Pinole City Council
August 20, 2024

Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Summary
Final 9
Table 4 Pinole GHG Emissions Forecast Through 2045
Sector
2017
(MT of CO2e)
2030
(MT of CO2e)
2045
(MT of CO2e)
Business-as-Usual GHG Emissions
Transportation 35,719 42,076 47,413
Energy 33,088 38,331 45,359
Water & Wastewater 165 196 239
Solid Waste 3,300 3,912 4,761
Total 72,273 84,515 97,772
GHG Emissions After Implementation of State Legislation/Existing City Programs Transportation 35,719 34,860 33,890
Energy 33,088 29,960 31,102
Water & Wastewater 165 169 148
Solid Waste 3,300 3,912 4,761
Total 72,273 68,902 69,901
GHG Emissions After Implementation of State Legislation/Existing City Programs and Pinole CAAP Transportation 35,719 27,117 329
Energy 33,088 19,477 0
Water & Wastewater 165 169 148
Solid Waste 3,300 553 678
Total 72,723 47,316 1,155
MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents
State legislation and existing programs include State vehicle fuel efficiency standards, the Renewable Portfolio Standard, triennial updates of Title 24, and community-wide enrollment in Marin Clean Energy (MCE).

Source: Pinole, City of. 2023. Pinole Forecasts and Targets.

At this time, the State has codified a target of reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 emissions levels by 2030 (SB 32) and has developed the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan to demonstrate how the State will achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 set by AB 1279.

While State and regional regulations related to energy and transportation systems, along with the State’s Cap-and-Trade program, are designed to be set at limits to achieve most of the GHG emissions reduction needed to achieve the State’s long-term targets, local governments can do their fair share toward meeting the State’s targets by siting and approving projects that accommodate planned population growth and projects that are GHG-efficient. The Association of Environmental Professional (AEP) Climate Change Committee recommends that CEQA GHG analyses evaluate project emissions in light of the trajectory of State climate change legislation and assess their “substantial progress” toward achieving long‐term reduction targets identified in available plans, legislation, or Executive Orders (EO).

The City has adopted a longer-term goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and has proposed the CAAP as a pathway to make progress toward this goal. Implementation of the CAAP would achieve an approximately 40 percent reduction in communitywide GHG emissions below 1990 levels by 2030.
9 Therefore, the City’s longer-term target of carbon neutrality and the associated CAAP 9 (78,982 MT of CO2e – 47,273 MT of CO2e) / 78,982 MT of CO2e = 40 percent reduction

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
10 establish a trajectory that provides GHG emissions reduction equal to those required by SB 32 for 2030. Because SB 32 is considered an interim target toward meeting the State’s long-term goals, implementation of the Pinole CAAP would make substantial progress toward meeting the State’s long-term goal. Avoiding interference with, and making substantial progress toward, these longterm State targets is important because these targets have been set at levels that achieve California’s fair share of international emissions reduction targets that will stabilize global climate change effects and avoid the adverse environmental consequences described in Appendix A (AB 1279).

Regulatory and Legal Setting
Final 11
3 Regulatory and Legal Setting
The following regulations, EOs, and case law pertain to the analysis of GHG emissions consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

3.1 Relevant CEQA Guidelines Sections
Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97, the California Natural Resources Agency has adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted CEQA Guidelines, which were last updated in December 2018, provide general regulatory guidance on the analysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents, while giving lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHG emissions and climate change impacts.

Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, impacts related to GHG emissions generated by a proposed plan/project would be significant if the plan/project would:
▪ Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or
▪ Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

The vast majority of individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to directly influence climate change. However, physical changes caused by a plan/project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that are significant, even if individual changes resulting from a plan/project are limited. As discussed in Appendix A, the adverse environmental impacts of cumulative GHG emissions, including sea level rise, increased average temperatures, more drought years, and more wildfires, are already occurring. As a result, cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions and climate change are significant. Therefore, per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(b), the analysis of GHG emissions under CEQA typically involves an analysis of whether a plan or project’s contribution towards an impact would be cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[h][1]).

The following sections of the CEQA Guidelines (last updated on December 28, 2018) pertain to the creation of significance thresholds and the analysis of a plan/project’s GHG emissions.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b)
The determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. An ironclad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting. For example, an activity which may not be significant in an urban area may be significant in a rural area.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
12 Thresholds of significance, as defined in Section 15064.7(a), may assist lead agencies in determining whether a project may cause a significant impact. When using a threshold, the lead agency should briefly explain how compliance with the threshold means that the project’s impacts are less than significant. Compliance with the threshold does not relieve a lead agency of the obligation to consider substantial evidence indicating that the project’s environmental effects may still be significant.10
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4
(a) The determination of the significance of GHG emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency shall make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to Quantify GHG emissions resulting from a project; and/or Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. (b) In determining the significance of a project’s GHG emissions, the lead agency should focus its analysis on the reasonably foreseeable incremental contribution of the project’s emissions to the effects of climate change. A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable even if it appears relatively small compared to Statewide, national, or global emissions. The agency’s analysis should consider a timeframe that is appropriate for the project. The agency’s analysis also must reasonably reflect evolving scientific knowledge and State regulatory schemes. A lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, when determining the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment:

The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting.

Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.

The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a Statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (see, e.g., section 15183.5[b]). Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. In determining the significance of impacts, the lead agency may consider a project’s consistency with the State’s long-term climate goals or strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency’s analysis of how those goals or strategies address the project’s incremental contribution to climate change and its conclusion that the project’s incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
10 2022 CEQA Guidelines.

Regulatory and Legal Setting
Final 13
(c) A lead agency may use a model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions resulting from a project. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate to enable decision makers to intelligently take into account the project’s incremental contribution to climate change. The lead agency must support its selection of a model or methodology with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use.11 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7
(a) A threshold of significance is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant. (b) Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. Thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and be supported by substantial evidence. Lead agencies may also use thresholds on a case-by-case basis as provided in Section 15064(b)(2). (c) When adopting or using thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.
(d) Using environmental standards as thresholds of significance promotes consistency in significance determinations and integrates environmental review with other environmental program planning and regulation. Any public agency may adopt or use an environmental standard as a threshold of significance. In adopting or using an environmental standard as a threshold of significance, a public agency shall explain how the particular requirements of that environmental standard reduce project impacts, including cumulative impacts, to a level that is less than significant, and why the environmental standard is relevant to the analysis of the project under consideration. For the purposes of this subdivision, an “environmental standard” is a rule of general application that is adopted by a public agency through a public review process and that is all the following:
a quantitative, qualitative or performance requirement found in an ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, plan or other environmental requirement; adopted for the purpose of environmental protection;
addresses the environmental effect caused by the project; and, applies to the project under review.12
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
14 CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5
(a) Lead agencies may analyze and mitigate the significant effects of GHG emissions at a programmatic level, such as in a general plan, a long-range development plan, or a separate plan to reduce GHG emissions. Later project-specific environmental documents may tier from and/or incorporate by reference that existing programmatic review. Project-specific environmental documents may rely on an EIR containing a programmatic analysis of GHG emissions as provided in section 15152 (tiering), 15167 (staged EIRs) 15168 (program EIRs), 15175–15179.5 (Master EIRs), 15182 (EIRs Prepared for Specific Plans), and 15183 (EIRs Prepared for General Plans, Community Plans, or Zoning). (b) Plans for the Reduction of GHG Emissions. Public agencies may choose to analyze and mitigate significant GHG emissions in a plan for the reduction of GHG emissions or similar document. A plan to reduce GHG emissions may be used in a cumulative impacts analysis as set forth below. Pursuant to sections 15064(h)(3) and 15130(d), a lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the requirements in a previously adopted plan or mitigation program under specified circumstances.

Plan Elements. A plan for the reduction of GHG emissions should:
(A) Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area; (B) Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable;
(C) Identify and analyze the GHG emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area;
(D) Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level; (E) Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan’s progress toward achieving the level and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels; (F) Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.

Use with Later Activities. A plan for the reduction of GHG emissions, once adopted following certification of an EIR or adoption of an environmental document, may be used in the cumulative impacts analysis of later projects. An environmental document that relies on a GHG reduction plan for a cumulative impacts analysis must identify those requirements specified in the plan that apply to the project, and, if those requirements are not otherwise binding and enforceable, incorporate those requirements as mitigation measures applicable to the project. If there is substantial evidence that the effects of a particular project may be cumulatively considerable, notwithstanding the project’s compliance with the specified requirements in the plan for the reduction of GHG emissions, an EIR must be prepared for the project.

Regulatory and Legal Setting
Final 15
(c) Special Situations. As provided in Public Resources Code sections 21155.2 and 21159.28, environmental documents for certain residential and mixed use projects, and transit priority projects, as defined in section 21155, that are consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in an applicable sustainable communities strategy or alternative planning strategy need not analyze global warming impacts resulting from cars and light duty trucks. A lead agency should consider whether such projects may result in GHG emissions resulting from other sources, however, consistent with these Guidelines.13
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(c)
Consistent with section 15126.4(a), lead agencies shall consider feasible means, supported by substantial evidence and subject to monitoring or reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of GHG emissions. Measures to mitigate the significant effects of GHG emissions may include, among others:

Measures in an existing plan or mitigation program for the reduction of emissions that are required as part of the lead agency’s decision;
Reductions in emissions resulting from a project through implementation of project features, project design, or other measures, such as those described in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines;
Off-site measures, including offsets that are not otherwise required, to mitigate a project’s emissions;
Measures that sequester GHGs;
In the case of the adoption of a plan, such as a general plan, long range development plan, or plans for the reduction of GHG emissions, mitigation may include the identification of specific measures that may be implemented on a project-by-project basis. Mitigation may also include the incorporation of specific measures or policies found in an adopted ordinance or regulation that reduces the cumulative effect of emissions.14

3.2 Relevant State and Regional GHG Reduction
Targets
Executive Order S-03-05
On June 1, 2005, the governor issued EO S-03-05, which established a statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and created the Climate Action Team. The 2020 GHG reduction target contained in EO S-03-05 was later codified by Assembly Bill (AB) 32.

Assembly Bill 32
California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in AB 32, the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” which was signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the State’s goal of reducing Statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for 13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
16 reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of Statewide GHG emissions. Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 Statewide GHG level and 2020 limit of 427 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e. The Scoping Plan was approved by CARB on December 11, 2008, and included measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among other measures. Many of the GHG reduction measures included in the Scoping Plan (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards, and Cap-andTrade) have been adopted since approval of the Scoping Plan.15 2014 Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan Update
In May 2014, CARB approved the first update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan. The 2013 Scoping Plan update defined CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years and set the groundwork to reach post-2020 Statewide goals. The update highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluated how to align the State’s longer-term GHG reduction strategies with other State policy priorities, including those for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use.
16 Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, the governor issued EO B-30-15, which established Statewide GHG emission reduction targets of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

The 2030 GHG emissions reduction target contained in EO B-30-15 was later codified by SB 32.

Senate Bill 32
On September 8, 2016, the governor signed SB 32 into law, extending AB 32 by requiring the Statewide reduction of GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). The bill charges CARB to adopt the regulation so that the maximum technologically feasible emissions reductions are achieved in the most cost-effective way. 2017 Scoping Plan Update
On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 goal set by SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, as well as implementation of recently adopted policies, such as SB 350 and SB 1383 .

The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2014 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project-level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with statewide per capita goals of six metric tons (MT) CO2e by 2030 and two MT CO2e by 2050. As stated in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan-level analyses (city, 15 CARB. 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan. December 2008. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf. 16 CARB. 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan. May 15, 2014. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_climate_change_scoping_plan.pdf.

Regulatory and Legal Setting
Final 17
county, subregional, or regional level), but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the State (CARB 2017).

Senate Bill 375
SB 375, signed in August 2008, enhances the state’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. SB 375 aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and affordable housing allocations. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which allocates land uses in the MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Qualified projects consistent with an approved SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy categorized as “transit priority projects” would receive incentives to streamline CEQA processing.

On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) was assigned targets of a 7 percent reduction in GHGs from transportation sources by 2020 and a 15 percent reduction in GHGs from transportation sources by 2035. ABAG adopted the 2050 RTP (Plan Bay Area 2050) in October 2021, which includes the region’s SCS and meets the requirements of SB 375.17 Executive Order B-55-18
On September 10, 2018, the governor issued Executive Order B-55-18, which established a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide GHG reduction targets established by SB 375, SB 32, SB 1383, and SB 100.
2022 Scoping Plan Update
Provides a framework for achieving the 2030 goal and working towards carbon neutrality by 2045 set by SB 32. The 2022 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, as well as implementation of recently adopted policies. The 2022 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

Assembly Bill 1279
On August 31, 2022, the California Legislature passed AB 1279, which established a new Statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. The bill also requires statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions to be reduced to at least 85% below 1990 levels. This goal is in addition to the existing Statewide GHG emission reduction targets established by SB 375, SB 32, SB 1383, and SB 100. AB 1279 also tasked CARB with including a pathway toward the AB 1279 carbon neutrality goal, which was developed as part of the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
17 Association of Bay Area Governments. October 2021. Plan Bay Area 2050.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
18 3.3 Relevant GHG Emissions Analysis Case Law
Friends of Oroville v. City of Oroville (Case No. 070448) The Third District Court of Appeal decision in the Friends of Oroville v. City of Oroville case was published on August 19, 2013. This decision evaluated the methodology used to analyze GHG emissions in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for a Wal-Mart Supercenter development project that included replacing an existing Wal-Mart store with a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Oroville in Butte County. The EIR used consistency with the AB 32 emissions reduction target as the significance threshold for evaluating the project’s GHG emissions and compared the magnitude of the proposed project’s emissions to statewide 2004 emission levels as part of the analysis. The Court found that EIR applied “a meaningless, relative number to determine insignificant impact” rather than evaluating the project’s emissions in light of the AB 32 emissions reduction target. The Court also found that the EIR “misapplied the [AB] 32 threshold-of-significance standard by [1] failing to calculate the GHG emissions for the existing Wal-Mart and [2] failing to quantitatively or qualitatively ascertain or estimate the effect of the Project’s mitigation measures on GHG emissions.” The Court determined that the EIR could and should have performed these quantifications to adequately evaluate the project’s GHG emissions using the AB 32 emissions reduction target.

Sierra Club v. County of San Diego (Case No. 37-2018-00043084-CU-TT-CTL) The Fourth District Court of Appeal decision in the Sierra Club v. County of San Diego case was published on October 29, 2014. This decision evaluated the adequacy of the Climate Action Plan prepared by the County of San Diego to satisfy Mitigation Measure CC-1.2 of the program EIR prepared for the 2011 General Plan. To reduce GHG emissions impacts of the 2011 General Plan to a less-than-significant level, Mitigation Measure CC-1.2 required the preparation of a CAP that would include “more detailed GHG emissions reduction targets and deadlines” and that would “achieve comprehensive and enforceable GHG emissions reduction of 17 percent (totaling 23,572 MT of CO2e) from County operations from 2006 by 2020 and 9 percent reduction (totaling 479,717 MT of CO2e) in community emissions from 2006 by 2020.” The Court found the CAP did not include enforceable and feasible GHG emission reduction measures that would achieve the necessary emissions reduction; therefore, the CAP did not meet the requirements of Mitigation Measure CC1.2 and would not ensure that the mitigation measure would reduce GHG emissions to a less-thansignificant impact. In addition, the Court found that the County failed to evaluate the environmental impacts of the CAP and the associated thresholds of significance under CEQA.

Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Case No. 217763)
The California Supreme Court’s decision in the Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife case was published on November 30, 2015. This decision evaluated the methodology used to analyze GHG emissions in an EIR prepared for the Newhall Ranch development project that included approximately 20,885 dwelling units with 58,000 residents on 12,000 acres of undeveloped land in Los Angeles County. The EIR used a business-as-usual approach to evaluate whether the project would be consistent with the AB 32 Scoping Plan. The Court found there was insufficient evidence in the record of that project to explain how a project that reduces its GHG emissions by the same percentage as the business-as-usual reduction identified for the State to

Regulatory and Legal Setting
Final 19
meet its Statewide targets supported a conclusion that project-level impacts were below the level of significance.

The California Supreme Court suggested regulatory consistency as a pathway to compliance by stating that a lead agency might assess consistency with the State’s GHG reduction goals by evaluating for compliance with regulations designed to reduce GHG emissions. This approach is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(b), which provides that a determination of an impact is not cumulatively considerable to the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements implementing a Statewide, regional, or local plan to reduce or mitigate GHG emissions. The Court also found that a lead agency may rely on numerical and efficiency-based thresholds of significance for GHG emissions, if supported by substantial evidence.

Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego/Sierra Club, LLC v.

County of San Diego (Case No. 072406)
The Fourth District Court of Appeal decision in the Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego case (published on September 28, 2018) evaluated the County of San Diego’s 2016 Guidance Document’s GHG efficiency metric, which establishes a generally applicable threshold of significance for proposed projects. The Court held that the County of San Diego is barred from using its 2016 Guidance Document’s threshold of significance of 4.9 MT of CO2e per service person per year for GHG analysis. The Court stated that the document violated CEQA because it was not adopted formally by ordinance, rule, resolution, or regulation through a public review process per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b). The Court also found that the threshold was not supported by substantial evidence that adequately explained how a service population threshold derived from Statewide data could constitute an appropriate GHG metric to be used for all projects in unincorporated San Diego County. Nevertheless, lead agencies may make plan- or project-specific GHG emissions threshold determinations.

Climate Action Campaign v. City of San Diego (Case No. 37-2022-00036430-

CU-TT-CTL)
The Superior Court of California in the Climate Action Campaign v. City of San Diego case is currently evaluating the City of San Diego’s compliance with CEQA as part of their Climate Action Plan (the case was filed on September 12, 2022). The Climate Action Campaign alleges that the City of San Diego failed to comply with CEQA because the City of San Diego failed to adequately analyze or mitigate significant impacts and failed to specify criteria or standards to ensure the Climate Action Plan’s emission reductions would be achieved. The Climate Action Campaign accordingly request that the Superior Court of California issue a writ of mandate under California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 and 1094.5 directing the City of San Diego to vacate and set aside its previous approvals as part of the Climate Action Plan. A verified petition for writ of mandate has been filed, with a final decision by the Superior Court of California pending.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
20 4 Determining Consistency with the CAAP
As discussed in Chapter 2, Climate Action Plan Summary, the Pinole CAAP is a qualified GHG emission reduction plan per the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 for year 2030 and can, therefore, be utilized to streamline the GHG emissions analysis for plans and projects with buildout years through 2030. Projects that are consistent with the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions in the CAAP can utilize the City’s CEQA GHG Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the CAAP GHG emissions reduction strategy, and if consistent, can tier from the environmental review contained in the CAAP IS-ND. In doing so, these projects would result in less-than-significant GHG emissions and not result in a cumulatively considerable GHG emissions impact. The following process (see Figure 3) shows how to demonstrate a plan/project’s consistency with the CAAP’s GHG emissions reduction strategy and, thereby, tier from the IS-ND for the CAAP. This approach is consistent with the recommendations of the AEP Climate Change Committee for tiering from qualified GHG reduction plans that demonstrate substantial progress toward meeting the next milestone Statewide planning reduction target (i.e., a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2030 as set forth by SB 32).

Figure 3 Determining Consistency with the Pinole CAAP

Determining Consistency with the CAAP
Final 21
Step 1: Consistency with Demographic Forecasts and Land Use Assumptions The demographic forecasts of the CAAP are based on ABAG’s demographic forecasts (PBA 2040 and PBA 2050) and the growth projected in the City’s 2010 General Plan with 2023-2031 Housing Element Update. If a plan/project is consistent with the existing (2010) General Plan land use of the plan area/project site as identified in the Pinole General Plan, then the plan/project is consistent with the Business as Usual (BAU) demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the CAAP and can move on to Step 2. In such cases, the plan/project’s associated GHG emissions were accounted for in the GHG emissions forecasts included in the CAAP and, therefore, are within the scope of this plan’s analysis of communitywide GHG emissions. Accordingly, the analysis of the plan/project’s GHG emissions in its CEQA document should include a reference to the plan/project’s consistency with the existing (2010) General Plan land use of the plan area/project site and should explain the connection between the existing (2010) General Plan land use and the GHG emissions forecasts in the CAAP. Then, proceed to Step 2. Note that this general methodology can also be utilized for projects with a post-2030 buildout year; however, the CEQA GHG thresholds would need to be updated to match the latest, adopted General Plan land use designations as well as the latest, adopted CAAP.

If a plan/project is not consistent with the existing (2010) General Plan land use of the plan area/project site but would result in equivalent or fewer GHG emissions as compared to existing onsite development or the development anticipated for the site under the City’s existing (2010) General Plan, then the plan/project would still be within the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the CAAP and can move on to Step 2. To provide substantial evidence for this determination, GHG emissions generated under existing conditions/existing (2010) General Plan buildout and the proposed project need to be quantified and included in the CEQA analysis. See Chapter 6, Quantifying GHG Emissions, for guidance on quantifying GHG emissions for existing conditions/existing (2010) General Plan buildout and the proposed plan/project. In this case, the analysis of the plan/project’s GHG emissions in its CEQA document should include a quantitative comparison of the proposed plan/project’s GHG emissions and GHG emissions generated by existing on-site development, or the development anticipated for the site under the City’s existing (2010) General Plan. The analysis should clearly explain how the plan/project’s emissions are equivalent or less than those generated by existing on-site development, or the development anticipated for the site under the City’s existing (2010) General Plan.

If a plan/project is not consistent with the existing (2010) General Plan land use of the plan area/project site and would result in either new development of undeveloped land or redevelopment with higher GHG emissions than existing on-site development or than the development anticipated for the site under the City’s existing (2010) General Plan, the plan/project cannot use the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to tier from the adopted IS-ND for the CAAP. Instead, the plan/project’s GHG emissions can be evaluated using the quantitative GHG thresholds described in Chapter 5, Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds, to evaluate the significance of the plan/project’s GHG emissions.

Step 2: Consistency with CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist The City has prepared the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist for plans and projects to confirm they are consistent with the strategies of the CAAP. A project applicant can utilize the checklist to show that a plan/project includes all applicable strategies of the CAAP. Projects that use the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist are not required to quantify reductions

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
22 from the strategies included on the checklist, because the reductions from applicable strategies have already been quantified at a programmatic level in the CAAP.

If a plan/project is consistent with the applicable strategies on the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist, then the plan/project can streamline from the plan/project-level CEQA GHG emissions analysis utilizing the programmatic GHG emissions environmental review included in the adopted IS-ND for the CAAP pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b)(1).

A plan/project that is consistent with all applicable strategies of the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist would result in less-than-significant GHG emissions and would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to GHG emissions and climate change. In this case, the analysis of a plan or project’s GHG emissions in its respective CEQA review document should include a qualitative summary of the plan/project’s consistency with applicable measures of the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist and an explanation with substantial evidence of why any strategies in the checklist are not applicable to the plan/project.

Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds
Final 23
5 Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG
Thresholds
As discussed in Chapter 4, Determining Consistency with the CAAP, if a plan/project is not consistent with the existing (2010) General Plan land use of the plan area/project site or has a post-2030 buildout year or is not consistent with all applicable GHG reduction strategies of the CAAP as listed in the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist, then that plan/project cannot utilize the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to streamline its project/plan-level GHG emissions analysis in a qualitative manner. Instead, the significance of that plan/project’s GHG emissions can be evaluated using quantitative GHG thresholds derived from the assumptions of the CAAP. If that plan/project’s GHG emissions are at or below the applicable quantitative threshold and it has a pre-2030 buildout year, it can be determined that the project/plan would result in a less than significant GHG emissions impact. Similarly, if a CAAP-specific project can tier from the existing programmatic environmental review contained in the adopted programmatic IS-ND for the CAAP, GHG emissions impacts associated with that project would also be considered less than significant.

In doing so, such plans/projects would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to GHG emissions and climate change. In addition, plans/projects with post-2030 buildout year and GHG emissions at or below the quantitative thresholds for 2045, which equate to net zero MT of CO2e per year, would be considered less-than-significant and would not result in a cumulatively considerable GHG emissions impact. Note that the CEQA GHG thresholds need to be updated for consistency when new General Plan land use designations and new CAAP updates are adopted. The following sections provide an explanation of the methodology used to calculate the quantitative GHG emissions thresholds, guidance on how to utilize the thresholds, and justification for use of the thresholds.

5.1 Thresholds Calculation Methodology
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 does not establish a specific quantitative threshold of significance for evaluating GHG emissions associated with a proposed plan or project. As mentioned above, lead agencies have the discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, and in establishing those thresholds, a lead agency may appropriately look to thresholds developed by other public agencies, or suggested by other experts, if the threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7[c]). The following methodology is consistent with guidance provided by the AEP Climate Change Committee in 2016 for establishing GHG emissions efficiency thresholds using the local jurisdictional GHG inventory and demographic forecasts.
18 An efficiency threshold is a threshold expressed as a per-person metric (e.g., per resident, per employee, or per service person). Efficiency thresholds are calculated by dividing the allowable GHG emissions inventory in a selected calendar year by the resident, employee, or service population in that year. The efficiency threshold identifies the quantity of GHG emissions that can be generated on a per-person basis without significantly impacting the environment. 18 AEP. 2016. Final White Paper Beyond 2020 and Newhall: A Field Guide to New CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California. https://califaep.org/docs/AEP-2016_Final_White_Paper.pdf.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
24 Locally appropriate, plan- and project-specific GHG emissions efficiency thresholds were derived from the GHG emissions forecasts calculated for the CAAP. These thresholds were created to comply with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and interpretive GHG emissions analysis case law, which are summarized in Chapter 3, Regulatory and Legal Setting. The City of Pinole GHG emissions efficiency thresholds were calculated using the emissions forecasts with all local emissions sectors included, because plans and projects would generate vehicle trips, consume energy and water, and produce wastewater and solid waste, thereby generating emissions in all categories. Efficiency thresholds were calculated for the year 2030 to provide GHG emissions thresholds for new development in line with the State’s next milestone target for year 2030.

