Environmental impact statement and environmental impact report for the proposed Mesquite Regional Landfill

100 Pages·1995·21.9 MB·English

by  United States. Bureau of Land Management. California Desert District

APPENDIX I
Annotated Air Quality Analysis
Environmental Impact Statement &
Environmental Impact Report
for the proposed
£x*v>rir'" ♦-x* £z W^-
> ''3&h*p5$£*
’> * >.*. ^•• A5;r^# •*£ v
*' *»^ ‘•t>'fcsv. r^i *r^V4i»vVV ' T*V&*^ >w•**•’ •) ^>' vi o?c' V- ^W.Vi j fcis-*i; • jp^quite^pi
cu - JV /vr^V/ ^ *u *..»/, ' ■
Av'TStf *«}/ “ . ■ ■ '4j/jj A~ • *» ■' ' Si SY.V*f AiAJt a * li> ‘;
. i ' V /^ ry * ,'TvCW . ^ >*ij9 * *A.; -vvk%>.k>> >v v**- 4/^i'• ATv,, «_& b7*„ ,Vf i v- '-i*.£i 4»*. L•-yA.t41#,
Regional
■‘■'J. Kr"**‘r$* -' v^stV'-'V ‘C, ,
- ? ©**&■*&
Yf*. VtxjL - *T? 7 :t.» *7*>\i ^ V‘.7, l> t\
V*~ \f ^■vs-• «a*<svX\T ‘Ij fvt»*#V/X £3T?* WS1'vS
'VT*-«.-itL’• V/1.. *V‘j. -»'^. jr<1 ■ l^f/)fwiv<*"**'
»■ -(; ii . *’**,* ■ , •§JL‘V**w2 \ J' . R*. % , « X *V . ' Imperial County, California
rVjv’/.t^ li V.>^ .fay^^iVTaJH - .T^'T^Vu* *'*£*<
SCH. No. 92051024
,v«** r« . ?■:•.>»,* v*jv(*>-yV CV. «. i *w * Ti "-/V •'•jw*' ''• BLM No. CA-060-02-5440-10-B026
^ 1 s'• .jH^niw*»r%5C,*fc& ^\i c*//Oix
a? 1* T^’Of.* 7v7?Vi ^ »1 « * ,«Lil i<f*‘ X*iYT7 1 I j» j*^_ V
'r&t&l'i*& Ui^^S*&i
•' -TmV^ ■ rv v; ■ ..:- Prepared by the
>r’- * *'-f > \ - y w' i<7 >'lW'l|* f '.l -vi&d-i! ■ •~.TT
Bureau of Land Management
California Desert District
b%> JrabvV. ^Cfe>*-’ir3w^322|25 <*&Jh
\ h-€±?J %J * ♦ h, \ J**#*? * ~ ; w Vr TTf --Tv. ',,**r :-*$*7* “ :?*
A
'W i.a _4<l-® » • »■ ** 4\k < w ”, v Ik'®*' ■ L J^.- j V* B
rV y^'M -<:?■*?v***+\*'v>/Arv^
i , - <,\ ’ V ry^'iivt i*^r- r v "■>: s ; i
‘> <.^ vv'v. r>>, »4A-' *. • *;“•» ^^ *a4, ..^. 'A * -■'.i "k '-''*^ #. ♦A -t» 4.*^67*./
V* >1 j • rfA*?/>*• ^ a.;■'«, *»*^5'-V!
V •* 7 *r-t., -A 7. >.‘A» *r~s t . . j£J
\JI'*it, ** .>• i iWiiTt~ ■* ,fc^ ‘ ’■
Bif i*ir^ «', »S■ S>■** >%*■•* i?jVV '*' L: * *Z a*j rt■ G••» S- S,. Af,4T. 4
and the
County of Imperial
3* -V -y .H'vT’T^iisfe- vr^»- ;Xk/i4r''»'v
>Vv*-,-^ /Lii- I’. »,5X>_';'*5 - S
Planning & Building Department
3tsl1Ws'. np
r^-’’ 0*^1 / ^ ‘ Vy '*<&> • / a / w • O •' ‘t'*
at-ivS-<-*‘
Environmental Consultant
The Butler Roach Group, Inc.
San Diego, California
June 1995
^4‘S'S.1
J t <Xr'Sr!I^•iP*'XVX\

