3 - The Bowery_PUBLIC COMMENT_RAMSEY

Home Browse Search

8 further mitigation measures are not feasible and why approval of a project with significant unavoidable impacts is warranted.” 9 As you can see, an impact can only be labeled as significant and unavoidable after all available, feasible mitigation is considered. However, as previously stated, the DEIR determines that “[t]here are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold” (p. 5.2-16). However, this is incorrect, and as a result, mitigation measures should be identified and incorporated, such as those suggested in the section of this letter titled “Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Operational Emissions,”10 in order to reduce the Project’s air quality impacts to the maximum extent possible. Until all feasible mitigation is reviewed and incorporated into the Project, impacts from operational VOC cannot be considered significant and unavoidable. Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated The DEIR concludes that the Project’s construction and operational health risk impacts would be less than significant without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk assessment (HRA). More specifically, the DEIR attempts to justify this claim by stating: “According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project, if the project includes stationary sources, or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse buildings). The proposed project does not include such uses, and thus, due to the lack of significant stationary source emissions, no long-term localized significance threshold analysis is needed” (Appendix B, pp. 49). The DEIR goes on to state, “Results of the LST analysis indicate that, with application of mitigation, the Project will not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial criteria pollutant concentration during Project construction. Results of the LST analysis indicate that the Project will not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during operational activity...Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the result of Project operations” (Appendix B, pp. 54). However, these justifications and subsequent less than significant impact finding are incorrect for several reasons. First, the use of the LST method to determine the Projects health risk impacts on nearby, existing sensitive receptors is incorrect. While the LST method assesses the impact of pollutants at a local level, it only evaluates impacts from criteria air pollutants. According to the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document prepared by the SCAQMD, the LST analysis is only applicable to NOx, 9 http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, p. 115 of 125 10 See section titled “Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Operational Emissions” on p. 19 of this comment letter. These measures would effectively reduce operational VOC emissions.