GHG emissions efficiency thresholds would be used during the CEQA review process for new residential, non-residential, and mixed-use plans and projects. Therefore, forecasted GHG emissions in the 2030 CAAP were disaggregated into existing development and new development for each threshold year. Forecasted GHG emissions for new development were further disaggregated into residential and non-residential development for each threshold year for the purpose of calculating thresholds specific to residential, non-residential, and mixed-use projects. The results of the disaggregation of the GHG emissions forecast are presented in Figure 4 and Table 5, which summarizes the total amount of GHG emissions expected to be generated by existing, new residential, and new non-residential development for threshold year 2030.

Figure 4 Allowable GHG Emissions from Existing and New Development in 2030 41,919
2,963
2,435
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
2030 GHG Emissions (MT CO2e)
Existing New Residential New Nonresidential

Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds
Final 25
Table 5 GHG Emissions Reductions for Year 2030 by Type of Development (MT of CO2e) Existing
Development
New Development
Source Residential Non-Residential
Baseline GHG Emissions 72,273 6,654 5,588
State Legislation/Existing City Programs (12,552) (1,430) (1,631) 2030 CAAP Energy Measures (8,475) (1,329) (680)
2030 CAAP Transportation Measures (6,493) (579) (670)
2030 CAAP Waste Measures (2,834) (354) (172)
Remaining Total GHG Emissions 41,919 2,963 2,435
Note: ( ) denotes a negative number
See Appendix B for calculations.

Table 6 summarizes the demographic projections for the City of Pinole that were used in calculating GHG efficiency thresholds for year 2030. As shown below, the numbers of residents, employees, and service persons are all anticipated to increase between 2017 and 2030.

Table 6 Pinole Demographic Projections
Metric 2017 Estimate 2030 Forecast
Net Increase from New
Development
(2017-2030)
Residents 19,663 23,110 3,447
Employees 7,970 9,645 1,674
Service Population1 27,633 32,755 5,122
1 Service population is equal to residential population plus the number of employees.

Source: Pinole, City of. 2022. Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Forecast.

5.2 Thresholds and Use
The GHG efficiency thresholds for residential, non-residential, and mixed-use projects built prior to December 31, 2030 are presented in Figure 5 and Table 7. If a plan or project’s emissions do not exceed the applicable threshold, then it is considered consistent with the Pinole CAAP and its GHG emissions impacts (both project- and cumulative-level) would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to GHG emissions and climate change and would, therefore, be less than significant. If a plan/ project’s emissions exceed the applicable threshold, then mitigation measures must be identified, and respective GHG emissions reduction calculations included within the CEQA review document in order to reduce plan or project GHG emissions to at or below the applicable threshold level. These thresholds are applicable to the following plan and project types proposed in Pinole:
▪ Residential. Single-family dwellings, multi-family dwellings, accessory dwelling units, boarding house, caretaker quarters, fraternities and sororities, high-occupancy residential uses, continuing care communities, mobile-home parks, or any combination of these uses. ▪ Non-residential. All commercial uses (including office and retail uses), all lodging uses, all public and quasi-public uses, older adult and long-term care, hospice in-patient facilities, family day cares, residential care facilities, supportive and/or transitional housing, sports and entertainment assembly facilities, all industry, manufacturing and processing, and wholesaling

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
26 uses that are not subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) stationary source permitting or the State Cap-and-Trade program, or any combination of these uses. ▪ Mixed-use. A combination of at least one residential and at least one non-residential land use specified above.

Figure 5 Pinole GHG Efficiency Thresholds
Source: Appendix B, CEQA GHG Thresholds Calculations
Table 7 Pinole Locally Applicable Plan/Project CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds 2030 New Development
Non-Residential Residential Mixed-Use
GHG Emissions Forecast
(MT of CO2e per year)1
2,556 3,059 5,626
Demographic Metric2 1,674 new employees 3,447 new residents 5,122 new service persons GHG Efficiency Threshold
(MT of CO2e per year)

1.45 per employee 0.86 per resident 1.05 per service person MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents
1 Emissions from new mixed-use development would count against the total remaining GHG budget for both new residential and new non-residential development rather than as a function of the number of new service people expected in 2030. This avoids double counting.
2 Demographic estimates were calculated using the forecasts in Table 6.

Source: Appendix B, CEQA GHG Thresholds Calculations

0.86 1.45

1.05 -

0.20 0.40

0.60 0.80

1.00 1.20

1.40 1.60
New Residential
(per resident)
New Nonresidential
(per job)
New Mixed-Use
(per service person)
GHG Emissions Thresholds (MT CO2e)

Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds
Final 27

5.3 Justification for Thresholds
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b)(1), “the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data.” In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b)(2) states, “When using a threshold, the lead agency should briefly explain how compliance with the threshold means that the project’s impacts are less than significant.” Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) states, “Thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and be supported by substantial evidence.” Therefore, the key considerations when developing thresholds of significance are 1) the thresholds’ basis on scientific and factual data; 2) demonstration of how compliance with the thresholds reduces project impacts to a less than significant level; 3) support of the thresholds by substantial evidence; and 4) adoption of the thresholds by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process. The following subsections address these four key considerations.

Basis of Scientific and Factual Data
As discussed in Section 5.1,Thresholds Calculation Methodology, the quantitative thresholds were developed using data from the City’s 2017 communitywide GHG inventories and the GHG emissions forecasts for year 2030. These inventories and forecasts were developed by the City in compliance with all relevant protocols and guidance documents, including the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Local Government Operations Protocol, the Global Protocol for Community Scale GHG Emissions, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National GHG Inventories. Furthermore, the inventories and forecasts are based on locally appropriate data for Pinole provided by Marin Clean Energy (MCE), Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Bay BAAQMD, CARB, solid waste management providers, and water providers.
19 Therefore, the emissions inventory and forecast data underlying the thresholds is both scientific and factual.

As discussed in Section 2.3, GHG Emissions Forecast, implementation of the Pinole CAAP will achieve a 40 percent reduction in 1990 emissions levels by 2030 (equivalent to 47,273 MT of CO2e 2030).

Therefore, this local target makes substantial progress toward achieving the State’s long-term goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. The quantitative thresholds are tied directly to the level of GHG emissions anticipated for new development in the CAAP for year 2030. As a result, because the CAAP is consistent with the State’s 2030 GHG emission target, the quantitative thresholds are also consistent with the next State milestone GHG emission reduction target for 2030. The State’s GHG emission reduction targets for 2030 and 2045 are set at the levels scientists say are necessary to meet the Paris Agreement goals to reduce GHG emissions and limit global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius by 2100 in order to avoid dangerous climate change (CARB 2022; AB 1279).

Therefore, the City’s emission reduction targets that inform the CAAP and the associated quantitative thresholds are based on scientific and factual data on the level of emissions reduction necessary to avoid a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative impact of climate change.
19 Pinole, City of. 2022. Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Forecast.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
28 Reduction of Plan or Project Impacts to a Less-than-Significant Level The quantitative GHG thresholds shown in Section 5.2, Thresholds and Use, are tied directly to the level of GHG emissions anticipated for new development in the CAAP for year 2030. Therefore, the thresholds are consistent with the City’s local emission reduction target, which is consistent with the State’s GHG emission reduction targets. As mentioned in the preceding subsection, the State’s GHG emission reduction targets for 2030 and 2045 are set at the levels scientists say are necessary to meet the Paris Agreement goals to reduce GHG emissions and limit global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius by 2100 in order to avoid dangerous climate change (CARB 2022; AB 1279).

Therefore, the quantitative thresholds are set at the level necessary to ensure the City does not have a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact of climate change. As a result, plans and projects with GHG emissions at or below the quantitative thresholds would also not have a considerable contribution to the cumulative impacts of climate change, and plan/project impacts would be less than significant.

Support of Substantial Evidence
Substantial evidence regarding the calculation of the quantitative GHG emissions thresholds is provided in Section 5.1, Thresholds Calculation Methodology. The following subsections provide additional evidence of how the GHG emissions thresholds are locally appropriate and plan- or project-specific and how the thresholds distinguish between existing and new development.

Use of Local Data
The quantitative thresholds were developed using the City’s communitywide GHG emissions forecast for year 2030 and are therefore specific to the City of Pinole. The thresholds are directly tied to the population and employment growth anticipated by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and in alignment with the Pinole 2010 General Plan Land Use/Community Character and updated Housing Elements as well as to the City-specific GHG emission reduction measures that the City has proposed to reduce communitywide emissions. In addition, the magnitude of local GHG emission reduction achieved by State legislation/policies (i.e., vehicle fuel efficiency standards, the Renewable Portfolio Standard [RPS], and Title 24) was estimated based on City-specific growth and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) forecasts. As a result, these locally appropriate thresholds directly address the concerns raised in the Golden Door Properties, LLC v.

County of San Diego/Sierra Club, LLC v. County of San Diego (2018) case, because they are based on local GHG emissions data rather than Statewide GHG emissions data.

Disaggregation of Existing versus New Development
The quantitative thresholds were developed by disaggregating the County’s business-as-usual GHG emissions forecasts for year 2030 into emissions forecasts for existing and new development, as shown in Table 5. The emissions reductions specific to new development achieved by State legislation/policies and the 2030 CAAP were then subtracted from the business-as-usual forecast to determine the maximum limit of emissions from new residential and new non-residential development for year 2030. These limits were then divided by the numbers of residents, employees, and service persons forecasts for new development to determine efficiency thresholds for residential, non-residential, and mixed-use development, respectively. Therefore, these thresholds directly address the concerns raised in the Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) case regarding the different rates of GHG emissions reductions anticipated

Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds
Final 29
for new development as compared to existing development in order to meet the specified GHG reduction target.

Selection of Sector-Specific Thresholds
The quantitative thresholds are separated into three categories – residential, non-residential, and mixed-use – which are intended to apply to the three main types of development projects in Pinole.

These thresholds were calculated by disaggregating the City’s business-as-usual GHG emissions forecasts for residential and non-residential development. The emissions reduction specific to residential and non-residential development achieved by State legislation/existing City programs and the CAAP were then subtracted from the business-as-usual forecast to determine the maximum limit of emissions for new residential and new non-residential development for year 2030. These emissions limits were then divided by the numbers of residents and employees forecast for the year 2030 to determine efficiency thresholds for residential and non-residential projects, respectively.

For mixed-use development, the residential and non-residential emissions limits were summed, then divided by the service population forecast for 2030 to determine an efficiency threshold for mixed-use projects. As a result, these project-specific thresholds directly address the concerns raised in the Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) case, because they are specific to each development project type.

Adoption via Public Review Process
In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b), this guidance document and the quantitative thresholds contained herein will be presented to the City Council for formal adoption via resolution through a public review process, which will include an opportunity for public input.

The public review process for these City of Pinole CEQA GHG Thresholds and Guidance will specifically occur via public availability to comment on the draft resolution item during a public meeting (i.e., Board of Supervisors hearing). This process directly addresses the concerns raised in the Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego/Sierra Club, LLC v. County of San Diego (2018) case regarding formal adoption of new CEQA thresholds.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
30 6 Quantifying GHG Emissions
There are a variety of analytical tools available to estimate project-level GHG emissions, including the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod),20 which is a free, publicly available computer model developed for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with various air quality districts throughout the State. Alternative tools may be used to quantify emissions if they can be substantiated. In general, the most current version of CalEEMod should be used to calculate total emissions for discretionary development projects. The analysis should focus on carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) because these are the GHGs that most development projects would generate in the largest quantities. Fluorinated gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluorides, should also be considered for the analysis as reported in CalEEMod from refrigerants used in air conditioning and refrigeration equipment. Emissions of all GHGs should be converted into their equivalent global warming potential in terms of CO2 (CO2e). Calculations should be based on the current methodologies recommended by the CAPCOA and the BAAQMD.
21 ,
22 6.1 Construction GHG Emissions
Construction activities emit GHGs primarily though combustion of fuels (mostly diesel) in the engines of off-road construction equipment, in on-road construction vehicles, and in the commute vehicles of the construction workers. Smaller amounts of GHGs are emitted indirectly through the energy required for water used for fugitive dust control and lighting for the construction activity.

Every phase of the construction process, including demolition, grading, paving, and building, emits GHG emissions in volumes proportional to the quantity and type of construction equipment used.

Heavier equipment typically emits more GHGs per hour than lighter equipment because of its engine design and greater fuel consumption.

BAAQMD recommends quantifying and disclosing construction related GHG emissions and making an impact level determination. CalEEMod generates a default construction schedule and equipment list based on the plan/project-specific information, including land use, project size, location, and construction timeline.23 In general, if specific applicant-provided information is unknown, the default construction equipment list and phase lengths are the most appropriate inputs. However, if more detailed site-specific equipment and phase information (i.e., data from the project applicant) is available, the model’s default values can (and should) be overridden.24 20 The most current available version of CalEEMod should be used. As of February 2022, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0 is the most current version and should be used to quantify project-level emissions. 21 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2008. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). January 2008.
22 BAAQMD. 2022. “CEQA Thresholds and Guidelines Update.” https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmentalquality-act-ceqa/updated-ceqa-guidelines. 23 CAPCOA. 2020. California Emissions Estimator Model User Guide: Version 2020.4.0. Prepared by BREEZE Software, A Division of Trinity Consultants in collaboration with South Coast Air Quality Management District and the California Air Districts. http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide.
24 Ibid.

Quantifying GHG Emissions
Final 31

6.2 Operational GHG Emissions
CalEEMod estimates operational emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 generated by area sources, energy use, vehicle trips (i.e., mobile sources), waste generation, and water use and conveyance.

Operational emissions should be calculated for the year 2030, rather than the plan/project buildout year, in order to provide an appropriate comparison of project emissions to the year 2030 threshold.

Area Source Emissions
Area sources include GHG emissions that would occur from the use of landscaping equipment, hearths, and woodstoves, which emit GHGs associated with the equipment’s fuel combustion. The landscaping equipment emission values in CalEEMod are derived from the 2011 Off-Road Equipment Inventory Model.25 Emission rates for combustion of wood and natural gas for wood stoves and fireplaces are based on those published by the U.S. EPA in Chapter 1.9 of AP-42.

Typically, no adjustments to landscaping equipment inputs are necessary. The number of hearths and woodstoves should be adjusted in CalEEMod to reflect the project design.

Energy Use Emissions
GHGs are emitted on-site during the combustion of natural gas for cooking, space and water heating, and decorative uses, as well as off-site during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels in power plants. CalEEMod estimates GHG emissions from energy use by multiplying average rates of residential and non-residential energy consumption by the quantities of residential units and nonresidential square footage entered in the land use module to obtain total projected energy use. This value is then multiplied by electricity and natural gas GHG emission factors applicable to the plan/project location and utility provider. Building energy use is typically divided into energy consumed by the built environment and energy consumed by uses that are independent of the building, such as plug-in appliances. Non-building energy use, or “plug-in energy use,” can be further subdivided by specific end-use (refrigeration, cooking, office equipment, etc.). In California, Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built environment, mechanical systems, and some types of fixed lighting.

Electricity emissions are calculated by multiplying the energy use by the carbon intensity of the utility district per kilowatt hour.26 Projects would be served either by MCE or by PG&E. The specific energy intensity factors (i.e., the amount of CO2, CH4, and N2O per kilowatt-hour) for the applicable utility should be used in the calculations of GHG emissions.

As of publication of this guidance document, the current iteration of Title 24 included the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In accordance with Section 150.1(b)14 of the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, all new residential uses three stories or less must install photovoltaic (PV) solar panels that generate an amount of electricity equal to expected electricity usage. The calculation method contained in Section 150.1(b)14 of the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards should be utilized to estimate the number of kilowatts from PV solar panels would be required for a residential project three stories or less. In addition, modeling should account for local regulations 25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
32 pertaining to mandatory solar provisions.27 Online resources can be used to determine the amount of kilowatt-hours that would be generated per year by the required PV system.28 The energy reduction achieved by on-site PV panels should be included in CalEEMod. Future updates to Title 24 as they relate to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards should be incorporated into CalEEMod as applicable.

Mobile Source Emissions
CalEEMod quantifies mobile source emissions generated by vehicle trips associated with the proposed plan/project. If available, plan/project-specific trip generation rates or VMT data should be input in CalEEMod.

Water and Wastewater Emissions
The amount of water used, and the amount of wastewater generated by a plan/project generate indirect GHG emissions. These emissions are a result of the energy used to supply, convey, and treat water and wastewater. In addition to the indirect GHG emissions associated with energy use, the wastewater treatment process itself can directly emit both CH4 and N2O.

The indoor and outdoor water use consumption data for each land use subtype comes from the Pacific Institute’s (2003) Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in California.
29 Based on that report, a percentage of total water consumption is dedicated to landscape irrigation, which is used to determine outdoor water use. Wastewater generation is similarly based on a reported percentage of total indoor water use.

New development will be subject to the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which currently requires a 20 percent increase in indoor water use efficiency and the use of waterefficient irrigation systems. Thus, to account for compliance with CALGreen, a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use and the use of water-efficient irrigation systems should be included in the water consumption calculations for new residential, non-residential, and mixed-use development. Future updates to Title 24 as they relate to CALGreen water efficiency requirements should be incorporated into CalEEMod as applicable.

Solid Waste Emissions
The disposal of solid waste produces GHG emissions from the transportation of waste, anaerobic decomposition in landfills, and incineration. To calculate the GHG emissions generated by solid waste disposal, the total volume of solid waste is calculated using waste disposal rates identified by CalRecycle. The methods for quantifying GHG emissions from solid waste are based on the IPCC method, using the degradable organic content of waste. CEQA document preparers should contact the City's Community Development Department to obtain the City’s most recent solid waste diversion rate to be included in the calculation of solid waste GHG emissions. 27 In 2020, the City Council will consider adoption of the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which may include solar requirements for other types of land uses.
28 Zientara, Ben. 2019. How much electricity does a solar panel produce? Last updated: November 6, 2019. https://www.solarpowerrocks.com/solar-basics/how-much-electricity-does-a-solar-panel-produce/. 29 CAPCOA. 2017. California Emissions Estimator Model User Guide: Version 2016.3.2. Prepared by BREEZE Software, A Division of Trinity Consultants in collaboration with South Coast Air Quality Management District and the California Air Districts. http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide.

Quantifying GHG Emissions
Final 33
Plan or Project Design Features
CEQA document preparers should use the “Mitigation” tabs in CalEEMod to include project design features applicable to the plan/project.30 These features often include increased density, improved destination accessibility, proximity to transit, integration of below market rate housing, unbundling of parking costs, provision of transit subsidies, implementation of alternative work schedules, use of energy- and/or water-efficient appliances, use of reclaimed and/or grey water, and installation of water-efficient irrigation system. Users should consider the applicability of these features to the plan/project and review the CAPCOA Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (2010) publication to ensure that the chosen features are relevant and feasible considering the plan/project.31
Residents, Employees, and Service Populations
The quantitative thresholds presented in Chapter 5, Utilizing Quantitative CEQA GHG Thresholds, are expressed in terms of per resident for residential projects, per employee for non-residential projects, and per service person for mixed-use projects. Estimates of the resident, employee, or service population for a plan/project should be based on substantial evidence. Data provided by the applicant as well as the following resources may be utilized in estimating resident and employee populations:
▪ Persons per Household. Users should refer to the California Department of Finance website (https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/) for the most recent estimate of persons per household in Pinole. This estimate can be multiplied by the number of proposed residential units to estimate a plan/project’s resident population. ▪ Proposed Number of Beds. For projects such as group homes, assisted living facilities, nursing homes, or similar uses, the number of beds can be used to determine the resident population. ▪ United States Green Building Council. The United States Green Building Council has published a summary of building area per employee by business type. These rates, which are expressed in terms of square feet per employee, can be utilized to estimate the number of employees a plan/project would require. This document is included as Appendix C.

6.3 Modeling GHG Emissions from Existing Land Use
For a plan/project that would result in a change in the plan area/project’s site General Plan land use designation, emissions anticipated for the existing (2010) General Plan land use designation must be calculated in conjunction with emissions for the proposed plan/project to demonstrate whether the plan/project would be more or less GHG-intensive than development anticipated for the existing (2010) General Plan land use designation for the site. In this case, GHG emissions should be reported for both the existing and proposed scenarios.

Emissions anticipated for the existing land use should be quantified using the methods described in Section 6.1, Construction Emissions, and Section 6.2, Operational Emissions, with consistent assumptions between the two scenarios as applicable. Any emission reduction credits applied to the proposed plan/project scenario that are related to State legislation/policies (e.g., the RPS, vehicle 30 “Mitigation” is a term of art for the modeling input and is not equivalent to mitigation measures that may apply to the CEQA impact analysis.
31 CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. August 2010. http://www.capcoa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
34 standards, Title 24) or the plan area/project site location (e.g., proximity to transit, destination accessibility, etc.) should also be applied to the existing scenario.

Emission reduction credits that are specific to the proposed plan/project (e.g., use of recycled water, increased density, installation of energy and/or water-efficient appliances, integration of below market rate housing, etc.) should only be included for the proposed plan/project scenario. In addition, care should be taken to identify any emission reduction credits that might be unique to the existing land use designation that would not apply to the proposed plan/project. For example, if the existing land use designation allows for single-family residences and the proposed land use designation would allow for only commercial uses, then the existing scenario should include the emission reduction credit associated with the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards requirements for PV solar panels on residential uses that are three stories or less whereas the proposed plan/project scenario should not include this credit unless PV solar panels are included as a plan/project design feature.

Moving into the Future
Final 35
7 Moving into the Future
Full implementation of the Pinole CAAP will reduce communitywide GHG emissions by approximately 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 98 percent by 2045, which would leave a gap of approximately 1,155 MT of CO2e per year in 2045 that will need to be addressed to achieve carbon neutrality. This gap represents emissions that could be addressed by laws, regulations, policies, programs, and ordinances set forth by the federal and State governments, regional agencies, and local partners. The gap also represents the uncertainty that the City faces in taking a leadership role in addressing a challenge that has not been previously solved.

Pinole is committed to embracing that uncertainty, striving toward constant learning, engaging in systemic change using the tools and actions that local governments are uniquely suited to carry out, and positioning itself to take full advantage of future innovations, technologies, and policies and legislation that may be undertaken at the State and federal level through adaptive management techniques. Technological innovation and changes to climate related policy and regulation occur rapidly. Several of the State’s most successful environmental policy initiatives, including the RPS, also had a gap between what was known at the time of adoption and eventual successful implementation. By committing to the ambitious target of carbon neutrality by 2045, Pinole intends to catalyze innovation, invite and acquire resources from funding sources and partners, and provide climate leadership.

The CAAP acknowledges that additional actions beyond those identified in the plan will be necessary to achieve carbon neutrality and, therefore, provides a mechanism for updating and adopting a new climate action plan every five years (with annual assessment of progress) in order to incorporate new measures and innovative technologies that will further Pinole toward meeting its goal of carbon neutrality. As the CAAP is updated, the associated CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist will also be updated as needed to incorporate new strategies, measures, and/or foundational actions that discretionary development projects will need to incorporate, as applicable, to demonstrate consistency with the latest CAAP. At the time at which the City identifies measures to achieve its carbon neutrality goal in totality, the City will adopt those measures in a public process following CEQA review, at which time that updated CAAP will become a qualified GHG emission reduction plan for projects with post-2030 buildout years. However, the quantitative thresholds included in this guidance document will need to be updated, because residential, nonresidential, and mixed-use projects with post-2030 buildout years will still need to achieve GHG emissions equivalent to zero MT of CO2e per year to demonstrate consistency with the Pinole CAAP.

Finally, if future amendments or updates of the Pinole Land Use and Economic Development/Community Character Element and/or Housing Element occur, then such amendments or updates will be incorporated into future updates of the Pinole CAAP to allow project applicants to continue to utilize the streamlining process, which is partly dependent on a plan/project’s consistency with the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions based on the General Plan Land Use/Community Character and Housing Elements to the greatest extent practicable.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
36 This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix A
Overview of GHG Emissions and Climate Change

Overview of GHG Emissions and Climate Change
Final A-1
Overview of GHG Emissions and Climate
Change
Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period. The term “climate change” is often used interchangeably with the term “global warming,” but “climate change” is preferred to “global warming” because it helps convey other changes in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates from historical records identifying temperature changes that have occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate changes continuously, as evidenced by repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling documented in the geologic record. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed substantial acceleration in the rate of warming during the past 150 years. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expressed that the rise and continued growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is unequivocally due to human activities in the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report from 2021. Human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, which has led the climate to warm at an unprecedented rate in the last 2,000 years. It is estimated that between the period of 1850 through 2019, that a total of 2,390 gigatonnes of anthropogenic CO2 was emitted. It is likely that anthropogenic activities have increased the global surface temperature by approximately 1.07 degrees Celsius between the years 2010 through 2019.32 Furthermore, since the late 1700s, estimated concentrations of CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere have increased by over 43 percent, 156 percent, and 17 percent, respectively, primarily due to human activity.33 Emissions resulting from human activities are thereby contributing to an average increase in Earth’s temperature. Further, in 2023, Earth’s average land and ocean surface temperature was 2.12 degrees F (1.18 degrees C) above the 20th century — the highest global temperature among all years in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 1850-2023 climate record and the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred in the past decade.34
Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called GHGs. The gases widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of 32 IPCC. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.

Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)] Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf 33 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2021. Climate Change Indicators: Atmospheric Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases. Last updated April 2021. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-atmosphericconcentrations-greenhouse-gases 34 NOAA. January 12, 2024. 2023 was the world’s warmest year on record, by far. https://www.noaa.gov/news/2023-was-worldswarmest-year-on-record-by-far#:~:text=Earth's%20average%20land%20and%20ocean,0.15%20of%20a%20degree%20C).

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
A-2
GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere, and natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation, largely determine its atmospheric concentrations.

GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are usually by-products of fossil fuel combustion, and CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Human-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and SF6.
35 Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e), which is the amount of GHG emissions emitted multiplied by its GWP.

Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a GWP of 28, meaning its global warming effect is 28 times greater than CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis.36 The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the Earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat-trapping effect of GHGs, the earth’s surface would be about 33 degrees Celsius (°C) cooler.37 GHG emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, are believed to have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of concentrations that occur naturally.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories
Global Emissions Inventory
Worldwide anthropogenic emissions of GHGs were approximately 54,593 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e in 202138 Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes contributed about 67 percent of total emissions in 202139. Of anthropogenic GHGs, CO2 was the most abundant, accounting for about 75 percent of total 2021 emissions. Methane emissions accounted for 19 percent of the 2021 total, while N2O accounted for 9 percent. 40 United States Emissions Inventory
Total U.S. GHG emissions were 6,340 MMT of CO2e in 2021. Emissions increased by 6 percent from 2020 to 2021 (after accounting for sequestration from the land sector); since 1990, total U.S. emissions have increased by an average annual rate of 0.06 percent for a total increase of 1.8 percent between 1990 and 2019. The increase in total greenhouse gas emissions was driven largely 35U.S. EPA. 2021. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019. April 2021. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-02/us-ghg-inventory-2022-main-text.pdf 36 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf 37 World Meteorological Organization. 2020. “Greenhouse Gases.” https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/focusareas/environment/greenhouse%20gases 38 Our World in Data. 2020. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions 39 Future Earth. 2021. The Global Carbon Project. https://globalcarbonatlas.org/emissions/carbon-emissions/ 40 Our World in Data. 2020. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

Overview of GHG Emissions and Climate Change
Final A-3
by an increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. In 2021, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion increased by 7 percent relative to the previous year. This increase in fossil fuel consumption emissions was due primarily to economic activity rebounding after the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, the industrial and transportation end-use sectors accounted for 30 percent and 29 percent, respectively, of nationwide GHG emissions while the commercial and residential end-use sectors accounted 30 percent of nationwide GHG emissions, respectively.

Agriculture accounted for 11 percent of nationwide GHG emissions. Electricity emissions were distributed among the various sectors.41
California Emissions Inventory
Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) California GHG Inventory for 2000-2021, California produced 381.3 MMT CO2e in 2021.
42 The largest single source of GHG in California is
transportation, contributing 39 percent of the State’s total GHG emissions. Industrial sources are the second-largest source of the State’s GHG emissions, contributing 22 percent of the State’s GHG emissions.43 The magnitude of California’s total GHG emissions is due in part to its large size and large population compared to other states. However, a factor that reduces California’s per capita fuel use and GHG emissions as compared to other states is its relatively mild climate. In 2014, the State of California achieved its 2020 GHG emission reduction target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels as emissions fell below 431 MMT of CO2e.
44 The annual 2030 Statewide target emissions level
is 260 MMT of CO2e.
45 Potential Effects of Climate Change
Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources through potential impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21st century than were observed during the 20th century. Long-term trends have found that each of the past four decades has been warmer than all the previous decades in the instrumental record and the decade from 2011 through 2020 has been the warmest.

The observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) for the decade from 2011 to 2020 was approximately 1.09°C (0.95°C to 1.20°C) higher than the average GMST over the period from 1850 to 1900. Due to past and current activities, anthropogenic GHG emissions are increasing global mean surface temperature at a rate of 0.2°C per decade. In addition to these findings, the latest IPCC report states that “human-induced climate change is already affecting many weather and climate 41 U.S. EPA. 2023. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2021. April 2023. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2021 42 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2021. “Current California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory – 2000-2021 GHG Inventory (2023 Edition). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data
43 Ibid.
44 Ibid.
45 CARB. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. December 14, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
A-4
extremes in every region across the globe.”46 These climate change impacts include sea level rise, increased weather extremes, and substantial ice loss in the Arctic over the past three decades.

According to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, Statewide temperatures from 1986 to 2016 were approximately 0.6 to 1.1°C higher than those recorded from 1901 to 1960. Potential impacts of climate change in California may include reduced water supply from snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more large forest fires, and more drought years.47 In addition to Statewide projections, California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment includes regional reports that summarize climate impacts and adaptation solutions for nine regions of the State and regionally-specific climate change case studies.48 However, while there is growing scientific consensus about the possible effects of climate change at a global and Statewide level, current scientific modeling tools are unable to predict what local impacts may occur with a similar degree of accuracy. A summary follows of some of the potential effects that could be experienced in California as a result of climate change.

Hydrology and Sea Level Rise
Climate change could affect the intensity and frequency of storms and flooding.49 Furthermore, climate change could induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century. Rising sea level increases the likelihood of and risk from flooding. The rate of increase of global mean sea levels between 1993 to 2020, observed by satellites, is approximately 3.3 millimeters per year, double the twentieth century trend of 1.6 millimeters per year.50
,
51 Global mean sea levels in 2013 were about

0.23 meter higher than those of 1880.52 Sea levels are rising faster now than in the previous two millennia, and the rise will probably accelerate, even with robust GHG emission control measures.

The most recent IPCC report predicts a mean sea level rise of 11 to 21.5 inches by 2100 under the lowest emissions scenario and a rise of 25 to 40 inches by 2100 under the very high emissions scenario.53
A rise in sea levels could erode 31 to 67 percent of California beaches and cause flooding of approximately 370 miles of coastal highways during 100-year storm events. This would also jeopardize California’s water supply due to saltwater intrusion and induce groundwater flooding 46 IPCC. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.

Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)] Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf 47 California, State of. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf 48 Ibid.
49 Ibid.
50 World Meteorological Organization. 2013. A summary of current and climate change findings and figures: a WMO information note.

March 2013. https://library.wmo.int/opac/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=15892#.Wt9-Z8gvzIU 51 National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 2020. “Global Climate Change – Vital Signs of the Planet – Sea Level.” https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
52 Ibid.
53 IPCC. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.

Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)] Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf

Overview of GHG Emissions and Climate Change
Final A-5
and/or exposure of buried infrastructure.54 Furthermore, increased storm intensity and frequency could affect the ability of flood-control facilities, including levees, to handle storm events.

Air Quality
Scientists project that the annual average maximum daily temperatures in California could rise by

4.4 to 5.8°F by mid-century (2040 – 2069) and by 5.6 to 8.8°F by late century (2070 – 2100). 55 Higher
temperatures are conducive to air pollution formation, and rising temperatures could therefore result in worsened air quality in California. As a result, climate change may increase the concentration of ground-level ozone, but the magnitude of the effect, and therefore its indirect effects, are uncertain. In addition, as temperatures have increased in recent years, the area burned by wildfires throughout the State has increased, and wildfires have occurred at higher elevations in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.56 If higher temperatures continue to be accompanied by an increase in the incidence and extent of large wildfires, air quality could worsen. Severe heat accompanied by drier conditions and poor air quality could increase the number of heat-related deaths, illnesses, and asthma attacks throughout the State. However, if higher temperatures are accompanied by wetter, rather than drier conditions, the rains could temporarily clear the air of particulate pollution, which would effectively reduce the number of large wildfires and thereby ameliorate the pollution associated with them.57
Water Supply
Analysis of paleoclimatic data (such as tree-ring reconstructions of stream flow and precipitation) indicates a history of naturally and widely varying hydrologic conditions in California and the west, including a pattern of recurring and extended droughts. Uncertainty remains with respect to the overall impact of climate change on future precipitation trends and water supplies in California.

Year-to-year variability in Statewide precipitation levels has increased since 1980, meaning that wet and dry precipitation extremes have become more common.58 This uncertainty regarding future precipitation trends complicates the analysis of future water demand, especially where the relationship between climate change and its potential effect on water demand is not well understood. The average early spring snowpack in the western U.S., including the Sierra Nevada Mountains, decreased by about 10 percent during the last century. During the same period, sea level rose over 0.15 meter along the central and southern California coasts.59 The Sierra snowpack provides the majority of California's water supply as snow that accumulates during wet winters is released slowly during the dry months of spring and summer. A warmer climate is predicted to reduce the fraction of precipitation that falls as snow and the amount of snowfall at lower elevations, thereby reducing the total snowpack.60 Projections indicate that average spring 54 California, State of. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf 55 Ibid.
56 Ibid.
57 California Natural Resources Agency. 2009. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. March 2009. http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/Statewide_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf 58 California Department of Water Resources. 2018. Indicators of Climate Change in California. May 2018. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/climate-change/report/2018caindicatorsreportmay2018.pdf 59 California, State of. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf 60 Ibid.

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
A-6
snowpack in the Sierra Nevada and other mountain catchments in central and northern California will decline by approximately 66 percent from its historical average by 2050.61 Agriculture
California has a roughly $49 billion annual agricultural industry that produces nearly a third of the country’s vegetables and over half of the country’s fruits and nuts.62 Higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency. However, if temperatures rise and drier conditions prevail, certain regions of agricultural production could experience water shortages of up to 16 percent, which would increase water demand as hotter conditions lead to the loss of soil moisture. In addition, crop yield could be threatened by water-induced stress and extreme heat waves, and plants may be susceptible to new and changing pest and disease outbreaks.63 Temperature increases could also change the time of year certain crops, such as wine grapes, bloom or ripen, and thereby affect their quality.64
Ecosystems and Wildlife
Climate change and the potential resultant changes in weather patterns could have ecological effects on global and local scales. Soil moisture is likely to decline in many regions as a result of higher temperatures, and intense rainstorms are likely to become more frequent. Rising temperatures could have four major impacts on plants and animals: timing of ecological events; geographic distribution and range of species; species composition and the incidence of nonnative species within communities; and ecosystem processes, such as carbon cycling and storage.65 ,
66 61 Ibid.
62 California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2021. “California Agricultural Statistics Review.” https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/PDFs/2020_Ag_Stats_Review.pdf 63 California, State of. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf 64 California Climate Change Center (CCCC). 2006. Climate Scenarios for California. 65 Parmesan, C. August 2006. Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change. 66 California, State of. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf

Appendix B
CEQA GHG Threshold Calculations

CEQA GHG Threshold Calculations
Final B-1

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
B-2

CEQA GHG Threshold Calculations
Final B-3

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
B-4
This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix C
United States Green Building Council Building Area per Employee by Business Type Rates 67 67 United States Green Building Council. 2008. “Building Area per Employee by Business Type.” May 13, 2008.

United States Green Building Council Building Area per Employee by Business Type Rates Final C-1

City of Pinole
CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance
C-2
This page intentionally left blank.

Page intentionally left blank.

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12.A.

DATE: MAY 7, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KAPIL AMIN, SUSTAINABILITY FELLOW

LILLY WHALEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT CLIMATE

ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN

RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation and provide direction

BACKGROUND
On October 19, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-93, which declared a climate emergency, directed staff to complete a GHG emissions inventory, and directed staff to prepare a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) that includes GHG emission reduction goals that align with the State’s GHG emission reduction goals of Senate Bill 32 and Executive Order B-55-18. Starting November 2021 through May 2024, Table 1 below provides a monthby-month summary of activities in CAAP development.

Table 1: Month by Month Summary of CAAP Development
Year Month Activities
November
• Staff solicited and negotiated informal quotes from three consulting firms
• City Council approved a mid-year budget adjustment in the amount of $160,000 to fund the GHG inventory and CAP
2021
December
• Staff reviewed proposals from three firms to conduct the GHG Inventory
• Staff selected and executed a contract with CSG Consultants, with Rincon Consultants as a subconsultant, to perform the GHG Inventory at a cost of $28,771
2022 January
• On January 13 City staff and the CSG/Rincon team met for the kickoff of the GHG inventory project.
• On January 27 City staff and the CSG/Rincon team met to further discuss data for the Community Inventory and the Municipal Inventory with a focus on the data related to energy, solid waste,

water/wastewater, and employee commute patterns.

February
• On February 3 City staff circulated an employee commute survey to all Pinole City employees.
• On February 8 City staff and the CSG/Rincon team met to discuss draft findings, data sources, project status, schedule, and next steps.
• On February 18 staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) to develop the CAP.
• On February 23 staff and the CSG/Rincon team increased the initial inventory cost of $28,771 by $3,256 in order to include the most accurate data and calculations for Climate Action planning, which increased the total contract cost to $32,027, with a total of $127,973 budgeted funds available to support development of the CAP.
• Throughout the month, City staff and the CSG/Rincon team continued to communicate regularly regarding data sources to keep the project on schedule.

March
• On March 10 City staff and the CSG/Rincon team met to discuss the draft community emissions inventory and review the upcoming work tasks including the municipal inventory and forecast setting, which are expected in draft form in early April.
• On March 11 the City received a proposal from Rincon/CSG for CAP development.

April
• In April the community GHG emissions inventory, municipal GHG inventory and GHG emissions forecasts and provisional target report were completed by the CSG/Rincon Team, wrapping up the GHG inventory task item (total amount of contract: $32,027). • In April Staff negotiated CAAP development project details with Rincon and prepared a City Council staff report for contract approval.

May
• On May 3, 2022 the City Council approved contracting with Rincon and CSG Consultants for the development of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (total contract amount: $184,808). • Additionally, the Council authorized a partnership with Strategic Energy Innovations Inc., to participate in the Climate Corps program and receive a Sustainability Fellow for 10 months to support the CAAP development ($48,500).

June
• During the month of June City staff and Rincon Inc. negotiated contracting details.

• On June 27, 2022 the contract with Rincon for development of the CAAP was executed.

July
• On July 19, the City kicked off the CAAP process with a coordination meeting between Community Development and
consultants Rincon and CSG.
• Development of the outreach and engagement plan began. • Connection was made between the Rincon/CSG team and the consultant team coordinating the Housing, Safety and Health & Environmental Justice Element for cross coordination efforts. • Contract documents were finalized between the City and Strategic Energy Innovations Inc., (SEI) Climate Corps so that Pinole could host a Sustainability Fellow.

August
• Interviews with SEI Climate Corps candidates for the
Sustainability Fellow position were conducted by City staff and a Fellow was selected to begin work in September 2022.
• A draft of the CAAP outline was developed.
• An evaluation of existing sustainability-related programs in the City began.

September
• Sustainability Fellow Kapil Amin began a 10-month assignment with Pinole on September 8, assisting with development of the CAAP in addition to other high priority sustainability initiatives. • A dedicated project website was developed.
• Online sign-up link for interested community members to receive CAAP-related information (notification about upcoming community events, surveys or other participation options) was established and promoted.
• Community engagement survey was drafted.
• Initial community outreach materials were prepared.
• The public engaged with Sustainability Fellow regarding the CAAP at the Coastal Clean Up event.

October
• Began preparing a scenario planning and reduction analysis quantification tool and continued to draft GHG emissions reduction measures
• Began developing a community outreach plan and prepared outreach materials
• Reviewed and refined the community survey drafted in the first quarter of FY 2022/23
• Began to prepare a list of adaptation and waste measures • Engaged with the public at the Dumpster Day event

• Updated the CAAP website
November
• Continued preparing provisional GHG emissions reduction and adaptation measures
• Finalized the community survey and prepared for survey launch • Drafted and revised outreach materials such as a city-wide postcard and flyer
• Reviewed the draft Vulnerability Assessment prepared by the consultant team coordinating the Housing, Safety and Health & Environmental Justice Element
• Updated the CAAP website
December
• Continued drafting provisional greenhouse gas emission reduction and adaptation measures
• Finalized outreach strategy and mapping community outreach events
• Prepared and refined outreach materials such as the CAAP logo, postcard, PCTV materials
• Launched the community survey through many channels,
including the Administrative Report, social media, a postcard, PCTV and the website
• Preliminarily reviewing survey results
• Reviewing the draft Vulnerability Assessment and summarizing necessary updates
• Updated the CAAP website
2023 January
• Prepared for first CAAP Workshop/Open House on January 26 by:
o Designing and ordering CAAP seed paper pins for swag
gifts, CAAP banners for publicity, CAAP tablecloth made from sustainable materials, custom print visioning, voting, Pinole climate information and schedule boards
o Preparing and recording CAAP Open House promo video
for social media, background/climate information video for Open House attendees/website
o Designing and disseminating CAAP flyer with survey to CAAP email list, physical postings, social media,
administrative report in addition to CAAP Open House
Guide
• Hosted the first CAAP Hybrid Open House on January 26. Agency partners at the event included EBMUD, Republic Services, BayREN, 511 Contra Costa and MCE. Vegan food and drinks were provided, and there was a children’s upcycling craft activity in addition to interactive Visioning and Voting boards
• Prepared preliminary greenhouse gas and adaptation measures

• Updated the CAAP website
February
• Extended the CAAP survey to February 23
• Created a CAAP Open House recap for social media, website and email list along with a scrapbook video with survey extension update
• Arranged a CAAP Open House City Hall display with surveys, postcards, seed paper pins, Visioning and Voting Board, schedule poster, and Pinole’s climate info poster and communicated via normal communication channels about the display
• Conducted stakeholder interview polls to find best times for community focus group, civic focus group, and business groups • Conducted outreach at the Pinole Farmer’s Market
• Coordinated with Administration Department for Earth Month planning to align with CAAP sectors
• Closed the survey
• Began drafting CAAP document
March
• Conducted outreach at the Pinole Farmer’s Market
• Gave CAAP presentation to Pinole Valley High School Earth Team
• Conducted stakeholder focus group interviews on March 20, 21 and 23
• Coordinated with Administration Department for Earth Month planning to align with CAAP sectors
• Reviewed survey responses from the community to understand perspectives and desires
• Updated preliminary greenhouse gas and adaptation measures based on feedback received from the community
April
• Reviewing, revision, and development of preliminary CAAP draft measures
• Initial planning of second community workshop
• Earth Month activities, promotion, education, and rebate in alignment with CAAP sectors
• Publicity of CAAP notifications signup and public review workshop at City of Pinole’s Earth Walk
• Publicity of CAAP notifications signup and public review workshop at Farmer’s Market
May
• Revision and development of CAAP measures
• Initial planning of public review workshop
• Key findings of CAAP survey results shared to social media and assembled into a future press release

• Publicity of CAAP notifications signup and public review workshop at Shoreline Festival in the City of Crockett
June
• Revision and development of CAAP measures
• Initial planning of public review workshop
• Publicity of CAAP notifications signup and public review workshop at City of Pinole Car Show
• Initial coordination with the County for a presentation/briefing to City Staff on CAAP background, how a CAAP may affect their duties and information to address public inquiries
July
• Review and revision of draft CAAP
• Coordination with County on CAAP presentation to City Staff August
• Refinement of draft CAAP for Staff review
• Internal staff meetings with key personnel in each Department to review and refine preliminary greenhouse gas and adaptation measures and action in advance of public review
• County presentation to City Staff on background of CAAP and future policy changes
September
• Finalize the draft CAAP measures and actions for public review • Finalize community workshop design and create outreach materials
• Promote community workshop
October
• Community workshop planning and materials preparation • In-person and digital promotion of community workshop • Hosted community workshops on October 26 in multiple locations in the City (Library, Senior Center, City Hall), in addition to onlineoptions • CAAP website updates
November
• Two digital versions of carbon bucks game made available • Publicity of digital versions of community workshop
• Preparation of public review draft
December
• Review and revision of public review draft chapters
• Presentation at County Sustainability Exchange on Climate Action Planning

January
• Review and revision of public review draft
• Tribal consultation requests sent by letter and email • CAAP partner confirmations and feedback collection by email/meetings
February
• Review and revision of public review draft
• CAAP partner confirmations and feedback collection by email/meetings
March
• Review and revision of public review draft
• CAAP partner confirmations and feedback collection by email/meetings
April
• Review and revision of public review draft
• Tribal consultation with Lisjan Nation
• CAAP partner confirmations and feedback collection by email/meetings
• Created a new project page on Pinole Speaks to collect public input on public review draft of CAAP
• Public review draft of CAAP released April 19
• Publicity of public review draft CAAP at City of Pinole’s Earth Walk 2024
May
• Public meeting to review public review draft - May 7

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The draft CAAP, released for public review on April 19, contains programs committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, preparing the community for the impacts of climate change, improving the quality of life, and enhancing economic vitality. Specifically, Pinole's CAAP aims to support the City's “fair share” towards reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It is designed to help Pinole achieve California’s goals outlined in Senate Bill (SB) 32, which requires the state to reduce GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels, as well as make substantial progress towards carbon neutrality in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 1279, which requires California to achieve “net zero greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter.

The CAAP is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements outlined in Section 15183.5(b), includes a framework for implementation, monitoring emission reduction activities, and further promotes community resilience and adaptation.

The CAAP further serves as a Qualified Climate Action Plan through which the City can streamline the environmental review process of GHG emissions generated from future development projects. This can save time and money while simultaneously spurring emissions

reductions and promoting sustainable economic growth and prosperity.

It should be noted that further CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) documentation is forthcoming, including Appendix C (Measure Substantial Evidence), Appendix D: (CEQA Documentation) and Appendix E (CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and Guidance). This documentation will be published for public review following public review of the CAAP document, and prior to City Council taking formal action to adopt the CAAP.

The public review period for the CAAP will run from April 19 through May 20. The purpose of this item on May 7 is to provide an opportunity for Staff and the City's consultant, Rincon, to present the CAAP to the community, solicit feedback, and for the Council to provide any direction. Staff will then incorporate feedback from the community and the Council, and release the final CAAP including all environmental documentation, for public review. Depending on the level of feedback and direction provided, Staff will return in June or July for Council formal adoption of the CAAP and CEQA certification.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the introduction and review of the public review draft CAAP. Individual programs in the CAAP will each have a fiscal impact, which will be alleviated to a certain extent through actively seeking grant funding to support both administrative and individual program costs. As indicated in the CAAP, additional staffing is required to carry out the actions in the CAAP.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Public Review Draft CAAP

Comment/Feedback Received Update Made
SW-2j – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary CAR-1f – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary CAR-2i – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary FL-1e – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary WF-1h – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary Question related to battery recycling Updated Action TR-4k to read: Develop outreach and education materials and distribute them to local businesses, property owners, and developers on the financial (e.g., new funding streams), environmental, and health, and safety benefits of ZEVs. Provide information on available funding opportunities and the City’s streamlined permitting process. Additionally, as part of this process, include information on EV battery recycling to dispel myths, ease disposal concerns, and promote sustainable practices grounded in science.

SW-5 – missing phasing Actions updated to reflect Phase 1 Battery revolving fund recommended Action BE-2o added, which states: Explore the development of a revolving fund to integrate wall batteries for energy storage with Pinole’s Energy Enhancement Rebate Program, aiming to enhance energy efficiency, sustainability, and financial viability for a more resilient energy future.

TR-1d: change to “partner with entities” Updated Action TR-1d to read: Partner with an entity entities such as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 511 Contra Costa, or the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to expand existing rebate programs to help families living in Pinole on low- and fixed-incomes purchase alternative modes of transportation (e.g., bicycles, scooters, rollerblades, skates, skateboards) and appropriate safety gear.

BE-3d: there was confusion on wording phase 1, phase
2, phase 3, and phase 4 of the building performance
standard program with the phasing of the overall plan
Updated action BE-3d to read: Develop a building performance standard program to meet a specific level of energy use per square foot for all commercial and industrial buildings over 20,000 square feet.

Implementation and compliance support, including resources and tools which will be implemented through four phases stages:

1. Pre-development phase – Phase Stage 1 – Staff to receive technical assistance from the Building Technologies Office in the Federal Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). Per the EERE, technical assistance may take the form of:

▪ Building stock analyses, including analysis of energy and emission impacts associated with building performance standard adoption ▪ Performance target-setting and trajectories
▪ Measure and technology prioritization and packaging
▪ Cost-effectiveness analyses

2. Data collection phase – Phase Stage 2 – All commercial and industrial building owners with floor area over 20,000 square feet report electricity and natural gas data through energy star portfolio manager

3. Retro commissioning phase – Phase Stage 3 – All covered building owners complete a retro commissioning process to identify and correct system inefficiencies while identifying opportunities for electrification and downsizing of oversized equipment.

4. GHG Performance Standard – Phase Stage 4 – Implement a building performance standard that requires buildings to meet a specific GHG performance level
TR-1c – shift to Phase 1 from Phase 2 Phasing updated and actions re-numbered sequentially, where necessary The bandwidth study has been completed Updated measure CR-1g to read: Based on the findings and recommendation of the broadband feasibility study (currently in progress), a subsidy or grant program may be developed to improve existing infrastructure of multi-family units (i.e., upgrade internal wiring etc.) to update policies to increase Pinole residents' work-from-home rate, including incorporating work-from-home strategies into the Transportation Demand Management standards of Action TR-3a.

