4.10 NOISE AND VIBRATION

Transcription

1 4.10 NOISE AND VIBRATION INTRODUCTION This section addresses the potential for the Proposed Project to produce noise and vibration impacts. Information in this section is summarized from the Noise Impact Analysis prepared for the Proposed Project by Bollard Acoustical Consultants (BAC; Appendix T). Following an overview of the environmental setting in Section and the relevant regulatory setting in Section , projectrelated impacts and recommended mitigation measures are presented in Section and , respectively ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Fundamentals of Acoustics Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound is defined as any pressure variation in air that the human ear can detect. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are designated as sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz). Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 decibels (db). Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 db, and changes in levels (db) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness. Acoustical Terminology Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the equivalent, or energyaveraged, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A-weighted sound level (dba) containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise. The day/night average sound level (Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day. The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by filtering the frequency response of a sound level meter by means of the standardized A-weighting network (dba). As a result, all sound levels reported in this study are in terms of dba. Table shows examples of noise levels for several common noise sources and environments. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

2 TABLE TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dba) Common Indoor Activities Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft) Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft), at 80 km/hr (50 mph) Noisy Urban Area, Daytime Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft) Commercial Area Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) Rock Band Quiet Urban Daytime Quiet Urban Nighttime Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft) Garage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft) Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft) Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft) Quiet Suburban Nighttime Library Large Business Office, Dishwasher in Next Room Theater, Large Conference Room (Background) Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background) Broadcast/Recording Studio Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans, Effects of Noise on People The effects of noise on people can be divided into three categories: 1. Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, dissatisfaction; 2. Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning; and 3. Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling. Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the third category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise, or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists, and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual s past experiences with noise. Generally, most noise is generated by transportation systems, primarily motor vehicles, aircraft, and railroads. Poor urban planning may also give rise to noise pollution, since juxtaposing industrial and residential land uses, for example, often adversely affects the residential acoustic environment. Prominent sources of indoor noise are office equipment, factory machinery, appliances, power tools, lighting hum, and audio entertainment systems. An important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment (or ambient noise) to which one has adapted. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it. With regard to increases in A- weighted noise level for similar sources, the following relationships occur (Caltrans, 2013): AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

3 Under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, the trained healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dba; Outside such controlled conditions, the trained ear can detect changes of 2 dba in normal environmental noise; It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level changes of 3 dba; A change in level of 5 dba is a readily perceptible increase in noise level; and A 10-dBA change is recognized as twice as loud as the original source. These relationships occur in part because of the logarithmic nature of sound and the decibel system. Specifically, the decibel scale represents ten times the logarithm (base 10) of the square of the ratio of a sound pressure to a reference pressure. Noise levels are measured on a logarithmic scale, instead of a linear scale, to keep the numbers in a practical range. On a logarithmic scale, the sum of two noise sources of equal loudness is 3 dba greater than the noise generated by only one of the noise sources (e.g., a noise source of 60 dba plus another noise source of 60 dba generate a composite noise level of 63 dba). To apply this formula to a specific noise source, in areas where existing levels are dominated by traffic, a doubling in traffic volume will increase ambient noise levels by 3 dba. Similarly, a doubling in heavy equipment use, such as the use of two pieces of equipment where one formerly was used, would also increase ambient noise levels by 3 dba. A 3 dba increase in similar noise sources is considered to be the smallest change in noise level detectable to the average person. A change in ambient sound of 5 dba in similar noise sources is subjectively considered to be a clearly noticeable change and can begin to create concern. A change in sound of 7 to 10 dba typically elicits extreme concern and/or anger. Where two noise sources differ in frequency content, the thresholds for perception of the differing sources are reduced. Noise Attenuation Stationary point sources of noise, including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles, attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6+ dba per doubling of distance from the source, depending upon environmental conditions (i.e., atmospheric conditions and noise barriers, either vegetative or manufactured, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility, spread over many acres or a street with moving vehicles (a line or moving point source), would typically attenuate at a lower rate, approximately 4 to 6 dba per doubling distance from the source (also dependent upon environmental conditions) (Appendix T). Noise from large construction sites (with heavy equipment moving dirt and trucks entering and exiting the site daily) would have characteristics of both point and line sources, so attenuation would generally range between 4.5 and 7.5 dba per doubling of distance. Effects of Temperature and Relative Humidity on Atmospheric Absorption of Sound Air absorbs sound energy, referred to as atmospheric absorption. The amount of Atmospheric absorption of sound varies dependsing on temperature and relative humidity, as well as the frequency content of the noise source. In general,for average/standard day atmospheric conditions (59 F and 70 percent relative humidity), sound in the 1,000 Hertz frequency band is absorbed at a rate of result in attenuation at a rate of approximately 1.5 db per thousand feet of distance (Appendix T). For lower frequencies and higher frequencies, the absorption rates are lower and higher than at 1,000 Hertz, respectively. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

4 The predominant frequencies for the ground level and rooftop mechanical equipment either existing or proposed as part of this project are centered around 1,000 Hertz, with minor low-frequency content. As a result, the 1,000 Hertz atmospheric absorption coefficients were used to analyze sound propagation with distance for this project. In Mt. Shasta, the summers are warm, dry, and mostly clear and the winters are cold, wet, and partly cloudy (Nature Works, 2017). Over the course of the year, the temperature typically varies from 25 F to 85 F and is rarely below 18 F or above 93 F. During summer months, average daily high temperatures typically range from 76 F to 85 F. The cold season lasts for approximately 4 months, from mid- November through early March, with an average daily high temperature below 51 F. The atmospheric absorption coefficients for the 1,000 Hertz frequency band range from a low of 1.2 db (14 F and 10 percent relative humidity) to a high of 6.5 db (50 F and 10 percent relative humidity), per thousand feet. Within the range of typical average temperatures encountered in Mount Shasta (25 to 85 F), the average atmospheric absorption coefficient at 1,000 Hertz for 50 percent relative humidity is approximately 1.8 db per thousand feet. As a result, the use of an atmospheric absorption rate of 1.5 db per thousand feet in this study is considered to be conservative. Because the nearest residences to the project site are located as close as 300 feet, the net effect of normal seasonal changes in temperature and humidity conditions occurring in Mt. Shasta on the assessment of atmospheric absorption effects for this project is considered to be negligible. Furthermore, the effects of changes in atmospheric conditions would not be limited to sound propagation from the project site, as sound generated by local railroad and traffic noise sources would similarly be affected (Appendix T). Effects of Wind on Sound Propagation During windy conditions over open level ground, wind gradients almost always exist. This is due to the friction between the moving air and the ground. Due to these gradients, the speed of sound varies with height above ground. This condition tends to refract, or bend, sound waves upward or downward, depending on whether the receiver is upwind or downwind from the source. At locations upwind from the sound source, wind gradients bend sound rays upward, thereby reducing sound levels at the receiver. Conversely, downwind locations will experience higher sound levels due to wind gradients bending sound rays downward. The average hourly wind speed in Mt. Shasta does not vary significantly over the course of the year, remaining within 0.3 miles per hour of 2.3 miles per hour throughout (Nature Works, 2017). The wind is most often from the north the 6 month period from mid-april to late October. The wind is most often from the south from late October to mid-april, although it is recognized that normal variations occur. The effects of wind on the propagation of sound can be substantial over very long distances, but at distances of less than 1,000 feet the effects are somewhat limited. Due to the generally low annual average wind speeds reported for Mt. Shasta, the effects on wind are predicted to be limited. PDuring periodic high wind conditions, the sound generated by wind in the trees would dominate the ambient AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