TECHNICAL APPENDIX I
ANNOTATED AIR QUALITY SECTION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
for the proposed
MESQUITE REGIONAL LANDFILL
IMPERIAL COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SCH. No. 92051024
BLM No. CA-060-02-5440-10-B026
prepared for
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
California Desert District
1661 S. 4th Street
El Centro, California
and
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL
Planning and Building Department
939 Main Street
El Centro, California
May 1995

FOREWORD
A number of changes have been made to the air quality emissions data presented in the Final
EIS/EIR for the proposed Mesquite Regional Landfill Project. These changes are predominantly
due to the following assumption corrections:
• The American Association of Railroads' proposal for 55 percent NOx emissions
reductions over the next ten years;
• Improved train emissions modeling along the rail haul route;
• Corrections to errors found in modeling; input data and assumptions for site emissions;
• Updated monitoring data; and,
• Corrections of computational errors.
The purpose of this document, Appendix I to the Mesquite Regional Landfill EIS/EIR, is to
provide the public with an explanation of each of these changes. This document presents Air
• Quality Sections 3.1.8 and 4.1.8 in their entirety, with annotations that indicate changes. The
annotations correspond to endnotes, which can be found at the back of this Appendix, and are
indicated by a in the margin. Pages with changes to the air quality emissions data for
sections 4.4.8, 4.6.8, and 4.7.3.5 are also included in this Appendix. These changes are also
annotated. The endnotes that follow these sections correspond to the annotations, and provide the
explanation of why each specific change occurred.