TR-1a - studies have been complete and the draft ATP
is coming soon
This can be an early win – do not recommend updating the language to instead track the progress for next steps
In SW-2a and following mentions: the Sustainable
Foodware Ordinance is officially named “Single-use
Plastic Foodware and Bag Reduction”
Updated Action SW-2a to read: Adopt a Zero Waste Policy and Zero Waste Strategic Plan to guide and detail methods to meet the reduction target of 35% by 2030 and 90% by 2045. Include in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan, the milestones of the Sustainable Foodware Single-use Plastic Foodware and Bag Reduction Ordinance to phase in the reduction, and subsequent elimination of, single-use plastic foodware by food facilities.

BE-3c: Change to “Pinole Energy Enhance Rebate
Program”
Evaluate the success of the pilot Energy Efficiency Program Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate Program which offers for calendar year 2024 additional rebates to Pinole residents for energy efficiency improvements stacked on top of federal, state, or regional rebates or discounts. Work with Contra Costa County

Department of Conservation and Development to restructure the pilot program as needed. Seek annual grant funding sources to sustain and support the program through.

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12.A.

DATE: AUGUST 20, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RECEIVE A REPORT ON ENERGY CONSERVATION, GENERATION AND STORAGE ASSESSMENT (CIP PROJECT # IN2201)

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) accepting the report (Attachment B) by Tetra Tech for the Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment, CIP Project # IN2201.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole provides services from numerous City facilities and through a variety of City infrastructure, including roads, parks, and streetlights. The City has invested in some energy conservation and generation measures over the past 10 years. These include solar arrays, EV charging stations, and streetlight improvements. The City spent approximately $1.41million on electric and natural gas consumption in City facilities during FY 2022-23 and $1.66million during the FY 2023-24.

During FY 2022-23 the City prioritized a project to identify steps to further conserve, generate, and store energy in City facilities and infrastructure. Through the Energy Conservation, Generation and Storage Assessment, the City sought to achieve the following outcomes:
• An assessment of the City’s energy use in its facilities and infrastructure. • Identification of cost effective and environmentally responsible investments in energy conservation, generation, and storage.
• Identification of investments to make the City more resilient during power outages, natural disasters, and from the impacts of climate change.
• A recommended system(s) to track and provide reports on savings that result from investment in energy conservation and generation at City facilities.

On June 6, 2023, City staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) soliciting consultant proposals to perform the energy assessment. Five proposals were submitted. At its meeting on September 5, 2023, the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Tetra Tech to complete the assessment.

The scope for this project included the following:

1. Energy Efficiency and Resiliency Trends Review

2. Conditions Assessment

3. Opportunities Analysis

4. Recommendations

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The Final Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment report has been finalized and is attached to this staff report. The Tetra Tech project manager will be present at the City Council meeting to summarize the report’s findings and respond to City Council questions.

Tetra Tech received building information from staff and conducted site visits in November and December of 2023. The final report includes: descriptions of building operations, utility usage, deficiency assessments and recommendations. Tetra Tech performed financial analyses of installing new renewable energy generation systems and battery storage at the Senior Center and Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Tetra Tech also evaluated the effect of installing electric vehicle (EV) charging stations at Pinole facilities.

A total of 25 energy conservation measures (ECMs) are recommended in the report. Table ES.1 presents a summary of the recommended ECMs and summarizes the cost, savings, and simple payback period for the ECMs. Detailed descriptions of each of the recommended ECMs are provided in Section C. Potential funding sources (e.g. grants) are also identified.

Microgrid analyses were performed on two facilities. At the Senior Center, Tetra Tech reviewed a proposal to add a photovoltaic (PV) panel array and EV chargers in the parking lot, evaluated the additional load the EV chargers would place on the building, calculated the amount of additional PV that would be needed to offset the EV load, and provided options for battery storage capacity needed to accomplish energy resilience goals. At the WWTP, Tetra Tech evaluated the amount of PV that could be installed at the facility and assessed the effect of PV energy production and load shifting using a battery energy storage system (BESS) on the demand charges seen by the plant.

Implementation of findings
Staff has already begun implementing certain measures recommended in the report (e.g. pool covers at the swimming center, completed installation of a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) for the pool pump etc.) in which budget authority is in place.

The report identifies grant sources that could provide funding for certain recommended improvements. Staff will be working with the City’s grant writer to prioritize and pursue grant opportunities for energy investments recommended in the report.

Finally, it is important that significant investments in energy enhancements align with the future Facilities and Real Estate Master Plan. The development of this master plan was recently deferred due to immediate budget considerations. Once funded, the master plan will be informed by, and incorporate, recommendations in the Tetra Tech report.

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact associated with accepting the Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment report for the City facilities.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment Report

RESOLUTION NO. 2024 – xx

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE REPORT

FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION, GENERATION, AND STORAGE ASESSMENT (CIP PROJECT # IN2201).

WHEREAS, the City of Pinole (“City”) recognizes that energy efficiency and resiliency of City facilities is important to provide effective City services; and WHEREAS, the City wanted to better understand steps that it could take to further conserve, generate, and store energy in City facilities and infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the City was also interested in identifying investments to make the City more resilient during power outages, natural disasters, and from the impacts of climate change; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the FY 2023/24 through FY 2027/28 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which includes an energy conservation, generation, and storage assessment (CIP Project # IN2201) as a funded project; and WHEREAS, the City awarded the professional services contract to Tetra Tech Inc. on September 5
th
, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Tetra Tech Energy Conservation, Generation and Storage Assessment was included in the June 18, 2024 City Council agenda packet; and WHEREAS, a Tetra Tech representative presented a summary of the findings of the assessment during the August 20, 2024 City Council meeting; NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole:

1. Accepts the Energy Conservation, Generation and Storage Assessment completed by Tetra Tech.

2. Directs staff to:

A. Implement recommendations in the Assessment in which budget authority exists.

B. Work with the City’s grant writer to identify funding sources that will support implementation of additional Assessment recommendations.

C. Consider the Assessment recommendations in the future development of the City of Pinole Facilities and Real Estate Master Plan.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 20th day of August 2024 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 20th day of August 2024.
____________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk

City of Pinole

ENERGY CONSERVATION, GENERATION, AND STORAGE

ASSESSMENT
April 26, 2024

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
a
i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 A. Energy Efficiency and Resiliency Trends Review................................................................................................................... 4 B. Facility Overview...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 B.1 Senior Center.............................................................................................................................................................. 8 B.2 City Hall..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 B.3 Public Safety Building .............................................................................................................................................. 14 B.4 Wastewater Treatment Plant................................................................................................................................... 17 B.5 Swim Center ............................................................................................................................................................. 21 B.6 Youth Center............................................................................................................................................................. 24 B.7 Post Office ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 B.8 Fire Station #74 ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 B.9 Tiny Tots.................................................................................................................................................................... 30 B.10 Caretaker’s Building................................................................................................................................................. 31 B.11 Faria House .............................................................................................................................................................. 31 B.12 Pinole Valley Park..................................................................................................................................................... 31 B.13 Fernandez Park ........................................................................................................................................................ 32 B.14 Parking Lot Lighting ................................................................................................................................................. 33 B.15 Streetlighting ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 C. Measure Descriptions........................................................................................................................................................... 35 C.1 Senior Center Microgrid Design............................................................................................................................... 35 C.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Microgrid .................................................................................................................. 44 C.3 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations........................................................................................................................... 54 C.4 Energy Dashboard and Demand Management...................................................................................................... 57 C.5 Rooftop Air Handler Replacement and Demand Control Ventilation .................................................................... 59 C.6 Duct Air Temperature and Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset ........................................................................ 61 C.7 Zone Temperature Setback..................................................................................................................................... 63 C.8 Interior LED Retrofit ................................................................................................................................................. 64 C.9 Interior Lighting Occupancy Controls ...................................................................................................................... 65 C.10 Boiler Replacement.................................................................................................................................................. 66 C.11 Fire Station Garage Demand Control Ventilation and AHU Rehab........................................................................ 67 C.12 Exterior Lighting Photocell Controls ........................................................................................................................ 68 C.13 Boiler Insulation ....................................................................................................................................................... 69 C.14 Pool Pump VFD Controls .......................................................................................................................................... 70 C.15 Pool Cover................................................................................................................................................................. 71

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
a
ii
C.16 Swim Center PV Repair............................................................................................................................................ 72 C.17 Ballpark Lighting....................................................................................................................................................... 73 C.18 Streetlighting Utility Bill Update............................................................................................................................... 74 D. Funding Sources ................................................................................................................................................................... 75 D.1 Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP).............................................................................................................. 75 D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market program ...................................................................................................... 76 D.3 MCE’s Peak FLEXMarket Program .......................................................................................................................... 77 D.4 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) Direct Pay Tax Credits .............................................................................................. 78 D.5 Energy Conservation Assistance Act (ECAA) Low-Interest Loan Program ............................................................. 79 D.6 Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG)............................................................................................................. 80

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
RFQ No. 2005 2 January 16, 2020
Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

Executive Summary
Tetra Tech was contracted by the City of Pinole to create an energy conservation and storage study for Pinole facilities. Tetra Tech developed an energy report that includes descriptions of building operations, utility usage, deficiency assessments, and recommendations. As part of this study, Tetra Tech performed financial analyses of installing new renewable energy generation systems and battery storage at the Senior Center and Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Tetra Tech also evaluated the effect of installing electric vehicle (EV) charging stations at Pinole facilities. The facility site visits were conducted in November and December of 2023.

A total of 25 energy conservation measures (ECMs) are recommended. Table ES.1 presents a summary of the recommended ECMs identified during the energy assessment and summarizes the cost, savings, and simple payback period for the ECMs. Detailed descriptions of each of the recommended ECMs are provided in Section C. Implementing all of the recommended ECMs, will result in an annual electrical savings of approximately 338,099 kilowatt-hours (kWh), annual natural gas savings of 17,618 therms, and annual cost savings of $111,147. In total, the recommended measures will payback the cost of installation in 5.3 years (simple payback) and over the course of the life of the new equipment the savings will be 2.05 times larger than the cost (savings-to-investment ratio [SIR]).

Additionally, microgrid analysis was performed on two facilities. At the Senior Center, Tetra Tech reviewed a proposal to add a photovoltaic (PV) panel array and EV chargers in the parking lot, evaluated the additional load the EV chargers would place on the building, calculated the amount of additional PV that would be needed to offset the EV load, and provided options for battery storage capacity needed to accomplish energy resilience goals. At the WWTP, Tetra Tech evaluated the amount of PV that could be installed at the facility and assessed the effect of PV energy production and load shifting using a battery energy storage system (BESS) on the demand charges seen by the plant.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
RFQ No. 2005 3 January 16, 2020
Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

Table ES.1: Recommended Energy Measures
ECM Building Description Project
Cost
Cost
Savings
($/yr)
Energy
Savings
MBtu/yr
Simple
Payback
(years)
ECM 1 City-wide Building Control and
Metering Dashboard and
Demand Management
$42,500 $2,450 37.7 9.9
ECM 2 City Hall Chambers Demand Control
Ventilation
$74,500 $10,243 439.3 7.2
ECM 3 City Hall Duct Air Temp and Hot
Water Reset
$40,800 $9,595 438.4 4.3
ECM 4 City Hall Zone Temperature Setback $15,900 $4,256 174.2 3.7 ECM 5 City Hall Interior LED Retrofit $39,800 $4,416 106.3 9.0 ECM 6 City Hall Interior Occupancy Sensor
Retrofit
$8,400 $1,146 28.3 7.3
ECM 7 Public Safety Boiler Replacement $71,800 $5,157 277.3 13.9 ECM 8 Public Safety Fire Station Garage AHU
Rehab and DCV
$40,400 $7,638 339.6 5.3
ECM 9 Public Safety Zone Temperature Setback $11,300 $1,481 69.1 7.6 ECM 10 Public Safety Interior LED Retrofit $44,400 $6,995 171.3 6.3 ECM 11 Public Safety Interior Occupancy Sensor
Retrofit
$9,700 $1,049 25.9 9.3
ECM 12 Post Office Interior LED Retrofit $19,700 $2,903 70.6 6.8 ECM 13 Post Office Interior Occupancy Sensor
Retrofit
$1,100 $725 17.9 1.5
ECM 14 Post Office Exterior Lighting Controls $300 $109 2.7 2.8 ECM 15 WWTP Boiler Insulation $6,200 $1,582 92.5 3.9
ECM 16 Senior Center High Efficiency RTU
Replacement and DCV
$89,500 $9,486 322.9 9.4
ECM 17 Senior Center Zone Temperature Setback
Schedules
$3,700 $1,262 53.9 2.9
ECM 18 Youth Center Zone Temperature Setback
Schedules
$7,100 $814 20.1 8.7
ECM 19 Swim Center Pool Pump VFD Controls $68,700 $9,562 238.1 7.2 ECM 20 Swim Center Pool Cover $28,500 $4,921 346.6 5.8
ECM 21 Swim Center PV Repair $8,400 $2,464 51.6 3.4
ECM 22 Tiny Tots Interior LED Retrofit $3,400 $428 9.0 7.9 ECM 23 Fernandez
Park
Ballpark LED Retrofit $29,800 $507 14.2 58.7
ECM 24 Parking Lots Photocell Repair $900 $252 7.0 3.6
ECM 25 Streetlighting Utility Bill Update - $31,950
Total $592,300 $111,147 2,915 5.3
AHU Air handling unit
DCV Demand control ventilation
LED Light emitting diode
RTU Rooftop unit
VFD Variable frequency drive

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
4 A. Energy Efficiency and Resiliency Trends Review
Introduction
In anticipation of an Energy Conservation and Storage Study for the City of Pinole, Tetra Tech reviewed projects in the Bay Area from the last 5 years that had similar goals to Pinole’s. The search revealed a handful of local municipalities that have gone through a similar process, including the City of Dublin, City of Milpitas, City of Palo Alto, and Solano County. Tetra Tech focused on the Cities of Dublin and Milpitas because both projects included converting community spaces into emergency power centers as Pinole is considering doing with its senior center.

None of these municipalities operate a WWTP, so Tetra Tech looked for examples of WWTP microgrid projects in Northern California. This type of project has far less precedent, but the City of Santa Rosa did install a demonstration microgrid at their Laguna WWTP to control the power draw of the facility during peak demand periods. Table A.1 shows the components of the three analyzed energy projects, and each is described in further detail in the following sections.

Table A.1: Analyzed Energy Projects
Entity PV BESS Metering EMS HVAC
Retrofits
LED
Retrofit
City of Dublin X X X X X
City of Milpitas X X X X
Laguna Wastewater Treatment Plant X X
EMS Energy Management System
HVAC Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
City of Dublin
In 2021, the City of Dublin, California, in Alameda County, initiated a project to install microgrids, complete energy efficiency upgrades, and install electric vehicle charging stations over 20 city-owned facilities. The project was scoped to take significant steps toward Dublin’s Climate Action Plan, which includes the goal of 100% carbon-free energy, building electrification, and fleet electrification by 2030. Details about the project were taken from a report to the Dublin City Council on July 20, 2021,1
Energy Resiliency – The City of Dublin installed microgrids at the four sites described in Table A.2. The Dublin Senior Center doubles as a community emergency response center that provides Dublin residents shelter and cooling in the event of a prolonged power outage. Solar panels were also installed at the Dublin Library, two fire stations, and a sports park without battery storage. Emergency generators were installed at the library, Shannon Community Center, and three fire stations. Finally, emergency power was installed at traffic lights throughout the city using hydrogen fuel cells and battery backup systems.

Table A.2: City of Dublin Microgrids
Facility Solar Production
Capacity (kW-DC)
Battery
Discharge
Capacity (kW)
Battery Storage
Capacity (kWh)
Civic Center 232 32 64
Corporation Yard 47 100 165
Senior Center 38 100 165
The Wave (Swim Center) 525 500 1,100
kW Kilowatt
kW-DC Kilowatt-direct current
kWh Kilowatt-hour
1 https://citydocs.ci.dublin.ca.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=858670&dbid=0&repo=CityofDublin

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
5 Energy Efficiency – The City of Dublin also completed a wide range of energy efficiency upgrades as part of this project. Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) efficiencies were improved through rooftop unit (RTU) replacement, split-system heat pump replacements, a heating boiler replacement, and new HVAC controls. New light emitting diode (LED) lights were installed for building interior lighting, building exterior lighting, parking lots, streetlights, and outdoor sports facilities.

Electric Vehicle Charging – Charging stations were installed with dedicated solar panels at two sites to serve the City’s electric vehicle fleet. At the Public Safety Complex, six Level 2 charging stations were installed with a 136 kilowatt-direct current (kW-DC) solar array. At the Dublin Sports Complex, five Level 2 charging stations were installed with 200 kW-DC solar array.

Funding – This project was executed using an Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC). In this type of contract, the city enlists a third party, called an Energy Service Company (ESCO), to design and construct the energy improvements. The City issued low-interest, green bonds to finance the project over the course of 25 years.

Supplemental funding was provided though a custom incentive program administered by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). Table A.3 provides a summary of the project financials.

Table A.3: City of Dublin ESPC Fact Sheet
2021 ESPC
ESCO Willdan Energy Solutions
Value $21.4 million
Performance Period 25 years
Rebates and Incentives $437,953
Total Annual Savings $694,068
City of Milpitas
In 2021, the City of Milpitas, California, in Santa Clara County, began a project to install solar electric generators, battery energy storage systems, new metering infrastructure, energy efficiency retrofits, and water efficiency retrofits at its facilities and parks. Information on the project was taken from the city’s website and press releases.2 Energy Resiliency – Microgrids were installed at two resilient community centers that provide Milpitas residents shelter and cooling in the event of a prolonged power outage. The Barbera Lee Senior Center and Milpitas Community Center now serve as these resilient community centers. In total, the microgrids are powered by over 200 kilowatts (kW) of solar power production and natural gas generators backed up by batteries with a discharge capacity of 250 kW.

Energy and Water Efficiency – Milpitas reduced its energy and water consumption and increased resilience by installing several large efficiency projects. LED lights were installed for streetlighting, building interior lighting, and at parks and sports fields. Outage detection controls were also installed at streetlights across the city to ease the maintenance burden of keeping streets lit. Efficient water fixtures were installed in bathrooms across all city facilities with touchless 2 https://www.smartcitymilpitas.org/
https://svcleanenergy.org/news/milpitas-community-center-powers-up-with-resiliency-grant-from-silicon-valley-cleanenergy/ Young, Julie. "Power Play: Milpitas Energy Upgrades Will Save the City Millions." The Municipal, Aug 2022, pp. 62-63.

Barbera Lee Senior Center PV
Source: City of Milpitas website

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
6 sensors to reduce water usage. Advanced water meters were installed at community centers and parks to detect leaks and avoid unnecessary water losses.

Electric Vehicle Charging – New public electric vehicle charging stations were installed at the Resilient Community Centers. Four chargers are available to the public; charging is free for the first 4 hours.

Funding – This project was executed using an ESPC. The City issued low-interest, green bonds to finance the project, received a Community Resilience grant from Silicon Valley Clean Energy, and received incentives from PG&E. Table A.4 provides a summary of the project financials.

Table A.4: City of Milpitas ESPC Fact Sheet
2021 ESPC
ESCO ENGIE North America
Value $34 million
Performance Period 20 years
Grants and Incentives Over $700,000
Total Annual Savings $1.5 million
City of Santa Rosa Laguna Wastewater Treatment Plant Microgrid In 2019, the City of Santa Rosa, California, in Sonoma County, executed a project to install a microgrid at its Laguna WWTP. The plant has served Santa Rosa and surrounding areas since 1968 and had undergone many upgrades over the decades to add capacity and ultraviolet light disinfection. When the project was initiated, the plant had an average daily throughput of 17.5 million gallons and operated a 2.2-megawatt (MW) co-generation system that was fueled by methane harvested from the wastewater. The goal of the project was to enable the plant to respond to fluctuations in grid demand and the price of electricity and to stabilize the power produced by the co-generation system. Details from this project were taken from a 2020 report from the California Energy Commission (CEC).3 The microgrid integrated the existing co-generation system with a new 126-kW solar electric generator. A BESS was
installed with a storage capacity of 480 kilowatt-hours (kWh) and a discharge capacity of 2MW. The BESS was used in
conjunction with water storage basins on site to regulate the demand of the plant seen by the grid. This allows the plant to avoid large spikes in power draw during the peak demand period, thus reducing the cost and carbon footprint of the energy consumed. The microgrid is controlled using a
Schweitzer SEL3555 Real-Time Automation Controller and
interconnected to the PG&E grid via a 69-kilovolt (kV)
substation.

Funding – This microgrid project was funded by the CEC’s Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC) program. This grant program funds projects that demonstrate the viability of clean, safe, and resilient energy technologies and is currently funded through 2025. Table A.5 provides a summary of the project financials. 3 https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2019/constructing-microgrid-wastewater-treatment-facility Santa Rosa PV Array
Source: The Santa Rosa Press Democrat

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
7 Table A.5: Laguna WWTP Microgrid Fact Sheet
2019 Microgrid Project
Project / Construction Manager Trane
Grant $5 million
BESS Demand Reduction 250 kW
Total Annual Savings $80,000
Future Trends
In 2022, California passed a law to set decarbonization standards for the state and set the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. The cost-effective measure included in the example projects and recommended in this report take a significant step towards achieving these goals. However, to fully achieve carbon neutrality additional steps will need to be taken to remove gas appliances and gas-fired hydronic heating systems. The technologies available to solve these problems are currently emerging but have much to prove in terms of cost and reliability. Heat pump water heaters of the size needed to replace boilers and pool water heaters will have the largest effect on direct carbon emissions but are the least developed of the decarbonization technologies. As these technologies evolve, more decarbonization measures may become cost effective and/or available at a cost acceptable to carbon conscious customers.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
8 B. Facility Overview
B.1 Senior Center
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation, energy generation, energy storage, and electric vehicle charging station measures for the Senior Center. Table B.1 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.1: Senior Center Measures List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy
Savings
(MBtu/yr)
SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.1 Microgrid/PV/BESS $562,877 $62,744 679.7 3.67 48.1
C.3 EV Charging Stations $45,000
C.4 Energy Dashboard and Demand
Management $9,500 $685 10.0 1.44 2.7
C.5 High Efficiency RTU
Replacement and DCV $89,500 $9,486 322.9 1.60 97.8
C.7 Zone Temperature Setback $3,700 $1,262 53.9 1.71 23.1 Total $710,577 $74,177 1,066.5 1.82 171.7
GHG Greenhouse gas
MBtu Million British thermal units
Building Operation
The Senior Center building provides meeting
rooms, an activity hall, and a kitchen for Pinole’s
seniors. The building is open to the public Monday
through Friday from 8 AM to 4:00 PM. Tetra Tech
visited the building on November 9, 2023, to
inspect the HVAC and lighting equipment; on
November 28, 2023, to collect data loggers; and on
December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime
operation of the lighting equipment. During these
site visits, approximately 30 people were in the
building during normal operating hours; the
building is unoccupied at night and on weekends.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 9845996180; Acct:
9840139961) purchases energy at the B10S rate, which has time-of-use energy charges and demand charges based on the highest power draw during any 15-minute interval of the monthly billing period. The natural gas account (SAID: 8402601005; Acct: 8402601462) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. Figure B.1 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. Figure B.2 shows the demand profile of the building for a typical day.

In total, City Hall has an annual electric usage of 132,519 kWh and natural gas usage of 3,214 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 774 million British thermal units (MBtu), an energy cost of $49,873.31, and an Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 53.9.

Pinole Senior Center at Night

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
9 Figure B.1: Senior Center Utility Profile

Figure B.2: Senior Center Demand Curve

0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Oct-22 Dec-22 Feb-23 Apr-23 Jun-23 Aug-23 Oct-23
Gas Service
Electric Service
Senior Center Monthly Usage and Cost
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
10 HVAC
The primary HVAC system consists of two large air handlers that serve the main hall and kitchen. These air handlers use natural gas furnaces and direct expansion (DX) cooling. Conditioned air is distributed to the space though high bay registers. The units are controlled by two non-programmable thermostats located in the main hall that are locked and inaccessible to the public.

A secondary HVAC system serves the meeting rooms and offices on the south side of the building. There are four vertically ducted furnaces that heat and distribute air to these spaces. Each furnace is equipped with a ducted heat pump installed directly down steam of the heating unit, which is used for cooling. Each furnace/ heat pump system is controlled by an individual non-programmable thermostat, though each unit serves multiple zones. Table B.2 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.2: Senior Center HVAC List
Equipment Make Model Capacity units Vintage
Air Handler #1 York D2CG180 180 kBtu/hr 1991
Air Handler #2 York D2CG150 150 kBtu/hr 1991
(4) Forced Air Furnaces Trane XL80 79 kBtu/hr 2009
(4) Ducted Cased Coil Aspen CC60B3X 60 kBtu/hr 2009
Split System Air Conditioner York H2CB060S25C 60 kBtu/hr 2006 kBtu Thousand British thermal units
The two large air handlers on the roof of the building are well past their expected useful life. Efficiency standards for air conditioning have increased greatly since these units were manufactured in 1991. A new, premium efficiency RTU would have a cooling efficiency twice that of the existing units. In addition, the HVAC system does not have the capability to effectively ramp down when the building is unoccupied. The large air handlers are sized to provide fresh air for a fully packed crowd in the main hall but must cool or heat that large amount of air even when no one is present. The thermostats throughout the building maintain a constant space temperature. This forces the HVAC units to fully cool the building on the hottest afternoons of the year and fully heat the building on the coldest nights of the year even though the buildings are nearly always unoccupied after 3 PM.

Lighting
The office areas, meeting rooms, kitchen, and lobby of the building are lit by two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures. The main hall is lit by compact fluorescent (CFL) fixtures in high-bay recessed fixtures and wall-mounted sconces. The offices, lobby, kitchen, and main hall lights are controlled by manual switches. The meeting rooms lights are controlled by wall-mounted occupancy sensors. Nighttime observations showed that only emergency lighting operates at night.

