Laserfiche WebLink
Section 5 <br />Level of Impact after Mitigation <br />Alternative 1: No adverse impact <br />Alternative 2: Less than significant adverse impact <br />Alternative 3: Less than significant adverse impact <br />Alternative 4: Less than significant adverse impact <br />IMPACT HG -2: Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy <br />or regulation of agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions <br />of greenhouse gasses" <br />Alternative 1: No Federal ActioniNo Project <br />Linder Alternative 1, the project would not be implemented, No increases in <br />construction GHG emissions or operational GHG emissions would occur within <br />the project area that would have the potential to not meet the AB 32 GHG <br />reduction goals. <br />Alternative 2: Proposed Project <br />As discussed above, the primary State plan and policy adopted for the purpose <br />of reducing GHG emissions is AB 32. The quantitative goal of AS 32 is to reduce <br />GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The Proposed Project would increase <br />recharge of the local groundwater basin and thereby increase local water <br />supplies and reduce the demand for imported water. Thus, the Proposed Project <br />would reduce the GHG emissions associated with importing wafter from outside <br />the region, which would support State policies, plans, and regulations to reduce <br />GHG emissions. <br />Alternative 3: Reduced Intensity Alternative <br />The analysis of conformance of Alternative 3 with applicable plans and policies <br />for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions would be the same as the analysis <br />for the Proposed Project, Alternative 3 would not conflict with these plans and <br />regulations. Alternative 3 would increase recharge of the local groundwater basin <br />and thereby increase local water supplies and reduce the demand for iimported <br />water. Thus, Alternative 3 would reduce the GHG erissions associated with <br />importing water from outside the region, which would support State policies, <br />plans, and regulations to reduce GHG emissions. <br />Alternative 4: Pipeline Design Alternative <br />The analysis of conformance of Alternative 4 with applicable plans and policies <br />for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions would be the same as the analysis <br />for the Proposed Project. Alternative 4 will not conflict with these plans and <br />f Mid Basin Centennial Park Ycl*Wn lLProject Final FIR 5 -96 <br />