5 noise environment, tending to mask other local noise sources. Due to the generally low annual average wind speeds reported for Mt. Shasta, and the factors described above, the net effects on wind on projectgenerated sound levels are predicted to be inconsequential (Appendix T). Effects of Snow on Sound Propagation The propagation of sound over distance is also affected by ground type. Soft surfaces, such as grass, shrubs, and new snowfall are acoustically absorbent. Hard surfaces, such as asphalt and water, are acoustically reflective. During periods when snow is present in Mt. Shasta, ambient conditions in the project vicinity may be incrementally lower due to the additional absorption provided snow versus that of the typical packed dirt or vegetative ground cover in the area. However, the presence of snow would similarly provide more absorption of project-generated sound levels. In addition, during periods of snowfall, colder temperatures tend to result in people keeping their windows closed during nighttime hours. As a result, the net effect of snowfall on the noise generation of the project relative to ambient conditions is expected to be negligible (Appendix T). Single-Event Noise and Sleep Disturbance A single event is an individual distinct loud activity, such as an aircraft overflight, a train or truck passage, or any other brief and discrete noise-generating activity. Because most noise policies applicable to transportation noise sources are typically specified in terms of 24-hour-averaged descriptors, such as Ldn or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), the potential for annoyance or sleep disturbance associated with individual loud events can be masked by representing the data as an average. The analysis of single event noise effects under CEQA can be traced to a 2001 court case (Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Committee v. Board of Port Commissioners of the City of Oakland (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344), which concerned a challenge to the proposed expansion of the Oakland Airport because the project EIR noise analysis didn t include an evaluation of the effects of single-event noise on sleep disturbance. The court required, in that context (i.e., an airport expansion), that the EIR address single-event noise and sleep disturbance effects on existing residents in the City of Berkeley. However, the court did not recommend an appropriate single event noise level standard to be employed. Extensive studies have been conducted regarding the effects of single-event noise on sleep disturbance, with the Sound Exposure Level (SEL) metric being a common metric used for such assessments. SEL represents the entire sound energy of a given single-event normalized into a one-second period regardless of event duration. As a result, the single-number SEL metric contains information pertaining to both event duration and intensity. Another descriptor utilized to assess single-event noise is the maximum, or Lmax, noise level associated with the event. A problem with utilizing Lmax to assess single events is that the duration of the event is not considered. There are currently on-going discussions regarding the appropriateness of using the SEL metric as a supplement or replacement for cumulative noise level metrics such as Ldn and CNEL, 24-hour noise descriptors. Nonetheless, because SEL describes a receiver's total noise exposure from a single impulsive event, SEL is often used to characterize noise from individual brief loud events. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

6 Industry Guidance on Single Event Noise and Sleep Disturbance The Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN) has provided estimates of the percentage of people expected to be awakened when exposed to specific SELs inside a home (FICAN, 1997). However, FICAN did not recommend a threshold of significance based on the percent of people awakened. According to the FICAN study, 10 percent of the population is estimated to be awakened when the SEL interior noise level reaches 81 dba. An estimated 5 to 10 percent of the population is affected when the SEL interior noise level is between 65 and 81 dba, and few sleep awakenings (less than 5 percent) are predicted if the interior SEL is less than 65 dba. The FICAN results focused on individual single-event sound levels but did not take into consideration how exposure to multiple single events affected sleep disturbance. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Acoustical Society of America (ASA) released a voluntary methodology to predict sleep disturbance in terms of the probability of awakening. ANSI s Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound -Part 6: Methods for Estimation of Awakenings Associated with Outdoor Noise Events Heard in Homes, July 2008, provides a method to predict sleep disturbance associated with noise levels in terms of indoor A-weighted sound exposure level (ASEL). The methodology was developed from about 10,000 subject-nights of observations primarily in homes near areas of routine jet aircraft takeoff and landings, railroads, roads, and highways. The methodology only applies to individuals with no sleep disorders, normal hearing, and that are over 18 years of age. The methodology also defines disturbance as being restricted to a behaviorally confirmed awakening. While FICAN has a recommended means of predicting awakenings from a single aircraft event, the ANSI methodology further refines this approach by taking into account the time since the person fell asleep and the ability to identify the probability of being awakened from multiple aircraft events over the course of the entire night. However, research performed by BAC questions the accuracy of the ANSI methodology. Although the FICAN and ANSI methodologies provide a means by which the potential for awakenings due to single events can be predicted, neither methodology provides a recommended target level for acceptable single-event noise or percentage of awakening. Further, there is no industry consensus establishing recommended target levels for acceptable single-event noise or percentage of awakening. Vibration Fundamentals Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, while vibration is usually associated with transmission through the ground or structures. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person s response to vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source. Vibration can be described in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration measures in terms of peak particle velocities (inches/second). Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration in terms of peak particle velocity. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

7 As vibrations travel outward from the source, they excite the particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate. Differences in subsurface geologic conditions and distance from the source of vibration will result in different vibration levels characterized by different frequencies and intensities. In all cases, vibration amplitudes will decrease with increasing distance. The maximum rate, or velocity of particle movement, is the commonly accepted descriptor of the vibration strength. Human response to vibration is difficult to quantify. Vibration can be felt or heard well below the levels that produce any damage to structures. The duration of the event has an effect on human response, as does the frequency of the event. Generally, as the duration and vibration frequency increase, the potential for adverse human response increases. According to the Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans, 2004), operation of construction equipment and construction techniques generate ground vibration. Traffic traveling on roadways can also be a source of such vibration. At high enough amplitudes, ground vibration has the potential to damage structures and/or cause cosmetic damage (e.g., crack plaster). Ground vibration can also be a source of annoyance to individuals who live or work close to vibrationgenerating activities. However, traffic, including heavy trucks traveling on a highway, rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage. Existing Conditions Noise Sensitive Receptors Existing land uses in the project vicinity include a mix of residential and industrial uses. The nearest noise-sensitive receptors to the project site are identified on Figure With the exception of Receptor 10, which is a church, the identified receptors are residences. It is recognized that there are more sensitive receptors in the general project vicinity than the identified on Figure ; however, because the receptors evaluated in this analysis represent the closest sensitive uses to the project site (representative of a worst-case scenario ), and because sound decreases with distance from the noise source, analysis of noise impacts at more distant receptors is not warranted. In other words, if noise levels at the nearest receptors are below the applicable noise standard, noise levels at the more distant receptors would also be below applicable standards. The focus of this analysis is the identification of potential noise impacts at the nearest noise-sensitive receptors to the project site, as neighboring industrial land uses are not-considered noise-sensitive. Ambient Noise Environment The ambient noise environment within the overall project area is primarily defined by traffic noise emanating from the local roadway network, and to a lesser extent by distantincluding traffic noise from Interstate 5 (I-5) west of the project site. Railroad operations through Mt. Shasta also result in periods of elevated ambient conditions. To generally quantify the existing (2016) ambient noise environment at locations representative of the noise environment at the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site, long-term (continuous) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at three locations indicated on Figure between July 21 and August 1, Additional noise monitoring was conducted at two locations from June 14 to 20, The supplemental noise monitoring locations are also identified on Figure as Monitoring Sites 4 and 5. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

8 Ski Village Dr n xo Ni 4 Rd 6 13 n Mou asta t Sh C C GW Dr 3 4 LEGEND Project Site Blvd 5 12 Long Term Measurement Locations City of Mt Shasta Noise Sensitive Receptors Siskiyou County Noise Sensitive Receptors Feet 0 SOURCE: USDA aerial photograph, 7/7/2014; AES, 7/17/ Crystal Geyser Draft Environmental Impact Report / Figure Sensitive Receptors and Noise Measurement Locations

9 Monitoring Sites 1 through 3 were selected to represent residences to the immediate northwest, east, and south of the project site. Supplemental monitoring Site 4 was selected to represent residences located adjacent to or near Mt. Shasta Boulevard and the railroad tracks. Supplemental Monitoring Site 5 was selected to represent residences to the northeast of the site along Ski Village Drive. It should be noted that it is not necessary to conduct ambient noise monitoring at each residence surrounding the project site. Rather, utilizing locations which are representative of ambient conditions at groups of sensitive receptors is common practice. Both the 2016 and 2017 ambient noise surveys were conducted during summer months. Average temperatures present during the ambient surveys ranged from of 59 to 82 F, with a mean of 75 F for the 2016 survey and 70 F for the 2017 survey. Average daily relative humidity ranged from 37 to 62 percent, with a mean of 43 percent for the 2016 survey and 54 percent for the 2017 survey. Average daily wind speeds ranged from 1 to 5 mph, with a mean of 2 mph for the 2016 survey and 3 mph for the 2017 survey. Maximum wind speeds during both survey periods ranged from 4-12 mph with average maximum wind speeds of 7 mph during the 2016 survey and 9 mph during the 2017 survey. Larson-Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 820 precision integrating sound level meters were used to complete the noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before use with an LDL Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4). Ambient noise measurement results are summarized in Table Detailed results of the noise measurements can be found within Appendices B and C of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T). As shown in Table , the typical Leq noise levels at Sites 1 and 3 were 49 db Leq and 44 db Leq at Site 2. Measured maximum (Lmax) daytime noise levels were approximately 16 db higher than measured daytime average noise levels at all locations. The complete listing of ambient noise measurement results is provided in Appendices B and C of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T). Existing ambient noise levels were higher at Sites 1 and 3 than at Site 2 due to their closer proximity to Interstate 5 and other local traffic noise sources. It should be noted that measured ambient noise levels at all three sites were slightly higher during nighttime hours than daytime hours. This is due to the fact that I-5 is the major noise source in the region and atmospheric absorption of sound is considerably lower during nighttime conditions when temperatures are lower and relative humidity is higher than during warmer and dryer daytime conditions. Typical daytime average (Leq) noise levels at Sites 4 and 5 were Leq, respectively. Measured maximum (Lmax) daytime noise levels were approximately 9 db higher than measured daytime average noise levels at Site 4 and 17 db higher at Site 5. As noted previously, the complete listing of ambient noise measurement results is provided in Appendices B and C of Appendix T. Measured nighttime average and maximum noise levels were comparable to the measured daytime noise levels at both Sites 4 and 5. Existing ambient noise levels were much higher at Site 5 than all of the other sites due to the closer proximity of Site 4 to the railroad tracks, Mt. Shasta Boulevard, and Interstate 5. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