All the lighting in the building is controlled by manual switches and remains on for large portions of the day even when large portions of the building are unoccupied.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
11 B.2 City Hall
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for City Hall. Table B.3 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.3: City Hall Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy
Savings
(MBtu/yr)
SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard and
Demand Management $9,500 $751 12.8 1.44 0.9
C.5 Chamber RTU
Replacement and DCV
$74,500 $10,243 439.3 2.08 195.6
C.6 Duct Air and Hot Water
Temp Reset
$40,800 $9,595 438.4 1.18 201.7
C.7 Zone Temp Setback $15,900 $4,256 174.2 2.68 70.9
C.8 Interior LED and
Retrofit
$39,800 $4,301 106.3 1.08 7.5
C.9 Occupancy Sensor
Retrofit
$8,400 $1,146 28.3 1.36 2.0
Total $188,900 $30,291 1,199.4 1.65 478.6
Building Operation
The City Hall building is a two-story building that
provides offices for City of Pinole staff, meeting rooms for staff and the public, and a large conference room
for City Council meetings. The building is open to the
public Monday through Thursday from 8 AM to 4:30
PM and during City Council meetings for five hours
every other Tuesday evening. Tetra Tech visited the
building on November 1, 2023, to inspect the HVAC and
lighting equipment; on November 28, 2023, to collect
data loggers; and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the
nighttime operation of the lighting equipment. During
these site visits, approximately 20 people were in the
building during normal operating hours, very few
people are in the building on Friday, and the building is unoccupied at night and on weekends.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 527600364; Acct:
527600923) purchases energy at the B10S rate, which has time-of-use energy charges and demand charges based on the highest power draw during any 15-minute interval of the monthly billing period. The natural gas account (SAID: 1152600005; Acct: 1152600883) is shared with the Public Safety Building. Tetra Tech estimated the natural gas usage based on building models. Figure B.3 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. Figure B.4 shows the demand profile of the building for a typical day. In total, City Hall has an annual electric usage of 232,437 kWh and natural gas usage of 13,610 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 2,154 MBtu, energy cost of $95,151.71, and EUI of 122.4. The energy intensity is about two times larger than similar office buildings in similar climates. This marks the building as having great potential for energy savings.

City Hall Council Chambers

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
12 Figure B.3: City Hall Utility Profile

Figure B.4: City Hall Demand Profile

-
800
1,600
2,400
3,200
4,000
4,800
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Oct-22 Dec-22 Feb-23 Apr-23 Jun-23 Aug-23 Oct-23
Gas Service
Electric Service
City Hall Monthly Usage and Cost
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0

20.0 25.0

30.0 35.0

40.0 45.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Demand (kW)
Hour
City Hall Demand Curve
Mon-Thurs Fri Sat-Sun

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
13 HVAC
The primary HVAC system consists of a large air handler that receives chilled water from a 4-ton, air-cooled chiller.

The air handler mixes return air and fresh air, cools the air to 53˚F, and distributes air to variable-air-volume (VAV) boxes throughout the building to reheat using hot water provided by a 400 thousand British thermal units per hour (kBtu/hr) boiler. Each of the 25 VAV boxes is controlled by an individual thermostat. The zone temperatures are set via a centralized Building Management System (BMS) with a small adjustment dead band controlled by the building occupants. The BMS is no longer accessible by public works personnel to monitor equipment operation or adjust system setpoints.

A secondary HAVC system exclusively serves the council chambers. This system consists of a rooftop air handler that uses a natural gas furnace and a DX cooling coil. The unit is sized to provide enough fresh air for the occupancy capacity of the council chambers and provides full fresh air ventilation 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. The unit maintains a temperature in the chamber between 60˚F and 78˚F for most of the time and between 67˚F and 73˚F during scheduled City Council meetings. Table B.4 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.4: City Hall HVAC List
Equipment Make Model Capacity Units Vintage
Air Handler #1 Vertiv Energy Labs 12,000 cfm 2012
Hot Water Boiler LAARS MT2H0400NACK1BXX 400 kBtu/hr 2011 Air Cooled Chiller Carrier 38APS04065A12190 480 kBtu/hr 2021 Packaged Air Handler McQuay LGA150SH2G 150 kBtu/hr 1997 Computer Room Heat Pump Carrier 38YCB024310 240 kBtu/hr 1997 cfm Cubic feet per minute
Based on field observations and monitoring data, the building is wasting a lot of energy through simultaneous heating and cooling and through conditioning and ventilating unoccupied spaces. During the monitoring period from November 1 to November 28, 2023, the outside air temperature varied from 75˚F to 36˚F, but the boiler always ran, and the chiller ran whenever needed to cool the incoming air to 53˚F. The HVAC system effectively ramped down on the weekends but ran at high capacity at night and on Fridays when the building is sparsely occupied. Also, during this time, the packaged air handler serving the council chambers were always running at full capacity.

The proposed HVAC measures aim to improve the HVAC system’s ability to respond to changes in ambient conditions and building occupancy. When the outside air temperature is cool (53˚F – 62˚F), the chiller should not operate, and the air handler should use the cool outside air as free cooling for zones with high cooling loads. When the outside air temperature is warm (above 67˚F), the boiler should not operate, and the air handler should set the duct air temperature to the minimum temperature needed to cool the zone with lowest heating load.

For areas with highly variable occupancy loads, the air handlers should reduce the airflow rate when the space is not in use.

Lighting
The office areas and hallways of the building are lit by two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures. This lighting is supplemented by recessed CFL fixtures in the lobby areas and stairwells. The council chambers are lit by fluorescent track lighting and recessed CFL fixtures. The office, council chambers, and meeting room lights are controlled by manual switches. Nighttime observations showed that only hallway and emergency lighting operate at night.

All the lighting in the building is controlled by manual switches and remains on for large portions of the day, even when large portions of the building are unoccupied.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
14 B.3 Public Safety Building
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for the Public Safety Building (PSB). Table B.5 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.5: Public Safety Building Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard $2,000 $0
C.10 Boiler Replacement $71,800 $5,157 277.3 1.44 146.7 C.11 Fire Station Bay
DCV $20,400 $7,638 339.6 5.62 152.0
C.7 Zone Temperature
Setback $11,300 $1,481 69.1 1.31 32.6
C.8 Interior LED and
Retrofit $44,400 $6,995 171.3 1.58 12.1
C.9 Occupancy Sensor
Retrofit $9,700 $1,049 25.9 1.08 1.8
Total $159,600 $22,320 883.2 1.96 345.2
Building Operation
The PSB provides facilities for Pinole’s fire and police departments. The building contains four main areas: the fire department garage, fire department offices and lodging, police department offices and dispatch, and the detention center. The occupancy schedule for each space type is provided in the following table:

Table B.6: Public Safety Occupancy Schedule
Space Type Schedule
Police Offices M-F 7AM-5PM w/limited off-hour staff
Police Dispatch 24/7
Detention Center 24/7
Fire Dept. Offices M-F 7AM-5PM
Fire Dept. Lodging 24/7
Fire Dept. Garage M-F 7AM-8PM w/emergency operation 24/7 Tetra Tech visited the building on November 1, 2023, to inspect the HVAC and lighting equipment; on November 28, 2023, to collect data loggers; and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 1196945891; Acct:
1194267547) purchases energy at the B10S rate, which has time-of-use energy charges and demand charges based on the highest power draw during any 15-minute interval of the monthly billing period. The natural gas account (SAID: 1152600005; Acct: 1152600883) is shared with City Hall. Tetra Tech estimated the natural gas usage based on building models. Figure B.5 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. Figure B.6 shows the demand profile of the building for a typical day. In total, the PSB has an annual electric usage of 404,896 kWh and natural gas usage of 16,635 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 3,045 MBtu, energy cost of $141,757, and an EUI of 114.9.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
15 Figure B.5: PSB Utility Profile

Figure B.6: PSB Demand Profile

-
640
1,280
1,920
2,560
3,200
3,840
4,480
5,120
5,760
6,400
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Oct-22 Dec-22 Feb-23 Apr-23 Jun-23 Aug-23 Oct-23
Gas Service
Electric Service
Public Safety Monthly Usage and Cost
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

0.0 10.0

20.0 30.0

40.0 50.0

60.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Demand (kW)
Hour
PSB Weekday and Weekend Demand
Weekday Weekend

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
16 HVAC
The building’s HVAC system consists of four air handlers that serve the four sections of the building. Hot water is provided to the air handlers from a central hot water boiler located in the first-floor mechanical room on the northeast side of the building. AHU 1 serves the fire department garage; it always provides 3,300 cubic feet per minute (cfm) of fresh outside air and provides heat when the outside air temperature is below 60˚F. AHUs 2 and 3 are builtup air handlers that serve the fire department lodging rooms and detention center. Each provides cooling using a ducted heat pump and are controlled by a non-programmable, pneumatic thermostat in the space they condition.

AHU 4 is a Trane Intellipak unit located on the roof of the building. AHU 4 serves the Police Department offices and dispatch. Supplemental cooling for the dispatch servers and offices is provided by split-system heat pumps. Table B.7 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.7: PSB HVAC List
Equipment Qty Make Model Capacity Units Vintage
Boiler 1 Bryan CL-90W-100-GI 720 kBtu/hr 1984
Air Handler (AHU)1 1 Custom 3 hp 1976
AHUs 2&3 2 Trane BACA-8756-D 1.5 hp 1984
Rooftop Air Handler
(AHU 4) 1 Trane SAHFC20E0726D4DD7000A 0W00000000RT0080000S 20 tons 2005 Air Conditioner 2 Payne PA13NR030-J 2 tons 2012
Air Conditioner 2 Carrier 692APX048000AAAA 4 tons 1988
hp Horsepower
The boiler and built-up air handers are well past their expected useful life. Efficiency standards for boilers, motors, and cooling equipment has increased dramatically since this equipment was installed. The boiler has a rated efficiency of 80%, while modern condensing boilers can operate at 92% to 96% efficiency. The fan motors have a rated efficiency of 75% to78%, while similar modern motors have efficiencies of 89% to 92%. The cooling units have a rated seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) of 8.8-9.1, while modern units have EERs of over 15.2.

The pneumatic system that controls this legacy equipment is not capable of effectively adjusting the operating setpoints in response to changes in heating and cooling loads in the spaces they serve. This is reflected in the building power demand profile that remains steady throughout the week despite significant changes in occupancy and cooling load. The negative effect of these controls can also be seen in the boiler monitoring that Tetra Tech performed. The boiler remained on and provided 165˚F water for nearly the entire monitoring period, despite the outside air temperature regularly rising above 70˚F.

Lighting
The private offices, garage, lodging rooms, and detention facilities of the building are lit by two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures. The open office area on the second floor is lit by recessed CFL fixtures. All lighting appeared to be controlled by manual switches, though the switch panel was not accessible in the open office area, lobby, and garage. Nighttime observations showed that the lights in the open offices, lobby, garage, and hallways areas remained on at full power throughout the night though few people are in these areas after hours.

All the lighting in the building is controlled by manual switches and remains on for large portions of the day and night even when large portions of the building are unoccupied.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
17 B.4 Wastewater Treatment Plant
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation, energy generation, energy storage, and electric vehicle measures for the WWTP. Table B.8 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.8: WWTP Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.2 Microgrid/PV/
BESS $1,677,000 $239,200 2,666.7 3.28 188.5
C.4 Energy
Dashboard $3,000
C.13 Boiler
Insulation $6,200 $1,582 92.5 2.55 48.9
Total $1,686,200 $240,782 2,759.2 2.48 237.4
Plant Operation
The WWTP processes and discharges wastewater
from Pinole and Hercules. The site sits on a 179,000
square foot plot of land located between Pinole
Creek, San Pablo Bay, and the Union Pacific Railway.

The plant has water sanitation equipment and solids
handling equipment to process over 2.5 million
gallons of water per day. The site went through a
major renovation in 2019, which replaced a large
portion of the wastewater treatment equipment.

Tetra Tech visited the plant on November 6, 2023, to
inspect the equipment, learn about the equipment
operation, and download trend data critical to
understanding the energy usage of the site.

Energy Usage
The plant receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 1409506534; Acct:
1404844256) purchases energy at the B10S rate, which has time-of-use energy charges and demand charges based on the highest power draw during any 15-minute interval of the monthly billing period. The natural gas account (SAID: 5944278005; Acct: 5944278716) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. Figure B.7 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. Figure B.8 shows the demand spikes from month to month compared to the energy usage. In total, the WWTP has an annual electric usage of 2,936,114 kWh and natural gas usage of 31,767 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 13,195 MBtu and energy cost of $889,391.

WWTP Anaerobic Digesters

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
18 Figure B.7: WWTP Utility Profile

Figure B.8: WWTP Demand Profile
0 800
1,600
2,400
3,200
4,000
4,800
5,600
6,400
7,200
8,000
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
10/1/2022 11/30/2022 1/29/2023 3/30/2023 5/29/2023 7/28/2023 9/26/2023 Gas Service
Electric Service
WWTP Monthly Usage and Cost
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
19 Energy Generation
The plant is equipped with a 100-kilowatt (kW) combined heat and power (CHP) generator that uses waste gas from the anaerobic digesters to generate power and heat for the anaerobic digester. At the time of the site visit, the CHP generator was down for maintenance but the plant personnel provided trend data of the power output of the system. Emergency power is provided by three diesel generators. A list of generation equipment is provided in the following table:

Table B.9: WWTP Generator List
Equipment Qty Make Model Size Units Vintage
CHP Generator 1 MAN Engines E2866E 95 kW 2014
Diesel Generator 1 Caterpillar C27 800 kW 2011
Diesel Generator 2 Caterpillar C27 905 kW 2016
Process
The largest energy loads at the WWTP are the pumps and fans used in the treatment process. Most of this equipment was replaced during the 2019 renovation of the facility. Broadly, the equipment falls into one of two categories: water sanitation and solids handling. Water sanitation equipment is controlled to maintain conditions favorable to the decomposition of harmful pathogens and to pump water through the plant and out to San Pablo Bay. The solids handling equipment is used to separate and dewater the biosolids for disposal at the landfill.

Because of limited space at the site, all incoming waste is treated on demand with regular fluctuations in volume throughout the day and large inflows of stormwater when it rains. A list of the motors, pumps, and blowers used in the treatment process is provided in the following table:

Table B.10: WWTP Equipment List
Equipment Qty Make Model Size Units Flow
Unit
s Lift Units Vintage
Vertical
Turbine
Effluent
Pumps 3 Weir Floway 77938-1-1/3 400 hp 4,830 gpm 240
ft
head 2019
Aeration
Blower 3 Aerzen AT200-0.8S G5 200 hp 3,814 cfm 11.6 psi 2017 Centrifuge 1 Andritz D5LX60CHPE2
100
/20 hp 2018
Submersible
Influent
Pump 4 Sulzer
XFP306M
PE430/8 58 hp 4,650 gpm 35
ft
head 2017
Vertical
Turbine
Pumps 2 Weir Floway 77938-5-1/2 20 hp 232 gpm 175
ft
head 2019
Grit Pumps 2 Grundfos
Morris 6100CT
4x4-18 10 hp 250 gpm 30
ft
head 2017
Sludge
Pumps 2 Grundfos
Morris 6100CT
2x3-13 10 hp 175 gpm 65
ft
head 2019
RAS Pumps 4 Grundfos
7100 -
NC0606122V 10 hp 1100 gpm 20
ft
head 2019
Primary
Scum Pumps 1 Vaughan SE3P2-460V-090 10 hp 150 gpm 65
ft
head 2018

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
20 Equipment Qty Make Model Size Units Flow
Unit
s Lift Units Vintage
Submersible
Propeller
Pump 2 Landia
AXP-I 500 9.0 HP
480 9 hp 2017
Thickener
Scum Pumps 1 Vaughan SE3L1-460V-080 7.5 hp 150 gpm 40
ft
head 2018
Progressive
Cavity Pumps 2 Netzsch
NM063SY01L07
V 4 hp 150 gpm 15 psi 2018
Rotary Drum 2 FKC Screw Press 3 hp 2015
WAS Pumps 2 Grundfos 6150 - 4307-1Y 1 hp 100 gpm 12
ft
head 2019
Primary
Clarifier 3 ClearStream CCGI.045 0.75 hp
2018/1
9 Secondary
Clarifier 2 ClearStream CCGI.065 0.75 hp
2018/1
9 Sample
Pumps 6 AMT 285E-999-95 0.5 hp 52
ft
head 2019
ft Feet
gpm Gallons per minute
psi Pounds per square inch
WAS Waste Activated Sludge
The WWTP has a highly variable electric power load because the process equipment turns on and ramps up based on the real-time water processing demand of Pinole and Hercules.

HVAC
A 3-ton rooftop air handler provides heating and cooling to the WWTP offices. This air handler uses a natural gas furnace and DX cooling. The unit is controlled by a programmable thermostat in the hallway of the office building.

Lighting
The office building and mechanical rooms throughout the facility use two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
21 B.5 Swim Center
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for the Swim Center. Table B.11 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.11: Swim Center Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard $3,000 $0
C.14 Pool Pump VFD
Controls
$68,700 $9,562 238.1 1.39 16.8
C.15 Pool Cover $28,500 $4,921 346.6 1.73 183.3
C.16 PV Repair $8,400 $2,464 51.6 2.93 3.6
Total $135,600 $16,946 636.3 1.25 203.8
Building Operation
The Pinole Swim Center is a recreation center with two pools: a 183,200-gallon lap pool and an 11,700-gallon kids pool. The pool is open for a variety of classes and public swimming from 10AM to 6PM, Tuesday through Sunday during the summer months (June through August) and open on weekends during the fall and spring (April, May, September, and October). The pool schedule from 2023 showed that there are gaps in planned activities on many days and the pool often is occupied only until 4PM. The pool is heated to 80˚F during the entire operating season.

The Swim Center’s off season occurs from fall (beginning October 15 to November 1 depending on weather) to spring (ending April 1 to 15 depending on weather). During this time, the pool pumps and heater are ramped down to the level needed to allow for filtration, maintain the pH and chemical treatment levels, and avoid freezing. At the time of the site visit, the pool temperature was at 60˚F and the pH level was a 7.4.

Tetra Tech visited the building on November 9, 2023, to inspect the pool equipment and photovoltaic (PV) array and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building received electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 3735045069; Acct:
3735045137) purchases energy at the net energy meter (NEM) A6 rate, which has time-of-use energy charges. The usage shown on the account are significantly offset by the production of the 49-kW PV array. The natural gas account (SAID: 3735045010; Acct: 3735045137) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. Figure B.9 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. In total, the Swim Center has an annual net electric usage of 42,447 kWh and natural gas usage of 6,591 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 804 MBtu and energy cost of $17,767.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
22 Figure B.9: Swim Center Utility Profile
Pool Equipment
The two pools have independent pumping and heating systems. Each pumping system maintains a flow rate at or slightly above the minimum flow rate mandated by the California building code. The Main pool pump must have enough flow to recirculate the entire volume of the pool every 6 hours, which equates to a flow rate of 509 gallons per minute (gpm). The kids pool must circulate the water every hour, which equates to a flow rate of 195 gpm. Each heating system maintains a water temperature of 80˚F during the summer and 60˚F during the winter. Table B.12 lists the pool pumping and heating equipment.

Table B.12: Swim Center Equipment List
Equipment Qty Make Model Capacity Units
Main Pool Pump 1 Sta-Rite CCSPHL3-143 10 hp
Main Pool Pump Motor 1 Baldor EJMM33127 10 hp
Main Pool Heater 2 Hamilton Engineering EVO 599 611 kBtu/hr Kid Pool Pump/Motor 1 Pentair 11529 3 hp
Kid Pool Heater 1 Raypack B-R266A-EN-C ASME 218 kBtu/hr Despite the long period of downtime at the Swim Center, the electric meter data show very little variance in the pool pumping energy load. While the pool temperature is reduced during the off season, the pool pumps operate at the same level all year long. The California Code of Regulations allows pools to reduce their pumping flow rates by up to 25% when the pool is not in use. Retrofitting the pool pumps to enable variable flow would allow the Swim Center to significantly reduce its power demand at nights, on Mondays, and during the off season. These controls would also make it easier to tune the pump flow in response to system pressure loss so that the flow rate can always meet the minimum requirements.
0 350
700
1,050
1,400
1,750
2,100
2,450
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
26-Sep 27-Nov 28-Jan 31-Mar 1-Jun 2-Aug 3-Oct 4-Dec
Natural Gas Usage and Cost
Electric Usage and Cost
Swim Center Energy Profile
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
23 Energy Generation
The pool has a fixed-tilt, 49-kW solar PV canopy at the southside of the property. The system was installed in 2013 and consists of 221 Canadian Solar CS6P-250P solar panels and 221 Enphase M215 micro inverters. At the time of the site visit, the City of Pinole did not have access to the Enphase monitoring system. Tetra Tech worked with Enphase and the solar installer to create an account for Pinole; however, the system is still not reporting because of issues with the Wi-Fi connection. Tetra Tech evaluated the production of the PV array using interval data from the utility meter.

Based on the analysis of the utility interval data, the PV array is producing at 80% of its expected capacity. Solar production is expected to decease about 7 to 10% over the first 10 years of operation, so the observed lack of production indicates larger issues with the system. The most likely culprit for the lack of production are broken panels or inverters. Both of these components come with a 25-year warranty that should cover all or part of the replacement.

Lighting
The pool offices and locker rooms are lit by two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures controlled by manual switches. These lights do not operate during off-hours.

The exterior of the pool offices is lit by wall-mounted CFL sconces that are controlled by photocells to operate at night. The pool deck is lit by pole-mounted halogen fixtures. Because of the limited number of hours that the pool operates at night, these fixtures run infrequently and do not significantly contribute to the electrical usage of the site.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
24 B.6 Youth Center
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for the Youth Center. Table B.13 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.13: Youth Center Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4
Energy Dashboard
and Demand
Management
$9,500 $1,014 14.9 1.83 1.1
C.7 Zone Temperature
Setback Schedules $7,100 $814 20.1 1.15 1.4
Total $16,600 $1,828 35.0 1.54 2.5
Building Operation
The Pinole Youth Center is a recreation center for youths in Pinole from preschool through high school. It contains cooking areas, a multipurpose room, a radio studio, and theater spaces including a 30-seat theater. The center is occupied sporadically as groups use it for classes, events, and theater productions. Tetra Tech visited the building on November 9, 2023, to inspect the HVAC equipment, lighting equipment, and PV array, and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 9527530591; Acct:
9527530466) purchases energy at the NEM A6 rate, which has time-of-use energy charges. The usage shown on the account are significantly offset by the production of the 25-kW PV array. The natural gas account (SAID:
8455531566; Acct: 8455531156) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. Figure B.10 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. In total, the Youth Center has an annual net electric usage of 29,984 kWh and natural gas usage of 779 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 180 MBtu, energy cost of $10,429, and an EUI of 18.9.

Figure B.10: Youth Center Utility Profile
0 60
120
180
240
300
360
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
Sep-22 Nov-22 Jan-23 Mar-23 Jun-23 Aug-23 Oct-23 Dec-23 Natural Gas Usage and Cost
Electric Usage and Cost
Youth Center Energy Profile
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
25 HVAC
The primary HVAC system consists of a rooftop air handler that serves the second floor and eight split system heat pumps that serve the first-floor areas. The air handler uses a natural gas furnace and DX cooling. The heat pumps provide heating and cooling to the other areas. The units are controlled by programmable thermostats that do not have schedules programmed. Many of the thermostats have notes near them asking occupants not to adjust the temperatures so a constant space temperature is maintained. Table B.14 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.14: Youth Center HVAC List
Equipment Qty Make Model Capacity Units Vintage
Heat Pump 5 Bryant 538BNX024000AEAA 2 tons 2005
Heat Pump 1 Bryant 538BNX048 4 tons 2005
Heat Pump 2 Bryant Unreadable 3 tons Unknown
Rooftop Air Handler 1 Bryant 581BPV072072ALEX 6 tons 2005 Theater AHU 1 Custom 3 hp Unknown
The theater has its own dedicated air handler controlled by a thermostat in the house that is turned on during performances. This air handler is in a tight attic space and was not fully assessable, but because of the infrequency of use, it likely has a minor impact on the overall energy usage of the building.

The Youth Center has an erratic schedule and is now listed as temporarily closed for events. Despite this, the HVAC system is not set up to adjust its operation during unoccupied periods. Installing new, Wi-Fi enabled thermostats and BMS would allow Public Works staff to set schedules for the HVAC system and adjust those schedules based on the calendar of events, special events, and maintenance requirements.

Energy Generation
The pool has a 25-kW solar PV canopy on the roof of the building. The system was installed in 2013 and consists of 114 Canadian Solar CS6P-250P solar panels and 114 Enphase M215 micro inverters. At the time of the site visit, the City of Pinole did not have access to the Enphase monitoring system. Tetra Tech worked with Enphase and the solar installer to create an account for Pinole. Tetra Tech evaluated the production of the PV array using interval data from the utility meter. Based on these data, the system is producing at its expected capacity.

Lighting
The Youth Center meeting rooms are lit by 2-foot, one-lamp recessed T8 fluorescent fixtures. The backstage areas of the theater are lit by 4-foot, two-lamp T8 fixtures. The theater lobby is lit by 23-watt CFL fixtures. All interior lighting is controlled by manual switches. Nighttime observations showed that the lights are typically turned off during off hours.

