The URL can be used to link to this page

Ordinance No. 1235 (17)M ORR Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results 66 kV Model SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #1 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 1 12.005. Location: City of Vernon Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage' pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. VSIBK7KV 7.00 2.745-27.416 27.553 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.752 2.378 23.870 23.752 2.378 23.870 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary (1/2 Cycle network) values in rms kA • LLG fault current is the larger of the two faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 �r Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Resort Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance VSIBK7KV T000 0,01462 0.14595 0.14668 0.01460 0.14594 0.14657 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 lam_. Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #1 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 w M Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Short -Circuit Summary Resort 1/2 Cycle Gv(Phase, L- , LL, & LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage • Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Page: I Date: Ov(112Q015 SN: POWEREN- Q Re9sion: Aase Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. VSIAK8KV 8.00 v.v07 07.111 v7.254 0.000 0.000 0.000 w.226 v.156 w.v85 w.226 v.156 w.v85 =11 fault currents are symmetrical momentary (1/2 Cycle networ3) flues in rms 3= p LL- fault current is the larger of the two faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: Ov®2Q015 Contract: SN: POWEREN- Q Engineer: Study Case: S/C ReRsion: Aase Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID 3V Resistance Reactance knl edance Resistance Reactance knit edance Resistance Reactance lank edance VSIAK8KV 8.000 0.00914 O. 10525 0.10565 0.01069 0AN55 0.10410 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 L Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #2 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 M, 14.. Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage' pu Voltage from Bus Editor Page: 1 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real lmag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. VS2BK(KV3W (.00 1.357-24.021 24.060 0.200 -0.002 0.200 20.807 1.1(( 20.843-20.857 -1.1(( 20.872 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary d/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rms kA " LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 1Ls 12.5.00 Location: City of Vernon Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON OR Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance VS2BK(KV3 W (.000 0.00747 0.16((1 0.16(78 0.0074( 0.16(61 0.16(88 60.627(6 0.18730 60.63006 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 L Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #2 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 on Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON ETAP Page: 1 12.5.00 Date: Ov®2Q0 ] 5 SN: POWEREN- Q Rel3sion: Aase Study Case: SIC Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle GvCPhase, L- , LL, & LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground I� 3V Real knag. Mag. Real lanag. Mag. Real knag. Mag- Real knag. Mag. VS2AK(KVvW (.00 2.110 07.271 v7.v40 0200 0.001 0.200 vv.442 2.212 vv.515 Crv.482 (2.211 vv.565 =11 fault currents are symmetrical momentary v4/2 Cycle net) or39BAlues in rrns 3= p LL- fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Bus IiD VS2AK(KWW ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: Ov®2Q015 SN: POWEREN- (2 Study Case: S/C ReHsion: Aase Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) 3V Resistance Reactance knl edance Resistance Reactance I nt edance Resistance Reactance knl edance (.000 0.00570 0.10525 0.10541 0.00(88 0. 10v 15 0.1Ov46 60.628(6 0.178vO 60.6006 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 I%.- Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #3 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 i Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM •► Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage . pu Voltage from Bus Editor Page: 1 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault 'Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. VS3BK7KV 7.00 3.172 -31.641 31.438 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.((5 2.7(7 27.543 27.((5 2.7(7 2T543 All fault currents are symmetrical momentaryv}/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rtns kA • LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 ` Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM 1•► Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON u Bus ID VS3BK7KV ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Page: 2 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance 7.000 0.01265 0.12630 0,12683 0.01263 0.12622 0.12645 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Vernon Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #3 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP 12.5.00 Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Retort Page: 1 Date: Ov®2Q015 SN: POWEREN- Q ReRsion: Aase Config.: Normal 1/2 Cycle GvC?hase, L- , LL, & LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage . Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground 1D 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real lanag. Mag. VSvAK8KV 8.00 v.747 Cr8.842 v8.457 0.000 0.000 0000 v2.(54 v, l4v w.017 v2.(54 v. l4v w.017 =11 fault currents are symmetrical momentary d/2 Cycle net) or39 Bilues in nns 3= p LL- fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Y Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: Ov®2Q015 Contract: SN: POWEREN- Q Engineer: Study Case: S/C Re9sion: Aase Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID 3 V Resistance Reactance tent edance Resistance Rwclance lent edance Resistance Reactance lent edance VSvAK8KV 8.000 0.004(0 0. 