10 Site Date TABLE AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS Average Noise Level (db Leq) Maximum Noise Level (db Lmax) Day-Night Average Daytime 2 Nighttime 3 Daytime Nighttime (db Ldn) 7/22/ /23/ /24/ /25/ /26/ /27/ /28/ /29/ /30/ /31/ Average /22/ /23/ /24/ /25/ /26/ /27/ /28/ /29/ /30/ /31/ Average /22/ /23/ /24/ /25/ /26/ /27/ /28/ /29/ /30/ /31/ Average /14/ /15/ /16/ /17/ /18/ /19/ AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

11 Site 1 5 Date Average Noise Level (db Leq) Maximum Noise Level (db Lmax) Day-Night Average Daytime 2 Nighttime 3 Daytime Nighttime (db Ldn) 6/20/ Average /14/ /15/ /16/ /17/ /18/ /19/ /20/ /21/ Average Notes: 1 - Measurement site locations are shown on Figure Daytime hours are 7 AM 10 PM. 3 - Nighttime hours are 10 PM 7 AM. Source: BAC, (Appendix T). The 2017 measurement results for Site 5 were consistent with the 2016 data collected at Sites 1-3. As expected, the 2017 survey results for Site 4 were considerably higher than the data collected elsewhere due to the closer proximity to the railroad tracks and Mt. Shasta Boulevard. With respect to existing ambient noise levels within the residences located in the immediate project vicinity, the degree of current interior noise exposure depends on the exterior noise exposure and the degree of noise attenuation provided by the existing residential building facades. Building façade noise reduction is dependent on several factors, including the construction materials (wood vs stucco siding, single vs. dual-pane windows, façade orientation relative to the noise source, quality of window and door weather-stripping, etc.). The degree of noise attenuation provided by the building façade will also vary depending on whether windows are in the open or closed positions. Typical building façade noise reduction for residences in fair to good condition is 25 db (20 db in poor condition), with windows in the closed position, and approximately db with windows open. The Table data indicate that measured daytime and nighttime ambient noise levels averaged 49 and 51 db Leq at Sites 1 and 3, which represent sensitive receptors within the City of Mt. Shasta (City). If the building façade noise reduction is 20 db with windows closed and 10 db with windows open, the resulting existing ambient noise levels within residences with windows in the open position would be approximately 39 db Leq during daytime hour and 41 db Leq during nighttime hours. Existing (2016) Traffic Noise Environment Table shows the existing traffic noise levels in terms of Ldn at closest sensitive receptors along each roadway segment. Where no identified sensitive receptors were noted, a reference distance of 100 feet was used. This table also shows the distances to existing traffic noise contours. The actual AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

12 distances to noise level contours may vary from the distances predicted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) model due to roadway curvature, grade, shielding from local topography or structures, elevated roadways, or elevated receivers. The distances reported in Table are generally considered to be conservative estimates of noise exposure along the project site roadways. A complete listing of the FHWA Model input data is provided within Appendix D the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T). TABLE EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AND DISTANCE TO CONTOURS Roadway Segment Distance Ldn Ldn Contour (feet) Mt. Shasta Boulevard North of Spring Hill Drive Mt. Shasta Boulevard Spring Hill Drive to Ski Village Drive Mt. Shasta Boulevard Ski Village Drive to Nixon Drive (south) Mt. Shasta Boulevard Nixon Drive (south) to CGWC Drive Mt. Shasta Boulevard South of CGWC Drive Spring Hill Drive East of Mt. Shasta Boulevard Nixon Road West of Mt. Shasta Boulevard Mt. Shasta Blvd to Everitt Memorial Ski Village Drive Hwy Everitt Memorial Hwy North of Ski Village Drive Everitt Memorial Hwy South of Ski Village Drive CGWC Drive East of Mt. Shasta Boulevard Notes: Ldn is computed at the closest sensitive receptors along each project-area roadway segment Source: FHWA-RD ; Abrams Associates, (Appendix U); BAC, (Appendix T). Existing Vibration Environment The existing bottling plant located on the project site is not currently in operation. As a result, no mechanical equipment is in operation at the site that would affect ambient vibration levels. In addition, field inspections conducted by BAC revealed no sources of appreciable vibration in the immediate project vicinity or any perceptible vibration levels around the site perimeter. Therefore, the existing vibration environment in the immediate project vicinity is considered to be negligible REGULATORY CONTEXT Federal United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Noise Control Act, 1972 The Noise Control Act of 1972 established a national policy to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health and welfare. The Act serves to: 1) establish a means for effective coordination of federal research and activities in noise control; 2) authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce; and AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

13 3) provide information to the public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction characteristics of such products. In the past, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) coordinated all federal noise control activities through its Office of Noise Abatement and Control. USEPA phased out the office's funding in 1982 as part of a shift in federal noise control policy to transfer the primary responsibility of regulating noise to state and local governments. However, the Noise Control Act of 1972 was never rescinded by Congress and remains in effect today, though it is essentially unfunded (USEPA, 2016b). State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, indicate that a significant noise impact may occur if a project exposes persons to noise levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Local Siskiyou County General Plan The Siskiyou County General Plan Noise Element contains ranges of acceptable noise levels for a variety of land use types, presented in Table As shown in Table , 60 db Ldn is identified as acceptable for residential land uses (including transient lodging). In addition, the Noise Element also identifies that interior CNEL, with windows closed, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed a CNEL of 45 db in any habitable room. TABLE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR EXTERIOR COMMUNITY NOISE Land Use Category Auditoriums, concert halls, amphitheaters, music halls. Passively-used open space (quiet or contemplation areas of public parks) Residential. All dwellings including single-family, multi-family, group quarters, mobile homes, etc. Transient lodging, hotels, motels. School classrooms, libraries, churches. Hospitals, convalescent homes, etc. Actively utilized playgrounds, neighborhood parks, golf courses. Noise Ranges (Ldn) Office buildings, personal business and professional services. Light commercial. Retail, movie theaters, restaurants Heaving commercial. Wholesale, industrial, manufacturing, utilities, etc. Notes: Noise Ranges: 1 - Acceptable land use. No special noise insulation or noise abatement requirements unless the proposed development is itself considered a source of incompatible noise for a nearby land use. 2 - New construction or development allowed only after necessary noise abatement features included in design. 3 - New construction or development should generally be avoided unless a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is completed and needed noise abatement features included in design. 4 - New construction or development generally not allowed. Source: County of Siskiyou, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

