APPENDIX A. CalEEMod Model Output

Transcription

1 APPENDIX A CalEEMod Model Output

2 This page intentionally left blank.

3 Remarks for the San Joaquin Valley Christian School Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodology and Modeling Calculations November 2015 (Updated March 2016) For the San Joaquin Valley Christian School (SJVCS) project Initial Study (IS), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from construction activities and operation of the project were estimated using CalEEMod (Version ). These modeling scenarios were prepared in accordance with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) December 17, 2009, document: District Policy Addressing GHG Emissions Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency, and other associated documents. Significance Thresholds The 2009 SJVAPCD guidance was developed to assist lead agencies, project applicants, permit applicants, and interested parties in assessing and reducing the impacts of project specific GHG emissions on global climate change. In accordance with this guidance, a project would be considered to have a less-than-significant cumulatively considerable impact on climate change if the project: Implements SJVAPCD adopted Best Performance Standards (BPS); Complies with an approved GHG plan or mitigation program; or Demonstrates a 29 percent reduction 1 in GHG emissions from business-as-usual (BAU). The analysis for the SJVCS does not use any of the above criteria for determining the significance of GHG emissions, for the following reasons: (1) There are no adopted BPS for a school development project; (2) Merced County does not have an adopted GHG reduction plan or climate action plan; (3) The California Supreme Court 2 questioned the use of Scoping Plan targets for individual projects without adequate explanation. Therefore, this analysis does not use demonstration of a 29 percent reduction in GHG emissions from BAU emissions to determine that a project would have a less than cumulatively significant impact consistent with GHG emission reduction targets established in the ARB s AB 32 Scoping Plan. However, the BAU projection is useful in considering GHG emissions in that it represents the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of regulatory measures that reduce GHG emissions. 1 2 The California Attorney General (AG) has expressed opposition to SJVAPCD strategy, claiming it leaves a number of unanswered questions, and the AG s office issued a letter dated November 4, 2009 stating that the proposed approach would not withstand legal scrutiny and may result in significant lost opportunities for the Air District and local governments to require mitigation of GHG emissions. The AG stated that the threshold does not take into account the need for new development to be more GHG-efficient than existing development to achieve AB 32 goals, given that past and current sources of emissions, which are substantially less efficient than this average, will continue to exist and emit. Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th

4 The SJVAPCD guidance does not limit the lead agency from establishing its own methodology in determining the significance of project-related greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change impacts. In its significance analysis, CEQA states that a lead agency should consider the following factors, among others: The extent to which the project may increase or decrease greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. (CEQA Guidelines Section (b)) When determining the significance of GHG emissions, the State CEQA Guidelines specify that thresholds adopted by other agencies may be considered by lead agencies when determining project significance. In efforts to identify a numeric threshold that could be appropriate for this analysis, the table below summarizes numeric GHG emissions thresholds adopted by other Air Districts, including the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), and the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD). Category SCAQMD BAAQMD SMAQMD Construction 30-yr amortization applied None recommended 1,100 t/yr CO2e to operational Stationary Sources Operation Land Use Projects 10,000 t/yr CO2e 10,000 t/yr CO2e 10,000 t/yr CO2e 3,000 t/yr CO2e OR 4.6 t CO2e/SP/yr 1,100 t/yr CO2e OR 4.6 t CO2e/SP/yr 1,100 t/yr CO2e SP = Service Population; t/yr = metric tons per year; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District; BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District; SMAQMD = Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District This analysis uses the more conservative and commonly adopted numeric threshold for land use projects of 1,100 metric tons CO 2 e per year for both construction and operation emissions. If emissions exceed 1,100 metric tons of CO 2 e per year, then a significant impact would result. The project proponent would be required to either mitigate below the 1,100 threshold or implement all feasible mitigation for a project. Additionally, lead agencies must demonstrate how a project does not conflict with implementation of an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases in accordance with the CEQA Initial Study checklist (CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, Section VII). 2