1060v 0.1067( 0.01080 0.10501 0.10555 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results 66 W Model SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 1%.1 Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #1 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 ` Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: I �.r Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Reuort M 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage r pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mug. LSIBK7KV 7.00 0.607-21.052 21.061 0.010 0.000 0.010 14.237 0.525 14.288 -1423( -0.525 14.287 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary vi/2 Cycle net) ork9values in mrs kA • LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance ResistanceReactance Impedance LSIBK7KV 7.000 0.00553 0.1(142 oI(1(0 0.00551 0.1(171 0.1(17( 1212.83(00 0.14355 1212.83(00 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #2 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 1 12.5.00 Location: City of Vernon Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage' pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag, Mug. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. LS2BK(KV (.00 1.077-21.741 21.417 0.010 0.000 0.010 17.468 0.482 17.47(-17.466 -0.482 IT440 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary vt/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rms kA LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Eq Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON Bus ID LS2BK(KV ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Page: 2 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) kV Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance (.000 0.00415 0,17816 0.17834 0.00418 0.17806 0.17827 1212.88300 0.1(451 1212.88300 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 IM Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #3 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: I Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Reoort 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage • pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID W Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag- LS3BK(KV (.00 0.776-20.418 20.434 0.674 -0.023 0.677 14.031 0.463 14.052 -14.206 -0.460 14.226 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary, W12 Cycle net) orW9 alues in rms kA LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON Bus ID LS3BK(KV ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Study Case: S/C Revision: Base Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance (.000 0.0072( 0.173(2 0,17378 0.00726 0.17361 0.17343 1(.32422 0.142(( 1(.32714 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #4 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 1 Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Revision: Base Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage . pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag, Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. LS(BK16KV 16.50 0.771-15.461 15.480 0.733-16.((5 16.(61 13.830 0.667 13.8(6 13.(82 4.137 16.287 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary rt/2 Cycle net) ork9values in mis kA • LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M MGS GENERATORS ON Bus ID LS(BK16KV ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Study Case: S/C Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance 1 & 500 0.02875 0.545(5 0.5461( 0.02866 0. 54( 86 0.54555 0.01443 0.5((1( 0.5((50 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 M Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #4 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 IMm Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle Qt(P, ase&L- &LW LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage . Aus Nominal Voltage p 1 u Voltage from Aus Editor Page: I Date: 02(3v(2015 SN: POWEREN- (2 ReRsion: Aase Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault •Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. LS8AK16KV 16.50 0.448 134.122 14.18h 0A8h Gv.(82 lv.(62 15.v88 0.425 15.v65 15. h(1 (.6hh 14.15v = II fault currents are symmetrical momentary vt/2 Cycle net) or391311lues in tons 3= p LL- fault current is t, a larger of t, a u o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 �.. Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02QvQ015 Contract: SN: POWEREN- (2 Engineer: Re9sion: Aase Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID 3V Resistance Reactance Ianl edance Resistance Reactance knl edanm Resistance Reactance knledance LS8AK16KV 16.500 0.0255( 0.5288h 0.52505 0.02(15 0.520A 0.52156 o0l((h 0.58818 0,58850 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 MR Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #5 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Contract: Engineer: Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage s pu Voltage from Bus Editor Page: 1 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. LS5BK16KV 16.50 0.774-16.038 16.057 0.738-16.(44 16.516 13.847 0.67( 13.413 13.5(8 4.158 16.353 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary A/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rms kA - LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Lam► Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: SIC Short -Circuit Summary Report Page: 2 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance LS5BK16KV 16.500 0.02876 0.54257 0.54327 0.02868 0.54148 0.54267 0.01443 0.5((1( 0.5((50 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #5 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 1 12.5.00 Location: City of Vernon Date: 02QvQ015 Contract: SN: POWEREN- Q Engineer: Re9sion: Aase Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Y 1/2 Cycle Chi, ase8L- 8LL&7 LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage * Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Lino -to -Lino -to -Ground ID 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. LS5AK16KV 16.50 0.482 04.188 14.221 0.4(4 0v.882 14.012 15.411 0.4hl 15.4h2 15.