14 City of Mt. Shasta General Plan Although the Proposed Project is not within the jurisdiction of the City, certain sensitive receptors near the project site occur within the City boundaries and truck traffic and related noise would pass through the City. The General Plan Noise Element provides long-term policies concerning the noise environment within the City. The General Plan is broken down into various objectives and programs that each have goals, policies, and implementation measures. The following General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures are relevant to noise within the City: General Plan Objectives and Programs Noise Goal NZ-1 Protect City residents from the harmful and annoying effects of exposure to excessive noise. Policy NZ-1.1 Enforce standards for noise exposure from proposed and existing non-transportation noise sources. The General Plan Noise Standards for the City of Mt. Shasta for new uses affected by non-transportation noise sources are shown on [Table ]. The standards of [Table ] shall be applied to both new noise-sensitive land uses and new noise-generating uses, with the responsibility for noise attenuation placed on the new use. TABLE NOISE STANDARDS FOR NEW USES AFFECTED BY NON-TRANSPORTATION NOISE Land Use Outdoor Activity Area - Leq 1 Daytime Nighttime Interior Leq Day & Night All Residential 2,3, Transient Lodging Hospitals & Nursing Homes Theatres & Auditoriums Churches, Meeting Halls, Schools, Libraries, etc Office Buildings 7, Commercial Buildings 7, Playgrounds, Parks, etc Industry Notes: 1 - The standards in this table shall be reduced by 5 db for sounds consisting primarily of speech or music, and forrecurring impulsive sounds. If the existing ambient noise level exceeds the standards of this table, then the noise level standards shall be increased at 5 db increments to encompass the ambient. 2 - Outdoor activity areas for single-family residential uses are defined as backyards. For large parcels or residences with no clearly defined outdoor activity area, the standard shall be applicable within a 100 foot radius of the residence. 3 - For multi-family residential uses, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the common outdoor recreation area, such as at pools, play areas or tennis courts. 4 - It may not be possible to achieve compliance with this standard at residential uses located immediately adjacent to loading dock areas of commercial uses while trucks are unloading. The daytime and nighttime noise level standards applicable to loading docks shall be 55 and 50 db Leq, respectively. 5 - Outdoor activity areas of transient lodging facilities include swimming pool and picnic areas, and are not commonly used during nighttime hours. 6 - Hospitals are often noise-generating uses. The exterior noise level standards for hospitals are applicable only at clearly identified areas designated for outdoor relaxation by either hospital staff or patients. 7 - Only the exterior spaces of these uses designated for employee or customer relaxation have any degree of sensitivity to noise. 8 - The outdoor activity areas of office, commercial and park uses are not typically utilized during nighttime hours. Source: City of Mt. Shasta, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

15 Implementation Measure NZ-1.1(b): When noise study levels due to non-transportation noise sources exceed acceptable noise level standards as indicated in [Table ], noise mitigation measures shall be required to comply with the standards. Implementation Measure NZ-1.1(c): Noise created by new proposed non-transportation noise sources shall not exceed the noise level standards indicated in [Table ]. Policy NZ-1.2 Review impacts more closely when a project is potentially a high noise generator. Implementation Measure NZ-1.2(a): Proposed non-residential land uses that are likely to produce noise levels exceeding the acceptable noise standards at existing or planned noise-sensitive uses shall require an acoustical analysis as part of the application review process to ensure that methods of achieving noise standards are included in project design. Policy NZ-1.4 Enforce General Plan noise standards for noise exposure from proposed and existing transportation noise sources. The General Plan Noise Standards for the City of Mt. Shasta for new uses affected by transportation noise sources are shown on [Table ]. Where the noise level standards of [Table ] are expected to be exceeded at proposed new uses that would be affected by traffic or railroad noise, appropriate noise mitigation measures shall be included in the project design to reduce projected noise levels to comply with the standards of [Table ]. TABLE NOISE STANDARDS FOR NEW USES AFFECTED BY TRAFFIC AND RAILROAD NOISE Land Use Outdoor Activity Area Ldn 1 Interior Ldn/Peak Hour Leq 1 All Residential 2,3, Transient Lodging Hospitals & Nursing Homes Theatres & Auditoriums Churches, Meeting Halls, Schools, Libraries, etc Office Buildings Commercial Buildings Playgrounds, Parks, etc Industry Notes: 1 - For traffic noise within the City, Ldn and peak-hour Leq values are estimated to be approximately similar. Interior noise level standards are applied within noise-sensitive areas of the various land uses, with windows and doors in the closed positions. 2 - Outdoor activity areas for single-family residential uses are defined as back yards. For large parcels or residences with no clearly defined outdoor activity area, the standard shall be applicable within a 100-foot radius of the residence. 3 - For multi-family residential uses, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the common outdoor recreation area, such as at pools, play areas or tennis courts. 4 - Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 db Ldn or less using a practical application of the bestavailable noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 db Ldn may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. 5 - Outdoor activity areas of transient lodging facilities include swimming pool and picnic areas. 6 - Hospitals are often noise-generating uses. The exterior noise level standards for hospitals are applicable only at clearly identified areas designated for outdoor relaxation by either hospital staff or patients. 7 - Only the exterior spaces of these uses designated for employee or customer relaxation have any degree of sensitivity to noise. Source: City of Mt. Shasta, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

16 Implementation Measure NZ-1.4(a): Evaluate transportation noise sources of proposed projects according to the noise level standards shown in [Table ]. Implementation Measure NZ-1.4(b): Using acceptable acoustical engineering and construction standards, incorporate design features to reduce traffic noise to achieve the noise standards shown in [Table ]. Implementation Measure NZ-1.4(c): Noise created by new transportation noise sources, including roadway improvements, shall be mitigated to comply with the noise level standards shown in [Table ]. Policy NZ-1.7 Noise attenuation measures required to achieve acceptable noise standards shall emphasize site planning and project design. Implementation Measure NZ-1.7(a): Use creative concepts and accepted acoustical engineering standards to achieve acceptable noise standards. Implementation Measure NZ-1.7(b): The use of noise barriers, such as soundwalls, shall be considered a supplemental means of achieving the noise standards after all practical design-related noise mitigation measures have been integrated into the project. When soundwalls and noise barriers are proposed, the City will consider the visual impacts in addition to their effectiveness in attenuating noise. Policy NZ-1.8 Monitor compliance with noise standards. Implementation Measure NZ-1.8(c): Noise associated with construction activity between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. shall be exempt from the standards cited in [Table ]. Construction activity outside of this period may exceed the cited standards if an exemption is granted by the City to cover special circumstances. Substantial Increase Criteria Generally, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or expose people to measurably severe noise levels. In practice, a noise impact may be considered significant if it would generate noise that would conflict with local project criteria or ordinances, or substantially increase noise levels at noise sensitive land uses. The potential increase noise levels from the Proposed Project is a factor in determining significance. Neither Siskiyou County (County) nor the City noise regulations contain standards for assessing the significance of project-related noise level increases. In such cases, noise evaluation criteria developed by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) provide guidance in the assessment of changes in ambient noise levels, as shown in Table The recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by noise. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, these criteria have been applied to other sources of noise similarly described in terms of cumulative noise exposure metrics such as the Ldn. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

17 TABLE SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES IN CUMULATIVE NOISE EXPOSURES Ambient Noise Level Without Project Source: FICON, Increase Required for Significant Impact < 60 db db or more db db or more > 65 db db or more As shown in Table , an increase in noise from similar sources of 5 db or more would be noticeable where the ambient level without the project is less than 60 db. Where the ambient level is between 60 and 65 db, an increase in noise of 3 db or more would be noticeable, and an increase of 1.5 db or more would be noticeable where the ambient noise level exceeds 65 db Ldn. The rationale for the Table criteria is that, as ambient noise levels increase, a smaller increase in noise resulting from a project is sufficient to cause annoyance. Conversely, in lower ambient noise environments, a greater increase in noise levels was found to be tolerated before people became annoyed. Vibration Criteria Neither the County nor the City have adopted vibration standards. As a result, Caltrans-recommended criteria are applied for this analysis, as described below. Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events. The Caltrans Transportation- and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual, written for Caltrans by Jones & Stokes in June 2004, provides guidelines for acceptable vibration limits for transportation and construction projects in terms of the induced peak particle velocity (PPV), as shown in Table Structure and Condition Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments TABLE VIBRATION CRITERIA FOR STRUCTURES Transient Sources 1 Maximum PPV (in/sec) Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Sources Fragile buildings Historic and some old building Older residential structures New residential structures Modern industrial/commercial building Notes: 1 - Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event. 2 - Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include repetitive single events. Source: Caltrans, Current Caltrans research illustrates that there are different thresholds of perception for different types of vibration sources. Section XI(b) of Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines requires that a project result in AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