The exterior of the building is lit by CFL fixtures mounted on the overhand above the front of the building. The exterior of the theater is lit by wall-mounted CFL sconces that are controlled by photocells to operate at night.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
26 B.7 Post Office
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for the Post Office. Table B.15 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.15: Post Office Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard $2,000 $0
C.8 Interior LED
Retrofit $19,700 $2,903 70.6 1.47 5.0
C.9 Interior Occupancy
Sensor Retrofit $1,100 $725 17.9 6.59 1.3
C.12 Exterior Lighting
Controls $300 $109 2.7 2.80 0.2
Total $23,100 $3,737 91.3 1.59 6.5
Building Operation
The Post Office provides facilities for the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). The building contains a large mail
room for the sorting and distribution of mail and a
small customer service area for the pick-up/dropoff of packages and access of post office (PO) boxes.

The building is open to the public from 8:30AM
to5PM from Monday through Friday and from 9AM
to 12PM on Saturdays. Postal workers use the
building outside those hours, with the building
being in partial use from 4AM to 8PM Monday
through Saturday. Tetra Tech visited the building on
November 9, 2023, to inspect the HVAC and lighting
equipment and on December 14, 2023, to inspect
the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The USPS is the customer of these accounts, so Tetra Tech was not able to access the utility billing data. The energy conservation measures were evaluated using the electric and gas rates of City Hall and the Public Safety Building.

HVAC
The building’s HVAC system consists of a large, packaged air handler on the roof of the building. The air handler uses a natural gas furnace and direct expansion (Dx) cooling. The unit is controlled by a digital, programmable thermostat in the mail room that does not have a schedule programmed. Table B.16 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.16: Post Office HVAC List
Equipment Qty Make Model Cooling
Capacity Units Heating Capacity Units Vintage
Rooftop AHU 1 Carrier 48HGD016AC-551AG 14 tons 250 kBtu/hr 2006 Post Office and Exterior Lighting

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
27 The Post Office HVAC system has no schedules programmed and it is difficult for Pinole staff to observe or modify the HVAC setpoints. Installing a new, Wi-Fi enabled thermostat and BMS would allow Public Works staff to set schedules for the HVAC system and adjust those schedules based on change to operation or maintenance requirements.

Lighting
The mail room and customer service areas are lit by lineal two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures. These fixtures are controlled by manual switches and the lights in the mail room and PO box area operate throughout the day and night.

The exterior of the building is lit by CFL fixtures mounted on the overhang above the front of the building and in wall sconces on either side of the front door. These fixtures operate on a continuous schedule. Either they do not have controls to turn them off during the day or the controls are broken.

All the lighting in the building is controlled by manual switches or not controlled at all. The lights remain on for large portions of the day and night even when the building is unoccupied or lightly occupied.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
28 B.8 Fire Station #74
Tetra Tech evaluated energy monitoring for the Fire Station. Table B.17 summarizes the cost of that measure.

Table B.17: Fire Station #74 Measure List
Section Description Project Cost Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard $2,000 $0
Total $2,000 $0
Building Operation
The Fire Station provides facilities for the Contra Costa Fire Department. It contains a garage, offices, lodging rooms, and meeting rooms for the crew. The building is in use for emergency response continuously but is often unoccupied for large portions of the day. Emergency power is provided by a 30-kW diesel generator located behind the building. Tetra Tech visited the building on November 9, 2023, to inspect the HVAC equipment, lighting equipment, and photovoltaic (PV) array and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 6317540399; Acct:
6317540498) purchases energy at the B10S rate, which has time-of-use energy charges and demand charges based on the highest power draw during any 15-minute interval of the monthly billing period. The natural gas account (SAID: 6275873005; Acct: 6275873834) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. Figure B.11 shows the cost and usage on the utility bills for the site for the last 14 months. In total, the station has an annual net electric usage of 31,035 kWh and natural gas usage of 1,164 therms, for a total annual energy usage of 222 MBtu, energy cost of $14,146, and an EUI of 51.5.

Figure B.11: Fire Station #74 Utility Profile
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 600
1,200
1,800
2,400
3,000
3,600
4,200
Sep-22 Nov-22 Jan-23 Mar-23 Jun-23 Aug-23 Oct-23 Dec-23 Natural Gas Usage and Cost
Electric Usage and Cost
Fire Station #74 Energy Profile
Electric Usage (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Gas Usage (therms) Gas Cost ($)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
29 HVAC
The HAVC system consists of two ducted furnaces in the attic of the building. Each furnace is equipped with a ducted heat pump installed directly downstream of the heating unit, which is used for cooling. Each furnace/heat pump system is controlled by an individual non-programmable thermostat, though each unit serves multiple zones.

The garage is heated by a natural gas-fired ceiling-mounted, radiant heater that the crew manually turns on during period of extreme cold weather. Table B.18 lists the HVAC equipment for the building.

Table B.18: Fire Station #74 HVAC List
Equipment Qty Make Model Capacity units Vintage
Furnace 2 Carrier WeatherMaker 9200 150 kBtu/hr 2001
Heat Pump 2 ADP HD03336D175B260300 3 tons 2001
Radiant Heater 1 Modine PD 200AE0130 200 kBtu/hr 2001
Lighting
The building is lit by two-lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures controlled by manual switches. Most lights do not operate at night when the crew is asleep, but a third of the garage lights are left on for security.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
30 B.9 Tiny Tots
Tetra Tech evaluated energy conservation measures for the Tiny Tots Building. Table B.19 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of those measures.

Table B.19: Tiny Tots Measure List
Section Description Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.4 Energy Dashboard $2,000 $0
C.8 Interior LED Retrofit $3,400 $428 9.0 1.26 0.6
Total $5,400 $428 9.0 0.79 0.6
Building Operation
The Tiny Tots provides facilities for the City of Pinole’s Pre-K youth program. It contains a large childcare room, an office, and a storage room. The building operates
from 8:30AM to 3:30PM Monday through Friday with
small variations in class schedule from season to season.

Tetra Tech visited the building on November 9, 2023, to inspect the HVAC and lighting equipment and on
December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation
of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric and natural gas service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 3735045069; Acct:
3735045137) is shared with the Swim Center. The natural gas account (SAID: 3776711005; Acct: 3776711801) purchases gas at the GNR1 rate. In total, the building has an annual natural gas usage of 1,164 therms and a small electric energy load, for an approximate annual energy usage of 191 MBtu, energy cost of $2,584, and EUI of 48.5.

HVAC
The HAVC system consists of two small air handlers controlled by non-programmable thermostats in the childcare room. The AHUs use natural gas furnaces for heating and ducted heat pumps for cooling.

Lighting
The building is lit by one-lamp and four-lamp T12 fluorescent fixtures controlled by manual switches and pendant CFL fixtures in the childcare room. These lights are left on during operating hours and shut off upon closing.

Tiny Tots Childcare Room

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
31 B.10 Caretaker’s Building
The Caretaker’s Building is an old Victorian building that served as the residence for the Pinole Valley Park Caretaker. The building is currently unoccupied with no planned use. Tetra Tech visited the building on November 17, 2023, to inspect the lighting equipment and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 4484683203; Acct: 4484683029) purchases electricity at the B1 rate. In total, the building has an annual electric usage of 3,267 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 11 MBtu, energy cost of $1,189, and EUI of 3.1.

B.11 Faria House
The Faria House is an old Victorian building that is a historic landmark in Pinole. The building is currently unoccupied but serves as a restoration project for Pinole volunteers. Tetra Tech visited the building on November 17, 2023, to inspect the lighting equipment and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The building receives electric service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 4484683203; Acct: 4484683029) purchases electricity at the B1 rate. In total, the building has an annual electric usage of 713 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 2 MBtu, energy cost of $358, and EUI of 1.0.

B.12 Pinole Valley Park
The Pinole Valley Park is 231-acre park and wilderness area at the south end of Pinole. The park contains a baseball field, two soccer fields, a dog park, skate park, and playground. Tetra Tech visited the park on November 17, 2023, to inspect the lighting equipment and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The site receives electric service from PG&E. The electric account (SAID: 2263576043; Acct: 2263576890) purchases electricity at the B1 rate. In total, the site has an annual electric usage of 526 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 2 MBtu and energy cost of $286.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
32 B.13 Fernandez Park
Tetra Tech evaluated a lighting project at Fernandez Park. Table B.20 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of that project.

Table B.20: Fernandez Park Measure List
Section Description Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.17 Ballpark LED Retrofit $29,800 $507 14.2 0.17 1.0
Total $29,800 $507 14.2 0.17 1.0
Park Operation
The Pinole Valley Park is a 6-acre park in the heart of Pinole between the Youth Center and Senior Center. The park contains a baseball field, basketball court, picnic benches, maintenance shed, and playground. Tetra Tech visited the park on November 9, 2023, to inspect the lighting equipment and on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
The site receives electric service from PG&E. The ballpark electric account (SAID: 6069113784; Acct: 6069113914) and maintenance shed electric account (SAID: 7069113482; Acct: 706911350) purchases electricity at the B1 rate. In total, the site has an annual electric usage of 12,069 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 41 MBtu and energy cost of $4,138.

Lighting
The park is lit by pole mounted 80-watt LED fixtures that are controlled by photocells to operate at night. The ballpark is lit by 1,500-watt metal halide fixture on tall poles to illuminate the entire field for games. These lights are turned on by Pinole staff during scheduled night games at the field. In total, they consume up to 8,200 kWh per year. Pinole is evaluating a project to replace the ballpark lights with LEDs. While this project would not produce enough energy savings to justify the cost, the energy savings could be an additional driver for the project.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
33 B.14 Parking Lot Lighting
Tetra Tech evaluated a lighting measure for the Pinole parking lots. Table B.20 summarizes the savings and financial analysis of that measure.

Table B.21: Parking Lot Measure List
Section Description Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.12 Photocell Repair $900 $252 7.0 2.80 0.5
Parking Lot Operation
Pinole has public parking lots throughout downtown as well as illuminated parking lots associated with City Hall, the PSB, the Senior Center, the Youth Center, and the Swim Center. These parking lots see heavy use throughout the day and much less use at night except for the parking lot that is used by the Pinole Police Department. Tetra Tech visited the sites on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

Energy Usage
Pinole has three electric utility account tied solely to parking lots:
- On Tennent Ave near the Youth Center (SAID: 1048223998; Acct: 1048223537) - On the east side of Fernandez Ave near Pear Street (SAID: 9465139366; Acct: 9465139985) - On the west side of Fernandez Ave that connects through to Tennent Ave (SAID: 4840156969; Acct:
4840156501).

These accounts purchase electricity from PG&E at the B1 rate. In total, these sites have an annual electric usage of 11,972 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 41 MBtu and energy cost of $4,242.

Other parking lots lights are tied into the accounts for City Hall, the PSB, the Senior Center, and the Swim Center.

The energy usage profile for those parking lots will be similar to the lots with dedicated meters.

Lighting
The parking lots use pole-mounted 80-watt LED fixtures that are controlled by photocells to operate at night. Tetra Tech found a significant number of lights operating during the day. Based on observations and meter data, 10% of the fixtures are running continuously.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
34 B.15 Streetlighting
Tetra Tech evaluated a billing for Pinole streetlighting. Table B.22 shows the financial analysis of billing corrections.

Table B.22: Streetlighting Measure List
Section Description Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($/yr)
Energy Savings
(MBtu/yr) SIR
GHG
Reduction
(tons/yr)
C.18 Utility Bill Update $0 $31,950
Total $0 $31,950
Streetlighting Operation
Tetra Tech visited the sites on December 14, 2023, to inspect the nighttime operation of the lighting equipment.

The streetlights are controlled by photocell to operate at night. Light level measurements showed that light levels on Pinole streets are consistent with the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommended level of 10 lux.

Energy Usage
Pinole’s streetlighting receives electric service from PG&E. All the streetlighting service agreements are under one PG&E account, #3857662222. The monthly charges are based on the estimated usage of the fixtures listed on the account. In total, these sites have an annual electric usage of 420,185 kWh for a total annual energy usage of 1,434 MBtu and energy cost of $191,854. The service agreement numbers and rates under that account are listed in the following table:

Table B.23: Streetlighting Rates
SA ID Rate City/PG&E Owned
3857662002 LS1-A PG&E
3853073720 LS2-A City
3857662004 LS1-C PG&E
3857662008 LS1-D PG&E
3857662014 LS1-E PG&E
3857662022 LS1-F PG&E
3857662026 LS2-A City
3857662351 LS2-A City
3857662375 LS1-A PG&E
3857662619 LS1-D PG&E
3857662649 LS1-D PG&E
3857662949 LS1-E PG&E
3859273460 LS2-A City
3857662791 LS2-A City
3857662843 LS2-A City
Lighting
The streetlights are high output fixtures mounted on 15-foot or 25-foot poles or mounted to utility poles. Most streetlights are LED fixtures. The fixtures mounted on utility poles at 20-ft above the road are 29-watt LEDs and the 25-foot pole-mounted fixtures are 73-watt LEDs. Tetra Tech observed a small number of fixtures on Monte Vista Drive, Monte Verde Drive, and Seville Court that use high pressure sodium (HPS) fixtures. It is unclear whether these are City-owned or PG&E-owned fixtures.

Over 90 percent of the streetlights in Pinole are LEDs, but the PG&E streetlighting bills list only 56 percent of Cityowned fixtures as LED. The remaining fixtures on the bills are 70-watt to 400-watt HPS and metal halide (MH) fixtures. Pinole is being charged 50 to 80% more for the HPS and MH fixtures than they would for an equivalent LED.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
35 C. Measure Descriptions
C.1 Senior Center Microgrid Design
Tetra Tech performed a renewable microgrid analysis for the Pinole Senior Center located at 2500 Charles Ave, in Pinole. Pinole currently uses this facility as a respite and cooling center during times of extreme weather. Pinole’s goal is for this facility is to have a microgrid with sufficient generation assets to island (operate without commercial power) for 14 days or longer during any type of emergency. A design for a 110-kW carport PV array was developed by CSW/Stuber-Stoeh Engineering Group in 2023; however, no cost or economic payback information was provided with the design. BESS sizing was not provided with the PV design either. Tetra Tech performed a preliminary microgrid analysis to determine proper sizing of all generation assets required to support the Senior Center during routine operation and during an emergency.

Tetra Tech compiled information on building load interval data, expected PV production, energy storage performance, and utility rate tariffs to present several possible photovoltaic/energy storage (PV/BESS) combinations and their respective economic benefit. The load analysis was adjusted to account for future electric vehicle (EV) charging load, using several plausible load scenarios. Pinole indicated that they plan to install five Level 2 EV charging stations and make them available to seniors attending events at the Senior Center, as well as for general public use.

Energy Consumption and Rate Tariff
The Pinole Senior Center is served by PG&E for electric delivery and My Clean Energy (MCE) for electric generation.

PG&E provides billing for both generation and delivery and utilizes the rate schedule for Business Medium Use (B10S) customers. This is a time-of-use rate schedule with current 2024 rates (all adders and non-bypassable charges included) summarized in Table C.1.

Table C.1: Senior Center Rate Schedule
Season and Time Period Energy Charge
($/kWh)
Demand Charge
($/kW)
Winter Peak $0.28898
Winter Off Peak $0.25498
Spring Super Off Peak $0.22098 $21.3
Summer Peak $0.3622
Summer Part Peak $0.3042
Summer Off Peak $0.2732
In 2023, the Senior Center consumed 131,313 kWh of electricity and incurred a maximum demand of 50 kW on June 15 at 11AM. The total cost of electric utilities for 2023 is $48,846 as shown in Table C.2.

Table C.2: Senior Center Cost Breakdown
Customer Charges ($240/month) $2,880
Energy Charges $36,126
Demand Charges $10,840
Total Annual Electric Bill $48,846
Figure C.1 depicts the total monthly energy use, maximum demand, and average monthly demand. Monthly energy consumption varies from 9,000 kWh to 15,000 kWh. The maximum demand, which billing is based on, ranges from 33 to 51 kW. The average demand when the facility does not have events going on is 10 to 15 kW. The highest demand occurs during the summer when air conditioning loads are greatest.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
36 Figure C.1: Senior Center Usage and Demand History
Load Profile
It is critical to understand how and when energy is used in a facility in order to properly design renewable and energy storage assets. The load profile indicates when building demand begins to ramp up, peak, and taper off during the day. Figure C.2 depicts the average daily load profile by month for the Senior Center for 2023 loads; this does not yet include anticipated loads from EV charging.

Figure C.2: Senior Center Load Profile
The current load profile data indicate that building load ramps up quickly starting around 8AM, reaches a peak around 1PM, and tapers off quickly. Nighttime demand remains consistent between 12 to 15 kW. The Senior Center currently hosts most activities during morning hours. During the summer, there are some extended programs in the afternoon and building load does not begin to taper off until around 5PM. In the summertime,

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
37 there are also occasional evening events which run from around 5PM to 9PM at the Senior Center; however, these events do not occur on a routine basis.

Load Profile with EV Charging
The Senior Center does not currently have EV charging stations; thus, the additional load that will be incurred is not yet known. Pinole plans to install five Level 2 EV charging stations that will ultimately be powered by the carport PV system. It is difficult to predict exactly what local demand for the EV charging stations will be and how frequently they will be used; thus, Tetra Tech considered several scenarios.

1. Scenario #1 – EV charging stations are utilized only during events at the Senior Center and stations are only occupied half of that time.

2. Scenario #2 – EV charging stations are utilized only during events at the Senior Center but are fully occupied during that time.

3. Scenario #3 – EV charging stations are made available to the general public as well as Seniors. EV chargers remain fully occupied during the hours of 8AM to 4PM. Charging after 4PM is restricted because of higher peak period rates during this time.

4. Scenario #4 – EV charging stations are made available to the general public as well as Seniors. EV chargers remain fully occupied during the hours of 8AM to 8PM. Charging is allowed during peak periods.

Each Level 2 EV charging station will draw approximately 7 to 11 kW of power while in use. For the purposes of this analysis, 10 kW is the assumed power draw. Table C.3 depicts the impact of the additional load from EV charging.

Table C.3: Senior Center Load
Scenario Annual Load
(kWh)
Average
Demand (kW)
Peak Demand
(kW)
0 Building Only 131,313 15 50
1 Building + ½ EV use during events 171,328 20 76
2 Building + full EV use during events 211,343 24 101
3 Building + EV use 8AM to 4PM 277,313 32 101
4 Building + EV use 8AM to 8PM 350,313 40 101
If the five EV chargers are in full use at the same time, it will double the facility’s peak demand from 50 kW to 101 kW. The additional demand charges can be mitigated with sufficient battery capacity. The additional energy (kWh) cost can be recovered by charging customers a modest rate to charge their vehicles.

The most significant impact that EV chargers have on the microgrid design is that the PV capacity will not be able to be sized for net zero capacity. PG&E limits the capacity of installed PV at 50 percent over the current annual load.

Scenario 4 represents full EV charging for 12 hours a day, which would increase the annual load by 267%. PV cannot be installed at a sufficient capacity to fully meet this load, per PG&E net metering rules. This impact is explained further in the following section.

PV/BESS Sizing Analysis
The PV analysis was performed by evaluating how solar production would be utilized at a range of PV capacities to serve the current annual building load (not including EV charging). The analysis includes pairing the PV with a properly sized BESS, such that most of the surplus PV is stored, rather than exported back to the grid. The new PG&E net billing tariff (NBT) that went into effect in April 2023 is much less economically favorable for exporting PV back to the grid than the NEM 2.0 tariff. PG&E reimburses PV export at the utility avoided cost, which varies on an

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
38 hourly basis, but averages $0.08/kWh. The average energy rate Pinole is paying at the Senior Center is $0.28/kWh.

Thus, this microgrid design seeks to make maximum economic use of all PV generated by consuming the majority of the renewable power on site. Figure C.3 displays the PV power utilization for capacities ranging from 10 kW to 82 kW (the net zero capacity for current load). The PV power that is consumed at the time of generation is shown in green; the blue bar represents PV power that is stored in the BESS and dispatched later; the yellow bar represents the small amount of PV that must be exported back to the grid for reduced retail credit. The black solid line represents the total annual building load, which remains consistent for every scenario. For PV capacities ranging from 10 to 40 kW, there is not a significant amount of surplus PV power that is not consumed at the time of generation. Beyond 40 kW, the system will generate a lot of surplus power, requiring larger BESS and inflating the overall project cost.

Figure C.3: Senior Center PV Sizing
The net zero PV capacity and corresponding BESS requirements are presented in Table C.4 for all of the load scenarios, with and without EV charging.

Table C.4: Senior Center Production and Storage Breakdown Scenario Net Zero PV
Capacity (kW)
Required BESS
Capacity (kWh)
0 Building Only 82 240
1 Building + ½ EV use during events 106 320
2 Building + full EV use during events 130 375
3 Building + EV use 8AM to 4PM 171 330
4 Building + EV use 8AM to 8PM 216 475
Since PG&E has firm capacity limits of 150% beyond the current building load, the remainder of this PV analysis will use 123 kW as the target PV capacity.

Recommended Microgrid Design
Tetra Tech recommends selecting the maximum PV capacity that PG&E will allow, which is 123 kW. The final analysis was run using 123 kW PV, 279 kWh BESS, and assumed loads from Scenario #2 which represents full EV charging while events are being held at the Senior Center. The BESS capacity is derived from the actual battery

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
39 hardware product offered by Elexity in conjunction with its microgrid controls and building management software.

This is a packaged system which accomplishes several purposes including routine energy management for the building, demand management utilizing HVAC setpoints and battery discharge, and microgrid islanding controls.

Elexity also offered a larger BESS capacity of 500 kWh, but that capacity far exceeds the requirements for the recommended microgrid system.

The 123-kW PV system will produce more power (shown in green) than the site requires during the summertime, as depicted in Figure C.4. The battery will store the surplus and dispatch that power beginning at 4pm in order to displace expensive grid power purchases during peak period (4PM to 9PM). Loads throughout the day may fluctuate dramatically as vehicles begin and end EV charging.

Figure C.4: Summer Daily Demand Profile
During the summer daytime hours, there should be ample PV power to cover all daytime EV charging loads. This recommended microgrid design uses battery to peak shave and displace some of the building load during peak periods. However, the BESS is not sufficient capacity to cover EV loads during peak period. Thus, if Pinole would like to allow for EV charging during peak hours, Tetra Tech recommends increasing the customer EV charging rate from $0.30/kWh to $0.40/kWh.

During the winter, the PV output is significantly reduced and is not sufficient to serve the entire daytime load, including the EV charging load. Thus, Pinole will need to draw power (as shown in gray on Figure C.5) from PG&E at almost all times of the day and night in order to supplement PV and BESS output.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
40 Figure C.5: Summer Daily Demand Profile
During the winter months, the BESS is primarily used to mitigate demand spikes during the day which are incurred by EV charging. The supplemental grid power is needed to serve the EV charging (kWh) requirements; however, Pinole will be able to recover the energy (kWh) cost by passing that cost on to the EV customers.

The PV power produced annually from the 123-kW carport PV array is estimated at 199,200 kWh, which will offset around 94 percent of the total load, estimated at 211,300 kWh including the increase from EV charging during events at the Senior Center. A PV capacity of 123 kW is close to the net zero requirement for the site; however, only 61 percent of the PV power can be consumed on site at the time that it is generated, as indicated by the solid green bar in Figure C.6. The 279-kWh BESS will store another 30% of the PV power, as indicated by the green shaded bar in Figure C.6. This battery capacity is sufficient to store all the surplus PV power in the winter months but does not store all the surplus power in the summer. About 9 percent of the PV power is expected to be exported back to the grid for net metering credit. There is also opportunity for Pinole to further utilize this surplus PV power during the day to accommodate more EV charging for the public.

Figure C.6: PV/BESS Utilization
The PV and BESS system also have a significant impact on reducing overall demand for the site as depicted in Figure C.7. The 123-kW PV array alone reduces site demand by around 10 kW during the winter months, and 30 to 40 kW during the summer months. The BESS offers a significant peak shaving advantage to the system and is estimated to

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
41 secure another 50 to 60 kW of demand reduction each month. The battery helps to triple the amount of demand savings that PV alone would have provided. Battery storage can be deployed on cloudy days when solar PV output is decreased, such that the cloud cover does not erode the demand reduction savings the system otherwise would have yielded. The battery is also dispatched during times of EV charging in order to avoid sharp demand spikes.

Peak shaving during winter months occurs mainly during the hours of 9AM to 1PM, while peak shaving during the summer months occurs during peak period of 4PM to 9PM.

Figure C.7: Demand Reduction
Microgrid Emergency (Islanding) Operation
In the absence of commercial power, the microgrid controller will sense a voltage drop in the distribution system.

The automatic transfer switch will engage and will isolate the Senior Center electrical infrastructure from PG&E’s main electrical feed. At this point, the microgrid control system will switch into “island” mode and will power on the generator. The generator is sized at 30 kW, with the intent of mainly carrying evening and nighttime loads after the PV has waned and the BESS is depleted. However, the generator will be required to start at the onset of islanding operation, because the generator will initially be the anchor resource, or grid-forming electrical source, in the absence of commercial power. When system voltage is re-established, the PV inverters can power back on and continue to work in conjunction with the BESS. If PV output is sufficient to carry the load at that time, the generator may then power down and let the PV and BESS continue to serve the site load.

Depending on the time of year and time of day that the outage occurs, the PV output may be insufficient to support the building load and EV charging requirements. For this reason, Tetra Tech recommends that EV Charging Stations are deactivated and not used while the microgrid is in emergency operation. A decision to activate the EV Charging Station(s) can be made after microgrid islanding operation is stable and there is assured power for all building requirements. The primary objective of the microgrid will be to power building HVAC and lighting systems in order to keep occupants safe and comfortable during an emergency. EV charging is a secondary goal if there is sufficient power.

