 3.6 Architectural Coating Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 25

63 3.6 Architectural Coating Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker Mobile Detail 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 16 of 25

64 ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Manufacturing , ,919 Manufacturing , ,922 Parking Lot ,128,840 1,128, Trip Type Information 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 Manufacturing Manufacturing of 25

65 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 Parking Lot Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Electricity Mitigated Electricity Unmitigated NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGas Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 18 of 25

66 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing e Manufacturing e Parking Lot Mitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing e Manufacturing e Parking Lot of 25

67 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing e Manufacturing Parking Lot Mitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing e Manufacturing Parking Lot Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 20 of 25

68 ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping of 25

69 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 22 of 25

70 ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Mitigated 1, , Unmitigated 1, , NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / 0 1, , Parking Lot 0 / , , of 25

71 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / 0 1, , Parking Lot 0 / , , Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 24 of 25

72 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Parking Lot Mitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Parking Lot Vegetation 25 of 25

73 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Date: 3/15/2013 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Facility Phase III Santa Barbara-North of Santa Ynez County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Manufacturing sqft Manufacturing sqft 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 3.1 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company Climate Zone 4 Precipitation Freq (Days) User Entered Comments Project Characteristics - 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. Off-road Equipment - Trips and VMT - Grading - 1 of 19

74 Vehicle Trips - Trip rates consistent with ITE Land Use #220, per ATE Traffic Analysis (February 2013). 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Year tons/yr MT/yr of 19

75 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water , , , of 19

76 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Area Energy Mobile Waste Water , , , Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 4 of 19

77 3.2 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 19

78 3.2 Building Construction Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 19

79 3.3 Paving Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 19

80 3.3 Paving Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Off-Road Paving Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 19

81 3.4 Architectural Coating Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker of 19

82 3.4 Architectural Coating Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Archit. Coating Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Hauling Vendor Worker Mobile Detail 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 10 of 19

83 ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Manufacturing , ,970 Manufacturing , , , , Trip Type Information 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 Manufacturing Manufacturing of 19

84 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Electricity Mitigated Electricity Unmitigated NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGas Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 12 of 19

85 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing e Mitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Land Use kbtu tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing e Manufacturing of 19

86 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Mitigated Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use kwh tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Manufacturing Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 14 of 19

87 ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping of 19

88 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CH4 N2O e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 16 of 19

89 ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / of 19

90 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing / Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Unmitigated NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 18 of 19

91 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Mitigated Waste Disposed ROG NOx CO SO2 CH4 N2O e Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr Manufacturing Vegetation 19 of 19

92 Emissions from Existing JC Carter Facility THC ROG NOx CO CH4 N2O Venting of methane gas (lbs/year) 1,733,600.0 Boil off Emissions (lbs/year) 683,333.0 lbs/year ,416, lbs/day , tons/year , MT/year 0.0 1,

93 Appendix F Sound Level Assessment

94 Sound Level Assessment for Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Manufacturing Plant and Office Santa Maria, CA requested by Omni Design Group San Luis Obispo, CA February 4, dB.com David Lord, PH.D. Acoustics Consulting P.O. Box 1406 San Luis Obispo California tel

95 Table of Contents 1.0 Description Sound Level Assessment Conclusion APPENDIX I: Notes, Definitions Acoustical Modeling Method 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 Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 2 2/04/13

96 Sound Level Assessment for Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench Manufacturing Plant and Office Santa 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 Office 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 significant 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 sandblasting 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 threephase 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 figure caption and description. Terms are defined in 4.0 APPENDIX I: Notes, Definitions on page 11. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 3 2/04/13

97 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. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 4 2/04/13

98 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 traffic and commercial truck traffic serving the proposed facility. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 5 2/04/13

99 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. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 6 2/04/13

100 Figure 3. Phase One Sound Levels Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. A significant 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. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 7 2/04/13

101 Figure 4. Phase Two Sound Levels Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. Additional employee parking and commercial traffic adds a small increment to generation of sound. All sound level contours are dba CNEL. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 8 2/04/13

102 Figure 5. Phase Three Sound Levels Sound level contours from on-site transporation and stationary sources. Employee parking and commercial traffic add a small increment to on-site generation of sound. All sound level contours are dba CNEL. Atlas Copco Mafi-Trench page 9 2/04/13