18 exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive groundborne vibration levels or groundborne noise levels to be considered a significant impact. The CEQA guidelines specifically mention excessive vibration, rather than just perceptible vibration. Because the general range at which vibration becomes distinctly to strongly perceptible ranges from 0.1 to 0.50 in/sec PPV (Caltrans, 2004), vibration levels exceeding 0.1 in/sec PPV at the nearest sensitive receptors are considered significant IMPACTS Method of Analysis As discussed in Section 4.0, to provide a conservative analysis, this EIR evaluates impacts resulting from all modifications undertaken and proposed by CGWC to operate the proposed bottling facilities; therefore, the environmental impacts of construction activities occurring prior to the publication of the NOP in June 2016, proposed future construction activities, and operation are evaluated below. The environmental setting as it existed in 2013, when CGWC purchased the property, forms the baseline from which impacts associated with prior construction activities are measured and evaluated, and the existing environmental setting (2016) forms the baseline from which proposed construction activities and operation is measured. Because little to no growth has occurred in the project area, the environmental baseline with respect to ambient noise levels has not changed appreciably between 2013 and June Construction Noise Construction noise was analyzed using data compiled for various pieces of construction equipment at a representative distance of 50 feet. Construction activities are discussed relative to the applicable County and City standards. Operational Noise Analysis of noise impacts associated with plant operations was limited to noise-generating equipment that would be operating on the exterior of the building on the project site and on-site truck circulation and loading dock movements. This is due to the fact that the most significant on-site exterior mechanical equipment at the project site in terms of noise generation includes roof-top heating, ventilating and airconditioning (HVAC) equipment, ground-mounted cooling towers and chiller equipment, the proposed wastewater treatment equipment, and proposed propane power generators. Additional equipment associated with water bottling, flavoring, packaging, etc., will be located within the interior of the facility. Due to the noise-reduction provided by the insulated building shell, noise generated by equipment located within the building is predicted to be inconsequential relative to equipment located at the exterior of the structure. Of the four wastewater treatment options, Wastewater Treatment Option 4 is the only option that would generate noise that could contribute to impacts at off-site sensitive receptors. Therefore, in order to provide a conservative analysis, the noise model analyzed Wastewater Treatment Option 4 with the Proposed Project. All Proposed Project noise levels analyzed below include noise generated by wastewater treatment equipment utilized under operation of Option 4. However, it should be noted that noise levels associated with operation of the Proposed Project under Wastewater Treatment Options 1 through 3 would be slightly lower than analyzed below. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

19 To quantify the noise generation of the on-site mechanical equipment, BAC utilized sound power levels provided for the various equipment types as well as locations of the equipment as illustrated on Figure 3-4. The sound power levels were radiated to the sensitive receptor locations identified closest to the project site, with a 6-dBA decrease in sound levels for each doubling of distance from the noise source and standard corrections for atmospheric absorption. In addition, where the nearby sensitive receptors would be partially or completely shielded from view of the on-site mechanical equipment by intervening topography or structures, offsets were applied to predicted noise levels to account for such shielding (see Noise Attenuation discussion under Section above). Appendix E of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T) contains the reference sound power levels for the on-site mechanical equipment and the formula used to convert sound power to sound pressure levels at distance. Because the on-site mechanical equipment generates steady-state noise levels, noise impacts associated with this equipment are evaluated relative to day/night average (Ldn) criteria for receptors located in the County, and relative to hourly average noise level (Leq) criteria for receptors located in the City. To provide conservative computation of Ldn values, all on-site mechanical equipment would be in operation for the entire 24-hour period of a day. As a means of quantifying noise exposure associated with on-site heavy truck circulation, noise level data collected for previous trucking facility noise studies were utilized. From that data, it was determined that the SEL due to a heavy semi-trailer truck operation similar to what will occur at the project site is approximately 83 db at a distance of 50 feet. The maximum noise level for the same truck passage is 75 db Lmax. It should be noted that Lmax values for truck passbys will always be lower than SEL values because the SEL value is computed as the entire sound energy of the passby event compressed into a one-second duration (to allow normalization of the duration of the passby event), whereas the maximum value (Lmax) is the highest noise level at a discrete point in time. See Appendix T for equations that were utilized to calculate on-site heavy truck noise exposure. Traffic Noise To describe future noise levels due to traffic, the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD ) was used. Direct inputs to the model included traffic volumes provided by Abrams Associates (Appendix U). The FHWA model is based upon the Calveno reference noise factors for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site. The Calveno vehicle noise emission curves were used with the FHWA Model. Appendix D of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T) provides the complete input data for the FHWA traffic noise prediction modeling. Traffic noise levels were predicted at 50 feet from the roadway centerlines and were modeled under existing and cumulative conditions, with and without the Proposed Project. Off-site Improvements The potential for noise impacts resulting from construction of off-site sewer improvements in South Old Stage Road is addressed below. The operation of the off-site sewer improvements would not result in any audible noise; therefore, operational impacts are not discussed. The potential for environmental impacts from the off-site improvements described in Section 3.7 that would serve the Proposed Project, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

20 but would occur with or without the Proposed Project, is analyzed in Section 4.12, Utilities. Environmental effects from the planned City of Mt. Shasta State-Mandated Wastewater Treatment and Outfall Improvement Project are discussed in Section , Impact Environmental effects from the proposed Lassen Substation Project are discussed in Section , Impact Thresholds of Significance Criteria for determining the significance of impacts to the noise environment have been developed based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and relevant agency thresholds. Impacts to the noise environment would be considered significant if the Proposed Project would result in: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The following specific standards are used in this analysis: o o For sensitive receptors located within Siskiyou County, an exterior noise limit of 60 db Ldn and an interior noise limit of 45 db CNEL, for all noise sources. For sensitive receptors located within Mt. Shasta: For non-transportation noise sources, a daytime exterior noise limit of 50 db Leq, a nighttime exterior noise limit of 55 db Leq 1, and a daytime interior noise limit of 40 db Leq, and a nighttime interior noise limit of 45 db Leq 2. For transportation noise sources, an exterior noise limit of 60 db Ldn and an interior noise limit of 45 db Ldn. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, defined as 0.1 inches/second. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, defined as 5 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient noise level less than 60 db, 3 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient noise level between 60 and 65 db, and 1.5 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient noise level greater than 65 db (see Tables and ). A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, defined as 5 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient noise level less than 60 db, 3 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient 1 The general footnote at the bottom of Table states that the noise standards shall be increased in 5 db increments to encompass the ambient noise level in cases where existing ambient noise levels exceed the Table standards. Data in Table (existing ambient noise levels) indicate that measured nighttime ambient noise levels averaged 51 db Leq at Sites 1 and 3, which represent sensitive receptors within Mt. Shasta. Per the footnote in Table 7-5 of the Mt. Shasta General Plan (Table ), the nighttime noise level standard is adjusted upwards in 5 db increments until the ambient noise environment is encompassed. The resulting nighttime noise level threshold is adjusted to 55 db Leq at the sensitive receptors within the City of Mt. Shasta. 2 Because both daytime and nighttime interior noise levels currently exceed the City s 35 db Leq (see Table ) noise standard (windows open for 10 db of noise reduction), the standard is adjusted upwards in 5 db increments until the ambient is encompassed. Therefore, the interior noise level standard applicable to this project would be 40 and 45 db Leq within residences during day and nighttime periods, respectively. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

21 noise level between 60 and 65 db, and 1.5 db Ldn for receptors in areas with an existing ambient noise level greater than 65 db (see Tables and ). For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Effects Found Not to be Significant As discussed within the Initial Study for the Proposed Project included within Appendix C, the Proposed Project is located over 12 miles from the nearest airport or airstrip. Therefore the Proposed Project would have no impact related to the following criteria and these issue areas are not discussed further: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Project Impacts Construction Impacts Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation SHORT-TERM NOISE GENERATED BY ON-SITE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Proposed Project: Less Than Significant Off-Site Sewer Improvements: Significant MM S : Off-Site Sewer Improvements Area Construction Noise Reduction Less Than Significant During construction of the Proposed Project and associated off-site sewer improvements, construction activities would add to the noise environment in the vicinity of the project site and construction areas. Activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table , ranging from 70 to 90 db at a distance of 50 feet. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