5 While this analysis does not use the BAU condition to show a 29 percent reduction in GHG emissions as set forth in the SJVAPCD guidance, the BAU scenario was calculated to consider the difference from proposed project conditions. The SJVAPCD defines business as usual as emissions projected for 2020 if the average baseline emissions during the period grew to 2020 levels without additional GHG emission control. The District has proposed to establish emission factors per unit of activity, for each class and category, using the baseline period as the reference. As of November 2015, the emission factors that have been established by the SJVAPCD are for stationary sources only. At this time, the District has not established any emissions factors for development projects or schools 3. Due to the small scope of the project and level of analysis required in an Initial Study, it is unreasonable to develop an appropriate emission factor specific to this project. To represent the BAU condition, the school population and facilities proposed to be built in 2020 were run in CalEEMod under 2 conditions. As a comparison, the 2020 project scenario was modeled, which represents a partial build-out of the project with 230 students. The show full build-out GHG emissions, a 2025 project scenario was modeled with 800 students and all proposed facilities. Mitigation Measure Selection As identified above, for projects that exceed 1,100 metric tons of CO 2 e per year, all feasible mitigation measures would need to be implemented. For this analysis, feasible was determined to be applicable measures included in the CAPCOA report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (August 2010) and as included in the CalEEMod mitigation options. Assumptions used to complete the modeling for each project scenario are outlined below. SJV Christian School Project Construction and Operation Remarks are typically used in CalEEMod to explain non-default inputs. For the current modeling this document replaces the remarks section of the referenced CalEEMod model to provide more space to both identify non-default inputs and to explain how CalEEMod is used to calculate emissions for the current project. When defaults were retained and no further explanation was necessary, no remarks are recorded below. SJV Christian School Model Run Construction Emissions (SJVCS Build-out 2025) Construction of the proposed school would occur over three phases over a 10-year period following project approval. While Phase 1 would be completed prior to the start of the 2017 school year, to calculate the worst-case scenario for annual construction emissions, this modeling analysis includes build-out of the school in one phase using CalEEMod default parameters starting in Land Use The High School land use type was selected with 800 students at full build-out. There would be parking for 489 vehicles. Construction Phase Default construction parameters were used. 3 Yang, Sharla - San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Staff. Personal communications with Raadha Jacobstein regarding BAU GHG emission factors for schools. November 17 and 18,

6 Vehicle Trips As used in the traffic report, the weekday trip rate for the proposed school was estimated to be 2.48 ADT per student. SJV Christian School Model Run Business As Usual Scenario Project Characteristics 2020 project conditions were run in the 2 scenario to represent BAU Land Use The High School land use type was selected with 230 students at 2020 conditions. There would be parking for 322 vehicles at completion of Phase 1. Construction Phase Construction is not considered in this scenario. Vehicle Trips As used in the traffic report, the weekday trip rate for the proposed school was estimated to be 2.48 ADT per student. SJV Christian School Model Run 2020 Scenario Project Characteristics The CO 2 intensity factor for the project s energy provider, PG&E, was adjusted to 488 to account for the 33 percent Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) in 2020 for the project scenario 6. Land Use The High School land use type was selected with 230 students at 2020 conditions. There would be parking for 322 vehicles at completion of Phase 1. Construction Phase Construction not considered in this scenario. Vehicle Trips As used in the traffic report, the weekday trip rate for the proposed school was estimated to be 2.48 ADT per student. Sequestration 20 trees required to be planted. 6 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Qualification of GHG Emissions for Non Transportation Activities Revised November

7 SJV Christian School Model Run 2025 Build-out Emissions Project Characteristics To maintain consistency in the project scenarios, the CO 2 intensity factor for the project s energy provider, PG&E, was adjusted to 488 to account for the 33 percent Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) in 2020 for the 2025 project scenario 8. Land Use The High School land use type was selected with 800 students at full build-out. There would be parking for 489 vehicles. Construction Phase Default construction parameters were used. Vehicle Trips As used in the traffic report, the weekday trip rate for the proposed school was estimated to be 2.48 ADT per student. Traffic Mitigation The CAPCOA report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (August 2010) includes two school-related vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction measures in the Commuter Trip Reduction Strategy. The two measures include implementing a School Pool or a School Bus Program. Implement School Bus Program TRT-13: 10 percent of families would be required to use the program. Area Mitigation Low VOC paint would be required by Section of the California Green Building Code. Energy Mitigation The project would exceed Title 24 efficiencies by at least 15 percent. Since CalEEMod version includes only 2008 Title 24 Standards, the proponent must account for both the percent improvements from 2008 to 2013 and the additional 15 percent commitment. Because the 2013 Title 24 Standards are estimated to be 25 percent more efficient than the 2008 Title 24 Standards, percent improvement entered is 40 percent. Energy efficient interior and exterior lighting fixtures would be used; mitigation measure would require a 20 percent reduction. Scaled by lumens, proponent may take the following credit for efficiency: 16% for metal halide post top lights 35% for metal halide cobrahead or cutoff lights 40% for high pressure sodium cutoff lights While the project indicates the potential for on-site renewable energy, no specifics were provided and could not be included in the model. 8 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Qualification of GHG Emissions for Non Transportation Activities Revised November

