CFCs (Chlorofluorocarbons): Any of a number of substances consisting of chlorine, fluorine, and carbon. CFCs are used for refrigeration, foam packaging, solvents, and propellants. They have been found to cause depletion of the atmosphere's ozone layer.
G-3
1046 of 2287
Final 2016 AQMP
Chronic Health Effect: An adverse health effect which occurs over a relatively long period of time (e.g., months or years).
CO (Carbon Monoxide): A colorless, odorless gas resulting from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Over 80 percent of the CO emitted in urban areas is contributed by mobile sources.
CO interferes with the blood's ability to carry oxygen to the body's tissues and results in numerous adverse health effects. CO is a criteria air pollutant.
CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality Model): A computer modeling system designed to address air quality as a whole by including state-of-the-science capabilities for modeling multiple air quality issues, including tropospheric ozone, fine particles, toxics, acid deposition, and visibility degradation.
CAMx (Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions): An open-source modeling system for multi-scale integrated assessment of gaseous and particulate air pollution.
Conformity: Conformity is a process mandated in the federal Clean Air Act to insure that federal actions do not impede attainment of the federal health standards. General conformity sets out a process that requires federal agencies to demonstrate that their actions are air quality neutral or beneficial. Transportation conformity sets out a process that requires transportation projects that receive federal funding, approvals or permits to demonstrate that their actions are air quality neutral or beneficial and meet specified emissions budgets in the SIP.
Congestion Management Program: A state mandated program (Government Code Section 65089a) that requires each county to prepare a plan to relieve congestion and reduce air pollution.
Consumer Products: Products for consumer or industrial use such as detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes, lawn and garden products, personal care products, and automotive specialty products which are part of our everyday lives and, through consumer use, may produce air emissions which contribute to air pollution.
Contingency Measure: Contingency measures are statute-required back-up control measures to be implemented in the event of specific conditions. These conditions can include failure to meet interim milestone emission reduction targets or failure to attain the standard by the statutory attainment date. Both State and federal Clean Air Acts require that District plans include contingency measures.
Electric Vehicle: A motor vehicle which uses a battery-powered electric motor as the basis of its operation. Such vehicles emit virtually no air pollutants. Hybrid electric motor vehicles may operate using both electric and gasoline powered motors. Emissions from hybrid electric motor vehicles are also substantially lower than conventionally powered motor vehicles.
G-4
1047 of 2287
Glossary
EMFAC: The EMission FACtor model used by CARB to calculate on-road mobile vehicle emissions.
The 2016 AQMP is based on the latest version, EMFAC2014.
Emission Inventory: An estimate of the amount of pollutants emitted from mobile and stationary sources into the atmosphere over a specific period such as a day or a year.
Emission Offset (also known as an emission trade-off): A regulatory requirement whereby approval of a new or modified stationary source of air pollution is conditional on the reduction of emissions from other existing stationary sources of air pollution or banked reductions. These reductions are required in addition to reductions required by BACT.
Emission Standard: The maximum amount of a pollutant that is allowed to be discharged from a polluting source such as an automobile or smoke stack.
FIP (Federal Implementation Plan): In the absence of an approved State Implementation Plan (SIP), a plan prepared by the U.S. EPA which provides measures that nonattainment areas must take to meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act.
Fugitive Dust: Dust particles which are introduced into the air through certain activities such as soil cultivation, off-road vehicles, or any vehicles operating on open fields or dirt roadways.
Goods Movement: An event that causes movement of commercial materials or stock typically at ports, airports, railways, highways, including dedicated truck lanes and logistics centers.
GHGs (Greenhouse Gases): A gas in an atmosphere that absorbs long-wave radiant energy reflected by the earth, which warms the atmosphere. GHGs also radiate long-wave radiation both upward to space and back down toward the surface of the earth. The downward part of this long-wave radiation absorbed by the atmosphere is known as the “greenhouse effect.” Growth Management Plan: A plan for a given geographical region containing demographic projections (i.e., housing units, employment, and population) through some specified point in time, and which provides recommendations for local governments to better manage growth and reduce projected environmental impacts.
HEV (Hybrid Electric Vehicles): Hybrids commercially available today combine an internal combustion engine with a battery and electric motor.
Hydrocarbon: Any of a large number of compounds containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms. They may be emitted into the air as a result of fossil fuel combustion, fuel volatilization, and solvent use, and are a major contributor to smog. (Also see VOC.) HFCV (Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles): Vehicles that produce zero tailpipe emissions and run on compressed hydrogen fed into a fuel cell "stack" that produces electricity to power the vehicle.
G-5
1048 of 2287
Final 2016 AQMP
Incentives: Tax credits, financial rebates/discounts, or non-monetary conveniences offered to encourage further use of advanced technology and alternative fuels for stationary and mobile sources.
Indirect Source: Any facility, building, structure, or installation, or combination thereof, which generates or attracts mobile source activity that results in emissions of any pollutant (or precursor). Examples of indirect sources include employment sites, shopping centers, sports facilities, housing developments, airports, commercial and industrial development, and parking lots and garages.
Indirect Source Control Program: Rules, regulations, local ordinances and land use controls, and other regulatory strategies of air pollution control districts or local governments used to control or reduce emissions associated with new and existing indirect sources.
Inspection and Maintenance Program: A motor vehicle inspection program implemented by the BAR. It is designed to identify vehicles in need of maintenance and to assure the effectiveness of their emission control systems on a biennial basis. Enacted in 1979 and strengthened in 1990. (Also known as the "Smog Check" program.)
LEV (Low Emission Vehicle): A vehicle which is certified to meet the CARB 1994 emission standards for low emission vehicles.
Maintenance Plan: In general, a plan that details the actions necessary to maintain air quality standards. In particular, the federal Clean Air Act requires maintenance plans for areas that have been redesignated as attainment areas.
Mobile Sources: Moving sources of air pollution such as automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, off-road vehicles, boats and airplanes.
Model Year: Model year refers to the actual annual production period (year) as determined by the manufacturer.
NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards): Standards set by the federal U.S. EPA for the maximum levels of air pollutants which can exist in the outdoor air without unacceptable effects on human health or the public welfare.
Near-Zero Emission Technologies: Refers to emissions approaching zero and will be delineated for individual source categories through the process of developing the Air Quality Management Plan/State Implementation Plan and subsequent control measures.
NOx (Nitrogen Oxides, Oxides of Nitrogen): A general term pertaining to compounds of nitric acid (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and other oxides of nitrogen. Nitrogen oxides are typically created during combustion processes, and are major contributors to smog formation and acid G-6
1049 of 2287
Glossary
deposition. NO2 is a criteria air pollutant, and may result in numerous adverse health effects; it absorbs blue light, resulting in a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility.
Nonattainment Area: A geographic area identified by the U.S. EPA and/or CARB as not meeting either NAAQS or CAAQS standards for a given pollutant.
NSR (New Source Review): A program used in development of permits for new or modified industrial facilities which are in a nonattainment area, and which emit nonattainment criteria air pollutants. The two major requirements of NSR are Best Available Control Technology and Emission Offsets.
Ozone: A strong smelling reactive toxic chemical gas consisting of three oxygen atoms. It is a product of the photochemical process involving the sun's energy. Ozone exists in the upper atmosphere ozone layer as well as at the earth's surface. Ozone at the earth's surface causes numerous adverse health effects and is a criteria air pollutant. It is a major component of smog.
Ozone Precursors: Chemicals such as hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, occurring either naturally or as a result of human activities, which contribute to the formation of ozone, a major component of smog.
PZEV (Partial Zero Emission Vehicle): A vehicle emissions rating within California’s exhaust emission standards. Cars that are certified as PZEVs meets the Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle exhaust emission standard and has zero evaporative emissions from its fuel system.
Permit: Written authorization from a government agency (e.g., an air quality management district) that allows for the construction and/or operation of an emissions generating facility or its equipment within certain specified limits.
PIC (Particle-in-Cell) Model: An air quality simulation model that is used to apportion sulfate and nitrate PM10 concentrations to their precursor emissions sources. The PIC model uses spatially and temporally resolved sources of NOx and SOx emissions, with meteorological, physical, and simplified chemical processes, to calculate the contributions from various emission source categories.
PEV (Plug-in Electric Vehicle): Vehicles that can be recharged from any external source of electricity and the electricity is stored in a rechargeable battery pack to drive or contribute to drive the wheels.
PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle): Vehicles similar to traditional hybrids but are also equipped with a larger, more advanced battery that allows the vehicle to be plugged in and recharged in addition to refueling with gasoline. This larger battery allows the car to drive on battery alone, gasoline alone, or a combination of electric and gasoline fuels.
G-7
1050 of 2287
Final 2016 AQMP
PM (Particulate Matter): Solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes, and aerosols.
PM10 (Particulate Matter less than 10 microns): A major air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes, and aerosols. The size of the particles (10 microns or smaller, about 0.0004 inches or less) allows them to easily enter the air sacs in the lungs where they may be deposited, resulting in adverse health effects. PM10 also causes visibility reduction and is a criteria air pollutant.
PM2.5 (Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns): A major air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles, generally soot and aerosols. The size of the particles (2.5 microns or smaller, about 0.0001 inches or less) allows them to easily enter the air sacs deep in the lungs where they may cause adverse health effects, as noted in several recent studies. PM2.5 also causes visibility reduction and is a criteria air pollutant.
PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration): A program used in development of permits for new or modified industrial facilities in an area that is already in attainment. The intent is to prevent an attainment area from becoming a non-attainment area. This program, like require BACT as defined in the Clean Air Act and, if an AAQS is projected to be exceeded, Emission Offsets.
Public Workshop: A workshop held by a public agency for the purpose of informing the public and obtaining its input on the development of a regulatory action or control measure by that agency.
RTP (Regional Transportation Plan): The long-range transportation plan developed by the Southern California Association of Governments that provides a vision for transportation investments throughout the South Coast region. The RTP considers the role of transportation in the broader context of economic, mobility, environmental, and quality-of-life goals for the future, identifying regional transportation strategies to address regional mobility needs.
ROG (Reactive Organic Gas): A reactive chemical gas, composed of hydrocarbons, that may contribute to the formation of smog. Also sometimes referred to as Non-Methane Organic Compounds (NMOCs). (Also see VOC.)
SSAB (Salton Sea Air Basin): Area comprised of a central portion of Riverside County (the Coachella Valley) and Imperial County. The Riverside county portion of the SSAB is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley.
SIP (State Implementation Plan): A document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and measures which will be taken to attain and maintain national ambient air quality standards. (see AQMP.)
G-8
1051 of 2287
Glossary
Smog: A combination of smoke, ozone, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and other chemically reactive compounds which, under certain conditions of weather and sunlight, may result in a murky brown haze that causes adverse health effects. The primary source of smog in California is motor vehicles. (See Inspection and Maintenance Program.) Smoke: A form of air pollution consisting primarily of particulate matter (i.e., particles). Other components of smoke include gaseous air pollutants such as hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide. Sources of smoke may include fossil fuel combustion, agricultural burning, and other combustion processes.
SO2 (Sulfur Dioxide): A strong smelling, colorless gas that is formed by the combustion of fossil fuels. Ocean-going vessels, which may use oil high in sulfur content, can be major sources of SO2. SO2 and other sulfur oxides contribute to ambient PM2.5. SO2 is also a criteria pollutant.
Stationary Sources: Non-mobile sources such as power plants, refineries, and manufacturing facilities which emit air pollutants; can include area sources depending on context.
SULEV (Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle): A vehicle emissions rating within California’s LEV 1 and LEV 2 exhaust emission standards.
SCS (Sustainable Communities Strategy): Planning element in the RTP that integrates land use and transportation strategies that will achieve CARB’s GHG emissions reduction targets.
TAC (Toxic Air Contaminant): An air pollutant, identified in regulation by the CARB, which may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs are considered under a different regulatory process (California Health and Safety Code Section 39650 et seq.) than pollutants subject to CAAQS.
Health effects due to TACs may occur at extremely low levels, and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure which do not produce adverse health effects.
TCM (Transportation Control Measure): Under Health & Safety Code Section 40717, any control measure to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions. TCMs can include encouraging the use of carpools and mass transit. Under federal law, includes, but is not limted to those measures listed in CAA Section 108(f).
UFP (Ultrafine Particles): Particles with a diameter less than 0.1 µm (or 100 nm).
ULEV (Ultra Low Emission Vehicle): Vehicles with low emission ratings within California’s LEV 1 or LEV 2 exhaust emission standards. The LEV 1 emission standards typically apply to cars from 1994–2003. The LEV 2 emission standards were adopted in 1998 and typically apply to cars from 2004–2010.
G-9
1052 of 2287
Final 2016 AQMP
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency): The federal agency charged with setting policy and guidelines, and carrying out legal mandates for the protection of national interests in environmental resources.
VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled): Total vehicle miles traveled by all or a subset of mobile sources.
Visibility: The distance that atmospheric conditions allow a person to see at a given time and location. Visibility reduction from air pollution is often due to the presence of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, as well as particulate matter.
VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds): Hydrocarbon compounds that exist in the ambient air. VOCs contribute to the formation of smog and/or may themselves be toxic. VOCs often have an odor, and some examples include gasoline, alcohol, and the solvents used in paints.
Zero-Emission Technologies: Advanced technology or control equipment that generates zero enduse emissions from stationary or mobile source applications.
ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle): A vehicle that produces no emissions from the on-board source of power.
G-10
1053 of 2287
APPENDIX A
BACKGROUND
1054 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-1 August 2003
Since the late 1970’s, the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) has been used to guide the development of the AQMD’s regulatory program and reduce the emission of smog precursors and other air contaminants. Since that time, a growing focus has been on air toxic emissions and the health effects associated with their release into the air. The AQMD conducted a study in 1987 to assess air toxics levels in the Basin. That study, called the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES I), integrated measured ambient concentrations, population distribution, and health risk data for 20 Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) to estimate regional inhalation exposure, risk, and number of potential excess cancer cases.
The concept for a final draft Air Toxics Control Plan was an outgrowth of the Environmental Justice principles and the Environmental Justice Initiatives adopted by the Governing Board in October 1997.
Extensive air monitoring under Environmental Justice Initiative #2 (MATES II) and work under Environmental Justice Initiative #10 (related to air toxics rules for new and existing sources) highlighted the need for a more systematic approach to reducing air toxics emissions. The Air Toxics Control Plan was approved by the Governing Board in March 2000 as a further tool to addressing air toxic emissions and reducing exposure. The Air Toxics Control Plan relies upon the findings of MATES II relative to focusing efforts to maximize public health protection. MATES II is further discussed below.
Local Programs
AQMP
The first AQMP was prepared and approved by the AQMD in 1979 and has been updated and revised many times. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires a three-year plan review and update to the AQMP. Implementation of the AQMP has resulted in significant progress towards meeting federal and state air quality standards over the last several decades and has contributed to the overall reduction of cumulative impacts of air pollution (criteria as well as air toxic pollutants) throughout the Basin.
The 2003 AQMP will provide an updated air pollution control strategy to attain federal ambient air quality standards. In addition, the AQMP will include an initial analysis of the estimated emission reductions needed to achieve new federal eight-hour and fine particulate ambient air quality standards.
Air Toxics Control Plan
The final draft Air Toxics Control Plan was approved by the AQMD Governing Board in March 2000 and utilized valuable information developed as a part of the MATES II monitoring and modeling study. This planning document was designed to examine the overall direction of the AQMD’s air toxics control program.
Development and implementation of strategic initiatives have required partnerships with other agencies, the regulated community, environmental groups, and the public. The plan is not required by state or federal law, so it was not submitted as a part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The final draft Air Toxics Control Plan identifies potential strategies to reduce toxic levels in the Basin over the next ten years. To the extent the strategies are implemented by the relative agencies, the plan will improve public health by reducing health risks associated with both mobile and stationary sources.
To date, the majority of strategies have been implemented, making significant progress in many areas.
These include increased emission reductions, and therefore health risk reduction, from sources such as gas stations, dry cleaners, motion picture film processing, metal plating, and on road motor vehicles. In addition, AQMD Rules 1401 and 1402 have been strengthened to reduce air toxic exposures from new and 1055 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-2 August 2003
existing stationary sources, respectively. In addition, ARB will be implementing CARB Phase III gasoline production requirements after January 1, 2004, which is anticipated to significantly lower motor vehicle emissions. Appendix B contains a table summarizing the progress made in implementing the March 2000 Air Toxics Control Plan.
Rule 1401 – New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants Permits for new, modified or relocated equipment that emits toxic air contaminants must meet limits for cancer and non-cancer impacts. Rule 1401 is updated periodically to reflect new information on air toxics that is developed by the state. Individual equipment must meet one-in-one million or use Toxic Best Available Control Technology (T-BACT) to reduce their health risk below ten-in-one million in order to obtain a permit. Equipment must also be below a hazard index of 1.0 (for acute and chronic impacts).
Rule 1401 has been amended numerous times in the last five years to implement risk values approved by the state and now encompasses more than 200 compounds.
Rule 1402 – Control of Air Toxic Emissions from Existing Sources Existing facilities that emit TACs must meet facility-wide limits for cancer and non-cancer impacts. This rule utilizes the same list of compounds as Rule 1401. Rule 1402 impacts are assessed every time the state introduces new risk values. Rule 1402 was amended in March 2000 and the action risk levels of the rule were lowered to a facility-wide cancer risk level of 25 in 1 million or a non-cancer hazard index of 3.0.
AB 2588 Program
The AB 2588 program requires certain facilities to inventory their TACs. Public notifications are required by companies whose facility-wide cancer risk exceeds 10-in-one million or a noncancer hazard index (chronic or acute exposure) of 1.0. Risk reductions are required through Rule 1402 if their cancer risk is above 25 in one million or the hazard index (HI) exceeds 3.0. Through this program, public notification and disclosure have proven to be a valuable tool in reducing air toxic emissions and many companies make changes at their facilities to reduce below notification thresholds. Voluntary reductions undertaken by these facilities are responsible for significant toxic reductions.
AQMD Regulation XIII and BACT
This regulation is designed to meet state and federal statutory requirements and ensure that the construction and operation of new or modified sources will not interfere with progress towards attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Permits for new, modified, or relocated equipment must meet offset and BACT requirements. Reductions in volatile organic compound (VOC) and particulate matter (PM) often result in concurrent toxic reductions. Review of permits at the new source review stage ensures that adequate controls are installed to meet rule requirements.
Source Specific Rules
AQMD has, over the years, adopted prohibition rules (Regulation IV) and rules for Best Available Retrofit Control Technology, or BARCT, (Regulation XI) to reduce criteria pollutants, largely as part of AQMP implementation. Reductions of emissions from VOC and PM sources can also result in toxic reductions through reformulation, add-on controls or process changes. Adopted rules with future compliance dates and continuous implementation of the 1999 Amendment to the 1997 AQMP are expected to further reduce VOC emissions. Zero or near-zero coating and solvent technologies, and enhanced controls on VOC fugitive emissions from industrial processes will benefit air toxics emission reductions as well. During the rule development of future AQMP measures, corresponding air toxics impacts will be closely examined to maximize potential air toxics reductions.
1056 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-3 August 2003
AQMD Regulation XIV
In addition to the programmatic rules, Regulation XIV contains a number of source-specific air toxics rules applicable to existing sources. The regulation contains fifteen rules, including asbestos abatement, dry cleaning operations, chrome plating, and motion picture film processing.
Technology Incentive Programs
The AQMD manages several technology incentive programs that use monies from several different sources to fund projects that not only lower emissions of criteria air pollutants, but toxic air contaminants as well.
These programs lower diesel particulates from school and transit buses, heavy duty on/off road vehicles, and marine vessels. Included in these programs are the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program (Carl Moyer Program), the Lower-Emission School Bus Program, the State Emissions Mitigation Program, the Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP), and the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC). These programs fund, in whole or in part, retrofit or replacement of higher emitting diesel engines that significantly reduce diesel particulate emissions, as well as other programs that directly benefit the public’s health through reduction of air toxic emissions.
Relative to these programs, a state law was signed by the Governor in October 2001 on the distribution of state funds (AB 1390, Firebaugh). Each air district must spend at least 50% of their allotted funds to directly benefit communities that are disproportionately impacted by air pollution. 2002-03 EJ Enhancements
In September 2002, the Governing Board approved a series of enhancements to the AQMD’s Environmental Justice Program. Several of those enhancements will contribute to reduce cumulative impacts in the Basin. These EJ Enhancements include:
· Subregional analysis (I-3);
· Localized impact thresholds via the CEQA process (I-4); · Lowest feasible air toxics emissions alternative for rules with significant impacts under CEQA (II-1) · Electronic posting of air toxic emissions (II-4)
· Off-road Intermodal equipment (III-1)
· Super mitigation (III-2)
EJ Enhancement I-3 focuses on subregional studies. AQMD staff conducted an air quality impact study on the Mira Loma area to analyze cumulative emissions impacts from distribution centers/warehouse facilities (especially due to diesel exhaust), and to identify potential control opportunities. The study encompassed a three-step process, including: 1) the development of a land use map and data base per the local General Plan along with facility permit activity, 2) estimation of diesel truck emissions from these activities, and 3) computer modeling to estimate cumulative impacts from air toxics and fine particulate. The analysis also includes working on methodology to separate out transported and locally generated PM.
This enhancement calls for the continuance and expansion of these subregional analyses to other areas of the Basin which may be specially impacted by hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and/or fine particulates in a manner that poses a potential environmental justice concern. The end product of these efforts will likely be 1057 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-4 August 2003
refined emission inventory data, improved air quality modeling estimates of pollution levels, and proposed mitigation measures, if needed. Staff anticipates that one of these studies might be conducted on an annual basis, as needed. The next subregional analysis is anticipated to be conducted for the Alameda Corridor. Any proposed mitigation measures will be within current legal authority of AQMD or other responsible agencies.
EJ Enhancement I-4 calls for AQMD staff to continue pursuing the Governing Board direction of February 2002, to develop and evaluate the implications of localized significance thresholds (primarily for NO2, PM10, and CO) for potential inclusion in a revision of AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The Handbook serves as a guidance document to assist local government agencies and consultants in developing the environmental analysis required pursuant to CEQA.
Currently, significance is based on regional thresholds (except for CO hot-spots analysis for mobile sources). Localized analysis would provide a second test of significance, and provide additional information to decision-makers who are considering a proposed project for approval. A working group has provided feedback to the staff analysis regarding potential significance threshold values and public workshops have been conducted to solicit additional comments and suggestions.
The purpose of CEQA is to require public disclosure of potential impacts to the air, as well as other environmental media, due to projects and to require mitigation measures, as necessary, to limit risk and public health exposure. CEQA mitigation measures can include actions affecting mobile sources, as well as measures to be taken by stationary sources. Appendix D contains a summary of how cumulative impacts are analyzed as a part of the CEQA process. Significant cumulative impacts from air toxic emissions are, for the purposes of AQMD’s local CEQA program, set at a cancer risk equal to or greater than 10 in 1 million or a noncancer health impact equal to or greater than a Hazard Index (HI) of 3.0.
EJ Enhancement II-1 calls for AQMD staff, in CEQA documents comparing specific project alternatives, to include a least toxic alternative, where feasible, which considers the proposed project or rule from a “least harmful” perspective with regard to hazardous air emissions. Such alternative would pertain to major equipment or processes under review that create a significant environmental impact and would feature the lowest feasible air toxics emissions and/or exposure of the alternatives being analyzed, and would present comparative impacts and potential trade-offs for the particular project.
EJ Enhancement II-4 calls for AQMD to streamline and expedite the electronic posting of its own information on the Basin air toxics and health risk assessments, to be publicly available on the internet.
Such posting would be similar to the access given to the federal Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting data for interested members of the public. This tool would allow more direct monitoring of environmental performance by permit-holders.
EJ Enhancement III-1 calls for developing a rule to require emission reductions from off-road intermodal fleets, such as those operating at ports or large distribution centers, through use of low emission and clean equipment technologies. As a part of rule development, staff will examine the feasibility of additional emission reductions from the on-road vehicles visiting such facilities.
EJ Enhancement III-2 included a proposal to expedite the CEQA analysis process for any major project which contains commitments and milestone schedules for implementation of “super mitigation” actions. 1058 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-5 August 2003
This proposed enhancement would offer the incentive of an expedited CEQA review in return for emission reduction components to a project that are not otherwise legally required.
EPA Programs
Since the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments were enacted, federal Environmental Protection Agency has promulgated NESHAPs to reduce Hazardous Air Pollutants. In addition, EPA has been developing programs to further address urban air toxics, the residual risk after federal standards have been implemented, and cumulative impacts associated with multiple sources. These are summarized below.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is required to regulate sources that emit one, or more, of the 188 federally listed HAPs. More than 55 NESHAPs have been promulgated by EPA and more than twenty more source categories have had standards proposed, many of which were proposed in 2002. EPA develops standards that require the application of Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) to control emissions from “major sources,” those sources emitting greater than 10 tons per year of a single HAP or greater than 25 tons per year of multiple HAPs. To implement NESHAPs, AQMD adopts a rule, or rule amendment, or directly implements the NESHAP. AQMD rules must contain requirements that are at least as stringent as the NESHAP requirements. However, the NESHAPs are often based on controlled sources in the Basin. On this basis, many of the sources that would have been subject to the federal requirements already comply or are exempt.
Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy
The Urban Air Toxics Strategy is a program developed by EPA that will seek to reduce emissions of 30 key TACs from 70 area source categories. This includes mobile sources using diesel engines. Thirty of these HAPs have been identified as coming from small industrial sources (or area sources). Development and implementation of the Urban Air Toxics Strategy includes a series of reports, development of vehicle and fuels standards, and promulgation of standards for new area source categories.
Residual Risk
The residual risk program is a requirement of the federal CAA and applies to all source categories for which a federal MACT standard has been promulgated by EPA. Residual risk refers to the public health and environmental risk remaining after technology-based standards have been promulgated and applied to emission sources of HAPs. The Residual Risk Report to Congress was prepared by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, March 1999, and contains EPA’s general framework for assessing risks to public health or the environment. Under the program, each MACT standard is to be revisited 10 years after promulgation to assess the residual risk after full implementation.
EPA has begun the residual risk review process, such as that for halogenated solvent cleaning.
Cumulative Exposure Project
This strategy will address adverse health impacts due to cumulative TAC exposures if toxic hot spots are identified. This program will likely include a multi-government approach to address the issue of cumulative impacts, dependent on the source and type of toxic hot spots identified. Additional data and support programs may require development as a part of this strategy, including, but not limited to, improved database and air quality modeling development, and source-specific rule adoptions or amendments. 1059 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-6 August 2003
Regional Air Impact Modeling Initiative (RAIMI) Pilot Study – Initial Phase The purpose of the RAIMI pilot study is to establish a program for a region-wide prioritization of potential for community-level health risks as a result of exposure to multiple air contaminants from multiple sources through multiple exposure pathways. Also, RAIMI is designed to complement concurrent federal air toxics programs, including the Cumulative Exposure Project, Integrated Urban Air Toxics Program, and residual risk. The RAIMI pilot study is a two phase process. Under the initial phase EPA investigated test methods for source prioritizations based on risks resulting from direct inhalation. The initial phase has been completed and EPA recently completed assessment on three entire counties at the same level of detail as the pilot study (see Appendix E for more details). EPA is currently examining the results from these assessments from an implementation and enforcement standpoint to lower community level inhalation risks. The intent is to have all counties in the major areas of the region (primarily Texas and Louisiana) fully mapped in the next five years. Under the second phase, EPA is studying indirect exposures resulting from air-related sources. Here, the focus of this stage of the pilot study is indirect exposures resulting from air-related sources. This element of the pilot project will focus on other pathways of exposure besides inhalation, such as ingestion. Work on this phase is anticipated for completion by the end of 2003, to be followed by a review stage prior to publishing. Under this phase, EPA will be examining surrogates to effectively and accurately determine the impacts from indirect exposures.
State Programs
CARB has several programs that reduce the impact of cumulative emissions. Two key programs are summarized, as follows:
California Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCM)
In 1983, the California Legislature adopted the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (AB 1807, Tanner), which established a two-step process of risk identification and risk management to protect Californians from the health effects of toxic substances in the air. The first step is the identification of a toxic air contaminant (TAC). In the risk identification phase, staff of the Air Resources Board (ARB) and California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) evaluates the potential for human exposure to a suspect air contaminant (from a prioritized list of substances) and health effects of exposure to the contaminant. The staff’s evaluation is subject to the Scientific Review Panel (SRP) approval of the report. The SRP develops specific scientific findings that are officially submitted to CARB.
CARB uses this information to determine whether to identify a substance as a TAC.
Once a substance is identified as a TAC, CARB determines if regulatory action is needed to reduce the risk associated with that substance through a risk management evaluation. In this evaluation, CARB investigates the need, feasibility, and cost of reducing emissions of that substance. If controls are feasible and needed, CARB adopts airborne toxic control measures (ATCMs) and local Districts are then required to adopt and enforce equivalent or more restrictive measures to reduce emissions of the TAC. In some instances, AQMD adopts rules to implement these state ATCMs. To date, the state has adopted 11 ATCMs.
ARB’s Community Health Program – EJ & Neighborhood Assessment Program The Environmental Justice Policies and Actions adopted by the ARB in December 2001 include the consideration of cumulative health risks in our programs. Among those specific actions is the development of technical tools for performing assessments of cumulative emissions, exposures, and health risks on a neighborhood scale. Since that time, the ARB staff is developing a visualization tool for mapping emission 1060 of 2287
Appendix A
AQMD A-7 August 2003
sources on the Internet that will allow the public to view a map of a community and the spatial array of facilities and emissions in that community.
Other ARB efforts include developing statewide cumulative impact maps that will allow the public to view cumulative risk at a much more refined scale than is currently available. The ARB staff is also assessing microscale and regional inventories and modeling, as well as tracer and toxics studies as part of the ARB’s Neighborhood Assessment Program (NAP) in Barrio Logan (San Diego) and Wilmington (Los Angeles).
Tools such as the ARB’s Air Quality Handbook for Land-Use Planners are also under development that will provide local decision-makers with information for assessing cumulative air pollution impacts of proposed projects. Upon completion, all newly developed models and methods will be subject to a peer review process as routinely followed by the ARB.
1061 of 2287
APPENDIX B
AIR TOXIC CONTROL PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
1062 of 2287
Appendix B
AQMD B-1 August 2003
Air Toxics Control Plan
Implementation Progress
The final draft Air Toxics Control Plan was approved by the AQMD Governing Board in March 2000. It is a comprehensive plan that was designed to examine the overall direction of the AQMD’s air toxics control program and listed potential strategies to reduce toxic levels in the Basin over the next ten years. To the extent the strategies are implemented by the relative agencies, the plan will improve public health by reducing health risks associated with both mobile and stationary sources. The plan is not required by state or federal law, so it was not submitted as a part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
To date, a number of strategies have been implemented that will increase protection of the public’s health from the emission of air toxics. These include increased emission reductions, and therefore health risk reduction, from sources such as gas stations, motion picture film processing, and on road motor vehicles.
In addition, AQMD Rules 1401 and 1402 have been strengthened to reduce air toxic exposures from new and existing stationary sources, respectively. The following table provides an implementation status of the Air Toxic Control Plan control strategies. Shaded rows indicate those control strategies which have been completed. Unshaded rows indicate those control strategies that are in progress. 1063 of 2287
Appendix B
AQMD B-2 August 2003
RULE Title
Scheduled Adoption
Date Adoption date TAC Estimated Reductions Implementation date 461
Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Apr-00 4/21/2000 Benzene, hexane 27.3 tpd (total VOC) 2001 1401
New Source Review of TACs As needed 8/18/2000 Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 8/18/2000 1401
New Source Review of TACs As needed 6/15/2001 Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 6/15/2001 1401
New Source Review of TACs As needed 5/3/2002 Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 5/3/2002 1401
New Source Review of TACs As needed 2/7/2003 Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 2/7/2003 1401
New Source Review of TACs As needed 5/2/2003 Cancer Compounds Cannot be determined 5/2/2003 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 3/17/2000 Numerous Cannot be determined 3/17/2000 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 8/18/2000 report* Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 5/19/2001 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 6/15/2001 report* Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 3/16/2002 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 5/3/2002 report* Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 3/1/2003 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 2/7/2003 report* Chronic Compounds Cannot be determined 11/1/2003 1402
Control of TACs from Existing Sources As needed 5/2/2003 report* Cancer Compounds Cannot be determined 3/7/2004 CARB
Phase 3 California Gasoline Regulation None given Benzene,MTBE 6 tpd begin 12/31/03 431.2
Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels None given 8/18/2000 Diesel PM 1.1 tpd 2005 (?) 1122
Emission Reductions from Degreasing Operations None given 9/21/2001 Perchloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, methylene chloride 0.81tpd 2003 1064 of 2287
Appendix B
AQMD B-3 August 2003
RULE Title
Scheduled Adoption
Date Adoption date TAC Estimated Reductions Implementation date 1131
Food Manufacturing and Processing Operations None given 9/15/2000 IPA
2.4 tpd if by solvent reformulation; 2.1 tpd if by air pollution control option 2002 1186.1 Less-polluting Sweepers None given 8/18/2000 Diesel PM 48 tons cumulative thru 2011; thereafter 10.7 tons per year 2012 1191
Clean On-road Lightand Medium-duty Public Fleet Vehicles None given 6/16/2000 Diesel PM 1192
Clean On-road Transit Buses None given 6/16/2000 Diesel PM 0.9 tons per year 2003 1193
Clean On-road Residential and Commercial Refuse Vehicles None given 6/16/2000 Diesel PM 7 tons per year 2001 1194
Commercial Airport Ground Access None given
8/18/2000 partial adoption delayed on taxis until 10/00 Diesel PM 60 tons -cumulative 2010 1195
Clean On-road School Buses None given 4/20/2001 Diesel PM 90 tons per year 2001 1196
Clean On-road Heavyduty Public Fleet Vehicles None given 10/20/2000 Diesel PM 1.0 tons per year 2003 1405
Control of Ethylene Oxide and CFC Emissions from Sterilizers Mar-01 2001 Ethylene Oxide rule is not necessary due to reduced usage an efficiency of controls 1421
Control of Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry Cleaning Operations Mar-01 12/6/2002 Perchloroethylene 849 tons - cumulative 2021 1065 of 2287
Appendix B
AQMD B-4 August 2003
RULE Title
Scheduled Adoption
Date Adoption date TAC Estimated Reductions Implementation date 1425
Motion Picture Film Labs Mar-01 3/16/2001 Perchloroethylene
39.5 tons per year (including NESHAP) 2003
1426 Metal Finishing Mar-01 May-03
Nickel, Cadmium, Lead, Copper, Chromic Acid
No reductions realized - recordkeeping only N/A
1427 Rubber Manufacturing Mar-01 N/A various
staff recommended that this rule is not necessary due to limited emissions 1437 Furniture Stripping Mar-03 Jun-03 Methylene chloride tbd tbd 1469 Hexavalent Chromium Emissions Mar-01 5/2/2003 Hexavalent Chromium 48 lbs/year 5/5/2005 * The list of Toxic Air Contaminants was updated in conjunction with amendments to Rule 1401. Note: Shaded rules have been adopted or determined to not be necessary 1066 of 2287
APPENDIX C
CONFIRMED ODOR-COMPLAINTS AND NOVs ISSUED
1067 of 2287
Appendix C
AQMD C-1 August 2003
Notice of Violation (NOV) data shown on the following table cover the period from January 1, 1988 to June 30, 2003. A brief explanation of each column heading is as follows:
· SIC Code – This table includes standard industrial categories that had complaints which resulted in the issuance of an NOV. There are several additional industrial categories that received complaints (usually fewer than 10 complaints were received) that were not issued a NOV.
· Confirmed Odor Complaints – This refers to the number of complaints that were received that could be traced back to a permitted facility that has an AQMD facility ID number. There were approximately 104,000 total complaints logged, although these were not all confirmed.
· Notices of Violation (NOVs) Issued – This is the number of Notices of Violation that were issued as a result of complaints received that were tied to a valid facility ID or SIC code.
There is not a one-to-one correspondence between complaints and NOVs. An NOV may be issued for one or more incidences that generated multiple complaints. 1068 of 2287
Appendix C
AQMD C-2 August 2003
SIC Code Description Confirmed Odor
Complaints
Notices of
Violation
(NOVs)
Issued
2911 PETROLEUM REFINING 8399 109
4953 REFUSE SYSTEMS 4099 120
4952 SEWERAGE SYSTEMS 3039 48
1794 EXCAVATING AND FOUNDATION WORK 1188 26
1311 CRUDE PETRO AND NATURAL GAS 803 18
2077 ANIMAL & MARINE FATS AND OILS 691 57
7538 GENERAL AUTO REPAIR SHOPS 634 34
2992 LUBRICATING OILS AND GREASES 598 14
7532 TOP & BODY REPAIR/PAINT SHOPS 543 44
9511 AIR WATER & SOLID WASTE MANAG 461 1
4214 LOCAL TRUCKING AND STORAGE 410 40
3341 SECONDARY NONFERROUS METALS 364 15
2824 ORGANIC FIBERS, NONCELLULOSIC 363 21
2819 INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC CHMLS,NEC 352 10
4911 ELECTRIC SERVICES 285 1
3088 PLASTICS PLUMBING FIXTURES 243 9
2821 PLASTICS MATERIALS AND RESINS 240 12
5093 SCRAP & WASTE MATERIALS 233 5
7216 DRY CLEANING PLANTS, EXC RUG 230 13
3089 PLASTICS PRODUCTS, NEC 228 8
3479 METAL COATING/ALLIED SERVICES 209 10
2399 FABRICATED TEXTILE PROD, NEC 199 10
5541 GASOLINE SERVICE STATIONS 173 36
3792 TRAVEL TRAILERS AND CAMPERS 173 16
5171 PETRO BULK STATIONS/TERMINALS 157 8
3471 PLATING AND POLISHING 152 12
2951 PAVING MIXTURES AND BLOCKS 144 5
7261 FUNERAL SERVICE & CREMATORIES 139 9
5199 NONDURABLE GOODS, NEC 119 9
3365 ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES 111 13
3599 INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY, NEC 107 3
2047 DOG AND CAT FOOD 106 8
1761 ROOFING AND SHEET METAL WORK 103 6
2099 FOOD PREPARATIONS, NEC 101 5
3079 MISC PLASTICS PRODUCTS 100 4
3321 GRAY IRON FOUNDRIES 85 3
2295 COATED FABRICS, NOT RUBBERIZED 85 1
3714 MOTOR VEHICLE PARTS/ACCESORIES 82 1
2434 WOOD KITCHEN CABINETS 78 2
7699 REPAIR SERVICES, NEC 68 4
3711 MOTOR VEHICLES AND CAR BODIES 57 1
2499 WOOD PRODUCTS, NEC 55 5
4959 SANITARY SERVICES, NEC 54 3
4011 RAILROAD, LINE-HAUL OPERATING 53 7
1069 of 2287
Appendix C
AQMD C-3 August 2003
SIC Code Description Confirmed Odor
Complaints
Notices of
Violation
(NOVs)
Issued
3061 MECHANICAL RUBBER GOODS 51 1
3412 METAL BARRELS, DRUMS, & PAILS 50 5
2759 COMMERCIAL PRINTING, NEC 49 1
2833 MEDICINALS AND BOTANICALS 48 2
3444 SHEET METALWORK 45 3
2431 MILLWORK 40 1
3354 ALUMINUM EXTRUDED PRODUCTS 39 2
2095 ROASTED COFFEE 37 3
3672 PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS 35 1
3086 PLASTICS FOAM PRODUCTS 34 5
5511 NEW AND USED CAR DEALERS 33 1
2851 PAINTS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS 32 5
1799 SPECIAL TRADE CONTRACTORS, NEC 30 4
2511 WOOD HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE 29 4
7534 TIRE RETREADING & REPAIR SHOPS 29 2
3621 MOTORS AND GENERATORS 29 1
5169 CHEMICALS & ALLIED PRDCTS, NEC 28 1
7218 INDUSTRIAL LAUNDRERERS 27 1
3999 MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, NEC 26 3
3334 PRIMARY ALUMINUM 26 2
3826 ANALYTICAL INSTRUMENTS 25 4
3356 NONFERROUS ROLLING/DRAWING,NEC 24 1
3799 TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT, NEC 22 2
2999 PETROLEUM & COAL PRODUCTS, NEC 20 1
3441 FABRICATED STRUCTURAL METAL 19 5
2261 FINISHING PLANTS, COTTON 19 3
181 ORNAMENTAL NURSERY PRODUCTS 17 2
3721 AIRCRAFT 16 3
3543 INDUSTRIAL PATTERNS 14 2
2299 TEXTILE GOODS, NEC 14 1
3261 VITREOUS PLUMBING FIXTURES 13 1
3273 READY-MIXED CONCRETE 9 1
3295 MINERALS, GROUND OR TREATED 9 1
7389 BUSINESS SERVICES, NEC 9 1
7535 PAINT SHOPS 8 2
5211 LUMBER & OTHER BLDG MATERIALS 8 1
7531 TOP & BODY REPAIR SHOPS 8 1
2541 WOOD PARTITIONS AND FIXTURES 6 2
2599 FURNITURE AND FIXTURES, NEC 5 2
2426 HARDWOOD DIMENSION & FLOORING 5 1
2519 HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, NEC 5 1
3716 MOTOR HOME MANUFACTURE 5 1
7359 EQUIPMENT RENTAL & LEASING,NEC 5 1
7819 SERV ALLIED TO MOTION PICTURES 5 1
7542 CAR WASHES 4 1
1070 of 2287
Appendix C
AQMD C-4 August 2003
SIC Code Description Confirmed Odor
Complaints
Notices of
Violation
(NOVs)
Issued
3761 GUIDED MISSILES AND SPACE VEH 2 1
134 IRISH POTATOES 1 1
1389 OIL/GAS FIELD SERVICES, NEC 1 1
3572 COMPUTER STORAGE DEVICES 1 1
3695 MAGNETIC & OPTICAL RECDG MEDIA 1 1
5039 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, NEC 1 1
5411 GROCERY STORES 1 1
8744 FACILITIES SUPPORT SERVICES 1 1
9999 UNKNOWN 773 52
Total 27,906 936
1071 of 2287
APPENDIX D
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
PURSUANT TO CEQA
1072 of 2287
Appendix D
AQMD D-1 August 2003
CUMULATIVE IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The following summarizes the requirement to analyze cumulative impacts pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the procedures by which the AQMD complies with the requirement.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS DEFINED
"Cumulative impacts" refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.
REQUIREMENT TO ANALYZE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.
An adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts requires:
(1) Either:
(A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency. Factors to consider include the nature of each environmental resource being examined, the location of the project and its type. Or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area-wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact.
Lead agencies should define the geographic scope of the area affected by the cumulative effect and provide a reasonable explanation for the geographic limitation used. (2) A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available. (3) A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects. An EIR shall examine reasonable, feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project's contribution to any significant cumulative effects.
1073 of 2287
Appendix D
AQMD D-2 August 2003
REQUIREMENTS WHEN CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ARE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT Where a lead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not "cumulatively considerable," a lead agency need not consider that effect significant, but shall briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable.
An EIR may determine that a project's contribution to a significant cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not significant. A project's contribution is less than cumulatively considerable if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact.
An EIR may determine that a project's contribution to a significant cumulative impact is de minimus and thus is not significant. A de minimus contribution means that the environmental conditions would essentially be the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. Note that this provision (CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(a)[4]) was challenged by Communities for a Better Environment and has not been resolved. Therefore, the SCAQMD does not rely on this provision to conclude that a project does not have cumulatively significant impacts.
CONSIDERATIONS WHEN CONDUCTING CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSES "Probable future projects" may be limited to those projects requiring an agency approval for an application which has been received at the time the notice of preparation is released; projects included in an adopted capital improvements program, general plan, regional transportation plan, or other similar plan; projects included in a summary of projections of projects (or development areas designated) in a general plan or a similar plan; projects anticipated as later phase of a previously approved project (e.g. a subdivision); or those public agency projects for which money has been budgeted.
If a cumulative impact was adequately addressed in a prior EIR for a community plan, zoning action, or general plan, and the project is consistent with that plan or action, then an EIR for such a project should not further analyze that cumulative impact.
When analyzing the cumulative impacts of a project, the Lead Agency is required to discuss not only approved projects under construction and approved related projects not yet under construction, but also unapproved projects currently under environmental review with related impacts or which result in significant cumulative impacts. The analysis should include a discussion of projects under review by the Lead Agency and projects under review by other relevant public agencies, using reasonable efforts to discover, disclose, and discuss the other related projects.
The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute. An EIR should not discuss impacts that do not result in part from the project evaluated in the EIR.
With some projects, the only feasible mitigation for cumulative impacts may involve the adoption of ordinances or regulations rather than the imposition of conditions on a project-by-project basis.
AQMD COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIREMENT The AQMD has two primary roles under CEQA. As a Lead Agency, the AQMD is responsible for preparing environmental analyses in the form of EIRs, Negative Declarations, or Environmental Assessments. As a Commenting Agency, the AQMD is responsible for review and comment on air quality analyses prepared by other public agencies.
1074 of 2287
Appendix D
AQMD D-3 August 2003
The AQMD, as Lead Agency, complies with all cumulative impact analysis requirements when preparing CEQA documents. As a Commenting Agency, the AQMD recommends that other public agencies perform cumulative impact analyses relative to air quality in the same manner as does AQMD. The following discussion focuses on how AQMD complies with the cumulative impact analysis as a Lead Agency.
The SCAQMD’s regulatory program (i.e., development of rules and regulations) has been certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency per Public Resources Code Section 21080.5. This means the SCAQMD prepares environmental analyses, including cumulative analyses, in documents other than EIRs and Negative Declarations. AQMD documents are always called Environmental Assessments.
As Lead Agency preparing Environmental Assessments for rule projects, AQMD evaluates requirements of the proposed rule as well as other AQMD rules with future compliance dates and AQMP control measures to determine if the proposed project may significantly contribute to cumulative impacts.
When AQMD is Lead Agency for a non-SCAQMD project (i.e., permit projects), standard CEQA requirements apply and Negative Declarations and EIRs are prepared. By definition, projects that qualify for a Negative Declaration do not have cumulative impact.
For permit projects, AQMD evaluates cumulative impacts relative to other projects within a geographical sphere of influence as well as other related projects. While cumulative impact analyses include projects undergoing a CEQA review, AQMD also typically requires the consultant to contact the city/county in which the project is located to identify projects where applications have been submitted, but the project has not yet undergone an environmental analysis. For these projects, general plan growth projections are applied to estimate impacts as applicable.
As Lead Agency, the AQMD uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental Assessment or EIR. The only case where the significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts differ is the Hazard Index (HI) significance threshold for toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions. The project specific (project increment) significance threshold is HI > 1.0 while the cumulative (facility-wide) is HI > 3.0. It should be noted that the HI is only one of three TAC emission significance thresholds considered (when applicable) in a CEQA analysis. The other two are the maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) and the cancer burden, both of which use the same significance thresholds (MICR of 10 in 1 million and cancer burden of 0.5) for project specific and cumulative impacts.
Projects that exceed the project-specific significance thresholds are considered by the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. This is the reason project-specific and cumulative significance thresholds are the same. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant.
References
Title 14, California Code of Regulations. Chapter 3 - Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Article 9 - Contents of EIRs, Section 15130 - Discussion of Cumulative Impacts and Article 20 – Definitions, Section 15355 - Cumulative Impacts.
Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Discussion relative to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 ( http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/ceqa/guidelines/art9.html ). 1075 of 2287
Appendix D
AQMD D-4 August 2003
Note: Authority cited for CEQA Guidelines Section 15130: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21083(b), 21093, 21094, and 21100, Public Resources Code; Whitman v.
Board of Supervisors (1979) 88 Cal.App.3d 397; San Franciscans for Reasonable Growth v. City and County of San Francisco (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 61; Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692; Laurel Heights Homeowners Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376; Sierra Club v. Gilroy (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 30; Citizens to Preserve the Ojai v.
County of Ventura (1985) 176 Cal.App.3d 421; Concerned Citizens of South Cent. Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 826; Las Virgenes Homeowners Fed'n v. County of Los Angeles (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 300; San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Ctr v. County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal. App.4th 713; and Fort Mojave Indian Tribe v. Cal. Dept. Of Health Services (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1574.
1076 of 2287
APPENDIX E
RAIMI PILOT STUDY, INITIAL PHASE
1077 of 2287
Appendix E
AQMD E-1 August 2003
Cumulative Impacts Summary of the
Regional Air Impact Modeling Initiative (RAIMI) Pilot Study – Initial Phase By: USEPA, Region VI
Purpose: To establish a Regional Air Impact Modeling Initiative (RAIMI) program for a region-wide prioritization of potential for community-level health risks as a result of exposure to multiple air contaminants from multiple sources through multiple exposure pathways. Also, to complement concurrent federal air toxics programs including Cumulative Exposure Project, Integrated Urban Air Toxics Program, and residual risk after the establishment of standards for maximum achievable control technology (MACT).
Process: Conduct a pilot study comprised of 2 phases: 1) investigate test methods for source prioritizations based on risks resulting from direct inhalation; and 2) study indirect exposures resulting from air-related sources. (The Region VI report addresses the initial phase of the pilot.)
Goals: The RAIMI pilot project has five stated goals, summarized as follows:
1. Use as a permitting tool, independently or combined, applicable for cross media permitting.
2. Provide a standardized and consistent means by which permitting authorities could account for and assess aggregate health effects from multiple contaminants from multiple sources, which are often subject to multiple permitting schemes (local, RCRA, CAA, etc.) but cumulatively impact the same receptor area.
3. Provide necessary level of detailed information, at a community level, to prioritize, and identify potential solutions, for sources subject to unacceptable risks by estimating combined health effects resulting from multiple contaminants and sources.
4. Calculate and track potential risks from numerous sources and contaminants based on actual emissions data. New data can be directly entered into the program for real time risk updates.
5. Serve as a versatile and dynamic platform, allowing for rapid use of the program tools.
Design: RAIMI is designed to provide a prioritization based on the estimate of potential health risks resulting from multiple air contaminants and sources (point, area, and mobile sources) within a pre-defined geographical area and to a community level of resolution. The level of detail is intended to be sufficient enough to allow association of risk to a specific contaminant, source, and exposure pathway. The intent is to have a flexible and dynamic platform that would allow active updates to data for rapid identification, characterization, assessment, and management of aggregate environmental exposures based on relevant and current exposures. Data completeness and accuracy that are contained within the platform are of greatest importance.
Benefits: The potential for RAIMI, under complete and successful implementation, is that it can be used by EPA, state, and local agencies to provide input on risk management decisions, policies regarding cumulative health risks, permitting, regulatory development, land use decisions and planning, and contribute to cross media regulatory protections.
Results: The Phase I RAIMI Pilot Study successfully demonstrated its stated design objectives.
The most significant limitation and uncertainty is the potential lack of complete emissions characterization. Complete, accurate, and timely data are crucial to successful use of the 1078 of 2287
Appendix E
AQMD E-2 August 2003
RAIMI platform. Uncertainties also exist relative to air and risk modeling programs and respective inputs.
Next Steps: The initial phase of the pilot study was a test for application to larger areas. USEPA Region VI has recently completed an assessment on three entire counties at the same level of detail. EPA is currently examining the results from the assessments from an implementation and enforcement standpoint to lower community level inhalation risks. The intent is to have all counties in the major areas of the region (primarily Texas and Louisiana) fully mapped in the next five years.
The second phase of the pilot is to study indirect exposures resulting from air-related sources. This element of the pilot will focus on other pathways of exposure besides inhalation, such as ingestion. Work on this phase is anticipated for completion by the end of 2003, to be followed by a review stage prior to publishing. Under this phase, EPA will be examining surrogates to effectively and accurately determine the impacts from indirect exposures.
1079 of 2287
APPENDIX F
COMMUNITY FORUM SUMMARY
1080 of 2287
Appendix F
AQMD F-1 August 2003
Summary
Community Forums
For Addressing Cumulative Impacts
In May and June 2003, staff held a series of 5 evening and weekend Community Forums. The meetings were held in Mira Loma, Santa Ana, Sun Valley, Fontana, and Wilmington. The intent of the meetings were to seek input for addressing cumulative impacts from sources of air pollution. One of the primary goals was to receive feedback on a list of 19 options (see attached) developed by the Cumulative Impacts Working Group. The meetings were attended by about 150 individuals representing environmental and community groups, local government, and neighboring residents.
A summary of key comments and concerns raised at the individual meetings follows:
· Mira Loma: The primary concerns raised related to the heavy rail and diesel truck traffic and lengthy idling associated with the large number of warehouses and distribution centers. These structures are located in and around the 15/60 freeway interchange, which are in close proximity to schools.
Concerns were also raised regarding proposed increased numbers of warehouses in the same vicinity.
Another major concern was regarding a particular facility that conducts manufacturing of foam, plastic, and rubber products.
· Santa Ana: Although there were several questions on the cumulative impact effort, no specific concerns regarding local issues were raised.
· Sun Valley: A number of concerns were raised relative to the high local concentration of landfills and waste processing, strip mining (quarries), vehicle scrap yards, plating facilities, and rail and freeway transportation corridor. Due to the dust, odors, and other emissions, concerns were raised regarding the high incidence of asthma in children in the area. A number of requests were specifically made for air monitoring in the local area, particularly around schools. Therefore, requests for increased inspector field presence. This community also wanted AQMD staff to come back to this area. · Fontana: The major concern raised was increased vehicle traffic due to relocated and new businesses, including manufacturing, into the area.
· Wilmington: Attendees stressed that a strong cumulative impacts program should be developed and implemented, and should include indicators other than cancer risk only. Several attendees testified that the program should address both stationary and mobile sources. Concerns were raised regarding the high incidence of asthma and nose bleeds of local residents. The rail and diesel truck traffic associated with the ports and the Alameda Corridor are of key concern, as well as density of local facilities, such as refineries, auto body shops, plating facilities, and vehicle scrap yards. Requests were made for increased localized monitoring and neighborhood assessment modeling. Several groups offered to support the AQMD regarding legislation to increase its authority over ships, trucks, and trains. Several concerns were also raised by residents located near the runway of the Santa Monica airport, citing high exposure to airplane emissions due to the increased number of planes idling prior to take-off.
1081 of 2287
Appendix F
AQMD F-2 August 2003
Specific suggestions from the combined meetings included:
· Legislation to mandate disclosures of environmental problems in the community by landlords when leasing or selling residential or commercial real estate. · Information was requested on whether screens or trees around schools would decrease particulate pollution.
· Request for notices to schools in areas of high pollution at levels lower than traditionally notified based on the Air Quality Index ratings.
· Inspectors are requested to respond to all complaints during the middle of the night. · The AQMD should have more involvement in the 710 freeway expansion project. · Reduced idling of trucks, trains, and ships when near residential communities should be required; · Thresholds in Rules 1401 and 1402 should be reduced;
· Rail traffic along the Alameda Corridor should be electrified; · Enforcement programs should be stronger, including greater field presence and penalties; · AQMD should exert more and better influence on land use decisions; · Require controls on small diesel engines;
· Require a buffer zone around certain types of factories or do not allow more new sources; · Provide incentives for air purification systems for homes; · Incentives and requirements for pollution prevention and reduction should be pursued; · The AQMD should help the community with resources to address localized issues; and · Repeat visits to the community should be made regarding this and other subjects. 1082 of 2287
Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality
Issues in General Plans and Local Planning
A Reference for Local Governments Within the
South Coast Air Quality Management District
This guidance document is prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) as a reference for cities and counties within AQMD’s jurisdiction.
It provides suggested policies that local governments can use to prevent or reduce potential air pollution impacts and protect public health in their General Plans or through local planning. The objective of the guidance document is to facilitate stronger collaboration between local governments and the AQMD to reduce community exposure to source-specific and cumulative air pollution impacts. It is recognized that local governments, to make the best decisions for the benefit of their residents, must weigh and balance multiple issues, demands and concerns, including, but not limited to, the need for housing, existing development and development patterns, environmental responsibilities and more when making land use decisions.