22 Equipment Description TABLE TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE Maximum Noise Equipment Description Level at 50 feet, dba Maximum Noise Level at 50 feet, dba Auger drill rig 85 Front end loader 80 Backhoe 80 Generator (25 kilovolt-amperes Bar bender 80 [kva] or less) Boring jack power unit 80 Generator (more than 25 kva) 82 Chain saw 85 Grader 85 Compactor (ground) 80 Jackhammer 85 Compressor (air) 80 Paver 85 Concrete batch plant 83 Pickup truck 55 Concrete mixer truck 85 Pneumatic tools 85 Concrete pump truck 82 Pumps 77 Concrete saw 90 Rock drill 85 Crane (mobile or stationary) 85 Scraper 85 Dozer 85 Soil mix drill rig 80 Dump truck 84 Tractor 84 Excavator 85 Vacuum street sweeper 80 Flatbed truck 84 Vibratory concrete mixer 80 Source: FHWA, Proposed Project Previous Construction Activities The initial construction phase of the Proposed Project that occurred between 2015 and 2016 involved the installation of equipment within the plant building (process system, aseptic system, boilers, blowing and filling machine, and packing equipment), the installation of equipment around the perimeter of the plant building (water storage tanks, juice tank concrete pad, transformers, chiller and cooling towers, juice unloading station and fuel storage tanks), and perimeter landscaping improvements. Improvements involving earth disturbance and external construction activities completed prior to the NOP publication are shown in orange in Figure 3-4. The nearest sensitive receptors to prior construction activities are located approximately 700 feet from the northeast area of the central project site where the juice unloading station and chiller and cooling towers are located. Standard spherical spreading of noise results in a noise attenuation rate of 6 db per doubling of distance from the reference position. Without shielding of on-site construction activities by intervening topography, the resulting maximum noise levels at the nearest residences would range from 50 to 70 db Lmax. After accounting for shielding by surrounding topography, actual construction noise levels would be even lower. CGWC implemented mitigation measures in accordance with the 1998 Mitigation Agreement between Dannon and the County described in Section 3.6; thus, the following construction best management practices were implemented during construction of the previously constructed facilities: o Outdoor construction activities will be limited to daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.). If specific noise complaints are received during construction, one or more of the following noise mitigation measures will be implemented: AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

23 Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitive properties. Notify nearby residents whenever extremely noisy work (e.g., pile driving, use of pneumatic drill) would be occurring and ongoing. Use construction-related soils stockpiles as effective noise barriers when feasible. Shut off idling equipment. Install temporary or portable acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources if excessive noise is reasonably anticipated to be ongoing. No reportedseveral noise complaints were received by the County and CGWC during previous construction activities occurring between 2015 and 2016 regarding construction outside the hours of 7:00 am to 7:00 pm. After receipt of the noise complaints, CGWC contacted the contractor to ensure construction activities would comply with the correct hours of operation. Once the contractor followed this direction, no further noise complaints were received. After consideration of the location of the construction activities relative to the nearest residences, the fact that construction activities were limited to daytime hours, and shielding of the nearest existing residences by intervening topography, average noise levels generated during prior construction activities are expected to have been satisfactory relative to Siskiyou County and Mt. Shasta daytime noise standards. Additionally, noise complaints were addressed per the 1998 Mitigation Agreement s noise mitigation measure. As a result, noise impacts associated with prior construction activities are less than significant. Proposed Project Future Construction Activities (All Options for Wastewater Treatment) The nearest sensitive receptors to any proposed future on-site construction activities are located approximately 500 feet west of the proposed caretaker residence. The next closest sensitive receptors are in excess of 700 feet from any proposed construction. Standard spherical spreading of noise results in a noise attenuation rate of 6 db per doubling of distance from the reference position. Without shielding of on-site construction activities by intervening topography, the resulting maximum noise levels at the nearest residences would range from 50 to 70 db Lmax. After accounting for shielding by surrounding topography, actual construction noise levels would be even lower. As discussed above, CGWC has committed to implementing mitigation measures in accordance with the 1998 Mitigation Agreement between Dannon and the County described in Section 3.6; thus, the following construction best management practices will be implemented during future proposed construction activities: o Outdoor construction activities will be limited to daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.). If specific noise complaints are received during construction, one or more of the following noise mitigation measures will be implemented: Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitive properties. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

24 Notify nearby residents whenever extremely noisy work (e.g., pile driving, use of pneumatic drill) would be occurring and ongoing. Use construction-related soils stockpiles as effective noise barriers when feasible. Shut off idling equipment. Install temporary or portable acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources if excessive noise is reasonably anticipated to be ongoing. After consideration of the percentage of the hour each type of equipment would be operating, the location of the construction activities relative to the nearest residences, the fact that construction activities would be limited to daytime hours, and shielding of the nearest existing residences by intervening topography, average noise levels generated during construction activities are expected to be considerably lower than maximum noise levels and satisfactory relative to Siskiyou County and Mt. Shasta daytime noise standards. As indicated in Appendix C to the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix T), existing maximum noise levels were measured to frequently exceed 70 db Lmax at noise measurement Site 2, and exceed 80 db Lmax at noise measurement Sites 1 and 3 (see Figure ). Maximum nnoise levels generated during the short period of Proposed Project construction would be below measured existing ambient noise levels, resulting in a non-audible noise level increase at off-site receptors of less than 3 dba. Therefore, the noise levels associated with on-site Proposed Project construction would not cause a substantial temporary increase at nearby receptors, or generate noise in excess of Siskiyou County or Mt. Shasta noise standards. As a result, noise impacts associated with on-site construction activities would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Off-Site Sewer Improvements Construction of off-site sewer improvements is estimated to last approximately two weeks. The noise levels shown in Table are maximum noise levels, without consideration for the percentage of the hour each type of equipment would be operating or shielding of the nearest existing sensitive receptor by landscape. Therefore, actual noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors would likely be lower than the maximum levels shown in the table. The nearest sensitive receptor to the off-site improvements is approximately 50 feet from the edge of the roadway where construction would occur. Maximum noise levels generated by construction activities at this nearby receptor would be above the County threshold of 60 db. Additionally, maximum noise levels generated by construction would cause a substantial temporary increase above existing ambient noise levels. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measure S requires that construction activities be limited to Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and provides a list of noise-reducing measures to be employed by construction contractors to reduce potential noise impacts. Mitigation Measure S also requires the designation of a disturbance coordinator who would receive all public noise complaints and implement any feasible measures to alleviate the problem. As the construction of off-site improvements would be short-term, intermittent, and limited to daytime hours, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

25 Significance IMPACT GENERATE EXCESSIVE GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Proposed Project: Less than Significant Off-Site Sewer Improvements: Less than Significant Mitigation Measures None Required Significance After Mitigation Less than Significant Proposed Project (All Options for Wastewater Treatment) To quantify reference vibration levels commonly generated by construction equipment, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans, 2013) was utilized. Table 18 of that manual, reproduced below as Table , contains reference peak particle velocity for typical construction equipment. The vibration data shown in Table indicate that heavy equipment-generated vibration levels are below the significance threshold of 0.1 ppv with the exception of the vibratory roller, even at the very close measurement locations of 25 feet from the operating equipment. As described above under Impact , the nearest sensitive receptors to any on-site construction activities are located approximately 500 feet west of the proposed caretaker residence. Based on the way that vibration levels dissipate rapidly as distance from the source increases, all vibration levels produced from on-site construction equipment would be significantly below the threshold of 0.1 ppv at the nearest off-site receptors. Therefore, this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required. TABLE VIBRATION AMPLITUDES FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Vibration Source Measurement Distance, ft. Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec) Vibratory Roller Large Bulldozers Loaded Trucks Jackhammer Source: Caltrans, Construction of Off-Site Sewer Improvements The nearest sensitive receptor to off-site construction activities associated with sewer improvements is approximately 50 feet away. Utilizing the formula recommended in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual 3, maximum vibration levels at the nearby sensitive receptor would be approximately ppv, which is less than the significance threshold of 0.1 ppv. Therefore, 3 PPVEquipment = PPVRef (25/D) n where PPVRef = reference ppv at 25 feet, D = distance from equipment to the receiver in feet, and n = 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through ground). AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