8 Water Mitigation The project applicant shall be required to prepare a Water Conservation Strategy that would result in 20 percent reduction in indoor and outdoor water use. (If Water Consevation Strategy measure is selected in CalEEMod all other mitigation measures for water supply and water use cannot be used.) The California Green Building Code requires low-flow faucets, toilets, and showers. Drip or spray irrigation would be required. The project applicant can combine a variety of water reduction measures to meet the 20 percent reduction. Solid Waste Existing state law requires 50 percent diversion. The recycling program shall be required to specify a reduction of waste disposed by 50 percent. Resource Documents: CAPCOA Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. August Accessed on May 15, 2015 at < 6

9 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Page 1 of 1 Date: 3/24/2016 9:49 AM SJVCS Build-out 2025 Merced County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population High School Student , Parking Lot Space , Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 49 Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2025 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company CO2 Intensity (lb/mwhr) 488 CH4 Intensity (lb/mwhr) N2O Intensity (lb/mwhr) User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - See notes Land Use - Construction Phase - Vehicle Trips - See notes Sequestration - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Mobile Commute Mitigation - Area Mitigation - Energy Mitigation - Water Mitigation - Waste Mitigation -

10 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblconstructionphase PhaseEndDate 1/27/17 1/28/17 tblconstructionphase PhaseEndDate 2/10/17 2/11/17 tblprojectcharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor tblprojectcharacteristics OperationalYear tblprojectcharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblsequestration NumberOfNewTrees tblvehicletrips WD_TR Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated Construction Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr

11 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area e Energy e Mobile , , , Waste Water e , , e , Mitigated Operational Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

12 Area e Energy e Mobile , , , Waste Water e , , e , Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction Vegetation Vegetation CO2e Category MT New Trees Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description

13 1 Demolition Demolition 1/1/2017 1/28/ Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/29/2017 2/11/ Grading Grading 2/12/2017 3/10/ Building Construction Building Construction 3/11/2017 1/26/ Paving Paving 1/27/2018 2/23/ Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/24/2018 3/23/ Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 10 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 167,995; Non-Residential Outdoor: 55,998 (Architectural Coating sqft) OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws Demolition Excavators Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Grading Excavators Grading Graders Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Building Construction Cranes Building Construction Forklifts Building Construction Generator Sets Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Building Construction Welders Paving Pavers Paving Paving Equipment Paving Rollers

14 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads 3.2 Demolition Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

15 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling

16 Vendor Worker e e Site Preparation Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Dust Off-Road e e Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e

17 Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Dust Off-Road e e Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Grading Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

18 Dust Off-Road e e e e Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Dust Off-Road e e e e

19 Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road e e Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

20 Hauling Vendor Worker e e e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e e

21 3.5 Building Construction Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road e e Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

22 Off-Road e e Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e e Paving Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road e Paving e

23 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Off-Road e Paving e Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

24 Hauling Vendor Worker e e Architectural Coating Unmitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Archit. Coating Off-Road e e Unmitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e

25 e Mitigated Construction On-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Archit. Coating Off-Road e e e e e e e e e e e e e Mitigated Construction Off-Site Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Hauling Vendor Worker e e Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

26 Implement School Bus Program Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated , , , Unmitigated , , , Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT High School 1, ,678,989 5,641,492 Parking Lot , ,678,989 5,641,492 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W High School Parking Lot H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

27 Exceed Title 24 Install High Efficiency Lighting ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Electricity Mitigated Electricity Unmitigated e e NaturalGas Mitigated e e NaturalGas Unmitigated e e Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr High School e e e Parking Lot e e Mitigated