May 6, 2005
1083 of 2287
Acknowledgements
The AQMD would like to acknowledge and thank the Western Riverside Council of Governments and the Orange County Council of Governments for their assistance in the preparation of the initial draft of the model air quality element and this subsequent guidance document. The AQMD staff appreciates the ideas and suggestions received from the many stakeholders that participated in the development of this document. 1084 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................................... i CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................1-1 REGULATED AIR POLLUTANTS................................................................................................................1-2 EFFECTS OF AIR POLLUTION ON HEALTH AND WELFARE........................................................................1-10 THE ROLE OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL AGENCIES TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION...............................1-10 THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ................................................................................................1-14 THE REGIONAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN.................................................................................1-15 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE....................................................................................................................1-15 FORMAT OF THE DOCUMENT ................................................................................................................1-16 CHAPTER 2
AIR QUALITY ISSUES REGARDING LAND USE ...................................................................................2-1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT SITING CRITERIA FOR SENSITIVE RECEPTORS........................................................2-1 JOB HOUSING BALANCE.......................................................................................................................2-13 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES RELATED TO LAND USE ............................2-13 CHAPTER 3
TRANSPORTATION..................................................................................................................................3-1 CATEGORIES OF MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS ........................................................................................3-1 TRANSPORTATION AND INDIRECT SOURCE CONTROL PROGRAMS ............................................................3-1 CONGESTION AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT..................................................................3-2 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES ..................................................................3-5 CHAPTER 4
STATIONARY SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION.......................................................................................4-1 CATEGORIES OF STATIONARY EMISSION SOURCES.................................................................................4-1 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES ..................................................................4-2 CHAPTER 5
REDUCTION OF FUGITIVE DUST............................................................................................................5-1 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES ..................................................................5-2 CHAPTER 6
ENERGY ...................................................................................................................................................6-1 ENERGY CONSERVATION .......................................................................................................................6-1 GREEN BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES .........................................................................................................6-1 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FLEETS .............................................................................................................6-2 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES ..................................................................6-2 1085 of 2287
CHAPTER 7
PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION...............................................................................................7-1 SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES ..................................................................7-2 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................... R-1 GLOSSARY ..............................................................................................................................................G-1 APPENDIX A – CITIES AND COUNTIES WITHIN THE SCAQMD THAT HAVE ADOPTED AIR QUALITY ELEMENTS IN GENERAL PLANS & EXAMPLES OF AIR QUALITY ELEMENTS ................................... A-1 APPENDIX B - AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS .................................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C - HEALTH EFFECTS OF AMBIENT AIR POLLUTANTS ................................................................ C-1 APPENDIX D - COACHELLA VALLEY MODEL DUST CONTROL ORDINANCE................................................... D-1
APPENDIX E - FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUGGESTED POLICIES/STRATEGIES...................................................... E-1 1086 of 2287
Guidance Document
i
PREFACE
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) environmental justice program is designed to protect the rights of the residents in the South Coast basin to live and work in an environment of clean air, free of airborne health threats. The guiding principle of the program is based on “equitable environmental policymaking and enforcement to protect the health of all residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location, from the health effects of air pollution.” In suggesting enhancements to the AQMD’s 2002 environmental justice program, stakeholders proposed the development of a model air quality element for cities and counties within AQMD’s jurisdiction that considers the health risks to community residents associated with local government land use planning and decisionmaking. To that end, the AQMD is making this guidance document available to local governments as a tool to assist them as they develop or update their General Plans and make other planning decisions. The primary users will likely be local government planners within the geographic boundaries of the South Coast air district; however, the ideas, technical issues, and references in the guidance document are also intended for use by private developers, residents, and community organizations. The use of this document by local governments is strictly voluntary. The AQMD recognizes that local governments, to make the best decisions for the benefit of their residents, must weigh and balance multiple issues, demands and concerns, including, but not limited to, the need for housing, existing development and development patterns, environmental responsibilities and more when making land use decisions.
Neither state or federal law mandates separate air quality elements in General Plans.
Similarly, the AQMD does not require that cities or counties include a “stand alone” air quality element in their plans, but we encourage local governments to use the information presented in this guidance document to: (1) help develop a separate air quality element, (2) update their current air quality element or (3) integrate air quality policies in other elements of their General Plans such as Land Use and Circulation. We recognize that each community must address a unique combination of air quality and community development issues in their General Plans; therefore, the suggested goals, objectives and policies/strategies presented in this document will not apply uniformly in every jurisdiction. The format and scope of suggested air pollution policies and strategies for each local jurisdiction should be tailored to be consistent with the structure and content of the existing General Plan. Local jurisdictions have complete discretion to select the appropriate mix of pertinent air quality goals and objectives and determine the level of detail of policies and implementation measures that will effectively reduce air pollution and protect public health in their communities.
The combined implementation of the suggested strategies throughout the region will strengthen the local government partnership with the AQMD to achieve state and federal clean air standards and demonstrate the resolve of cities and counties in the district to provide environmental equity and protect public health. The AQMD will 1087 of 2287
Guidance Document
ii
update this document periodically to make available the most current air quality information, the results of local health effects studies related to air pollution and the state of air pollution control technologies to help local governments update their General Plans and make other planning decisions.
1088 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
• REGULATED AIR POLLUTANTS
• EFFECTS OF AIR POLLUTION ON HEALTH AND WELFARE
• THE ROLE OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL AGENCIES TO
REDUCE AIR POLLUTION
• THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
• THE REGIONAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
• ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
• FORMAT OF THE DOCUMENT
1089 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-1
INTRODUCTION
California state law requires each city and county to adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning”. The General Plan must contain seven “elements:” land use, circulation, housing, open-space, conservation, noise and safety. The policies in the required General Plan elements are the basis for most land use decisions. General Plan policies and practices have the potential to exacerbate localized air pollution impacts and adversely affect public health. State law offers the flexibility to go beyond the mandatory elements, to adopt “any other elements or address any other subjects, which in the judgment of the legislative body, relate to the physical development of the county or city.” Many cities and counties in the district have addressed air quality in other sections of their General Plan, such as land use, circulation, and conservation.
While an air quality element is not mandatory, two counties (San Bernardino and Riverside) and 44 cities within AQMD’s jurisdiction have adopted separate air quality elements in their General Plans (see Appendix A). The fact that Southern California continues to be faced with some of the most serious air pollution problems in the United States is a strong case for the topic of air quality to be included as a stand alone element in General Plans. It is recognized that local governments, to make the best decisions for the benefit of their residents, must weigh and balance multiple issues, demands and concerns, including, but not limited to, the need for housing, existing development and development patterns, environmental responsibilities and more when making land use decisions.
The South Coast basin exceeds federal standards for ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Although the AQMD is moving forward in implementing both near and long term control measures that aggressively seek to reduce air quality emissions, the basin is currently one of only two areas in the nation classified as “extreme” nonattainment for ozone. Clean air for all the residents in the basin cannot be accomplished by air quality agencies alone. Achieving the mutual goals of protecting public health and providing environmental equity to residents throughout the basin can only be accomplished through a strong partnership with local jurisdictions. The involvement of local governments to establish public policies that support AQMD strategies is essential for this region to meet state and federal air quality goals. The General Plan, as the foundation for all local planning and development, is an important tool to implement local government policies and programs that are vital to achieving clean air standards. Cities and counties have the flexibility and authority to address air quality issues through General Plans that guide the development of local circulation systems, transportation services, and land use. The AQMD and CARB have strong, comprehensive regulatory programs in place for new and existing sources of air pollution. However, local policies in conjunction with air agency efforts can greatly enhance the effectiveness of these programs by addressing cumulative impacts in local areas. Many land use decisions that involve siting, zoning and permitting actions provide opportunities to complement local and state air regulations and prevent or 1090 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-2
minimize adverse health impacts. The development of land use policy and the authority to site sensitive land uses are local government functions. In local planning and policy development, sensitive land uses should be given special consideration to best protect those individuals that are especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution. The intent of this document is to provide information that will lead to general plan policies and local decision making that considers potential air quality impacts on public health. The suggested policies and strategies are intended to guide land use planners in developing approaches tailored to their community that reduce exposure to source-specific air pollution and lower the health risk associated with cumulative air pollution impacts.
Chapter 1 presents an overview of regulated air pollutants in the South Coast air district and summarizes the effects of air pollution on public health and welfare.
REGULATED AIR POLLUTANTS
Air pollutants regulated by the federal and California Clean Air Acts or other laws fall under three categories:
• criteria air pollutants,
• toxic air contaminants (TAC),
• global warming and ozone-depleting gases.
Pollutants in each of these categories are monitored and regulated differently. Criteria air pollutants are measured by sampling concentrations in the ambient air; toxic air contaminants are measured at the source and in the general atmosphere; and, global warming and ozone-depleting gases are not monitored but are subject to federal and regional policies that call for their reduction and eventual phase out. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has established ambient air quality standards for the following air pollutants:
• ozone (O3)
• nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
• carbon monoxide (CO)
• sulfur dioxide (SO2)
• lead (Pb)
• particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5 )
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has also established ambient air quality standards for the six pollutants regulated by the USEPA. Some of the California ambient air quality standards are more stringent than the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In addition, California has established ambient air quality standards for the following pollutants or air quality conditions:
• hydrogen sulfide
• sulfates
1091 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-3
• vinyl chloride
• visibility
NAAQS and California ambient air quality standards for the criteria pollutants are listed in Appendix B.
Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and state governments have established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health. The national and state ambient air quality standards have been set at levels to protect human health with a determined margin of safety. For some pollutants, there are also secondary standards to protect the environment. The following is a description of the ambient air pollutants and the attainment status of each pollutant in the South Coast basin. A discussion of the health effects of the ambient air pollutants is found in Appendix C.
Carbon Monoxide. Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas formed by the incomplete combustion of fuels. Motor vehicles are the main source of this gas. CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, thus reducing the blood's ability to transport oxygen to vital organs in the body. The ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide is intended to protect persons whose medical condition already compromises their circulatory system's ability to deliver oxygen. These medical conditions include certain heart ailments, chronic lung diseases, and anemia. Persons with these conditions have reduced exercise capacity even when exposed to relatively low levels of CO. Fetuses are at risk because their blood has an even greater affinity to bind with CO. Smokers are also at risk from ambient CO levels because smoking increases the background level of CO in their blood. The South Coast basin is designated as a serious non-attainment area for carbon monoxide by both USEPA and CARB. However, there have been no violations of the CO standard in the past three years, and AQMD has submitted to EPA a request for redesignation to attainment status.
Nitrogen Dioxide. Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is a byproduct of fuel combustion. The principal form of nitrogen oxide produced by combustion is nitric oxide (NO), but NO reacts quickly to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOx.
NO2 acts as an acute irritant and, in equal concentrations, is more injurious than NO. At atmospheric concentrations, however, NO2 is only potentially irritating. There is some indication of a relationship between NO2 and chronic pulmonary fibrosis. Some increase in bronchitis in young children has also been observed at concentrations below
0.3 parts per million (ppm). NO2 absorbs blue light which results in a brownish red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. Although NO2 concentrations have not exceeded national standards since 1991 and the state hourly standard since 1993, NOx emissions remain of concern because of their contribution to the formation of O3 and particulate matter.
1092 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-4
Ozone. Ozone (O3) is one of a number of substances called photochemical oxidants that are formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and NOx react in the presence of ultraviolet sunlight. O3 concentrations in the South Coast basin are typically among the highest in the nation, and the damaging effects of photochemical smog, which is a popular name for a number of oxidants in combination, are generally related to the concentrations of O3. Individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with preexisting lung disease, such as asthma and chronic pulmonary lung disease, are considered to be the subgroups most susceptible to O3 effects. Short-term exposures (lasting for a few hours) to O3 at levels typically observed in southern California can result in breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, and some immunological changes. In recent years, a correlation between elevated ambient O3 levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates, as well as mortality, has also been reported.
The South Coast basin is designated by both the USEPA and the CARB as an extreme non-attainment area for ozone. Although O3 concentrations declined between 1991 and 2004 to the lowest levels since monitoring began, the South Coast basin continues to have peak O3 levels that exceed both state and federal standards. In 2004, the peak concentration (1-hr standard) exceeded the federal standard 131 percent and the state standard 163 percent.
In 1997, the USEPA issued a new ozone air quality standard based on an 8-hour average exposure (the current federal ozone air quality standard is based on a 1-hour average period). The new 8-hour average ozone air quality standard provides for greater health protection. Current regulatory controls which are directed toward attaining the 1-hour ozone standard will also have benefits toward attaining the 8-hour ozone standard.
Particulate Matter. Inhalable fine particulate matter (PM10) consists of extremely small suspended particles or droplets 10 microns or smaller in diameter that can lodge in the lungs, contributing to respiratory problems. PM10 arises from such sources as reentrained road dust, diesel soot, combustion products, tire and brake abrasion, construction operations, and fires. It is also formed in the atmosphere from NOx and SO2 reactions with ammonia. PM10 scatters light and significantly reduces visibility.
Inhalable particulates pose a serious health hazard, alone or in combination with other pollutants. More than half of the smallest particles inhaled will be deposited in the lungs and can cause permanent lung damage. Inhalable particulates can also have a damaging effect on health by interfering with the body’s mechanism for clearing the respiratory tract or by acting as a carrier of an absorbed toxic substance. USEPA designates the South Coast basin as serious non-attainment for PM10, while CARB designates the South Coast basin simply as non-attainment.
In 1997, the USEPA established a new particulate matter PM2.5 standard, in addition to the PM10 standard. PM2.5 is defined as particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns and is a subset of PM10. PM2.5 consists mostly of products from the reaction of NOx and SO2 with ammonia, secondary organics, finer dust particles, and the 1093 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-5
combustion of fuels including diesel soot. Deadlines for meeting this standard will be ten years after the region is designated as non-attainment by the USEPA.
Sulfur Dioxide. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent gas formed primarily by the combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. Health effects include acute respiratory symptoms and difficulty in breathing for children. Individuals with asthma may experience constriction of airways with exposure to SO2. Though SO2 concentrations have been reduced to levels well below state and federal standards, further reductions in SO2 emissions are needed because SO2 is a precursor to sulfate and PM10. The South Coast basin is considered a SO2 attainment area by USEPA and CARB.
Lead. Lead (Pb) concentrations once exceeded the state and federal air quality standards by a wide margin, but have not exceeded state or federal air quality standards at any regular monitoring station since 1982. Though special monitoring sites immediately downwind of lead sources recorded very localized violations of the state standard in 1994, no violations were recorded at these stations in 1996. Consequently, the South Coast basin is designated as an attainment area for lead by both the USEPA and CARB.
Volatile Organic Compounds. It should be noted that there are no state or federal ambient air quality standards for VOCs because they are not classified as criteria pollutants. VOCs are regulated, however, because a reduction in VOC emissions reduces certain chemical reactions which contribute to the formation of ozone. VOCs are also transformed into organic aerosols in the atmosphere, contributing to higher PM10 and lower visibility levels.
Although health-based standards have not been established for VOCs, health effects can occur from exposures to high concentrations of VOC. Some hydrocarbon components classified as VOC emissions are hazardous air pollutants. Benzene, for example, is a hydrocarbon component of VOC emissions that is known to be a human carcinogen.
Criteria air pollutant concentrations are typically higher in the South Coast basin than in any other area of the country because of the region’s climate, geographical setting, and high concentrations of industry and motor vehicles. Although still high, pollutant concentrations have declined sharply throughout the 1990s. Air quality in 2004, aided by favorable weather conditions, was the best recorded since air pollution agencies began monitoring air pollution in this region in the 1940s prior to the creation of the AQMD. Table 1-1 lists the primary emission sources of the criteria pollutants and some of the harmful effects of the pollutants.
1094 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-6
Table 1-1
Primary Sources and Effects of Criteria Pollutants
Pollutants Source Primary Health and Welfare Effects
Lead
(Pb) Contaminated soil
Behavioral and hearing disabilities in children;
Nervous system impairment
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
Combustion of sulfurcontaining fossil fuels;
Smelting of sulfurbearing metal ores;
Industrial processes
Aggravation of respiratory diseases (asthma,
emphysema);
Reduced lung function
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Incomplete combustion
of fuels and other
carbon-containing
substances, such as
motor vehicle exhaust;
Natural events, such as
decomposition of
organic matter
Aggravation of some heart diseases (angina);
Reduced tolerance for exercise;
Impairment of mental function;
Impairment of fetal development;
Death at high levels of exposure
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Motor vehicle exhaust;
High-temperature
stationary combustion;
Atmospheric reactions
Aggravation of respiratory illness
Ozone
(O3)
Atmospheric reaction of
organic gases with
nitrogen oxides in
sunlight
Aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases; Reduced lung function, Increased cough and chest
discomfort
Fine Particulate
Matter
(PM10 and PM2.5)
Stationary combustion of
solid fuels;
Construction activities;
Industrial processes;
Atmospheric chemical
reactions
Reduced lung function;
Aggravation of respiratory & cardio-respiratory diseases; Increases in mortality rate;
Reduced lung function growth in children
The AQMD measures current air quality and provides forecasts on the AQMD website in several formats. Current information on air pollution levels may be viewed in text form on the "Current Air Quality Readings" page, or retrieved from a clickable map on the "Animated Air Quality Map" page. Air quality data, trends, and studies are available via the “Air Quality Data” page, and a forecast of pollution levels for the following day is available on the "Daily Air Quality Forecast" page. Also, meteorological data needed for the air dispersion model applications may be downloaded from this website at no charge.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) are often referred to as “non-criteria” air contaminants because ambient air quality standards have not been established for them. There are hundreds of TACs, and exposure to these pollutants is associated with elevated risk of cancer and non-cancer health effects such as birth defects, genetic damage, and other 1095 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-7
adverse health effects. Effects may be chronic (i.e., of long duration) or acute (i.e., of short duration) on human health. Acute health effects are attributable to short term exposure to air toxics. These effects include nausea, skin irritation, respiratory illness, and, in extreme cases, death. Chronic health effects result from long-term exposure.
The effect of major concern for this type of exposure is cancer, which may develop up to 30 years after exposure. The USEPA regulates TACs through technology-based requirements which are implemented by state & local agencies. California regulates TACs through the air toxics program (H&SC §§ 39660 et seq.) and the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act (H&SC §§ 44300 et seq.).
The CARB, working in conjunction with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), identifies TACs. Air Toxic Control Measures (ATCMs) must then be adopted by CARB to reduce the identified TACs. Where there are federal standards, CARB must, at minimum, adopt the standards established by the USEPA. If there is a threshold below which there would be no significant adverse health impacts, CARB must create an ATCM to reduce emissions so there are no adverse health effects. If there is not a threshold below which there would be no significant adverse health impacts CARB must create an ATCM that reduces TAC emissions using the best available control technologies. Local air quality control agencies must implement ATCMs, or adopt equal or more stringent control measures as rules, within six months of adoption by CARB.
The Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act, codified in the Health and Safety Code, requires operators of specified facilities in the South Coast air district to submit to the AQMD comprehensive emissions inventories and reports by specified dates. The AQMD reviews the reports and then places the facilities into high-, intermediate-, and low-priority categories, based on the potency, toxicity, quantity, and volume of emissions and on the proximity of receptors, including sensitive receptors, to the facility. Facilities designated as high priority must prepare a health risk assessment.
If the risk is above specified levels, facilities are required to notify the surrounding population and may be required to develop and implement a risk reduction plan.
The AQMD has also developed “industry-wide” inventories and assessed risks of small business facilities with emissions that are easily characterized. Some of the facilities in the industry-wide program are gas stations, small auto body shops, small dry cleaners, plating shops, and fiberglass product manufacturers. This information can then be used as an initial screening tool to determine whether a particular site is advisable for siting a sensitive receptor, or vice versa. Additional information is available on control strategies to minimize cumulative impacts of toxic emissions at http://www.aqmd.gov/rules/CIWG/final_white_paper.pdf and the AQMD Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program (AB2588) at http://www.aqmd.gov/prdas/AB2588/AB2588.html.
Information is also available from the AQMD Office of Engineering and Compliance to determine if a facility is operating under AQMD permits and what types of pollutants are emitted.
1096 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-8
AQMD also adopts other rules that are not part of the federal or state programs and works with other agencies to encourage TAC reductions in their purview. The emissions inventory data are to be updated every four years. In addition to implementing federal and state toxic requirements, AQMD has an Air Toxics Control Plan and a Cumulative Impacts Reduction Strategy to further reduce TACs and their impacts on the communities in the South Coast basin.
Global Warming and Ozone-Depleting Gases
“Stratospheric ozone depletion” refers to the slow destruction of naturally occurring ozone, which lies in the upper atmosphere (called the stratosphere) and which protects Earth from the damaging effects of solar ultraviolet radiation. Certain compounds, including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs,) halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and other halogenated compounds, accumulate in the lower atmosphere and then gradually migrate into the stratosphere. In the stratosphere, these compounds participate in complex chemical reactions to destroy the upper ozone layer. Destruction of the ozone layer increases the penetration of ultraviolet radiation to the Earth’s surface, a known risk factor that can increase the incidence of skin cancers and cataracts, contribute to crop and fish damage, and further degrade air quality.
Some gases in the atmosphere affect the Earth’s heat balance by absorbing infrared radiation. This layer of gases in the atmosphere functions much the same as glass in a greenhouse (i.e., both prevent the escape of heat). This is why global warming is also known as the “greenhouse effect.” Gases responsible for global warming and their relative contribution to the overall warming effect are carbon dioxide (55 percent), CFCs (24 percent), methane (15 percent), and nitrous oxide (6 percent). It is widely accepted that continued increases in greenhouse gases will contribute to global warming although there is uncertainty concerning the magnitude and timing of the warming trend.
Global warming gases and ozone-depleting gases include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide results from fossil fuel combustion in stationary and mobile sources. It contributes to the greenhouse effect, but not to stratospheric ozone depletion. In the South Coast basin, approximately 48 percent of carbon dioxide emissions come from transportation, residential and utility sources contribute approximately 13 percent each, 20 percent come from industry, and the remainder come from a variety of other sources. • Chlorofluorocarbons. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are emitted from blowing agents used in producing foam insulation. They are also used in air conditioners and refrigerators and as solvents to clean electronic microcircuits. CFCs are primary contributors to stratospheric ozone depletion and to global warming.
Sixty-three percent of CFC emissions in the South Coast basin come from the industrial sector. Federal regulations require service practices that maximize recycling of ozone-depleting compounds (both CFCs, hydro-chlorofluorocarbons and their blends) during the servicing and disposal of air-conditioning and 1097 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-9
refrigeration equipment. AQMD Rule 1415 – Reduction of Refrigerant Emissions from Stationary Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems requires CFC refrigerants to be reclaimed or recycled from stationary refrigeration and air conditioning systems. AQMD Rule 1405 – Control of Ethylene Oxide and Chlorofluorocarbon Emissions From Sterilization or Fumigant Processes requires recovery of reclamation of CFCs at certain commercial facilities and eliminates the use of some CFCs in the sterilization processes. Some CFCs are classified as TACs and regulated by AQMD Rule 1401 – New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants and AQMD Rule 1402 Control of Toxic Air Contaminants from Existing Sources.
• Halons. These compounds are used in fire extinguishers and behave as both ozone-depleting and greenhouse gases. Halon production ended in the United States in 1993. AQMD Rule 1418 – Halon Emissions From Fire Extinguishing Equipment requires the recovery and recycling of halons used in fire extinguishing systems and prohibits the sale of halon in small fire extinguishers. • Hydro-chlorofluorocarbons. HCFCs are solvents, similar in use and chemical composition to CFCs. The hydrogen component makes HCFCs more chemically reactive than CFCs, allowing them to break down more quickly in the atmosphere. These compounds deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, but to a much lesser extent than CFCs. HCFCs are regulated under the same AQMD rules as CFCs.
• Methane. Methane is emitted from biogenic sources, incomplete combustion in forest fires, landfills, and leaks in natural gas pipelines. It is a greenhouse gas and traps heat 40-70 times more effectively than carbon dioxide. In the South Coast basin, more than 50 percent of human-induced methane emissions come from natural gas pipelines, while landfills contribute 24 percent. Methane emissions from landfills are reduced by AQMD Rule 1150.1 - Control of Gaseous Emissions from Active Landfills. Methane emissions from petroleum sources are reduced by a number of rules in AQMD Regulation XI that control fugitive emissions from petroleum production, refining and distribution. • 1,1,1,-trichloroethane (TCA). TCA (methyl chloroform) is a solvent and cleaning agent commonly used by manufacturers. It is less destructive on the environment than CFCs or HCFCs, but its continued use will contribute to global warming and ozone depletion. 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) is a synthetic chemical that does not occur naturally in the environment. No TCA is supposed to be manufactured for domestic use in the United States after January 1, 2002 because it affects the ozone layer. TCA had many industrial and household uses, including use as a solvent to dissolve other substances, such as glues and paints; to remove oil or grease from manufactured metal parts; and as an ingredient of household products such as spot cleaners, glues, and aerosol sprays. AQMD regulates this compound as a toxic air contaminant under Rules 1401 and 1402.
1098 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-10
The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer controls the phase-out of ozone depleting compounds (ODCs). Under this international agreement, several organizations report on the science of ozone depletion, implement projects to help move away from ODCs, and provide a forum for policy discussions. The AQMD supports state, federal and international policies to reduce levels of ozone depleting gases through its Global Warming Policy and rules. Further, AQMD has developed ODC Replacement Guidelines to facilitate transition from ODCs to substances that are the most environmentally benign.
EFFECTS OF AIR POLLUTION ON HEALTH AND WELFARE
The residents of Southern California bear the cost of air pollution by:
• reduced visibility
• increased episodes of respiratory infections and other illnesses • increased number of days of discomfort
• absent days from work and school
• increased symptoms related to respiratory disease, including asthma • slowed lung function growth and increased asthma risk in children • heart disease
• shortened life spans
Polluted air also damages agriculture, the natural environment, and human-made materials. Improving air quality enhances public health and produces economic benefits that more than offset the costs of attaining clean air. The overall strategy for reducing air pollution for criteria pollutants in the South Coast air district is contained in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP provides control measures that reduce emissions to attain federal ambient air quality standards by their applicable deadlines. The cost benefit analysis for the plan is conducted as part of the AQMP development. However, not all the health benefits associated with implementing the AQMP can be quantified. Further, the Air Toxic Control Plan amended in 2003 outlines the strategies pursued by the AQMD, CARB, and USEPA to reduce air toxic emissions.
THE ROLE OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL AGENCIES TO REDUCE AIR
POLLUTION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is responsible for establishing the national ambient air quality standards and enforcing the federal Clean Air Act. This agency also regulates emission sources under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, certain types of ships and locomotives. The USEPA has jurisdiction over emission sources outside state waters (e.g., beyond the outer continental shelf) and establishes various emission standards, including those for 1099 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-11
vehicles sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must also meet the often stricter emission standards established by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). For additional information about the USEPA, contact the USEPA’s general internet address at www.epa.gov. Information on the programs and activities in USEPA Region IX, which includes California, can be found at www.epa.gov/region9, and additional information on mobile source emissions is available from the Office of Mobile Sources at www.epa.gov/otaq/index.htm.
California Air Resources Board
The CARB became part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) in 1991. The agency is responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act, meeting state requirements of the federal Clean Air Act, and establishing state ambient air quality standards. It is also responsible for setting vehicle emission standards and fuel specifications, and regulating emissions from other sources such as consumer products and certain types of mobile equipment (e.g., lawn & garden equipment, industrial forklifts). The internet address for CalEPA is www.calepa.ca.gov; the internet address for CARB is www.arb.ca.gov.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Because Southern California has one of the worst air quality problems in the nation, the AQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis Air Quality Management Act. Four county air pollution control agencies were merged into one regional district to better address the issue of improving air quality in Southern California. Under the act, revised and renamed the Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act in 1988, the AQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South Coast basin. Specifically, the AQMD is responsible for monitoring air quality and planning, implementing, and enforcing programs designed to attain and maintain state and federal ambient air quality standards in the district. Programs developed include air quality rules and regulations that regulate stationary source emissions, including area and point sources and certain mobile source emissions. The AQMD is also responsible for establishing permitting requirements and issuing permits for stationary sources and ensuring that new, modified, or relocated stationary sources do not create net emissions increases. The AQMD enforces air quality rules and regulations through a variety of means, including inspections, educational and training programs, and fines.
The AQMD has jurisdiction over an area of 10,743 square miles, referred to in this document as the South Coast air district. This area includes all of Orange county, all of Los Angeles county except for the Antelope Valley, the non-desert portion of western San Bernardino county, and the western and Coachella Valley portions of Riverside county. The South Coast basin is a sub-region of the district and covers an area of 6,745 square miles. The South Coast basin includes all of Orange county and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. Figure 1-1 shows the jurisdictional boundaries of the South Coast air district and the South Coast basin.
1100 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-12
Both the district and the South Coast basin are surrounded by mountains, which tend to restrict air flow and concentrate pollutants in the valleys or “basins” below. The South Coast basin is almost entirely urban, and its pollution is typically related to dense population and associated area sources, heavy vehicular traffic, and industrial sources.
In the Coachella Valley, pollution problems are associated primarily with ozone transport from the South Coast basin and with particulate emissions from heavy construction, travel on paved and unpaved roads, and agriculture.
South Coast
Air Quality Management District
SCAQM D Jurisdiction
Mojave Desert
Air Basin
Salton Sea
Air Basin
San Diego
Air Basin
South
Central
Coast Air Basin
South Coast
Air Basin
San Diego County Imperial County
Riverside County
Los Angeles
County
Kern County San Bernardino County
Orange
County
Santa
Barbara
County
Ventura
County
San Joaquin
Valley
Air Basin
Figure 1-1
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The AQMD is organized according to procedures established by the California Legislature and specified in the Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act. The AQMD is organized into three branches. The first branch is the 12-member Governing Board, which is the decision-making body of the AQMD that adopts rules, regulations, and plans, such as the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The Governing Board is comprised of nine elected officials, one county supervisor from each of the four counties in the district and five members representing the cities of each county. Because of its size, Los Angeles county has both an eastern and western cities representative. The three remaining board members are appointed to the board by state elected officials:
one is appointed by the governor, another is appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, and the third is appointed by the state Senate Rules Committee. Several advisory committees review and recommend actions to the Governing Board. For example, the Local Government and Small Business Assistance Advisory Group is made up of local government officials, small business representatives, and members of the general 1101 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-13
public. This committee, therefore, offers local governmental agencies the opportunity to comment on the AQMD’s rule-making and planning processes.
The second branch of the AQMD is the Hearing Board, which is a quasi-judicial panel authorized to provide relief to regulated facilities from AQMD regulations. Relief from regulations can only occur under specific circumstances, such as emergencies, etc.
State law requires that the Hearing Board be appointed by the Governing Board, but the Hearing Board acts independently of the Governing Board. The third branch is management/staff, which is the bulk of the agency and reports to the AQMD Governing Board. This branch includes the divisions responsible for: developing rules and rule amendments; permitting of air pollution sources and rule compliance; planning programs such as the AQMP; air quality monitoring; public outreach and small business assistance; and prosecuting cases of rule violations. Additional information on the AQMD is available at AQMD’s internet address - www.aqmd.gov.
Local Governments
Air quality issues in the South Coast air district are addressed through the efforts of federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies and the legislation that authorizes them to regulate air quality are shown in Figure 1-2. Local governments work in concert with their Councils of Governments and the AQMD to improve air quality through a variety of programs, including regulatory actions, policy making, and education programs. Local governments have the flexibility to address air quality issues through ordinances, local circulation systems, transportation services, and land use. No other level of government has that authority, including the AQMD. This document recognizes the vital role of local government policies and programs that are designed to complement and support both local and state air regulations. These policies, particularly in land use, transportation and energy, are essential to achieve state and federal air pollution standards and reduce localized air pollution impacts. For many local governments in the district, the General Plans consolidate air quality related goals, objectives and polices into an optional air quality element. A stand alone air quality element gives direction for sound decision making on air quality-related issues and provides a solid basis to inform the public, as well as developers, about air quality policies to protect public health.
Local governments, which include both city and county agencies, have the ability to control or mitigate air pollution through their police powers and land use decisionmaking authority. Local ordinances can also provide mechanisms for reducing air pollution. Many cities in the South Coast air district have adopted air quality elements into their General Plans, coordinating these elements with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the congestion management program requirements required by state law. Local design standards such as requirements for bicycle racks and bicycle paths may result in reducing motor vehicle trips, and administrative actions can be taken that reduce air pollution, such as creating a telecommunication program that enables employees to work at home. Also, capital improvement programs can fund transportation infrastructure projects such as bus turnouts, energy-efficient street lights, and synchronized traffic signals that contribute to improved air quality. 1102 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-14
Government Legislation Implementing Agencies
Federal
Clean Air Act U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA)
California Clean Air Act
(H&S §§ 39660 et seq.)
California EPA (Cal-EPA) and
California Air Resources Board
(CARB)
State
AB 1807, Air Toxics
Contaminants Act
Office of Environmental and Health
Hazard Assessments
(OEHHA)
Assembly Bill 2588, Air
Toxics “Hot Spots”
Information and
Assessment Act of 1987
Regional
Lewis-Presley Air Quality
Management Act
South Coast Air Quality Management
District (AQMD)
Local Local Ordinances and Air
Quality Elements in
General Plans (Gov’t.
65303)
CEQA mitigation
measures (PRC §21000,
et seq.)
Public Agencies Including Local
Governments and County
Transportation Commissions
Figure 1-2
Authorizing Legislation with Air Quality Components
THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) is being developed by SCAG as a useful resource for local governments within the SCAG region to implement regional plans and policy objectives. The goals, policies and strategies of four regional plans are described in the RCP:
• 2004 Regional Transportation Plan
• 2004 Regional Transportation Plan Environmental Impact Report • 2004 Transportation Improvement Plan
• Regional Growth Strategy (“Compass Growth Vision”)
1103 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-15
Similar to this Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality in General Plans and Local Planning, the RCP is an advisory document that lays out steps that local governments and other stakeholders may take to support regional objectives.
THE REGIONAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
The AQMD has authority to reduce emissions from stationary sources, some area sources, and certain indirect sources. The AQMD is the lead agency in charge of, with input from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and CARB, developing the AQMP. The AQMP is a comprehensive plan that includes control strategies for stationary and area sources, as well as for on-road and off-road mobile sources. SCAG has the primary responsibility for providing future growth projections and the development and implementation of transportation control measures. CARB in coordination with federal agencies provides the control element for mobile sources.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
California state law defines environmental justice as the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies (California Government Code sec.65040.12). In 1997, AQMD implemented 10 environmental justice initiatives designed to protect district residents’ right to live and work in an environment of clean air, free of airborne health threats. The AQMD defines environmental justice as “equitable environmental policymaking and enforcement to protect the health of all residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location, from the health effects of air pollution.” AQMD’s environmental justice program was expanded in 2002 to include 23 enhancements that serve as the basis for further outreach and problem-solving activities regarding environmental justice issues. The goal of developing a model air quality element for local government General Plans is one of the program enhancements established to reduce health risks associated with exposure to air pollution. The progress of AQMD’s environmental justice program is reviewed each year and a new workplan is established for the coming year. Public input on the workplan is solicited through a series of public consultation meetings. Prior to being adopted by the AQMD Governing Board, environmental justice work plans are reviewed by the Ethnic Community Advisory Group, an ethnically-diverse committee of residents and businesspeople. For an update on AQMD’s environmental justice initiatives, visit http://www.aqmd.gov/ej/index.htm.
Often, local governments broadly define “environmental justice” in general plans to balance air quality with other environmental, economic, and social objectives. Broad definitions supported by specific goals, objectives and polices prevent possible procedural inequities (e.g., public meeting times that limit attendance by certain groups) 1104 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-16
and geographical inequities (e.g., heavy industrial land uses adjacent to certain neighborhoods). California General Plan Guidelines recommend incorporating policies that support environmental justice in all mandatory and optional elements. Local jurisdictions may choose to define “environmental justice” and consolidate all environmental justice policies in an optional environmental justice element. As stated in the California General Plan Guidelines, the definition of environmental justice clearly leads to policies and planning principles that prevent incompatible land uses that pose threats to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Furthermore, the definition of “environmental justice” and the policies to achieve environmental equity in an air quality element must not conflict with policies in other elements.
FORMAT OF THE DOCUMENT
This guidance document is formatted with six topics that are typically addressed in an air quality element of a general plan. Air quality issues are described as they are related to each topic, and a menu of strategies and suggested policies are listed that will integrate air quality issues into the general plan. Not all suggested policies are pertinent or applicable for all jurisdictions. The severity of local air pollution problems in various regions of the district (e.g., windblown dust or localized TAC concentrations) will influence the number and scope of air pollution-related strategies that jurisdictions consider for adoption in their General Plans.
The six topics discussed in this document are:
Chapter 2 - Land Use
Chapter 3 - Transportation
Chapter 4 - Stationary Sources of Pollution
Chapter 5 - Reduction of Fugitive Dust Emissions
Chapter 6 - Energy Conservation
Chapter 7 - Public Awareness and Education
The State Guidelines closely adhere to statute and case law and rely upon commonly accepted principles of contemporary planning practice. A four-tier format for general plan elements is suggested, using the terms “goal,” “objective,” “policy,” and “implementation measure” as follows:
1. Goal - A goal statement expresses an end, not an action.
2. Objective - An objective describes a specified end, condition, or state that is an intermediate step toward attaining a goal. It should be achievable and, when possible, measurable and time-specific.
3. Policy - A policy statement guides decision-making and indicates a commitment of the local legislative body to a particular course of action. A policy is based on and 1105 of 2287
Guidance Document
1-17
helps implement a general plan’s objectives. A policy is carried out by implementation measures.
4. Implementation Measure - An implementation measure is an action, procedure, program, or technique that carries out general plan policy. Each policy has at least one corresponding implementation measure.
This guidance document includes a three-tier format (goals, objectives, and policies/strategies) which closely parallels the four-tier format outlined in state guidelines. A number of stakeholders suggested that the “policies/strategies” category is more helpful and less prescriptive, and allows more flexibility to interpret and craft policy statements that are specific to the needs of the local jurisdiction. During the implementation phase, staff will continue to solicit feedback from stakeholders. If necessary, AQMD staff will move toward a four-tier format in the future and consider an additional subcategory of “implementation measures”.
1106 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 2
AIR QUALITY ISSUES REGARDING LAND USE
• LOCAL GOVERNMENT SITING CRITERIA FOR SENSITIVE
RECEPTORS
• JOB-HOUSING BALANCE
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES RELATED TO LAND USE
1107 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-1
AIR QUALITY ISSUES REGARDING LAND USE
Local government land use authority in planning, zoning, and permitting can be a very effective tool to minimize air pollutant emissions and associated health risks. However, it is important to recognize that traditional assumptions about planning and zoning compatibility to protect the public may not always eliminate adverse health impacts of air pollution. While it is recognized that local governments, to make the best decisions for the benefit of their residents, must weigh and balance multiple issues, demands and concerns, including, but not limited to, the need for housing, existing development and development patterns, environmental responsibilities and more when making land use decisions, some projects being considered by local land use decision-makers may comply with zoning and air pollution control requirements but still result in adverse health impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. These health impacts may result from emissions released at a single site, along a transportation corridor or a combination of co-located air pollution sources in a community. For example, the co-location of residential and commercial zones often minimize transportation-related emissions, but in some situations this mixed land use may also increase health risks if commercial facilities that emit toxic chemicals are over concentrated. While mixed-use zoning offers economic, social, and environmental benefits compared to single-use zoning, this chapter describes certain industrial, commercial and transportation uses that may pose health concerns with residences, schools, and other sensitive sites. This document introduces land use related policies that rely on design and distance parameters to minimize emissions and lower potential health risk.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT SITING CONSIDERATIONS FOR SENSITIVE RECEPTORS There is a strong connection between health risk and the proximity of the source of air pollution. Local jurisdictions have the responsibility for determining land use compatibility for sensitive receptors. A sensitive receptor is a person in the population who is particularly susceptible to health effects due to exposure to an air contaminant.
The following are land uses (sensitive sites) where sensitive receptors are typically located:
• schools, playgrounds and childcare centers
• long-term health care facilities
• rehabilitation centers
• convalescent centers
• hospitals
• retirement homes
• residences
Facilities and Operations That Emit Odors and Dust
Both the AQMD and local governments receive complaints about dust and offensive odors. Odors and dust are air pollutants that can have negative health impacts. While 1108 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-2
almost any source may emit objectionable odors, some land uses will be more likely to produce odors or dust because of their operation. The types of facilities or operations that are prone to generate odors, and dust, and other air pollutants can be identified from complaints received by the AQMD (Table 2-1). While AQMD records indicate these facilities have the potential to emit odor or dust that may impact sensitive receptors, individual equipment and operations within each source category do not necessarily generate dust or odor. Special care needs to be given to the initial siting and design of operations and facilities listed in Table 2-1. Assessing potential impacts depends on a number of variables such as wind speed and direction, design features of the proposed facility such as stack height, and the physical distance from the source and the sensitive receptors. Local governments should identify both new projects that have a probability of pollution-related complaints and new developments that may be affected by existing upwind sources. Ideally, potential odor and dust emissions from new projects should be identified and evaluated while the project is still in its initial design phase. This early effort could provide an opportunity to change the project design to minimize or eliminate emissions before the facility becomes operational.
Potential odor and dust sources that can be identified and mitigated before construction of a project begins will minimize health impacts and enforcement problems. Local governments are advised to contact the AQMD’s Office of Engineering and Compliance to determine if complaints have been filed by property owners or occupants in the general vicinity of a proposed project site to help evaluate the potential for dust or odor complaints.
Table 2-1
Sources of Odor and Dust Complaints Received by the AQMD Sources of Odors Sources of Dust
Agriculture (farming and livestock) Agricultural (Land Tilling) Chemical Plants Asphalt and Cement Plants
Composting Operations Auto Body Facilities
Dairies Construction Activities
Fiberglass Molding Diesel Engines/Vehicles
Landfills Composting Operations
Refineries Fertilizer Operations
Rendering Plants Fiberglass Molding
Rail Yards Furniture Manufacturing - Sawdust
Wastewater Treatment Plant Landfills and Transfer Stations Refineries
Roofing Operations
Rubber Manufacturing
Sand and Gravel Operations
Sandblasting
Silk Screening
Wood dust
1109 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-3
Toxic Air Contaminants
Sensitive receptors (and the facilities that house them) in proximity to sources of air pollutants that emit TACs are of particular concern. Exposure to TACs can increase the risk of contracting cancer or result in adverse non-cancer health effects. Non-cancer health risks associated with TAC exposure include birth defects and other reproductive damage, neurological disorders, and damage to the respiratory system. A comprehensive monitoring study of TACs was initiated as part of AQMD’s environmental justice program. The Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES-II) included fixed sites characterizing neighborhood-scale conditions and a complementary microscale study to sample potential localized influences of toxic-emitting sources near residential neighborhoods. Inventories of TACs were utilized in computer simulation models to depict toxic risks for the entire South Coast basin. The MATES-II project represents one of the most comprehensive air toxics monitoring programs ever conducted in a major urban area in the country, and it has been recognized as a model program. Findings from the study revealed the following:
• Average cancer risk from ambient measurements in the South Coast basin was found to be 1400 in a million;
• Diesel exhaust is responsible for about 70 percent of the total cancer risk from air pollution;
• Emissions from mobile sources -- including cars and trucks as well as ships, trains and planes -- account for about 90 percent of the cancer risk. Emissions from businesses and industry are responsible for the remaining 10 percent; and • The highest cancer risk occurs in south Los Angeles county -- including the port area -- and along major freeways.
In 2005, the AQMD plans to release the results of another intensive one-year study that examined current levels of cancer-causing TACs and the risk they pose to district residents. This study will help gauge the effectiveness of current regulations and serve as a vital tool in helping shape future air quality and environmental justice policies.
MATES-III will monitor 21 TACs and four other substances at 10 sites across the Los Angeles basin. The AQMD will use mobile monitoring stations to sample at neighborhood sites near toxic emission sources or in areas where community members are concerned about health risks from air pollution. Such neighborhood sites could be near airports, rail yards, warehouses, landfills, high-volume vehicle traffic, or multiple commercial or industrial facilities. Sampling at each neighborhood site lasts for up to two months. The goal of MATES-III is to update TAC levels and toxic emission inventories, determine the cancer and non-cancer health risk from air toxics across the district. Also, the study will investigate potential toxic “hot spots” in local communities.
The potential impacts of new facilities on sensitive sites will depend on a variety of factors including the amount and toxicity of pollutants emitted, the type of air pollution control equipment at the facility, design features of the facility, the distance from the 1110 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-4
source of emissions to the sensitive receptor, and local meteorology. All these factors should be carefully evaluated when siting a source of air pollution. Typically, the siting process followed by land use agencies to avoid the location of sensitive sites (e.g., residences, health clinics, etc.) near sources of air pollution does not involve the AQMD.
The potential for public health impacts remains unchanged when siting sensitive receptors near a pollution source or a pollution source near a sensitive receptor.
Therefore, local policies should allow for a thorough evaluation of the air quality impacts for both scenarios.
Where possible, CARB recommends a minimum separation between new sensitive land uses and the following eight categories of existing sources (Table 1-1 in CARB’s Proposed Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.
March 2005, or subsequent versions adopted by CARB):
• high-traffic freeways and roads
• distribution centers
• rail yards
• ports
• refineries
• chrome plating facilities
• perchloroethylene dry cleaners
• large gasoline stations
It is recommended that the AQMD be consulted to obtain facility-specific emissions information and accepted assessment methods for determining relative exposure and health risk for proposed projects.
Recent studies have found an increased incidence of adverse effects among those who live near busy roadways; these include increased respiratory disease and increased mortality (Wilhelm, M., et al 2003; Kim, J. et al 2004). These studies found that residential proximity to traffic was associated with increased risk of low birth weight, increased medical visits for asthma and increased respiratory symptoms in children.
Studies conducted near freeways in Southern California show that traffic emissions, such as carbon monoxide, ultra-fine particulates, and black carbon (soot) are several times higher next to freeways than the background concentrations. These concentrations fell to lower levels with increasing distance from the roadway, decreasing about 60-80 percent within 100 meters (Zhu, Yifang, et al, 2002).
Recent results from the Children’s Health Study have shown strong evidence of adverse effects in children exposed to ambient levels of traffic-related pollutants. This study followed children in 12 communities in Southern California from 4th grade through 12th grade (McConnell, K., et al, 2002). Children in communities with high levels of NOx, PM2.5, acid vapors, and elemental carbon showed reduced lung function growth over the study period. Additionally, a higher level of asthma was found in the children that lived nearest to busy roadways. In a report prepared for CARB, researchers concluded that the current levels of ambient air pollution in Southern California are associated with 1111 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-5
clinically important chronic health effects that have substantial health and economic impacts (Peters, 2004).
The primary authority for siting public schools rests with local school districts which are the designated “lead agencies” for the CEQA environmental analyses. The California Education Code requires public school districts to notify the local planning agency when siting new public schools and the planning agency to determine if the proposed site conforms with the General Plan. If the proposed school is within 500 feet of the edge of a freeway or traffic corridor that has specified minimum average daily traffic counts, the school district is required to determine through specified risk assessment and air dispersion modeling that neither short-term nor long-term exposure poses significant heath risks to pupils. Both the California Education Code section 17213 and the California Public Resources Code section 21151.8 require school districts to consult with the AQMD when preparing the environmental assessment. The AQMD verifies all permitted and non-permitted sources of air pollution that might significantly affect health have been identified and evaluated.
Generally, cancer risk will drop off with distance from a ground level pollution source, such as a freeway. Freeways and busy traffic corridors are defined as traffic volume of over 100,000 vehicles per day in urban areas and 50,000 vehicles per day in rural areas (Education Code Section 17312). CARB studies show that air pollution levels can be significantly higher within 500 feet (150 meters) of freeways or busy traffic corridors and then diminish rapidly. Actual concentration of diesel particulate matter will vary at a particular location depending on traffic volume, vehicle mix, prevailing winds and other variables. The decline in the relative concentration of diesel particulate matter as one moves away from the edge of a freeway is illustrated Figure 2-1. These data have been normalized to a receptor located 20 meters from the edge of freeway (i.e., at a distance of 20 m, the receptor is exposed to 100 percent of the diesel particulate matter emissions from the freeway). A downwind distance of 328 feet (100 m) will reduce cancer risk by over 60 percent. If the physical downwind distance is increased to 984 feet (300 m), the relative concentration is reduced over 80 percent. 1112 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-6
0 0.2
0.4 0.6
0.8 1
0 100 200 300 400 500
Distance from Edge of Freeway (m)
Relative Concentration
Figure 2-1
Relative Concentration of Diesel Particulate Matter
in Relation to the Distance from The Edge of a Freeway
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District. Adapted from the California Air Resources Board’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan.
A comparison of total cancer risk and cancer risk from diesel particulate matter emissions in rural and urban areas shows that cancer risk associated with elevated levels of diesel particulate both decrease rapidly within the first 100 – 150 meters from the edge of a roadway (Table 2-2). Estimated cancer risk from diesel particulate matter along rural and urban roadways is decreased approximately 68 percent at a distance 150 m (492 ft) from the edge of the roadway. Clearly, these data demonstrate that a minimum distance that separates sources of diesel emissions from nearby receptors is effective in reducing potential cancer risk. The AQMD recognizes that physical separation of the receptors from the pollution sources is not always reasonable or feasible particularly in mature communities. For example, in southern Los Angeles county a sequence of land use decisions in urban areas allowed freeway construction through existing neighborhoods.
1113 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-7
Table 2-2
Cancer Risks from Diesel Particulate Matter at the
Edge of Roadways in Rural and Urban Areas
Diesel Particulate Matter
Cancer Risk (in one million)
Total Cancer Risk
(in one million)* Distance from Edge of
Roadway
(meters) Rural Urban Rural* Urban*
20 m 475 890 589 1104
150 m 151 277 187 343
500 m 86 159 107 197
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District. Adapted from the California Air Resources Board’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan.
*To account for gasoline vehicle emissions, the diesel PM risk was multiplied by 1.24. This represents the relative risk contribution from benzene, 1, 3 butadiene, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde on a basin-wide basis. It is assumed that the vast majority of benzene, 1, 3 butadiene, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde emissions come from on-road gasoline vehicles.
The AQMD provides guidance for analyzing cancer risks from diesel particulate matter from mobile sources at facilities such as truck stops and warehouse distribution centers in the document titled Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis. This document may be downloaded at http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html. This guidance describes analysis of potential cancer risks associated with diesel particulates from truck idling and movement (such as truck stops, warehouse and distribution centers, or transit centers), ship hotelling at ports, and train idling. It is suggested that projects with diesel-powered mobile sources use this health risk guidance document to quantify potential cancer risks from the diesel particulate emissions.
Projects that incorporate transit nodes may include a range of multiple services ranging from a bus or light rail stop to a combination of services that may include bus, shuttles, light and heavy rail systems. The concept of a “clean” transit node refers to transit services that predominately operate with zero emission vehicles (e.g., electric light rail), clean fuel vehicles (e.g., compressed natural gas or hydrogen), or vehicles powered with low-emission engines (e.g., California certified Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicles). Projects that emphasize “clean” transit nodes not only minimize VMT, but also reduce the potential health impacts associated with transit-related emissions on individuals living near transit services.
Current USEPA regulations establish fuel registration and formulation requirements. All diesel fuels and all additives for on-road motor vehicles are required to be registered with the USEPA, and all new diesel-fueled on-road and off-road engines and vehicles sold in California are required to meet both federal and state emission certification requirements. In addition, the Carl Moyer Program, administered by CARB and local air 1114 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-8
districts, is a clean engine incentive program that incentivizes projects that substantially reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and fine particulate matter (PM) from heavy-duty diesel engines. Funds are distributed to project proponents through the AQMD to incentivize cost-effective projects. Funds, in the form of grants for private companies, public agencies, or individuals operating heavy-duty diesel engines, cover an incremental portion of the cost of cleaner on-road, off-road, marine, locomotive, and agricultural irrigation pump engines. This framework is also used to award grants for other equipment and for retrofitting or repowering existing engines.
The CARB Diesel Risk Reduction Plan proposes a three-pronged approach that would require use of low-sulfur diesel fuel; retrofitting existing engines with PM filters; and nearly a 90 percent reduction of PM emissions from all new diesel engines and vehicles. A number of adopted and proposed state regulations that will reduce diesel emissions target the following source categories: Heavy-Duty Public Fleets and Private Utilities; Cargo Handling Equipment; Non-Urban Transit Buses; Harbor Craft; Truck Idling from Sleeper Cabs; Off Road and Private On-Road Fleets; Agriculture Equipment; and Ships.
Further, the AQMD has adopted fleet rules that will gradually shift public agencies to lower emissions and alternative fuel vehicles whenever a fleet operator with 15 or more vehicles replaces or purchases new vehicles.
Rule 1186.1 Less – polluting sweepers
Rule 1191 Clean On-Road Light and Medium-Duty Public Fleet Vehicle Rule 1192 Clean On-Road Transit Buses
Rule 1193 Clean On-Road Residential and Commercial Refuse Collection Vehicles Rule 1194 Commercial Airport Ground Access Vehicles
Rule 1195 Clean On-Road School Buses
Rule 1196 Clean On-Road Heavy-duty Public Fleet Vehicles Air regulatory agencies have collaborated closely with regulated industries, refineries and diesel vehicle manufacturers to establish cleaner fuel specifications and engine technologies. Although AQMD’s fleet rules have been challenged, CARB is moving forward with its rulemaking to facilitate the implementation of fleet rules in the South Coast Air Basin that will result in significant emission reductions. In addition, state and federal requirements are the cornerstone of the clean air strategy to clean up diesel pollution in the South Coast district. Combined, the current and planned regulatory efforts by USEPA, CARB and AQMD are expected to substantially lower the average level of diesel emissions per vehicle. CARB or AQMD staff can be contacted to obtain additional information on the current status of rule development.
The goals established by the CARB plan call for a statewide reduction in diesel particulate emissions of 75 percent by 2010 and 85 percent by 2020. AQMD’ s 2004 addendum to the 2000 Air Toxics Control Plan indicates that full implementation of the 2003 AQMP, including CARB’s measures to reduce diesel particulate matter, would reduce basin-wide toxic-weighted emissions by 50 percent. While there continues to be 1115 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-9
an overall reduction in air pollution for the region, the emission reductions expected from cleaner engine standards that employ new control technologies often require a lengthy “fleet turnover” time to be effective. Given projections for future growth and additional vehicles that will utilize the regions transportation corridors, there are no guarantees that localized cancer risk and non-cancer impacts will diminish rapidly in the short term or adequately in the long run. Cities are encouraged to join the AQMD in a proactive approach to address existing health concerns in their communities identified in the AQMD’s Multiple Air Toxics Emissions Study (MATES II). Policies and strategies suggested in this guidance document can offer a near-term remedy to lower cancer risk from exposure to air pollution, and at the same time, provide preventive measures that protect health over the long-term planning horizon of the general plan.
TACs from stationary sources are of particular concern with regard to sensitive receptors. For example, state law requires school districts to consider the impact of siting a new school close to existing facilities that emit TACs. This same principle should be applied in siting other sensitive sites such as retirement homes and hospitals.
AQMD serves as a clearinghouse for publicly available information on stationary sources that emit TACs and associated public health risks. This information is compiled from documentation required of facilities that emit TACs by AQMD Rules 1401 & 1402, and Assembly Bill (AB) 2588 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program (H&SC §§ 39660 et seq.).
Toxic risk assessments are routinely included in CEQA evaluations performed by the local governments in its land use decisions
Jurisdictions may conduct a current inventory of all major sources of air pollution within a specified radius of the proposed sensitive site. Examples of facilities with the potential to emit TACs that could pose a health risk are shown in Table 2-3. Also, AQMD staff are available to assist local governments in identifying sources of TACs within their jurisdictions and evaluating potential health risk from TAC exposure. Local governments may contact the AQMD to obtain recommended analytical methods.
Existing land use conflicts are best addressed on an individual basis. AQMD is available to assist cities and counties in evaluating local government options and strategies for minimizing existing pollution exposure problems. Options may include relocation, recycling, redevelopment, rezoning, process changes, incentive programs, and other types of measures.