(56 8.652 14.22h =11 fault currents are symmetrical momentaryvt/2 Cycle net) or3913illues in rms 3= p LL- fault current is t, a larger oft, a t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 LIM Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Bus ID LS5AK16KV ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02QvQ015 SN: POWEREN- Q ReBSion: Aase Study Case: S/C Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) 3V Resistance Reactance hnl edance Resistance Reactance hnl edance Resistance Reactance hnl edance 1&500 0.02560 0.52218 0,52242 0.0281h 0.5145( 0.518h6 0.0188h 0.5((1( 0.5((50 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 OR Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Feeder 63 — No DG - 7 W Model SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: FEEDER 63 Location: Contract: Engineer: Filename: Feeder 63 ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: SC Short -Circuit Summary Report Page: 1 Date: 03-02-2015 SN: POWERENG-2 Revision: Base Config.: Normal 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = 100 % of the Bus Nominal Voltage Bus 3-Phase Fault Lino -to -Ground Fault Lino -to -Line Fault "Lino -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mal. Real Imag. Mag. Bust Z20 1.861-26.932 26.996 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.324 1.612 23.379 23.324 1.612 23.379 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary (1/2 Cycle network) values in rrns kA LLG fault current is the larger of the two faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: FEEDER 63 Location: Contract: Engineer: Filename: Feeder 63 Bust Bus ID ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 03-02-2015 SN: POWERENG-2 Study Case: SC Revision: Base Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance 7.200 0.01062 0.15362 0.15398 0.01062 0,15362 0.15398 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 R Leonis Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Feeder 66 — No DG - 7 W Model SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 M Project: ETAP Page: 1 Location: 12.5.00 6 ate: OD02-2015 Contract: SN: POWERENG-2 Engineer: Study Case: SC Revision: Base Filename: FEE6 ER 33 Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report 1 /2 Cycle - DPhase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = 100 % of the Bus Nominal Voltage Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground 16 kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Bust 9.00 1.81D-29.4Dt 29.474 0.000 0.000 0.000 2D957 1.590 2D811 2D957 1.590 2D811 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary (1/2 Cycle network) values in rms kA . LLG fault current is the larger of the two faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 M Project: ETAP Page: 2 Location: 12.5.00 6 ate: OD02-2015 Contract: SN: POWERENG-2 Engineer: Revision: Base Study Case: SC Filename: FEE6 ER 33 Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) 16 kV Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Bu I 9.000 0.00737 0.14339 0.14377 0.00737 0.14339 0.14377 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 `.. Yabarra Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results 66 W Model SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 L Yabarra Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #1 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 M Project COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON ETAP 12.5.00 Study Case: S/C Short -Circuit Summary Report Page: 1 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage — Bus Nominal Voltage' pu Voltage from Bus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag, Real Imag. Mag. Y16KV1 16.50 0.723-14.833 14.862 0.(34-14.705 14.72( 12.864 0_(00 12.8(7 12.372 (.333 14.734 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary d/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rms kA . LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Location: City of Vernon Date: 02-26-2015 Contract: SN: POWER-ENGW Engineer: Revision: Base Study Case: SIC Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report Bus Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) ID W Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Y16KV1 16.500 0.04036 0.64405 0.64531 0.04030 0,64355 0.644(1 0.02632 0.623(0 0.62436 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Nq Yabarra Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #1 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 ` Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP y Location: City of Vernon I2.5.00 Contract: Engineer: Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle (3t(]P, ase&- &LW LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage * Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Page: 1 Date: 02(3v(2015 SN: POWEREN- Q Re9sion: Aase Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault *Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Y16KVI 16.50 1.5v2 Gv.048 2,085 1.246 (21.625 21.661 2h.60 1.68h 2h.vh5 2h.h10 WA& 25.552 = II fault currents are symmetrical momentary (1/2 Cycle networ3) Balues in rms 3= p LL- fault current is t, a larger of t, a two faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Y16KVl M Bus kD ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02QvQ015 SN: POWEREN- Q Study Case: S/C ReRsion: Aase Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) 3V Resistance Reactance Linl edance Resistance Reactance Lint edance Resistance Reactance last edance 16.500 0.020h8 O.h5100 O.h5158 0.02819 O.h4240 O.h4h64 0.026h2 0.62h90 0.624h6 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 \-w Yabarra Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #2 — No DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Contract: Engineer: Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle - 3-Phase, LG, LL, & LLG Fault Currents Prefault Voltage = Bus Nominal Voltage * pu Voltage from Bus Editor Page: I Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Revision: Base Config.: Normal Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fault "Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID kV Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. Real Imag. Mag. YI6KV2 16.50 0.716-14.884 14.712 0.828-15.00( 15.030 12.875 0.