26 impacts from vibration levels at nearby receptors associated with construction of off-site sewer improvements would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Operation Impacts Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation EXPOSE EXISTING NOISE SENSITIVE LAND USES TO SUBSTANTIAL PERMANENT NOISE LEVEL INCREASES OR NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF THE SISKIYOU COUNTY OR CITY OF MT. SHASTA NOISE STANDARDS Traffic Noise: Less Than Significant Operational Noise: Significant Traffic Noise: None AvailableRequired Operational Noise: MM : Noise Reduction at Propane Generators Operational Noise: MM : Rooftop Exhaust Fans Operational Noise: MM : Noise Reduction at Exhaust Vents Traffic Noise: Less Than Significant and Unavoidable Operational Noise: Less Than Significant Traffic Noise Day-Night Average Traffic Table shows the predicted traffic noise level increases on the local roadway network for existing and existing plus project conditions. As shown in Table , some project area roadways are currently exposed to exterior traffic noise levels exceeding the applicable exterior noise level standard for residential uses in both the County and the City. These roadways will continue to experience elevated exterior noise levels with implementation of the Proposed Project. In no case is the Proposed Project predicted to cause new exceedances of the Siskiyou County 60 db or City of Mt. Shasta 60 db exterior noise level standards for transportation noise sources. However, according to the standards for determining a substantial increase in the ambient noise environment presented in Table , the Proposed Project would result in a substantial increase in ambient traffic noise levels along Mt. Shasta Boulevard from Ski Village Drive to Nixon Drive and CGWC Drive. The nearest sensitive receptor to CGWC Drive is located approximately 400 feet from the roadway centerline, resulting in low ambient traffic noise levels at the sensitive receptor. However, ambient noise levels measured at Site 3 indicate that existing background noise levels along CGWC Drive currently average 60 db Ldn (Table ). Therefore, CGWC Drive traffic noise levels with the Proposed Project are predicted to be approximately 15 db less than measured existing ambient noise and so no increase in ambient noise is predicted along this roadway segment. Two residences are located close to the roadway alongthe nearest sensitive receptors to Mt. Shasta Boulevard between Ski Village Drive and Nixon Drive include Receptors 13 to 15, as shown on Figure As indicated in Table , the project-generated increase in traffic noise levels at those residences is not predicted to be substantial. The closest residence is located approximately feet AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

27 Roadway Segment TABLE PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Day/Night Average Level (Ldn) Existing + Project Change Substantial Increase? Existing Peak Hour Average Level (Leq) Existing + Project Mt. Shasta Blvd North of Spring Hill Drive No No Mt. Shasta Blvd Spring Hill Drive to Ski Village Drive No No Mt. Shasta Blvd Ski Village Drive to Nixon Drive (south) NoYes No Mt. Shasta Blvd Nixon Drive (south) to CGWC Drive No No Mt. Shasta Blvd South of CGWC Drive No No Spring Hill Drive East of Mt. Shasta Boulevard No No Nixon Road West of Mt. Shasta Boulevard No No Ski Village Drive Mt. Shasta Blvd to Everitt Memorial Hwy No No Everitt Memorial North of Ski Village Drive No No Everitt Memorial South of Ski Village Drive No No Change Substantial Increase? CGWC Drive East of Mt. Shasta Boulevard YesNo YesNo Notes: 1 - Ambient noise levels measured at measurement Site 3 indicate that the true existing background noise levels along CGWC Drive currently average approximately 60 db L dn (Table 1). The low levels of 37.7 db Ldn and 36.6 db Leq reported for existing conditions along this roadway segment are based only on traffic noise prediction modelling results for this currently lightly travelled roadway segment. However, when the overall ambient noise environment in the vicinity of this roadway are considered (approximately 60 db Ldn), the actual increase in both Ldn and Peak Hour Leq noise levels along this segment are negligible, as CGWC Drive noise levels with the project alone are predicted to be approximately 15 to 17 db less than existing ambient noise levels along this segment. Ambient noise levels measured at Site 3 indicate that existing background noise levels along CGWC Drive currently average 60 db L dn (Table ). Therefore, CGWC Drive noise levels are predicted to be approximately 15 db less than existing ambient noise and no increase in ambient noise is predicted along this roadway segment. Source: FHWA-RD ; Abrams Associates, ; BAC, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

28 from the roadway centerline and would experience a traffic noise level increase of db Ldn, relative to existing traffic noise conditions without the projectwhich is above the applicable standard of 1.5 db for substantial increases at sensitive receptors with existing noise levels above 65 db. It is anticipated that both residences located close to this roadway segment would experience substantial ambient noise level increases, at locations where the ambient noise is already above City standards. This is a significant impact. In addition, the increases in existing peak hour traffic noise exposure at this closest residence to the roadway are predicted to be 2.0. These increases are all below the applicable threshold of 3 db for substantial increases at sensitive receptors with existing noise levels between 60 and 65 db Ldn. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is required. Where existing residences are affected by project-related traffic noise level increases, it is generally infeasible to develop mitigation measures which could be utilized to mitigate the impact, because conventional traffic noise mitigation measures, such as setbacks and the construction of solid noise barriers, cannot be used. Because the residences are existing, additional setbacks between the residences and the roadways cannot be provided without moving either the residence or the roadway. Noise barriers are often a viable alternative for new residences, but not so for existing residences where driveway openings and other obstacles would either prevent their construction or render them ineffective, as is the case with this roadway segment. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, this impact is significant and unavoidable. Single-Event Noise from Nighttime Truck Passbys The Proposed Project would generate 100 daily heavy truck trips. Because all 100 of those trips are limited to daytime hours (between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm), no nighttime project-generated truck trips would occur within the City or County. As a result, project truck traffic would not result in an increase in the potential for nighttime sleep disturbance from the single event noise of heavy truck passbys. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant. As discussed in Section 3.5.1, while the majority of these truck trips would reportedly occur during daytime hours, some trips may occur during nighttime hours as the Plant is planned for 24-hour operations. Therefore, analysis of potential noise impacts related to sleep disturbance was conducted. There are a very limited number of residences located along the proposed haul route between the project site access road and I-5. Specifically, only 5 residences were identified within 200 feet of the Mt. Shasta Boulevard roadway centerline, the nearest of which is approximately 40 feet from the roadway centerline. The posted speed limit is 35 mph along this stretch of roadway, and it is reasonable to conclude that project-generated heavy trucks will be travelling at even slower speeds as they pass the nearest residences due to the relatively short distance between the nearest residences and CGWC Drive, the project site access. To quantify the noise generation of individual passages of slower moving heavy trucks on Mt. Shasta Boulevard, BAC utilized heavy truck single-event noise monitoring data collected for the Teichert Boca aggregate quarry in May of The measurements were conducted to specifically quantify singleevent noise levels generated by individual truck passbys under very controlled circumstances. Detailed information on the test approach can be found within Appendix T. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

29 During the single-event passby noise monitoring test, minimum (Lmin) noise levels at the test location were recorded to be 42 db, and background (L90) values were recorded to be db. Because test results indicate that maximum noise levels generated during the aggregate truck passbys were in excess of 20 db above background noise levels, there was no contamination of the heavy truck passby test results by other noise sources and measured single-event levels captured the entire passby. The passby test results indicate that the passby noise levels were higher for the loaded truck than for the empty trucks. In addition, passby levels were only marginally louder when Jake brakes were used to slow the truck. Because heavy truck passbys will consist of a combination of uphill and downhill, loaded and empty trucks with the potential for some Jake brake usage, the average measured sound exposure level of 74 db SEL at the 85-foot measurement location is considered to be representative of typical passby noise levels for Crystal Geyser heavy trucks. Given a measured SEL value of 74 db at 85 feet, the SEL at the exterior building facades of residences located between 40 and 200 feet from Mt. Shasta Boulevard would range from 68 to 79 db SEL based on a 4.5-dB increase/decrease in noise levels per each halving/doubling of distance from the roadway centerline. Because heavy trucks currently utilize Mt. Shasta Boulevard during nighttime hours, it is reasonable to conclude that persons living in close proximity to that roadway would sleep with windows closed if they currently experience sleep disturbance issues with windows open. Even with a worst-case estimate of building façade noise exposure of 20 db with windows closed, the resulting worst-case interior noise level in the nearest residence to Mt. Shasta Boulevard would be 59 db SEL during passby of heavy trucks. As discussed earlier, incidents of sleep disturbance are predicted to be relatively low at interior SEL values of less than 65 db. According to the ANSI methodology, a single passby of a heavy truck during nighttime hours for which an interior SEL of 48 to 59 db is registered within a sleeping room would result in a probability of awakening of 0.9 to 1.4 percent. This publication also includes a compilation of test results from seven different studies. Those results indicate that the percentage awakened ranged from 0 to 1.5 percent in cases where interior noise levels registered 59 db SEL plus or minus 2 db. In light of the low number of nighttime heavy truck passbys and the low percentage of awakening during such passbys, this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required. Operational Noise The most significant on-site exterior mechanical equipment at the project site in terms of noise generation includes roof-top heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment; ground-mounted cooling towers and chiller equipment; the proposed wastewater treatment equipment; proposed propane power generators; operation of on-site wells; loading dock movements; and on-site truck circulation. Additional operations associated with water bottling, flavoring, packaging, etc., will be located within the interior of the facility. The building shell consists of rigid foam insulation sandwiched between two layers of sheet metal. A single layer of 26-gauge sheet-metal provides an average sound attenuation of 18 db between 125 and 4,000 Hertz frequency bands (Appendix T). After consideration of double layers of sheet metal and the rigid foam insulation, the noise reduction provided by the building shell is AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