1116 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-10
Table 2-3
Examples of Facilities That Emit Toxic Air Contaminants Categories Facility Type Air Pollutants of Concern
Commercial
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaners1 Perchloroethylene
Chrome Platers/Chrome Spraying Operations Hexavalent Chromium Gas Stations Benzene
Auto Body Shops Metals, Solvents
Furniture Repair Solvents2
, Methylene Chloride
Film Processing Services Solvents, Perchloroethylene
Cold Storage Distribution Centers, Warehouses Diesel Particulate Matter Printing Shops
Diesel Engines
Solvents
Diesel Particulate Matter
Industrial
Manufacturers Solvents, Metals
Metal Platers, Welders, Metal Spray (flame
spray) Operations Hexavalent Chromium, Nickel, Metals
Chemical Producers Solvents, Metals
Gasoline Refineries Benzene, Solvents, Metals, PAHs
Furniture Manufacturers Solvents
Shipbuilding and Repair Hexavalent Chromium and other metals, Solvents
Hazardous Waste Incinerators Dioxin, Solvents, Metals
Power Plants Benzene, Formaldehyde, Particulate
Matter
Research and Development Facilities Solvents, Metals, etc.
Freight Distribution Centers Diesel Particulate Matter
Public
Landfills Benzene, Vinyl Chloride, Diesel
Particulate Matter
Waste Water Treatment Plants Hydrogen Sulfide
Medical Waste Incinerators Dioxin, Benzene, PAH, PCBs,
1,3-Butadiene
Recycling, Garbage Transfer Stations Diesel Particulate Matter Municipal Incinerators Dioxin, Benzene, PAH, PCBs,
1,3-Butadiene
Transportation
Port Facilities Diesel Particulate Matter, Methyl Bromide Airports Benzene, Formaldehyde
Rail Yards (diesel locomotives) Diesel Particulate Matter Rail Corridors Diesel Particulate Matter
Intermodal Facilities Diesel Particulate Matter
Truck Stops Diesel Particulate Matter
Freeways and Roadways Diesel Particulate Matter, Benzene, 1,3-Butadiene, Formaldehyde
Agricultural
Operations
Farming Operations Diesel Particulate Matter, VOCs, NOx, PM10, CO, SOx, Pesticides
Livestock and Dairy Operations Ammonia, VOCs, PM10
Source: Adapted from the Proposed Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. CARB, March 2005.
1 Non-perc alternatives (e.g. wet cleaning and CO2 cleaning) may eliminate TAC emissions. 2 Many, but not all solvents contain TACs.
1117 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-11
Mapping Sources of Toxic Air Contaminants. Land use/zoning maps should be utilized to identify the location of facilities and transit corridors that are potential sources of TACs and the locations of sensitive receptors. An internet-based mapping tool is available from CARB that allows local planners to view maps showing the locations of air pollution sources. The Community Health Air Pollution Information System (CHAPIS) was developed by ARB and the State's 35 local air districts. The AQMD provides the data for facilities in its jurisdiction. Facilities that emit 10 or more tons per year of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, PM10, or reactive organic gases are included in the database. AQMD facilities that emit TACs are being phased in by categories. The CHAPIS database includes chemical manufacturing, metal fabrication, and aerospace/electronics manufacturing facilities if they have conducted health risk assessments under California's Air Toxics "Hot Spots" program. The remaining "Hot Spot" facilities and other industries and smaller businesses, such as gas stations and dry cleaners will eventually be added. An example of a CHAPIS map for the Central Los Angeles - Port region is shown in Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2
Example of a CHAPIS Map of Central Los Angeles Port Regions CHAPIS maps may answer questions such as:
• What are the major sources of air pollution within several miles from a residence?
• What are the relative contributions of mobile and stationary source emissions? • What are major sources of air pollution near schools? • What air pollutants are emitted by a particular facility or from mobile sources? 1118 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-12
While the CHAPIS information can serve as an indicator of local levels of air pollution, it is the exposure to emissions that influences health effects. Exposure is the amount of pollution that someone actually breathes or otherwise ingests. The degree of exposure varies with the distance from the source and the activities of the individual. Exposure is also dependent on how the emissions are released and dispersed into the atmosphere.
Exposure to air pollutants can also occur from indoor sources such as cooking, cleaning, and smoking. Health risk, as it is related to exposure to air contaminants is influenced by the number of air pollutants an individual is exposed to and the relative toxicity of those pollutants. The air pollutant emission information contained in CHAPIS is provided for general informational purposes. This mapping tool does not address the contribution of indoor sources of air pollution, and it does not show exposure levels or the health risks associated with the pollutants and sources it tracks. Not all stationary source facilities that are required to be permitted by the AQMD can be identified by CHAPIS at this time. Also, there can be a lag time between when the emissions occurred and the reporting of the information to the AQMD or CARB emission inventory databases. The AQMD should be consulted for the most recent emissions data and for information on facilities that may not appear on CHAPIS maps.
Siting issues, with respect to sensitive receptors need to be identified early in the review process, preferably before projects are formally submitted to the public agencies’ planning boards. The following three air quality questions related to land use compatibility should be considered for each project in close proximity to sensitive receptors:
• Will a sensitive receptor be located downwind from an existing source of dust or odors (Table 2-1)?
• Will a sensitive receptor be located in close proximity to a congested roadway or an existing facility that emits TACs (Table 2-3)?
• Is adequate separation provided, or are there established siting criteria to minimize exposure and health risk between sensitive receptors and sources of air pollution (see Table 1-1 in CARB’s Draft Air Quality and Land Use Handbook:
A Community Health Perspective. February 2005)?
Cities and counties could establish policies that provide for the location of sensitive sites and sources of air pollution in a manner that seeks to avoid the over-concentration of these facilities near sensitive sites. A number of strategies that may be employed to address over-concentration of emission sources and the cumulative impacts of the combined emissions include:
• physical separation between the source and the sensitive site • design features at the source to minimize air pollution emissions • siting, permitting and zoning policies
• capping cumulative impacts of various pollution sources 1119 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-13
• changing the land use designations in areas where there are significant cumulative impacts
“Cumulative” air quality analyses describe health and nuisance impacts related to cumulative emissions from sources that individually comply with AQMD, state, and federal rules. For example, in local jurisdictions where there are neighborhoods near a relatively large number of industrial facilities or near heavy cross-town traffic, there is concern that there may be accumulated effects of numerous emission sources operating near residences, schools, or other sensitive sites. Cumulative impacts may be mitigated through siting and zoning policies that consider, where feasible, appropriate setbacks and buffer zones to disperse the air pollutants before they reach sensitive receptors. When physical separation of sensitive receptors from sources of air pollution is not a feasible option, particularly in older well-developed communities, the design features of a specific facility or project (e.g., barriers and walls, landscaping, stack height, and ventilation systems) should be evaluated as an alternative to physical land separation.
JOB-HOUSING BALANCE
Residents in urban areas in the South Coast basin have become increasingly concerned with increased traffic congestion and the failure of the region to achieve state and federal clean air standards. The concept of a “jobs/housing balance” is based on the premise that the number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) can be reduced when sufficient jobs are available locally to balance the employment demands of the community, and when commercial services are convenient to residential areas.
Achieving a good balance requires planning the location and nature of jobs and housing in order to encourage a reduction in vehicle trips and VMT while increasing mass transit ridership and alternative modes of transportation, such as bicycles and walking. The AQMD and the SCAG both embrace jobs/housing balance as a viable tool available to local governments to reduce air pollution.
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES RELATED TO
LAND USE
Goal 1 Land use policies that address the relationship between land use and air quality to protect public health and minimize impacts on existing land use patterns and future land use development Objective 1.1 Through land use plans provide heightened consideration of policies and strategies to minimize exposure of sensitive receptors and sites (e.g., schools, hospitals, and residences) to health risks related to air pollution.
1120 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-14
Suggested Policies/Strategies to Protect Sensitive Receptors from Health Risks Related to Air Pollution:
AQ 1.1.1 Develop mapping and inventory resources to identify sensitive receptors and sources of air pollution.
AQ 1.1.2 Consider environmental justice issues as they are related to potential health impacts associated with air pollution and ensure that all land use decisions, including enforcement actions, are made in an equitable fashion to protect residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location from the health effects of air pollution.
AQ 1.1.3 Encourage site plan designs to provide the appropriate set-backs and/or design features that reduce TAC at the source.
AQ 1.1.4 Encourage the applicants for sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, daycare centers, playgrounds and medical facilities) to incorporate design features (e.g., pollution prevention, pollution reduction, barriers, landscaping, ventilation systems, or other measures) in the planning process to minimize the potential impacts of air pollution on sensitive receptors.
AQ 1.1.5 Promote and support mixed-use land patterns that allow the integration of retail, office, institutional and residential uses. Consult with the AQMD when siting new facilities with dust, odors or TAC emissions to avoid siting those facilities near sensitive receptors and avoid siting sensitive receptors near sources of air pollution.
AQ 1.1.6 Consider cumulative air quality impacts from both existing and new projects when making siting decisions.
AQ 1.1.7 Facilitate communication among residents, businesses and the AQMD to quickly resolve air pollution nuisance complaints. Distribute information to advise residents on how to register a complaint with AQMD (AQMD’s “Cut Smog” program).
AQ 1.1.8 The owners of new developments that have the potential to emit air pollutants that would impact sensitive receptors are required, during the early stages of the business license, development or conditional use permit processes, to notify residents and businesses adjacent to the proposed site prior to starting construction. However, potential business and resident occupants newly locating near sites that may impact sensitive receptors should be encouraged to inquire through their local government or the AQMD about the air quality emissions from such sites.
AQ 1.1.9 Consider all feasible alternatives to minimize emissions from diesel equipment (e.g., trucks, construction equipment, and generators).* AQ 1.1.10 Actively participate in decisions on the siting or expansion of facilities or land uses (e.g. freeway expansions), to ensure the inclusion of air quality 1121 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-15
mitigation measures.
AQ 1.1.11 Where decisions on land use may result in emissions of air contaminants that pose significant health risks, consider options, including possible relocation, recycling, redevelopment, rezoning, process changes, incentive programs, and other types of measures.
Objective 1.2 Reduce mobile source emissions by reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled associated with land use patterns.
Suggested Policies/Strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled:
AQ 1.2.1 For planned high density and mixed use developments, project proponents should consult with the local transit agency and incorporate all appropriate and feasible transit amenities into the plans.
AQ 1.2.2 Establish a Mixed-Use Zoning District that offers incentives to mixed use developments.
AQ 1.2.3 Encourage through the land use entitlement process or business regulation, design of commercial and residential areas to foster pedestrian circulation.
AQ 1.2.4 Adopt and implement zoning codes that encourage community centers, telecommuting programs, and home-based businesses.*
AQ 1.2.5 Create opportunities to receive State transportation funds by adopting incentives (e.g., an expedited review process) for planning and implementing infill development projects within urbanized areas that include job centers and clean transportation nodes (e.g., preparation of “transit village” plans).
AQ 1.2.6 Collaborate with local, regional, state and federal agencies to create incentives for “job/housing opportunity zones,” to promote housing in jobrich areas and jobs in housing-rich areas.
AQ 1.2.7 Design safe and efficient vehicle access to commercial land uses from arterial streets to ensure efficient vehicular ingress and egress.
AQ 1.2.8 Locate public facilities and services so that they further enhance job creation opportunities.
AQ 1.2.9 Ensure that development projects and zoning codes create the maximum opportunity for the use of bicycles as an alternative work transportation mode.*
AQ 1.2.10 Encourage “walkable neighborhoods“ by siting parks and community centers near residential areas.*
1122 of 2287
Guidance Document
2-16
Objective 1.3 Reduce mobile source emissions by increasing population densities within one-half mile of clean transit nodes.
Suggested Policies/Strategies to Increase Densities:
AQ 1.3.1 Increase residential and commercial densities around clean rail and bus transit stations and corridors. Clean rail and bus transit nodes and corridors are those that are served by rail and buses that are powered by electricity, alternative fuels (i.e., CNG and LNG), or that meet or exceed SULEV emission standards.
AQ 1.3.2 Sponsor paratransit transportation systems, such as neighborhood electric vehicle “station cars” or jitneys for short trips to and from transit nodes.* *Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1123 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 3
TRANSPORTATION
• CATEGORIES OF MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
• TRANSPORTATION AND INDIRECT SOURCE CONTROL
PROGRAMS
• CONGESTION AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
MANAGEMENT
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1124 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-1
TRANSPORTATION
CATEGORIES OF MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
Mobile sources are motorized vehicles, which are classified as either on-road or offroad. On-road mobile sources typically include automobiles and trucks that operate on public roadways. Off-road mobile sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and selfpropelled construction equipment that operate off public roadways. Mobile source emissions are accounted for as both direct source emissions (those directly emitted by the individual source) and indirect source emissions that by themselves do not emit air contaminants but indirectly cause the generation of air pollutants by attracting vehicles.
Examples of indirect sources include office complexes, commercial and government centers, warehouses/distribution centers, sports and recreational complexes, rail yards, port terminals, and residential developments that attract mobile source emissions.
TRANSPORTATION AND INDIRECT SOURCE CONTROL PROGRAMS
Indirect sources are generally considered to be sources which generate or attract motor vehicle activity. State law is clear that the creation of the AQMD does not constitute an infringement on the existing authority of cities and counties to plan or control land use, and does not provide or transfer new land use authority to the AQMD, SCAG or CARB (H&SC § 40414). Historically, cities and counties in the South Coast basin have determined appropriate land uses through the planning process, while the AQMD imposes air quality requirements on sources of air pollution operating within the local jurisdictions. The relationship between the AQMD and the cities and counties is one of concurrent jurisdictional authority over sources of air pollution. Therefore, the regulation of indirect sources by the AQMD falls within the existing shared authority with the local jurisdictions and would not infringe on city and county land use decisions. This is supported by state law which specifies the authority of the AQMD to reduce or mitigate emissions from indirect and area wide sources of air pollution but does not constitute an infringement on the existing authority of counties and cities to plan or control land use (H&SC § 40716(a)).
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) authorizes the AQMD to consider Indirect Source Control (ISC) programs in the development of the AQMP, and CARB has provided guidance for air districts and local governments that advocates the development of ISC programs as an effective tool to attain and maintain state ambient air quality standards.
Generally the AQMD relies on the CEQA process to mitigate indirect source emissions.
SCAG has the responsibility to coordinate the efforts of the counties and cities in the process of developing and reviewing plan elements which meet the requirements of state and federal law, and local needs relating to transportation, land use, demographic projections, employment, housing, and other matters of local concern (H&SC § 40464). 1125 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-2
The CCAA defines the term “transportation control measure” (TCM) as “any strategy to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions” (H&SC § 40717(g)).
The TCMs must be at a stringency level commensurate with the air quality designation (H&SC § 40918-40920). Indirect source control measures in the 2003 AQMP are broadly described in the TCMs developed by SCAG. There is inherent overlap between ISC strategies and TCMs, and the distinction between the two is subtle. Generally, TCMs are designed to implement a local or regional strategy to change travel behavior.
In contrast, an indirect source control measure may rely on TCMs or stand alone to affect a change in travel behavior that occurs to and from a specific indirect source.
According to the CARB document, Guidance for the Development of Indirect Source Control Programs, land use design strategies that are sensitive to air quality issues, such as incorporating mixed uses into a land use project, can reduce vehicle trips by as much as 50 percent. Design strategies for site plans that are sensitive to air quality are also effective in reducing mobile source emissions. For example, a site plan design that incorporates amenities such as bicycle racks and pedestrian paths may reduce vehicle trips up to 10 percent.
CONGESTION AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
Land use development may affect local transportation/circulation systems by increasing traffic to congested roadways and reducing vehicle speeds. The resulting increase in mobile source emissions adversely affects regional air quality, especially ozone levels and localized carbon monoxide concentrations. Under the regional Congestion Management Plan (CMP), local governments are required to adopt and implement a program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions on their portion of the CMP transportation system. If the project would cause traffic service at an intersection to deteriorate below level of service E (considerable congestion) or the level established in the CMP, the resulting congestion should be addressed by improvements, programs, or actions that either mitigate the deficiency or measurably improve the level of service of the system. In fact, the CMP requires that the impact be mitigated through the development of a deficiency plan. AQMD staff are available to assist local agencies identify areas where a project or series of projects may bring increased congestion to a segment of roadway.
The following questions should be asked regarding the potential of a development project to adversely affect air quality:
• Does the site design for public right-of-way and pedestrian walkways encourage pedestrian traffic? If not, can the site be modified to encourage pedestrian traffic?
• Is onsite traffic circulation designed to reduce vehicle queuing? If not, can the project layout be modified to minimize vehicle idling emissions? 1126 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-3
• Are links between the project and bike/pedestrian pathways adequate to facilitate walking and bicycling rather than driving? If not, can the site be modified to accommodate bike/pedestrian pathways?
• Do residential-specific plans incorporate mixed uses such as banks, post offices, etc., to minimize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) but avoid incompatible land use between sensitive receptors and air pollution sources? If not, can mixed uses be incorporated?
• Is the project accessible to transit facilities? If not, can the project design be modified to access public transit facilities?
• Do developments in transit corridors provide sustainable densities to support transit ridership? If not, how could those developments be modified to achieve minimum densities?
• Could the project affect the levels of service on the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) transportation system? If so, what would be the impact on the transportation system?
Transportation System Management
Transportation System Management (TSM) is a means of improving the efficiency of the existing transportation system through more effective utilization of facilities. TSM programs that discourage single-occupant vehicle trips and promote flexible work hours may improve levels of service on city streets. Overall, effective TSM programs that reduce the existing traffic congestion and VMT while increasing the carrying capacity of the transportation system will reduce air pollution. The California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) lists the following TSM measures that could be appropriately included in the air quality element:
• programs to improve traffic flow
• preferential treatments for transit and other HOV strategies • provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists
• management/control of parking
• changes in work schedules, fares and tolls
• actions to reduce motor vehicle use in congested areas • improved public transit
CALTRANS and local transit agencies recommend uniform design features that should be considered in the planning stages of some TSM measures. For example, the Riverside Transit Agency provides guidelines for local planners, developers and decision makers that outline uniform standards for the design and placement of busrelated facilities. The document, titled Design Guidelines for Bus Transit, defines criteria, dimensions, and space requirements for the following transit facilities and amenities:
• pedestrian and bicycle access-ways connecting with transit 1127 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-4
• bus stops, signs, and hardware (e.g., benches, shelters, lighting) • park and ride facilities
• transit centers
Cities are encouraged to consider all CALTRANS TSM measures in their air quality elements and to collaborate with CALTRANS and local transit agencies to reduce air pollution through efficient design and management of transportation facilities and fleets.
Cities may utilize a portion of the state motor vehicle registration fees to fund TSM measures. Assembly Bill 2766 authorizes a $4 motor vehicle fee surcharge at the time motor vehicles are registered to be used solely to fund projects and programs that reduce air pollution from motor vehicles, as well as to fund mobile-source related planning, monitoring, enforcement, and technical studies necessary to implement the California Clean Air Act. The AQMD subvenes 40 percent of the total AB 2766 revenue Subvention Funds to cities and counties within the air district based on the prorated share of the jurisdiction’s population. For many cities, the AB 2766 revenue provides a vital funding source to implement TSM measures and AQMP mobile source control measures. The AQMD provides an AB 2766 Resource Guide as a framework for use of the funds to help local governments evaluate and select cost-effective projects that are eligible for funding. The Resource Guide describes typical projects that reduce vehicle emissions from the following categories:
• purchase of alternative-fueled vehicles
• abatement of vehicle emissions
• implement land use strategies to reduce vehicle emissions • public transportation programs
• traffic management projects
• transportation demand programs
• market-based strategies
• promote bicycle use
• PM10 reduction strategies
• public education
A California statewide regulation now limits diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicle idling. Effective February 1, 2005, operators of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles over 10,000 pounds are prohibited from idling more then five minutes when not engaged in work activity. California state law prohibits the idling of a vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than five minutes at any location with some exceptions. The use of diesel auxiliary power systems and main engines are limited to five minutes when within 100 feet of homes or schools while a driver is resting. The idling rules are among a series of rules adopted by the CARB as part of its Diesel Risk Reduction Plan. Efforts by local jurisdictions to encourage residents to turn their engines off when they park, saves fuel and emissions. Cities may adopt ordinances to impose more stringent engine idling requirements than those imposed by the state or the local air district. 1128 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-5
Cities are encouraged to work collaboratively with non-government organizations and consult with the broader community about the mix of anti-idling initiatives (e.g., workplace-based, school-based, municipal by-law, and/or community outreach) that will work best in their area. Further, cities could determine if vehicle idling is a concern at municipally-owned or controlled facilities (e.g., city hall, community centers) and implement measures to discourage idling. Local jurisdiction environmental advisory or air quality committees are good forums to start to discuss the health effects of emissions from idling vehicles and the options available to reduce or eliminate those emissions. Local jurisdictions may consider partnering with other community organizations (e.g., environmental groups, school boards) to implement a community anti-idling campaign or project and consider participating in a “fleet challenge” with other municipalities or fleet owners in the community.
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STATEGIES
Goal 2 A reduction in air pollution from mobile sources Objective 2.1 Reduce motor vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled.
Suggested Policies/Strategies to Reduce Motor Vehicle Trips and VMT:
AQ 2.1.1 Seek new cooperative relationships between employers and employees to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT).*
AQ 2.1.2 Work with large employers and commercial/industrial complexes to create Transportation Management Associations and to implement trip/VMT reduction strategies. (For additional information please refer to AQMD’s Rule 2202 Employee Commute Reduction Program Guidelines.)* AQ 2.1.3 Cooperate with surrounding jurisdictions to provide incentives, adopt regulations and develop transportation demand management programs that reduce and eliminate vehicle trips and VMT.*
AQ 2.1.4 Collaborate with local transit agencies to:*
• develop programs and educate employers about employee rideshare and transit
• establish mass transit mechanisms for the reduction of workrelated and non-work related vehicle trips • promote mass transit ridership through careful planning of routes, headways, origins and destinations, and types of vehicles AQ 2.1.5 Identify and develop non-motorized transportation corridors (e.g., bicycling & walking trails).*
1129 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-6
AQ 2.1.6 Provide merchants with fliers/posters that publicize public mass transit schedules to encourage their customers to use mass transit.* AQ 2.1.7 Outline a plan of mobile source enforcement methods such as periodic mobile source (e.g., trucks and buses) checkpoints throughout the City to enforce opacity regulations. Technical assistance can be sought from by CARB and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) on enforcement issues.
AQ 2.1.8 Provide incentives such as preferential parking for alternative-fuel vehicles (e.g., CNG or hydrogen).
Objective 2.2 Establish necessary policies and requirements to reduce indirect source emissions.
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to the Reduction of Mobile Source Emissions at Special Event Centers:
AQ 2.2.1 Establish requirements for special event centers to provide off-site parking and park-n-ride facilities at remote locations. Remote parking should be as close as practicable to the event site and the operator should operate or provide alternative-fuel vehicles for shuttles.*
AQ 2.2.2 Promote peripheral parking by increasing on-site parking rates and reduced peripheral parking rates.*
AQ 2.2.3 Encourage special event center operators to provide discounted transit passes with event tickets or offer discounted on-site parking for carpooling patrons (four or more persons per vehicle).*
Objective 2.3 Reduce mobile source emissions through efficient management of transportation facilities and system
infrastructure using cost-effective management and
innovative demand-management techniques.
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to TSM efficiency:
AQ 2.3.1 Synchronize traffic signals throughout the City and with adjoining cities and counties while allowing free flow of mass transit systems.* AQ 2.3.2 Construct and improve traffic signals with Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control systems at appropriate intersections.*
AQ 2.3.3 Reduce traffic delays through highway maintenance, rapid emergency 1130 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-7
response, debris removal, and elimination of at-grade railroad crossings.* AQ 2.3.4 Encourage businesses to schedule deliveries at off-peak traffic periods through the land use entitlement or business regulation process.
AQ 2.3.5 Encourage the construction of HOV lanes whenever necessary to relieve congestion and reduce air pollution. Emphasize the use of HOV lanes, as well as light rail and bus routes, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities to improve mobility and air quality.
AQ 2.3.6 Monitor traffic and congestion to determine when and where the City needs new transportation facilities to achieve increased mobility efficiency.*
AQ 2.3.7 Work with local transit providers to incorporate best design practices for transit into new development projects.*
AQ 2.3.8 Adopt a Trip Reduction Ordinance that is equivalent to or more stringent than the requirements of AQMD Rule 2202 (refer to Rule 2202 (l)).* AQ 2.3.9 Implement the required components of the Congestion Management Plan (CMP), and continue to work with (applicable body/organization) on annual updates to the CMP.
AQ 2.3.10 Support SCAG’s Regional Growth Management Plan by developing intergovernmental agreements with appropriate governmental entities such as the (Council of Government) , sanitation districts, water districts, and those sub-regional entities identified in the Regional Growth Management Plan.
AQ 2.3.11 Replace existing vehicles in the city fleet with the cleanest vehicles commercially available.*
Objective 2.4 Secure all available funding from local, state and federal sources to improve TSM cost effectiveness
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Funding Resources:
AQ 2.4.1 Develop and coordinate a plan with local agencies for cost-effective use of AB 2766 funds so that revenue is used for projects and programs identified in the AQMP.
AQ 2.4.2 Develop and adopt a policy to utilize federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) funds in coordination with regional agencies in a manner consistent with projects approved in the AQMP. 1131 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-8
AQ 2.4.3 Apply annually to the AQMD Mobile Source Reduction Committee (MSRC) for AB 2766 “Local Government Match Program” grants for projects that reduce mobile source emissions (e.g., purchases of alternative-fueled vehicles).
AQ 2.4.4 Seek opportunities to pool AB 2766 revenue with neighboring cities to fund programs that will reduce mobile source emissions (e.g., traffic synchronization, fueling station infrastructure, teleconferencing facilities).
Objective 2.5 Advocate for stricter regulations on mobile source emissions.
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Advocacy:
AQ 2.5.1 Cooperate with federal and state agencies and the AQMD in their efforts to reduce exposure from railroad, truck, and ship emissions.
AQ 2.5.2 Collaborate with the USEPA, CARB, AQMD, and warehouse owners to create programs and ordinances to minimize the amount of diesel emissions related to warehousing operations.
Objective 2.6 Purchase and operate alternative fuel vehicles and encourage the greater use of alternative fuel vehicles
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to the Increased Use of Alternative Fuels:* AQ 2.6.1 Support full compliance with the AQMD’s and CARB’s Fleet Rules.
AQ 2.6.2 Manage the City’s transportation fleet fueling standards to achieve the greatest number of alternative fuel vehicles in the City fleet.
AQ 2.6.3 Encourage City contractors who operate vehicles within the City boundaries to operate alternative fuel vehicles.
AQ 2.6.4 Support the development of alternative fuel infrastructure that is publicly accessible.
AQ 2.6.5 Establish programs for priority or free parking on City streets or in City parking lots for alternative fuel vehicles.
AQ 2.6.6 Join or continue current membership with a Clean Cities Coalition. 1132 of 2287
Guidance Document
3-9
Objective 2.7 Reduce emissions from idling vehicles.
Suggested Policies/Strategies to Reduce Emissions From Idling Vehicles:* AQ 2.7.1 Enforce a statewide regulation that requires school buses and other heavy-duty vehicle operators to turn off their engines if they are idling within 100 feet of a school.
AQ 2.7.2 Adopt an ordinance that restricts vehicle engine idling for the purpose of controlling or mitigating vehicle emissions or abating a nuisance.
AQ 2.7.3 Design traffic plans, including the development of suggested routes, to minimize diesel truck idling.
*Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1133 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 4
STATIONARY SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION
• CATEGORIES OF STATIONARY EMISSION SOURCES
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1134 of 2287
Guidance Document
4-1
STATIONARY SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION
CATEGORIES OF STATIONARY EMISSION SOURCES
Air pollutant emissions sources are typically grouped into two categories: stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources are further divided into two major subcategories:
point and area sources. Point sources consist of a single emission source with an identified location point at a facility. Facilities could have multiple point sources located onsite. Point sources are usually associated with manufacturing and industrial processes, such as boilers, spray booths or degreasers. Area sources are small emission sources that are widely distributed, but may have substantial cumulative emissions; examples include residential water heaters, small engines, and consumer products, such as barbecue lighter fluid and hair spray.
Stationary source facilities that propose new or modified equipment, or want to relocate operations need to obtain or modify permits issued by the AQMD. For modifications at an existing facility, such as expansion of existing operations, it may be helpful for local governments to coordinate with the AQMD and the facility to obtain information about the facility’s current operations. Further, AQMD will provide information on the type and quantity of pollutants that are currently emitted from the facility and the pollutants that are proposed after the modification. Information on permitted facilities can be obtained from the AQMD’s Office of Engineering and Compliance.
The AQMP is a blueprint for achieving clean air that contains regulations and commitments to adopt regulations and programs to reduce pollution from stationary, mobile and area sources. Cities and counties are encouraged to act prospectively to support these strategies to improve air quality by including in their decision-making full consideration of the air quality impacts that will result in new receptors near existing sources of air pollution. For example, cities could consider incentives for existing businesses and new developments which complement AQMD strategies to reduce emissions. The air quality element could include a clear policy statement(s) that commits local agencies to work with the AQMD and other stakeholders to find costeffective emission reductions and pollution prevention strategies that could be implemented at sources within their jurisdictions. SCAG and the AQMD provide forums for local jurisdictions to participate in control measure development when the AQMD is updated every three years. Control measures in the 2003 AQMP are classified in nine categories:
• coatings and solvents
• petroleum operations and fugitive VOC emissions
• combustion sources
• fugitive dust sources
• miscellaneous sources
• compliance flexibility programs
1135 of 2287
Guidance Document
4-2
• mobile sources
• long term measures
• transportation conformity budget backstop
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES
Goal 3 A reduction of air pollution emissions from stationary sources Objective 3.1 Coordinate with the AQMD and operators of stationary source equipment or processes to minimize air pollution emissions Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Reduction of Emissions from Stationary Sources:
AQ 3.1.1 Assist small businesses by developing training programs related to clean, innovative technologies to reduce air pollution (e.g., wet cleaning or CO2 cleaning in lieu of perchloroethylene), and provide incentives to those businesses that use clean air technologies.*
AQ 3.1.2 Encourage the use of building materials and methods that minimize air pollution.
AQ 3.1.3 Support, through the use of development standards, the use of fuelefficient heating equipment, and other appliances, such as water heaters, swimming pool heaters, cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces, boiler units, and low or zero-emitting architectural coatings. Provide incentives to encourage the use of clean air technology beyond what is required by AQMD. For example, encourage the use of fuel and material substitution, cleaner fuel alternatives, product reformulation, change in work practices, and air pollution control measures identified in the latest AQMP.* AQ 3.1.4 Encourage pollution prevention and source emission reduction strategies through:
• process change
• best management practices
• preventative inspection and maintenance programs
• emergency response planning
AQ 3.1.5 Provide incentives to promote siting or use of clean air technologies (e.g., fuel cell technologies, renewable energy sources, UV coatings, hydrogen fuel).
1136 of 2287
Guidance Document
4-3
AQ 3.1.6 Consider support of legislation which promotes clean industrial technologies, and more efficient stationary source combustion equipment and energy generation.*
*Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1137 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 5
REDUCTION OF FUGITIVE DUST
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1138 of 2287
Guidance Document
5-1
REDUCTION OF FUGITIVE DUST
Fugitive dust is a generic term used to describe any solid particulate matter that becomes airborne, other than that emitted from an exhaust stack, directly or indirectly as a result of the activities of any person. Fugitive dust can vary in size and composition, depending on the location, wind direction, time of the day, and the time of season for its source. The AQMD includes two air basins that exceed State and federal ambient air quality standards for PM10 (fine particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter). Studies indicate that approximately one-third of the South Coast basin’s ambient PM10 concentrations and over ninety percent of Coachella Valley’s ambient PM10 levels are a result of fugitive dust.
AQMD regulates fugitive dust via several district rules. For example, Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) requirements are applicable to the South Coast Air District and to the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin. The purpose of Rule 403 is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic (man-made) fugitive dust sources. Rule 403 requires implementation of control measures to prevent, reduce, or mitigate fugitive dust emissions and includes a performance standard that prohibits visible emissions from crossing any property line.
Under Rule 403, large operations (projects greater than 50 acres and/or more than 5,000 cubic yards of daily earth-movement) are required to notify the AQMD of the project location and implement Table 2, and, if necessary Table 3, control measures and maintain recordkeeping. Rule 403 can be viewed or downloaded at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/rules/reg/reg04/r403.pdf Forms for large operation submittals can be viewed or downloaded at: http://www.aqmd.gov/comply/Forms/403N_8_2004.doc.
Rule 403 requires all projects and activities in the South Coast Air Basin to control dust generation, with specified control measures for large operations of 50 acres or more. In spite of these basin-wide requirements, ground disturbances, geological conditions, or meteorological conditions may result in dust generation that constitutes a chronic public nuisance, or would prevent attainment of federal PM10 standards. These limited areas may warrant additional dust control efforts on the part of local governments. A local dust control policy that requires preparation and approval of a dust control plan for all projects seeking a grading permit in such limited areas may be needed to supplement current Rule 403 requirements. Local governments may also choose to apply specific control measures crafted to address their chronic public nuisance dust problems or PM10 exceedances.
Coachella Valley (Palm Springs area) local governments have adopted dust control ordinances that require approval of a dust control plan prior to local government issuance of grading permits. The Coachella Valley’s response to its elevated levels of PM10 illustrates how local dust control plans can work to address areas with elevated 1139 of 2287
Guidance Document
5-2
particulate levels. AQMD and Coachella Valley local government staff have developed a guidance handbook to assist persons preparing and reviewing dust control plans. A copy of the model dust control ordinance for Coachella Valley is provided in Appendix D. AQMD Rule 403.1 (Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources) is a companion regulation to Rule 403 that is only applicable to fugitive dust sources in the Coachella Valley. Rule 403.1 establishes special requirements for Coachella Valley fugitive dust sources under high-wind conditions and requires AQMD approval of dust control plans for sources not subject to local government ordinances (e.g., school districts). AQMD compliance staff ensures compliance with Rules 403 and 403.1 to complement the fugitive dust control programs developed by local Coachella Valley governments. Rule 403.1 can be viewed or downloaded at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/rules/reg/reg04/r403-1.pdf.
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES
Goal 4 Achieve ambient levels of particulate matter that meet state and federal clean air standards
Objective 4.1 Reduce the amount of fugitive dust that is re-entrained into the atmosphere from unpaved areas, parking lots and construction sites
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Controlling Fugitive Dust Emissions:* AQ 4.1.1 Where fugitive dust is causing a chronic public nuisance or the air quality is in exceedance of the PM10 standards consider adopting a dust control policy that requires preparation and approval of a dust control plan.
Please contact AQMD for the most recent local PM10 air quality information.
AQ 4.1.2 Adopt by ordinance, a regulation, after considering small business impacts that controls the use of leaf blowers in areas with sensitive receptors.
AQ 4.1.3 Encourage vegetative thinning or mowing for weed abatement activities to minimize wind-blown dust.
AQ 4.1.4 Identify and create a control plan for areas within the jurisdiction that are prone to wind erosion of soil and take measures to prevent illegal offhighway vehicle (OHV) use.
AQ 4.1.5 Require conditions in a zoning or conditional use permit to require fugitive dust controls and compliance mechanisms for stationary sources (landfills, composting facilities, aggregate facilities, etc.).
1140 of 2287
Guidance Document
5-3
AQ 4.1.6 Ensure compliance with California Vehicle Code section 23113 provisions intended to prevent deposition and rapid removal of material from any highway or street.
AQ 4.1.7 Adopt incentives, regulations, and/or procedures to reduce paved road dust emissions through targeted street sweeping of roads subject to high traffic levels and silt loadings.
AQ 4.1.8 Pave currently unpaved roads and parking lots or establish and enforce 15 mile per hour speed limits on low-use unpaved roads as permitted under California Vehicle Code section 22365.
AQ 4.1.9 Adopt incentives or procedures to limit dust from agricultural lands and operations.
AQ 4.1.10 Consider the suspension of all grading operations, not including dust control actions, at construction projects when the source represents a public nuisance or potential safety hazard due to reduced visibility on streets surrounding the project.
AQ 4.1.11 Cooperate with local, regional, state and federal jurisdictions to better control fugitive dust from stationary, mobile and area sources.
AQ 4.1.12 Collaborate with the transportation agencies, utilities, railroads, etc., to minimize fugitive dust during construction and maintenance activities.
AQ 4.1.13 Encourage, and support stricter state and federal legislation for vehicles that spill debris on roadways.
AQ 4.1.14 Ensure that vehicles do not transport aggregate or similar material upon a highway unless the material is stabilized or covered, in accordance with state law and AQMD regulations.
AQ 4.1.15 Encourage vegetation or chemical stabilization for disturbed land for phased construction projects.
*Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1141 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 6
ENERGY
• ENERGY CONSERVATION
• GREEN BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES
• PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FLEETS
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1142 of 2287
Guidance Document
6-1
ENERGY
ENERGY CONSERVATION
All new residential and non-residential buildings within California must meet minimum energy efficiency standards contained in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations. New 2005 standards were recently adopted by the California Energy Commission and the Building Standards Commission. These new standards become effective October 1, 2005, and will reduce energy demand from all new development, translating into emission reduction benefits. The Energy Commission estimates the standards will save $57 billion by 2011. The previous 2001 standards have already saved more than $20 billion in electricity and natural gas costs.
New development consumes energy in several ways. Gas-fired combustion equipment such as water heaters, pool heaters, space heaters, furnaces, boilers, steam generators, internal combustion engines, etc. are used throughout the South Coast basin in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. Residential uses of natural gas include space heating, water heating, laundry, cooking, dishwashers, and pool/hot tub heaters. The largest demand for natural gas from this sector is from space and water heating. Natural gas in the commercial sector is used for space heating, water heating, process heating, cooling, and food preparation. The industrial sector includes a wide range of manufacturing and industrial processes that use natural gas in a variety of processes such as steam generation, curing and drying processes, metal melting, and heat treatment.
Implementation policies in this chapter promote full implementation of Title 24 and, where possible, voluntary energy conservation beyond Title 24 to reduce emissions.
Local governments may provide incentives to developers and proponents of facilities to incorporate energy efficiency measures to improve air quality.
GREEN BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES
Projects may be voluntarily designed to exceed energy efficiency standards established by Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. Local governments have the voluntary option to provide incentives to implement energy-saving measures for projects, and energy performance targets beyond those required by Title 24 as appropriate. A comprehensive approach to energy conservation in building construction is known as “green building”. Green building techniques integrate energy efficiency and sustainable building practices into the design and construction phases. Municipal buildings that follow green building design principles not only help create healthy workplaces, but also reduce the city’s energy demand. This results in cost savings and a reduction in air pollution associated with energy production. There are several private and government rating systems for green buildings. One system for example, is the voluntary LEED 1143 of 2287
Guidance Document
6-2
(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standard developed by the U.S.
Green Building Council, which has been extensively used to date for commercial projects. LEED standards have been adopted nationwide by federal agencies, state and local governments, and interested private companies as the guideline for sustainable building. Another example of a “green building” program is a voluntary program developed by the Building Industry Institute for residential development called the California Green Builder Program. Developers of Green Builder projects select measures that reduce energy consumption to levels that are 15 percent below Title 24 requirements.
Where opportunities exist to go beyond Title 24 energy efficiency requirements, those techniques and features that best fit the nature and economics of the development may be selected. Examples of energy conservation features incorporated into LEEDS and California Green Builder projects include the following:
• more energy efficient lighting, heating and cooling systems and appliances • landscape treatments that reduce energy consumption use (e.g., planting of deciduous trees)
• use of passive daylight and heating (i.e., sun light) • use of photovoltaic systems (solar energy)
• use of lighter colored building and roofing materials and coatings • installation of recharging outlets for electric and hybrid vehicles • remote sensors that adjust heating, cooling and lighting when rooms are occupied
• bicycle lockers and paths, preferred parking spaces and bus turnouts to encourage alternative modes of transportation
AQMD staff plan to establish a website that will provide examples of green building practices and policies.
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FLEETS
Energy conservation efficiency and generation operations should be considered when building, acquiring, or retrofitting public facilities. Also, alternative-fuel vehicles are in operation in many local jurisdictions in the air district which help reduce mobile source emissions (see Chapter 3 -Transportation).
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES
Goal 5 Reduction in air pollution resulting from greater energy efficiency and conservation, and the use of renewable resources
1144 of 2287
Guidance Document
6-3
Objective 5.1 Increase energy efficiency of city facilities and private developments
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Energy Conservation:
AQ 5.1.1 Utilize source reduction, recycling and other appropriate measures, to reduce the amount of solid waste disposed in landfills.
AQ 5.1.2 Develop incentives that encourage the use of energy conservation strategies by private and public developments.
AQ 5.1.3 Promote energy-efficient design features, including appropriate site orientation, use of lighter color roofing and building materials, and use of deciduous shade trees and windbreak trees to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling.
AQ 5.1.4 Promote or provide incentives for “Green Building” programs that go beyond the requirements of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and encourage energy efficient design elements as appropriate to achieve “green building” status.
AQ 5.1.5 Promote the use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors to control central heating and air conditioning.
AQ 5.1.6 Utilize all available renewable energy sources to reduce fuel consumption and demand on the power grid.
AQ 5.1.7 Replace vehicles in the local government fleet with the most fuel-efficient vehicles that are commercially available.*
*Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1145 of 2287
Guidance Document
CHAPTER 7
PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION
• SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1146 of 2287
Guidance Document
7-1
PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION
In Town Hall meetings held by the AQMD, residents throughout the South Coast basin have asked how the public can become more involved in reducing local air pollution impacts in their communities. Local governments are encouraged to invest in public outreach activities and programs to build strong public awareness of regional and local air quality issues and health studies. To foster greater community involvement and support in developing public policy, local jurisdictions should consider the following activities to improve awareness of air quality and environmental justice issues. • identify an individual as a contact person for environmental justice issues. • participate with the AQMD in Town Hall meetings to hear citizen concerns regarding air quality and environmental justice.
• schedule community meetings to update residents of proposed large development projects, the results of AQMD air monitoring programs (e.g., MATES-II), cumulative air quality impacts and evaluate various options to reduce health impacts from exposure to air pollution. To encourage greater participation, hold public meetings in centrally-located community meeting rooms, libraries, and schools. Schedule meetings at times that encourage public participation (e.g., evenings and weekends) and provide translation services, and childcare services, if needed.
• collaborate with local school districts and private schools to increase student awareness of air pollution and health effects issues.
• distribute air quality information, AQMD brochures and fact sheets on the health effects of air pollution, public service announcements, and web page links.
Provide this information in languages of the major ethnic groups in the community.
• collaborate with AQMD and other public entities as appropriate on distribution of public notices for air emission related actions and events involving environmental justice, including, but not limited to, mailing lists, noticing venues, and content of notices to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of this outreach effort. • dedicate a page of the local government website to address local land use policies as they relate to environmental justice programs and cumulative air quality impacts.
1147 of 2287
Guidance Document
7-2
• allow, encourage, and promote community access to activities related to land use activities such as General Plan or Community Plan updates, zoning changes, special studies, CEQA reviews, variances, etc.
• create and distribute simple, easy-to-read, understandable material on public participation that describes how to contact the local jurisdiction or AQMD to obtain information and assistance regarding air quality, health effects and environmental justice programs. A model handbook is available from CARB titled “Public Participation Guidebook.”
USEPA's Environmental Education Center provides curricula and creative activities on a variety of air quality topics. Kids’ sites from the USEPA include educational material on air pollution and its effects on global warming. USEPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards' Environmental Education Web site describes air quality training opportunities for teachers K-12, resource materials and available grants.
The AQMD provides a number of air quality curricula and materials to assist teachers at no charge. For example, a project titled: “Air Pollution - What's the Solution” has been developed for students, grades 6 – 12. This curriculum utilizes online, real-time data to guide student discovery of the science behind the causes and effects of ground level ozone in the context of an authentic real-world problem. The AQMD Student's Health Web Site is a resource for high school students and adults to learn about the health effects of air pollution in Southern California. Also, the website includes a “Kids’ Page” that shows three colorful chameleons to teach children how to moderate their activity to safely play outside when air pollution levels are elevated.
SUGGESTED GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES/STRATEGIES
Goal 6 Greater public awareness of the changes in personal behavior that can be chosen to minimize air pollution
Objective 6.1 Make air quality education a priority for the City’s effort to protect public health and achieve state and federal clean air standards.
Suggested Policies/Strategies Related to Public Awareness:* AQ 6.1.1 Provide regional and local air quality information on City’s website, including links to the AQMD, CARB, USEPA and other environmentalbased internet sites.
AQ 6.1.2 Organize city-sponsored events on topics that educate businesses and the public about compliance with air quality regulations (e.g., alternative fuels and low polluting clean household products).
AQ 6.1.3 Work with school districts to develop air quality curricula for students. 1148 of 2287
Guidance Document
7-3
AQ 6.1.4 Encourage, publicly recognize, and reward innovative approaches that improve air quality.
AQ 6.1.5 Encourage the participation of environmental groups, the business community, civic groups, special interest groups, and the general public in the formulation and implementation of programs that effectively reduce air pollution.
AQ 6.1.6 Encourage the purchase and use of low- or zero-emission vehicles, coordinate with AQMD and with local car dealerships and their associations to encourage and support the dealerships’ participation in AQMD’s “Clean Air Choice” vehicle information program.
AQ 6.1.7 Provide public education to encourage local consumers to choose the cleanest paints, consumer products, etc.
AQ 6.1.8 Publicize the AQMD’s 1-800-CUT-SMOG number for the public to report air pollution complaints to the AQMD.
*Potential funding for these policies has been identified in Appendix E. 1149 of 2287
Guidance Document - References
R-1
REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board Guidance for the Development of Indirect Source Control Programs.
California Air Resources Board. A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf Blowers. Mobile Source Control Division.
February 2000.
California Air Resources Board. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fired Engines and Vehicles. Stationary Source Division/Mobile Source Division. October 2000.
California Air Resources Board. Draft Air Quality Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. February 2005
Design Guidelines for Bus Transit. Riverside Transit Agency. August 2004.
General Plan Guidelines 2003. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. October 2003.
Kim, J., et al, Traffic-Related Air Pollution Near Busy Roads – the East Bay Children’s Respiratory Health Study. American J. of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2004. 170: 520-526.
McConnell, K., et al, Traffic and Asthma Prevalence in Children. American J. of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2002. 165 (8): A 492.
Peters, John M., Epidemiologic Investigation to Identify Chronic Effects of Ambient air Pollutants in Southern California. CARB Contract No. 94-331. May 2002 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Policy on Global Warming and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion. April 6, 1990.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April 1993 (updates to the Handbook at www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/index.html.) South Coast Air Quality Management District. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES II). March 2000.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis. August 2003.
1150 of 2287
Guidance Document - References
R-2
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Management Plan. August 2003.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. AB 2766 Subvention Fund Program Resource Guide. January 2005.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Rule 2202 Employee Commute Reduction Program Guidelines. February 2004.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Dust Control in The Coachella Valley. A Comprehensive Guide for Plan Reviewers, Developers, Contractors and Code Enforcement Staff. April 2004.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Concept Paper: More Stringent Risk Requirements for New or Relocated Facilities Near Schools. November 2004.
Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CALTRANS CO Protocol).
University of California Davis. December 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Planning Standards Toxic Air Pollutants and Non-cancer Health Risks: Screening Studies. Final External Review Draft.
September 1990.
Wilhelm, M., et al, Residential Proximity to Traffic and Adverse Birth Outcomes in Los Angeles County, California, 1964 -1966. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2002. 111:207-216.
Zhu, Yifang, et al, Study of Ultra-fine Particles Near a Major Highway with Heavy-Duty Diesel Traffic. Atmospheric Environment. 2002. 36: 4323. 1151 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-1
GLOSSARY
AB 2766 Funds (AB 2766 (Sher) Motor Vehicle Fee Program): A program that permits air districts and local governments to allocate vehicle registration surcharge fees to projects that reduce motor vehicle emissions such as zero emission vehicles, alternative-fueled street sweepers and trip reduction programs.
Air Pollutants: Amounts of foreign and/or natural substances occurring in the atmosphere that may result in adverse effects on humans, animals, vegetation, and/or materials.
Area Sources: Stationary sources of pollution (e.g., water heaters, gas furnaces, fireplaces, and wood stoves) that are typically associated with homes and non-industrial sources. The CCAA requires districts to include area sources in the development and implementation of AQMPs.
Air Toxics: A generic term referring to a harmful chemical or group of chemicals in the air that has the potential to produce adverse health effects. Typically, substances that are especially harmful to health, such as those considered under USEPA’s hazardous air pollutant program or California’s AB 1807 toxic air contaminant program, are considered to be air toxics.
Alternative Fuels: Fuels such as methanol, ethanol, natural gas, and liquid propane gases that are cleaner burning and help to meet CARB’s mobile and stationary emission standards.
Ambient Air: The air found at a particular time and place outside of structures. Often used interchangeably with “outdoor air.”
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP): A plan prepared by an air pollution control district or air quality management district, for a county or region designated as a nonattainment area, for the purpose of bringing the area into compliance with the requirements of the national and/or California Ambient Air Quality Standards. AQMPs are incorporated into the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Best Available Control Technology (BACT): The most up-to-date methods, systems, techniques, and production processes available to achieve the greatest feasible emission reductions for given regulated air pollutants and processes. BACT is a requirement of NSR (New Source Review) and PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) under the federal Clean Air Act. BACT, as used in federal law under PSD, is defined as an emission limitation based on the maximum degree of emission reductions allowable taking into account energy, environmental and economic impacts and other costs [CAA Section 169(3)]. The term BACT as used in state law means an emission limitation that will achieve the lowest achievable emission rates, which means 1152 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-2
the most stringent of either the most stringent emission limits contained in the SIP for the class or category of source, (unless it is demonstrated that the limitation is not achievable) or the most stringent emission limit achieved in practice by that class in category of source. “BACT” under state law is more stringent than federal BACT and is equivalent to federal LAER (lowest achievable emission rate) which applies to NSR permit actions.
Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT): An air emission limitation that applies to existing sources and is based on the maximum degree of reduction achievable, taking into account environmental, energy, and economic impacts by each class or category of source.
Best Available Control Technology for Toxics (T-BACT): The most stringent emissions limitation or control technique which:
• has been achieved in practice for such permit unit category or class of source; or • is any other emissions limitation or control technique, including process and equipment changes of basic and control equipment, found by the Executive Officer to be technologically feasible for such class or category of sources, or for a specific source.
Best Design Practice for Transit: An approach to transit planning that requires adherence to nationally recognized industry standards for physical facilities and services.
Buffer Zone: An area of land separating two distinct land uses that acts to soften or mitigate the effects of one land use on the other.
California Air Resources Board (CARB): The State’s lead air quality agency, led by an eleven-member Governor-appointed board. It is responsible for attainment and maintenance of the State and federal air quality standards, and is chiefly responsible for motor vehicle pollution control. It oversees county and regional air pollution management programs.
California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS): Standards set by the State of California for the maximum levels of air pollutants which can exist in the outdoor air without unacceptable effects on human health or the public welfare. These are more stringent than NAAQS.
California Clean Air Act (CCAA): A California law passed in 1988 which provides the basis for air quality planning and regulation independent of federal regulations. A major element of the Act is the requirement that local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts in violation of state ambient air quality standards must prepare attainment plans which identify air quality problems, causes, trends, and actions to be taken to attain and maintain California’s air quality standards by the 1153 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-3
earliest practicable date utilizing all feasible measures and an expeditious adoption schedule.
Carbon Monoxide (CO): A colorless, odorless gas resulting from the incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon fuels. CO interferes with the blood's ability to carry oxygen to the body's tissues and results in numerous adverse health effects. Over 80% of the CO emitted in urban areas is contributed by motor vehicles. CO is a criteria air pollutant.
Congestion Management Plan (CMP): A state mandated program (Government Code Section 65089a), that requires each county to prepare a plan to relieve congestion and reduce air pollution.
Criteria Pollutant: An air pollutant for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which an ambient air quality standard has been set. Examples include: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and PM10 and PM2.5.
The term "criteria air pollutants" derives from the requirement that the U.S. EPA must describe the characteristics and potential health and welfare effects of these pollutants.
The U.S. EPA and CARB periodically review new scientific data and may propose revisions to the standards as a result.
Environmental Justice: California state law defines environmental justice as the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies (California Government Code section 65040.12). The AQMD defines environmental justice as equitable environmental policymaking and enforcement to protect the health of all residents, regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location, from the health effects of air pollution.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA): The United States agency charged with setting policy and guidelines, and carrying out legal mandates for the protection of national interests in environmental resources.
Federal Clean Air Act (CAA): A federal law passed in 1970 and amended in 1977 and 1990 which forms the basis for the national air pollution control effort. Basic elements of the act include national ambient air quality standards for major air pollutants, air toxics standards, acid rain control measures, and enforcement provisions.
Fugitive Dust: Dust particles which are introduced into the air through certain activities such as soil cultivation, off-road vehicles, or any vehicles operating on open fields or dirt roadways.
Fugitive Dust Control Plan: A document that describes fugitive dust sources at a site and the corresponding control measures.
1154 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-4
Growth Management Plan: A plan for a given geographical region containing demographic projections (i.e., housing units, employment, and population) through some specified point in time, and which provides recommendations for local governments to better manage growth and reduce projected environmental impacts.
Hybrid Vehicles: Hybrid electric motor vehicles may operate using both electric and gasoline-powered motors. Emissions from hybrid electric motor vehicles can be substantially lower than conventionally powered motor vehicles.
Indirect Source: Any facility, building, structure, or installation, or combination thereof, which generates or attracts mobile source activity that results in emissions of any pollutant (or precursor) for which there is a state ambient air quality standard.
Examples include employment sites, shopping centers, sports facilities, housing developments, airports, commercial and industrial development, and parking lots and garages.
Jobs/Housing Balance (Jobs/Housing Ratio): The availability of housing for employees. The jobs/housing ratio divides the number of jobs in an area by the total number of dwelling units. Jobs/housing balance is an indicator of the number of residents in an area that must travel outside their commute-shed for work. No jobs/housing ratio is recognized in state, regional or local plans and policies. However, SCAG considers South Coast Air Basin communities to be jobs –rich if they have more than 1.29 jobs per dwelling unit, and housing-rich if they have less than 1.0 jobs per household.
Land Use Recycling: Changing historic land uses to meet the changing needs and priorities of a community. For example, commercial or industrial land areas that are “recycled” to housing, mixed use or institutional use in order to facilitate and be consistent with the current and future needs of a community.
Lead: A gray-white metal that is soft, malleable, ductile, and resistant to corrosion.
Sources of lead resulting in concentrations in the air include industrial sources and crystal weathering of soils followed by fugitive dust emissions. Health effects from exposure to lead include brain and kidney damage and learning disabilities. Lead is the only substance which is currently listed as both a criteria air pollutant and a toxic air contaminant.
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT): Federal emissions limitations based on the best demonstrated control technology or practices in similar sources to be applied to major sources emitting one or more federal hazardous air pollutants.
Mixed Use: Properties on which various uses such as office, commercial, institutional, and residential are combined in a single building or on a single site in an integrated development project with significant functional interrelationships and a coherent physical design. A “single site” may include contiguous properties. 1155 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-5
Mobile Sources: Sources of air pollution such as automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, offroad vehicles, boats and airplanes (contrast with stationary sources).
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): Standards established by the USEPA that apply for outdoor air throughout the country. There are two types of NAAQS. Primary standards set limits to protect public health and secondary standards set limits to protect the environment and public welfare.
New Source Review (NSR): A program used in development of permits for new or modified industrial facilities which are in a non-attainment area, and which emit nonattainment criteria air pollutants. The two major requirements of NSR are Best Available Control Technology and Emissions Offset.
Nitrogen Oxides: Oxides of Nitrogen, NOx. A general term pertaining to compounds of nitric acid (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and other oxides of nitrogen. Nitrogen oxides are typically created during combustion processes, and are major contributors to smog formation and acid deposition. NO2 is a criteria air pollutant, and may result in numerous adverse health effects. It absorbs blue light, resulting in a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility.
Non-Attainment Area: A geographic area identified by the USEPA and/or CARB as not meeting either NAAQS or CAAQS standards for a given pollutant.
Opacity Regulations: Rules, laws, and regulations that require the measurement of the amount of light obscured by particle pollution in the atmosphere and limit the amount of allowable emissions from pollution sources. Opacity is used as an indicator of changes in performance of particulate control systems.