28 NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr High School e e e Parking Lot e e Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e Parking Lot e e e Mitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e- Parking Lot e e e e

29 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated Unmitigated e e Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e Mitigated

30 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Apply Water Conservation Strategy CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated e- Unmitigated e Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

31 Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Mitigated Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Institute Recycling and Composting Services Category/Year CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated

32 Unmitigated Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School Parking Lot Mitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School Parking Lot Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

33 10.0 Vegetation CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT Unmitigated Net New Trees Species Class Number of Trees CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT Miscellaneous

34 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Page 1 of 1 Date: 3/24/2016 8:54 AM SJV Christian School - BAU Merced County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population High School Student , Parking Lot Space , Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 49 Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company CO2 Intensity (lb/mwhr) CH4 Intensity (lb/mwhr) N2O Intensity (lb/mwhr) User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - No construction Vehicle Trips - Traffic report Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblprojectcharacteristics OperationalYear tblprojectcharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblvehicletrips WD_TR Emissions Summary

35 2.1 Overall Construction 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area e e e Energy e e Mobile , , , Waste Water e , , e , Mitigated Operational Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area e e e Energy e e Mobile , , , Waste

36 Water e , , e , Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated , , , Unmitigated , , , Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT High School ,632,709 1,632,709 Parking Lot ,632,709 1,632,709 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %

37 Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W High School Parking Lot H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Electricity Mitigated e e Electricity Unmitigated e e NaturalGas Mitigated e e NaturalGas Unmitigated e e Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

38 Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr High School e e Parking Lot e e Mitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr Parking Lot High School e e e e Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e- Parking Lot e e e e e

39 Mitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e- Parking Lot e e e e e Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated e e e Unmitigated e e e Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

40 Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e e e e e Mitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e e e e e Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated e

41 Unmitigated e Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Mitigated Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

42 Category/Year CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Unmitigated Mitigated Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School Parking Lot Mitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School

43 Parking Lot Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation

44 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod Page 1 of 1 Date: 3/24/2016 8:49 AM SJVCS Merced County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population High School Student , Parking Lot Space , Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Rural Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 49 Climate Zone 3 Operational Year 2020 Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company CO2 Intensity (lb/mwhr) 488 CH4 Intensity (lb/mwhr) N2O Intensity (lb/mwhr) User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - See remarks Land Use - Remarks Construction Phase - No construction. Vehicle Trips - See remarks. Energy Use - Sequestration - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Mobile Commute Mitigation - Area Mitigation - Energy Mitigation - Water Mitigation -

45 Waste Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblprojectcharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor tblprojectcharacteristics OperationalYear tblprojectcharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblsequestration NumberOfNewTrees tblvehicletrips WD_TR Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area e e e Energy e e Mobile Waste Water e , , e , Mitigated Operational

46 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area e e e Energy e e Mobile Waste Water e e Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction Vegetation Vegetation CO2e Category MT New Trees Operational Detail - Mobile

47 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile Implement School Bus Program Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated Mitigated Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT High School ,632,709 1,621,929 Parking Lot ,632,709 1,621,929 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W High School Parking Lot H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N

48 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 Install High Efficiency Lighting ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Electricity Mitigated e e Electricity Unmitigated e e NaturalGas Mitigated e e NaturalGas Unmitigated e e Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGas Use Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr High School e e Parking Lot e e Mitigated

49 NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kbtu/yr tons/yr MT/yr Parking Lot High School e e e e Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e- Parking Lot e e e e e Mitigated Electricity Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kwh/yr MT/yr High School e e

50 Parking Lot e e e e Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated e e e Mitigated e e e Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e e

51 e e e Mitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Sub Architectural Coating Consumer Products Landscaping e e e e e e Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Apply Water Conservation Strategy CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Unmitigated e- Mitigated e Water by Land Use Unmitigated

52 Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Mitigated Indoor/Outd oor Use CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr High School / e Parking Lot 0 / e Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Institute Recycling and Composting Services Category/Year CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

53 MT/yr Mitigated Unmitigated Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School Parking Lot Mitigated Waste Disposed CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr High School Parking Lot Operational Offroad

54 Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT Unmitigated Net New Trees Species Class Number of Trees CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT Miscellaneous