30 conservatively estimated to be at least 40 db. Due to this noise-reduction provided by the insulated building shell, noise generated by equipment located within the building is predicted to be inconsequential relative to equipment located at the exterior of the structure. As a result, this analysis focuses on the noise generation of the significant noise generating equipment which will be operating in the exterior areas of the project site. Louvered openings in the bottling plant building are acoustic louvers, designed to attenuate sound while permitting airflow. These acoustic louvers would not compromise the acoustic integrity of the building shell. The existing building shell and intervening topography provides partial to complete shielding of some of the project noise sources in the direction of some of the nearby sensitive receptors analyzed in this evaluation. To account for this shielding, conservative offsets were developed as described in the noise study (BAC, 2017; Appendix T). Because the on-site mechanical equipment generates steady-state noise levels, noise impacts associated with this equipment are evaluated relative to day/night average (Ldn) criteria for receptors located in the County, and relative to hourly average noise level (Leq) criteria for receptors located in the City. To provide a conservative computation of Ldn values, all on-site mechanical equipment would be in operation for the entire 24-hour period of a day. The primary noise sources associated with on-site circulation of heavy trucks, including loading dock area turning movement, are the slow-moving semi-trailer trucks approaching, stopping (air brakes), backing into the loading docks (back-up alarms), and pulling out of the loading docks to depart the site. Once the trucks have backed into the loading dock, the engines will be shut off and they will be loaded or unloaded from the inside of the facility using a fork lift or hand cart. As a result, the majority of the noise generated by the loading dock area is contained within the building and truck trailer. The Proposed Project is expected to generate 50 heavy truck loads per day (100 trips), with approximately 15 semi-trailer truck movements during the peak hour, which occurs during the daytime (Appendix U). Trucks would access the project site via the southwest entrance from Mt. Shasta Boulevard and head north along the access road until arriving at loading dock area on the west side of the building. Heavy trucks would depart the project site using the same roadways. For this analysis, 80 of theall 100 daily truck operations would occur during daytime hours between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm, with 20 occurring during nighttime periods. For calculation of hourly average noise levels, busy peak hour operations could consist of up to trucks in an hour during daytime periods and 4 trucks per any given nighttime hour. A shielding offset was applied at receiver locations where the loading dock or the truck route is screened from view of the receiver to accurately reflect the existing of the intervening project buildings or topography. A matrix of shielding offsets applied to the on-site noise sources to account for intervening shielding is provided within Appendix F G of the Noise Analysis (Appendix T). Table presents the predicted noise levels for all major on-site noise sources as well as applicable noise standards. As shown in Table , two one sensitive receptors located in the City and one sensitive receptor in the County would experience ambient noise levels above applicable City and County standards, and two sensitive receptors within the County would experience substantial ambient noise level increases above FICON standards. Additionally, the impacted sensitive receptor located in the AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

31 Receiver Jurisdiction Criteria 1 TABLE PREDICTED EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS AT NEAREST SENSITIVE RECEPTORS RESULTING FROM ON-SITE EQUIPMENT AND OPERATIONS EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS Project Noise Measured Ambient Increase in Ambient Ambient + Project Day Leq Generation Night Leq Ldn Day Leq Noise Levels Night Leq Ldn Day Leq Night Leq Ldn Day Leq due to Project Night Leq Significant Impact? 1 County 60 db Ldn YesNo No No 2 County 60 db Ldn YesNo YesNo YesNo 3 County 60 db Ldn No No No 4 County 60 db Ldn Yes NoYes No 5 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) NoYes No NoYes 6 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) NoYes No No 7 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) NoYes No No 8 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) NoYes No No 9 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No 10 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No 11 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) YesNo No No 12 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No 13 City 55 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No 14 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No 15 City 50 Leq (d) - 55 Leq (n) No No No Notes: Numbers in bold indicate either an exceedance of the local noise standard where that standard was not already exceeded, or a substantial increase in ambient noise levels resulting from the project. 1 - The 60 db L dn criteria is applied to receptors located within Siskiyou County. The noise standards applicable to sensitive receptors located within the City of Mt. Shasta are 50 db L eq during daytime hours and 55 db L eq during nighttime hours. Due to the increased ambient conditions at receptor 13 resulting from Mt. Shasta Boulevard traffic, the City s 50 db Leq daytime noise level standard is increased to 55 db at Receptor 13 in accordance with the City s policies described in Section Source: BAC, (Appendix T). Ldn Day Leq Night Leq Ldn AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

32 County would also experience a substantial increase in ambient noise levels of 7 db Leq during the day and 5 db Leq at night. This is a significant impact. Noise levels impacts at the impacted sensitive receptors are generally caused byprimarily attributable to the operation of the proposed propane generators located on the southeast side of the plant building near the propane tanks, rooftop exhaust fans, and chiller building exhaust vents. No noise impacts were identified due to operation of rooftop mechanical equipment, ground level HVAC equipment, or wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) equipment. Mitigation Measure requires either the installation of quieter generators that produce noise levels 5 db lower than the proposed generators or the construction of a localized noise barrier (as shown on Figure ) surrounding the propane generators. The noise barrier is recommended to extend 3 feet above the height of the propane generators on all sides in order to reduce noise at the impacted sensitive receptor by 5 db. Mitigation Measure requires either the installation of quieter rooftop exhaust fans that produce noise levels 5 db lower than the existing fans (48 dba rather than 53 dba) or the construction of localized noise barriers surrounding each rooftop exhaust fan. The noise barrier would reduce noise at sensitive receptors by approximately 5 db. Additionally, in-line duct silencers would be required by Mitigation Measure at the exhaust vents of the chiller on the east side of the plant building. Silencers would reduce the sound output at these vents by 10 db. With the installation of quieter generators or construction of a noise barrier, quieter fans or construction of noise barriers, and in-line duct silencers at the chiller exhaust vents, noise levels at the impacted sensitive receptors would be below the applicable threshold level. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures , , and , operational noise impacts of the Proposed Project on nearby sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Significance IMPACT INTERIOR NOISE INCREASES AT NEARBY SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Potentially Significant MM : Noise Reduction at Propane Generators Mitigation Measures MM : Rooftop Exhaust Fans MM : Noise Reduction at Exhaust Vents Significance After Mitigation Less than Significant Because the adjusted exterior daytime and nighttime noise level standards for residences in the City are 50 and 55 db Leq, respectively, and because the worst-case building façade noise reduction with windows open is 10 db for this study (as discussed previously), compliance with the exterior noise level standards would ensure compliance with the 40 and 45 db Leq interior noise level standards for daytime and nighttime in the City and 45 db Leq interior noise level standard for the County. Because noise levels generated by on-site activities are predicted to exceed applicable standards at the exterior spaces of two sensitive receptors, it is possible that noise levels within the interior spaces of these residences could also be excessive. Similarly, because there is a substantial increase in exterior ambient noise levels at one sensitive receptor, it is possible that the increase noise levels within the interior space of this AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

33 SCALE LEGEND Production Well DEX-6 A Existing Bottling Plant! ÐN O R T H Feet Proposed Improvements Facilities Installed by CGWC Landscaping Ski Village Dr Fire Tank Parking Lot Water Storage (Production Water from DEX-6) Juice Tank Concrete Pad Juice Tanks Domestic Water Tank & Pad Cooling Tower Transformers Backup Generator Domestic Well and Pump Chiller and Cooling Towers Truck Docks Juice Unloading Station Truck Parking HVAC Equipment CO2 and Nitrogen Tank Vaporizers Noise Barrier Location E Proposed Parking Stall Proposed Caretaker/Security Residence Proposed ph Neutralization Building Proposed Propane Power Generators Propane Tank Potential Future Propane Tank * NOTE: Proposed wastewater facilities are shown in separate figures. SOURCE: Kibler & Kibler, 3/6/2016; USDA aerial photograph, 7/2014; AES, 6/9/2017 Crystal Geyser Draft Environmental Impact Report / Figure Mitigation Measure : Noise Barrier Location