Ozone: A strong smelling, pale blue, reactive toxic chemical gas consisting of three oxygen atoms. It is a product of the photochemical process involving the sun’s energy.
Ozone exists in the upper atmosphere ozone layer as well as at the earth’s surface.
Ozone at the earth’s surface causes numerous adverse health effects and is a criteria air pollutant. It is a major component of urban smog.
Paratransit: Transportation systems such as jitneys, car pooling, van pooling, taxi services and dial-a-ride services.
Particulate matter (PM): Solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes, and aerosols.
• Particulate Matter less than 10 microns (PM10) in size: A major air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes, and aerosols. The size of the particles (10 microns or smaller, about 0.0004 inches or less) allows them to easily enter the air sacs in the lungs where they may be deposited, resulting in adverse health effects. PM10 also causes visibility reduction and is a criteria air pollutant.
1156 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-6
• Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) in size: A major pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles, generally soot and aerosols. The size of the particles (2.5 microns or smaller, about 0.0001 inches or less) allows them to easily enter the air sacs deep in the lungs where they may cause adverse health effects, as noted in several recent studies. PM2.5 also causes visibility reduction.
Permit: Written authorization from a government agency (e.g., air quality management district) that allows for the construction and/or operation of an emissions generating facility or its equipment within certain specified limits.
Redevelop: To demolish existing buildings; or to increase the overall floor area existing on a property; or both; irrespective of whether a change occurs in land use.
Rezoning: An amendment to the map and/or text of a zoning ordinance to effect a change in the nature, density, or intensity of uses allowed in a zoning district and/or on a designated parcel or land area.
Sensitive Receptor (Sensitive Individual): Those segments of a population such as children, athletes, elderly, and sick that are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at large.
Sensitive Sites: Land uses where sensitive receptors are most likely to spend time, including schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities.
Setback: In zoning parlance, a setback is the minimum amount of space required between a lot line and a building line.
State Implementation Plan (SIP): A document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and measures which will be taken to attain and maintain national ambient air quality standards (see AQMP).
Smog Check Program: A motor vehicle inspection program implemented by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair. It is designed to identify vehicles in need of maintenance and to assure the effectiveness of their emission control systems on a biennial basis. Enacted in 1979 and strengthened in 1990.
Station Car: A vehicle that operates at transit stations for the use of patrons of these transit services. The availability of station cars facilitates and encourages the use of mass transit systems.
Stationary Sources: Non-mobile sources such as power plants, refineries, and manufacturing facilities which emit air pollutants.
1157 of 2287
Guidance Document - Glossary
G-7
South Coast basin: Includes all of Orange county and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): A strong smelling, colorless gas that is formed by the combustion of fossil fuels. Power plants, which may use coal or oil high in sulfur content, can be major sources of SO2. SO2 and other sulfur oxides contribute to the problem of acid deposition. SO2 is a criteria pollutant.
Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC): An air pollutant, identified in regulation by the CARB, which may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs are considered under a different regulatory process (California Health and Safety Code section 39650 et seq.) than pollutants subject to CAAQS. Health effects due to TACs may occur at extremely low levels, and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure which do not produce adverse health effects.
Transportation System Management (TSM): A comprehensive strategy developed to address the problems caused by additional development, increased vehicle trips, and a shortfall in transportation capacity. Transportation Systems Management focuses on more efficiently utilizing existing highway and transit systems rather than expanding them. TSM measures are characterized by their low cost and quick implementation time frame, such as computerized traffic signals, metered freeway ramps, and one-way streets.
Visibility: A measurement of the ability to see and identify objects at different distances. Visibility reduction from air pollution is often due to the presence of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, as well as particulate matter.
Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV): Vehicles which produce no emissions from the onboard source of power (e.g. an electric or fuel cell vehicle). 1158 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix A
APPENDIX A
CITIES AND COUNTIES WITHIN THE
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
THAT HAVE ADOPTED
AIR QUALITY ELEMENTS IN GENERAL PLANS
&
EXAMPLE AIR QUALITY ELEMENTS*
*FOR ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES OF AIR QUALITY ELEMENTS LISTED IN ATTACHMENT A, PLEASE CONTACT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DIRECTLY. 1159 of 2287
Cities and Counties within the
South Coast Air Quality Management District
that have Adopted
Air Quality Elements in General Plans
Source – The California Planners’ Book of Lists 2004: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research City/County Date City/County Date
Agoura Hills 1994 Laguna Hills 2002
Baldwin Park 2002 Lakewood 1996
Buena Park 1994 Lawndale 1992
Calabasas 1995 Long Beach 1998
Carson 1994 Los Angeles 1992
Cathedral City 2002 Montclair 1999
Cerritos 2002 Palm Desert 1980
Chino 1991 Palm Springs 1993
Colton 1992 Rancho Cucamonga 2001
Commerce 1991 Rancho Mirage 1997
Cudahy 1992 Rancho Palo Verdes 1975
Cypress 2001 Redlands 1995
El Segundo 1992 Riverside County 1995
Fontana 1990 San Bernardino County 1989
Garden Grove 1995 Santa Clarita 1991
Glendale 1994 South Gate 1993
Grand Terrace 1999 Temecula 1993
Hemet 1992 Upland 1991
Huntington Beach 1996 Walnut 1974
Indian Wells 1996 West Hollywood 1988
La Cañada-Flintridge 1995 Whittier 1993
La Habra 1992 Yorba Linda 1993
La Quinta 2002 Yucaipa 1992
1160 of 2287
AIR QUALITY ELEMENT
EXAMPLE #1
CITY OF CHINO
1161 of 2287
1162 of 2287
1163 of 2287
1164 of 2287
1165 of 2287
1166 of 2287
1167 of 2287
1168 of 2287
1169 of 2287
1170 of 2287
1171 of 2287
1172 of 2287
1173 of 2287
1174 of 2287
1175 of 2287
1176 of 2287
1177 of 2287
1178 of 2287
1179 of 2287
1180 of 2287
1181 of 2287
1182 of 2287
1183 of 2287
1184 of 2287
1185 of 2287
1186 of 2287
1187 of 2287
1188 of 2287
1189 of 2287
1190 of 2287
1191 of 2287
1192 of 2287
1193 of 2287
1194 of 2287
1195 of 2287
1196 of 2287
1197 of 2287
1198 of 2287
1199 of 2287
1200 of 2287
1201 of 2287
1202 of 2287
1203 of 2287
1204 of 2287
1205 of 2287
1206 of 2287
1207 of 2287
1208 of 2287
1209 of 2287
1210 of 2287
1211 of 2287
1212 of 2287
1213 of 2287
1214 of 2287
1215 of 2287
1216 of 2287
1217 of 2287
1218 of 2287
1219 of 2287
1220 of 2287
1221 of 2287
1222 of 2287
1223 of 2287
1224 of 2287
1225 of 2287
1226 of 2287
1227 of 2287
1228 of 2287
1229 of 2287
1230 of 2287
1231 of 2287
1232 of 2287
1233 of 2287
1234 of 2287
1235 of 2287
1236 of 2287
1237 of 2287
1238 of 2287
1239 of 2287
1240 of 2287
1241 of 2287
1242 of 2287
1243 of 2287
1244 of 2287
1245 of 2287
1246 of 2287
1247 of 2287
1248 of 2287
1249 of 2287
1250 of 2287
1251 of 2287
1252 of 2287
1253 of 2287
1254 of 2287
1255 of 2287
1256 of 2287
1257 of 2287
1258 of 2287
1259 of 2287
1260 of 2287
1261 of 2287
1262 of 2287
1263 of 2287
1264 of 2287
1265 of 2287
1266 of 2287
1267 of 2287
1268 of 2287
1269 of 2287
AIR QUALITY ELEMENT
EXAMPLE #2
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
1270 of 2287
1271 of 2287
1272 of 2287
1273 of 2287
1274 of 2287
1275 of 2287
1276 of 2287
1277 of 2287
1278 of 2287
1279 of 2287
1280 of 2287
1281 of 2287
1282 of 2287
1283 of 2287
1284 of 2287
1285 of 2287
1286 of 2287
1287 of 2287
1288 of 2287
1289 of 2287
1290 of 2287
1291 of 2287
1292 of 2287
1293 of 2287
1294 of 2287
1295 of 2287
1296 of 2287
1297 of 2287
1298 of 2287
1299 of 2287
1300 of 2287
1301 of 2287
1302 of 2287
1303 of 2287
1304 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix B
APPENDIX B
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
1305 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix B
B-1
Ambient Air Quality Standards
STATE STANDARD FEDERAL PRIMARY
AIR STANDARD
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION/
AVERAGING TIME
CONCENTRATION/
AVERAGING TIME
MOST RELEVANT EFFECTS
Ozone 0.09 ppm, 1-hr. avg. > 0.12 ppm, 1-hr avg.>
0.08 ppm, 8-hr avg.>
(a) Short-term exposures: (1) Pulmonary
function decrements and breathing
difficulty. (2) Risk to public health implied
by alterations in pulmonary morphology and
host defense in animals; (b) Long-term
exposures: Risk to public health implied by
altered connective tissue metabolism and
altered pulmonary morphology in animals
after long-term exposures and pulmonary
function decrements in chronically exposed
humans; (c) Vegetation damage; (d)
Property damage
Carbon
Monoxide
9.0 ppm, 8-hr avg. >
20 ppm, 1-hr avg. >
9 ppm, 8-hr avg.>
35 ppm, 1-hr avg.>
(a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and
other aspects of coronary heart disease;
(b) Decreased exercise tolerance in
persons with peripheral vascular disease
and lung disease; (c) Impairment of central
nervous system functions; (d) Possible
increased risk to fetuses
Nitrogen Dioxide 0.25 ppm, 1-hr avg. > 0.053 ppm, ann. avg.> (a) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and respiratory
symptoms in sensitive groups; (b) Risk to
public health implied by pulmonary and
extra-pulmonary biochemical and cellular
changes and pulmonary structural
changes; (c) Contribution to atmospheric
discoloration
Sulfur Dioxide 0.04 ppm, 24-hr avg.>
0.25 ppm, 1-hr. avg. >
0.03 ppm, ann. avg.>
0.14 ppm, 24-hr avg.>
(a) Broncho constriction accompanied by
symptoms which may include wheezing,
shortness of breath and chest tightness,
during exercise or physical activity in
persons with asthma
Suspended
Particulate
Matter (PM10)
20 µg/m3, ann. geometric mean >
50 µg/m3, 24-hr average>
50 µg/m3, ann. arithmetic
mean > 150µg/m3, 24-hr
avg.>
Suspended
Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
12 µg/m3, ann. arithmetic mean 15 µg/m3, ann. arithmetic mean > 65 µg/m3, 24-hr
avg.>
(a) Excess deaths from short-term
exposures and exacerbation of symptoms
in sensitive patients with respiratory
disease; (b) Declines in pulmonary function,
especially in children; (c) Increased risk of
premature death from heart or lung
diseases in elderly
Sulfates 25 µg/m3, 24-hr avg. ≥ (a) Decrease in ventilatory function; (b) Aggravation of asthmatic symptoms;
(c) Aggravation of cardio-pulmonary
disease; (d) Vegetation damage;
(e) Degradation of visibility; (f) Property
damage
Lead 1.5 µg/m3, 30-day avg. ≥ 1.5 µg/m3, calendar quarter> (a) Learning disabilities in children; (b) Impairment of blood formation and nerve
conduction
VisibilityReducing
Particles
In sufficient amount such that the
extinction coefficient is greater
than 0.23 inverse kilometers (to
reduce the visual range to less
than 10 miles) at relative humidity
less than 70 percent, 8-hour
average (10am - 6pm)
Visibility impairment on days when relative
humidity is less than 70 percent
Hydrogen
Sulfide (H2S)
0.03 ppm, 1-hr. avg. ≥ Odor (rotten egg smell)
Headache
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District
1306 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix C
APPENDIX C
HEALTH EFFECTS
OF
AMBIENT AIR POLLUTANTS
1307 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix C
C-1
Health Effects of Ambient Air Pollutants
Ozone
Ozone is a strong irritant that can constrict the airways, forcing the respiratory system to work hard to deliver oxygen. Individuals exercising outdoors, children and people with pre-existing lung disease such as asthma and chronic pulmonary lung disease are considered to be the most susceptible to the health effects of ozone. Short term exposure (lasting for a few hours) to ozone at levels typically observed in Southern California can result in aggravated respiratory diseases such as emphysema, bronchitis and asthma, shortness of breath, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, increased fatigue as well as chest pain, dry throat, headache and nausea.
Elevated ozone levels are associated with increased school absences. In recent years, a correlation between elevated ambient ozone levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates, as well as mortality, has also been reported. An increased risk for asthma has been found in children who participate in multiple sports and live in high ozone communities.
Ozone exposure under exercising conditions is known to increase the severity of the above mentioned observed responses. Animal studies suggest that exposures to a combination of pollutants which include ozone may be more toxic than exposure to ozone alone. Although lung volume and resistance changes observed after a single exposure diminish, with repeated exposures biochemical and cellular changes appear to persist, which can lead to subsequent lung structural changes.
Particulate Matter
A series of scientific studies has linked particulate matter, especially fine particles, with a variety of significant health problems. A consistent correlation between elevated ambient fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) levels and an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections number and severity of asthma attacks, and the number of hospital admissions has been observed in different parts of the United States and various areas around the world. In recent years, some studies have reported an association between long-term exposure to air pollution dominated by fine particles and increased mortality, reduction in life-span, and an increased mortality from lung cancer.
Daily fluctuations in fine particulate matter concentration levels have also been related to hospital admissions for acute respiratory conditions in children, to school and kindergarten absences, to a decrease in respiratory lung volumes in normal children and to increased medication use in children and adults with asthma. Recent studies show lung function growth in children is reduced with long-term exposure to particulate 1308 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix C
C-2
matter. Seniors, people with pre-existing respiratory and/or cardiovascular disease and children appear to be more susceptible to the effects of PM10 and PM2.5.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Carbon monoxide replaces oxygen in the body’s red blood cells. Individuals with a deficient blood supply to the heart, patients with diseases involving heart and blood vessels, fetuses (unborn babies), and patients with chronic hypoxemia (oxygen deficiency) as seen in high altitudes are the most susceptible to the adverse effects of CO exposure. People with heart disease are also more susceptible to developing chest pains when exposed to low levels of carbon monoxide. Exposure to high levels of carbon monoxide can slow reflexes and cause drowsiness, and result in death in confined spaces at very high concentrations.
Reduction in birth weight and impaired neurobehavioral development has been observed in animals chronically exposed to CO resulting in carboxyhemoglobin levels similar to those observed in smokers. Recent studies have found increased risks for adverse birth outcomes with exposure to elevated CO levels. These include pre-term births and heart abnormalities. Additional research is needed to confirm these results.
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Population-based studies suggest that an increase in acute respiratory illness, including infections and respiratory symptoms in children (not infants), is associated with longterm exposures to NO2 at levels found in homes with gas stoves, which are higher than ambient levels found in Southern California. Increase in resistance to air flow and airway contraction is observed after short-term exposure to NO2 in healthy individuals.
Larger decreases in lung functions are observed in individuals with asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (e.g. chronic bronchitis, emphysema) than in healthy individuals, indicating a greater susceptibility of these sub-groups.
In animals, exposure to levels of NO2 considerably higher than ambient concentrations results in increased susceptibility to infections, possibly due to the observed changes in cells involved in maintaining immune functions. The severity of lung tissue damage associated with high levels of ozone exposure increases when animals are exposed to a combination of ozone and NO2.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
Exposure of a few minutes to low levels of SO2 can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics. All asthmatics are sensitive to the effects of SO2. In asthmatics, increase in resistance to air flow, as well as reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe breathing difficulties, are observed after acute exposure to SO2. In contrast, healthy individuals do not exhibit similar acute responses even after exposure to higher concentrations of SO2. Animal studies suggest that despite being a respiratory irritant, it does not cause substantial lung injury at ambient concentrations. However, very high 1309 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix C
C-3
levels of exposure can cause lung edema (fluid accumulation), lung tissue damage, and sloughing off of cells lining the respiratory tract.
Some population-based studies indicate that the mortality and morbidity effects associated with fine particles show a similar association with ambient SO2 levels. In these studies, efforts to separate the effects of SO2 from those of fine particles have not been successful. It is not clear whether the two pollutants act synergistically or one pollutant alone is the predominant factor.
Sulfates
Most of the health effects associated with fine particles and sulfur dioxide at ambient levels are also associated with sulfates. Thus, both mortality and morbidity effects have been observed with an increase in ambient sulfate concentrations. However, efforts to separate the effects of sulfates from the effects of other pollutants have generally not been successful. Clinical studies of asthmatics exposed to sulfuric acid suggest that adolescent asthmatics are possibly a subgroup susceptible to acid aerosol exposure.
Animal studies suggest that acidic particles such as sulfuric acid aerosol and ammonium bisulfate are more toxic than non-acidic particles like ammonium sulfate.
Whether the effects are attributable to acidity or to particles remains unresolved.
Lead
Fetuses, infants, and children are more sensitive than others to the adverse effects of lead exposure. Exposure to low levels of lead can adversely affect the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased lead levels are associated with increased blood pressure. Lead poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures and death. It appears that there are no direct effects of lead on the respiratory system. Lead can be stored in the bone from earlyage environmental exposure, and elevated blood lead levels can occur due to breakdown of bone tissue during pregnancy, hyperthyroidism (increased secretion of hormones from the thyroid gland) and osteoporosis (breakdown of bony tissue).
Fetuses and breast-fed babies can be exposed to higher levels of lead because of previous environmental lead exposure of their mothers.
1310 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
APPENDIX D
COACHELLA VALLEY
MODEL DUST CONTROL ORDINANCE
1311 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-1
Section 100 Purpose
The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimum requirements for construction and demolition activities and other specified sources in order to reduce man-made fugitive dust and the corresponding PM10 emissions.
Section 200 Definitions
For the purpose of this ordinance, the following definitions are applicable:
1 AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS are any operation directly related to the growing of crops, or raising of fowls or animals for the primary purpose of making a livelihood.
2 AQMD is the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the representatives thereof.
3 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) is the number of motor vehicles that traverse a given unpaved or paved surface during a specified 24-hour period.
ADT levels are calculated as the average daily volume over a specified 48-hour period as determined by the City (County) in consultation with the AQMD. 4 BULK MATERIAL is all sand, gravel, soil, aggregate and other organic and inorganic particulate matter.
5 CHEMICAL DUST SUPPRESSANTS are non-toxic chemical soil binders that are not prohibited for use by the City (County), the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Air Resources Board, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), or any other law, rule or regulation, used to reduce dust on disturbed surfaces.
6 COACHELLA VALLEY BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES (CV BACM) are methods to prevent or mitigate the emission and/or airborne transport of fugitive dust, as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook.
7 COACHELLA VALLEY FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL HANDBOOK is the most recently approved reference document by the AQMD that includes a description of fugitive dust control measures, guidance for preparation of Fugitive Dust Control Plans, notification forms, signage provisions, and test methods. 8 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES are any on-site activities preparatory to or related to the building, alteration, rehabilitation, or improvement of property, including, but not limited to the following activities; grading, excavation, trenching, loading, vehicular travel, crushing, blasting, cutting, planning, shaping, breaking, equipment staging/storage areas, weed abatement activities or adding or removing bulk materials from storage piles. 9 DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES are the wrecking or taking out of any loadsupporting structural member of a structure or building and related handling operations or the intentional burning of any structure or building. 1312 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-2
10 DISTURBED SURFACE AREA is any portion of the earth's surface (or material placed thereupon) that has been physically moved, uncovered, destabilized, or otherwise modified from its undisturbed native condition (including vehicular disturbances) thereby increasing the potential for the emission of fugitive dust.
This definition does not include land that has been restored to a native condition, such that the vegetative ground cover and soil characteristics are equal to surrounding native conditions.
11 EARTH-MOVING OPERATIONS are the use of any equipment for an activity where soil is being moved or uncovered.
12 FINISH GRADE is the final grade of the site that conforms to the approved grading plan.
13 FUGITIVE DUST is any solid particulate matter that becomes airborne, other than that emitted from an exhaust stack, directly or indirectly as a result of human activities. PM10 is a subset of fugitive dust and is defined as particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less. 14 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN is a document that describes fugitive dust sources at a site and the corresponding control measures and is prepared in accordance with the guidance contained in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook.
15 HIGH-WIND EPISODE is when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour as measured by:
A. the closest AQMD monitoring station, or
B. a certified meteorological monitoring station, or
C. an on-site wind monitor calibrated and operated on-site in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications with a data logger or strip chart. 16 OPERATOR is any person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises any potential fugitive dust generating operation subject to the requirements of this ordinance. This definition includes any person who has been officially designated by a property owner as the person responsible for fugitive dust control at a site, as indicated in an approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 17 PAVED ROAD is an improved street, highway, alley, public way, or easement that is covered by roadway materials (e.g., cement, asphalt or asphaltic concrete).
18 PHYSICAL ACCESS RESTRICTION is any barrier, including but not limited to; curbs, fences, gates, posts with fencing, shrubs, trees, or other measures that are effective in preventing vehicular and Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) use of a specified site.
19 SILT is any bulk material with a particle size less than 75 micrometers in diameter that passes through a Number 200 sieve as determined by American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method C 136 or any other test method approved by the U.S. EPA and AQMD.
1313 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-3
20 SITE is the real property on which construction, demolition, or other activities subject to this ordinance may occur.
21 STABILIZED SURFACE is any portion of land that meets the minimum standards as established by the applicable test method contained in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook.
22 STORAGE PILE is any accumulation of bulk material with a height of three feet or more and a total surface area of 300 or more square feet. 23 UNPAVED PARKING LOT is an area utilized for parking vehicles and associated vehicle maneuvering that is not covered with roadway materials (e.g., cement, asphalt or asphaltic concrete).
24 UNPAVED ROAD is any service roads, internal access roads, heavy and light duty equipment paths and other roadways which are not covered by typical roadway materials (e.g., cement, asphalt, asphaltic concrete). 25 TEMPORARY UNPAVED PARKING LOTS are those used less than 24 days per year.
Section 300 Performance Standards and Test Methods
All performance standards and test methods referenced in this ordinance shall be based on the methodologies included in the Coachella Valley Dust Control Handbook.
Section 400 Control Requirements
410. Work Practices – All Fugitive Dust Sources
1 No operator shall conduct any potential dust-generating activity on a site unless the operator utilizes one or more Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures, as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook for each fugitive dust source such that the applicable performance standards are met.
2 Any operator involved in any potential dust-generating activity on a site with a disturbed surface area greater than one acre shall, at a minimum, operate a water application system as identified in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, if watering is the selected control measure.
Performance Standards and Test Methods
3 No person subject to the requirements contained in Section 410.1 shall cause or allow visible fugitive dust emissions to exceed 20 percent opacity, or extend more than 100 feet either horizontally or vertically from the origin of a source, or cross any property line.
420. Construction and Demolition Activities
1 Any operator applying for a grading permit, or a building permit for an activity with a disturbed surface area of more than 5,000 square feet, shall not initiate any earth-moving operations unless a Fugitive Dust Control Plan has been 1314 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-4
prepared pursuant to the provisions of the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook and approved by the City (County).
2 A complete copy of the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan must be kept on site in a conspicuous place at all times and provided to the City (County) and AQMD upon request.
3 Any operator involved in demolition activities shall comply with AQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities) requirements, and the requirements of Title 40, Part 61 of the code of Federal Regulations.
4 Any operator involved in earth-moving operations shall implement at least one of the following short-term stabilization methods during non-working hours:
A. maintaining soils in a damp condition as determined by sight or touch; or B. establishment of a stabilized surface through watering; or C. application of a chemical dust suppressant in sufficient quantities and concentrations to maintain a stabilized surface.
5 Within 10 days of ceasing activity, an operator shall implement at least one of the following long-term stabilization techniques for any disturbed surface area where construction activities are not scheduled to occur for at least 30 days:
A. revegetation that results in 75 percent ground coverage provided that an active watering system is in place at all times; or
B. establishment of a stabilized surface through watering with physical access restriction surrounding the area; or
C. use of chemical stabilizers to establish a stabilized surface with physical access restriction surrounding the area.
6 Any operator shall remove all bulk material track-out from any site access point onto any paved road open to through traffic:
A. within one hour if such material extends for a cumulative distance of greater than 25 feet from any site access point; and
B. at the conclusion of each workday.
7 Any operator of a project with a disturbed surface area of five or more acres or of any project that involves the import or export of at least 100 cubic yards of bulk material per day shall install and maintain at least one of the following control measures at the intersection of each site entrance and any paved road open to through traffic with all vehicles exiting the site routed over the selected device(s):
A. pad consisting of minimum one inch washed gravel maintained in a clean condition to a depth of at least six inches and extending at least 30 feet wide and at least 50 feet long; or
B. paved surface extending at least 100 feet and at least 20 feet wide; or C. wheel shaker / wheel spreading device consisting of raised dividers (rails, pipe, or grates) at least three inches tall and at least six inches apart and 20 feet long; or
1315 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-5
D. a wheel washing system.
8 Any operator required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan under Section 420.1 shall install and maintain project contact signage that meets the minimum standards of the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook, including a 24-hour manned toll-free or local phone number, prior to initiating any type of earth-moving operations.
9 Any operator of a project with a disturbed surface area of 50 or more acres shall have an Environmental Observer on the site or available on-site within 30 minutes of initial contact that:
A. is hired by the property owner or developer; and
B. has dust control as the sole or primary responsibility; and C. has successfully completed the AQMD Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class and has been issued a Certificate of Completion for the class; and
D. is identified in the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan as having the authority to immediately employ sufficient dust mitigation 24-hours per day, seven days a week and to ensure compliance with this ordinance, the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan, and AQMD regulations.
Performance Standards and Test Methods
10 No operator required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan under Section 420.1 shall cause or allow visible fugitive dust emissions to exceed 20 percent opacity, or extend more than 100 feet either horizontally or vertically from the origin of a source, or cross any property line.
11 Exceedance of the visible emissions prohibition in Section 420.10 occurring due to a high-wind episode shall constitute a violation of Section 420.10, unless the operator demonstrates to City (County) all the following conditions:
A. all Fugitive Dust Control Plan measures or applicable Coachella Valley Best Available Control Measures were implemented and maintained on site; and B. the exceedance could not have been prevented by better application, implementation, operation, or maintenance of control measures; and C. appropriate recordkeeping was complied and retained in accordance with the requirements in Section 420.12 through 420.15; and
D. documentation of the high-wind episode on the day(s) in question is provided by appropriate records.
Reporting / Recordkeeping
Before Construction
12 The operator of a project with ten acres or more of earth-moving operations shall:
1316 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-6
A. forward two copies of a Site-Specific, Stand Alone [8½ by 11 inch] Fugitive Dust Control Plan to the AQMD within ten days after approval by the City (County). [Note: A separate AQMD approval will not be issued]; and B. notify the City (County) and the AQMD at least 24-hours prior to initiating earth-moving operations.
During Construction
13 Any operator involved in earth-moving operations shall compile, and maintain for a period of not less than three years, daily self-inspection recordkeeping forms in accordance with the guidelines contained in the Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Handbook.
14 Any operator involved in earth-moving operations that utilizes chemical dust suppressants for dust control on a site shall compile records indicating the type of product applied, vendor name, and the method, frequency, concentration, quantity and date(s) of application and shall retain such records for a period of not less than three years.
After Construction
15 Any operator subject to the provisions of Section 420.12 shall notify the City (County) and the AQMD within ten days of the establishment of the finish grade or at the conclusion of the finished grading inspection. 430. Disturbed Vacant Lands / Weed Abatement Activities 1 Owners of property with a disturbed surface area greater than 5,000 square feet shall within 30 days of receiving official notice by the City (County) prevent trespass through physical access restriction as permitted by the City (County). 2 In the event that implementation of Section 430.1 is not effective in establishing a stabilized surface within 45 days of restricting access, the owner shall implement at least one of the following long term stabilization techniques within an additional 15 days, unless the City (County) has determined that the land has been restabilized:
A. uniformly apply and maintain surface gravel or chemical dust suppressants such that a stabilized surface is formed; or
B. begin restoring disturbed surfaces such that the vegetative cover and soil characteristics are similar to adjacent or nearby undisturbed native conditions. Such restoration control measure(s) must be maintained and reapplied, if necessary, such that a stabilized surface is formed within 8 months of the initial application.
3 Any operator conducting weed abatement activities on a site that results in a disturbed surface area of 5,000 or more square feet shall:
A. apply sufficient water before and during weed abatement activities such that the applicable performance standards are met; and
1317 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-7
B. ensure that the affected area is a stabilized surface once weed abatement activities have ceased.
Performance Standards and Test Methods
4 No person subject to the provisions of Sections 430.1 through 430.3 shall cause or allow visible fugitive dust emissions to exceed 20 percent opacity, or extend more than 100 feet either horizontally or vertically from a source, or cross any property line, and shall either:
A. maintain a stabilized surface; or
B. maintain a threshold friction velocity for disturbed surface areas corrected for non-erodible elements of 100 centimeters per second or higher.
Reporting / Recordkeeping
5 Within 90 days of ordinance adoption, operators of property with disturbed surface area of 5,000 or more square feet shall notify the City (County) of the location of such lands and provide owner contact information. 6 Any person subject to the provisions of Sections 430.1 through 403.3 shall compile, and retain for a period of not less than three years, records indicating the name and contact person of all firms contracted with for dust mitigation, listing of dust control implements used on-site, and invoices from dust suppressant contractors/vendors.
440. Unpaved Roads
1 Owners of private unpaved roads with average daily traffic levels between 20 and 150 vehicles must take measures (signage or speed control devices) to reduce vehicular speeds to no more than 15 miles per hour. 2 Owners of a cumulative distance of six or less miles of private unpaved roads shall pave each segment having 150 or more average daily trips or, alternatively apply and maintain chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards included in Section 440.4 in accordance with the following treatment schedule:
A. one-third of qualifying unpaved road segments within one year of ordinance adoption; and
B. remainder of qualifying unpaved road segments within three years of ordinance adoption. (Note: treatments in excess of annual requirements can apply to future years.)
3 Owners of a cumulative distance of more than six miles of private unpaved roads shall stabilize each segment having 150 or more average daily trips in accordance with the following treatment schedule:
A. at least two miles paved or four miles stabilized with chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for a 1318 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-8
travel surface and the performance standards established in Section 440.4 within one year of the ordinance adoption; and
B. at least two miles paved or four miles stabilized with chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for a travel surface and the performance standards included in Section 440.4 in accordance with the following treatment schedule annually thereafter until all qualifying unpaved roads have been stabilized. (Note: treatments in excess of annual requirements can apply to future years).
Performance Standards and Test Methods
4 Owners of any private unpaved road shall not allow visible fugitive dust emissions to exceed 20 percent opacity, or extend more than 100 feet either horizontally or vertically from the origin of a source, and shall either:
A. not allow silt loading to be equal to or greater than 0.33 ounces per square foot; or
B. not allow the silt content to exceed six percent.
Reporting / Recordkeeping
5 Within 90 days of ordinance adoption, owners of unpaved roads shall provide to the City (County) and the AQMD the location and ADT estimates for all unpaved roads.
6 Owners of unpaved roads that utilize chemical dust suppressants shall compile, and retain for a period of not less than three years, records indicating the type of product applied, vendor name, and the method, frequency, concentration, quantity and date(s) of application.
450. Unpaved Parking Lots
1 Owners of parking lots established subsequent to ordinance adoption are required to pave such areas, or alternatively apply and maintain chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for traffic areas and the performance standards included in Section 450.4. 2 Owners of existing private unpaved parking lots shall implement one of the following control strategies within 180 days of ordinance adoption:
A. pave; or
B. apply and maintain dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for traffic areas and the performance standards included in Section 450.4;
C. apply and maintain washed gravel in accordance with the performance standards included in Section 450.4.
3 Owners of private temporary unpaved parking lots (those that are used 24 days or less per year) shall apply and maintain chemical dust suppressants in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for traffic areas and the 1319 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-9
performance standards included in Section 450.4 prior to any 24-hour period when more than 40 vehicles are expected to enter and park. The owner of any temporary unpaved parking lot greater than 5,000 square feet shall implement the disturbed vacant land requirements contained in Section 430 during nonparking periods.
Performance Standards and Test Methods
4 The operator of any private unpaved parking lot shall not allow visible fugitive dust emissions to exceed 20 percent opacity, or extend more than 100 feet either horizontally or vertically from the origin of a source, and shall either:
A. not allow silt loading to be equal to or greater than 0.33 ounces per square foot; or
B. not allow the silt content to exceed eight percent.
Reporting / Recordkeeping
5 Within 90 days of ordinance adoption, owners of unpaved parking lots shall provide to the City (County) and the AQMD the location and ADT estimates and the size (in square feet) of unpaved parking lots.
6 Owners of unpaved parking lots that utilize chemical dust suppressants or apply gravel shall compile, and retain for a period of not less than three years, records indicating the type of product applied, vendor name, and the method, frequency, concentration, quantity and date(s) of application. 460. Public or Private Paved Roads
1 Any owner of paved roads shall construct, or require to be constructed all new or widened paved roads in accordance with the following standards:
A. curbing in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials guidelines or as an alternative, road shoulders paved or treated with chemical dust suppressants or washed gravel in accordance with the performance standards included in Section 440.4 with the following minimum widths:
Average Daily Trips Minimum Shoulder Width
500 - 3,000 4 feet
3,000 or greater 8 feet
B. paved medians or as an alternative, medians surrounded by curbing and treated with landscaping, chemical dust suppressants, or washed gravel applied and maintained in accordance with the performance standards included in Section 440.4.
2 Any owner of public or private paved roads shall remove or cause to be removed any erosion-caused deposits of greater than 2,500 square feet within 1320 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-10
24-hours after receiving notice by the City (County) or the AQMD or prior to resumption of traffic where the paved area has been closed to vehicular traffic.
Section 500 Administrative Requirements
1 Any operator preparing a Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall complete the AQMD Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class and maintain a current valid Certificate of Completion.
2 At least one representative of each construction or demolition general contractor and subcontractor responsible for earth-movement operations shall complete the AQMD Coachella Valley Fugitive Dust Control Class and maintain a current valid Certificate of Completion.
3 All reporting / recordkeeping required by Section 420 shall be provided to the City (County) and AQMD representatives immediately upon request. 4 All reporting / recordkeeping required by Section 430 through Section 460 shall be provided to the City (County) and AQMD representatives within 24-hours of a written request.
Section 600 Exemptions
1 The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to:
A. agricultural operations including on-field sources and unpaved roads used solely for agricultural operations.
B. any dust-generating activity where necessary fugitive dust preventive or mitigative actions are in conflict with either federal or State Endangered Species Act provisions as determined in writing by the appropriate federal or state agency.
C. any action required or authorized to implement emergency operations that are officially declared by the City (County) to ensure the public health and safety.
2 The provisions of Section 420.1 shall not apply to any construction or demolition activity meeting any of the following activity levels or requirements:
A. the activity is occurring entirely within an enclosed structure from which no visible airborne particulate matter escapes; or
B. activities that do not require issuance of a grading permit or those that require a building permit provided that the project results in 5,000 or less square feet of soil disturbance.
3 The provisions of Section 420.8 shall not apply to:
A. projects that takes two weeks or less to complete provided that a long-term stabilization technique(s) identified in Section 430 are implemented; and B. line projects (i.e., pipelines, cable access lines, etc.). 1321 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix D
D-11
Compliance
1 A person violating any section of this ordinance or with any portion of an approved Dust Control Plan is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation and a fine not exceeding four hundred dollars ($400.00) for a second violation within one year. A third violation, or more, within one year shall each be prosecuted at a level consistent with a misdemeanor violation.
2 In addition to any other remedy provided by law, failure to correct any condition indicated in a notice of violation within one hour of issuance will allow the City (County) to initiate one or more of the following actions where appropriate:
A Criminal proceedings.
B Civil proceedings to obtain an injunction; or any other relief against the owner or operator to stop operations at the site.
C Refusal to issue future permits and/or release of securities held until owner or operator has adequately demonstrated compliance with the notice of violation.
D Correction of the condition by the City (County) through the use of any securities held under this ordinance.
1322 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix E
APPENDIX E
FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE
TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
TO SUPPORT
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUGGESTED POLICIES/STRATEGIES
1323 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix E
E-1
FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE
TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF SUGGESTED POLICIES/STRATEGIES
AB2766 Subvention Fund. Cities within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) receive a portion of the fees charged to register motor vehicles. AQMD disburses this fund to the cities on a quarterly basis. The revenue must be used to fund projects and programs that reduce emissions from mobile sources. Additional revenue is available to match AB2766 subvention funding for certain types of expenditures from the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee’s (MSRC) AB2766 Local Government Match Program. A separate application is required for the MSRC matching fund.
Contact: South Coast AQMD
Transportation Programs
(909) 396-3271
Website: www.aqmd.gov/Business/Transportation/
AB2766SubventionFunding
AQMD Financial Assistance for Small Business. Small businesses that are planning to purchase air pollution control equipment may apply for a loan guarantee under the California Capital Access Program (CalCAP). The program guarantees the repayment of your loan and motivates banks and other lenders to offer loans to small businesses for pollution control equipment. Guarantees are available for loans from $15,000 to $250,000 and may be up to 90 percent of the loan amount. To be eligible for assistance, a business must be subject to AQMD rules and regulations and must meet the definition of small business set by the U.S. Small Business Administration (typically less than 500 employees and $5 million annual gross revenue).
Contact: South Coast AQMD
Public Affairs
1-800-CUT-SMOG
Website: www.aqmd.gov/Business/Financial Assistance
AQMD Lower Emission School Bus Program. AQMD requires public schools and private operators with more than 15 or more school buses to purchase or lease cleaner buses to protect children from exposure to toxic diesel emissions. AQMD grants are available to public school districts for the purchase of clean school buses (e.g. compressed natural gas or low-emitting diesel), and for the retrofit of diesel buses with 1324 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix E
E-2
particulate traps. To qualify for grants to purchase new buses, school districts agree to retire an equivalent number of the oldest, most polluting buses in the district’s fleet.
Funds are first distributed in proportion to the number of residents within each county.
School Districts in LA county receive about 61 percent, Orange county - 18 percent, San Bernardino county - 11 percent, and Riverside receives - 10 percent. LA Unified School District is restricted to a maximum of 50 percent of the total funds distributed to LA County. Additional funding criteria apply.
Contact: South Coast AQMD
Technology Advancement Office
(909) 396-3331
Website: www.aqmd.gov/Education/CleanAirTechnologies/
Implementation/SchoolBusProgram
Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program. The state legislature created this funding program to develop state air quality measures. The Carl Moyer program is designed to facilitate the introduction and use of low-emission, heavyduty engines. Funds may be used to help purchase or repower new vehicles. New vehicles and equipment must achieve a 30 percent reduction of NOx emissions compared to current emission standards. Alternative fuel engines, (e.g. compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, propane and electricity) will be given preference for funding. However, cleaner diesel engines may be considered in the off-road category if a CARB-certified alternative fuel engine is not available for a specific application.
Vehicles and equipment must remain in operation for at least five years, and 75 percent of their use must be within the South Coast basin.
Contacts: South Coast AQMD
Technology Advancement Office
On-Road, Off-Road, Locomotive, Construction
(909) 396-3331
Website: www.aqmd.gov/Education/CleanAirTechnologies/
Implementation/CarlMoyerProgram
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program. This program is implemented by the local transportation commissions or metropolitan planning organization. Funding is available for transit improvement projects and alternative fuels.
Website: www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/cmaq.htm
Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) – Competitive Grants. The discretionary funds are to be used for clean air projects that results in direct and tangible reductions in air pollution from vehicles within the South Coast Air District. Project categories include clean fuel vehicles, alternative fuel infrastructure, transportation control measures; such as ridesharing telecommuting, 1325 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix E
E-3
videoconferencing, parking management, traffic synchronization and research and development of new clean air technologies, as well as educational projects.
Contacts: South Coast AQMD
[email protected]
Website: www.msrc-cleanair.org
MSRC – Local Government Match Program. This program provides matching funding against local funds for investments such as alternative fuel infrastructure and vehicles. Local governments such as cities and counties are eligible to apply for funding. Historically, project categories include clean fuel vehicles, alternative fuel infrastructure, and transportation.
Contacts: South Coast AQMD
[email protected]
Website: www.msrc-cleanair.org
Rule 2202 Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP). AQMD requires employers with over 250 employees to reduce emissions from employee commute trips. One option available to employers under Rule 2202 is to invest in the AQMD’s Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP) in lieu of implementing other rule requirements. AQIP revenue is placed in a restricted fund to be used to reduce emissions to mitigate the impacts of not participating in an employee commute reduction program. The objective of the program is to use the AQIP fund to reduce emissions to levels that are equivalent to levels that would have been achieved if the employer had implemented other strategies in the rule. The AQMD accepts emission reduction proposals and awards contracts on a bi-annual basis. Qualified AQIP proposals may include the purchase of clean on-road and off-road vehicles, and projects that enhance mobility (e.g. shuttle services).
Contacts: South Coast AQMD
Technology Advancement Office (909) 396-3331
Website: www.aqmd.gov/Education/CleanAirTechnologies/
Implementation/Rule2202AirQualityInvestmentProgram
Sempra Energy. Rebates, grants and loans are available until funding is depleted.
Flex Your Power’s website is a great resource for energy efficiency and conservation information. Incentives/rebates, technical assistance, retailers, product guides, case studies and more are found on this website.
Website: www.fypower.org
U.S. Department of Energy (U.S.DOE)-Clean Cities Program. The United States Department of Energy (DOE) established the Clean Cities Program as a locally based public/private alliance to expand the use of alternative fuels to gasoline and diesel fuel.
By combining local decision-making with voluntary action by partners, the grassroots 1326 of 2287
Guidance Document – Appendix E
E-4
approach of Clean Cities departs from traditional top-down federal programs. It creates an effective plan carried out at the local level for creating a sustainable nationwide alternative fuels market.
Contacts: US DOE
[email protected]
(206) 553-2155
California Energy Commission (CEC)
[email protected]
(916) 654-4639
Website: www.eere.energy.gov/cleancities
1327 of 2287
Glendale Water and Power Commission
Dr. Gary Dorris PhD
July 1, 2019
2019 SB 350 Integrated Resource
Plan for Glendale Water and Power
1328 of 2287
How we got here and where are we going?
Original
Repower
Proposal
• 262 MW
natural gas
power
Clean Energy
RFP
• Sought proposals
for clean and
local energy
technologies
Interim IRP
• Established longterm energy and
capacity needs
• Determined 250
MW of local
capacity needed for
reliability
Final IRP
• Incorporates Clean
Energy RFP results
into resource plan
• Includes stakeholder
engagement results
• Sets GWP on path
towards SB 100
compliance
Implement Plan
• Secure contracts
with Clean Energy
RFP winners
• Built/implement
projects
• Grayson
replacement in
2021
• Procurement
rounds for local
and remote
renewables
March
2018
May
2018
December
2018
July
2019
2019 -
2022
1329 of 2287
Power Plan Principles
3 1. Keep the lights on
2. Clean and renewable
3. The community participates
4. Plan one step at a time
5. Keep the bills low
1330 of 2287
Recommended Resources for Grayson Replacement
4 “The resource portfolio recommended in this Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) will firmly establish Glendale Water and Power (GWP) as a national clean energy leader. The future envisioned herein represents a complete transformation of the way GWP provides reliable, affordable, and clean energy resources to the citizens of Glendale.” - 2019 Integrated Resources Plan, Page 1.
28 MW of energy
efficiency and
demand response
23 MW of rooftop
solar and storage
75 MW of large scale
battery storage
93 MW of critical
back-up power
1331 of 2287
GWP situation
5 Glendale’s load significantly exceeds the available local supply, therefore transmission is critical for reliability RICE
Local Replacement
Portfolio for Grayson
1-8
Glendale 2025
344 MW
1332 of 2287
Clean Energy RFP Process Summary
6 Vendors 34 Legal
Screening 31 Feasibility Screening 18 Proposal Scoring 9 Vendor Interviews 8 Final Shortlist • Evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of implementing a portfolio of local and regional clean energy resources in lieu of some or all of the proposed Grayson repowering projects
• Candidate resources shortlisted in this process were used in compiling the recommended resource portfolio
• Ascend modeled shortlisted projects in PowerSimm to evaluate cost and reliability for GWP system
1333 of 2287
Alternatives Considered
7 Portfolio B – NG
Repower
C – ICE
Repower
D – 50
MW Batt
+ 6xICE
E – 75 MW
Batt +
5xICE
F – 100
MW Batt +
3xICE
G – 100%
Clean
Candidate Resource Nameplate Capacity (MW)
Clean Energy
+ Load
Reduction
Residential DER 13 13 13 13
Public Spaces DER 10 10 10 20
Residential and Large
Commercial EE+DR 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.5
Small Commercial
EE+DR
20.4 20.4 20.4 20.4
Imported
Renewable
Resources
Solar 140 140 130 130 130 130
Wind 140 140 130 130 130 130
Storage Utility Battery 50 50 50 75 100 150
Conventional
Generation
CC 71
CT 120
ICE 149 112 93 56
1334 of 2287
Present Value Cost Comparison
8 Portfolio E is the least-cost portfolio that incorporates clean energy and load reduction resources identified through the Clean Energy RFP.
1335 of 2287
Major reductions in GHG emissions
9 15%
reduction 40% reduction
from today
after Clean
Energy RFP
Clean Energy RFP process will result in a 40 percent reduction from current emissions by 2030 and 28% fewer emissions than the original repower proposal
1336 of 2287
Exceeding renewable portfolio targets
GWP will exceed RPS targets through aggressive procurement of wind and solar resources, both local and remote.
10 1337 of 2287
Clean and Renewable
Clean and renewable resources to compromise over 71% of energy in 2030 11 1338 of 2287
Load Growth: Transportation Electrification
• Transportation electrification is a major component of California’s decarbonization strategy. California is implementing policies to reach 5,000,000 electric vehicles by 2030.
• Transportation accounts for 41% of the State’s GHG emissions. GWP is going to decarbonize its electricity portfolio and plan to transfer energy from gasoline to clean electricity.
This increase in electric vehicles will cause growth of GWP’s electricity demand.
We are going to clean up our worst air emissions
source by using more electric vehicles
1339 of 2287
Energy demand after load modifiers
13 Despite large projected increases in energy from GWP’s system due to electrification, energy efficiency and rooftop solar keep growth modest. 1340 of 2287
GWP will exceed emissions reductions goals through
clean energy and transportation electrification
14 • Plan reaches emissions
targets in 2026 after
Grayson 1-8 close and
Magnolia is repowered
Emissions are driven up
again in the 2030s
because of increased
load
• EV emissions savings is
calculated to account
for tailpipe emissions
avoided with new EVs
This emissions credit
shows that GWP’s net
emissions become
negative starting in
2029
1341 of 2287
Improvement in air quality with new technology
15 Grayson 1-8 Retire
SO2 emissions begin low and stay low with the implementation of the proposed power plan while NOx emissions fall through the study period with the implementation of the proposed power plan 1342 of 2287
Reliability Assessment
16 Resource Capacity (MW)
Existing Local Resource
Grayson – Unit 9 48
Magnolia 48
Scholl 9
Proposed Local Resources
BESS 75
ICE 5 * 18.7 = 93
Proposed Load Reduction Resources
BTM Residential Solar+Storage 13
Commercial and Public Solar 1.3
Commercial DR 8
Small-Commercial EE 20
Transmission Resources
Southwest AC Intertie 100
Pacific DC Intertie 100
Total Local + Transmission Capacity 515
N-1-1 Reserve Capacity
(excluding resources in red) 367
LOLH = Hours where Load > Capacity + 1 MW
N-1-1 Reserve Capacity Calculation Loss of Load Hours
GWP assesses reliability through an LOLH (loss of load hours) and N-1-1 reserve capacity analysis • To meet the N-1-1 reliability standard GWP created the proposed resource portfolio to include sufficient capacity resources to meet peak load during an N-1-1 event • Utilities are expected to meet a reliability standard of less than one (cumulative) day of power outage within 10 years (1-in-10), which is equivalent to < 2.4 hours of power outage per year 1343 of 2287
Reliability Requirements: N-1-1
17 (MW) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2025 2030 2035 2038
Mean Peak 340 341 339 339 341 344 359 371 377
N-1-1 Reserve Requirement 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 Total Capacity Requirement (at peak) 488 489 487 487 489 492 507 519 525 NERC standards require GWP to maintain contingency reserves up to an N-1-1 contingency situation in which the second largest resource fails while the first largest resource is unavailable Local Replacement
resources for Grayson 1-8
Glendale 2025
344 MW
The 100 MW Pacific DC
Intertie which sees frequent
deratings and outages is
GWP’s single largest
contingency
48 MW Magnolia Power
Plant with a forced
outage rate of 10% is
GWP’s second largest
contingency
RICE
1344 of 2287
Spring Hourly Portfolio Performance - 2035
18 Springtime load is fairly consistent between afternoons and evenings allowing for a fairly consistent dispatch stack mostly served by imported renewables
Load is served mostly by
imported renewable energy
Batteries are primarily charged in
lower-load, low-cost early morning
hours and discharged in the afternoon
or early evening
1345 of 2287
Summer Hourly Portfolio Performance - 2035
19 Summer shows significantly higher loads with greater variation between peak and minimum daily load that require more thermal generation
Magnolia is dispatched
around the clock
ICEs and Batteries dispatch in
peak evening load hours
1346 of 2287
Reliability of Alternative Portfolios
20 Portfolio G – 100% Clean
Portfolio F – 100 MW Batt + 3xICE
Portfolio G – 100% Clean
fails to maintain sufficient
reliability beginning in 2021
with a mean loss of load for
20.3 hours.
Portfolio F – 100 MW Batt +
3xICE fails to maintain
sufficient reliability
beginning in 2024 with a
mean loss of load for 2.8
hours.
1347 of 2287
100% Clean Portfolio Reliability
21 During a PacDC Outage
This portfolio has insufficient
resources to meet load
Southwest AC utilization
reaches 98% in a 2028 outage
and is completely maxed out
in a 2036 outage
This portfolio would need
additional transmission to be
viable
Normal operating conditions
With high load this portfolio
fails to meet load even when
the battery is fully cycled
each day
1348 of 2287
Next Steps and Q&A
1349 of 2287
About GWP’s Current Supply Portfolio
Resource Resource Type
Capacity
(MW)
Expiration
Date
Notes
Grayson Units 1-8
Gas 207 2021
Grayson Unit 9 Gas 48 -
IPP
Coal (Gas*) 39 (35*) 2024*
Expected repower in 2024 converts GWP
share from 39 to 35 MW (or 4.167% of the
project).
Magnolia Gas 48 -
Palo Verde Nuclear 10 -
Hoover Hydro 12 -
Skylar Contract
Contract 50 2040
This contract delivers 292,000 MWh of
energy annually, 50% of which is guaranteed
to be from renewable resources.
Highwinds Wind (firmed) 3 2028 Renewable resource.
Pleasant Valley Wind 10 2022 Renewable resource.
Pebble Springs Small Hydro 10 2028 Renewable resource.
Tieton Small Hydro 6.8 - Renewable resource.
Scholl Landfill
Landfill Gas 9 -
Estimated to begin production in 2020,
pending environmental review. 1350 of 2287
Energy Load Growth Forecast
24 (GWh) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2025 2030 2035 2036 2038 GWP System Load 1,166 1,181 1,198 1,227 1,247 1,298 1,451 1,610 1,643 1,708 Historic Forecast
1351 of 2287
Growth of Peak Demand
Modeling the additional EV load yields the following peak demand values:
• P5 is a low estimate that you might experience in a cool summer. • Mean peak is the average peak driven by average summer weather. • P95 is a high estimate of peak demand during a very hot summer. Climate change impacting southern California would make the P95 peak more common. *Recorded peak
25 (MW) 2018* 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2025 2030 2035 2038 P5 Peak 336 276 285 282 290 295 298 314 327 333
Mean peak 338 340 341 339 339 341 344 359 371 377
P95 336 426 407 406 410 405 423 429 434 432
1352 of 2287
Recommended Power Plan and Resource Portfolio
26 Proposed Portfolio Composition
Candidate Resource
Nameplate
Capacity
(MW)
20-year PV
Cost
(Million $)
Clean Energy + Load Reduction
(51 MW)
Residential DER 13 $33
Public Spaces DER 10 $34
Residential and Large
Commercial EE+DR 7.5 $10
Small Commercial EE+DR 20.4 $42
Imported Renewable Resources
(260 MW)
Solar 130 $40
Wind 130 $63
Storage
(75 MW)
Battery Energy Storage System
(BESS) [4 hour] 75 $107
Conventional Generation
(93 MW)
Internal Combustion Engines
(ICE) [5x 18.6 MW] 93 $126
1353 of 2287
Grifth Park Fire
27 Griffith Park Fire 2018
1354 of 2287
Modeling PacDC Transmission Outage: N-1 Contingency
Pacific DC Intertie Outage and De-Rates (May-October)
28 • To help ensure that the power plan can meet N-1-1 reserve needs, Ascend has simulated an N-1 event in the modeling where the utility loses its largest contingency, the Pacific DC Intertie, throughout the entirety of 2036 in all model runs
The PacDC Intertie experiences frequent de-rates and outages The increasing threat of wildfires in California makes the threat of a transmission outage more and more likely
1355 of 2287
Emissions
29 All portfolios considered have comparable emissions profiles with Portfolios D through G being the least emitting.
Low emissions because
portfolio fails to meet load
1356 of 2287
Additional Transmissions Needs
30 Transmission utilization
follows system load with
greatest utilization in months
with greatest load. With the
PacDC intertie out in 2036 SW
AC usage reaches almost
100%.
Under normal operating
conditions when both
interties are available, both
lines max out during daylight
hours year-round with about
50% capacity at night.
When the PacDC line is out the
SW AC line is almost always
maxed out with an average
hourly utilization of 93%
1357 of 2287
Renewable Integration Challenges
• On a minute-to-minute timescale, renewable generation exhibits significant volatility.
This requires regulating technologies to balance the volatility Wind
Load
Net-Load
Regulation
Requirements
31 • Proposed plan
includes flexible
resources:
75MW/300MWh of
batteries
5x18.7MW natural
gas ICEs
1358 of 2287
EV Contribution to Peak Demand
32 (MW) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2025 2030 2035 2038
EV contribution to Peak Load 3 4 5 7 9 13 27 40 47
1359 of 2287
Contributors to Load Growth
33 • Transportation
electrification
increases GWP system
load
• Energy Efficiency
programs and rooftop
PV decrease GWP
system load
• The net contribution
of electric vehicles to
load is roughly equal
to the load savings
from energy efficiency,
and PV
1360 of 2287
Solar Drives Lower Mid-Day Prices And Peakier Shoulder
Hours
• A four-hour duration battery can shift solar energy from mid-day to shoulder peak times, reducing the need for peaking thermal and associated emissions.
CHARGE HERE DISCHARGE HERE
$100/MWh
1361 of 2287
Battery Storage Deployment
35 • Dramatic declines in cost
since 2010 and expected
through 2030.
• Current battery prices
competitive with peaking
power plants.
• With battery price
decline expected to
continue, the BESS will
be deployed in two
parts:
50 MW/200 MWh in
2021
25 MW/100 MWh
added in 2031
Expected savings of
~$27 million
Enovation Partners Analysis
$50 - $75/kWh by 2025
During previous IRP, battery core
prices were ~$450/kWh. Now
predicted to be ~$162/kWh when
Grayson repower occurs.