Figure C.8 illustrates the reliance on each microgrid asset during islanding, considering the time of year that the emergency occurs. For instance, reduced PV output (green) during the winter months of December and January will lead to an increased dependence on the gas generator to make up the load during a winter emergency. In the spring, there is very little reliance on the gas generation asset since PV output is higher and the site load has not yet increased substantially because of hotter weather. In the summer, when the Senior Center is most likely to be needed as a cooling center, PV output is high, but the building air conditioning load is also high. Thus, the generator (purple) will also be required during the hottest summer months. The “Load Unmet” in orange is the EV

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
42 charging load. A judgment call will need to be made on whether the microgrid assets can support EV charging in addition to the required building load during an emergency.

Figure C.8: Islanding Potential
One of the main benefits of this microgrid design is that this system can operate indefinitely without commercial power as long as the natural gas supply is not interrupted.

Project Costs
Project costs are based on current market rates for commercial solar installations as well as estimates provided by Elexity for battery storage and controls. There is a licensing fee for ongoing microgrid/BMS controls. The total fee is $50,000 for 5 years for Pinole’s license. That fee can be spread across all energy projects that are utilizing the controls and software. For the purposes of this analysis, the Senior Center microgrid assumes 20% of this cost.

There is an upfront hardware fee of $35,000 for microgrid controls to enable the system to operate in island mode.

That cost is reflected in the Project Cost Summary in Table C.5. The cost for EV Charging Stations includes three stations: two of those stations will be dual port, thus there are a total of five charging ports available.

Table C.5: Cost Estimate
Item Quantity Unit Cost per
Unit Cost
Carport PV 123 kW $2300 $282,900
BESS 279 kWh $663 $184,977
Controls 1 -- $35,000 $35,000
EV Charging
Stations-Level 2 3 -- $15,000 $45,000
Gas Generator 1 30-kW $15,000 $15,000
TOTAL $562,877
Economic Analysis
The economic analysis for the recommended microgrid system was run using the following assumptions:

1. Project life = 25 years

2. Escalation rate (for O&M and utilities) = 3%

3. Discount rate = 5%

4. Investment Tax Rebate (ITC) Rebate = 30% on microgrid project costs (PV, BESS, controls)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
43 There is a possibility of acquiring more incentives through PG&E’s Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) to pay down the cost (or completely cover the cost) of the BESS. The SGIP program is currently in Step 5 of seven steps.

The value of Non-Residential Storage is $0.85/watt-hour (Wh) and currently has a waitlist. The value of the incentive, if the project qualifies for “Equity Resilience,” is $1.00/Wh and this program is currently open. The microgrid project should qualify for “Equity Resilience” if there is medical oxygen or lifesaving equipment at the Senior Center. It would also qualify if the Senior Center was located in Tier 2 or 3 Wildfire threat area, or if the facility had been affected by two or more Public Safety Power Shutoffs; Pinole has indicated that these last two criteria do not apply. The microgrid installer should submit an SGIP application for BESS incentives as soon as the final project design is complete.

Tetra Tech completed the economic analysis without the added incentive from SGIP, just in case this project does not meet the California state criteria. The economics are favorable, even without the added BESS incentive.

Table C.6: Economic Analysis
Component Value
Cost Savings:

PV Savings (kWh) $37,171
BESS-Peak Shaving (kW) Savings $15,496
BESS-Energy (kWh) Value $5,589
Exported PV (kWh) Value $4,488
Subtotal $62,744
EV Charging Revenue $24,009
Investment Tax Credit (30%) $150,863
Economic Indicators:

Simple Payback 4.7 years
SIR 3.67
Net Present Value $1,115,173

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
44 C.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Microgrid Tetra Tech performed a renewable microgrid analysis for the Pinole WWTP located at 11 Tennant Ave in Pinole.

The Pinole WWTP is considered critical infrastructure to keep operational at all times, including during any type of emergency that may cause a long-term power outage. The Pinole WWTP has some microgrid infrastructure in place, allowing for isolation from the main PG&E grid. The backup generation assets currently consist of three diesel generators (905 kW, 905 kW, 800 kW) and a small CHP system (65 kW), powered by biogas generated on site.

Pinole’s goal for this facility is to add PV and BESS, which will serve to advance Pinole’s clean energy goals, reduce overall utility costs, and reduce reliance on diesel generation assets during an emergency. Tetra Tech performed a preliminary analysis to determine the technical and economic feasibility of installing renewable generation assets at the WWTP.

Tetra Tech has compiled information on building load interval data, expected PV production, energy storage performance, and utility rate tariffs to present several possible PV/BESS combinations and their respective economic benefit. There is very limited real estate to install solar arrays at the WWTP; thus, it is not anticipated that the renewable design will reach net zero capacity.

Energy Consumption and Rate Tariff
The Pinole WWTP is served by PG&E for electric delivery and MCE for electric generation. PG&E provides billing for both generation and delivery and utilizes the rate schedule for Business Medium Use (B10S) customers. This is a time-of-use rate schedule with current 2024 rates (all adders and non-by-passable charges included) summarized in Table C.7.

Table C.7 PG&E Rate Schedule B10S
Season and Time Period Energy Charge
($/kWh)
Demand Charge
($/kW)
Winter Peak $0.28898
Winter Off Peak $0.25498
Spring Super Off Peak $0.22098 $21.3
Summer Peak $0.3622
Summer Part Peak $0.3042
Summer Off Peak $0.2732
In 2023, the WWTP consumed 2,903,497 kWh of electricity and incurred a maximum demand of 910 kW on January 14 at 10AM. The total cost of electric utilities for 2023 is $929,963 as shown in Table C.8.

Table C.8 WWTP Annual Electric Costs
Customer Charges ($240/month) $2,880
Energy Charges $791,130
Demand Charges $135,954
Total Annual Electric Bill $929,963

Figure C.9 depicts the total monthly energy use, maximum demand, and average monthly demand. Monthly energy consumption varies from 200,000 kWh to 315,000 kWh. The maximum demand, which billing is based on, ranges from 400 kW to 910 kW. The average demand of the WWTP is 330 kW. The large demand spikes occur during severe storms when the WWTP may be required to process large volumes of stormwater in addition to normal wastewater intake.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
45 Figure C.9 WWTP Energy Consumption and Demand

It is critical to understand how and when energy is used in a facility in order to properly design renewable and energy storage assets. The load profile indicates when facility demand begins to ramp up, peak, and taper off during the day. Figure C.10 depicts the average daily load profile by month for the WWTP for 2023 loads.

Figure C.10 WWTP Load Profile

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
46 The load profile indicates that there is not much variance in load throughout the day or night. There are two slight peaks in load during the day, one around 12PM and the other around 9PM. The WWTP appears to maintain steady state operation with a mostly consistent flow and processing load. The minimum demand does not typically fall below 250 kW and average demand is slightly higher at 330 kW. The months of January and March experienced slightly higher average demands of around 400 kW because the plant processed higher volumes of rainwater.

Potential Locations for PV Arrays
The WWTP has limited options for installing PV arrays inside the fence-line of the property. Tetra Tech considered three different locations for installing PV arrays: one location inside the fence-line and two locations just outside the fence-line. The first option is a carport array as shown in Figure C.11, which is estimated at 50 kW.

The second option is a ground-mount PV array located in the public park area to the southwest of the WWTP as shown in Figure C.12. This is the largest open field area nearest the WWTP and has the added benefit of being nearly due south facing, ideal for maximum solar production. This space is estimated to support an estimated 175- kW PV array. There would be more available space here if the trees on the southern edge were removed. If a ground-mount PV array is installed here, the area will need to be cordoned off from the public for safety purposes.

Figure C.12 Southwest Ground-Mount PV Array
Figure C.11 Carport PV Location

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
47 The third option for a PV array is along the northeast perimeter of the WWTP, adjacent to the public pathway that runs along the canal, as shown in Figure C.13. If the PV is able to cover the pathway, there is sufficient space to accommodate a 271-kW array without moving too close to the canal embankment. However, this area will no longer be suitable for public access and will need to be cordoned off for safety purposes.

Tetra Tech did not evaluate the potential of installing solar over process areas to avoid interfering with the microbial processes of waste treatment.

Table C.9 displays the three different options for PV, area available, estimated capacity, and expected PV production. The PV analysis considers various combinations of the following three PV arrays.

Table C.9 Summary of PV Locations and Capacity
Location Estimated PV
Capacity (kW)
Solar Production
(kWh)
1 Carport array 50 75,931
2 Southwest ground mount array, in
open park area 175 282,410
3 Northeast ground mount array,
along canal pathway 271 422,675
PV/BESS Sizing Analysis
The PV analysis was performed by evaluating how solar production would be utilized at a range of PV capacities to serve the current annual WWTP load. The analysis includes pairing the PV with a properly sized BESS, such that most of the surplus PV is stored, rather than exported back to the grid. The new PG&E NBT that went into effect in April 2023 is much less economically favorable for exporting PV back to the grid than the NEM 2.0 tariff. PG&E reimburses PV export at the utility avoided cost, which varies on an hourly basis, but averages $0.08/kWh. The average blended rate Pinole is paying for power at the WWTP is $0.32/kWh. Thus, this microgrid design seeks to make maximum economic use of all PV generated by consuming the majority of the renewable power on site.

The net zero PV capacity for the WWTP is 1.8 MW; this is the size the PV array needs to be to produce the same amount of power (on an annual basis) that the WWTP consumes. The maximum amount of PV that could be installed using all three locations described in Table C.9 is 496 kW. This is less than 30% of the capacity required to reach net zero. Thus, this analysis will only examine PV capacities up to 496 kW.

Figure C.13 Northeast Ground-Mount PV Array

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
48 Figure C.14 displays the PV power utilization for capacities ranging from 50 kW (the smallest PV array) to 496 kW (the combination of all three PV locations). The PV power that is consumed at the time of generation is shown in green; the blue bar represents PV power that is stored in the BESS and dispatched later; the yellow bar represents the small amount of PV that must be exported back to the grid for reduced retail credit. For all PV capacities analyzed, 96 to 99% of the PV power is consumed at the time of generation. Thus, battery capacity is not required to store surplus PV in any of the scenarios evaluated. However, the battery can be used in a peak shaving capacity in order to trim demand charges on a routine basis. Peak shaving capability will be further explained in the following sections.

The various PV capacities and corresponding BESS requirements are presented in Table C.10.

Table C.10 WWTP PV/BESS Sizing Scenarios
Scenario Total PV
Capacity (kW)
Required BESS
Capacity (kWh)
Percent WWTP
Load Offset
1 Carport 50 279 3%
2 SW array 175 279 10%
3 NE array 271 550 15%
4 NE array + carport 321 550 17%
5 Carport + NE array + SW array 496 550 27%
Recommended Microgrid Design
Tetra Tech recommends installing the maximum PV capacity studied in this analysis, which is 496 kW. This will involve installing PV in at least two areas adjacent to the WWTP that are currently publicly accessible. This may present a challenge for Pinole to cordon off this area and restrict public access. However, in order to install enough PV to be impactful and useful for Pinole’s WWTP, more land is required than what is available inside the fence-line of the facility.

Figure C.14 PV/BESS Sizing Analysis

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
49 The final analysis used for design purposes in this study is 496 kW PV paired with 575 kWh BESS. The BESS capacity is derived from the actual battery hardware product offered by Elexity in conjunction with its microgrid controls and building management software. This is a packaged system which accomplishes several purposes including routine energy management for the building, demand management utilizing HVAC setpoints and battery discharge, and microgrid islanding controls. The Elexity controls system is also quoted for the Senior Center microgrid controls and BMS controls for at least three other Pinole buildings. In this manner, the Elexity licensing fee of $50,000 for five years can be spread across multiple facilities, saving Pinole significant upfront capital investment.

The routine operation (or grid-connected mode) of the microgrid was modeled for a typical summer day in Figure C.15 and typical winter day in Figure C.16. The 496-kW PV system will produce only slightly more power (shown in green) than the site requires during the summertime. There is not a significant amount of surplus power for the battery to charge. However, the combination of solar and battery is able to secure at least 100 kW of consistent demand reduction in the summertime.

Figure C.15 Routine Microgrid Operation: Summer
Figure C.16 Routine Microgrid Operation: Winter

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
50 During the winter, the PV output is significantly reduced and only offsets a small portion of the daily load. Thus, Pinole will need to draw power (as shown in gray on Figure C.16) from PG&E at almost all times of the day and night in order to supplement PV and BESS output. During the winter months, the BESS is primarily used to mitigate demand spikes incurred during times of increased wastewater processing from storms.

The PV power produced annually from the three PV arrays is estimated at 781,000 kWh, which will offset around 27% percent of the total WWTP load. Nearly all of the PV power can be consumed on site at the time that it is generated, as indicated by the solid green bar in Figure C.17. The 575 kWh BESS will store the surplus PV power, mainly in the summer months, as indicated by the green shaded bar in Figure C.17. This battery capacity is sufficient to store all the surplus PV power year around.

The PV and BESS also have a significant impact on reducing overall demand for the site as depicted in Figure C.18.

The 496-kW PV array alone reduces site demand by around 60 kW to 100 kW during the winter months. Large demand spikes, up to 900 kW, occurred during January and March of 2023 because the WWTP processed larger volumes of wastewater during storms. The battery can be dispatched during these storm events in order to reduce sharp demand spikes. The battery yields another 80 to 175-kW demand reduction during the winter months of January, February, and March.

During the remaining 9 months of the year, the facility peak demand rarely exceeds 500 kW. Since the combined maximum output of the 496 kW PV arrays is only 410 kW, the PV alone is not a sufficient capacity to reduce peak demand in the summer. The BESS is required to secure demand savings. The PV and BESS operated in conjunction with each other offers a significant peak shaving advantage to the system and is estimated to yield 120 kW of demand reduction during the summer and fall months. The battery helps to provide five times the amount of demand cost savings annually that PV alone would have provided. Battery storage can be deployed on cloudy days when solar PV output is decreased, such that the cloud cover does not erode the demand reduction savings the system otherwise would have yielded.

Figure C.17 PV-BESS Utilization

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
51 Microgrid Emergency (Islanding) Operation
In the absence of commercial power, the microgrid controller will sense a voltage drop in the distribution system.

The automatic transfer switch will engage and will isolate the WWTP electrical infrastructure from PG&E’s main electrical feed. At this point, the microgrid control system will switch into “island” mode and will power on the diesel generator. The microgrid will integrate one or more of the 905-kW generators to operate in conjunction with the PV and BESS during times of islanding operation.

The generator will be required to start at the onset of islanding operation, because the generator will initially be the anchor resource, or grid-forming electrical source, in the absence of commercial power. When system voltage is reestablished, the PV inverters can power back on and continue to work in conjunction with the BESS. If PV output is sufficient to carry the load at that time, the generator may then power down and let the PV and BESS continue to serve the site load. During summer and fall days, the PV and BESS are capable of serving the entire load for 4 to 6 hours per day, between 9AM and 3PM; however, this only represents 10% of the time on an annual basis. The other 90% of the time, a generator will be required to operate along with the PV and BESS in order to serve the entire WWTP load.

It is imperative to properly size the diesel generator such that it operates effectively at all expected load conditions.

A diesel generator will ideally be operated at 60 to 80% of its rated capacity for maximum efficiency of the generator. A diesel generator must be operated at a minimum load factor of 30%t in order to avoid wet-stacking and malfunction. The existing 905-kW diesel generator is sized to accommodate peak WWTP loads that occur during winter storm events. However, the average load that the diesel generator must serve throughout the year, when also integrated with PV and BESS, is approximately 300 kW. Over half of the hours the generator is running will be at a load factor below 30%. For this reason, Tetra Tech recommends that Pinole purchase a new, right-sized diesel generator, around 450-kW capacity. This will improve the average loading on the diesel generator to 60% load factor and improve fuel efficiency as well. Alternatively, the plant could use the 800-kW generator as the primary unit to increase the average load factor to 38%. This is a higher risk, lower cost option that reduces the time where the generator operates below 30% load but forces the generator to run at below 60% for most of the summer months when the risk of power outage is highest.

Figure C.18 Demand Reduction Potential

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
52 Figure C.19 illustrates the reliance on each microgrid asset during islanding, considering the time of year that the emergency occurs. The islanding analysis was done assuming a new 450-kW diesel generator is integrated with the microgrid. During January and March, there are some days where this smaller generator will not be sufficient to serve the increased loads because of stormwater; this is shown in orange as “Site Load Unmet”. On these particular days, the microgrid controller will transfer the load over to the larger 905-kW diesel generator; thus, the load will not actually be unmet. As expected, increased PV output (green) in the summer will offset more site load than the PV can offset in the wintertime.

Project Costs
Project costs are based on current market rates for commercial solar installations as well as estimates provided by Elexity for battery storage and controls. There is a licensing fee for ongoing microgrid/BMS controls. The total fee is $50,000 for 5 years for Pinole’s license. That fee can be spread across all energy projects that are utilizing the controls and software. For the purposes of this analysis, the WWTP microgrid assumes 35% of this cost. There is an upfront hardware fee of $35,000 for microgrid controls to enable the system to operate in island mode. That cost is reflected in the Project Cost Summary in Table C.11.

Table C.11 WWTP Microgrid Project Costs
Item Quantity Unit Cost per
Unit Cost
PV Arrays 496 kW $2,300 $1,140,800
BESS 575 kWh $663 $381,225
Controls 1 -- $35,000 $35,000
Diesel Generator 1 450-kW $120,000
TOTAL $1,677,025

C.2.8 Economic Analysis
The economic analysis for the recommended microgrid system was run using the following assumptions:

1. Project life = 25 years

2. Escalation rate (for O&M and utilities) = 3%
Figure C.19 Microgrid Islanding Operation

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
53 3. Discount rate = 5%

4. ITC Rebate = 30% on microgrid project costs (PV, BESS, controls) There is a possibility of acquiring more incentives through PG&E’s SGIP to pay down the cost (or completely cover the cost) of the BESS. The SGIP program is currently in Step 5 of seven steps. The value of Non-Residential Storage is $0.85/Wh and currently has a waitlist. The value of the incentive, if the project qualifies for “Equity Resilience,” is $1.00/Wh and this program is currently open. The microgrid project should qualify for “Equity Resilience” since a wastewater treatment plant is critical infrastructure for a community to keep operational during a power outage.

The microgrid installer should submit an SGIP application for BESS incentives as soon as the final project design is complete.

Tetra Tech completed the economic analysis without the added incentive from SGIP, just in case this project does not meet the California state criteria. The economics, shown in Table C.12, are favorable even without the added BESS incentive.

Table C.12 WWTP Microgrid Project Economics
Component Value
Cost Savings:

PV Savings (kWh) $204,306
BESS-Peak Shaving (kW) Savings $29,605
BESS-Energy (kWh) Value $3,596
Exported PV (kWh) Value $1,726
Subtotal $239,233
Investment Tax Credit (30%) $467,108
Economic Indicators:

Simple Payback 5.1 years
SIR 3.2
Net Present Value $3,000,442

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
54 C.3 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
Description
Tetra Tech evaluated the option for the City of Pinole to install Level 2 EV chargers at the Senior Center, Youth Center, and Swim Center, and to make them available for public use to recoup costs. Engineering design plans have been created for the installation of two dual-port stations and one single-port station at the Senior Center. For the Youth and Swim Centers, an estimate was calculated using two dual port charging stations at each facility.

Most modern EVs can draw 7 to 11 kW of power from a Level 2 charging station, so 10 kW was used as a conservative estimated power draw for each charging port in use, leading to a maximum load of 50 kW for the Senior Center, and 40 kW each for the Swim and Youth Centers.

Energy and Cost Savings
An economic breakdown for the three facilities is shown in the following tables. For each site, a range of scenarios were projected as explained in Table C.13. The estimated installation cost per charging station is $15,000, and it is assumed that newly installed stations will be separately metered using PG&E’s BEV-1 rate, for which a breakdown can be seen in Tale C.14. The BEV-1 rate includes a subscription charge plus a consumption charge using a time-ofuse rate. The Swim Center and Youth Center have existing PV arrays; these were not included in the economic analysis but would further increase profitability of EV charging stations. Additionally, the economics were estimated using three different charges for the public, $0.30, $0.35, and $0.40/kWh. Pinole already owns a Level 2 charging station near City Hall that is made available to the public for free. There are also other charging stations within Pinole that charge between $0.35 and $0.61/kWh, making the rates used in this analysis competitive for the area.

The analysis for the Senior Center was included in the PV and BESS analysis in Section C.1.

Bidirectional chargers are an emerging technology that allows a building to use energy stored in car batteries. These chargers have a cost premium of about $4,500 above the cost of a level 2 charger. Bidirectional chargers are not typically used in publicly available charging stations because drawing power from a privately owned car brings a host of compensation, consent, and liability problems that outweigh the potential benefits.

Table C.13: EV Usage
Use Case Description
Light Use 50% of charging ports used during normal hours of operation Medium Use 75% of charging ports used during normal hours of operation Heavy Use
100% of charging ports used during normal hours of operation, with additional use by neighboring businesses/residents outside of normal operating hours
Table C.14: Time-of-Use Rates
Part of PG&E BEV-1 Tariff Rate
Peak (4:00PM to 9:00PM) $0.40315/kWh
Off-Peak (9:00PM to 9:00AM, 2:00PM to 4:00PM) $0.21114/kWh Super Off-Peak (9:00AM to 2:00PM) $0.18448/kWh
Monthly Subscription Charge $12.41 per 10-kW block

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
55 Table C.15: Senior Center EV Revenue
Swim Center Use Case Customer Charge Annual Revenue Simple Payback Light Use
$0.30/kWh $1,855 16.2
$0.35/kWh $2,783 10.8
$0.40/kWh $4,543 6.6
Medium Use
$0.30/kWh $3,567 8.4
$0.35/kWh $5,351 5.6
$0.40/kWh $8,327 3.6
Heavy Use
$0.30/kWh $5,279 5.7
$0.35/kWh $7,919 3.8
$0.40/kWh $12,111 2.5
Table C.16: Senior Center EV Revenue
Youth Center Use Case Customer
Charge
Annual
Revenue
Simple
Payback
Light Use
$0.30/kWh -$32 NA
$0.35/kWh $2,014 14.9
$0.40/kWh $6,128 4.9
Medium Use
$0.30/kWh $1,382 21.7
$0.35/kWh $5,245 5.7
$0.40/kWh $12,216 2.5
Heavy Use
$0.30/kWh $2,796 10.7
$0.35/kWh $8,476 3.5
$0.40/kWh $18,304 1.6
Other Benefits and Considerations
An economic breakdown of replacement of city-owned gasoline vehicles with EVs was also performed. Modern EVs can use between 25 to 30 kWh per 100 miles driven. Assuming the average vehicle use of 15,000 miles per year, this represents an energy use of 3,750 to 4,500 kWh per vehicle per year. Using a blended PG&E rate of $0.30/kWh this represents a cost of $1,125 to $1,350 per year per vehicle for charging EVs.

Some of the most efficient traditional gasoline sedans can achieve 30 to 35 miles per gallon for city miles. Assuming the same driving behavior an average cost of gasoline in Pinole of $4.30/gallon (and at the time of this report), this represents an annual fuel cost of $1,850 to $2,150 per year per vehicle for fueling.

Over a 10-year lifespan of a vehicle, this represents fuel savings of about $5,000 to 10,000 per vehicle. However, it is worth noting that electricity rates are far less volatile than the price of gasoline in the State of California. Using data from the California Public Utilities Commission, the average electric rate year-over-year change is 2.68% since 2006, while the price of gasoline has swung wildly, at times rising almost 50% in a few months.

EVs also have lower scheduled maintenance costs. A 2021 Department of Energy study found that “the estimated scheduled maintenance cost for a light-duty battery-electric vehicle (BEV) totals 6.1 cents per mile, while a conventional internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) totals 10.1 cents per mile.” At an estimated 150,000 miles over a 10-year lifespan, this represents a savings of $4,000 per vehicle.

Over a 10-year lifespan, these savings amount to $11,000 to $16,250 per vehicle. This number will increase further if gasoline prices increase continue to outpace electric rate increases, or if Pinole elects to install more PV and battery storage systems to self-fuel EV fleet vehicles without paying PG&E rates. Table C.17 shows the yearly cost comparison between gas vehicles and EVs.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
56 Table C.17: Municipal EV Cost
Vehicle Type Fuel Cost per Vehicle per Year Maintenance Costs per Vehicle per Year Fully Electric $1,125 - $1,350 $915
Internal Combustion $1,850 - $2,150 $1,515

Funding Sources
There are several federal and state programs to help cities make the transition to electric vehicles:

Report Section Program
D.4 Federal Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit
D.5 California Energy Conservation Assistance Act (ECAA) Low interest Loan D.6 Federal Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG)

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
57 C.4 Energy Dashboard and Demand Management
Description
Tetra Tech evaluated the option for Pinole to create a centralized energy dashboard that would improve visibility of building operation to Public Works staff. There are many options for energy monitoring systems with varying levels of functionality. Tetra Tech aimed to identify a single option that met all project goals in order to simplify the acquisition and integration of monitoring system and get the most long-term value for Pinole. Thus, any energy dashboard would need to accomplish the following tasks:
• View real-time building electric meter and natural gas meter data. • View HVAC operation and modify system setpoints.
• View production of renewable energy systems.
• View and manage energy storage assets.

