Explanation:

a) Violation of air quality standard or contribution to existing violation: The impacts on air quality resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed project are potentially significant. NOx emissions from construction of the proposed project would exceed the SCAQMD threshold. The PEA in Table 3.7-4 (page 3-69) summarizes construction impacts of the proposed project (including both the pipeline and pump station modifications) with respect to SCAQMD criteria. The PEA text (Section 3.7.3.1, page 3-68) states that the PM10 emissions (fugitive dust from dirt piling, materials handling, and hauling away old roadway material) could be reduced by implementation of dust control measures. These measures (AQ-9 through AQ-15) are listed on page 3-74. Table 3.7-4 also notes a violation of the NOx quarterly emissions criteria, as well as exceedances of both the NOx and PM10 daily criteria as a result of construction emissions. NOx emissions result from construction vehicle exhaust, and could be reduced with application of SFPP’s proposed measures AQ-1 through AQ-8; however, according to the PEA, those measures would not reduce NOx emissions below the SCAQMD threshold.

The PEA does not evaluate the air quality impacts resulting from operation of the proposed pipeline. Operational impacts are potentially significant because operation of the proposed pipeline at its full capacity will result in increased trucking of petroleum products in the Inland Empire from the Colton facility. Trucking would increase from the current level of about 87,000 barrels per day to about 133,000 barrels per day, a 53% increase (PEA Amendment, page 2).

b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants: The project will have a potentially significant impact on air quality because pipeline construction or an accident such as a spill could expose sensitive receptors (including residences, parks, school, and churches) to pollutants.

c) Alter air movement/climate: Construction or operation of the proposed project will not have an impact on air movements or cause changes in climate because the project is of relatively small scale.

d) Create objectionable odors: Construction and operation of the pipeline could result in creation of objectionable odors; these impacts are potentially significant and need to be addressed in the EIR. Construction of the pipeline could result in odors from construction vehicle exhaust. A pipeline leak or rupture could also result in objectionable odors.

VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:	Potentially Significant Impact	Portentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite?
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?

Explanation:

a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion: The impact of increased trips and traffic during construction will be short-term and temporary, but is potentially significant and needs to be evaluated in the EIR. During pipeline construction, there will be minor increases in traffic congestion due to commuting of construction workers to the site (approximately 95 workers).

Operational traffic impacts of the pipeline are also potentially significant, and need to be evaluated in the EIR. Operation of the proposed pipeline at its full capacity will result in an increase in trucking of petroleum products in the Inland Empire from the Colton facility. Trucking will increase from the current level of about 87,000 barrels per day to about 133,000 barrels per day, a 53% increase (PEA Amendment, page 2).

b) Safety hazards: There are no design features of the proposed project that pose safety hazards.

c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses: The proposed project may have a potential significant impact in this area because pipeline construction will block traffic lanes and access to adjacent land uses, and emergency access along the streets and to adjacent properties could be restricted. Construction will occur primarily in heavily traveled urban streets, and will result in lane closures and access restrictions for short periods of time. SFPP proposes to incorporate nine measures to reduce impacts on traffic, including restriction of lane closures to off-peak periods, provision of alternative access, and coordination with emergency service providers (PEA pages 3-52 to 3-53). The effectiveness of these measures in reducing potential impacts needs to be evaluated in the EIR.

d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite: Because SFPP has incorporated an impact reduction measure T-7 (PEA page 3-53) which, if implemented, will require advance notification and temporary replacement of parking spaces, this impact is less than significant. Lane closures occurring during construction will reduce the availability of street parking, and may affect access to off-street parking areas.

e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists: Construction in the street will pose hazards to pedestrians and bicyclists during the construction period. While SFPP proposes measure T-4 (PEA page 3-53) which provides for alternative pedestrian access routes, construction may still result in a potentially significant impact which needs to be evaluated in the EIR.

f) Conflicts with adopted transportation policies: The proposed project will not conflict with transportation policies that address broad issues such as ride-sharing and vehicle emissions reduction. Construction of the proposed pipeline will be in compliance with local traffic requirements.

g) Impacts on rail, waterborne, or air traffic: A pipeline rupture could have potentially significant impacts on waterborne traffic (if the product reached the Los Angeles Harbor via the Los Angeles or San Gabriel Rivers). These impacts need to evaluated in the EIR. The construction and normal operation of the proposed project will not result in impacts on rail, waterborne or air traffic.

Back to Initial Study Table of Conents