1362 of 2287
Hourly Dispatch 2036: Simulated PacDC Intertie Outage
36 2036 sees more market sales as energy cannot be transmitted into Glendale across the PacDC Intertie Batteries become
increasingly important in
meeting high demand times
Magnolia and ICEs are run
around the clock to meet load 1363 of 2287
— Prepared by the California Gas and Electric Utilities — Prepared in Compliance with Cali fornia Public U tilities Commission Decision D .95-01-039
2020
California Gas Report
1364 of 2287
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
PREPARED BY THE CALIFORNIA GAS AND ELECTRIC UTILITIES
Southern California Gas Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
San Diego Gas and Electric Company
Southwest Gas Corporation
City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department
Southern California Edison Company
1365 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-iTABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD................................................................................................................... 1 Foreword................................................................................................................... 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 3 Executive Summary.................................................................................................. 4 Demand Outlook ................................................................................................ 4 Focus on Efficiency and Environmental Quality ................................................. 6 Future Gas System Impacts Resulting From Increased Renewable Generation and Electrification...................................................................... 9 Gas Price Forecast........................................................................................... 10 Market Condition........................................................................................ 10 Development of the Gas Price Forecast .................................................... 11 Natural Gas Projects ........................................................................................ 12 Gas Supply....................................................................................................... 12 Western North American Natural Gas Pipelines............................................... 15 Liquefied Natural Gas ................................................................................ 15 Statewide Consolidated Summary Tables........................................................ 17 Statewide Recorded Sources and Disposition.................................................. 28 Statewide Recorded Highest Sendout.............................................................. 34 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA........................................................................................... 35 Introduction............................................................................................................. 36 Gas Demand........................................................................................................... 39 Overview .......................................................................................................... 39 Forecast Method .............................................................................................. 41 Assumptions .............................................................................................. 42 Market Sector Forecasts .................................................................................. 44 1366 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-iiResidential ................................................................................................. 44 Commercial................................................................................................ 45 Industrial .................................................................................................... 45 Electric Generation .................................................................................... 46 SMUD Electric Generation......................................................................... 47 Forecast Scenarios .......................................................................................... 47 High Demand Scenario: Cold/Dry Hydro Year........................................... 47 Scenarios Evaluating Building Electrification ............................................. 48 Policies Impacting Gas Demand ...................................................................... 51 GHG Policies ............................................................................................. 51 Renewable Electric Generation.................................................................. 52 Energy Efficiency Programs....................................................................... 52 Impact of SB 350 on Energy Efficiency...................................................... 54 Impact of Reach Codes and Electrification ................................................ 54 Future Gas Demand Trends and Policy ........................................................... 55 Future Opportunities .................................................................................. 57 North American Gas Demand Trends .............................................................. 59 Liquefied Natural Gas Imports/Exports ...................................................... 59 U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico............................................. 61 Gas Supply, Capacity, and Storage........................................................................ 62 Overview .......................................................................................................... 62 Gas Supply....................................................................................................... 62 Renewable Gas ......................................................................................... 62 North American Supply Development ........................................................ 65 California-Sourced Gas.............................................................................. 66 U.S. Southwest Gas................................................................................... 66 Canadian Gas ............................................................................................ 66 1367 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-iiiRocky Mountain Gas.................................................................................. 67 Gas Pipeline Capacity ...................................................................................... 67 Interstate Pipeline Capacity ....................................................................... 67 In-State Pipelines....................................................................................... 67 Gas Storage ..................................................................................................... 68 McDonald Island ........................................................................................ 68 Los Medanos and Pleasant Creek ............................................................. 69 Other California Storage Facilities ............................................................. 69 Policies Impacting Future Gas Supply and Assets ........................................... 69 Overview.................................................................................................... 69 Renewable Natural Gas............................................................................. 69 Hydrogen ................................................................................................... 71 Hydrogen Storage (Conventional and New Tech)...................................... 71 LNG as Marine Fuel................................................................................... 72 Regulatory Environment ......................................................................................... 73 Overview .......................................................................................................... 73 Federal and Canadian Regulatory Matters....................................................... 73 GTN and Canadian Pipelines..................................................................... 73 Other Pipelines .......................................................................................... 74 FERC and CAISO Gas-Electric Coordination Actions................................ 74 State Regulatory Matters.................................................................................. 74 California State SB 100 and Carbon Neutrality Executive Order ............... 74 Pipeline Safety ........................................................................................... 75 Storage Safety ........................................................................................... 77 Gas Quality ................................................................................................ 77 The Downstream Effects of Increased Regulation: Cities Pursue Electrification.............................................................................................. 77 1368Known Regulatory Hurdles of 2287 ............................................................................... 78
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-ivOther Regulatory Matters ................................................................................. 78 Overview.................................................................................................... 78 GHG Reporting and Cap-and-Trade Obligations ....................................... 78 Biomethane OIR R.13-02-008 Phase 3 ..................................................... 80 Biomethane OIR R.13-02-008 Phase 4 ..................................................... 80 Gas System Planning OIR R.20-01-007 .................................................... 81 Abnormal Peak Day Demand and Supply............................................................... 82 APD Demand Forecast..................................................................................... 82 APD Supply Requirement Forecast ........................................................... 82 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA ............................................................ 86 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY................................................................ 92 Introduction............................................................................................................. 93 The Southern California Environment..................................................................... 94 Economics and Demographics......................................................................... 94 Gas Demand (Requirements)................................................................................. 96 Overview .......................................................................................................... 96 Assumptions Regarding Building Decarbonization Policy ................................ 97 Market Sensitivity ............................................................................................. 98 Temperature .............................................................................................. 98 Hydro Conditions ....................................................................................... 98 Market Sectors ................................................................................................. 99 Residential ................................................................................................. 99 Commercial.............................................................................................. 100 Industrial .................................................................................................. 102 Electric Generation .................................................................................. 104 Wholesale and International..................................................................... 107 Natural Gas Vehicles ............................................................................... 108 1369 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-vEnergy Efficiency Programs ........................................................................... 109 Combined EE Portfolio of EE Programs and Codes and Standards ........ 110 Gas Supply, Capacity, and Storage...................................................................... 111 Gas Supply Sources....................................................................................... 111 California Gas................................................................................................. 111 South-western U.S. Gas................................................................................. 111 Rocky Mountain Gas ...................................................................................... 111 Canadian Gas ................................................................................................ 112 Renewable Natural Gas ................................................................................. 112 Interstate Pipeline Capacity............................................................................ 113 Storage........................................................................................................... 114 Storage Regulations....................................................................................... 116 Regulatory Environment ....................................................................................... 118 State Regulatory Matters................................................................................ 118 General Rate Case .................................................................................. 118 Gas Reliability and Planning OIR............................................................. 118 Building Decarbonization Policy............................................................... 119 Affordability OIR....................................................................................... 120 Pipeline Safety ......................................................................................... 120 San Joaquin Valley OIR........................................................................... 121 Mobile Home Park Utility Upgrade Program ............................................ 122 Federal Regulatory Matters............................................................................ 122 El Paso .................................................................................................... 123 Kern River................................................................................................ 123 Transwestern ........................................................................................... 123 GTN and Canadian Pipelines................................................................... 123 Greenhouse Gas Issues ....................................................................................... 125 1370 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-viNational Policy................................................................................................ 125 Assembly Bill 32 ............................................................................................. 125 Senate Bill 32 ................................................................................................. 126 Senate Bill 350 ............................................................................................... 126 Senate Bill 1383 ............................................................................................. 126 Senate Bill 100 and Executive Order B-55-18................................................ 128 Assembly Bill 3232 ......................................................................................... 128 GHG Rulemaking ........................................................................................... 128 Reporting and Cap-and-Trade Obligations..................................................... 129 Motor Vehicle Emissions Reductions ............................................................. 130 Low Carbon Fuel Standard............................................................................. 131 Programmatic Emissions Reduction: California GHG Reduction Strategies................................................................................................. 133 Renewable Natural Gas ................................................................................. 133 Hydrogen........................................................................................................ 137 Peak Day Demand................................................................................................ 139 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA ............................... 142 CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ............................ 148 City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department ............................................. 149 CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA .................................................................................................................... 151 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY............................................................... 162 Introduction........................................................................................................... 163 Gas Demand......................................................................................................... 164 Overview ........................................................................................................ 164 Economics and Demographics....................................................................... 164 Market Sectors ............................................................................................... 165 Residential ............................................................................................... 165 1371 of 2287
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-viiCommercial.............................................................................................. 166 Industrial .................................................................................................. 167 Electric Generation .................................................................................. 168 Natural Gas Vehicles ............................................................................... 170 Energy Efficiency Programs ........................................................................... 171 Gas Supply ........................................................................................................... 173 Regulatory Environment ....................................................................................... 174 General Rate Case......................................................................................... 174 Other Regulatory Matters......................................................................... 174 Peak Day Demand................................................................................................ 175 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY – TABULAR DATA................................ 176 GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ 183 Glossary................................................................................................................ 184 RESPONDENTS......................................................................................................... 197 Respondents......................................................................................................... 198 1372 of 2287
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
-viiiLIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
LIST OF CHARTS
Figure 1 – California Gas Demand Outlook .............................................................. 5 Figure 2 – Natural Gas Price Chart: SoCalGas Border and PG&E Citygate Prices 2020-2035 ............................................................................................. 12 Figure 3 – Western North American Natural gas pipelines ..................................... 14 Figure 4 – North American Import/Export Terminals Existing ................................. 16 Figure 5 – PG&E Average demand Year Gas Forecast ......................................... 40 Figure 6 – PG&E Service Area: Core Gas Throughput Building Electrification Retrofit Scenarios............................................................................................. 50 Figure 7 – PG&E Service Area: Natural gas Savings from EE Programs.............. 53 Figure 8 – PG&E Service Area: Renewable natural Gas Pilot Projects Location............................................................................................................ 64 Figure 9 – SoCalGas 12-County Area Employment ............................................... 94 Figure 10 – SoCalGas Annual Active Meters and Growth Rates............................ 95 Figure 11 – Composition of SoCalGas Requirements Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (2019-2035) ............................................................... 97 Figure 12 – Composition of SoCalGas’ Residential Demand Forecast (2019-2035).................................................................................................... 100 Figure 13 – Annual Commercial Demand Forecast 2019-2035 Billion Cubic Feet per Year (Bcf/y), Average Year Weather Design.................................... 101 Figure 14 – Commercial Gas Demand by Business Type Composition of Industry (2019) ............................................................................................... 101 Figure 15 – Annual Industrial Demand Forecast (Bcf) (2019-2035)...................... 102 Figure 16 – Industrial Gas Demand by Business Type Composition of Industry (2019) ............................................................................................... 103 Figure 17 – SoCalGas Service Area Total EG (Bcf) ............................................. 104 Figure 18 – NGV Demand Forecast (2019-2035)................................................. 109 Figure 19 – SoCalGas Annual Energy Efficiency Cumulative Savings Goals (Bcf)................................................................................................................ 110 Figure 20 – Receipt Point and Transmission Zone Firm Capacities ..................... 114 1373 of 2287
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
-ixFigure 21 – LCFS Program NGV Fuel Statistics RNG’s Growing Role in California’s Transportation Fuel Market.......................................................... 132 Figure 22 – SDG&E’s Composition of Natural Gas Throughput Average Temperature, Normal Year (2019-2035) (Bcf/y)............................................. 165 Figure 23 – Composition of SDG&E’s Residential Demand Forecast Average Year Weather Design, 2019-2035 (Bcf/y)....................................................... 166 Figure 24 –SDG&E Commercial Natural Gas Demand Forecast Average Year Weather Design (2019-2035)................................................................. 167 Figure 25 –SDG&E Industrial Natural Gas Demand Forecast Average Year Weather Design (2019-2035) ......................................................................... 168 Figure 26 – SDG&E’s Total EG Gas Demand: Base Hydro and 1-in-10 Dry Hydro Design, 2019-2035 (Bcf/y) ................................................................... 169 Figure 27 – Annual NGV Demand Forecast ......................................................... 171 Figure 28 – SDG&E Annual Energy Efficiency Cumulative Saving Goals (Bcf).... 172
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 – Impact of Renewable Generation and Energy Efficiency Programs on Gas Demand ................................................................................................. 8 Table 2 – Potential and Proposed North American West Coast LNG Terminals as of Spring 2020............................................................................. 15 Table 3 – Statewide Total Supply Sources and Requirements Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2024 ............................. 18 Table 4 – Statewide Total Supply Sources and Requirements Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2025-2035 ............................. 19 Table 5 – Statewide Total Supply Sources-Taken Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2035.......................................................... 20 Table 6 – Statewide Annual Gas Requirements(a) Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2024.......................................................... 21 Table 7 – Statewide Annual Gas Requirements(a) Average Temperature and Normal Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2025-2035.......................................................... 22 Table 8 – Statewide Total Supply Sources and Requirements Cold Temperature(d) and Dry Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2024 ................................ 23 1374 of 2287
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
-xTable 9 – Statewide Total Supply Sources and Requirements Cold Temperature(d) and Dry Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2025-2035 ................................ 24 Table 10 – Statewide Total Supply Sources-Taken Cold Temperature (d) and Dry Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2035 ............................................................... 25 Table 11 – Statewide Annual Gas Requirements(a) Cold Temperature(g) and Dry Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2020-2024 ............................................................... 26 Table 12 – Statewide Annual Gas Requirements(a) Cold Temperature(g) and Dry Hydro Year (MMcf/d) 2025-2035 ............................................................... 27 Table 13 – Recorded 2015 Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary (MMcf/d) ........................................................................................................... 29 Table 14 – Recorded 2016 Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary (MMcf/d) ........................................................................................................... 30 Table 15 – Recorded 2017 Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary (MMcf/d) ........................................................................................................... 31 Table 16 – Recorded 2018 Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary (MMcf/d) ........................................................................................................... 32 Table 17 – Recorded 2019 Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary (MMcf/d) ........................................................................................................... 33 Table 18 – California Highest Sendout Days (2015-2019)...................................... 34 Table 19 – PG&E Service Area Assumption for Percentage of Gas Appliances Replaced by Electric Appliances.................................................... 49 Table 20 – PG&E Core Throughput Average Annual Growth Rates....................... 50 Table 21 – Forecast of Core Gas Demand and Supply on an APD (MMcf/d)......... 84 Table 22 – Winter Peak Day Demand (MMcf/d) ..................................................... 85 Table 23 – Summer Peak Day Demand (MMcf/d) .................................................. 85 Table 24 – Annual Gas Supply and Requirements (MMcf/d) – Recorded Sendout............................................................................................................ 87 Table 25 – Annual Gas Supply Forecast (MMcf/d) Average Demand Year............ 88 Table 26 – Annual Gas Supply Forecast (MMcf/d) Average Demand Year............ 89 Table 27 – Annual Gas Supply Forecast (MMcf/d) High Demand Year (1-in-10 Cold Year)........................................................................................... 90 Table 28 – Annual Gas Supply Forecast (MMcf/d) High Demand Year (1-in-10 Cold Year)........................................................................................... 91 1375 of 2287
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
-xiTable 29 – Core 1-in-35 Year Extreme Peak Day Demand (MMcf/d)................... 139 Table 30 – Winter 1-in-10 Year Cold Day Demand Condition (MMcf/d) ............... 140 Table 31 – Summer High Sendout Day Demand (MMcf/d)................................... 141 Table 32 – SoCalGas Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Recorded Years 2015-2019............................................................................................ 143 Table 33 – SoCalGas: Table 1-SCG Annual Gas Supply and
Requirements – MMcf/d Recorded Years 2020-2024 Average
Temperature Year .......................................................................................... 144 Table 34 – SoCalGas: Table 2-SCG Annual Gas Supply and
Requirements – MMcf/d Recorded Years 2025-2035 Average
Temperature Year .......................................................................................... 145 Table 35 – SoCalGas: Table 3-SCG Annual Gas Supply and
Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2020-2024 Cold Temperature Year (1-in-35 Cold Year Event) and Dry Hydro Year...................................... 146 Table 36 – SoCalGas: Table 4-SCG Annual Gas Supply and
Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2025-2035 Cold Temperature Year (1-in-35 Cold Year Event) and Dry Hydro Year...................................... 147 Table 37 – City of Long Beach-Energy Resources Department: Table 1-LB Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Recorded Years 2015-2019 for the 2020 CGR Report................................................................................ 152 Table 38 – City of Long Beach-Energy Resources Department : Table 1-LB Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Average Year Forecast for the 2020 CGR Report..................................................................................... 154 Table 39 – City of Long Beach-Energy Resources Department : Table 1A-LB Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Average Year Forecast for the 2020 CGR Report..................................................................................... 156 Table 40 – City of Long Beach-Energy Resources Department : Table 1-LB Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Cold Year Forecast for the 2020 CGR Report........................................................................................... 158 Table 41 – City of Long Beach-Energy Resources Department : Table 1A-LB Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Cold Year Forecast for the 2020 CGR Report........................................................................................... 160 1376 of 2287
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES
-xiiTable 42 – SDG&E Annual Gas Supply and Sendout – MMcf/d Recorded Years 2015-2019............................................................................................ 177 Table 43 – SDG&E: Table 1-SDGE Annual Gas Supply and Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2020-2024 Average Temperature Years ................ 179 Table 44 – SDG&E: Table 2-SDGE Annual Gas Supply and Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2025-2035 Average Temperature Years ................ 180 Table 45 – SDG&E: Table 3-SDGE Annual Gas Supply and Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2020-2024 Cold Temperature Year (1-in-35 Cold Year Event) and Dry Hydro Year ........................................................... 181 Table 46 – SDG&E: Table 4-SDGE Annual Gas Supply and Requirements – MMcf/d Estimated Years 2025-2035 Cold Temperature Year (1-in-35 Cold Year Event) and Dry Hydro Year ........................................................... 182 1377 of 2287
FOREWORD
-1-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
FOREWORD
1378 of 2287
FOREWORD
-2-
FOREWORD
The 2020 California Gas Report (CGR) presents a comprehensive outlook for natural gas requirements and supplies for California through the year 2035. This report is prepared in even-numbered years, followed by a supplemental report in odd-numbered years, in compliance with California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC or Commission) Decision (D.) 95-01-039.
The projections in the CGR are for long-term planning and do not necessarily reflect the day-to-day operational plans of the utilities.
The report is organized into three sections: Executive Summary, Northern California, and Southern California. The Executive Summary provides statewide highlights and consolidated tables on supply and demand. The Northern California section provides details on the requirements and supplies of natural gas for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), Wild Goose Storage, LLC., and Lodi Gas Storage LLC. The Southern California section shows similar detail for Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department, Southwest Gas Corporation (SWG), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E).
Each participating utility has provided a narrative explaining its assumptions and outlook for natural gas requirements and supplies, including tables showing data on natural gas availability by source, with corresponding tables showing data on natural gas requirements by customer class. Separate sets of tables are presented for average and cold year temperature conditions.
Any forecast, however, is subject to considerable uncertainty. Changes in the economy, energy and environmental policies, natural resource availability, and the continually evolving restructuring of the gas and electric industries can significantly affect the reliability of these forecasts. This report should not be used by readers as a substitute for a full, detailed analysis of their own specific energy requirements. Workpapers that document the assumptions and other forecast details are published separately by each of the utilities and the redacted versions are available upon request.
A working committee comprised of representatives from each utility was responsible for compiling the report. The membership of this committee is listed in the Respondents Section at the end of this report. 1379 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-3-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1380 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-4-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DEMAND OUTLOOK
Utility-driven, statewide natural gas demand1 is projected to decline at an average rate of
1.0 percent each year through 2035. The decline comes from reduced gas demand in the major market segment areas of residential, electric generation (EG), commercial, and industrial.
Statewide residential gas demand is projected to decrease at an average rate of 1.7 percent each year. EG gas demand is projected to decrease at an average annual rate of 1.5 percent each year.
The Commercial segment gas demand, which includes both core and noncore commercial demand, is projected to decrease at an average annual rate of 1.5 percent each year. The Industrial gas demand segment is expected to decline at an average rate of 0.2 percent per year.
Though the Natural Gas Vehicle (NGV) market shows moderate growth, it is not sufficient to offset the projected decrease in other market segments over the forecast horizon.
There are several drivers of these declines. Aggressive energy efficiency programs are dampening gas demand in these sectors. In addition, the statewide efforts to minimize greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are reducing EG demand due to increase in demand side and supply side generation resources that produce few or no carbon emissions. Nevertheless, gas-fired generation and energy storage will continue to be primary technologies to support long-term increases in electricity usage and integrate increasing quantities of intermittent renewable electric generation into the electric grid.
1 Gas Demand served by PG&E, SoCalGas, SWG, City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department, and SDG&E. 1381 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-5-
FIGURE 1 – CALIFORNIA GAS DEMAND OUTLOOK
The graph above summarizes statewide gas demand under the Average Demand year (Average Demand) forecast and the Cold Temperature, Dry Hydroelectric Generation2 scenario (Cold/Dry Hydro). The Average Demand refers to the gas demand projection for an average temperature year and normal hydroelectric generation (hydro) year, and the Cold/Dry Hydro refers to expected gas demand for a cold temperature year and dry hydro year conditions. Under an average-temperature condition and a normal hydro year, gas demand for the state is projected to average 5,205 million cubic feet of gas per day (MMcf/d) in 2020 decreasing to 4,343 MMcf/d by 2035, a decline of 1.2 percent per year.
In 2020, Northern California is projected to require an additional 5.0 percent of gas supply to meet demand for the Cold/Dry Hydro demand scenario, whereas Southern California is projected to require an additional 3.2 percent of supply to meet demand under this scenario. The 2 Dry Hydroelectric Generation scenario assumes dry hydro generation in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035 MMcf/Day California Demand Outlook
Average Demand Year Cold/Dry Hydro Year 1382 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-6-
weather for each year is an independent event and each event has the same likelihood of occurring.
FOCUS ON EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
California utilities continue to focus on Customer Energy Efficiency and other Demand-Side Management programs in their utility electric and gas resource plans. California utilities are committed to helping their customers make the best possible choices regarding use of this valuable resource. Gas demand for electric power generation is expected to be moderated by CPUC mandated goals for electric energy efficiency programs and additional renewable power generation. The Average Year demand forecasts in this report assume that renewable power will meet 33 percent of the state’s electric needs by 2020 and 60 percent by 2030 and beyond.
Passed in 2018, Senate Bill (SB) 100 increases and accelerates the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) targets. The increase comes in 2030 with renewable power generation equal to 60 percent of retail electric sales. Previously, the target was 50 percent. The acceleration requires the RPS at 50 percent by 2026. An additional requirement mandated in 2018 establishes a statewide goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 across all sectors of the California economy.
Enacted in 2015, SB 350 establishes annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses by January 1, 2030. These targets must be cost-effective and feasible.
Additional California legislation and policy direction3 provides directives and incentives to increase energy efficiency. Some of these efforts require access to building performance data, encouraging pay-for-performance incentive-based programs, and the use of energy management technology for use in homes and businesses. Moreover, legislation requires energy utilities to develop a plan to educate residential customers and small and medium business customers about the incentive programs.
The table on the following page provides estimates of total gas savings based on the impact of renewables in addition to the impact of electric and gas energy efficiency goals on the CPUC 3 For more information, see https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/egyefficiency/. 1383 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-7-
jurisdictional utilities. Gas savings from electric energy efficiency goals are based on a generic assumption of heat rate per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity produced at gas fired peaking and combined cycle power plants.
1384 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-8-
TABLE 1 – IMPACT
OF RENEWABLE GENERATION
AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS
ON GAS DEMAND
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
Electricity Demand (GWh) 251,983 250,319 249,569 249,434 249,469 249,490 249,666 249,841 251,392 253,308 33% Renewables by 2020 & 60% Renewables by 2030
Renewable Electric Generation (GWh/Yr) (2) 83,154 86,861 90,843 95,034 99,289 103,538 107,856 112,179 125,696 126,654 Increase over 2019 Level (GWh/Yr) (3) 23,415 27,121 31,104 35,295 39,549 43,799 48,116 52,439 65,957 66,915 Gas Savings over 2019 Level (Bcf/Yr) (4) 142 165 189 214 240 266 292 318 400 406 Electric Energy Efficieny Goals (5)
Electricity Savings over 2019 Level (GWh/Yr) 1,256 2,402 3,452 4,690 6,160 7,829 9,659 11,711 18,823 31,410 Gas Savings over 2019 Level (Bcf/Yr) (4) 8 15 21 28 37 48 59 71 114 191 Energy Efficiency Goal for Natural Gas Programs (6)
Gas Savings over 2019 Level (Bcf/Yr) 9 18 26 34 42 51 57 63 84 84 Total Gas Savings (Bcf/Yr) (7) 159 197 236 277 320 364 408 453 598 680 Notes:(1) (2) Assumes 33% renewables by the year 2020 and 60% renewables by 2030.(3) Increase reflects only the impacts of equipment installed after December 31, 2019.(4) Gas savings are estimated based on the following generic assumptions for California: gas-fired peaking plants are assumed to be the marginal source for 10% of the 8,760 hours in each year (24 x 365) and combined-cycle plants are marginal in another 75% of each year. Each MWh displaced from a peaking plant saves 10 MMBtu (10 Dth, or approximately 10,000 CF) of natural gas. Each MWh displaced from a combined-cycle plant saves 7 MMBtu (7 Dth, or approximately 7,000 CF) of natural gas. A conservation program that saves 1 MWh in every hour of a year savesabout 55,000 MMBtu of natural gas (8,750 hours x 10% x 10 MMBtu, plus 8,760 hours x 75% x 7 MMBtu). Conservation programs that save MWh primarily during summer peak periods producegreater natural gas savings per MWh. Similar estimates apply to renewable electric generators. (5)
(6)(7)
Electricity demand forecast from the California Energy Commission: https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=222582, LSE_and_BA_Tables_Med_Baseline_Demand_Mid_AAEEAAPV_Revised_CCA.xlsx, "form1.1c" tab. From 2030-2035 the average growth rate was used from the last five years (2026-2030) which is -0.371%.
Data from the California Energy Commission: https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=223608, "Electricity Committed Efficiency CED 2017"; Mid Case, sums of STATE TOTAL. From 2030-2035 the average growth rate was used from the last five years (2026-2030): 1.74% for Residential and 3.44% for NonResidential. Data from the California Energy Commission: https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=223609, "Natural Gas Committed Efficiency CED 2017"; TOTAL STATE Mid Case Totals. From 2030-2035 the average growth rate was used from the last five years (2026-2030): 1.13% for Residential and 2.29% for NonResidential. Total gas savings are annual savings from equipment installed after December 31, 2019.
California Energy Requirements by CPUCJurisdictional Utilities (CAISO) (1) 1385 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-9-
FUTURE GAS SYSTEM IMPACTS RESULTING FROM INCREASED RENEWABLE
GENERATION AND ELECTRIFICATION
Since electric utility system operators must balance electrical demand with generation sources on a real time basis, most system operators rely on “dispatchable” resources that can respond quickly to changes in demand. The challenge with renewable resources is that while they can provide energy, they are not always predictable and are not always dispatchable.
In the future, the increase in renewable generation in the state will reduce the total amount of natural gas usage. It is also expected that the increasing renewable generation will add to the daily and hourly load-forecast variance on the gas-fired EG fleet. Although the additional renewable energy will displace some of the natural gas currently being used to generate electricity in California, the intermittent nature of renewable generation will likely cause the electric system to rely on natural gas fired EG for providing the needed ancillary services (A/S) (ramping, voltage support, and quick starts) to balance the electric system in the short-term. In the long-term, this balancing may also come from the higher expected integration of energy storage devices e.g., batteries, fuel cells, and hydroelectric pumped storage.
The amount of gas consumed for integrating more renewables will fluctuate hourly. This is due to an increased need for rapid response from gas-fired generators to follow electric net load fluctuations. Since the gas-fired generation is expected to be the marginal resource in most hours, the gas system will need to be both robust and flexible to handle such fluctuations.
The expected growth in electrification poses considerable uncertainty on when, where, and how large will the impact be on gas demand throughout. In the building sector, electrification could decrease gas use. Recently, some California local jurisdictions4 have forbidden the use of gas in new building construction. Moreover, it is possible for jurisdictions to require appliance substitution to electric from natural gas. Expected growth in electrification of vehicles and buildings would result in increasing electric load. This load increase could cause additional use of gas-fired generators.
4 See the following for more details for about 30 local jurisdictions implementing these requirements:
https://www.sierraclub.org/articles/2020/03/californias-cities-lead-way-gas-free-future. 1386 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-10-
GAS PRICE FORECAST
MARKET CONDITION
The natural gas industry has seen its fair share of transformations over the last decade with the shale gas revolution, the first Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export cargo out of the United States (U.S.) Lower 48, and most recently the rise of associated supply from tight oil production growth. As a result, the North American gas supply portfolio contains a mix of conventional and unconventional natural gas supply sources. Moreover, improvements in fracking technology and horizontal drilling efficiencies in both dry and wet gas plays have resulted in the supply from unconventional shale resources increasing faster than conventional supplies.
The near-term gas price outlook continues to remain below $3.00/Million British Thermal Units (MMBtu) for most supply basins, in constant 2019 dollars. Production gains from the Permian Basin have been significant and are expected to remain strong for at least the next 5 years. Additionally, three Permian-area pipelines are expected to come online by late 2021.
Supplies are expected to ramp up from the Permian production area and shale-sourced supplies continue to expand in the Marcellus, Utica, and Haynesville areas.
Natural gas prices will gain further support in most supply basins over the forecast period and move towards the $3.00-$4.00/MMBtu range in constant 2019 U.S. dollars by end of the decade as more demand and exports ramp up to expand the market size. Additionally, the challenges of building new pipeline projects in North America will have a material impact on the Henry Hub price outlook and where resources will be developed in the long term.
Industry experts continue to forecast that North American gas supplies will be sufficient to meet expected demand growth. North American gas price increases may be somewhat tempered by renewable power generation additions both in the U.S. and in Mexico. Continuing closures of coal-fired generation to meet environmental goals may provide price support but could be tempered by the softening of the global economy due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) related impacts. Related uncertainties surrounding government policies are expected to create some headwinds for natural gas.
1387 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-11-
DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAS PRICE FORECAST
Natural gas prices at the SoCalGas border averaged $2.28/MMBtu in 2019. The inflation adjusted SoCalGas border price is expected to rise to $2.95/MMBtu by the year 2035. On average, the SoCalGas Border price is expected to be $2.56/MMBtu over the forecast horizon.
For the PG&E Citygate, the natural gas price in 2019 averaged $3.52/MMBtu and is forecasted to decline to an average of $3.23/MMBtu over the forecast horizon.
Consistent with prior CGRs, the 2020 CGR gas price forecast was developed using a combination of market prices and fundamental long-term forecasts. The natural gas custom futures curve was extracted from Intercontinental Exchange and Chicago Mercantile Exchange for the 2020-2025 period. Fundamental price forecasts were used for 2028 and beyond. The forecasts for 2026 and 2027 reflect a blending of market and fundamental prices, with declining weights for market prices (and corresponding increasing weights for the fundamental price forecast) over the 2-year period. The fundamental gas price forecast represents an average of three forecasts developed by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and independent consultants Wood Mackenzie and S&P Global (formerly PIRA). 1388 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-12-
FIGURE 2 – NATURAL GAS PRICE CHART: SOCALGAS BORDER AND PG&E CITYGATE PRICES 2020-2035
It is important to recognize that the natural gas price forecast is inherently uncertain. PG&E, SoCalGas, and the respondents of the 2020 CGR, separately and collectively, do not warrant the accuracy of the gas price projection. PG&E, SoCalGas, or the respondents of the 2020 CGR shall not be liable or responsible for the use of or reliance on this natural gas price forecast.
NATURAL GAS PROJECTS
Over the past 5 years, the natural gas industry has made investments to improve the safety, accessibility, and reliability of natural gas supply. In addition, more projects have been proposed and some are under construction. The following describes the state of supply and regionally important projects.
GAS SUPPLY
California’s existing gas supply portfolio is regionally diverse and ensures long-term supply availability. Gas supply to California includes sources from California (onshore and offshore), Southwestern U.S. (the Permian, Anadarko, and San Juan basins), the Rocky Mountains and Canada. Interstate pipelines currently serving California include Ruby Pipeline LLC, El Paso 1389 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-13-
Natural Gas Company, Kern River Transmission Company, Mojave Pipeline Company, Gas Transmission Northwest LLC (GTN), Transwestern Pipeline Company, Tuscarora Pipeline, and the Baja Norte/North Baja Pipeline. The map on the following page shows the locations of these supply sources and the natural gas pipelines serving California.
California benefits from substantial gas storage capacity in dedicated gas storage facilities across the state. In recent years, various regulations and standards5 have been proposed and implemented to ensure safe, reliable operation of California gas storage facilities.
In addition to traditional sources of gas supply, multiple Renewable Gas (e.g., Renewable Natural Gas and hydrogen to name a couple) interconnection projects in California are beginning to come online. As further detailed in this CGR, gas utilities are taking significant steps to make RG interconnection easier and more transparent and see broad potential for RG in California.
Currently, incentives (such as Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and Renewable Identification Number (RIN) credits) are funneling RG towards use in the transportation sector. However, with the help of policy makers and thoughtful incentives, the energy sector hopes to utilize increasing amounts of future RG to meet customer needs and support electric grid reliability.
As California continues towards achieving low or zero emissions from energy, Green Hydrogen (H2) will become an important fuel source in helping achieve the State’s emissions goals. There is also great potential for generating Green6 H2 and storing it in existing gas utility infrastructure to help meet California’s dynamic energy needs. No other storage technology has the capability for the long-term and large volume storage that H2 does. 5 See Geologic Energy Management Division’s Underground Natural Gas Storage for more details on regulations and standards at:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/UndergroundGasStorage.aspx. 6 Green Hydrogen is hydrogen produced from electricity that comes from renewable sources such as wind, solar or hydro.
1390 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-14-
FIGURE 3 – WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN NATURAL GAS PIPELINES
1. West Coast Pipeline
2. Woodfibre LNG Terminal
3. Terasen Sumas Gas Pipeline
4. TransCanada Pipeline
5. Alliance Pipeline
6. Northern Border Pipeline
7. Gas Transmission Northwest (GTN Pipeline
8. Northwest Pipeline
9. Jordan Cove LNG (Proposed)
10. Pacific Connector (Proposed)
11. Tuscarora Gas Transmission
12. Paiute Pipeline
13. Ruby Pipeline
14. Questar Pipeline
15. Rockies Express Pipeline
16. Southern Star Pipeline
17. TransColorado Pipeline
18. Kern River Pipeline
19. Pacific Gas and Electric Company
20. Southern California Gas Company
21. San Diego Gas and Electric Company
22. North Baja Pipeline
23. El Paso Natural Gas
24. TransWestern Pipeline
25. Rosarito Pipeline
26. Trasnportadora de Gas Natural (TGN)
27. Costa Azul LNG
1391 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-15-
WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN NATURAL GAS PIPELINES
LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS
Currently, there are three Western U.S. LNG facilities, two operating in Mexico and one facility in Alaska. The two in Mexico are the Costa Azul terminal and the Altamira terminal operating as import facilities.
The abundance of shale gas has changed the paradigm for LNG in the West. Until the mid-2000s, LNG was thought as being a potential gas supply for California, but that has now changed. Currently, four companies plan on building export facilities. Two in Canada have decided to build these facilities. One in Oregon and one in Baja California, Mexico await final jurisdiction approvals and final investment decisions to begin construction.
TABLE 2 – POTENTIAL AND PROPOSED NORTH AMERICAN WEST COAST LNG TERMINALS AS OF SPRING 2020
1392 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-16-
FIGURE 4 – NORTH AMERICAN IMPORT/EXPORT TERMINALS
EXISTING
1393 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-17-
STATEWIDE CONSOLIDATED SUMMARY TABLES
The consolidated summary tables on the following pages show the statewide aggregations of projected gas supplies and gas requirements (demand) from 2020-2035 for average temperature and normal hydro years and cold weather and dry hydro years.
Gas sales and transportation volumes are consolidated under the general category of system requirements. Details of gas transportation for individual utilities are given in the tabular data for Northern California and Southern California. The wholesale category includes the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department, SDG&E, SWG, City of Vernon, Alpine Natural Gas, Island Energy, West Coast Gas, Inc., and the municipalities of Coalinga and Palo Alto.
Some columns may not sum precisely because of modeling accuracy and rounding differences and do not imply curtailments.
1394 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-18-
TABLE 3 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2024
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 California's Supply Sources
2 Utility
3 California Sources 97 97 97 97 97
4 Out-of-State 4,357 4,274 4,270 4,206 3,984
5 Utility Total 4,454 4,371 4,367 4,303 4,081
6 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,011 1,007 978 983 969
7 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,465 5,378 5,344 5,286 5,050 8 California's Requirements
9 Utility
10 Residential 1,139 1,130 1,106 1,090 1,069
11 Commercial 484 483 487 483 478
12 Natural Gas Vehicles 54 56 57 59 60
13 Industrial 998 997 1,000 997 998
14 Electric Generation(b) 1,166 1,093 1,104 1,076 1,018 15 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
16 Wholesale/International + Exchange 251 251 252 251 251 17 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 71 69 69 69 68
18 Utility Total 4,194 4,111 4,107 4,057 3,974
19 Non-Utility
20 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 633 635 638 640 643
21 EOR Cogeneration/Industrial 60 59 56 57 49
22 Electric Generation 318 313 284 286 278
23 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,011 1,007 978 983 969
24 Statewide Requirements Total(c) 5,205 5,118 5,084 5,040 4,943 ________________
(a) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (b) Includes utility generation, wholesale generation, and cogeneration. (c) The difference between California supply sources and California requirements is PG&E's forecast of off-system deliveries. 1395 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-19-
TABLE 4 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2025-2035
Line
No. 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
1 California's Supply Sources
2 Utility
3 California Sources 97 97 97 97 97
4 Out-of-State 3,857 3,813 3,737 3,580 3,497
5 Utility Total 3,954 3,910 3,834 3,677 3,594
6 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 953 936 908 897 750
7 Statewide Supply Sources Total 4,907 4,846 4,742 4,574 4,343 8 California's Requirements
9 Utility
10 Residential 1,053 1,033 1,014 959 884
11 Commercial 472 462 455 436 389
12 Natural Gas Vehicles 62 64 65 70 78
13 Industrial 998 995 983 977 968
14 Electric Generation(b) 1,019 1,008 968 890 927
15 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
16 Wholesale/International + Exchange 251 250 249 249 250 17 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 68 66 66 64 65
18 Utility Total 3,954 3,910 3,834 3,677 3,594
19 Non-Utility
20 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 645 648 650 658 672
21 EOR Cogeneration/Industrial 43 41 23 18 6
22 Electric Generation 265 246 235 220 72
23 Non-Utility Served Load(c) 953 936 908 897 750
24 Statewide Requirements Total(c) 4,907 4,846 4,742 4,574 4,343 ________________
(a) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (b) Includes utility generation, wholesale generation, and cogeneration. (c) The difference between California supply sources and California requirements is PG&E's forecast of off-system deliveries. 1396 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-20-
TABLE 5 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES-TAKEN
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2035
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 California Sources(a) 34 34 34 34 34
4 Out-of-State 1,958 1,890 1,875 1,848 1,699
5 Northern California Total 1,992 1,924 1,909 1,882 1,733 6 Southern California
7 California Sources(b) 63 63 63 63 63
8 Out-of-State 2,399 2,384 2,394 2,358 2,286
9 Southern California Total 2,462 2,447 2,457 2,421 2,349 10 Utility Total 4,454 4,371 4,367 4,303 4,081
11 Non-Utility Served Load(c) 1,011 1,007 978 983 969
12 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,465 5,378 5,344 5,286 5,050 13 14 Utility 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
15 Northern California
16 California Sources(a) 34 34 34 34 34
17 Out-of-State 1,578 1,559 1,539 1,512 1,457
18 Northern California Total 1,612 1,593 1,573 1,546 1,491 19 Southern California
20 California Sources(b) 63 63 63 63 63
21 Out-of-State 2,279 2,254 2,198 2,069 2,040
22 Southern California Total 2,342 2,317 2,261 2,132 2,103 23 Utility Total 3,954 3,910 3,834 3,677 3,594
24 Non-Utility Served Load(c) 953 936 908 897 750
25 Statewide Supply Sources Total 4,907 4,846 4,742 4,574 4,343 ________________
(a) Includes utility purchases and exchange/transport gas. (b) Includes utility purchases and exchange/transport gas and City of Long Beach "own-source" gas. (c) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. 1397 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-21-
TABLE 6 – STATEWIDE ANNUAL GAS REQUIREMENTS(a)
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2024
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 Residential 509 506 492 484 474
4 Commercial – Core 224 224 223 222 220
5 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 8 8 9 9 10
6 Natural Gas Vehicles – Noncore 4 5 5 6 6
7 Industrial – Noncore 553 560 559 554 555
8 Wholesale 9 9 9 9 9
9 SMUD Electric Generation 117 117 117 117 117
10 PG&E Electric Generation(b) 267 196 196 196 196
11 Exchange (California) 1 1 1 1 1
12 Company Use and Unaccounted for 40 38 38 38 38
13 Northern California Total(c) 1,732 1,664 1,649 1,636 1,626 14 Southern California
15 Residential 629 624 614 605 596
16 Commercial – Core 209 208 213 210 206
17 Commercial – Noncore 51 51 51 52 51
18 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 42 43 43 44 45
19 Industrial – Core 54 52 52 51 50
20 Industrial – Noncore 391 386 389 391 393
21 Wholesale 240 241 241 241 240
22 SDG&E + Vernon Electric Generation 113 113 112 106 94 23 Electric Generation(d) 669 667 679 657 611
24 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
25 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 31 31 31 31 30
26 Southern California Total 2,462 2,447 2,457 2,421 2,349 27 Utility Total 4,194 4,111 4,107 4,057 3,974
28 Non-Utility Served Load(e) 1,011 1,007 978 983 969
29 Statewide Gas Requirements Total(f) 5,205 5,118 5,084 5,040 4,943 ________________
Note:
(a) Includes transportation gas.
(b) Electric generation includes cogeneration, PG&E-owned electric generation, and deliveries to power plants connected to the PG&E system. It excludes deliveries by the Kern Mojave and other pipelines. (c) Northern California Total excludes Off-System Deliveries to Southern California. (d) Southern California Electric Generation includes commercial and industrial cogeneration, refinery related cogeneration, EORrelated cogeneration, and non-cogeneration electric generation. (e) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (f) Does not include off-system deliveries.
1398 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-22-
TABLE 7 – STATEWIDE ANNUAL GAS REQUIREMENTS(a)
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2025-2035
Line
No. 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 Residential 464 453 443 413 341
4 Commercial – Core 219 215 212 202 167
5 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 10 11 12 13 16
6 Natural Gas Vehicles – Noncore 6 7 7 8 10
7 Industrial – Noncore 553 551 545 554 560
8 Wholesale 9 9 9 9 9
9 SMUD Electric Generation 117 117 117 117 117
10 PG&E Electric Generation(b) 194 194 191 192 233
11 Exchange (California) 1 1 1 1 1
12 Company Use and Unaccounted for 38 37 37 37 38
13 Northern California Total(c) 1,612 1,593 1,573 1,546 1,491 14 Southern California
15 Residential 589 580 572 547 543
16 Commercial – Core 201 196 192 182 171
17 Commercial – Noncore 52 51 51 51 51
18 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 45 46 47 49 52
19 Industrial – Core 49 48 47 44 39
20 Industrial – Noncore 395 395 391 380 369
21 Wholesale 241 240 240 239 241
22 SDG&E + Vernon Electric Generation 94 91 84 78 78
23 Electric Generation(d) 614 607 577 503 499
24 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
25 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 30 29 29 27 27
26 Southern California Total 2,342 2,317 2,261 2,132 2,103 27 Utility Total 3,954 3,910 3,834 3,677 3,594
28 Non-Utility Served Load (e) 953 936 908 897 750
29 Statewide Gas Requirements Total (f) 4,907 4,846 4,742 4,574 4,343 ________________
Note:
(a) Includes transportation gas.
(b) Electric generation includes cogeneration, PG&E-owned electric generation, and deliveries to power plants connected to the PG&E system. It excludes deliveries by the Kern Mojave and other pipelines. (c) Northern California Total excludes Off-System Deliveries to Southern California. (d) Southern California Electric Generation includes commercial and industrial cogeneration, refinery related cogeneration, EOR-related cogeneration, and non-cogeneration electric generation. (e) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (f) Does not include off-system deliveries.
1399 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-23-
TABLE 8 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS COLD TEMPERATURE(d) AND DRY HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2024
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 California's Supply Sources
2 Utility
3 California Sources 97 97 97 97 97
4 Out-of-State 4,522 4,501 4,489 4,406 4,176
5 Utility Total 4,619 4,598 4,586 4,503 4,273
6 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,045 1,043 1,033 1,038 1,025 7 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,664 5,641 5,619 5,541 5,298 8 California's Requirements
9 Utility
10 Residential 1,235 1,226 1,202 1,186 1,166
11 Commercial 504 503 507 503 498
12 Natural Gas Vehicles 54 56 57 59 60
13 Industrial 1,000 1,000 1,002 999 1,001
14 Electric Generation(b) 1,196 1,184 1,187 1,140 1,076 15 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
16 Wholesale/International + Exchange 264 265 265 265 264 17 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 73 73 73 71 70
18 Utility Total 4,359 4,338 4,326 4,257 4,166
19 Non-Utility
20 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 633 641 639 636 636
21 EOR Cogeneration/Industrial 75 73 70 74 64
22 Electric Generation 338 335 325 324 318
23 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,045 1,048 1,034 1,034 1,018 24 Statewide Requirements Total(c) 5,404 5,387 5,360 5,290 5,184 ________________
Note:
(a) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (b) Includes utility generation, wholesale generation, and cogeneration. (c) The difference between California supply sources and California requirements is PG&E's forecast of off-system deliveries.
(d) 1-in-35 cold year temperature for SoCalGas; 1-in-10 cold year temperature for PG&E. 1400 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-24-
TABLE 9 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS COLD TEMPERATURE(d) AND DRY HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2025-2035
Line
No. 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
1 California's Supply Sources
2 Utility
3 California Sources 97 97 97 97 97
4 Out-of-State 4,049 4,013 3,931 3,756 3,684
5 Utility Total 4,146 4,110 4,028 3,853 3,781
6 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,021 1,013 989 980 777
7 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,167 5,123 5,017 4,833 4,559 8 California's Requirements
9 Utility
10 Residential 1,149 1,129 1,110 1,055 978
11 Commercial 492 483 476 456 409
12 Natural Gas Vehicles 62 63 64 69 76
13 Industrial 1,000 997 985 980 970
14 Electric Generation(b) 1,077 1,073 1,029 933 984
15 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
16 Wholesale/International + Exchange 264 264 263 262 264 17 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 70 70 68 66 67
18 Utility Total 4,146 4,110 4,028 3,853 3,781
19 Non-Utility
20 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 645 648 650 658 672
21 EOR Cogeneration/Industrial 60 59 39 32 10
22 Electric Generation 316 305 300 290 95
23 Non-Utility Served Load(a) 1,021 1,013 989 980 777
24 Statewide Requirements Total(c) 5,167 5,123 5,017 4,833 4,559 ________________
Note:
(a) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (b) Includes utility generation, wholesale generation, and cogeneration. (c) The difference between California supply sources and California requirements is PG&E's forecast of off-system deliveries.
(d) 1-in-35 cold year temperature for SoCalGas; 1-in-10 cold year temperature for PG&E. 1401 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-25-
TABLE 10 – STATEWIDE TOTAL SUPPLY SOURCES-TAKEN
COLD TEMPERATURE (d) and DRY HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2035
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 California Sources(a) 34 34 34 34 34
4 Out-of-State 2,045 1,967 1,939 1,908 1,759
5 Northern California Total 2,079 2,001 1,973 1,942 1,793 6 Southern California
7 California Sources(b) 63 63 63 63 63
8 Out-of-State 2,477 2,534 2,550 2,497 2,417
9 Southern California Total 2,540 2,597 2,613 2,560 2,480 10 Utility Total 4,619 4,598 4,586 4,503 4,273
11 Non-Utility Served Load(c) 1,045 1,043 1,033 1,038 1,025 12 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,664 5,641 5,619 5,541 5,298 13 14 Utility 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
15 Northern California
16 California Sources(a) 34 34 34 34 34
17 Out-of-State 1,639 1,619 1,598 1,570 1,529
18 Northern California Total 1,673 1,653 1,632 1,604 1,563 19 Southern California
20 California Sources(b) 63 63 63 63 63
21 Out-of-State 2,411 2,394 2,334 2,185 2,155
22 Southern California Total 2,474 2,457 2,397 2,248 2,218 23 Utility Total 4,146 4,110 4,028 3,853 3,781
24 Non-Utility Served Load(c) 1,021 1,013 989 980 777
25 Statewide Supply Sources Total 5,167 5,123 5,017 4,833 4,559 ________________
Notes:
(a) Includes utility purchases and exchange/transport gas. (b) Includes utility purchases and exchange/transport gas and City of Long Beach "own-source" gas. (c) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (d) 1-in-35 cold year temperature for SoCalGas; 1-in-10 cold year temperature for PG&E. 1402 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-26-
TABLE 11 – STATEWIDE ANNUAL GAS REQUIREMENTS(a)
COLD TEMPERATURE(g) and DRY HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2020-2024
Line
No. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 Residential 552 549 535 528 517
4 Commercial – Core 234 234 233 232 231
5 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 8 8 9 9 10
6 Natural Gas Vehicles – Noncore 4 5 5 5 5
7 Industrial – Noncore 554 561 560 556 557
8 Wholesale 10 10 10 10 10
9 SMUD Electric Generation 117 117 117 117 117
10 Electric Generation(b) 297 216 204 199 199
11 Exchange (California) 1 1 1 1 1
12 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 41 40 40 39 39
13 Northern California Total(c) 1,819 1,741 1,713 1,696 1,686 14 Southern California
15 Residential 683 677 667 658 648
16 Commercial – Core 218 217 222 219 215
17 Commercial – Noncore 52 52 52 53 52
18 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 42 43 43 44 45
19 Industrial – Core 55 53 53 52 51
20 Industrial – Noncore 391 386 389 391 393
21 Wholesale 253 254 254 254 253
22 SDG&E + Vernon Electric Generation 113 124 126 118 106 23 Electric Generation(d) 669 727 740 706 654
24 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
25 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 32 33 33 32 31
26 Southern California Total 2,540 2,597 2,613 2,560 2,480 27 Utility Total 4,359 4,338 4,326 4,257 4,166
28 Non-Utility Served Load(e) 1,045 1,043 1,033 1,038 1,025 29 Statewide Gas Requirements Total(f) 5,404 5,381 5,359 5,295 5,191 ________________
Note:
(a) Includes transportation gas.
(b) Electric generation includes cogeneration, PG&E-owned electric generation, and deliveries to power plants connected to the PG&E system. It excludes deliveries by the Kern Mojave and other pipelines. (c) Northern California Total excludes Off-System Deliveries to Southern California. (d) Southern California Electric Generation includes commercial and industrial cogeneration, refinery related cogeneration, EORrelated cogeneration, and non-cogeneration electric generation. (e) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (f) Does not include off-system deliveries.
(g) 1-in-35 cold year temperature for SoCalGas; 1-in-10 cold year temperature for PG&E. 1403 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-27-
TABLE 12 – STATEWIDE ANNUAL GAS REQUIREMENTS(a)
COLD TEMPERATURE(g) AND DRY HYDRO YEAR
(MMcf/d)
2025-2035
Line
No. 2025 2026 2027 2030 2035
1 Utility
2 Northern California
3 Residential 508 496 486 457 385
4 Commercial – Core 229 225 222 213 177
5 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 10 11 12 13 16
6 Natural Gas Vehicles – Noncore 6 6 6 7 8
7 Industrial – Noncore 555 552 547 555 561
8 Wholesale 10 10 10 9 9
9 SMUD Electric Generation 117 117 117 117 117
10 Electric Generation(b) 199 197 193 194 249
11 Exchange (California) 1 1 1 1 1
12 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 39 39 38 38 39
13 Northern California Total(c) 1,673 1,653 1,632 1,604 1,563 14 Southern California
15 Residential 641 632 623 598 593
16 Commercial – Core 210 205 201 191 180
17 Commercial – Noncore 53 52 52 52 52
18 Natural Gas Vehicles – Core 45 46 47 49 52
19 Industrial – Core 50 49 48 45 40
20 Industrial – Noncore 395 395 391 380 369
21 Wholesale 254 253 253 252 254
22 SDG&E + Vernon Electric Generation 107 104 98 85 85
23 Electric Generation(d) 654 655 621 537 533
24 Enhanced Oil Recovery Steaming 32 32 32 32 32
25 Company Use and Unaccounted-for 31 31 30 28 28
26 Southern California Total 2,474 2,457 2,397 2,248 2,218 27 Utility Total 4,146 4,110 4,028 3,853 3,781
28 Non-Utility Served Load(e) 1,021 1,013 989 980 777
29 Statewide Gas Requirements Total(f) 5,167 5,123 5,017 4,833 4,559 ________________
Note:
(a) Includes transportation gas.
(b) Electric generation includes cogeneration, PG&E-owned electric generation, and deliveries to power plants connected to the PG&E system. It excludes deliveries by the Kern Mojave and other pipelines. (c) Northern California Total excludes Off-System Deliveries to Southern California. (d) Southern California Electric Generation includes commercial and industrial cogeneration, refinery related cogeneration, EORrelated cogeneration, and non-cogeneration electric generation. (e) Consists of California production and deliveries by El Paso, Kern/Mojave and TGN pipelines to industrial, EOR Cogen, EOR steaming and powerplant customers, and gas consumption at Elk Hills powerplant.
Source: CEC staff-provided forecast results from their own model simulations. (f) Does not include off-system deliveries.
(g) 1-in-35 cold year temperature for SoCalGas; 1-in-10 cold year temperature for PG&E. 1404 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-28-
STATEWIDE RECORDED SOURCES AND DISPOSITION
The Statewide Sources and Disposition Summary complements the existing 5-year recorded data tables included in the tabular data sections for each utility.
The information displayed in the following tables shows the composition of supplies from both out-of-state sources, as well as California sources. The data are based on the utilities’ accounting records and on available gas nomination and preliminary gas transaction information obtained daily from customers or their appointed agents and representatives. It should be noted that data on daily gas nominations are frequently subject to reconciliation adjustments. In addition, some of the data are based on allocations and assignments that, by necessity, rely on estimated information. These tables have been updated to reflect the most current information.
Some columns may not sum exactly because of factored allocation and rounding differences and do not imply curtailments.
1405 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-29-
TABLE 13
– RECORDED 2015 STATEWIDE SOURCES AND DISPOSITION SUMMARY (MMcf/d)
1406 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-30-
TABLE 14
– RECORDED 2016 STATEWIDE SOURCES AND DISPOSITION SUMMARY (MMcf/d)
1407 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-31-
TABLE 15
– RECORDED 2017 STATEWIDE SOURCES AND DISPOSITION SUMMARY (MMcf/d)
1408 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-32-
TABLE 16
– RECORDED 2018 STATEWIDE SOURCES AND DISPOSITION SUMMARY (MMcf/d)
1409 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-33-
TABLE 17
– RECORDED 2019 STATEWIDE SOURCES AND DISPOSITION SUMMARY (MMcf/d)
1410 of 2287
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-34-
STATEWIDE RECORDED HIGHEST SENDOUT
The tables below summarize the highest sendout days by the state in the summer and winter periods from the last 5 years. Daily sendout from SoCalGas, PG&E, and from customers not served by these utilities were used to construct the following tables.
TABLE 18 – CALIFORNIA HIGHEST SENDOUT DAYS
(2015-2019)
ESTIMATED CALIFORNIA HIGHEST SUMMER SENDOUT (MMcf/d)
Year Date PG&E (1)
SoCal
Gas (2)
Utility
Total (4) Non-Utility (3)
State
Total
2015 09/10/2015 2,787 3,601 6,388 1,407 7,795
2016 07/28/2016 2,867 3,136 6,003 1,356 7,359
2017 08/28/2017 2,602 3,484 6,086 1,416 7,502
2018 07/24/2018 2,925 2,926 5,851 1,410 7,261
2019 09/04/2019 2,634 3,106 5,740 1,310 7,050
ESTIMATED CALIFORNIA HIGHEST WINTER SENDOUT
(MMcf/d)
Year Date PG&E (1)
SoCal
Gas (2)
Utility
Total (4) Non-Utility (3)
State
Total
2015 12/29/2015 3,626 4,036 7,662 1,311 8,973
2016 02/02/2016 3,397 3,838 7,235 1,285 8,520
2017 12/21/2017 3,665 3,456 7,121 1,259 8,380
2018 02/20/2018 3,527 3,621 7,148 1,378 8,526
2019 02/05/2019 3,780 4,180 7,960 1,097 9,057
_______________
Notes:
(1) PG&E Pipe Ranger.
(2) SoCalGas Envoy.