There are a handful of vendors that offer services that meet these goals including Johnson Controls, Elexity, and Siemens. When Tetra Tech reached out to these companies, Elexity provided the most specific details about budget and controls strategies, so their system was used as the basis for analysis.

This energy management system would install electric meters and integrate with BACnet compatible controls systems and thermostats within Pinole buildings. Tetra Tech recommends installing electric meters on the renewable energy systems at the Swim Center, Youth Center, and WWTP and installing natural gas meters on all buildings with a significant natural gas load. The Elexity system also allows for strategic control of BESS to reduce demand charges while reserving energy for emergency power. The battery control aspects are described in Section C.1 of this report.

Where facilities have exiting controls systems, the new meters should report directly to the exiting controls to export data to the dashboard. In the case of the WWTP, the exiting controls system uses a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) based controls system. New meters should be compatible with that system and expert data to the BACnet based dashboard.

Energy and Cost Savings
The Elexity system enables the buildings with integrated controls to adjust the operation of their HVAC systems to respond to energy prices. Pinole can identify spaces where the temperature setpoint can be reset when energy prices are high and building demand is spiking, thus reducing the demand charges seen on the utility bills. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.18. Pinole has many options for setback strategies that can make a big impact:
- At City Hall, the energy use spikes at around 4PM at the beginning of the peak demand period where energy prices are highest. Increasing the setpoint in low-use meeting rooms would cut the cooling demand by about 15%.
- At the Senior Center, the energy use spikes at around 11:30AM. At that time, most of the patrons are in the main hall for lunch and the thermostat in the meeting rooms and lobby can increase their setpoints reducing the cooling demand by about 7%.
- At the Youth Center, the energy use spikes around 4:30PM when the solar production wanes and energy prices are highest. The temperature setpoint throughout the building can be increased reducing the cooling load by about 30%.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
58 Table C.18: Energy Dashboard Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($/yr)
Demand
Savings (kW)
Energy Savings
(kWh/yr)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $9,500 $751 6.2 3,744 12.8 1.44
Public Safety $2,000
Senior Center $9,500 $685 4.9 2,943 10.0 1.23
WWTP $3,000
Swim Center $3,000
Youth Center $9,500 $1,014 7.2 4,356 14.9 1.83
Firehouse $2,000
Post Office $2,000
Tiny Tots $2,000
Total $42,500 $2,450 18.3 11,042 37.7 1.05
Other Benefits and Considerations
Demand management services come with a subscription fee. For Elexity, this fee is $120 per month per building.

This fee has been incorporated into the financial analysis. For any system, Pinole should ensure that the energy monitoring aspects of the dashboard are accessible even if the demand management services are canceled.

Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.3 MCE Peak FLEXmarket
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
59 C.5 Rooftop Air Handler Replacement and Demand Control Ventilation Description
The existing RTUs at the City Hall Chambers and Senior Center Main Hall run at full speed on a continuous schedule.

Tetra Tech evaluated the effect of replacing these units with high efficacy, VAV RTUs. This type of RTU uses a variable frequency drive (VFD) to adjust the fan speed and air flow. The air flow level is controlled by carbon dioxide (CO2) sensors in the space served by the RTU so that the air flow increases when the room is in heavy use and decreases the flow when the rooms is lightly occupied or unoccupied. The cooling efficiency of an RTU is defined by its Seasonal Energy Efficiency Rating (SEER); new units have SEERs of over 15.2 compared to the existing units which have SEERs of 8.5 to 9.1. This 75% increase in SEER means that the units will use 43% less energy to provide the same cooling.

The fresh air provided by the existing units is designed to meet the needs of a fully occupied room. These rates are set by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) in Standard 62.1.

The flow rate is heavily dependent on the number of people in the ventilated space. As occupancy decreases the required flow rate decreases. Ramping down the flow rate saves fan energy and reduces the cooling and heating energy needed to condition the incoming outside air. This effect is especially pronounced when it is very hot or very cold outside. The fan speed should be controlled to maintain a CO2 level of 1,100 parts per million (ppm) to meet ASHRAE standards and ensure the comfort of occupants.

Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by calculating the fan, heating, and cooling load for the three RTUs at each outside air condition from 32˚F to 94˚F for both occupied and unoccupied conditions. For the City Council Chambers, Tetra Tech assumed minimal occupancy outside the City Council meetings posted on the council calendar. For the Senior Center Main Hall, Tetra Tech assumed minimal occupancy outside normal operating hours of the center. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.19.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new units, VFDs, installation labor, cranes for installation, and demolition.

There may be additional costs for replacing duct work that are not included in this analysis.

Table C.19: DCV Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings Electric
Savings (kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings (therms)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $74,500 $10,243 23,521 3,590 2.08 7.2
Senior Center $89,500 $9,486 46,697 1,635 1.60 9.4
Total $164,000 $19,728 70,218 5,226 1.80 8.3
Tetra Tech also evaluated the savings for this measure if the new units use heat pump heating elements. These units have higher price than a traditional gas pack unit but have lower heating costs than natural gas and current gas prices. These units have the added benefit of reducing on site carbon emissions. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.19b.

Table C.19b: DCV Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings Electric
Savings (kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings (therms)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $83,800 $11,406 11,210 5,129 2.05 7.3
Senior Center $103,500 $9,889 42,155 2,189 1.44 10.4
Total $187,300 $21,295 53,364 7,318 1.71 8.3
Other Benefits and Considerations
The CO2 sensors used to set the ventilation rate will need to be calibrated annually. This will add a small maintenance task to the regular servicing of the RTUs.

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
60 Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market programs
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
61 C.6 Duct Air Temperature and Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset Description
The main air handler at City Hall provides 52 ˚F air whenever the chiller is operating. This low duct air temperature (DAT) is necessary on the hottest days of the year, but during period of moderate temperatures (52˚F to 80°F) a low DAT is not needed to meet the building’s cooling load. The low DAT also creates needless load on the boiler to reheat air when heating is called for. New controls would increase this cooling temperature when the outside air temperature (OAT) is between 52˚F to 78°F. A schedule of the recommended setpoints is provided in the following table:

Table C.20: DAT Reset Setpoints
OAT (°F) DAT (°F)
≥ 80 52
75 54
70 56
65 58
≤ 60 60
Undesirable simultaneous heating and cooling will be further reduced by decreasing the hot water supply temperature (HWST) during periods of moderate load. If the DAT is higher than the current setpoint, a reduced HWST will allow the VAV boxes to better tune the air temperature supplied to the occupied building zones. A reduced HWST will also reduce heat losses and improve boiler efficiency at low to moderate loads. A schedule of the recommended setpoints is provided in the following table:

Table C.21: HWST Reset Setpoints
OAT (°F) HWST (°F)
≥ 66 160
62 165
58 170
54 175
≤ 50 180
Energy and Cost Savings
This measure produces significant savings during periods of moderate outside air temperatures. For example, rather than cooling air from 62°F to 52°F and then heating it to meet each space’s heating demands with 180°F water, the system can meet all cooling loads by cooling the air to 60°F. As a result, less reheating energy is needed to meet heating demand and the VAV boxes would only require 165°F water from the boiler. In this example, the cooling load would decrease by 80% and the heating load would decrease by 50%. Tetra Tech calculated the total savings by evaluating the change in cooling and heating loads resulting from changes to the DAT and HWST for the OAT at every hour of a typical year. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.22.

Table C.22: DAT&HWST Reset Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings
($)
Electric
Savings (kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings (therms)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $40,800 $9,595 19,327 3,725 1.18 4.3

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
62 Other Benefits and Considerations
This controls change would need to be accompanied by a rehab of the HVAC equipment and controls. A controls contractor would need to restore access to the BMS; test sensors, actuators, valves, and dampers; replace broken components; adjust building schedules to match current conditions; balance the air and water flows to match design conditions; and clean air ducts. Tetra Tech’s cost estimate includes this work.

Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market programs
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
63 C.7 Zone Temperature Setback
Description
Interval data for City of Pinole facilities show that the HVAC systems do not fully ramp down during unoccupied periods. Most thermostats cannot be programed with temperature schedules and the thermostats that can be programed do not have schedules that match the occupancy schedules in the zones they serve. This measure involves replacing the existing thermostats in multiple buildings with programmable thermostats and setting back the space temperature during unoccupied times such as nights and weekends. Tetra Tech evaluated thermostats available on the market and determined that new units should have the following features:
• Wi-Fi connectivity with a BACnet communication protocol to interface with the proposed energy dashboard.
• Ability to set individual schedules for all seven days of the week. • Ability to accept limited, temporary local overrides of the setpoint to accommodate atypical work schedules and special events.

Thermostats that meet these criteria are available from many manufacturers including Honeywell, Lennox, and Carrier. The recommended setpoints during unoccupied periods is provided in the following table:

Table C.23: Temperature Setback Setpoints
Status Temperature
Setpoint
Cooling 78 ˚F
Heating 58 ˚F
Energy and Cost Savings
This measure produces savings by reducing the heat gain of the building during hot summer evenings and reducing the heat loss during cold nights. Tetra Tech calculated the savings assuming a 12% reduction in heating and cooling loads when the thermostats are in unoccupied mode during hot and cold periods. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.24.

Table C.24: Temperature Setback Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings Electric
Savings (kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings (therms)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $15,900 $4,256 13,613 1,278 2.68 3.7
Public Safety $11,300 $1,481 2,561 604 1.31 7.6
Senior Center $3,700 $1,262 3,470 421 1.71 2.9
Youth Center $7,100 $814 5,902 - 1.15 8.7
Total $38,000 $7,813 25,545 2,303 2.01 4.86
Other Benefits and Considerations
Testing and balancing should accompany the installation of new thermostats whether they are connected to new equipment or existing air handlers, heat pumps, or VAV boxes. This testing should confirm that the system air flow rate, water coil flow rate, and discharge air temperature meet the requirements set in the system design or unit specifications. Tetra Tech’s cost estimate includes this work.

Funding Sources
There is a state program to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
64 C.8 Interior LED Retrofit
Description
City facilities throughout Pinole use linear fluorescent fixtures and CFL fixtures for interior lighting. This type of lighting has been standard for office and municipal buildings since the early 1990s, but over the last decade improvements in LED technology have made it clear that it is time to shift interior lighting to LED. Modern LEDs are more reliable than the exiting fluorescent fixtures and can illuminate the space with 40 to 50% less energy. New fixtures should have an efficiency of over 100 lumens per watt, a color rendering index of 840, and a consistent color temperature of either 4,000 Kelvin or 5,000 Kelvin. This will ensure all spaces are well lit and welcoming.

Another major advantage of LED lighting is its long lifespan. A typical LED currently on the market has a rated lifespan of 50,000 hours and a 5-year warranty compared to a T8 lamp, which has a rated lifespan of 30,000 hours and a 2-year warranty. Some buildings opt to replace fluorescent with LEDs as the old fixtures burn out, but this can negate the maintenance savings from LEDs as maintenance personnel will still need to check and replace fluorescent bulbs and ballasts throughout the Pinole facilities. Tetra Tech recommends completing the retrofit in one large project to ensure consistency in products and clear timelines for replacement.

Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by determining the number of fixtures that need to be replaced and the hours per year that those fixtures operate. Once the baseline of power and operating hours was established, Tetra Tech applied a reduction in wattage to reflect the higher efficiencies of the new fixtures. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.25.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new fixtures, installation labor, and demolition. There may be additional cost for replacing wiring and conduit that is not included in the analysis.

Table C.25: LED Retrofit Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost
Cost Savings Electric
Savings (kWh)
Demand Savings
(kW)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $39,800 $4,416 31,165 5.8 1.11 9.0
Public Safety $44,400 $6,995 50,199 3.4 1.58 6.3
Post Office $19,700 $2,903 20,700 2.4 1.47 6.8
Tiny Tots $3,400 $428 2,627 N/A 1.26 7.9
Total $107,300 $14,743 104,691 11.6 1.37 7.28
Tetra Tech also evaluated this measure for the Senior Center. The savings for the measure were significantly less than for the other buildings because of the limited operating hours of the existing lights. Table C.26b shows the financial analysis for this measure.

Table C.26b: Senior Center Occupancy Sensor Financial Analysis Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh)
SIR Payback
(years)
Senior Center $14,300 $1,196 8,665 0.84 12.0
Funding Sources
There is a state program to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
65 C.9 Interior Lighting Occupancy Controls
Description
City facilities throughout Pinole control the operation interior lighting with manual switches. This type of control is often used for its simplicity but relies on occupants to shut off lights when they leave a room. As a result, many rooms are illuminated throughout the day even when the room is empty, and some areas are illuminated at night when the facility is unoccupied or lightly occupied. Installing occupancy sensors that use passive infrared and ultrasonic technologies to sense movement and have a clear view of the room they serve will ensure that light is always available for occupants while reducing the operating hours of the lights significantly.

The best results for this measure can be achieved by purchasing LED fixtures with integrated occupancy sensors.

This will ensure that movement can be detected anywhere in the illuminated space and maximally reduce the run times of the controlled lights. This approach would tie in well with the LED replacement measure described in Section C.8 but was evaluated separately to allow Pinole to choose either option.

Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by determining the number of fixtures that need to be replaced and the hours per year that those fixtures operate. Once the baseline of power and operating hours was established, we applied a standard reduction in operating hours based on the space use type. Typical savings based on space use type are published by the Lighting Controls Association (LCA). The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.26.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new fixtures, installation labor, and demolition. There may be additional cost for replacing wiring and conduit that is not included in the analysis.

Table C.26: Occupancy Sensor Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh)
SIR Payback
(years)
City Hall $8,400 $1,146 8,306 1.36 7.3
Public Safety $9,700 $1,049 7,598 1.08 9.3
Post Office $1,100 $725 5,256 6.59 1.5
Total $19,200 $2,920 21,161 1.52 6.58
Tetra Tech also evaluated this measure for the Senior Center. The savings for the measure were significantly less than for the other buildings because of the limited operating hours of the existing lights. Table C.26b shows the financial analysis for this measure.

Table C.26b: Senior Center Occupancy Sensor Financial Analysis Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh)
SIR Payback
(years)
Senior Center $4,300 $142 1,032 0.17 28.4
Funding Sources
There is a state program to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
66 C.10 Boiler Replacement
Description
The Boiler at the PSB was manufactured in 1984 and is currently controlled by pneumatic system to maintain a HWST of 165˚F whenever the air handlers need to provide heating. This controls strategy forces the boiler to run for much of the year at a very low load where the boiler efficiency is at its worst. The boiler has a rated efficiency of 80%, but with the degradation of time and the low-load operation it is operating at an efficiency of between 74 to 78%.

Modern condensing boilers provide much finer control and higher efficiencies. Condensing boilers are able to extract more heat from flue gas leaving the combustion chamber to preheat incoming water. This effect is especially potent when the return water temperature is low, as is often the case with the boiler in the PSB. Figure C.20 shows the return water temperature over the course of November 2023. At these temperatures a condensing boiler operates at a thermal efficiency of 93 to 95%.

Figure C.20: PSB Boiler Water Temperatures
Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by modeling the gas consumption of the boiler using trend data and natural gas meter data. Once the baseline was established, Tetra Tech calculated how much natural gas would be needed by a high efficiency boiler to meet the same heating load. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.27.

The estimated costs consider the costs of a new unit, installation labor, installation equipment, system balancing, and demolition. There may be additional costs for replacing piping and pumps that are not included in this analysis.

Table C.27: Boiler Replacement Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Natural Gas
Savings (terms) SIR Payback(years)
Public Safety $71,800 $5,157 2,773 1.44 13.9
Funding Sources
There is a state program to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
11/1/2023 11/8/2023 11/15/2023 11/22/2023
PSB Boiler Water Temp
Return Water Supply Water

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
67 C.11 Fire Station Garage Demand Control Ventilation and AHU Rehab Description
The air handler that serves the Fire Station Garage at the PSB was manufactured 1976 and runs at full speed on a continuous schedule. The air handler is controlled by the pneumatic system to provide 75˚F whenever the garage thermostat calls for heating. On cold nights, the air handler is blowing in cold outside air and heating it to warm the space while the garage is unoccupied and the vehicles are off.

Similar to the DCV measure described in Section C.5, the fan energy and heating energy can be greatly reduced by installing a VFD to modulate the speed of the air handler’s supply fan. For a garage however, there are more control variables than for an assembly hall. The air handler and exhaust fan must remove engine exhaust in addition to CO2 from occupants. Therefore, the fan speed will be tied to sensors that detect CO2, carbon monoxide (CO), and nitric oxide (NO) levels. This type of controls system is widely used in parking garages, and there are a wide range of vendors that can set up a safe and efficient ventilation system for the garage.

To enable this type of control, the air handler will need to be upgraded with a new fan motor and digital controls system. The cost estimate for the project includes a full rehab of the air handler and exhaust system, including replacement of dampers, duct cleaning, testing, and balancing, Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by calculating the fan, heating, and cooling load for the AHU at each outside air condition from 32˚F to 94˚F for both occupied and unoccupied conditions. Tetra Tech then performed the same calculation for the case when the fan speed reduces to 30% of full load during unoccupied periods. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.28.

The estimated costs consider the costs of a new motor, VFDs, installation labor, cleaning, balancing, and demolition. There may be additional costs for replacing duct work that are not included in this analysis.

Table C.28: Garage DCV Financial Analysis
Building Project
Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings (kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings (therms) SIR Payback(years)
Public Safety $40,400 $7,638 17,721 2,791 2.84 5.3
Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market programs
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
68 C.12 Exterior Lighting Photocell Controls
Description
During daytime inspections, Tetra Tech observed exterior lights at the Post Office and in the downtown parking lots that were on. These fixtures should be controlled by a photocell light sensor to turn off during the day. These photocells need to be cleaned every 2 to 3 years to prevent buildup of dirt that obstructs the sensor and tells the lights that it’s dark out. Photocells typically need to be replaced every 10 years.

Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by determining the number and wattage of fixtures that are on during the day. Tetra Tech assumed these fixtures run on a continuous schedule, and that once the photocells are installed or replaced the fixtures will run 12 hour per day. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down by building in Table C.29.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new photocells and installation labor.

Table C.29: Photocell Controls Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh) SIR Payback (years)
Post Office $300 $109 788 1.81 2.8
Parking Lots $900 $252 2,062 1.40 3.6
Total $1,200 $360 2,851 1.50 3.3

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
69 C.13 Boiler Insulation
Description
The boilers used to supplement the CHP system at the anaerobic digester at the WWTP lose significant heat to the surrounding area. The boiler shells and hot water piping in the boiler room are uninsulated and the room was 82˚F with doors open to the outside during the site visit as shown in Figure C.21. Installing insulation jackets on the boilers and insulation blankets on the piping will greatly reduce the heat loss from the system.

Figure C.21 Uninsulated boilers and pipes
Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by determining the heating load of the boilers from the natural gas bill for the site. Tetra Tech assumed a baseline R-value of 0.68 and an insulation R-value of 3.4, corresponding to an 80% decrease in heat loss. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.30.

Table C.30: Boiler Insulation Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Natural Gas
Savings (terms) SIR Payback (years)
WWTP $6,200 $1,582 925 2.55 3.9
Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market programs
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
70 C.14 Pool Pump VFD Controls
Description
The Swim Center uses two pumps that run at full speed at all hours to circulate pool water through the filters and heaters. The pumps are sized for the necessary flow rate when the pool is in full use. The flow rate is set by California’s Title 24 section 3124B. However, when the pool is not being used, that code allows the flow rate to be decreased to 75% of the occupied flow rate. This measure would replace the pump motor for the main pool and the pump and motor for the kids pool with high efficiency units and install VFDs on the new motors to reduce the pump speed and power when the pools are not in use. Table C.32 shows the required flow rates for both pools during occupied and unoccupied periods. The VFDs would follow a set occupancy schedule.

Table C.31: Pool Pump Flow Rates
State Main Pool Kids Pool
Occupied 509 gpm 195 gpm
Unoccupied 382 gpm 146 gpm
Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by taking measurements of the pressure lift of the pumps and determining the flow rate from the manufacturer’s pump curves. Tetra Tech calculated the power draw for the motors from the flow rate, pressure lift, pump efficiency, and motor efficiency. Tetra Tech then evaluated the decrease in flow, pressure, and power from decreasing the motor speed to 75%. Operating hours were determined by schedules posted on the Swim Center’s website. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.32.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new motors, VFDs, installation labor, cleaning, balancing, and demolition.

There may be additional costs for replacing piping that are not included in this analysis.

Table C.32: Pool Pump VFD Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh) SIR Payback (years)
Swim Center $68,700 $9,562 69,793 1.39 7.2
Funding Sources
There are state and utility programs to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.2 MCE’s Commercial Efficiency Market programs
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
71 C.15 Pool Cover
Description
The pools are heated to 80˚F in the summer and 60˚F in the winter. The water is open to the atmosphere year around (as shown below in Figure C.22) and the largest loads on the pool heaters are the evaporative losses from the pool surface overnight. Installing a motorized roll-up pool cover on the pools would eliminate those evaporative losses with minimal additional tasks for pool staff.

Figure C.22 Uncovered Main Pool
Energy and Cost Savings
The Department of Energy has published case studies showing the effect of pool covers on pool water heating loads. They show that covers reduce the heat loss for 80˚F water by 70% and 60˚F water by 50%. Operating hours at each temperature were determined by schedules posted on the Swim Center’s website. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.33.

The estimated costs consider the costs of a pool cover and installation labor.

Table C.33: Pool Cover Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Natural Gas
Savings (terms) SIR Payback (years)
Swim Center $28,500 $4,921 3,466 1.73 5.8
Funding Sources
There is a state program to help cities make implement this type of measure:

Report Section Program
D.5 ECAA Low-Interest Loan

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
72 C.16 Swim Center PV Repair
Description
The Swim Center has a 49-kW canopy PV array that was installed in 2013. Pinole never gained access to the monitoring system for the array and has been unable to track its performance. Utility meter data show that the system is performing at about 80% of its rated capacity. This corresponds with 40 panel-inverter pairs not producing any power. Pinole, solar contractor, and solar equipment manufacturers should coordinate to identify malfunctioning equipment and replace broke components. The panels and inverters are under a 25-year warranty.

The warranty information for the equipment can be found in the links below:

LIMITED WARRANTY STATEMENT PHOTOVOLTAIC HiDM MODULE PRODUCTS (canadiansolar.com) January-2011-M215-warranty.pdf (enphase.com)
Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure estimating the production of the system operating at 90% of its expected capacity and calculated the savings as the difference between current operation and the 90% case. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.34.

Table C.34: Swim Center PV Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh) SIR Payback (years)
Swim Center $8,400 $2,464 15,114 2.93 3.4

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
73 C.17 Ballpark Lighting
Description
Pinole is evaluating a project to replace the lights that illuminate the ballpark at Fernandez Park with LEDs. The current fixtures are 1,500-watt HPS lamps. Spares of the lamps are in the caretaker’s shed in the park. To get the equivalent light from an LED, a 750-watt fixture with an efficiency of 140 lumens per watt would be needed. This project will not produce enough energy savings to justify the cost because of the limited runtime of the fixtures and high cost of replacing fixtures mounted on high ballpark lighting poles. However, the project is being evaluated to improve the usability of the field and reduce the work required from public works staff; the energy savings could be an additional driver for the project.

Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the savings for this measure by determining the power draw of the 14 fixtures from the equipment specifications and determining the runtime of those fixtures from the utility meter data. From the meter data, it appears that the fixtures run for about 330 hours per year. Once the baseline of power and operating hours was established, Tetra Tech applied a reduction in wattage to reflect the higher efficiencies of the new fixtures. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.35.

The estimated costs consider the costs of new fixtures, installation labor, and demolition. There may be additional costs for replacing wiring and conduit and cost associated with structural repairs that are not included in the analysis.

Table C.35: Ballpark Lighting Financial Analysis
Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh) SIR Payback (years)
Fernandez Park $29,800 $507 4,158 0.17 58.7

Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment City of Pinole
74 C.18 Streetlighting Utility Bill Update
Description
The PG&E bills for streetlighting show that 56% of city-owned fixtures are LEDs. The remaining 44% of fixtures on the bills are 70-watt to 400-watt HPS and MH fixtures. Inspection of the streetlights show the large majority are LEDs with much lower power draws than the fixtures listed on the bill. Table C.37 shows the fixture counts listed on the bills:

Table C.36: Billing Fixture List
Fixture Type Qty
70-watt HPS 139
70-watt MH 24
100-watt HPS 6
175-watt MH 4
200-watt HPS 14
250-watt HPS 11
400-watt MH 34
30-watt LED 40
35-watt LED 83
60-watt LED 21
75-watt LED 14
105-watt LED 69
130-watt LED 46
140-watt LED 19
Total 524
Pinole is being charged 50 to 80% more for the HPS and MH fixtures than they would for an LED with an equivalent light output. To update PG&E’s records and correct the billing amount, Pinole will need to provide invoices for the installed LED streetlights to this website:
https://pgeservice.my.site.com/ExternalWebform/s/
Assistance can be provided by the PG&E account representative for the City of Pinole. Contact information is listed below:

Anthony Corales, Local Customer Relationship Manager, Sr.

Mission & East Bay
Pacific Gas & Electric
Cell: 559.240.0250 |Email: [email protected]
Energy and Cost Savings
Tetra Tech evaluated the cost savings for this measure by comparing the monthly charge per fixture listed on the bills to the charge listed for the 73-watt LEDs and 29-watt LEDs found in the field. The savings and financial analysis for this measure are broken down in Table C.37.

Table C.37: Streetlighting Bill Update Financial Analysis Building Project Cost Cost Savings Electric Savings
(kWh) SIR Payback (years)
Parking Lots $0 $31,950 - N/A N/A