Table of Contents
APPENDIX I
ANNOTATED AIR QUALITY SECTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-1
3.1 Proposed Action 3-1
3.1.8 Air Quality 3-1
3.1.8.1 General 3-1
3.1.8.2 Exiting Air Resource Environment 3-8
3.1.8.3 Existing Odor Conditions 3-18
3.1.8.4 Offered Exchange Parcels 3-18
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4-1
4.1 Proposed Action 4-1
4.1.8 Air Quality 4-1
4.1.8.1 Introduction 4-1
4.1.8.2 Assumptions and Assessment Guidelines 4-1
4.1.8.3 Emission Sources 4-9
4.1.8.4 Impacts of Proposed Action 4-15
4.1.8.5 Emissions and Impacts of Energy Recovery Options 4-45
4.1.8.6 Mitigation Measures 4-49
4.1.8.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Measures 4-51
4.6 Alternative IV - Larger Project
4.6.8 Air Quality 4-55
REFERENCES (See Final EIS/EIR)
ENDNOTES
This document printed on recycled paper. i
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
CHAPTER 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
3-13 Ambient Air Quality Standards 3-5
3-14 Ambient Air Quality Standard Attainment Status 3-7
3-15 O3 and PM 10 Exceedances in Imperial County 3-10
3-16 Summary of Air Basin Characteristics 3-16
3-17 O3 and PM10 Exceedances in the Coachella Valley 3-22
CHAPTER 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4-6 Schedule for Amount of MSW Residue To Be Shipped 4-2
4-7 Flare Thermal Destruction Efficiency 4-5
4-8 Summary of Emission Sources and Control Assumptions 4-12
4-9 Estimated Project Site Emissions at Year 16 and Year 100
With "As Received" MSW Residue 4-16
4-10 Estimated Project Site Emissions at Year 16 and Year 100
With Water Added to the MSW Residue Conditioning 4-17
4-11 Estimated Maximum Off-Site, Ground-Level Air
Pollutant Concentrations with Conditioned MSW Residue 4-18
4-12 Emissions Factors for Landfill Gas Thermal Destruction Devices 4-19
4-13 Estimated MSW Residue Transport-Related Emissions
At 20,000 Tons Per Day (Ib/day) for Year 100 4-22
4-14 Project Related MSW Residue Transport Emissions
in Years 85/100 Compared to SOCAB Emissions in 1987 4-23
4-15 Train Emissions and Ambient Air Quality Impacts
in Coachella Valley 4-26
4-16 Comparison of Proposed Action and "No Action" Alternative
Maximum Anticipated Emissions for Year 100 (2093)
with Boiler/Generator (lb/day) 4-27
4-17 Site Emission Changes Proposed Action Using a Boiler
Generator With "As Received" MSW Residue 4-41
4-18 Site Emission Changes Proposed Action Using a Boiler
Generator and a Liquefied Methane Gas Plant With
MSW Residue Conditioning 4-42
4-19 Summary of Health Risk 4-45
4-20 Estimated Boiler/Generator Emissions at Year 100
with "As Received" MSW Residue 4-46
4-21 Estimated Compressed Methane Gas Plant Emissions at
Year 100 with "As Received" MSW Residue 4-48
4-22 Estimated Compressed Methane Gas Plant Emissions at
Year 100 with "Conditioned" MSW Residue 4-48
ii This document printed on recycled paper.
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table Page
4-23 Estimated Liquefied Methane Gas Plant Emissions
at Year 100 with "As Received" MSW Residue 4-50
4-24 Estimated Liquefied Methane Gas Plant Emissions at
Year 100 with "Conditioned" MSW Residue 4-50
4-25 Summary of Significance of Potential Air Quality Impacts 4-53
4-32 Estimated Project Site Emissions Alternative II
and Alternative IV 4-54
4-38 Rail Haul Transport Emissions for the Proposed Action
and Cumulative Regional Landfills 4-57
This document printed on recycled paper. Hi
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
CHAPTER 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
3-24 Project Location Map with Rail Route 3-2
3-25 Daily O3 Concentration Cycle for an exceedance
at El Centro - May 22, 1985 3-1 1
3-26 Annual Wind Rose for Mesquite Gold Mine 3-13
3-27 Mesquite Mine PM 10 Monitoring Station Locations 3-14
3-28 Number of Exceedance Days in SOCAB 1990 3-19
3-29 Percent of Days Exceeding Levels of Federal
or State Standard 1975-1990 3-21
3-30 Daily O3 Concentration Cycle for Exceedances
at Indio, Palm Springs and Banning on August 15, 1992 3-23
CHAPTER 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4-3 Alternative I - Year 85 Point and Fugitive Landfill Gas
Emission Source Locations 4-10
4-4 Alternative I - Year 85 Fugitive PM10 Emission Source
Locations 4-11
4-5 Emissions and Effect on Ozone of Landfill
vs. No Action Alternative 4-24
4-6 Potential NOx Emissions Offset Available from
Agricultural Burning 4-30
4-7 Potential Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) Emissions Offset
Available from Agricultural Burning 4-31
4-8 Potential Ozone Precursor Emissions Offset Available
from Agricultural Burning 4-32
4-9 Potential PM 10 + PM 10 Precursor Emissions Offset
Available from Agricultural Burning 4-33
4-10 NOx Emissions from Mesquite Mine and Mesquite
Regional Landfill 4-34
4-11 ROG Emissions from Mesquite Mine and Mesquite
Regional Landfill 4-35
4-12 PM 10 Emissions from Mesquite Mine and Mesquite
Regional Landfill 4-36
4-13 SOx Emissions from Mesquite Mine and Mesquite
Regional Landfill 4-37
4-14 CO Emissions from Mesquite Mine and Mesquite
Regional Landfill 4-3
4-15 03 Precurson (NOx + ROG) Emissions from Mesquite
Mine and Mesquite Regional Landfill 4-40
IV This document printed on recycled paper.