(3) Source: Provided by the CEC. Data are from the California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), Monthly Oil and Gas Production and Injection Report. Non-Utility Demand equals Kern-Mojave and California monthly average total flows less PG&E and SoCalGas peak day supply from Kern-Mojave and California in-state production.
(4) PG&E and SoCalGas sendouts are reported for the day on which the Utility Total sendout is maximum for the respective seasons each year. For each calendar year, Winter months are Jan, Feb, Mar, Nov, and Dec; while Summer months are Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, and Oct. 1411 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-35-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
1412 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-36-
INTRODUCTION
PG&E owns and operates an integrated natural gas transmission, underground storage, and distribution system across most of Northern and Central California. As of December 31, 2019, PG&E’s natural gas system consists of approximately 42,800 miles of distribution pipelines, over 6,400 miles of backbone and local transmission pipelines, and three underground storage facilities. PG&E uses its backbone transmission system, composed primarily of Lines 300A, 300B, 400, and 401, to transport gas from its interconnection with interstate pipelines, other local distribution companies, and California gas fields to PG&E’s local transmission and distribution systems.
PG&E provides natural gas procurement, transportation, and storage services to approximately 4.3 million residential customers and over 200,000 commercial and industrial customers. PG&E also provides gas transportation and storage services to a variety of gas-fired EG plants in its service area and serves multiple NGV fleets, including utility owned facilities, with its publicly-accessible fueling stations throughout California. Other wholesale distribution systems, which receive gas transportation service from PG&E, serve a small portion of the gas customers in the region. PG&E’s customers are located in 37 counties from south of Bakersfield to north of Redding, with high concentrations in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. In addition, some customers, including other regulated utilities, also utilize the PG&E system to meet their gas needs in Southern California.
The Northern California section of this report includes PG&E’s gas demand forecast and discussions on gas supply, pipeline capacity, storage, and related policies, as well as the natural gas regulatory environment, including legislative developments and regulatory proceedings.
Finally, the report includes PG&E’s forecast of supply and demand for an Abnormal Peak Day (APD).
What follows is a summary of key takeaways from the Northern California sections of this report.
1413 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-37-
• Gradual Decline in Forecasted Gas Demand: PG&E’s Average Demand7 is projected to decline at an annual average rate of 1.0 percent between 2020 and 2035. The decline in forecasted gas demand is in response to the state’s decarbonization policies and reflects reduced demand due to energy efficiency, building electrification resulting from fuel switching from natural gas appliances to electric, climate change, and an increase in GHG-free EG resources.
• There Is High Uncertainty in Gas Demand Due to Building Electrification: PG&E’s Average Demand forecast reflects the impact of California’s current policies for energy efficiency and the impact of existing and anticipated future policies around building decarbonization. Uncertainty around building electrification, especially retrofits, drives uncertainty in gas demand. In a high electrification scenario,8 PG&E projects on-system gas demand to decline at an annual average rate of 1.3 percent between 2020 and 2035. In a low electrification scenario, PG&E projects gas on-system demand to decline at an annual average rate of 0.8 percent between 2020 and 2035. The rate of decrease for both scenarios is non-linear, with larger rates of decrease in the later years of the forecast. • Current Forecast Does Not Reflect Impact From COVID-19 pandemic on Gas Throughput: When PG&E was preparing the gas throughput forecast for this report, economic shocks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic suddenly appeared. The lasting economic impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic are highly uncertain. As a result, this report does not attempt to forecast COVID-19 pandemic impacts on gas demand. As events unfold and reliable economic and policy forecasts become available, PG&E will consider such information.
• Without Policy Solutions and a Managed Transition from Fossil Fuel to Other Energy Forms, Lower Forecasted Gas Demand Could Put Upward Pressure on Customer Gas Costs and Rates: PG&E is committed to working with the regulators and other stakeholders to support the statewide GHG reduction policies and develop options to minimize rate increases. PG&E is doing this by safely reducing costs and maximizing utilization of existing infrastructure. To reduce costs, PG&E is pursuing opportunities to systematically retire infrastructure (where possible) and reduce capital and operating 7 Gas demand projection for an average temperature year and normal hydroelectric generation (hydro) year representing on-system demand.
8 See “Gas Demand, Future Gas Demand Trends and Policy,” section for details. 1414 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-38-
expenses through PG&E’s Integrated Investment Planning. To increase utilization, PG&E is implementing programs to decarbonize existing gas throughput, supporting Renewable Gas (RG) adoption across new industries with existing gas system infrastructure, and adapting to utilize the gas system as a large-scale and long-duration storage mechanism for Green H2.
There are broad opportunities for load growth that can help decarbonize the economy, such as marine, rail, and surface-transportation applications.
Regulatory bodies and investor-owned utilities (IOU) should work together to ensure that Californians continue to have access to clean, reliable, and affordable energy. In support of these important goals, PG&E is actively participating in the Biomethane Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) (Rulemaking (R.) 13-02-008) and the Gas System Planning OIR (R.20-01-007). Both OIRs address crucial topics that will impact the future of the California gas system. In addition to the efforts currently underway, additional steps need to be taken to adequately address:
• The possible impacts of climate change policies and laws on gas throughput and the cost structure of existing and future gas assets; and
• The barriers to Renewable Gas Standard9 (RGS).
10 The current investment and incentives for RG principally favor the transportation sector resulting in little RG available to establish a consistent RGS. If this is to change, California will have to balance the funding mechanisms between the transportation sector and a potential RGS so that RG project developers have opportunities to supply RG towards an RGS or the transportation sector.
9 A carbon-based standard for California’s gas supply.
10 An RGS does not currently exist. However, with implementation of SB 1440 through Phase IV of the Biomethane OIR and legislation that was proposed earlier this year (SB 1352), it is clear that there is some momentum to establishing an RGS that would require the utility to procure a certain percentage of RG for core gas customers (similar to the RPS on the electric side). 1415 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-39-
GAS DEMAND
OVERVIEW
PG&E’s 2020 CGR Average Demand forecast projects total on-system demand11 to decline at annual average rate of 1.0 percent between 2020 and 2035. This is due to the combination of a projected annual decline of 2.3 percent in the core market and a projected annual decline of
0.2 percent in the noncore market.
Different factors drive the gas demand decline projection. This projected decline could result in gas system operating and maintenance costs spread over lower usage, causing customer gas rates to increase. Consequently, PG&E and statewide utility stakeholders will need to continue their involvement to mitigate customer rate increases. Additional gas throughput offsetting lower carbon intensive fuel uses could help spread costs more evenly.
This chapter includes PG&E’s gas demand forecast and begins with a description of the forecast method, including assumptions driving the projection. After the methodology discussion, a sectorial forecast explanation follows for the Average Demand Year. To provide more robustness to the Average Demand Year forecast, scenarios show how demand looks under cold weather and dry hydroelectric conditions. The discussion finishes with gas demand policies, trends and impacts.
11 Excludes off-system sales. 1416 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-40-
FIGURE 5 – PG&E AVERAGE DEMAND YEAR GAS FORECAST
As shown in the above chart, total on-system gas demand for PG&E’s gas system is projected to decline at an annual average rate of 1.0 percent between 2020 and 2035. 12 Core
demand is projected to decline by an annual average rate of 2.3 percent over the 2020-2035 forecast horizon, driven by increasing energy efficiency, increasing building electrification, and a warming climate. Noncore non-EG demand is projected to remain relatively unchanged over the forecast horizon, as potential demand growth is offset by energy efficiency and increasing gas prices. Finally, the rate of growth of the noncore EG forecast decreases due to higher levels of renewable generation to meet the 60 percent requirement in 2030, 13 more electric storage, and
higher burner-tip gas prices for Northern California electric generators. In this projection, total gas demand by electric generators14 and cogenerators in Northern California15 decreases at
0.6 percent per year from 2020 through 2035. This projection assumes average hydrological conditions.
12 With the inclusion of off-system demand, the projection declines at an annual average rate of
1.9 percent between 2020 and 2035.
13 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/.
14 This gas demand forecast excludes gas delivered by non-utility pipelines to electric generators and cogenerators in PG&E’s service area, such as deliveries by the Kern/Mojave pipelines to the La Paloma and Sunrise plants in Central California.
15 Northern California electric generation gas demand consists of the generation fleet north of Path 26. 0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027--- 2030--- 2035 Bcf/Year Other
Non-Core, EG
Non-Core, Non-EG
Core, NonResidential
Core, Residential
1417 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-41-
FORECAST METHOD
PG&E’s gas demand forecasts for the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors are developed using econometric models as the foundation. These models are then modified to incorporate assumptions around future policy formation and technology adoption. Forecasts for NGVs and wholesale customers are developed based on market information and historical trends over the past five years. Forecasts of gas demand by power plants are developed by modeling the electricity market in the WECC using MarketBuilder software.
While variation in short-term gas use depends mainly on prevailing weather conditions and gas prices, longer-term projections in gas demand are driven primarily by changes in:
• Customer usage patterns influenced by underlying economic, demographic, and technological changes, such as growth in population and employment; • Forecasted prices;
• Growth in electricity demand;
• Growth of renewable generation;
• Efficiency profiles of residential and commercial buildings and the appliances within them; and
• Impacts from climate change.
In the 2020 CGR, the development of the forecasts comes at the same time as the initial impact of the global experience with the COVID-19 disease.16 PG&E recognizes that COVID-19 will impact natural gas demand. However, there is considerable uncertainty around the economic impact from COVID-19. For example, it is uncertain how broadly, deeply, and for how long reduced economic activity will persist. It is also unclear whether the public response to the virus will change consumption behavior patterns. Forecasting the load impacts of these factors requires strong assumptions on the epidemiological and political course of the pandemic.
Therefore, PG&E’s current forecast relies on long-term forecast assumptions and tools to project gas demand and does not attempt to reflect the current and nearer-term impacts of COVID-19.
What follows is an explanation of PG&E’s forecast assumptions, as well as scenario analyses 16 https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance. 1418 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-42-
that illustrate various potential outcomes from these assumptions. PG&E notes that these scenarios cannot capture all uncertainties.
ASSUMPTIONS
Temperature
Space heating accounts for a high percentage of use. Therefore, gas requirements for PG&E’s residential and commercial customers are sensitive to prevailing temperature conditions. PG&E’s Average Demand year forecast assumes that temperatures in the forecast period will be equivalent to the average of observed temperatures during the past 20 years, with the addition of a temperature adjustment for climate change. Adding the climate change adjustment has little impact to the temperature assumptions in the early years of the forecast; however, the later years begin to show the effects of a warming climate. For example, by 2035 the total December/January heating degree days (HDD) are projected to be 8 percent below the 20-year average, lowering core throughput by approximately 6 percent.
Actual temperatures in the forecast period will be higher or lower than those assumed in the climate-change scenario and gas use will vary accordingly. PG&E’s high-demand forecast assumes that winter temperatures in the forecast horizon will have a 1-in-10 likelihood of occurrence and have the same hydro conditions as those that prevailed during 2015 (This year represents the lowest hydroelectric generation over the past 20 years).
PG&E’s EG gas throughput forecast uses an average temperature approach. The forecast does not capture peak day temperatures. Each summer typically contains a few heat waves with temperatures 10 to 15 degrees F above normal. This leads to peak electricity demands and drives up power plant gas demand. However, this forecast captures the seasonal variations on a monthly basis.
Hydroelectric Conditions Assumptions
In contrast to temperature deviations, annual water runoff for hydroelectric plants has varied by 50 percent above and below the long-term annual average. PG&E uses a vintage approach to WECC hydroelectric generation by assuming average generation for the most recent 20 historical years, 1998-2017, in the average year demand forecast. PG&E uses a cold/dry hydro conditions scenario to forecast impacts from extreme conditions impacting both Core space heating demand 1419 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-43-
and EG. PG&E uses the hydroelectric generation conditions for the calendar year 2015 to represent the dry hydroelectric condition.
Gas Price and Rate Assumptions
Inputs for gas prices and transportation rate assumptions are important for forecasting gas demand; this is especially true for market sectors that are particularly price sensitive, such as industrial or EG. PG&E used the gas commodity price forecast described in detail in the Southern California section. It combines current transportation rates with the gas commodity price forecast. PG&E’s forecast assumes that changes to throughput do not directly impact rates.
As a reminder, natural gas price forecasts are inherently uncertain and impact market sectors sensitive to price.
Electric Load Assumptions
PG&E’s forecast relies on the mid-case electricity demand forecast from the CEC 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR). The IEPR captures the increasing load projected as electric vehicles become more commonplace. The electric demand forecast includes a component of building electrification as some local jurisdictions require new building construction to use electricity rather than natural gas.
Electric Generation Resource and Electric Transmission Assumptions With increasing electric load and more stringent environmental requirements, California’s portfolio of EG resources is expected to change significantly over the forecast horizon to 2035.
Generation resources come from the 2019-2020 CPUC Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Reference System Plan (RSP) from February 2020. The RSP proposes a target resource mix that includes new renewable resources, as well as energy storage resources. Renewable energy generation provides 33 percent of the state’s retail sales in 2020 and is targeted to provide 60 percent by 2030. The gas-fired generation fleet in California will continue to change due to the California State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) once-through cooling rules.
Gas-fired plants that employ once-through cooling are assumed to retire by the compliance dates 1420 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-44-
set by the SWRCB in conjunction with the CPUC direction,17 with some re-powered by new gas-fired units. Lastly, modeled electric transmission import capacity aligns with the RSP.
This forecast does not include A/S impacts on gas demand. As intermittent renewable energy generation increases, more electric resources will be needed to provide A/S, such as regulation. A/S will likely be provided by energy storage resources and gas-fired power plants, thus, affecting gas demand to some extent. This impact requires a more granular forecasting methodology than used for this forecast.
For cogeneration gas demand, PG&E’s forecast follows the RSP. Cogeneration gas demand mimics recent past usage throughout the forecast period. Most cogeneration plants are not strongly affected by prices in the wholesale electricity market. The electricity generated comes from some other industrial process, usually steam, and generation does not follow wholesale electric prices. Consequently, the cogeneration gas demand projection exhibits no variation throughout the forecast horizon.
MARKET SECTOR FORECASTS
RESIDENTIAL
Households in the PG&E service area are forecasted to grow 0.9 percent annually from 2020-2035. However, gas use per household has been dropping in recent years due to improvements in appliance and building-shell efficiencies. PG&E expects continued efficiency improvements, coupled with the following emerging trends, to decrease long-term residential gas demand.
1. As of April 2020, 30 cities in California passed local ordinance codes promoting the installation of all-electric appliances in new household construction. PG&E provides natural gas service to many of these cities. While the number of households are forecasted to grow at 0.9 percent annually, PG&E anticipates many of these households to install electric-only appliances.
17 Final Recommended Compliance Date Extensions for Alamitos, Huntington Beach, Ormond Beach, and Redondo Beach Generation Stations SACCWIS Report, January 23, 2020:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/ocean/cwa316/saccwis/docs/final _report.pdf.
1421 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-45-
2. In addition to new construction building electrification, PG&E’s forecast anticipates that existing households will begin to convert appliances from gas to electric driven by the formation of state or local policies, customer cost savings, or other mechanisms.
3. Finally, PG&E’s forecast anticipates that the warming climate will gradually decrease residential gas sales.
Total annual residential demand is projected to continue declining, driven by efficiency gains, building and appliance electrification, and warming temperatures. By 2035, annual residential gas throughput is projected to be 33 percent lower than forecasted 2020 throughput, with most of this decrease occurring in the later years of the forecast.
COMMERCIAL
The number of commercial customers in the PG&E service area is projected to grow on average by 0.3 percent per year from 2020-2035. Similar to the residential customer class, PG&E expects new construction and retrofit building electrification, coupled with continuing energy efficiency and climate change, to lead to a long-term decline in commercial throughput.
As a result, total commercial gas demand is projected to decline at 1.9 percent per year over the next 15 years.
INDUSTRIAL
Gas requirements for PG&E’s industrial sector are affected by the level and type of industrial activity in the service area and changes in industrial processes. Gas demand from this sector declined by close to 20 percent in 2001 due to a combination of increasing gas prices, noncore-to-core migration, and a manufacturing sector mired in a severe downturn. After a slight recovery in 2002, demand from this sector fell another 6 percent in 2003 but has seen slow growth in the recent past due to low natural gas prices and increased capacity at local refineries, though these effects have been tempered by the continuing structural change in California’s manufacturing sector. PG&E observed historically high demand from the industrial sector in 2016 and 2017 due in part to refinery demand. While the industrial sector has the potential for high year-to-year variability, over the long-term, industrial gas consumption is expected to be 1422 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-46-
relatively flat, with a projected 0.1 percent annual growth rate over the next 15 years as energy efficiency and future gas prices offset growth.18
ELECTRIC GENERATION
Gas demand from EG includes gas-fired cogeneration and power plants. Forecasts for this sector are subject to high uncertainty due to:
• Future gas prices, the combination of the commodity and transportation; • Impact of electrification of appliances on electric load; • Timing, location, and type of new generation, particularly renewable-energy facilities; • Precipitation driving hydroelectric generation; and
• Impacts of GHG policies and regulations on generation.
These factors exhibit wide variation with unknown future policy direction that influences gas demand.
Historically, gas demand for EG varied due to these factors above. Over the past 5 years, 2015-2019, demand averaged 770 MMcf/d. In 2017, demand was 650 MMcf/d. One of the major drivers of this low demand came from a high hydroelectric generation period from ample precipitation in the Western U.S. For 2015, EG used about 1,000 MMcf/d. This year represented a low level of hydroelectric generation as drought conditions persisted in 2014 and 2015. For a good portion of 2019, gas prices were less in Northern California than Southern California causing more gas use in the PG&E service territory. The variation demonstrates that demand can be 30 percent higher than average or 15 percent lower than average over the past five years. As more renewable generation projects come online, the industry expects a decline in EG gas demand.
PG&E’s forecast for gas use in cogeneration and power generation projects a decline.
One of the leading factors to this decline in the near-term comes from the gas price forecast. The gas price forecast shows Northern California prices higher than Southern California. This places the Northern California gas-fired EG plants at a competitive disadvantage compared to plants farther south. The gas price forecast drives the near-term results with 2020 demand around 18 PG&E’s industrial forecast includes impacts from California’s Cap-and-Trade policies. Future GHG policies may impact industrial demand, adding uncertainty to the forecast. 1423 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-47-
400 MMcf/d that decreases to 313 MMcf/d in 2021. Consequently, southern-based units should see an uptick in generation based on this forecast.
As renewable generation and storage capacity increase throughout the forecast period, gas-fired generation further decreases. The RPS calls for renewable generation to be 33 percent of electric retail sales in 2020. By 2030, the RPS target percentage increases to 60 percent.
Meanwhile, storage increases in the long-term coupled with capacity increases for renewable generation and the gas price forecast assumptions decrease the gas demand projection by
0.6 percent per year.
SMUD ELECTRIC GENERATION
SMUD is the sixth largest community-owned municipal utility in the U.S. and provides electric service to over 575,000 customers within the greater Sacramento area. SMUD operates three cogeneration plants, a gas-fired combined-cycle plant, and a peaking turbine with a total capacity of approximately 1,000 megawatts (MW). The peak gas load of these units is approximately 171 MMcf/d, and the average load is about 117 MMcf/d. This forecast assumes the average load of 117 MMcf/d, which is embedded in this forecast.
SMUD owns and operates a pipeline connecting the Cosumnes combined-cycle plant and the three cogeneration plants to PG&E’s backbone system near Winters, California. SMUD owns an equity interest of approximately 3.6 percent in PG&E’s Line 300 and approximately
4.2 percent in Line 401 for about 86 MMcf/d of capacity.
FORECAST SCENARIOS
The Average Demand year gas demand forecast presented above is a reasonable projection for an uncertain future. However, a point forecast cannot capture the uncertainty in the major determinants of gas demand (e.g., weather, economic activity, decarbonization policies, appliance saturation, and efficiencies). Therefore, to capture uncertainties in gas demand, PG&E developed three alternative forecast scenarios of gas demand. The first scenario reflects a high gas demand situation. The second and third scenarios examine the impacts of low and high building electrification.
HIGH DEMAND SCENARIO: COLD/DRY HYDRO YEAR
For the high-demand scenario, PG&E relied on cold temperature conditions combined with dry hydro conditions. This forecast assumes that winter temperatures over the time horizon will 1424 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-48-
have a 1-in-10 likelihood of occurrence. To represent dry hydroelectric conditions throughout the WECC, this forecast assumes the same hydroelectric generation conditions as those that prevailed during 2015.
The cold weather assumption increases electric load for space heating needs and impacts EG gas demand. The dry hydroelectric conditions show a need for incremental EG.
The gas demand impacts from this scenario project annual demand increasing 4 percent on average over the average year demand forecast. The cold weather impact represents the major driver in the gas throughput increase due to higher space heating. Winter monthly core throughput is projected to increase by 9 to 15 percent. The noncore industrial segment demonstrates little correlation to temperature leading to an insignificant demand increase over the average year demand forecast.
This scenario projects that EG gas demand increases by 1 to 8 percent. Hydroelectric resources in California represents 47 percent of the 20-year average. Broadly speaking, hydroelectric generation conditions in the rest of the WECC reflect near normal conditions.
Electric imports from Southern California help meet the incremental electric load and hydroelectric generation decrement based on current projections for gas commodity prices and transportation rates. However, hydroelectric conditions vary widely. Dry hydroelectric conditions throughout the Western U.S. would raise the EG gas use on the PG&E gas system resulting in a different forecast.
SCENARIOS EVALUATING BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION
PG&E’s Average Demand year forecast contains a projected level of new construction19 and retrofit20 building electrification; however, PG&E recognizes the uncertainty in this forecast. While a number of cities across California have demonstrated an interest in forming policies that incentivize building electrification or ban the installation of gas appliances in new residences, there has been very little historical adoption to inform a long-term forecast of building electrification. This is particularly true when forecasting the conversion of existing 19 New construction building electrification applies to residences subject to new construction building codes and standards. This includes brand new homes and homes undergoing renovations large enough to trigger new construction building codes and standards. 20 Retrofit building electrification applies to the conversion of individual appliances from gas to electric in an existing residence that does not undergo a renovation large enough to be classified as new construction. 1425 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-49-
building appliance stock from gas to electric, which poses multiple barriers to adoption including the remaining lifecycle of existing appliances, the upfront cost of conversion, and the economics of consuming energy in the form of gas versus electricity. PG&E’s Average Demand year forecast assumes these barriers are overcome to some extent as a result of state and local funding, technology development, and emerging policies, but recognizes the future could unfold in many different ways.
To illustrate the high degree of uncertainty in retrofit building electrification, PG&E has constructed two scenarios, in addition to the Average Demand year forecast, to analyze low and high levels of retrofit building electrification. To create these scenarios, adoption assumptions were modified in two ways. The first scenario, low electrification retrofit, modifies gas load by substituting 2 percent of residential gas water heater stocks to electric by 2030. This scenario assumes such substitution occurs for single family housing and does not occur for multifamily housing.. For the commercial sector, 3 percent of gas water heaters and space heaters are assumed to be electrified by 2030. The second scenario, high electrification retrofit, assumes higher levels of appliance substitution of water- and gas-heaters.
Table 19 below shows the percentage of existing gas fuel appliances to be replaced by electric appliances by the end of 2030 under different scenarios.
TABLE 19 – PG&E SERVICE AREA ASSUMPTION FOR PERCENTAGE OF GAS APPLIANCES
REPLACED BY ELECTRIC APPLIANCES
Scenario
Residential Commercial
Water
Heater
Space
Heater
Water
Heater
Space
Heater
Low Retrofit Scenario 2% – 3% 3%
Base Retrofit Scenario* 6% 2% 10% 8%
High Retrofit Scenario 19% 6% 34% 29%
*The appliance replacement percentage is approximate since the Base Scenario is a weighted average of multiple retrofit scenarios.
1426 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-50-
The following figure shows the impact of the different levels of building electrification.
FIGURE 6 – PG&E SERVICE AREA: CORE GAS THROUGHPUT
BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION RETROFIT SCENARIOS
As shown in the figure above, the level of retrofit building electrification significantly impacts the forecasted long-term trend of core gas throughput. Core throughput is projected to decline in all scenarios driven by energy efficiency, climate change, and building electrification for both new construction and building retrofits. The level of long-term decline varies significantly depending on the amount of building retrofits. The table below highlights the average annual percent decrease for the three forecasts, dividing the forecast horizon into three 5-year periods.
TABLE 20 – PG&E CORE THROUGHPUT AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES Forecast 2020-2025 2025-2030 2030-2035
Low Retrofit Electrification Scenario -1.2% -1.3% -1.5% Average Year Demand Forecast -1.3% -2.0% -3.7%
High Retrofit Electrification Scenario -2.2% -3.5% -5.4% Although building electrification causes core gas throughput to decline, it may increase natural gas demand for EG. The forecast from 2030-2035 illustrates the projected impact. In PG&E’s Average Demand year forecast, EG gas demand is forecasted to increase by 13 percent, mainly driven by transportation and building 1427 of 2287 electrification.
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-51-
However, uncertainties are not bounded within these scenarios. The impact of electrification could see no increase in natural gas demand or could grow by about 30 MMcf/d.
The EG load may be at or near zero if the additional electric load is served by excess renewable generation. Absent this, the increase in gas-fired EG could be served by non-fossil natural gas, such as Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) or H2. Other factors could come into play, such as electric generators buying carbon offsets for the use of fossil-based natural gas or use technologies not yet commercialized, such as carbon capture and storage. How the future unfolds is uncertain.
POLICIES IMPACTING GAS DEMAND
During the forecast horizon covered by this CGR, there are many policies that may significantly impact the future trajectory of natural gas demand. Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 set a goal to reduce annual GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. EO B-55-18 set a goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill (AB) 32) established the 2020 GHG emission reduction goal into law. SB 32 went further, calling for a 40 percent reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 levels by 2030. These goals are being accomplished by a suite of complementary policies, as well as the Cap-and-Trade Program, which was directly authorized through 2030 with the passage of AB 398.
GHG POLICIES
The gas demand forecast includes a GHG price projection.21 The forecast incorporates complementary policies that aim to achieve California state GHG emissions reductions goals. (See below for further discussion of these policies.) Any trends embedded in historical demand patterns due to GHG goals and/or the compliance entities’ participation in the Cap-and-Trade market translates to the forecast.
Since early 2019, several California local government jurisdictions have passed ordinances supporting all-electric new construction or explicitly limiting the expansion of the gas system.
This increase in local government activity within PG&E’s service territory could contribute to a decline in gas system throughput through the forecast horizon of the CGR and beyond. 21 CEC Integrated Energy Policy Report mid-case forecast to 2030. Extrapolated to 2035 using the real adder to the floor price (5 percent rate). 1428 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-52-
The ongoing OIR to Establish Policies, Processes, and Rules to Ensure Safe and Reliable Gas Systems in California and perform Long-Term Gas System Planning (R.20-01-07) could also have a significant influence on future trends in gas system throughput. In particular, the second track of that proceeding will focus on long-term gas system planning and will warrant active participation from industry stakeholders.
Another uncertainty comes from how GHG policy implementation will be executed.
SB 100 has a zero net GHG emissions goal. How this goal will be attained lacks clarity. If the zero net GHG emission goal is attained using more renewable generation and high levels of electric storage, for example, then EG gas demand may not increase in the long-term.
Given that the utilization of fossil natural gas emits GHGs, PG&E believes that RG must be part of the solution to reach California’s GHG reduction goals. PG&E will continue to minimize GHG emissions by pursuing both demand-side reductions and acquisition of preferred resources, which produce little or no carbon emissions.
RENEWABLE ELECTRIC GENERATION
PG&E expects renewable EG to grow due to current RPS and the IRP Proceeding at the CPUC. While this increase in renewable generation will put downward pressure on the demand for generation from natural gas-fueled resources, the intermittent nature of some renewable generation (e.g., wind or solar power) will cause the electric system to rely more heavily on natural gas-fired EG to cover forecast deviations and intra-day and intra-hour variability of intermittent generation.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS
PG&E engages in many Energy Efficiency and conservation (EE) programs designed to help customers identify and implement ways to benefit environmentally and financially from EE investments. Programs administered by PG&E include services that help customers evaluate their EE options and adopt recommended solutions, as well as simple equipment-retrofit improvements, such as rebates for new hot water heaters.
The forecast of cumulative natural gas savings due to PG&E’s EE programs is provided in the figures below. Savings for these efforts are based on the CPUC’s Potential and Goal Study that informs Additional Achievable Energy Efficiency (AAEE) forecast in the CEC’s California 1429 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-53-
Energy Demand 2020-2030 Revised Forecast.22 The savings below include any interactive effects that may result from efficiency improvements of electric end uses; for example, efficiency improvements in lighting and electric appliances may lead to increased natural gas heating load. In the case of lighting, replacing a less efficient light bulb with a more efficient light bulb (e.g., replacing an incandescent with a light-emitting diode) that releases less heat leads to a lesser need for space cooling energy in summer and to a greater need for space heating energy in winter.
FIGURE 7 – PG&E SERVICE AREA: NATURAL GAS SAVINGS FROM EE PROGRAMS Details of PG&E’s 2018-2025 Energy Efficiency Portfolio can be found in Commission D.18-05-041, which authorized programs and budgets through 2025, and D.19-08-034, which adopted goals for these programs for 2020.
22 The California Energy Demand and the AAEE results are on the CEC’s website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/AAEE%20Preliminary%20Results%2010-18- 19_ada.pdf.
1430 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-54-
IMPACT OF SB 350 ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY
SB 350, which was enacted in fall 2015, requires the CEC, in coordination with the CPUC and the local public utilities, to set EE targets that double the CEC’s AAEE mid-case forecast, subject to what is cost-effective and feasible.23 The CEC issued its final report on SB 350 EE targets in October 2017,24 and the CPUC incorporated higher levels of EE savings in their EE goals for 2018 and beyond. The CEC’s final report suggests the state is on a path to meet or exceed the natural gas SB 350 doubling goal after accounting for IOU programs, POU programs, and codes and standards.25
IMPACT OF REACH CODES AND ELECTRIFICATION
In California, cities and counties have enacted reach codes that require a substitution away from natural gas appliances to electric appliances. This substitution from gas to electric is termed electrification. By February 2020, about 30 local jurisdictions have adopted reach codes.26 This historical trend may continue its current projection or could change in other ways, either increasing or reversing at some unknown magnitude. Electrification, consequently, appears to be adding electric load in the long-term while removing sources of growth in gas demand.
The impact from electrification could be addressed in multiple ways. For example, the current RPS requirement states that 60 percent of system electric sales will be generated from renewable resources in 2030. As electrification increases load after 2030, the RPS requirement 23 The bill text states:
“On or before November 1, 2017, the commission, in collaboration with the Public Utilities Commission and local publicly owned electric utilities, in a public process that allows input from other stakeholders, shall establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses of retail customers by January 1, 2030. The commission shall base the targets on a doubling of the mid case estimate of additional achievable energy efficiency savings, as contained in the California Energy Demand Updated Forecast, 2015-2025, adopted by the commission, extended to 2030 using an average annual growth rate, and the targets adopted by local publicly owned electric utilities pursuant to Section 9505 of the Public Utilities Code, extended to 2030 using an average annual growth rate, to the extent doing so is cost effective, feasible, and will not adversely impact public health and safety.” 24 Jones, Melissa, Michael Jaske, Michael Kenney, Brian Samuelson, Cynthia Rogers, Elena Giyenko, and Manjit Ahuja. 2017. SB 350: Doubling Energy Efficiency Savings by 2030. CEC. Publication Number: CEC-400-2017-010-CMF.
25 See Figure 2 from the CEC report cited above.
26 https://www.sierraclub.org/articles/2020/03/californias-cities-lead-way-gas-free-future. 1431 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-55-
could increase and mitigate the use of natural gas for EG. The timing of the additional electric load within the day along with the intermittency characteristics of California’s renewable resources will impact EG gas demand.
Even if EG gas demand increases, the effort to achieve the GHG emissions goal may come by differing gas supply options. The natural gas supply sources could be a clean version in the form of RNG or H2. The next chapter on natural gas supply will elaborate on these potential gas supplies.
FUTURE GAS DEMAND TRENDS AND POLICY
PG&E’s gas demand forecast projects lower throughput over the long term (due to GHG policies, such as electrification and RPS) which would show a decline in revenues at current rates. At the same time, policies on safe utility operations have put upward pressure on costs.
Investments into long lived assets, such as gas pipelines, are typically recovered over the assets’ useful lives, which extend beyond this forecast. The combination of lower throughput and remaining investment in need of being recovered will put upward pressure on gas transportation rates. PG&E estimates that the declining throughput represented in the Average Demand year forecast and the scenarios could result in an increase to residential gas rates of approximately 60 percent to 100 percent by 2035 as compared to 2020. These estimates exclude changes to commodity costs, California GHG Emission Allowance costs, or authorized base revenue requirements.27
In addition, the transition from fossil fuel to other forms of energy usage needs to be carefully planned and managed. PG&E is committed to working with regulators and other stakeholders to support the statewide GHG reduction policies and develop options to minimize rate increase for the remaining gas customers.
Another high horsepower sector to consider for increasing gas throughput is rail transportation. Based on a study by the California Air Resource Board (CARB) from 2016, annual statewide locomotive diesel fuel consumption totals about 260 million gallons. Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) combined interstate and intrastate 27 The increase of 60 percent to 100 percent is based on nominal dollars. The gas rate increase in real dollars is approximately 35 percent to 50 percent.
1432 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-56-
locomotives account for 93 percent of this fuel usage, California’s passenger locomotives are 6 percent, and the remaining 1 percent is from military industrial locomotives. 28 LNG as a fuel source has been considered by the rail industry, but thus far has been mostly limited to pilot studies. Based on conversations with representatives from UP, BNSF, and CARB, some of the key obstacles to LNG locomotive adoption include: few, if any, new locomotives are planned to be purchased in the near future, the high cost of converting the fueling infrastructure from diesel to LNG, and current emission standards don’t adequately promote fuels cleaner than low sulfur diesel. Additionally, because LNG has an energy density of approximately 60 percent that of diesel, its use for long interstate routes would require increased fuel storage volume. This comes in the form of an LNG tender, which is an additional railcar that includes an insulated cryogenic tank and other equipment to convert LNG back to CNG. The added tender increases cost and complexity to the fuel transition. 29 One possible path to greater LNG locomotive adoption is higher emissions standards.
Locomotive emissions are governed by the U.S. EPA. Currently, their strictest emission level is Tier 4 and applies to locomotives manufactured in 2015 or later. In g/bhp-hr it limits nitrogen oxide (NOx), particulate matter (PM), and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions to 1.3, 0.03, and 0.14 respectively.
30 In 2017, CARB petitioned to the U.S. EPA to consider adopting a new, stricter, Tier 5 standard with a proposed effective date of 2025. The Tier 5 standard would limit NOx, PM, and HC emissions to 0.2, <0.01, and 0.02.
31 Thus far, there does not appear to be any
movement by the U.S. EPA to adopt the proposed Tier 5 standard.
Without policy solutions and a managed transition from fossil fuel to other energy forms, the increase in residential rates would be even higher. Gridworks’ most extreme estimate for their High Building Electrification – No Transition Strategy scenario could result in residential rates of $19/therm by 2050 (2018 dollars) compared to then-current residential rates near $1.37/therm. 28 CARB. (2016). Technology Assessment: Freight Locomotives. Sacramento: California Air Resource Board.
29 Ibid.
30 CFR 1033.101 (https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?SID=159ba6f126272ea1995c71a43b7af309&mc=true&node=pt40.36.1033&rgn=div5#se40.36. 1033_1101).
31 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
07/final_locomotive_petition_and_cover_letter_4_3_17.pdf. 1433 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-57-
The drivers to those higher rates come from lower projected gas throughput, higher GHG Emission Allowance costs, and the potential for added infrastructure investment costs. 32 To minimize the rate increase for the remaining gas customers, PG&E is following a two-pronged approach while keeping safety as its top priority: (1) reduce cost and (2) maximize utilization. To reduce cost, PG&E is pursuing opportunities to systematically retire infrastructure (where possible) and reduce capital and operating expenses through PG&E’s Integrated Investment Planning. To increase utilization of existing infrastructure, PG&E is actively planning for and implementing programs to decarbonize existing gas throughput, exploring new opportunities to support RG adoption across new industries, increase load on the natural gas system in areas that would replace less favorable hydrocarbon (e.g., marine, rail and transportation sectors) and seek opportunities to utilize the gas system as a long-term and large scale storage mechanism. Gridworks, with a mission to convene, educate and empower stakeholders working to decarbonize electricity grids, published its report33 that shows these tactics may not be sufficient. Other avenues to explore include aligning financial recovery of gas infrastructure investment with their useful lives and adjusting ratemaking for effective cost recovery.
FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES
One recent development that could improve the outlook for throughput comes from the June 2020 California Air Resources Board (CARB) approval of the Advance Clean Truck (ACT) Regulation. This regulation requires increasing percentages of all new medium- and heavy-duty trucks sales in California to be zero-emission vehicles (ZEV)34. The regulation begins in 2024 with sales percentages ranging between 5 percent and 9 percent depending on truck or chassis type. By 2035, the percentages increase to a range of 40 percent to 75 percent. 32 Then-current rate based on June 2020 G1 (Residential Service) tariff and $19/therm based on Gridworks’ report California’s Gas System In Transition, Equitable, Affordable, Decarbonized, and Smaller: https://gridworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/CA_Gas_System_in_Transition.pdf. 33 California’s Gas System in Transition: Equitable, Affordable, Decarbonize and Smaller, Gridworks, 2019: https://gridworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/CA_Gas_System_in_Transition.pdf. 34 ZEVs are defined as either battery electric or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. 1434 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-58-
Truck manufactures may choose hydrogen fuel cells as they decide how to meet this requirement. The hydrogen required for this could be transported via utility gas pipelines (under appropriate safety protocols) which could mitigate the potential for increasing customer costs.
Another potential growth area for gas throughput is the marine transportation sector which is increasingly looking at reducing its SOx and GHG emissions. This is orchestrated by The International Maritime Organization (IMO) which regulates global shipping emissions under Annex VI.
35 The IMO updated Annex VI on January 1, 2020 to target reductions in nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx). To reduce SOx, the Sulphur limit for all marine fuels was dropped from 3.50 percent m/m (mass by mass) to 0.50 percent m/m.
The consensus in the marine fuel industry is that the 0.50 percent Sulphur limit is only a stop on the way to a global 0.10 percent Sulphur limit, which currently exists in several Emissions Control Areas (ECA)36 around the globe. Moving to 0.10 percent would necessitate using road grade diesel fuel as bunker fuel, therefore increasing fuel cost. Refining companies would need to further invest in hydrodesulfurization, which is costly to build and operate.
The push towards lowering SOx is driven by environmental groups, government regulations, and the shipping industry itself. Large European container companies are driving it as part of their corporate carbon strategies,
37 managing their fuel costs while doing so.
LNG is widely recognized as the best path forward to reduce SOx and GHG for marine purposes but has not seen much growth the previous decade. The updated IMO Annex VI are changing that, spurring investments in bunkering equipment38 and vessels. 39 LNG is also seen
as the most practical way to de-carbonize the shipping industry as the fuel can be made from Renewable Gas and, further out, Green Hydrogen.
35 http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/AirPollution.aspx. 36 http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/SpecialAreasUnderMARPOL/Pages/Default.aspx. 37 https://www.maersk.com/news/articles/2019/06/26/towards-a-zero-carbon-future. 38 https://sea-lng.org/why-lng/bunkering/; https://www.ship-technology.com/news/west-coasts-lngbunker-abs/. 39 https://www.cma-cgm.com/news/2749/world-premiere-launching-of-the-world-s-largest-lngpowered-containership-and-future-cma-cgm-group-flagship. 1435 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-59-
California marine fuel markets can be divided into ocean and coastal. The ocean market is the largest due to the fuel volumes vessels consume. California, with its large container ports in Oakland, Los Angeles, and Long Beach, may see demand for LNG in the future (which will require large investments). Some of the investments needed to meet this demand include storage terminals, bunker loading vessels, or liquefaction terminals.
This demand may come sooner rather than later as modern ship engines are flex-fuel capable in that they can run on either fuel oil or natural gas, thus optimizing fuel costs and environmental compliance.
40 To give an idea of the potential size of this market, in 2016 bunkers delivered across the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach totaled 21.33 million barrels or 132 Bcf. 41 Coastal market consists mostly of smaller vessels such as passenger ferries, tugs, fishing vessels etc. Already using an Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel under CARB regulations, they could see a cost reduction by switching to LNG powered fleets.
42 Small on-demand liquefaction terminals
can bunker vessels at berth and have already been installed in Europe successfully. 43 They can
be connected directly to the natural gas grid producing fuel on-demand.
NORTH AMERICAN GAS DEMAND TRENDS
LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS IMPORTS/EXPORTS
In years past, the U.S. imported LNG to supplement North American supplies to meet demand. However, U.S. imports of LNG have been declining since 2008. Over the past decade, the development of low-cost domestic shale gas supplies has largely eliminated the need for LNG imports and positioned the U.S. as a net exporter of LNG.
The U.S. began exporting LNG in 2016. For LNG projects proposing to export LNG, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) evaluates the impact of exports to countries without a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S. The DOE grants approval if the project is deemed in the public interest. On the other hand, the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), 40 https://www.wartsila.com/twentyfour7/energy/taking-dual-fuel-marine-engines-to-the-next-level. 41 https://www.bunkerspot.com/americas/43523-americas-la-lb-annual-bunker-volumes-up-25-73-y-oy. 42 https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/oil-and-gas/our-insights/imo-2020-and-the-outlook-formarine-fuels#. 43 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/projects/sites/ieeprojects/files/projects/documents/magalog_lng_supply_chain.pdf. 1436 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-60-
focuses on evaluating the environmental impacts of proposed LNG projects, and authorizes the siting and construction of LNG facilities.
There are several proposed projects to export LNG to world markets. Many of the projects are “brownfield,” using existing U.S. import terminals to export LNG, but some are “greenfield.” A brownfield project on North America’s West Coast is the Energia Costal Azul (ECA) LNG export facility in Baja California, Mexico. ECA has received authorization from the DOE to liquify and re-export up to 1.7 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of U.S. produced natural gas.44 This facility will have a 4.5 million metric tons (mmt) per annum of liquification capacity.45 Construction of the project will occur in two phases. Phase 1 is a single LNG facility located adjacent to the existing LNG terminal. Phase 2 includes the addition of two trains and a storage tank. Transportation of gas for the planned ECA project is proposed to be over the expanded North Baja pipeline, subject to FERC approval. Construction and operation of the ECA export plant is contingent on commercial contracts, pertinent Mexican and U.S. government permitting, and financing. ECA anticipates construction to commence in the first half of 2021 with commercial operations beginning no later than 2025.
The ECA LNG export project, which would be the second on the North America’s West Coast, is positioned to source gas off the El Paso Mainline System. Thus, it could divert gas supplies currently available to Northern California. ECA diversion of gas supplies from California is currently under consideration at the CPUC in the R.20-01-007 Proceeding. 46 This proceeding will investigate whether the demand from ECA could impact supply reliability to California, especially the southern portion, and put upward pressure on gas prices.
One greenfield project is the Jordan Cove Project in Oregon. Jordan Cove in early 2020 received authorization from the FERC to site, construct, and operate an LNG export facility.
In order to supply the LNG facility with natural gas, FERC authorized the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline. This pipeline would interconnect with the Ruby Pipeline and the GTN Pipeline.
Additional work lies ahead to resolve issues of state and local approvals, financing, and facilities 44 https://www.sempra.com/energia-costa-azul-lng-receives-us-non-fta-approval-liquefactionexport-infrastructure-project. 45 FE DOCKET NO. 18-145-LNG.
46 OIR to Establish Policies, Processes, and Rules to Ensure Safe and Reliable Gas Systems in California and Perform Long-Term Gas System Planning.
1437 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-61-
planning. The Jordan Cove LNG export project could directly compete for gas supplies available to Northern California.
U.S. NATURAL GAS PIPELINE EXPORTS TO MEXICO
With low domestic natural gas prices compared to world markets, the U.S. remained a net exporter of natural gas in 2019.
47 Mexico, accounting for approximately 43 percent of total U.S. gas exports in 2019, became the largest importer of U.S. natural gas in 2015. The U.S. natural gas exports to Mexico have grown in recent years from 0.9 Bcf/d in 2010 to 5.5 Bcf/d in 2019, 48 and pipeline exports are projected to reach 7.5 Bcf/d by 2025.49 Declining gas production and increasing gas demand for power generation and industrial use in Mexico are main drivers of this export growth. Completion of several gas pipeline capacity expansion projects on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border have resulted in 15.5 Bcf/d of export capacity as of 2019, with an additional 0.6 Bcf/d expected to come online in 2020.
Most of the exports to Mexico are supplied through Texas from the Permian Basin and Western Gulf basins. Production growth in the Permian Basin, combined with new pipeline capacity, will enable growing exports to Mexico.
47 Energy Information Administration (EIA), The U.S. exported more natural gas than it imported in 2017: https://www.eia.gove/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35392. 48 EIA, U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_poe2_dcu_NUS-NMX_a.htm. 49 EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2020 – Natural Gas Imports and Exports Table (Reference Case):
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=76-AEO2020®ion=0-0&cases=ref2020&st art=2019&end=2025&f=A&linechart=~~ref2020-d112119a.9-76-AEO2020~ref2020-d112119a.10- 76-AEO2020&ctype=linechart&sourcekey=0.
1438 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-62-
GAS SUPPLY, CAPACITY, AND STORAGE
OVERVIEW
The Gas Supply, Capacity, and Storage section provides information about PG&E’s current gas supply, natural gas pipelines, gas storage, and policies affecting these topics. The Gas Supply section includes information about current and anticipated developments regarding RG, as well as gas supply from sources throughout North America. The Pipeline section includes information about “upstream” inter-state pipelines, as well as intra-state pipelines. The Storage section gives an overview of PG&E’s gas storage capacity and its gas storage facilities. The Policies section looks at a range of current policy developments and their impacts on PG&E’s gas supply, including integration challenges for RG, as well as alternative fuel types, such as H2.
Competition for gas supply, market share, and transportation access has increased significantly since the late 1990s. Implementation of PG&E’s Gas Accord in March 1998 and the addition of interstate pipeline capacity and storage capacity have provided all customers with direct access to gas supplies, intra- and inter-state transportation, and related services.
Overall, most of the gas supplies that serve PG&E customers are sourced from out of state with only a small portion originating in California. This mix is due to gas demand greater than the limited amount of native California production available.
PG&E anticipates that sufficient supplies will be available from a variety of sources at market-competitive prices to meet existing and projected market demands in its service area.
Supply can be delivered through a variety of sources, including any new and expanded interstate pipeline facilities and of PG&E’s existing transmission facilities, or other storage facilities.
GAS SUPPLY
RENEWABLE GAS
There are seven Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) projects that are in the process of interconnecting with PG&E’s gas system, with the first few expected to begin injecting pipeline quality gas in Q4 2020 and the rest expected to progress through 2021. These seven projects are expected to inject roughly 16,500 MCF/d into PG&E’s pipeline system. Two of the projects are 1439 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-63-
a result of the SB 1383 Dairy Pilot Program, highlighted below, and the other five are identified in the Biomethane Project Incentive Reservation Queue located on the CPUC website.50 SB 1383 Dairy Pilot Projects
On December 3, 2018, the CPUC, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) issued a joint press release announcing the selection of six dairy pilot projects in compliance with CPUC D.17-02-004 and SB 1383.
Two of the pilot projects were awarded in PG&E’s service territory: (1) the Merced Pipeline project sited at the Vander Woude Dairy in Merced (6 miles south of Merced); and (2) the J.G. Weststeyn Dairy project in Willows (5 miles west of Logandale). 50 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/renewable_natural_gas/.
1440 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-64-
FIGURE 8 – PG&E SERVICE AREA: RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS PILOT PROJECTS LOCATION PG&E is encouraged to see the first wave of RNG interconnection projects in its Northern California service territory.
1441 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-65-
Future California RNG Supply
A 2016 CARB-sponsored study by University of California (UC), Davis, “The Feasibility of Renewable Natural Gas as a Large-Scale, Low Carbon Substitute” (the “STEPS study”), anticipated that as much as 82 Bcf per year of RNG supply could become available in California with appropriate policy development and investment.51 The STEPS study identified that the largest opportunity for increasing the supply of RG would come from landfill sites, followed by dairy, municipal solid waste, and waste-water facilities.
A more recent assessment of in-state RNG supply for transportation, conducted by GNA, 52 projects that there will be roughly 16 BCF annually of RNG interconnected into gas pipelines in California by January 2024. Given the STEPS study results, the gas flowing from RNG sources by January 2024 is just the first wave of RNG expected to be eventually injected into the gas system.
Therefore, going forward, PG&E expects to see more RNG projects as developers realize the near and mid-term potential of this supply source.
Gas Absorption Capacity
To encourage effective development of RNG, PG&E created the Gas Supply Absorption Capacity Map.53 This map is a high-level snapshot of PG&E’s gas system that is designed to help contractors and developers find potential project sites by showing the relative ability (high to low) to accept new gas supply on PG&E transmission pipelines. Suppliers are encouraged to contact PG&E to discuss opportunities to bring on RNG supplies.
NORTH AMERICAN SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT
The biggest development in the North American gas supply picture in the past several years has been the rapid development of various shale gas resources through horizontal drilling 51 STEPS Program Study, The Feasibility of Renewable Natural Gas as a Large-Scale, Low Carbon Substitute, prepared by Amy Myers Jaffe, available at:
https://steps.ucdavis.edu/the-feasibility-of-renewable-natural-gas-as-a-large-scale-low-carbon-substit ute/.
52 https://www.gladstein.org/gna_whitepapers/an-assessment-californias-in-state-rng-supply-fortransportation-2020-2024/ 53 Available at: https://www.pge.com/en_US/for-our-business-partners/interconnectionrenewables/interconnections-renewables/biomethane-map-overview.page 1442 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-66-
combined with hydraulic fracturing. While the initial developments were concentrated in the U.S. Midcontinent, the large Marcellus and Utica plays in the eastern U.S. and the Permian Basin have become the main source of supply growth, resulting in record U.S. gas production in 2019.
While some of the traditional supply basins have shown some modest declines in production, the Marcellus and Utica plays have grown from roughly 10 percent of U.S. production in 2012 to about 33 percent in 2019, with further growth expected in the next few years. Most industry forecasts now expect supply can increase to meet the most aggressive demand scenario in the future.
The growth of associated gas production in the Permian Basin and eastern shale plays (e.g., the Haynesville in east Texas and west Louisiana and the Marcellus and Utica in Pennsylvania) have had the effect of pushing larger volumes of Canadian, Rockies, San Juan, and Permian supplies towards California.
CALIFORNIA-SOURCED GAS
Northern California-sourced gas supplies come primarily from gas fields in the Sacramento Valley. In 2019, PG&E’s customers obtained on average 26 MMcf/d of California sourced gas. PG&E does not anticipate a material change in this level of supply going forward.
U.S. SOUTHWEST GAS
PG&E’s customers have access to three major U.S. Southwest gas producing basins— Permian, San Juan, and Anadarko—via the El Paso and Transwestern pipeline systems.
PG&E’s customers can purchase gas in the producing basins and transport it to California via interstate pipelines. They can also purchase gas at the California-Arizona border or at the PG&E Citygate from marketers who hold inter- or intra-state pipeline capacity.
CANADIAN GAS
PG&E’s customers can purchase gas from various suppliers in Western Canada (British Columbia and Alberta) and transport it to California, primarily through the GTN pipeline. Likewise, they can also purchase these supplies at the California-Oregon border or at the PG&E Citygate from marketers who hold inter- or intra-state pipeline capacity. 1443 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-67-
ROCKY MOUNTAIN GAS
PG&E’s customers have access to gas supplies from the Rocky Mountain area via the Kern River Pipeline, the Ruby Pipeline and via the GTN Pipeline interconnect at Stanfield, Oregon.
GAS PIPELINE CAPACITY
INTERSTATE PIPELINE CAPACITY
California utilities and end-users benefit from access to supply basins and enhanced gas-on-gas and pipeline-on-pipeline competition. Interstate pipelines serving northern and Central California include the El Paso, Mojave, Transwestern, GTN, Paiute Pipeline Company, Ruby, and Kern River pipelines. These pipelines provide northern and Central California with access to gas-producing regions in the U.S. Southwest and Rocky Mountain areas, and in Western Canada.
U.S. Southwest and Rocky Mountains
PG&E’s Baja Path (Line 300) is connected to U.S. Southwest and Rocky Mountain pipeline systems (Transwestern, El Paso, and Kern River) at and west of Topock, Arizona. The Baja Path has a firm capacity of 960 MMcf/d.
Canada and Rocky Mountains
PG&E’s Redwood Path (Lines 400/401) is connected to GTN and Ruby at Malin, Oregon.
The Redwood Path has a firm capacity of 2,060 MMcf/d.
IN-STATE PIPELINES
PG&E continues to accelerate the analysis of the existing pipeline system for opportunities to minimize rate increases for our customers by reducing our expenses, look for new opportunities for load growth and to decarbonize by increasing throughput of RG. PG&E is actively pursuing opportunities on radial feeds where several miles of pipe are in place to serve a small handful of customers. Electrifying these customers and decommissioning the pipeline will achieve greater cost savings in the short-term. These opportunities will also help inform PG&E’s longer-term efforts, in partnership with cities, to strategize where to reduce our spending and predict long-term gas needs more accurately. 1444 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-68-
GAS STORAGE
Northern California is served by several gas storage facilities in addition to the long-standing PG&E fields at McDonald Island, Pleasant Creek, and Los Medanos. PG&E owns and operates 116 wells at these three natural gas storage fields located in California and is a 25 percent owner of a fourth storage field (Gill Ranch). PG&E’s wholly owned storage facilities have a combined maximum capacity of 102.2 Bcf.
Other storage providers include Gill Ranch Storage, LLC (the 20 Bcf facility was co-developed with PG&E), Wild Goose Storage, LLC, Lodi Gas Storage, LLC, and Central Valley Storage, LLC. The abundant storage capacity in the Northern California market has had the effect of creating ample liquidity in the market both in Northern California and in other parts of the West.
In the past few years, the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) (formerly, DOGGR) altered safety rules governing natural gas storage facilities. The CalGEM safety rules impact new investment in storage facilities and capacity throughout California while decreasing withdrawal capacity.
In PG&E’s recent Gas Transmission and Storage Rate Case, the CPUC in D.19-09-025 adopted PG&E Natural Gas Storage Strategy (NGSS). As part of the strategy, PG&E is focusing the use of PG&E’s gas storage facilities on system operations, including balancing supply and demand. Additionally, the strategy calls for the divestiture or decommissioning of the Los Medanos and Pleasant Creek storage facilities rather than investing the substantial amount money needed to make the facilities reliable and compliant with the new CalGEM regulations.
MCDONALD ISLAND
McDonald Island serves as the largest of PG&E’s three facilities and is located on a man-made island in a scarcely populated agricultural area near the Sacramento-San Juaquin River Delta. McDonald Island is PG&E’s largest gas storage field and has a maximum capacity of 82 Bcf. McDonald Island has 87 total wells; 81 wells operate for injection and withdrawal and 6 operate as observation wells. McDonald Island can provide 25 percent of Northern California’s winter peak day gas demand.
1445 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-69-
LOS MEDANOS AND PLEASANT CREEK
Los Medanos is PG&E’s second largest facility and has a maximum capacity of 17.9 Bcf.
The facility is in Contra Costa County and contains 22 wells. Pleasant Creek is PG&E’s smallest storage facility and has a maximum capacity of 2.0 Bcf. The facility is in Yolo County and contains seven wells. As reflected in the 2019 Gas Transmission and Storage (GT&S) Rate Case, NGSS,54 PG&E will be selling or decommissioning the Pleasant Creek and Los Medanos storage facilities.
OTHER CALIFORNIA STORAGE FACILITIES
In addition to storage services offered by PG&E, there are four other storage providers in Northern California: Wild Goose Storage, LLC; Gill Ranch Storage, LLC; Central Valley Gas Storage, LLC; and Lodi Gas Storage, LLC. As of 2018, these facilities had an estimated total working gas capacity of roughly 239 Bcf.55
POLICIES IMPACTING FUTURE GAS SUPPLY AND ASSETS
OVERVIEW
California’s policies to reduce the Carbon footprint and sources of GHGs, are expected to impact the gas supply and assets in the near future. PG&E is responding to these policies and actively planning for and implementing programs to decarbonize existing gas throughput, supporting RG adoption across new industries with existing gas system infrastructure, and adapting to utilize the gas system as a long-term storage mechanism.
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
As a result of various policy and regulatory changes, PG&E is seeing an influx of requests to interconnect RNG to utility pipelines in Northern California during 2020. RNG producers are leveraging available grants and incentives to encourage the production of RNG to reduce GHG emissions from the biogas sources to the environment and for use as an alternative fuel source for transportation and other end use customers. PG&E is engaged in the following efforts regarding RNG:
• Procuring RNG for all PG&E owned Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueling stations; • Proposed a joint utility RNG Interconnection Rule, filed November 1, 2019; 54 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/General.aspx?id=10432.
55 Working gas capacity comes from providers of storage services websites. 1446 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-70-
• Proposed a joint utility RNG Interconnection and Operating Agreement, filed May 1, 2020; and
• Participation in various Research and Development (R&D) efforts to further understand and develop new methods and technologies to produce RNG that reduce the carbon intensity of the gas in the pipeline.
Chief Interconnection Barriers and Issues
The interconnection of RG projects to the utility pipeline system is critical in the effort to meet the state of California’s GHG reduction goals and must be done first and foremost with consideration of public and employee safety.
The CPUC is continuing its work in R.13-02-008, establishing the process for the consistent interconnection of RNG across California, which should reduce the regulatory and incentive financing uncertainty that has slowed industry growth. At various points in the proceeding, interconnecting developers have indicated that interconnection costs are high, project timelines are long, and that utility gas quality and some contractual requirements are burdensome.
While there is significant potential for RNG to replace some portion of natural gas supply generally, the current investment and incentives for RNG principally favor the transportation sector. With the clear financial advantage towards transportation, there is comparatively little RNG available to establish a consistent RGS to meet PG&E’s customer or third-party needs, should an RGS be established. If this is to change, California will have to balance the funding mechanisms between the transportation sector and a potential RGS so that RNG project developers have opportunities to supply RNG towards an RGS or the transportation sector.
Monetary Incentive Program
D.15-06-029 established a biomethane monetary included program authorizing $40 million to encourage biomethane producers to design, construct, and safely operate projects that interconnect and inject biomethane into California’s natural gas utilities’ pipeline systems. 1447 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-71-
D.19-12-009 implements an Incentive Reservation System for the biomethane monetary incentive program established in D.15-06-029. The Incentive Reservation System opened to applications on February 3, 2020 and the queue is published on the CPUC’s RNG website.56 Based on information provided in D.19-12-009,
57 two projects have received a total of
$8.18 million of funding under the incentive program, leaving $31.82 million remaining in the program. PG&E is unaware of any additional incentive awards being issued since December 2019.
Research and Development
PG&E’s R&D RNG roadmap58 further outlines PG&E’s goals for incorporating RNG into the supply portfolio.
HYDROGEN
Green H2 is seen as a game changer in decarbonizing many sectors. To achieve the goals set forth in SB 100, California will likely need to incorporate Green H2 into the portfolio of green fuels for various sectors. Many other countries are already embracing H2 and fuel cell technology to reduce their carbon footprint. California is starting to see some movement on the legislative front to increase funding for furthering the use of Green H2. There is potential for Green H2 to be produced and then stored for future use or used to decarbonize the transportation sector. The California IOUs are working together on an action plan for incorporating Green H2 into the pipelines and will be filing an Application for a preliminary H2 injection standard in November 2020.
HYDROGEN STORAGE (CONVENTIONAL AND NEW TECH)
As mentioned above, Green H2 is seen as a game changer and has many potential applications. One such application is to produce Green H2 through electrolysis and stored in the pipeline system (or dedicated underground storage facilities) for later use, such as fuel for EG needed when the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing. Green H2 storage has incredible 56 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/renewable_natural_gas/.
57 D.19-12-009, p. 2.
58 https://www.pge.com/pge_global/common/pdfs/for-our-business-partners/interconnectionrenewables/interconnections-renewables/RNG_Roadmap_2020.pdf 1448 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-72-
potential for longer-term storage and at larger volumes for seasonal load shifting that would not be possible with batteries alone.
LNG AS MARINE FUEL
As mentioned above in the Gas Demand section, there is tremendous opportunity for growth in the marine market. The gas supply needed for this demand will need to come from cleaner sources of fuel such as RG and H2.
1449 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-73-
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
OVERVIEW
This section provides an overview of the existing and near-term regulatory policies and their effect on the Northern California gas system and its users.
Given the anticipated state and federal regulatory policies surrounding storage, transportation, inspection, and capacity requirements, the cost to safely and reliably operate PG&E’s gas system will continue to rise. At the same time, a decline in throughput—which PG&E anticipates is a result of California’s GHG goals and cities pushing for new electric reach codes—will mean those costs will be spread over fewer therms and possibly fewer customers, impacting the affordability of gas.
Furthermore, despite readily available domestic gas, operational innovation, and reaching a lower NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd (NGTL) rate for PG&E customers, the complex regulatory environment and evolving policies are likely to create price uncertainty in the medium/long-term.
FEDERAL AND CANADIAN REGULATORY MATTERS
PG&E actively participates in FERC ratemaking proceedings for interstate pipelines connected to PG&E’s system since these proceedings can impact the cost of gas delivered and the services provided to the PG&E’s gas customers. PG&E also participates in FERC proceedings of general interest to the extent they affect PG&E’s operations and policies or natural gas market policies generally.
GTN AND CANADIAN PIPELINES
On March 10, 2020, GTN, submitted Advance Notification of Natural Gas Facilities Replacement for three compressor stations: Athol Compressor Station, Kent Compressor Stations, and Starbuck Compressor Station. PG&E is monitoring these construction projects as they may affect gas throughput and pipeline costs.
1450 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-74-
On March 25, 2020, the Commission of the Canada Energy Regulator has approved a rate design methodology and other terms and conditions of service settlement for the NGTL System.59 This settlement will lower the NGTL rate for PG&E customers.
OTHER PIPELINES
There are currently no significant regulatory issues regarding El Paso Natural Gas Company, LLC (El Paso); Kern River Gas Transmission (Kern River); Ruby Pipeline, LLC (Ruby); or Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC (Transwestern) pipelines.
FERC AND CAISO GAS-ELECTRIC COORDINATION ACTIONS
While there are no general inquiries or proceedings at FERC addressing gas-electric coordination, the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), which is FERC-jurisdictional, has ongoing policy initiatives that may impact gas demand, supply, and prices. These initiatives include:
• Resource Adequacy Enhancements;
• Flexible Ramping Product Refinements; and
• Flexible Capacity Needs Assessment Process.
These policy initiatives will need FERC approval before the proposed changes can be implemented.
STATE REGULATORY MATTERS
CALIFORNIA STATE SB 100 AND CARBON NEUTRALITY EXECUTIVE ORDER On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed into law SB 100, which would further increase and accelerate the RPS targets and includes the following key requirements:
• Accelerates the RPS to 50 percent by 2026 and increases the RPS to 60 percent by 2030; • Creates a separate state policy that requires 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to serve end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve state agencies to come from RPS-eligible or zero-carbon resources by 2045; 59 In re NGTL., Can. Energy Reg., Decision C05448 (March 25, 2020), available at:
https://apps.cer-rec.gc.ca/REGDOCS/Item/Filing/C05448.
1451 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-75-
• Requires the CPUC, in consultation with the CAISO and other balancing authorities, to issue a joint report to the Legislature by January 1, 2021, and every 4 years thereafter, that evaluates the anticipated costs and benefits of the 100 percent clean policy to electric, gas, and water utilities, including customer rate impacts and benefits Additionally, Governor Brown signed an EO on September 10, 2018 establishing a new statewide goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 across all sectors of the California economy and to achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. Implementation of the order will require California to undertake additional decarbonization and negative emissions efforts. CARB plans to focus on carbon neutrality in its next Climate Change Scoping Plan, due in 2022.60
PIPELINE SAFETY
Since 2011, the CPUC and the California State Legislature have adopted a series of regulations and bills that reinforce the setting of public and employee safety as the top priority for the state’s gas utilities. In particular, SB 705 mandated for the first time that gas operators develop and implement safety plans that are consistent with the best practices in the gas industry.
On March 16, 2020, PG&E filed its 2020 Gas Safety Plan with the CPUC. The Gas Safety Plan demonstrates PG&E’s commitment to implement processes and procedures to achieve its vision of becoming the safest and most reliable natural gas utility in the nation. One of the plan highlights is the Gas Safety Excellence framework, which guides how PG&E operates, conducts, and manages all parts of its business by putting safety and people at the heart of everything it does; investing in the reliability and integrity of its gas system; and, by continuously improving the effectiveness and affordability of its processes.
Additionally, PG&E submits the following reports to the CPUC: (1) semi-annual Gas Transmission & Storage Compliance Report; and (2) annual Gas Distribution Pipeline Safety Report. These reports are designed to provide the CPUC and other interested stakeholders with insight into the amount of safety and reliability-related work PG&E has completed over the course of the reporting period. Selected highlights from PG&E’s 2019 reports, which further demonstrate PG&E’s commitment to gas safety, include:
60 CARB Scoping Plan Implementation Update (April 2020), available at:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/board/books/2020/042320/20-4-2pres.pdf. 1452 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-76-
• Asset Management System: PG&E maintains an asset management system to help drive the business toward achieving its commitment to the safe, reliable, affordable management and operation of PG&E’s gas assets, using the international Publicly Available Specification 55-1, International Organization for Standardization 55001, and American Petroleum Industry (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 1173 standards as guidance.
Additionally, in November 2019, Lloyd’s Register confirmed Gas Operations’ continued compliance with API RP 1173.
• Process Safety: PG&E’s commitment to implement process safety aligns with API RP 754 Process Safety Performance Indicators for the Refining and Petrochemical Industries.
Process Safety and Gas Safety Excellence teams use a risk-sorting criterion to track and tabulate leading and lagging safety indicators. This helps identify emerging issues before incidents occur. In 2019, Gas Operations reached a key milestone in the journey of Process Safety Management maturity. Gas Operations was recognized, through a third-party assessment, for being in compliance with the intent of API RP 754, Process Safety Performance Indicators, insofar as it meets its business operations, demonstrating a commitment to incident prevention.
• In-Line Inspection (ILI): In 2019, PG&E increased piggability to roughly 36 percent of the approximately 6,600 miles of its Gas Transmission system. PG&E inspected a total of 478.1 miles, with 266.4 of those miles assessed with ILI for the first time. Approximately two-thirds of PG&E’s transmission system (about 4,100 miles) has been or will be upgraded to accept ILI tools by the end of 2029.
• Third-Party Dig-Ins: In 2019, PG&E experienced 1.04 dig-ins per 1,000 Underground Service Alert (USA) tickets, out-performing its 2019 target of 1.23 dig-ins per 1,000 USA tickets.
• Community Pipeline Safety Initiative: A multi-year program designed to enhance safety by improving access to pipeline rights-of-way. The program was initially anticipated as a 5-year initiative ending in December 2017, but has been extended through December 2020 due to long-lead permitting and outstanding customer agreements. To date, the program has cleared approximately 1,542 vegetation miles and 359.72 structure miles. The remaining
9.27 miles of vegetation and 0.28 miles of structure clearing is expected to be completed in 2020.
1453 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-77-
STORAGE SAFETY
CalGEM (California Geologic Energy Management Division) finalized underground storage regulations in October 2018. Within the regulations, operators are required to increase monitoring and inspection practices and ensure well construction is in accordance with a dual barrier system by 2025. Implementation of the regulations to convert a targeted percentage of wells each year to dual barrier, tubing and packer completion, began in 2019 and impacts the available withdrawal capacity. PG&E, in its 2019 GT&S Rate Case application, included the impact of the proposed regulations in its NGSS, which includes the decommissioning or sale of the Pleasant Creek and Los Medanos storage facilities. The CPUC approved the NGSS in D.19-09-025, issued on September 23, 2019.
GAS QUALITY
Gas quality has received much less attention since 2010 due to the abundance of domestic gas supply. Domestic gas supply has diminished interest in LNG imports, as described in the previous section. Hence, the challenges associated with integrating LNG and traditional North American sources, each typically with different quality characteristics, do not require immediate resolution.
THE DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS OF INCREASED REGULATION: CITIES PURSUE
ELECTRIFICATION
In response to California’s firming GHG laws and strengthening public support, local governments have already begun taking significant steps towards electrification at the city level.
As of February 2020, thirty cities have passed new electric reach codes, the majority of which fall within PG&E’s territory.
61 In fact, per the Building Decarbonization Coalition, as of March 2020, 13 California cities have passed reach codes for all-electric new construction. 62 The spread of all-electric new construction would suggest a flattening demand for gas.
However, as cited in the gas demand section, the full effect of these new reach codes has not yet been determined.
61 “Forward-Looking Cities Lead the Way to a Gas-Free Future.” Sierra Club, 6 Mar. 2020:
https://www.sierraclub.org/articles/2020/07/californias-cities-lead-way-gas-free-future. 62 “Active Code Efforts.” The Building Decarbonization Coalition, 30 Mar. 2020:
www.buildingdecarb.org/active-code-efforts.html.
1454 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-78-
KNOWN REGULATORY HURDLES
Federal regulation along with state and local climate action goals are set to create a challenging environment for gas utilities. To succeed in achieving these operational safety and climate action goals, the following hurdles need to be addressed:
• As regulations continue to strengthen, the cost of providing a safe and reliable gas system continues to rise. This increase in cost, paired with state and local GHG goals, which are expected to drive down gas throughput, will likely result in a higher cost per-therm for customers.
• Barriers to RGS: With the clear financial advantage towards transportation, there is comparatively little RG available to establish a consistent RGS to meet PG&E’s customer or third-party needs should a RGS be established.
California’s gas system is going though unprecedent changes. As we brace for the future, now, more than ever, it’s important that regulatory bodies and IOUs work together to ensure that Californians continue to have access to clean, reliable and affordable energy.
OTHER REGULATORY MATTERS
OVERVIEW
This section includes PG&E’s GHG and Cap-and-Trade reporting and discusses other regulatory matters that may impact Northern California’s gas system.
PG&E is participating in a number of OIRs, which address crucial topics that will impact the California gas system. For example, the:
• Biomethane OIR (R.13-02-008) will help the utilities make RG interconnections more efficient and affordable across California; and
• Gas System Planning OIR (R.20-01-007) will allow the utilities to: (1) develop updated reliability standards that are in line with current and future operational challenges of gas system operators, (2) improve coordination between gas utilities and gas-fired generators, and (3) develop and implement a long-term strategy to work towards California’s decarbonization goals.
GHG REPORTING AND CAP-AND-TRADE OBLIGATIONS
In March 2020, PG&E Gas Operations reported the GHG emissions to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in accordance with 40 Code of Federal R 1455 of 2287 egulations
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-79-
(CFR) Part 98 in four primary categories: GHG emissions in reporting year 2019 resulting from combustion at seven compressor stations, where the annual emissions exceed 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (mtCO2e); the GHG emissions resulting from combustion of all customers except customers consuming more than 460 MMcf; certain vented and fugitive emissions from the seven compressor stations and natural gas distribution system; and GHG emissions from transmission pipeline blowdowns.
In April 2020, PG&E Gas Operations reported GHG emissions of approximately
42.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (mmtCO2e) to the CARB in three primary categories for reporting year 2019: GHG emissions resulting from combustion at seven compressor stations and one underground gas storage facility, where the annual emissions exceed 10,000 mtCO2e; the GHG emissions resulting from combustion of delivered gas to all customers; and vented and fugitive emissions from seven compressor stations, one underground gas storage facility and the natural gas distribution system.
PG&E’s deliveries to small customers not directly covered by CARB’s Cap-and-Trade program (i.e., PG&E’s natural gas supplier function) create compliance obligations for PG&E under the CARB Cap-and-Trade Program. PG&E emissions from covered compressor stations also create compliance obligations for PG&E under Cap-and-Trade. In 2019, CARB determined that PG&E’s compliance obligations as a natural gas supplier were approximately
18.3 mmtCO2e for reporting year 2018. CARB will determine PG&E’s natural gas supplier compliance obligation for reporting year 2019 in October 2020. In June 2019, PG&E filed the 2018 Annual Natural Gas Leakage Abatement Report and reported 2.9 billion standard cubic feet of methane emissions from intentional and unintentional releases. The annual report is a partial fulfillment of R.15-01-008 to adopt rules and best practices aiming to reduce methane emissions from the Natural Gas System in application of SB 1371.
In addition, PG&E filed its two-year Leak Abatement Compliance Plan in March 2020.
This plan addresses the 26 best practices outlined in the Leak Abatement OIR D.17-06-015.
It emphasizes minimizing methane emissions through changes to policies and procedures, personnel training, leak detection, leak repair, and leak prevention. PG&E’s plan includes transitioning from the 3-year gas distribution leak survey cycle to risk-based leak surveys, continuing repair of its distribution system largest leaks, refining blowdown reduction strategies and beginning to expand the use of these strategies at compressor stations and storage facilities, and improving inventory of other devices that release gas to the atmosphere. 1456 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-80-
Finally, PG&E is an active member and founding partner in the voluntary EPA. Natural Gas STAR and Methane Challenge Programs, respectively, where annual reports are submitted to the EPA showcasing PG&E’s efforts and best practices to reduce methane emissions. In April 2019, PG&E filed its Implementation Plan63 for this program. The plan includes replacing high-bleed pneumatic devices, replacing rod packing, excavation damage data collection, and utilizing methods such as drafting and cross compression. More information can be found on the EPA’s Methane Challenge Webpage.
64 In addition, PG&E is committed through its 1-million-ton challenge to reduce GHG emissions from company operations through 2022. PG&E’s strategy to meet this goal includes increased leak survey and repair, removing high-bleed pneumatic devices, replacing vintage distribution main, and reducing transmission pipeline blowdowns.
BIOMETHANE OIR R.13-02-008 PHASE 3
On July 5, 2018, the CPUC reopened R.13-02-008 Phase 3 and ordered the joint California utilities to propose a joint RG interconnection tariff and interconnection agreements.
On November 1, 2019, the joint utilities filed a proposed RG interconnection rule.
The CPUC held a workshop on November 13, 2019, to discuss the proposal, and parties filed comments thereafter.
On May 1, 2020, the joint utilities filed the proposed RG interconnection and operating agreement and related documents to be used with the RG rule. The CPUC held a workshop on May 18, 2020 to discuss the proposed agreement and parties filed comments thereafter.
The CPUC also instituted a Reservation System in D.19-12-009 that became effective as of February 3, 2020 for the biomethane incentive program implemented by D.15-06-029.
BIOMETHANE OIR R.13-02-008 PHASE 4
On November 21, 2019, the CPUC issued a Ruling to establish Phase 4 of the proceeding that will address injection of renewable H2 into gas pipelines and implementation of SB 1440 (RNG procurement).
63 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
06/documents/pacific_gas_and_electric_mc_ip_webready_2019-05.pdf. 64 https://www.epa.gov/natural-gas-star-program/pacific-gas-electric-company-methane-challengepartner-profile. 1457 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-81-
By November 21, 2020, the joint utilities are directed to file an application on a preliminary H2 injection standard. The joint gas utilities have hosted technical H2 working group sessions (the first on January 15, 2020 and the second on June 17, 2020) with reports filed by the joint utilities shortly thereafter.
GAS SYSTEM PLANNING OIR R.20-01-007
The CPUC opened a new Rulemaking to “Establish Policies, Processes, and Rules to Ensure Safe and Reliable Gas Systems in California and Perform Long-Term Gas System Planning.” This proceeding will be conducted in two phases and will: (1) develop and adopt as necessary updated reliability standards that reflect current and future operational challenges to gas system operators, (2) determine the regulatory changes to improve coordination between gas utilities and gas-fired generators, and (3) implement a long-term planning strategy to manage the transition away from natural gas-fueled technologies to meet California’s decarbonization goals. Phase I of this proceeding is expected to conclude within 18 months. • Reliability Standards - Phase 1 – Track 1A
• Market Structure and Regulations – Phase 1 – Track 1B • Long-Term Natural Gas Policy and Planning – Phase 2
1458 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-82-
ABNORMAL PEAK DAY DEMAND AND SUPPLY
APD DEMAND FORECAST
The APD forecast is a projection of demand under extreme weather conditions. PG&E uses a 1-in-90 year cold-temperature event as the design criterion. This criterion corresponds to a
28.3 degree F system-weighted mean temperature across the PG&E gas system. The PG&E core demand forecast corresponding to a 28.3 degree F temperature is estimated to be approximately
3.0 Bcf/d. The PG&E load forecast shown here excludes all noncore demand and excludes all EG demand. PG&E estimates that total noncore demand served by pipeline and storage withdrawal capability during an APD event would be approximately 1.4 to 1.6 Bcf/d, with EG demand comprising between one half to three quarters of the total noncore demand.
The APD core forecast is developed using the observed relationship between historical daily weather and core usage data. This relationship is then used to forecast the core load under APD conditions.
APD SUPPLY REQUIREMENT FORECAST
For APD planning purposes, supplies will flow under Core Procurement’s firm capacity, any as-available capacity, and capacity made available pursuant to supply-diversion arrangements.
Supplies could also be purchased from noncore suppliers. Flowing supplies may come from Canada, the U.S. Southwest, the Rocky Mountain region, SoCalGas, and California production.
Also, a significant part of the APD demand will be met by storage withdrawals from PG&E’s and independent storage providers’ underground storage facilities located within Northern and Central California.
PG&E’s Core Gas Supply Department is responsible for procuring adequate flowing supplies to serve approximately 80 percent of PG&E’s core gas usage. Core aggregators provide procurement services for the remaining balance of PG&E’s core customers and have the same obligation as PG&E Core Gas Supply to make and pay for all necessary arrangements to deliver gas to PG&E to match the use of their customers.
In previous extreme-cold weather events, PG&E has observed a drop in flowing pipeline supplies. Supply from Canada is affected as the cold weather front drops south from Canada 1459 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-83-
with a 2- to 3-day lag before hitting PG&E’s service territory. There is also impact on supply from the Southwest. While prices can influence the availability of supply to our system, cold weather can affect producing wells in the basins, which in turn can affect the total supply to the PG&E system and others.
If core supplies are insufficient to meet core demand, PG&E can divert gas from noncore customers, including EG customers, to meet it. PG&E’s tariffs contain diversion and Emergency Flow Order non-compliance charges that are designed to cause the noncore market to either reduce or cease its use of gas, if required. Since little, if any, alternate fuel-burn capability exists today, supply diversions from the noncore would necessitate those noncore customers to curtail operations. The implication for the future is that under supply-shortfall conditions—such as an APD—a significant portion of EG customers could be shut down with the impact on electric system reliability left as an uncertainty.
As mentioned above, PG&E projects that noncore demand served by pipeline and storage withdrawals, including gas-fired EG, on an APD would be approximately 1.4-1.6 Bcf/d in the near term. With the Wild Goose, Lodi, Gill Ranch, and Central Valley Gas storage facilities, more noncore demand will be satisfied in the event of an APD. The availability of supply for any given high-demand event, such as an APD, is dependent on a wide range of factors, including the availability of interstate flowing supplies and storage inventories. 1460 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-84-
TABLE 21 – FORECAST OF CORE GAS DEMAND AND SUPPLY ON AN APD (MMcf/d)
Line
No. 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
1 APD Core Demand (1) 3,031 3,043 3,055
2 Independent Storage Provider
Withdrawal (2)
2,190 2,190 2,190
3 Firm Flowing Supply (3) 3,055 3,055 3,055
4 Total Resources to Meet Demands (4) 4,067 4,067 4,067 _______________
Notes:
(1) Includes PG&E’s Gas Procurement Department’s and other Core Aggregator’s core customer demands. APD core demand forecast is calculated for 28.3 degrees F system composite temperature, corresponding to 1-in-90 year cold temperature event.1 PG&E uses a system composite temperature based on six weather sites. (2) The Independent Storage Provider Withdrawal is based on information provided by the Independent Storage Providers to PG&E.
(3) The Firm Flowing Supply includes firm Redwood and Baja capacities and nominal amounts of California gas production. These values are those currently approved for use within PG&E.
(4) The Total Resources to Meet Demands (Line No. 4) are less than the sum of Independent Storage Provider Withdrawal (Line No. 2) and Firm Flowing Supply (Line No. 3) because PG&E’s system cannot simultaneously accommodate all flowing supplies and all storage withdrawals.
1461 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
-85-
The tables below provide peak day demand projections on PG&E’s system for both winter month (December) and summer month (August) periods under PG&E’s high-demand scenario.
TABLE 22 – WINTER PEAK DAY DEMAND
(MMcf/d)
Year Core (1)
Noncore
Non-EG (2)
EG, Including
SMUD (2)
Total
Demand
2020 2,561 550 489 3,600
2021 2,571 565 425 3,561
2022 2,580 552 433 3,565
2023 2,589 556 428 3,573
2024 2,600 554 429 3,583
2025 2,612 553 439 3,604
_______________
Notes:
(1) Core demand calculated for 34.2 degrees F system composite temperature, corresponding to 1-in-10 year cold temperature event. (2) Average daily winter (December) demand under 1-in-10 cold and dry conditions.
TABLE 23 – SUMMER PEAK DAY DEMAND
(MMcf/d)
Year Core (1)
Noncore
Non-EG(1)
EG, Including
SMUD (1)
Total
Demand
2020 384 672 489 1,545
2021 385 681 424 1,490
2022 372 675 386 1,433
2023 367 675 376 1,418
2024 359 675 372 1,406
2025 352 673 366 1,391
_______________
Notes:
(1) Average daily summer (August) demand under 1-in-10 cold and dry conditions.
1462 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-86-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
1463 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-87-
TABLE 24 – ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS (MMcf/d) – RECORDED SENDOUT 1464 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-88-
TABLE 25 – ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY FORECAST
(MMcf/d)
AVERAGE DEMAND YEAR
1465 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-89-
TABLE 26 – ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY FORECAST
(MMcf/d)
AVERAGE DEMAND YEAR
1466 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-90-
TABLE 27 – ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY FORECAST
(MMcf/d)
HIGH DEMAND YEAR (1-IN-10 COLD YEAR)
1467 of 2287
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA – TABULAR DATA
-91-
TABLE 28 – ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY FORECAST
(MMcf/d)
HIGH DEMAND YEAR (1-IN-10 COLD YEAR)
1468 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-92-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
1469 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-93-
INTRODUCTION
SoCalGas is the principal distributor of natural gas in Southern California, providing retail and wholesale customers with transportation, exchange, storage services and also procurement services to most retail core customers. SoCalGas is a gas-only utility and, in addition to serving the residential, commercial, and industrial markets, provides gas for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and EG customers in Southern California. SDG&E, SWG, the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department, and the City of Vernon are SoCalGas’ four wholesale utility customers. SoCalGas also provides gas transportation services across its service territory to a border crossing point at the California-Mexico border at Mexicali to ECOGAS Mexico S. de R.L. de C.V which is a wholesale international customer located in Mexico.
This report covers a 16-year demand and forecast period, from 2020 through 2035; only the consecutive years 2020 through 2027 and the point years 2030 and 2035 are shown in the tabular data in the next sections. These single point forecasts are subject to uncertainty, but represent best estimates for the future, based upon the most current information available.
The Southern California section of the 2020 CGR begins with a discussion of the economic conditions and regulatory issues facing the utilities, followed by a discussion of the factors affecting natural gas demand in various market sectors. The outlook on natural gas supply availability, which continues to be favorable, is also presented. The regulatory environment and GHG issues are also discussed, followed by a review of the peak day demand forecast.
Summary tables and figures underlying the forecast are also provided. 1470 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-94-
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENT
ECONOMICS AND DEMOGRAPHICS
The gas demand projections are, in large part, determined by the long-term economic outlook for the SoCalGas service territory. After relatively steady growth from 2012-2019, in the first half of 2020 Southern California’s economy plunged into recession with global impacts from the COVID-19 virus pandemic. The economy is likely to suffer substantially in 2020 and 2021 before recovering. Overall SoCalGas’ area jobs are expected to average slow 0.6 percent annual growth from 2019 through 2025. Local manufacturing and mining industrial employment are projected to drop an average of 0.9 percent per year in the same period, with commercial jobs growing about 0.7 percent annually. Jobs in professional, business, health, and social services sectors should grow the fastest, averaging about 2 percent per year from 2019-2025.
FIGURE 9 – SoCalGas 12-COUNTY AREA EMPLOYMENT
Longer term, SoCalGas’ service-area employment is expected to increase slowly as the area population’s average age gradually increases—part of a national demographic trend of aging and 1471 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-95-
retiring Baby Boomers. From 2019 through 2035, total area job growth should average
0.5 percent per year. Area industrial jobs are forecasted to shrink an average of 0.7 percent per year through 2035; we expect the industrial share of total employment to fall from 7.7 percent in 2019 to 6.4 percent by 2035. Commercial jobs are expected to grow an average of 0.6 percent annually from 2019 through 2035.
From 2011-2019 SoCalGas’ service area housing market gradually strengthened after its prior downturn. Starting in 2020, home building and meter hookups are expected to drop due to disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic. Net active meter growth is projected to slow from 35,160 (+0.61 percent) in 2019 to 26,200 (+0.45 percent) in 2020 and 32,400 (+0.55 percent) in 2021. Longer term, SoCalGas expects active meters to average moderate 0.58 percent annual growth from 2019 through 2035.
FIGURE 10 – SoCalGas ANNUAL ACTIVE METERS AND GROWTH RATES 1472 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-96-
GAS DEMAND (REQUIREMENTS)
OVERVIEW
SoCalGas projects total gas demand to decline at an annual rate of 1 percent from 2020-2035. The decline in throughput demand is due to modest economic growth, and CPUC-mandated energy efficiency (EE) standards and programs and SB 350 goals. Other factors that contribute to the downward trend are tighter standards created by revised Title 24 Codes and Standards, renewable electricity goals, a decline in core commercial and industrial demand, and conservation savings linked to Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). By comparison, the 2018 CGR projected an annual decline in demand of 0.74 percent over the forecast horizon.
From 2020-2035, residential demand is expected to decline from 230 Bcf to 198 Bcf. The decline is approximately 1 percent per year, on average. The decline is due to declining use per meter—primarily driven by very aggressive energy efficiency goals and associated programs— offsetting new meter growth. The core, non-residential markets (comprising core commercial, core industrial and NGV) are expected to decline at an average annual rate of 1.0 percent or from 112 Bcf in 2020 to 96 Bcf by 2035. However, the NGV market is expected to grow 1.45 percent over the forecast horizon. The NGV market is expected to grow due to government (federal, state and local) incentives and regulations encouraging the purchase and operation of alternate fuel vehicles as well as the increased use of RNG that provides significant GHG emission reduction benefits. The noncore, non-EG markets are expected to decline 0.3 percent from 174 Bcf in 2020 to 165 Bcf by 2035. That decline is being driven by very aggressive energy efficiency goals and associated programs. Total EG load, including large cogeneration and non-cogeneration EG for a normal hydro year, is expected to decline from 245 Bcf in 2020 to 182 Bcf in 2035, a decrease of 2.0 percent per year.
1473 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-97-
The chart shows the composition of SoCalGas’ throughput for the recorded year 2019 (with weather-sensitive market segments adjusted to average year HDD assumptions) and forecasts for the 2020-2035 forecast period.
FIGURE 11 – COMPOSITION OF SOCALGAS REQUIREMENTS AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND NORMAL HYDRO YEAR (2019-2035)
_______________
Notes:
(1) Core non-residential includes core commercial, core industrial, gas air-conditioning, gas engine, NGVs. (2) Non-core non-EG includes non-core commercial, non-core industrial, industrial refinery, and EOR-steaming (3) Retail EG includes industrial and commercial cogeneration, refinery-related cogeneration, EOR-related cogeneration, and non-cogeneration EG.
(4) Wholesale includes sales to the City of Long Beach, City of Vernon, SDG&E, SWG, and Ecogas in Mexico.
ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING BUILDING DECARBONIZATION POLICY
Signed into law in September 2018, California AB 3232 calls on the CEC (working in consultation with the CPUC and other state agencies) to develop and articulate plans and projections, by year 2021, to reduce GHG emissions of California’s residential and commercial buildings to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Much of the reduction will likely occur by replacing some buildings’ gas end-use applications with electric ones. The CEC plans to develop and publish quantified projections of these electric-for gas substitutions in its 2021 IEPR. Since no state projections of AB 3232 1474 of 2287 -driven fuel substitutions are yet available, the 2020
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-98-
CGR and the ensuing gas demand forecasts do not include impacts from these policy changes. It is anticipated that state-projected impacts will be included in the 2022 CGR, assuming state projections are available by that time.
MARKET SENSITIVITY
TEMPERATURE
Core demand forecasts are prepared for two design temperature conditions—average year and cold year—to quantify changes in space heating demand due to weather. Temperature variations can cause significant changes in winter gas demand due to space heating in the residential, core commercial and core industrial markets. The largest core demand variations due to temperature are likely to occur in the month of December. HDD differences between the two temperature conditions are developed from a six-zone temperature monitoring procedure within SoCalGas’ service territory. One HDD is defined when the average temperature for the day drops 1 degree below 65 degrees F. The cold design temperature conditions are based on a statistical likelihood of occurrence of 1-in-35 on an annual basis.
In our 2020 CGR, SoCalGas and SDG&E have introduced a climate-change warming trend that gradually reduces HDD’s over the forecast period. First, average temperature year values were computed as the simple average of annual HDD’s for the calendar years 2000 through 2019: 1,273 HDD’s for SoCalGas and 1,186 HDD’s for SDG&E. Corresponding cold year HDD’s were 1,518 for SoCalGas and 1,399 for SDG&E. For the forecast period, projected annual HDD’s were reduced each year by 4 HDD’s for SoCalGas and by 2 HDD’s for SDG&E.
For SoCalGas, projected average year and cold year HDD’s both drop by 4 HDD annually: from 1,269 and 1,514 in year 2020, to 1,209 and 1,454 in year 2035. For SDG&E, projected average year and cold year HDD’s drop by 2 HHD annually: from 1,184 and 1,397 in year 2020, to 1,154 and 1,367 in year 2035. The annual reductions are based on the latest 20-year trend in 20-year-averaged HDDs. That is, they are based on the observed trend in changes starting with average HDD’s for years 1981-2000, then 1982-2001, 1983-2002...and ending with the average HDD’s for years 2000-2019.
HYDRO CONDITIONS
The EG forecasts are prepared for two hydro conditions—average year and dry hydro.
The Cold/Dry Hydro forecast refers to gas demand in a 1-in-10 dry hydro year. 1475 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-99-
MARKET SECTORS
RESIDENTIAL
Residential demand adjusted for temperature totaled 237.5 Bcf in 2019. The residential load is expected to decline on average by 1.1 percent per year from 237.5 Bcf in 2019 to 198.3 Bcf in 2035. The decrease in gas demand results from a combination of continued decline in residential use per meter, increases in marginal gas rates, the impact of savings from SoCalGas’ AMI project deployment which began in 2013 and CPUC authorized energy efficiency program savings in this market. These energy efficiency savings are forecasted to lead to demand reductions in the residential sector by a total of 18.8 Bcf in year 2035.
The total residential customer count for SoCalGas consists of five residential segment types:
(1) single family, (2) small multi-family, (3) large multi-family, (4) master meter, and (5) sub-metered customers. The active meters for all residential customer classes were
5.61 million at the end of 2019. This amount reflects a 68,331 increase in active meters between 2017 at year end and 2019 at year end. The 2020 CGR shows that in 2019, single family and overall multi-family temperature adjusted average annual use per meter was 468 therms and 292 therms, respectively. Over the forecast period, the demand is expected to decline to 442 therms/customer and 238 therms/customer, respectively. The decline in use per meter for residential customers is explained by conservation, improved building and appliance standards, aggressive energy efficiency programs, and demand reductions anticipated as the result of the deployment of AMI in the Southern California area. With AMI, customers will have more timely information available about their daily and hourly gas use and thereby are expected to use gas more efficiently.
The projected residential natural gas demand is influenced primarily by residential meter growth, moderated by the forecasted decline in use per customer. The residential load trend over the forecast period is illustrated in the graph below.
1476 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-100-
FIGURE 12 – COMPOSITION OF SoCalGas’ RESIDENTIAL DEMAND FORECAST (2019-2035)
COMMERCIAL
The core commercial market demand is expected to decline over the forecast period. On a temperature-adjusted basis, the 2019 core commercial market demand totaled 82.8 Bcf. By the year 2035, the load is anticipated to drop to approximately 62.5 Bcf. The average annual rate of decline from 2019-2035 is forecasted at 1.7 percent. The decline in gas usage is mainly the result of the impact of CPUC-authorized portfolio of energy efficiency programs and Title 24 codes building standards in this market.
In 2019, the noncore commercial temperature-adjusted usage was 18.3 Bcf. From 2019 through 2035, demand in this market is expected to rise slightly at approximate annual rate of 0.08 percent. By 2035, the noncore commercial load is expected to reach 18.6 Bcf. 1477 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-101-
FIGURE 13 – ANNUAL COMMERCIAL DEMAND FORECAST 2019-2035 BILLION CUBIC FEET PER YEAR (Bcf/y), AVERAGE YEAR WEATHER DESIGN FIGURE 14 – COMMERCIAL GAS DEMAND BY BUSINESS TYPE
COMPOSITION OF INDUSTRY
(2019)
1478 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-102-
The commercial market consists of 14 business types identified by the customers’ North American Industry Classification System codes. It represents includes both core and noncore usage. The restaurant business dominates this market with 24.5 percent of commercial usage in 2019, followed by the health services industry with a 12.4 percent share.
INDUSTRIAL
Non-Refinery Industrial Demand
In 2019, temperature-adjusted core industrial demand was 21.0 Bcf. Core industrial market demand is projected to drop by 2.3 percent per year from 21.0 Bcf in 2019 to 14.4 Bcf in 2035.
This decrease results from a combination of factors: an annual 0.7 percent decrease in employment growth, a minor increase in marginal gas rates and CPUC-authorized energy efficiency programs.
The 2019 non-refinery industrial gas demand served by SoCalGas is shown below. Food and beverage manufacturing, with 36 percent of the total share, dominates this market. The graph below summarizes the composition of the core and noncore market by business type.
FIGURE 15 – ANNUAL INDUSTRIAL DEMAND FORECAST (Bcf)
(2019-2035)
1479 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-103-
FIGURE 16 – INDUSTRIAL GAS DEMAND BY BUSINESS TYPE
COMPOSITION OF INDUSTRY
(2019)
Gas demand for the retail noncore industrial (non-refinery) market is expected to decline at an annual rate of 0.9 percent from 51 Bcf in 2019 to 45 Bcf by 2035. The reduced demand is primarily due to the CPUC-authorized energy efficiency programs, the departure of customers within the City of Vernon to wholesale service by the City of Vernon, and higher gas costs stemming from California’s GHG carbon fees.
Refinery-Industrial Demand
Refinery-industrial demand is comprised of gas consumption by petroleum refining customers, H2 producers and refined petroleum product transporters. Gas demand in the refinery industrial market sector is forecasted to decline about 0.2 percent per year over the 2019-2035 forecast period, from 93 Bcf in 2019 to 90 Bcf in 2035. The decrease in the forecast period is primarily due to the estimated savings from CPUC-authorized energy efficiency programs. 1480 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-104-
ELECTRIC GENERATION
FIGURE 17 – SoCalGas SERVICE AREA TOTAL EG
(Bcf)
The electric generation sector includes all commercial/industrial cogeneration, EOR-related cogeneration, and non-cogeneration electric generation. The forecast of electric generation (EG) load is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. Forecast uncertainty is, in large part, due to load sensitivity to weather conditions, regional fuel price differences, the construction and retirement of power generating facilities (including thermal, renewable, and energy storage resources), the amount of California’s import/export energy, and the state’s overall long-term electricity demand growth. The EG gas throughput forecast can be higher or lower than the Average Demand forecast, depending on the factors mentioned above. Forecasted electricity demand is a major factor. If the electricity demand forecast is higher, the EG gas throughput forecast would also tend to be higher. Please refer to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report for high, mid, and low electricity demand scenarios. On the supply side, lower SoCalGas Citygate gas prices relative to other regions, less energy imported into California, and dry hydro conditions are also factors that would increase the EG gas throughput forecast.
1481 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-105-
Additionally, many once-through-cooling (OTC) plants in California are scheduled to either retire or repower during the forecasted period. These are mostly gas-fired thermal plants, located near the coast, that use ocean water for cooling. There are several plants that are schedule to shut down by December 31, 2020. However, as of March 18, 2020, SWRCB has amended the OTC Policy to extend the compliance date for some of the power plants for an additional 1-3 years.
These plants include Alamitos, Huntington Beach, Ormond Beach, and Redondo Beach generating stations.
The forecast uses a power market simulation for the period of 2020-2030. The simulation reflects the anticipated dispatch of all EG resources in the SoCalGas service territory using a base electricity demand scenario under both average and low hydroelectric availability market conditions. The Average Demand assumes that the state will reach its 60 percent RPS by 2030, as mandated in SB 100. The Average Demand also assumes the IOUs will meet D.13-10-040, or the energy storage procurement framework and design program. Furthermore, the Average Demand also includes additional energy storage as outlined in CPUC’s “Revised 2019 Unified Resource Adequacy and Integrated Resource Plan Inputs and Assumptions – Guidance for Production Cost Modeling and Network Reliability Studies.” There is substantial uncertainty as to how this will be implemented, and its impact on gas throughput is unknown. Due to the large uncertainty in the timing and type of generating plants that could be added after 2030, the EG forecast is held constant at 2030 levels through 2035.
For electricity demand within California, SoCalGas relies on the CEC’s California Energy Demand 2019‐2030 Managed Forecast, dated February 2020. SoCalGas selected the Mid Energy Demand scenario with the Mid AAEE. In their CEC forecast, the state-wide energy demand is lower than prior forecasts used in the 2018 CGR from years 2020-2028, and slightly higher for years 2029 and 2030. However, for Southern California, the energy demand is slightly higher for the years 2020-2030 than prior CEC electric demand forecasts.
Industrial/Commercial/Cogeneration <20 MW
The commercial/industrial cogeneration market segment is generally comprised of customers with generating capacity of less than 20 MW of electric power. Most of the cogeneration units in this segment are installed primarily to generate electricity for internal customer consumption rather than for the sale of power to electric utilities. Customers in this market segment install their own EG equipment for both economic reasons (gas powered 1482 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-106-
systems produce electricity cheaper than purchasing it from a local electric utility) and reliability reasons (lower purchased power prices are realized only for interruptible service). In 2019, gas demand in the small cogeneration market was 28 Bcf. By 2035, cogeneration demand is projected to decline modestly to 27 Bcf (an average of 0.3 percent/year). The reduced demand is primarily due to higher gas costs due to California’s GHG carbon fees.
Refinery-Related Cogeneration
Refinery cogeneration units are installed primarily to generate electricity for internal use.
This market is forecasted to decline modestly at about 0.1 percent per year, decreasing from 23 Bcf in 2019 to 22 Bcf in 2035. The decline is mainly due to higher gas costs stemming from California’s GHG carbon fees.
Enhanced Oil Recovery-Related Cogeneration
In 2019, recorded gas deliveries to the EOR-related cogeneration were 6.2 Bcf. EOR demand is forecasted to remain at 6.2 Bcf throughout the forecast period. Crude oil futures prices appear to be flat for the immediate future which is expected to result in California EOR operations staying steady going forward.
Electric Generation, Including Large Cogen
EG customers are comprised of utility electric generation (UEG) customers, various Exempt Wholesale Generator (EWG) customers and large cogeneration customers where usage exceeds 20 MW. For the Average Demand (average hydro condition), gas demand is forecasted to decrease from 188 Bcf in 2020 to 127 Bcf in 2030. The main factors for the decline are an increasing RPS target level, retirement of older gas-fired plants, and the addition of more efficient gas-fired plants. SB 100 raised the RPS target level from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030. SoCalGas’ forecast includes the addition of approximately 1,382 MW of new, local, gas-fired combined cycle and peaking generating resources in its service area by summer 2020.
However, the forecast also assumes 5,370 MW of local, gas-fired plants will be retired during the same time period as a result of the state’s OTC regulation and economics. To account for dry climate conditions, a 1-in-10 dry hydro sensitivity gas demand forecast was created. This dry hydro forecast increases gas demand by 17 Bcf per year, on average. 1483 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-107-
For this forecast, SoCalGas followed CPUC’s guideline for energy storage resources. In the model, a state-wide installed capacity of 754 MW was added starting in 2020. Storage capacity increases to 3,638 MW by 2030.
WHOLESALE AND INTERNATIONAL
SoCalGas provides wholesale transportation service to SDG&E, the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department (Long Beach), SWG, and the City of Vernon (Vernon), and Ecogas Mexico, L. de R.L. de C.V. The wholesale load excluding SDG&E is expected to decrease from 39 Bcf in 2019 to 38.58 Bcf in 2035. The change reflects a 0.07 percent average annual decrease.
SDG&E
Under average year temperature and normal hydro conditions, SDG&E gas demand is expected to decrease at an average rate of 0.6 percent per year from 86.3 Bcf in 2019 to 78 Bcf in 2035. Additional information regarding SDG&E’s gas demand is provided in the SDG&E section of this report.
City of Long Beach
The wholesale load forecast is based on forecast information provided by the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department. Long Beach’s gas use is expected to decline slightly, from 9 Bcf in 2019 to 8 Bcf by 2035. Refer to the City of Long Beach Energy Resources Department for more information.
Southwest Gas Corporation
SoCalGas used the forecast prepared by Southwest Gas for this report. In 2019, SoCalGas delivered 10.3 Bcf to Southwest Gas and the total load is expected to remain flat at this level throughout the forecast horizon. Refer to SWG for more information.
City of Vernon
The City of Vernon initiated municipal gas service to its electric power plant within the city’s jurisdiction in June 2005. Since 2005, there has also been a gradual increase of commercial/industrial gas demand as customers within the city boundaries have left the SoCalGas retail system and interconnected with Vernon’s municipal gas system. The forecasted throughput starts at 8.5 Bcf in 2019 and increases to 9.24 Bcf by 2035. The forecasted 1484 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-108-
throughput includes Core and Non-Core customers and includes Malburg Power Plant throughput. Vernon’s commercial and industrial load is based on recorded historical usage for commercial and industrial customers already served by Vernon plus the customers that are expected to request retail service from Vernon.
Ecogas Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Ecogas)
SoCalGas used the forecast prepared by Ecogas for this report. Ecogas’ use is expected to remain steady at a level of 11.13 Bcf/y over the forecast horizon 2020-2035. Refer to Ecogas or IENova, Ecogas’ parent company, for more information.
Enhanced Oil Recovery-Steam
In 2019, recorded gas deliveries to the EOR market were 11.76 Bcf. EOR demand is forecasted to remain at 11.76 Bcf throughout the forecast period. Crude oil futures prices appear to be flat for the immediate future which is expected to result in California EOR operations staying steady going forward.
The EOR-related cogeneration demand is discussed in the EG section.
NATURAL GAS VEHICLES
The NGV market is expected to grow due to government (federal, state and local) incentives and regulations encouraging the purchase and operation of alternate fuel vehicles, as well as the increased use of RNG that provides significant GHG emission reduction benefits.
However, growth may be offset by competing technologies and fuels as well as the potentially lower cost differential between petroleum (gasoline and diesel) and natural gas.
At the end of 2019, there were 335 CNG fueling stations delivering 15.1 Bcf of natural gas during the year. The NGV market is expected to grow 1.44 percent per year, on average. At the end of 2035, it is expected there will be 418 CNG fueling stations delivering 19 Bcf of natural gas during the year.
1485 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-109-
FIGURE 18 – NGV DEMAND FORECAST
(2019-2035)
ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS
SoCalGas engages in a number of energy efficiency and conservation programs designed to help customers identify and implement ways to benefit environmentally and financially from energy efficiency investments. Programs administered by SoCalGas include services that help customers evaluate their energy efficiency options and adopt recommended solutions, as well as simple equipment-retrofit improvements, such as rebates for new hot water heaters.
The forecast of cumulative natural gas savings due to SoCalGas’ energy efficiency programs is provided in the figure below. The net load impact includes all energy efficiency programs that SoCalGas has forecasted to occur through year 2035.
The EE portfolio combines the EE customer programs goals and the Title 24 Codes and Standards. SoCalGas’ EE forecast is based on inputs from the 2020 energy efficiency annual budget advice letter (AL 5510-A), utilizing program level energy savings values forecasted for the 2020 program year. Forecasted savings for the 2021-2030 period are based on the 2020 EE forecast scaled to the goals approved in the recent EE proceeding goals decision, D.19-08-034, which set EE goals through 2030. Forecasted savings beyond 2030 are held constant based on 2030 forecasted values. Cumulative savings reflect the lifecycle EE program achievements from 1486 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-110-
forecasted program savings starting in 2020 and do not include lifecycle savings from prior program years. SoCalGas currently uses a 15-year lifecycle for cumulative savings calculations.
COMBINED EE PORTFOLIO OF EE PROGRAMS AND CODES AND STANDARDS FIGURE 19 – SoCalGas ANNUAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY CUMULATIVE SAVINGS GOALS (BCF)
Savings reported are for measures installed under SoCalGas’ energy efficiency programs.
Credit is only taken for measures that are installed as a result of SoCalGas’ energy efficiency programs, and only for the estimated measure lives of the measures installed. Measures with useful lives less than the forecast planning period fall out of the forecast when their expected life is reached.
1487 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-111-
GAS SUPPLY, CAPACITY, AND STORAGE
GAS SUPPLY SOURCES
SoCalGas and SDG&E receive gas supplies from several sedimentary basins in the Western U.S. and Canada including supply basins located in New Mexico (San Juan Basin), West Texas (Permian Basin), Rocky Mountains, Western Canada, and local California supplies.
Recorded 2015 through 2019 receipts from gas supply sources can be found in the Sources and Disposition tables in the Executive Summary.
CALIFORNIA GAS
Gas supply available to SoCalGas and SDG&E from California sources averaged 97 MMcf/d in 2019.
SOUTH-WESTERN U.S. GAS
Traditional South-Western U.S. sources of natural gas will continue to supply most of Southern California’s natural gas demand. This gas is primarily delivered via the El Paso Natural Gas pipeline with some volumes also on Transwestern pipeline. The San Juan Basin’s gas supplies peaked in 1999 and have been declining at an annual rate of roughly 2 percent. The Permian Basin has experienced a major increase in gas production as a byproduct of the tremendous amount of oil development in the area. The increase positioned the Permian Basin as a preferred gas supply source of economical gas. Permian gas production increased over 100 percent during the period 2017-2019. In early 2020 Permian Basin oil and gas production began to decline due to sharply lower oil prices.
Mexican demand for South-Western U.S. gas along with East of California demand continue to steadily increase and compete for South-Western supplies. This increased demand, which has been more than offset by the recent increase in Permian gas production, will continue to compete with Southern California for South-West supplies.
ROCKY MOUNTAIN GAS
Rocky Mountain supply supplements traditional South-Western U.S. gas sources for Southern California. This gas is delivered to Southern California primarily on the Kern River 1488 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-112-
Gas Transmission Company’s pipeline, although there is also access to Rockies gas through pipelines interconnected to the San Juan Basin. Many pipelines that supplying other markets connect to Rocky Mountain region, which allows these supplies to be redirected from lower to higher value markets as conditions change. Kern River Gas Transmissions volumes to Southern California have surpassed Transwestern pipeline’s deliveries of South-Western supplies.
CANADIAN GAS
Canadian gas only provides a small share of Southern California gas supplies due to the high cost of transport.
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
Since methane can come from the decomposition of organic matter, there are ways to generate natural gas other than extracting it from the ground. Biogas is produced from existing waste streams and a variety of renewable and sustainable biomass sources, including animal waste, crop residuals and food waste. Methane can also be produced by the combustion-free thermal conversion of agricultural crop residues, silvicultural residue, wood waste, and municipal sewage sludge or biosolids. The most common source of biogas is the naturally occurring biological breakdown of organic waste at facilities such as wastewater treatment plants and landfills.
The abundance of these materials allows for production of substantial quantities of biogas.
A study conducted by the University of California, Davis estimates that more than 20 percent of SoCalGas’s current residential natural gas use can be provided by biogas derived from our state’s existing organic waste alone.65 In the transportation sector, that’s enough to replace around 20 percent of the fuel used by heavy-duty trucks in the state. This can help reduce the need for other fossil-based fuels while boosting our supplies with a locally sourced renewable fuel.
Looking outside California, the opportunity to produce biogas is vast. According to estimates, 65 The Feasibility of Renewable Natural Gas as a Large-Scale, Low Carbon Substitute, prepared for the CARB and the California EPA by Amy Jaffe, Principal Investigator, STEPS Program, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
1489 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-113-
the U.S. could produce up to 10 trillion cubic feet of biogas annually by 2030—that is more than five times California’s projected natural gas consumption.66 A more recent study by ICF estimated a nation-wide potential range for RNG in 2040 of between 813-1,425 Bcf per year for RNG from Anaerobic Digestion, between 487-1,713 Bcf per year from Thermal Gasification and 265-695 BCF per year from Municipal Solid Waste.67 The study also estimated a potential range for RNG in 2040 for the Pacific region68 of 126-213 Bcf per year for RNG from Anaerobic Digestion, 22-51 Bcf per year from Thermal Gasification and 45-108 BCF per year from Municipal Solid Waste, for a total ‘Pacific’ region estimate of between 193-372 Bcf per year which would represent approximately 66 percent to 126 percent of SoCalGas’ 2035 projected core natural gas consumption.
INTERSTATE PIPELINE CAPACITY
California utilities and end-users benefit from access to supply basins and enhanced gas-on-gas and pipeline-on-pipeline competition. Interstate, international and intrastate pipelines serving Southern and Central California include the El Paso, Mojave, Transwestern, Kern River, TGN, North Baja, and PG&E pipelines. These pipelines provide Southern and Central California with access to gas-producing regions in the U.S. Southwest and Rocky Mountain areas, Western Canada, California Production and Mexico LNG. Indicated firm capacities for each zone are specified in the SoCalGas G-BTS Rate Schedule.
SoCalGas’ Southern Zone is connected to U.S. Southwest and Mexico pipeline systems at Ehrenberg, Blythe and Otay Mesa (El Paso, North Baja, and TGN). The Southern Zone has a firm capacity of 1210 MMcf/d.
SoCalGas’ Northern Zone is connected to U.S. South-West and Rocky Mountain pipeline systems (Transwestern, El Paso, Kern River and Mojave) at Needles, west of Topock AZ, and 66 U.S. DOE: 2016 Billion-Ton Report: Advancing Domestic Resources for a Thriving Bioeconomy, Volume 1: Economic Availability of Feedstocks. M. H. Langholtz, B. J. Stokes, and L. M. Eaton (Leads), ORNL/TM-2016/160. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. 448p. doi:
10.2172/1271651; 2030 values achievable at $60/ton.
67 Renewable Sources of Natural Gas: Supply and Emissions Reduction Assessment, ICF, p. 13. 68 Pacific Region is defined as production in the states of Alaska, California, Oregon, Hawaii, and Washington. 1490 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-114-
Kramer Junction. The Northern Zone has a nominal firm capacity of 1590 MMcf/d, but is projected to be less than this through the CGR plan period, due to extended maintenance activity.
SoCalGas’ Wheeler Zone is connected to Kern River/Mojave, OEHI Gosford, and PG&E that access supplies from the U.S. Southwest, Rocky Mountain, and Western Canada production areas and California production from Elk Hills. Wheeler Zone’s firm capacity is 765 MMcf/d.
FIGURE 20 – RECEIPT POINT AND TRANSMISSION ZONE FIRM CAPACITIES
STORAGE
Underground storage of natural gas plays a vital role in balancing the region’s energy supply and demand, and for system-wide reliability.69 Natural gas storage is also used to meet peak 69 California Council on Science and Technology (CCST), January 2018, Long-Term Viability of Underground Natural Gas Storage in California, An Independent Review of Scientific and Technical Information, Conclusion 2.4 at 504, available at: http://ccst.us/publications/2018/Full TechnicalReportv2.pdf.
1491 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-115-
daily and seasonal gas demand and to hedge against price volatility in natural gas commodity markets. In addition, natural gas storage has played a role in addressing emergency situations, including extreme weather and wildfires.70 SoCalGas owns and operates four natural gas storage facilities within Southern California: Aliso Canyon, Honor Rancho, La Goleta, and Playa Del Rey.
In southern California, natural gas storage fields are in areas with specific underground geologic characteristics, and in proximity to local gas consumers and transmission and distribution pipelines. Storage natural gas is withdrawn and delivered to customers through SoCalGas’ transmission and distribution system when customer demand exceeds flowing natural gas supplies and for system balancing.
SoCalGas’ natural gas storage fields have a combined theoretical storage working inventory capacity of more than 130 Bcf.71 However, the combined working inventory for SoCalGas is reduced due to current working inventory regulatory restrictions imposed at Aliso Canyon.
Aliso Canyon historically has had a stated natural gas storage working inventory of
86.2 Bcf.72 Since 2015,73 the CPUC and CalGEM74 have maintained restrictions on SoCalGas’ use of Aliso Canyon. In July 2018, the CPUC approved a maximum working inventory of 34 Bcf for Aliso Canyon to support system reliability.75 The CPUC and CalGEM may, in the future, authorize a different maximum inventory.
Since November 2017, the CPUC also developed a Withdrawal Protocol for Aliso Canyon, describing the process to be followed before making a withdrawal from the storage facility. In July 2019, in order to improve short-term reliability and price 70 Id., Conclusion 2.5 at 506.
71 SoCalGas 2019 General Rate Case (GRC) Filing, Exhibit SCG-10-R, p. NPN-3 and NPN-4. 72 As of July 19, 2017, CalGEM has authorized Aliso Canyon to operate with a working inventory of equivalently 68.6 Bcf.
73 Aliso Canyon experienced a natural gas leak in well SS25 on October 23, 2015. The leak was stopped on February 11, 2016 and SS25 was permanently sealed on February 18, 2016. 74 Formerly, DOGGR.
75 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC_Public_Website/Content/News_ Room/715Report_Summer2018_Final.pdf.
1492 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-116-
stability in the Southern California region, the CPUC deemed that Aliso Canyon be used for withdrawals if certain conditions are met.76
In recognition of the safety enhancements SoCalGas has completed at Aliso Canyon and the importance of Aliso Canyon to southern California reliability,77 SoCalGas continues to request that regulators lift withdrawal restrictions at Aliso Canyon.
STORAGE REGULATIONS
Since 2015, the CPUC, CalGEM, and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) have proposed and adopted various regulations addressing natural gas storage requirements and standards including safety and reliability. SoCalGas is committed to working with various regulating bodies and policy makers to promote safe and reliable energy and natural gas storage services.
Most recently, PHMSA issued their Final Rule for Underground Storage regulations, CFR Part 192.12, amending its minimum safety standards for underground natural gas storage facilities, effective March 13, 2020. The PHMSA Final Rule adopts API RP 1171, Functional Integrity of Natural Gas Storage in Depleted Hydrocarbon Reservoirs and Aquifer Reservoirs, as published, modifies compliance timelines, formalizes integrity management practices, and clarifies the state’s regulatory role.
CalGEM established 14 California Code of Regulations §1726 California Underground Gas Storage regulations effective October 1, 2018, which includes, among other things, mechanical testing mandates that require each well to be taken out-of-service as frequently as every 76 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUCWebsite/Content/News_Room/ NewsUpdates/2020/WithdrawalProtocol-Revised-April12020clean.pdf. 77 SoCalGas completed a comprehensive safety review of the facility and created multiple layers of safety at Aliso Canyon, and in July of 2017 the CPUC and CalGEM formally determined that Aliso Canyon is safe to operate, any risks of failure had been identified and addressed, and well integrity had been verified. See, e.g., July 19, 2017, SB 380 Findings and Concurrence Regarding the Safety of the Aliso Canyon Gas Storage Facility. 1493 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-117-
24 months, unless an alternative frequency is approved by CalGEM,78 and semi-annual field shut-in tests for inventory verification.
78 SoCalGas has submitted its Risk Management Plan to CalGEM, which proposes an alternative inspection frequency that would, among other things, reduce impacts to deliverability associated with a 24-month well re-assessment schedule. 1494 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-118-
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
STATE REGULATORY MATTERS
GENERAL RATE CASE
On September 26, 2019, CPUC unanimously approved a final 2019 GRC decision that adopts a TY 2019 revenue requirement of $2.770 billion for SoCalGas which is $166 million lower than the $2.937 billion that SoCalGas had requested in its Update testimony. The adopted revenue requirement represents an increase of $314 million or a 12.8 percent increase over 2018.
The final decision adopts PTY revenue requirement adjustments for SoCalGas of $220 million for 2020 (7.9 percent increase) and $150 million for 2021 (5.0 percent increase).
In January 2020 the CPUC revised the rate case plans and implemented a 4-year GRC cycle for California IOUs. SoCalGas was directed to file a Petition for Modification (PFM) to revise its 2019 GRC decision to add two additional attrition years including adjustment amounts, resulting in a transitional 5-year GRC period (2019-2023).
In April 2020 (then slightly revised in May), SoCalGas filed a PFM of its 2019 GRC decision requesting attrition year increases of $155 million (+4.95 percent) for 2022 and $137 million (+4.15 percent) for 2023. SoCalGas requested that a final decision be issued no later than October 1, 2020.
GAS RELIABILITY AND PLANNING OIR
The CPUC initiated a new rulemaking (R.20-01-007) to update gas reliability standards, determine the regulatory changes necessary to improve coordination between gas utilities and gas-fired electric generators, and implement a long-term planning strategy to manage the state’s transition away from natural gas-fueled technologies to meet California’s decarbonization goals.
The rulemaking will be managed in two phases and Phase 1 will include two tracks.
Track 1A will address reliability standards and focus on SoCalGas’ and PG&E’s system capabilities, the adequacy of existing gas reliability standards, whether slack capacity should be encouraged, whether transportation of gas to the planned Energía Costa Azul LNG export facility will impact reliability and prices, whether updated reliability standards will result in additional 1495 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-119-
costs, and what cost recovery and allocation mechanisms should be used. Track 1B will address market structure and regulations, with a focus on interstate pipeline capacity, impacts on EG, and system operating procedures. A decision in Phase 1 is expected by May 2021. Phase 2 will address long-term planning and a schedule will be established after the completion of Phase 1.
Preliminarily, Phase 2 is expected to address the appropriate gas infrastructure portfolio for gas utilities operating in California, the need to reconsider gas rate design and cost allocation methods, management of the natural gas transition indicated by the long-range portfolio modeling in the CPUC’s IRP Program, and utility workforce consideration.
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION POLICY
In September 2018, former Governor Brown signed two bills into law related to reducing GHG emissions from buildings, SB 1477 and AB 3232. SB 1477 calls on the CPUC to develop, in consultation with the CEC, two programs (BUILD and TECH) aimed at reducing GHG emissions associated with buildings. AB 3232 calls on the Energy Commission by 2021 to develop plans and projections to reduce GHG emissions of California’s residential and commercial buildings to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, working in consultation with the CPUC and other state agencies.
In January 2019, the CPUC issued an OIR on building decarbonization (R.19-01-011).
The proposed scope of the rulemaking includes: (1) implementing SB 1477; (2) potential pilot programs to address new construction in areas damaged by wildfires; (3) coordinating CPUC policies with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and Title 20 Appliance Efficiency Standards developed at the CEC; and (4) establishing a building decarbonization policy framework. A final decision D.20-03-027 was issued on April 6, 2020, which establishes a framework for CPUC oversight of two building decarbonization pilot programs—the Building Initiative for Low-Emissions Development (BUILD Program) program and the Technology and Equipment for Clean Heating (TECH Initiative) initiative. These two pilot programs are designed to develop valuable market experience for the purpose of decarbonizing California’s residential buildings in order to achieve California’s zero-emissions goals. SB 1477 makes available $50 million annually for 4 years, for a total of $200 million, derived from the revenue generated from GHG emission allowances directly allocated to gas corporations and consigned to auction as part of the Air Resources Board’s (ARB) Cap-and-Trade Program. Incentive eligibility for the BUILD Program shall be limited strictly to newly constructed all-electric building projects, without any hookup to the gas distribution grid. 1496 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-120-
AFFORDABILITY OIR
On July 12, 2018 the Commission instituted the OIR (R.18-07-006) to develop a common understanding, methods and processes to assess, the impacts on affordability of individual Commission proceedings and utility rate requests. This OIR includes gas, electric, water and communications utilities. On July16, 2020 the Commission issued its decision (D.20-07-032), which defines affordability as the degree to which a representative household is able to pay for an essential utility service, given its socioeconomic status. This decision also adopts three metrics and supporting methodologies to be used by the Commission for assessing the affordability of essential utility services, including: hours at minimum wage required to pay for essential utility services; vulnerability index of various communities; and ratio of essential utility service charges to non-disposable household income—known as the affordability ratio. The decision does not adopt an absolute definition of what constitutes affordable essential utility services; rather, the decision adopts metrics and methodologies for assessing affordability across utilities over time. The decision also authorizes a Phase 2 to the proceeding.
PIPELINE SAFETY
In 2011, the CPUC issued an OIR, R.11-02-019, to develop and adopt new regulations on pipeline safety, requiring that the utilities file implementation plans to test or replace natural gas transmission pipelines that do not have sufficient record of a pressure test.
SoCalGas and SDG&E jointly filed their comprehensive Pipeline Safety Enhancement Plan (PSEP) on August 26, 2011, pursuant to D.11-06-017. The comprehensive plan covered all of the utilities’ approximately 4,000 miles of transmission lines and would be implemented in two phases. Phase 1 focuses on populated areas and Phase 2 covers less populated areas of SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s service territories.
In June 2014, the CPUC issued D.14-06-007 approving the utilities’ plan for implementing PSEP, subject to after-the-fact reasonableness review, established criteria to determine the costs that may be recovered from ratepayers, and authorized the establishment of balancing accounts to facilitate the recovery of costs for implementing Phase 1.
Subsequently, in D.16‐12‐063 the Commission approved SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s joint application, (Application (A.) 14‐12‐016, requesting review and recovery of $33.2 million, which is a portion of the tracked PSEP costs incurred prior to June 12, 2014. Additionally, 1497 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-121-
D.16-08-003, approved SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s application (A.15‐06‐013) to establish Phase 2 memorandum accounts. The decision also authorized 50 percent interim cost recovery for Phase 1 actual revenue requirements booked to the regulatory accounts subject to refund, and a long-term procedural schedule for PSEP going forward. D.16‐08‐003 ordered SoCalGas and SDG&E to transition PSEP to the GRC starting with Test Year 2019 and that future GRC applications could include PSEP costs until implementation of the Plan is complete.
From 2011 through April 2020, SoCalGas and SDG&E have invested approximately $1.8 billion and $464 million, respectively, in PSEP, with additional expenditures planned.
In D,19-02-004, the Commission approved SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s second PSEP Reasonableness Review application (A.16‐09‐005), which presented costs totaling $195 million (including certain costs for which the utilities are not seeking recovery) of pipeline safety projects completed by June 30, 2015. The Commission approved cost recovery of approximately $187 million ($172 million for SoCalGas and $15 million for SDG&E).
In D.19-03-025, the Commission also approved SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s PSEP forecast application (A.17‐03‐021), finding $254.5 million associated with twelve SoCalGas Phase 1B and 2A pipeline projects reasonable and eligible for cost recovery. The decision directs SoCalGas and SDG&E to record costs to a one‐way balancing account on an aggregate basis and balance to the authorized revenue requirements.
In December 2018, SoCalGas and SDG&E filed a third joint PSEP reasonableness review application (A.18‐11‐010) requesting cost review and rate recovery for 83 completed Phase 1 projects. The total costs submitted for review are approximately $941 million ($811 million for SoCalGas and $130 million for SDG&E). SoCalGas and SDG&E anticipate a decision from the Commission in 2020.
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY OIR
In 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. signed into law AB 2672. This legislation added Public Utilities Code (Pub. Util. Code) Section 783.5, seeking to increase affordable access to energy for disadvantaged communities in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV). Pursuant to Pub. Util.
Code § 783.5, R.15-03-010 was initiated in March 2015, with the initial scope of the proceeding limited to identifying eligible disadvantaged communities. D.17-05-014 adopted a methodology for the identification of communities eligible under Section 1498 of 2287 783.5, and subsequently Phase 2
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-122-
commenced to address pilot projects and data gathering needs for evaluation of economically feasible energy options for the identified communities.
Pursuant to the updated scoping ruling in R.15-03-010 issued in December 2017, SoCalGas submitted natural gas pilot proposals in January 2018 for seven communities to extend existing pipelines, install gas service to each household, and replace existing propane appliances with new, energy efficient natural gas appliances. In December 2018, SoCalGas was approved to administer a natural gas pilot project in one community, California City, with a budget of $5.6 million.
MOBILE HOME PARK UTILITY UPGRADE PROGRAM
In February 2011, the Commission issued R.11-02-018 to examine what should be done to encourage mobile home parks (MHP) and manufactured housing communities to transfer to direct utility service. In March 2014, D.14-03-021 approved a three-year pilot program (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2017) to incentivize voluntary conversions of master-metered service at MHPs at a target rate of 10 percent of the spaces within their service territories. In December 2014, the Commission approved Rule No. 44, establishing the MHP Upgrade Program, pursuant to D.14-03-021.
In September 2017, the CPUC issued Resolution (Res.) E-4878 approving SDG&E and SoCalGas’ Advice Letters to continue converting 8,100 MHP spaces, or approximately an incremental 5 percent of MHP spaces through 2019. Subsequently, in March 2019, Res.E-4958 authorized an extension of the program through 2021, converting an additional 3.33 percent of spaces in years 2020 and 2021.
In April 2018, the CPUC opened R.18-04-018 to evaluate the existing MHP Pilot Program to determine whether to expand beyond the initial 3-year pilot into a permanent MHP Program.
On April 16, 2020, the CPUC voted to establish a 10-year the Mobile Home Park Utility Conversion Program (MHP Program) with a goal of converting 50 percent of eligible MHP spaces, pursuant to D.20-04-004.
FEDERAL REGULATORY MATTERS
SoCalGas and SDG&E participate in FERC proceedings involving interstate natural gas pipelines serving California that can affect the cost of gas delivered to their customers.
SoCalGas holds contracts for interstate transportation capacity on the El Paso, Kern 1499 of 2287 River,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-123-
Transwestern, and GTN and Canadian pipelines. SoCalGas and SDG&E also participate in FERC and Canadian regulatory proceedings involving the natural gas industry generally as those proceedings may impact their operations and policies
There has not been any significant activity in this area since the previous CGR was published, as reflected by the items noted below.
EL PASO
El Paso’s rates have been the subject of extensive litigation at FERC in recent years.
El Paso filed its third GRC in 5 years in September 2010. The 2010 rate case proceeded to a hearing on all issues in 2011 (a first since 1959), with the FERC Commission issuing an initial decision, Opinion No. 528, in 2013, a revised decision, Opinion No. 528-A, issued in 2016, and a further (and likely final) decision, Opinion No. 528-B, in May of 2018. Collectively, these decisions ruled on issues related to revenue requirements, abandonment costs, cost allocation, and rate design. These FERC decisions are currently under review before the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia Circuit. A decision from the Court of Appeals is anticipated by the end of 2020.
KERN RIVER
A final ruling was issued in 2013 in Kern River’s 2004 GRC. The ruling denied many rehearing requests to revisit the issues litigated in this case and accepted a series of orders retaining Kern River’s original 1992 levelized rate design, resulting in reduced rates for eligible shippers, who renew their contracts for another 10- or 15-year period. At the time of this publication, there have not been any new GRC filings made by Kern River.
TRANSWESTERN
Transwestern filed and the FERC approved a settlement agreement in its 2015 rate case.
Under the terms of this agreement, settlement transportation base rates remain unchanged through October 2019, and Transwestern may not file another GRC until July 2022. In the interim, the settlement agreement calls for separate proceedings to resolve issues related to capacity release procedures and gas quality.
GTN AND CANADIAN PIPELINES
SoCalGas acquires its Canadian natural gas supplies from the NGTL pipeline located in Alberta, Canada and transports these supplies through the NGTL pipeline in Alberta, to the 1500 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-124-
Foothills Pipelines Limited Company pipeline (Foothills) in British Columbia, and finally to GTN at the Canadian/U.S. international border.
NGTL filed and received approval in 2016 from its Canadian regulators for a settlement agreement on revenue requirements for its pipeline for 2016-17. Foothills filed and received approval from its Canadian regulators for its annual filing on rate changes for 2015, and separately for 2016.
GTN filed and the FERC approved a settlement agreement in its 2015 rate case. Under the terms of this agreement, transportation base rates will decrease incrementally over 6 years and be approximately 20 percent lower by 2021, relative to current 2014 levels. 1501 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-125-
GREENHOUSE GAS ISSUES
NATIONAL POLICY
The national GHG Program has been largely based on the Clean Power Plan adopted by the U.S. EPA, pursuant to EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act. The Clean Power Plan established unique emission rate goals and mass equivalents for each state. It was projected to reduce carbon emissions from the power sector 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. Individual state targets are based on national uniform “emission performance rate” standards (pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) per MWh) and each state’s unique generation mix.
On February 9, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, freezing carbon pollution standards for existing power plants while the rule was under review at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In March 2017, President Trump signed an EO to review the Clean Power Plan and if appropriate, suspend, revise or rescind the rule. Subsequently, on October 10, 2017 the EPA released a proposed rule to repeal the Clean Power Plan.
ASSEMBLY BILL 32
The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) requires California to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 directed the CARB to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the “maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions.”79 The ARB was also required to prepare and approve a Scoping Plan that provides a roadmap to reach the 2020 emissions reduction target. The Scoping Plan was first approved by the ARB in 2008 and must be updated every 5 years. The most recent update, as of this writing, was made in December 2017. The Scoping Plan Updates involve a collaborative process through engagement with the Legislature, State agencies, and a diverse set of stakeholders with public input facilitated through workshops and other meetings. The result is a policy framework that comprises a broad portfolio of GHG reduction strategies and regulations, including market-based compliance mechanisms, performance standards, technology requirements and voluntary reductions. 79 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=200520060AB32. 1502 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-126-
SENATE BILL 32
SB 32 was enacted on September 8, 2016 and went into effect on January 1, 2017. The law extended the goals of AB 32 by setting a 2030 emissions target of 40 percent below 1990 levels.
The continuation of the Global Warming Solutions Act keeps California on track with the emission reduction goals of the Paris Agreement. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update incorporated the 2030 goal and constructed California’s climate policy portfolio that includes doubling building efficiency, increasing renewable power by 50 percent cleaner zero and near-zero emission vehicles, reducing short-lived climate pollutants such as black carbon and limiting industry emissions through a Cap-and-Trade program. The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provided increased legislative oversight of the ARB and directed it to take certain actions to improve local air quality. Those actions include requiring the public posting of air quality and GHG information, adopt rules and regulations that protect disadvantaged communities from air toxins and to consider the social cost of carbon when preparing plans to meet GHG reduction goals.
SENATE BILL 350
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act, or SB 350, was signed into law on October 7, 2015 and sets ambitious goals that will help the State achieve the emissions reduction targets of SB 32. SB 350 increases and extends the RPS targets to 50 percent by 2030.
Additionally, the law requires the state to double statewide energy efficiency savings in both the electric and natural gas sectors by 2030. The GHG reduction targets associated with these requirements are to be incorporated into IRPs, which detail how each required utility will reduce GHGs, deploy clean energy resources and otherwise meet the resources needs of their customers.
The Energy Commission is coordinating with other state agencies—including the: CPUC, ARB, and CAISO—to implement the bill. SoCalGas has been engaged with these agencies throughout the process, and has been providing input.
SENATE BILL 1383
SB 1383 was signed into law on September 19, 2016, establishing methane emissions reduction targets in a statewide effort to reduce emissions of Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCP) in various sectors of California’s economy.80 SB 1383 requires a 40 percent reduction in methane, a 40 percent reduction on hydrofluorocarbon gases and a 50 percent reduction in 80 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1383. 1503 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-127-
anthropogenic black carbon by 2030, relative to 2013 baseline levels and requires the ARB, the CPUC, and the CEC to undertake various actions related to reducing SLCPs in the state.
SB 1383 also establishes targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. The bill mandates the ARB, in consultation with the Department of Food and Agriculture, to adopt regulations to reduce methane emissions from livestock and dairy manure operations. SB 1383 also requires state agencies to consider and, as appropriate, adopt policies and incentives to significantly increase the sustainable production and use of RG.
Pursuant to SB 1383, the ARB formed a Dairy and Livestock GHG Reduction Working Group in 2017 to help understand ways to reduce dairy and livestock methane emissions by 40 percent from 2013 levels by 2030. The working group’s assignment was to identify and address technical, market, regulatory, and other barriers to development of methane reduction projects. SoCalGas actively participated in the working group and its three sub-groups including SoCalGas staff serving as co-chair of the Fostering Markets for Digester Projects sub-group whose task was to establish a roadmap, attentive to the SB 1383 statute dates of July 1, 2020 and January 1, 2024, to significantly expand the number of livestock digester projects in California that support the state’s climate and air quality goals.
SoCalGas has participated in the CDFA Dairy Digester Research and Development Program (DDRDP), which provides financial assistance for the installation of dairy digesters in California, which will result in reduced GHG emissions. SoCalGas staff in SJV attended and presented at CDFA DDRDP workshops, webinars and listening sessions held in environmental justice (also known as disadvantaged communities) areas near dairies. We also provide education and assist customers who are interested in the CDFA Program, as well as on other topics related to RNG, such as alternative fuel vehicles. A specific example is our promotion of RNG in our marketing materials especially those developed and displayed at the International Ag Expo held every year in Tulare, California. CDFA also includes a link on their DDRDP website to SoCalGas’ RG website.
1504 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-128-
SENATE BILL 100 AND EXECUTIVE ORDER B-55-18
The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2019, or SB 100, was signed into law on September 10, 2018. SB 100 sets a state policy that eligible renewable energy and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity in California by 2045. The bill also accelerates California’s RPS, which, pursuant to a 2016 bill by the same author (SB 350), already mandates that load-serving entities procure at least 50 percent of retail sales from eligible renewable energy resources by 2030; under SB 100, the 2030 target will be increased to 60 percent, and the 50 percent target will be advanced to 2026, in recognition that California retail sellers are well on their way to achieving the target in advance of the existing deadlines.
EO B-55-18 establishes a new statewide goal to achieve economy-wide carbon neutrality no later than 2045.
ASSEMBLY BILL 3232
The zero-emissions buildings and sources-of-heat energy bill requires the CEC to assess the potential for the state to reduce the emissions of GHGs from the state’s residential and commercial building stock by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by January 1, 2030. Their report is due January 2021.
GHG RULEMAKING
Beginning on January 1, 2015, the ARB’s Cap-and-Trade Program expanded to include emissions from all SoCalGas customers. SoCalGas is required to purchase carbon allowances or offsets on behalf of our end-use customers for the emissions generated from the full combustion of the natural gas we deliver. Large end-use customers who emit at least 25,000 mtCO2e equivalent per year have a direct obligation to the ARB for their own emissions; therefore, SoCalGas’ obligation does not include these customers and they will not be responsible for compliance costs related to end-users from SoCalGas.
The CPUC completed a rulemaking proceeding in late 2015 to determine how the costs related to compliance with the Cap-and-Trade program will be included in end-use customers’ rates.
81 The rulemaking had also addressed how revenues generated from the sale of directly allocated allowances will be returned to ratepayers. The rulemaking had initially determined that all Cap-and-Trade compliance costs will be included on a forecasted basis in customers’ 81 CPUC D.15-10-032.
1505 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-129-
transportation rates beginning April 1, 2016. Customers with a direct obligation to the ARB for their emissions are exempt from SoCalGas’ end-users’ compliance obligation, and will receive a volumetric credit called the “Cap-and-Trade Cost Exemption” for the amount of their transportation rates that contribute to these costs. All customers’ rates will also include compliance costs related to SoCalGas’ covered facilities, as well as for Lost and Unaccounted For (LUAF) gas.
In the same CPUC decision, it was determined that revenues generated from the sale of directly allocated allowances would be returned as a fixed, once-annual, California Climate Credit to all residential households on their April bills. Nonresidential customers were not to receive a California Climate Credit. An Application for Rehearing on the use of the revenues generated from the sale of directly allocated allowances was granted in April 2016. As such, the introduction of Cap-and-Trade costs into rates and the distribution of the gas California Climate Credit was delayed. In March 2018, the CPUC issued its Final Decision (D.18-02-017), which directed IOUs to recover Cap-and-Trade costs and distribute the California Climate Credit. It found that: (1) only residential customers are eligible for the California Climate Credit, with the initial Climate Credit to be distributed in October 2018 and in April ever year thereafter; (2) GHG compliance costs can be incorporated in transportation rates beginning July 1, 2018, with 2018 costs amortized over 18 months; and (3) the accumulated 2015-2017 GHG costs and revenues are to be netted, with the remaining balance either distributed in the 2018 Climate Credit or amortized in transportation rates.
REPORTING AND CAP-AND-TRADE OBLIGATIONS
The ARB publishes total, covered and non-covered emissions because total emissions are used to calculate California’s GHG emissions inventory and covered emissions are used to determine a facility’s Cap-and-Trade obligation. At the time of the writing of the 2020 CGR, the 2019 GHG numbers have not been verified by the independent third party. The 2018 numbers are the most recent verified numbers for the reporting category. As of 2018, SoCalGas reported to the ARB verified GHG emissions of approximately 41.4 mmtCO2e in three primary categories: (1) combustion emissions at five compressor stations and two storage fields, where annual emissions exceed 10,000 mtCO2e; (2) vented and fugitive emissions from three compressor stations, two storage fields and the natural gas distribution system; and (3) the GHG emissions resulting from combustion of natural gas delivered to all customers. 1506 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-130-
In 2018, GHG emissions for gas delivered to all customers was 39.9 mmtCO2e, but
20.7 mmtCO2e for gas delivered to non-covered customers. Non-covered customers consist of smaller customers with emissions of less than 25,000 mtCO2e. For Cap-and-Trade obligation,
20.7 mmtCO2e is the appropriate Cap-and-Trade value. Large, covered customers pay their own Cap-and-Trade bill.
Four of the five facilities subject to the EPA’s mandatory reporting regulation are also subject to ARB’s Cap-and-Trade Program. On January 1, 2015, natural gas suppliers became subject to the Cap-and-Trade Program and now have a compliance obligation for GHG emissions from the natural gas use of their small customers (i.e., those customers who are not covered directly under ARB’s Cap-and-Trade Program). More recently, SoCalGas estimated that its GHG emissions compliance obligation as a natural gas supplier to be approximately
22.0 mtCO2e for 2019. ARB will issue final 2019 GHG emissions compliance obligations for natural gas suppliers in November 2020.
The adoption of rules and procedures to minimize natural gas leakage from Commission-regulated natural gas pipelines consistent with Pub. Util. Code Section 961 (d), § 192.703 (c) of Subpart M of Title 49 of the CFR, and the Commission’s General Order 112-F are covered under R.15-01-008. As part of this rulemaking, natural gas utilities are required to annually report their methane emissions from intentional and unintentional releases as well as their leak management practices. In 2020, SoCalGas reported 2.2 Bcf of methane emissions from intentional and unintentional releases for the year 2019. These emissions were reported in the SB 1371 report. Only some intentional emissions are subject to the ARB Cap-and-Trade Program.
MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
National GHG policymakers realize that motor vehicles are one of the largest sources of GHG emissions, and one of the potential solutions is the substitution of natural gas and electricity for the current diesel and gasoline energy sources. This transition to cleaner fuels will also increase the demand for both natural gas and natural gas-generated electricity. Under the EPA’s Mandatory Reporting of GHGs rule, all vehicle and engine manufacturers outside of the light-duty sector must report emission rates of CO2, nitrous oxide, and methane from their products.
1507 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-131-
LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARD
Established by EO, signed by then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007, the LCFS requires a 10 percent carbon intensity reduction by 2020 in the transportation sector. In 2019, the LCFS was updated and now requires a 20 percent carbon intensity by 2030 in the transportation sector. The LCFS requires fuel providers to ensure that the mix of fuel they sell into the California market meets, on average, a declining standard for GHG emissions measured in CO2 equivalent grams per unit of fuel energy sold. As stated above, the transition to cleaner fuels will increase the demand for natural gas, H2 and natural gas-generated electricity in order to meet the needs of a cleaner state transportation fleet. Further, the CPUC has authorized the utilities to sell LCFS credits generated both by their use of low-carbon fuel vehicles and those generated by utility-owned public refueling stations. The revenue generated by the sale of these credits is being returned to the customers who generated the credits, further enhancing the value of low-carbon fuels.
SoCalGas opted into the LCFS program in 2013 and began generating credits from utility-owned CNG refueling stations that serve both company vehicles and the general public.
The value from the credits generated is returned to CNG customers by reducing the price at the pump. In 2018, the CPUC approved a SoCalGas Advice Letter to initiate a Voluntary RNG Procurement Pilot program. The program enables SoCalGas to procure and dispense RNG at its utility-owned CNG stations. RNG is an eligible alternative fuel under LCFS program and EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Therefore, it generates Renewable Identification Number credits from the RFS Program in addition to the LCFS credits. Also, RNG has as lower carbon intensity than traditional CNG and will generate more credits per unit of energy under the LCFS program. On April 1, 2019, SoCalGas began procuring 100 percent RNG at all utility-owned CNG stations. SoCalGas anticipates the Pilot will result in more value returned to its CNG customers while supporting the development of the RNG market.
To date, there is a significant amount of RNG being used in California NGVs. The most recent data from the LCFS Program shows that approximately 78 percent of fuel delivered to NGVs in 2019 was RNG. The chart below shows how RNG’s role in this important program has 1508 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-132-
grown over time. Since 2013, RNG has delivered more than 3.9 mmt of carbon reductions and displaced more than 560 million gallons of diesel fuel.82 FIGURE 21 – LCFS PROGRAM NGV FUEL STATISTICS
RNG’S GROWING ROLE IN CALIFORNIA’S TRANSPORTATION FUEL MARKET The California NGV market represents an important growth opportunity for RNG due to the economic incentives available from the LCFS Program and the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard, which help to offset the price premium between RNG and relatively-abundant traditional natural gas. NGV demand in California is forecasted to grow, driven primarily by the urgent need to reduce smog-forming tailpipe NOx emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines, and the growing price spread between gasoline and diesel and natural gas. The EIA forecasts a
5.3 percent annual growth rate for NGV volumes in the Pacific region through 2050.83 82 LCFS Reporting Tool Quarterly Summaries: https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lrtqsummaries.htm. 83 EIA 2018 Annual Energy Outlook: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. 1509 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-133-
PROGRAMMATIC EMISSIONS REDUCTION: CALIFORNIA GHG REDUCTION
STRATEGIES
The ARB has the responsibility to develop the broad strategies to achieve California’s GHG emissions reduction targets. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update identified several strategies to achieve the 2030 target to reduce emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels: double building efficiency; 50 percent renewable power; cleaner transportation; and reduce SLCPs and Cap emissions from various sectors. The SLCP includes targets to reduce methane emissions from organic sources of methane and methane leakage from the oil and gas industry.
The CPUC has an on-going R.15-01-008 to implement SB 1371, which requires the adoption of rules and procedures to minimize natural gas leakage from Commission-regulated natural gas pipeline facilities. In D.17-06-015, utilities were ordered to implement a Natural Gas Leak Abatement Program consistent with 26 Best Practices for emission mitigation. This proceeding is led by the CPUC in consultation with the ARB. The first phase will develop the overall policies and guidelines for a natural gas leak abatement program consistent with SB 1371. The second phase will develop ratemaking and performance-based financial incentives associated with the natural gas leak abatement program determined through Phase 1 of the proceeding. Energy efficiency and renewables are considered fundamental to GHG emission reduction in the electric sector. As a result, integration of additional renewables will require quick-start peaking capacity for firming and shaping of intermittent power, which in the foreseeable future will be gas-fired combustion turbines.
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
Biomethane, or RNG, plays an important and growing role in helping California meet its environmental goals. Currently, RNG is predominantly recovered from organic waste streams, including landfills, agricultural operations, and wastewater treatment facilities. Sourcing RNG from these resources not only provides GHG reductions for natural gas users, but also helps to better manage these waste streams.
In March of 2019, SoCalGas announced a plan to replace 20 percent of its traditional natural gas supply with RNG by 2030 as part of SoCalGas’ vision to be the cleanest gas utility in North America, delivering affordable and increasingly renewable energy to its customers. To kickstart the plan, SoCalGas will pursue regulatory authority to implement a broad RNG procurement program with a goal of replacing 5 percent of its natural gas supply with RNG by 1510 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-134-
2022. SoCalGas also recently filed a request with the CPUC to allow customers to purchase RNG for their homes. SoCalGas aims to have CPUC approval of its voluntary program by the end of 2020.
SoCalGas is currently procuring RNG for use in its fleet and utility-owned public access NGV fueling stations, thereby encouraging further development of RNG sources, reducing GHG emissions, and advancing California’s environmental policies.
In addition to decarbonizing California’s transportation sector, RNG can play a significant role in decarbonizing other existing natural gas end uses in California. Approximately 90 percent of Californians use natural gas for space and water heating, and for delivering RNG to these appliances through existing natural gas infrastructure has the potential to seamlessly decarbonize these end-uses without disrupting customer behavior or preferences.
When biogas is conditioned/upgraded to pipeline quality specifications, commonly referred to as “biomethane” or “renewable natural gas,” it can be interconnected to a gas utility’s pipeline and nominated for a specific end-use customer.84 Biogas may also be consumed onsite for a variety of uses, including electrical power generation from internal combustion engines, fuel cells, and turbines, or as a fuel source for NGVs. Currently, there are instances where biogas is being vented naturally or flared to the atmosphere. Venting and flaring wastes this valuable renewable resource and fails to support the state in achieving its emission reduction targets set forth by AB 32 and SB 1383, whereas captured and processed RNG injected into a gas pipeline system can ultimately count towards satisfying AB 32 and SB 1383 emission reduction goals. In light of this, the legislature established SB 1440 which would require the CPUC, in consultation with the ARB, to consider adopting biomethane procurement targets or goals for each of the state’s gas corporations.
85 AB 1900 (2012, Gatto) required that the Commission open a rulemaking to ensure that each gas corporation provide non-discriminatory open access to its gas pipeline system to any party for the purposes of physically interconnecting with the gas pipeline system and effectuating the 84 SoCalGas’ Tariff Rule 30 (https://www2.socalgas.com/regulatory/tariffs/tm2/pdf/30.pdf) must be met in order to qualify for pipeline injection into SoCalGas’ gas pipeline system. 85 SB 1440 (Hueso, 2018): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201720180SB1440.
1511 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-135-
safe delivery of gas.86 On February 13, 2013, the Commission opened R.13-02-008, OIR to Adopt Biomethane Standard and Requirement, Pipeline Open Access Rules, and Related Enforcement Provisions (Biomethane OIR). In collaboration with and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, the Commission determined that biomethane could be safely injected into the natural gas pipeline system in D.14-01-034 (adopted January 16, 2014).87 D.14-01-034 adopted Pipeline injection standards for 17 “constituents of concern” potentially found in biomethane. H2 is one of the 17 “constituents of concern, and an injection standard of 0.1 percent of H2 was adopted for biomethane injected into gas pipelines. The statute directs that the pipeline injection standards shall be revisited every 5 years.88 The establishment of biomethane injection standards is Phase 1 of the Biomethane OIR. Phase 2 of the Biomethane OIR resulted in D.15-06-029, which adopted a biomethane interconnector monetary incentive program. The objective of the program is to encourage the development of biomethane projects that are interconnected to the utilities’ gas pipeline systems. Initially, the incentive program authorized a total of $40 million for incentives, up to $1.5 million per project, for projects that successfully interconnect and operate by June 11, 2020. The incentives are paid by the gas utility that operates the pipeline system where the facility interconnects. Pub. Util.
Code § 399.1989 extended the monetary incentive program to December 31, 2021 and increased the incentives to $3 million for non-dairy clusters and $5 million for dairy clusters.
In October 2019 Governor Newsom signed into law SB 457, which extends the program until December 31, 2026, or until all available program funds are expended, whichever occurs first. In accordance with SB 457, CPUC D.19-12-00990 extends the date for awarding pipeline interconnection incentives. This Decision also implements an Incentive Reservation System for the biomethane monetary incentive program established in D 15-06-029. The Incentive 86 AB 1900 (Gatto 2012):
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB1900. 87 D.14-01-034: Decision Regarding the Biomethane Implementation Tasks in AB 190:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M086/K466/86466318.PDF. 88 See Health and Safety Code, §§ 25421(a) and 25421(e). 89 AB 2313 (Williams 2016): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201520160AB2313.
90 D.19-12-009: Decision Establishing a Reservation System for the Biomethane Incentive Program, Extending Date and Addressing Rate Recovery for Pipeline Interconnection Infrastructure:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M321/K901/321901043.PDF. 1512 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-136-
Reservation System allows project developers to reserve incentive funds during the development phase of a project and receive the funds once the project is interconnected and operating.
Applications for the Incentive Reservation System are designed to ensure that only viable projects can secure a spot on the reservation list. The Commission maintains the Incentive Reservation System and makes it publicly available to promote the transparency of the use of funds. As of the time of this writing, all $40 million for incentives have been reserved by 11 biomethane projects currently in development, while an additional 8 projects are on a waiting list for possible incentive funding.91
Phase 3 of the Biomethane OIR addresses the need for a standard statewide RG interconnection tariff and interconnection agreement. An August 22, 2019 Ruling established a schedule to develop the standard tariff and required SoCalGas, SDG&E, Southwest Gas, and PG&E to file a standard RG Interconnection Tariff (Rule) and Agreement.92 The proposed joint utility RG Interconnection Rule was filed on November 1, 2019, and the proposed RG Interconnection Agreement was filed on May 1, 2019.
Phase 4 of the Biomethane OIR was opened November 21, 2019.93 It will address two issues: (1) standards for injection of renewable H2 into gas pipelines; and (2) implementation of SB 1440 to consider adopting biomethane procurement targets or goals for each gas corporation.
One of the primary policy drivers of California RNG development is SB 1383 (as discussed above). SB 1383 required, among other things, that the CPUC implement “at least 5 dairy biomethane pilot projects to demonstrate interconnection to the common carrier pipeline system.”94 For these pilot projects the gas corporations may fund and recover in rates the cost of pipeline infrastructure, including biogas collection lines and interconnection to existing pipelines, removing many upfront costs developers would otherwise have to incur. The pilot 91 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/renewable_natural_gas/.
92 Assigned Commissioner’s Ruling on Joint Motion Regarding Further Procedural Schedule for a Standard Renewable Gas Interconnection Tariff and Agreements:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M311/K290/311290174.PDF. 93 Assigned Commissioner’s Scoping Memo and Ruling Opening Phase 4 of R.13-02-008:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M320/K307/320307147.PDF. 94 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1383. 1513 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-137-
project Selection Committee consisted of staff members and attorneys from the CPUC, the ARB, and the CDFA. On December 3, 2018 the Selection Committee identified the selected six Dairy Biomethane Pilot Projects.95 Four of these are in SoCalGas’ service territory: CalBioGas Buttonwillow LLC; CalBioGas North Visalia LLC; CalBioGas South Tulare LLC; and Lakeside Pipeline LLC. (The other two projects are in PG&E’s service territory: Maas Energy Works in Merced; and DVO’s Weststeyn Dairy in Willows.)
HYDROGEN
Hydrogen is the simplest and most abundant element, making up approximately 75 percent of the observable universe. Hydrogen can be utilized as a fuel to generate energy. With its abundance and simple chemical structure, hydrogen can be manufactured from feedstock such as methane, or water and electricity, using scalable, sustainable, and renewable methods. Hydrogen has favorable emissions characteristics because it does not contain carbon or produce GHG when it is consumed. For this reason, hydrogen can play an important role in the transition to a clean, low-carbon energy system in California.96
As part of the State of California’s climate strategy, hydrogen can provide important GHG emissions reductions, and can also play a key role in enabling the use of zero-emissions fuel cell electric vehicles, which can reduce criteria emissions from on-road diesel, the largest and hardest to electrify contributors to the State’s black carbon and nitrogen oxides (NOx) inventories.97 California has also been at the forefront of developing hydrogen fueling stations to demonstrate the feasibility of hydrogen-fueled transportation and the potential that such a network creates for deployment of light duty fuel-cell electric vehicles (FCEVs).
Hydrogen fuel for transportation was adopted in California through the policy framework by Assembly Bill (AB) 8, which provided certainty for hydrogen fueling station deployment.98 In addition, new programs and policies have been developed and initiated to ensure that some of the most ambitious public-private goals are met as projected. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard’s (LCFS) Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure (HRI) credit provisions took effect, predicated on the 95 https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M246/K748/246748640.PDF. 96 http://hydrogencouncil.com.
97 https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/slcp/slcp.htm.
98 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB8. 1514 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-138-
goal of reaching 200 hydrogen stations by 2025 as described by Governor Brown’s Executive Order B-48-18 (EO B-48-18).99
Globally, hydrogen is widely seen as a pivotal component of the future clean energy economy. The two primary technological processes used today to produce hydrogen are electrolysis and reformation, including steam methane reformation (SMR) and autothermal reformation (ATR). Hydrogen is also produced when organic mass is gasified, but this “syngas,” consisting of mainly carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen, is typically an intermediate product often used to generate methane or electricity. Reforming is a mature technology and is the most economical way to produce hydrogen, supplying 95 percent or more of the hydrogen used in the United States today.100 The electrolysis process uses renewable electricity to split water (H2O) into H2 and oxygen (O2).
As a gaseous fuel, hydrogen can help decarbonize the gas grid and be used in a variety of end use applications, beyond transportation. The hydrogen can either be stored directly, or methanated and injected into the natural gas grid to be stored and delivered to a variety of end uses, supplementing or displacing traditional natural gas. Storing hydrogen from electrolysis is a scalable and versatile energy storage pathway.
99 https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2018/01/26/governor-brown-takes-action-to-increase-zeroemission-vehicles-fund-new-climate-investments/index.html. 100 The Potential to Build Current Natural Gas Infrastructure to Accommodate the Future Conversion to Near-Zero Transportation Technology, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis (March 2017), available at https://steps.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2017-UCD-ITS- RR-17-04-1.pdf 1515 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-139-
PEAK DAY DEMAND
Beginning in April 2008, gas supplies to serve both SoCalGas’ and SDG&E’s bundled core gas demand are procured as a combined portfolio. SoCalGas and SDG&E plan and design their systems to provide continuous service to their core customers under an extreme peak day event.
On the extreme peak day event, service to all noncore customers is assumed to be fully interrupted. The criteria for extreme peak day design is defined as a 1-in-35 likelihood event foreach utility’s service area. This criteria correlates to a system average temperature of
40.5 degrees F for SoCalGas’ service area and 43.0 degrees F for SDG&E’s service area.
Demand on an extreme peak day is met through a combination of withdrawals from underground storage facilities and flowing pipeline supplies. The following table provides forecasted core extreme peak day demand.
TABLE 29 – CORE 1-IN-35 YEAR EXTREME PEAK DAY DEMAND
(MMcf/d)
Year
SoCalGas
Core
Demand (1)
SDG&E
Core
Demand (2)
Other
Core
Demand (3)
Total
Demand
2020 2,912 425 123 3,460
2021 2,892 424 124 3,440
2022 2,878 425 125 3,427
2023 2,856 423 126 3,405
2024 2,834 422 126 3,382
2025 2,809 420 127 3,357
2026 2,782 419 128 3,329
_______________
Notes:
(1) 1-in-35 peak temperature cold day SoCalGas core sales and transportation.
(2) 1-in-35 peak temperature cold day SDG&E core sales and transportation.
(3) 1-in-35 peak temperature cold day core demand of SWG, City of Long Beach, and City of Vernon.
The CPUC has also mandated that SoCalGas and SDG&E design its system to provide service to both core and noncore customers under a winter temperature condition with an 1516 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-140-
expected recurrence interval of 10 years. The demand forecast for this 1-in-10 year cold day condition is shown in the table below.
TABLE 30 – WINTER 1-IN-10 YEAR COLD DAY DEMAND CONDITION (MMcf/d)
Year
SoCalGas
Core (1)
SDG&E
Core (2)
Other
Core (3)
Noncore
Non-EG (4) EG (5)
Total
Demand
2020 2,752 400 103 661 1,068 4,983
2021 2,732 399 104 659 1,072 4,967
2022 2,718 400 105 664 1,105 4,992
2023 2,698 398 105 668 1,106 4,975
2024 2,676 397 106 671 1,089 4,940
2025 2,652 395 107 674 1,119 4,948
2026 2,626 394 108 674 1,101 4,902
_______________
Notes:
(1) 1-in-10 peak temperature cold day SoCalGas core sales and transportation. (2) 1-in-10 peak temperature cold day SDG&E core sales and transportation. (3) 1-in-10 peak temperature cold day core demand of SWG, City of Long Beach, and City of Vernon.
(4) Noncore-Non-EG includes noncore Non-EG end-use customers of SoCalGas, SDG&E, SWG, City of Long Beach, City of Vernon, and all end-use customers of Ecogas. (5) EG includes UEG/EWG Base Hydro, large cogeneration, industrial and commercial cogeneration (<20 MW), refinery-related cogeneration, and EOR-related cogeneration.
The SoCalGas and SDG&E system is a winter peaking system; peak demand is expected to occur during the winter operating season of November through March. For this reason, the CPUC has not mandated a summer design standard. For informational purposes only, the table below presents a forecast of summer demand on the SoCalGas and SDG&E system. 1517 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
-141-
TABLE 31 – SUMMER HIGH SENDOUT DAY DEMAND
(MMcf/d)
Year
High-Demand
Month (1)
SoCalGas
Core (2)
SDG&E
Core (3)
Other
Core (4)
Noncore
Non-EG (5) EG (6)
Total
Demand
2020 Sep 620 94 28 536 1,928 3,206
2021 Sep 613 94 28 531 1,894 3,160
2022 Sep 612 94 28 536 1,936 3,206
2023 Sep 605 94 28 538 1,952 3,217
2024 Sep 598 93 29 540 1,631 2,891
2025 Sep 589 93 29 542 1,646 2,899
2026 Sep 580 92 29 541 1,626 2,868
_______________
Notes:
(1) Month of High Sendout gas demand during summer (July, August, or September). (2) Average daily summer SoCalGas core sales and transportation. (3) Average daily summer SDG&E core sales and transportation. (4) Average daily summer core demand of SWG, City of Long Beach, and City of Vernon. (5) Average daily summer Noncore-Non-EG demand. Noncore-Non-EG includes noncore Non-EG end-use customers of SoCalGas, SDG&E, SWG, City of Long Beach, City of Vernon, and all end-use customers of Ecogas.
(6) Highest demand during the high-demand month under 1-in-10 dry hydro conditions, except year 2020, when the EG highest demand is based on 2020 hydro condition.
Highest demand during the high-demand month under 1-in-10 dry hydro conditions, except year 2020, when the EG highest demand is based on 2020 hydro condition. 1518 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-142-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
1519 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-143-
TABLE 32 – SoCalGas
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT – MMcf/d
RECORDED YEARS 2015-2019
1520 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-144-
TABLE 33 – SoCalGas: TABLE 1-SCG
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS – MMcf/d
RECORDED YEARS 2020-2024
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE YEAR
1521 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-145-
TABLE 34 – SoCalGas: TABLE 2-SCG
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS – MMcf/d
RECORDED YEARS 2025-2035
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE YEAR
1522 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-146-
TABLE 35 – SoCalGas: TABLE 3-SCG
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS – MMcf/d
ESTIMATED YEARS 2020-2024
COLD TEMPERATURE YEAR (1-IN-35 COLD YEAR EVENT) AND DRY HYDRO YEAR 1523 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY – TABULAR DATA
-147-
TABLE 36 – SoCalGas: TABLE 4-SCG
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS – MMcf/d
ESTIMATED YEARS 2025-2035
COLD TEMPERATURE YEAR (1-IN-35 COLD YEAR EVENT) AND DRY HYDRO YEAR 1524 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
-148-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
1525 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
-149-
CITY OF LONG BEACH
ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
The annual gas supply and forecast requirements prepared by the Long Beach Energy Resources Department (Long Beach) are shown on the following tables for the years 2020 through 2035.
Long Beach operates the fifth largest municipally owned natural gas utility in the country and is one of only three in the State. The gas utility provides safe and reliable natural gas services to about 500,000 residents and businesses via approximately 150,000 connected gas meters, delivered through more than 1,800 miles of gas pipelines. Long Beach’s service territory includes the cities of Long Beach and Signal Hill, and sections of surrounding communities including Lakewood, Bellflower, Compton, Seal Beach, Paramount, and Los Alamitos.
Long Beach’s gas use is split at 53 percent residential and 47 percent commercial/industrial.
Long Beach serves core and noncore customers from three incremental supply sources:
(1) interstate supplies delivered into the SoCalGas’ intrastate pipeline system; (2) gas storage withdrawals; and (3) local gas delivered directly to Long Beach Energy Resources Department’s pipeline system from gas fields within the city. Currently, local production supplies about 5 percent of Long Beach’s gas use. Long Beach purchases most of its gas supplies from producers in the South-Western U.S. As a Wholesale customer, Long Beach contracts with SoCalGas for intrastate transmission service to deliver that gas from the California border to its service area.
The City of Long Beach is the only municipal government in the State of California that manages oil operations. Through its Energy Resources Department, the City operates the Wilmington Oil Field and has various financial interests in smaller oil fields throughout the City, such as the Signal Hill East and West Units, Recreation Park, and City Wasem.
As a municipal utility, Long Beach’s gas rates and policies are established by the City Council, which acts as the regulatory authority. The City Charter requires the gas utility to 1526 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
-150-
establish its rates comparable to the rates charged by surrounding gas utilities for similar types of service.
1527 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA -151-
2020 CALIFORNIA GAS REPORT
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA 1528 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA -152-
TABLE 37 – CITY OF LONG BEACH-ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT: TABLE 1-LB ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT – MMCF/D
RECORDED YEARS 2015-2019 FOR THE 2020 CGR REPORT
TABLE 1-LB
CITY OF LONG BEACH - GAS & OIL DEPARTMENT
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT - MMCF/DAY
RECORDED YEARS 2009 THRU 2019 for the 2020 CGR report
LINE GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 LINE California Source Gas
1 Regular Purchases 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
2 Received for Exchange/Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 3 Total California Source Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3
4 Purchases from Other Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4
Out-of-State Gas
5 Pacific Interstate Companies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5
6 Additional Core Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6
7 Incremental Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7
8 Out-of-State Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 Total Out-of-State Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9
10 Subtotal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
11 Underground Storage Withdrawal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 12 GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12
GAS SUPPLY TAKEN
California Source Gas
13 Regular Purchases 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.1 13
14 Received for Exchange/Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 15 Total California Source Gas 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.1 15
16 Purchases from Other Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 Out-of-State Gas
17 Pacific Interstate Companies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17
18 Additional Core Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18
19 Incremental Supplies 21.9 22.8 24.6 23.9 25.2 19
20 Out-of-State Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20
21 Total Out-of-State Gas 21.9 22.8 24.6 23.9 25.2 21
22 22 Subtotal 22.5 23.7 25.2 24.5 26.3
23 23 Underground Storage Withdrawal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24 24 TOTAL Gas Supply Taken & Transported 22.5 23.7 25.2 24.5 26.3 1529 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA -153-
TABLE 37 – CITY OF LONG BEACH-ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT : TABLE 1-LB ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT – MMcf/d
RECORDED YEARS 2009-2019 FOR THE 2020 CGR REPORT
(CONTINUED)
CITY OF LONG BEACH - GAS & OIL DEPARTMENT
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT - MMCF/DAY
RECORDED YEARS 2009 THRU 2019 for the 2020 CGR report
LINE ACTUAL DELIVERIES BY END-USE 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 LINE 1 CORE Residential 11.9 11.9 11.8 12.1 12.9 1
2 CORE/NONCORE Commercial 5.4 5.8 6.0 5.9 6.1 2
3 CORE/NONCORE Industrial 3.7 3.9 4.7 4.3 4.7 3
4 Subtotal 20.9 21.6 22.5 22.3 23.8 4
5 NON CORE Non-EOR Cogeneration 1.2 1.9 2.2 1.9 1.7 5
6 EOR Cogen. & Steaming 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6
7 Electric Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7
8 Subtotal 1.2 1.9 2.2 1.9 1.7 8
9 WHOLESALE Residential 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9
10 Com. & Ind., others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
11 Electric Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11
12 Subtotal-WHOLESALE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12
13 Co. Use & LUAF 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.8 13
14 Subtotal-END USE 22.5 23.7 25.1 24.5 26.3 14
15 Storage Injection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15
16 SYSTEM TOTAL-THROUGHPUT 22.5 23.7 25.1 24.5 26.3 16
ACTUAL TRANSPORTATION AND EXCHANGE
17 Residential N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17
18 Commercial/Industrial 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.1 18
19 Non-EOR Cogeneration 1.1 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.5 19
20 EOR Cogen. & Steaming N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20
21 Electric Utilites N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 21
22 Subtotal-RETAIL 3.4 4.3 5.0 4.9 4.7 22
23 WHOLESALE All End Uses 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23
24 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION & EXCHANGE 3.4 4.3 5.0 4.9 4.7 24
ACTUAL CURTAILMENT
25 Residential 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25
26 Commercial/Industrial 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26
27 Non-EOR Cogeneration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
28 EOR Cogen. & Steaming 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28
29 Electric Utilites 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29
30 Wholesale 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30
31 TOTAL- Curtailment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31
32 REFUSAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32
NOTE: Actual deliveries by end-use includes sales, transportation, and exchange volumes, but excludes actual curtailments. 1530 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA -154-
TABLE 38 – CITY OF LONG BEACH-ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT : TABLE 1-LB ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT – MMcf/d
AVERAGE YEAR FORECAST FOR THE 2020 CGR REPORT
TABLE 1-LB
CITY OF LONG BEACH - GAS & OIL DEPARTMENT
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT - MMCF/DAY
AVERAGE YEAR FORECAST 2020 CGR report
LINE GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 2020 2021 2022 2023 LINE
California Source Gas
1 Regular Purchases 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
2 Received for Exchange/Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2
3 Total California Source Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3
4 Purchases from Other Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4
Out-of-State Gas
5 Pacific Interstate Companies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5
6 Additional Core Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6
7 Incremental Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7
8 Out-of-State Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 Total Out-of-State Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9
10 Subtotal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
11 Underground Storage Withdrawal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11
12 GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12
GAS SUPPLY TAKEN
California Source Gas
13 Regular Purchases 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 13
14 Received for Exchange/Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14
15 Total California Source Gas 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 15
16 Purchases from Other Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16
Out-of-State Gas
17 Pacific Interstate Companies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17
18 Additional Core Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18
19 Incremental Supplies 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 19
20 Out-of-State Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20
21 Total Out-of-State Gas 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 21
22 22 Subtotal 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3
23 23 Underground Storage Withdrawal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
24 24 TOTAL Gas Supply Taken & Transported 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 1531 of 2287
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITY OF LONG BEACH ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT – TABULAR DATA -155-
TABLE 38 – CITY OF LONG BEACH-ENERGY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT : TABLE 1-LB ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT – MMcf/d
AVERAGE YEAR FORECAST FOR THE 2020 CGR REPORT
(CONTINUED)
TABLE 1-LB
CITY OF LONG BEACH - GAS & OIL DEPARTMENT
ANNUAL GAS SUPPLY AND SENDOUT - MMCF/DAY
AVERAGE YEAR FORECAST 2020 CGR report
LINE GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 2024 2025 2030 2035 LINE
California Source Gas
1 Regular Purchases 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
2 Received for Exchange/Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2
3 Total California Source Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3
4 Purchases from Other Utilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4
Out-of-State Gas
5 Pacific Interstate Companies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5
6 Additional Core Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6
7 Incremental Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7
8 Out-of-State Transport 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 Total Out-of-State Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9
10 Subtotal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
11 Underground Storage Withdrawal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11
12 GAS SUPPLY AVAILABLE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12