(73 12.717 12.525 8.353 15.055 All fault currents are symmetrical momentary, v1/2 Cycle net) ork9values in rms kA * LLG fault current is the larger of the t) o faulted line cuaents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 V Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM MGS GENERATORS ON Bus ID Y16KV2 ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02-26-2015 SN: POWER-ENGW Study Case: SIC Revision: Base Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) kV Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance Resistance Reactance Impedance 16.500 0,03724 0.63(61 0.63882 0.03717 0.63(16 0.63836 0.02632 0.62380 0,62436 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 L.. Yabarra Substation - Short -Circuit Limits - ETAP Results Bank #2 — DG SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM ETAP Page: l Location: City of Vernon 12.5.00 Date: 02Qv(2015 Contract: SN: POWEREN- (2 Engineer: Re9sion: Aase Study Case: S/C Filename: 66KV SYSTEM Config.: Normal M- S - ENER=TORS ON Short -Circuit Summary Report 1/2 Cycle CKP, ase&L- &LLE LL- Fault Currents Prefault Voltage • Aus Nominal Voltage p I u Voltage from Aus Editor Bus 3-Phase Fault Line -to -Ground Fault Line -to -Line Fauk 'Line -to -Line -to -Ground ID 3V Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Real knag. Mag. Y16KV2 16.50 1.486 (2 Mh 25.84v 1.210 (21.124 21.15( 22.65v L58h 22.v12 22.281 10.282 24.552 =11 fault currents are symmetrical momentary W/2 Cycle net) or391hlues in nas 3= p LL- fault current is t, a larger of t, a t) o faulted line currents SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 Project: COV 66 KV SYSTEM Location: City of Vernon Contract: Engineer: Filename: 66KV SYSTEM M- S - ENER=TORS ON Bus W Y16KV2 ETAP Page: 2 12.5.00 Date: 02QvQ015 SN: POWEREN- Q Study Case: SIC ReBision: Aase Config.: Normal Short -Circuit Summary Report Positive Sequence Imp. (ohm) Negative Sequence Imp. (ohm) Zero Sequence Imp. (ohm) 3V Resistance Reactance knl edance Resistance Reactance knl edance Resistance Reactance lani edance 16.500 0.0211v O.h6654 O.M6 15 0.028v( OhM(15 O.h58h( 0.026h2 0.62h(0 0.624h6 SAN 094-216 (SR-06) VERNON (03/06/2015) MM 135853 REV. 0 POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU M, 0M POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study APPENDIX B CEQA CHECKLIST ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU PAGE B-1 MOR POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU PAGE B-2 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project title: Distributed Generation Conditional Use Permit Requirements 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Vernon, 4305 Santa Fe Avenue, Vernon, CA 90058 I Contact person and phone number: Kevin Wilson 4. Project location: City of Vernon 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Vernon, Department of Gas and Electric MGM) 6. General plan designation: Varies 7. Zoning: Industrial with various overlays 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The City of Vernon General Plan (Section 2.2) and Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Section 26.4.1-3) currently require power generation projects to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). DG&E conducted a review to identify distribution system limitations, environmental constraints and financial considerations related to allowing various distributed power generation projects to be allowed by "right" instead of through the CUP process Based on this review process DG&E is considering the following options: 1) Maintain the status quo (CUP required for all power generating proiects): 2) Exempt solar power -generating units under 1 megawatt (MW) in size from the CUP requirement and maintain the CUP requirements for other generating facilities: and 3) Allow solar -generating units less than 1 megawatt in size without a CUP and prohibit all other generation facilities. This Initial Study (IS) addresses these options If the status quo remains (Option 1) every generating facility would continue to require a CUP and no IS is necessary as there would be no "project" under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under Option 2 solar projects less than 1 MW would be allowed without a CUP and this IS evaluates that potential environmental impacts associated with allowing these solar power generating units to be constructed without a CUP Under this option other power generating facilities would continue to require a CUP (i.e., no change to existing conditions) Consequently, these other projects would require a review under CEQA as part of the CUP process and no additional analysis is required in this IS. Similar to Option 2 under Option3 solar projects less than 1 MW would be allowed without a CUP and this IS evaluates that potential environmental impacts associated with allowing these solar power projects to be constructed without a CUP. Under this option, other power generating facilities would not be allowed This scenario would be similar to the City denying CUPs for these other projects under the current policy. There would be no changes to the environment and no significant or adverse environmental impacts associated with these other power generating projects. Consequently, no additional impact analysis is necessary as part of this IS. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: The City of Vernon General Plan contains one land use category (Industrial), and five Overlay `... Districts (Commercial Rendering Slaughtering Housing and Emergency Shelter) All uses allowed in the Industrial category are permitted in the Overlay Districts. Each Overlay District allows certain specialized uses not permitted in other areas of the City. All power generation facilities require a CUP for approval. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None. M �.... ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ❑ Biological Resources ❑ ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ ❑ Population / Housing ❑ ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. /s/ Samuel Kevin Wilson, Director of Public Works, Water & Development Services Signature Signature Date Date 11-30-15 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: ' a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 4 Issues: I. AESTHETICS --Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑ to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ ® ❑ adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: Solar generating projects less than 1 MW would typically be roof -mounted (buildings, carports, etc.) or on open land. These projects would typically require approximately 105,000 square feet. The very limited open space resources in the City consist of the channelized Los Angeles River and utility easements. There are no scenic vistas or scenic highways that traverse the City. The entire City, including the open space has the visual character of an urban setting and the installation of numerous solar power facilities would not degrade the visual character. Removing the ability to authorize other generation project under a CUP would not result in visual impacts since these facilities could not be built. II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES: In Potentially Less Than Less Than No determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are Significant Significant Significant Impact significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Impact with Impact California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model Mitigation (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an Incorporated optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. -- Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of ❑ ❑ ❑ Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ ❑ ❑ Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest ❑ ❑ ❑ land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land 11 ❑ ❑ M-. to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due ❑ ❑ ❑ X to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Comments: The City is a highly urban area with no agriculture or forest resources. III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria Potentially Less Than Less Than No established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution Significant Significant Significant Impact control district may be relied upon to make the following Impact with Impact determinations. -- Would the project: Mitigation Incorporated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ N quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an ❑ ❑ N ❑ existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria ❑ ❑ X ❑ pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ N ❑ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ N people? Comments: Item a): The currently applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan for the South Coast Air Basin is the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that was developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The AQMP addresses nonattainment pollutants ozone (and ozone precursors NOx and ROGs) and PM2.5. The SCAQMD adopts rules and regulations that apply to sources under its jurisdiction, which include stationary sources. Solar PV systems installed on developed property would not result in air emissions from operations and therefore would not be subject to the requirements of Regulation XIII. Construction activities associated with installation of PV systems would be anticipated to be minor, and would not require major grading or other earthmoving activities. Accordingly, the installation of solar PV units that are less than I MW would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. There would be no impact associated with the implementation of the AQMP. Item b): Solar PV systems would not result in air emissions from operations. Construction activities associated with installation of PV systems would be anticipated to be minor, and would not require major grading or other earthmoving activities. The installation of solar PV units that are less than I MW would not result in air emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's regional or localized significance thresholds for construction. Impacts would be less than significant. Item c): Because PV systems would not result in air emissions from operations, no cumulative operational impacts would result. Construction impacts for individual projects would be less than the SCAQMD's significance thresholds, and therefore would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact. Impacts would be less than significant. To the extent that electrical power from the PV systems replaces power from local fossil -fueled power facilities, the installation of solar PV systems could result in a minor improvement in air quality in the basin. Item d): Solar PV systems would not emit toxic air contaminants that would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Construction activities would emit minor amounts of diesel particulate matter; however, because health effects associated with exposure to diesel particulate matter are long-term and construction activities would be very short 2 term, construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Impacts would be less than significant. Item e): Solar power generation sources are not considered to be sources of objectionable odors, and are not listed under the categories of sources identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources. Accordingly, there would be no impact from odors. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other ❑ ❑ ❑ sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Comments: The only open space in the City is the Los Angeles River that is completely channelized in a highly urbanized area, minimizing the presence and value of habitat for biological resources. The ordinance and code changes proposed would apply to Industrial zoned property and no impacts would occur to the LA River channel. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ rA formal cemeteries? Comments: Items a & b: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 establishes rules for the analysis of historical resources, including archaeological resources, in order to determine whether a project may have a substantial adverse effect on the significance of the resource. An historical resource, according to the State Historic Preservation Office, includes buildings that are at least 45 years old and older. The City's General Plan Resource Management Element promulgates the following goal and policies with respect to cultural resources: GOAL R-4: Recognize and preserve Vernon's contributions to the industrial and architectural history of Los Angeles Policies: o R-4.1: Expand available cultural resource information by establishing a City -maintained database of historic sites and facilities; o R-4.2: Support the efforts of interested agencies or private organizations to undertake surveys or other research efforts to document buildings and places in Vernon of historic and/or architectural significance; o R-4.3: Ensure compliance with CEQA provisions regarding cultural resources at the time buildings or places of identified or potential historic or architectural merit are proposed for demolition; and, o R-4.4: Establish local programs and practices that recognize places of local or other historic significance. A review of the most recent update to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) database by the National Park Service shows that no NRHP-listed historic buildings or archaeological sites have been previously recorded within the City of Vernon (NPS 2015). None of the buildings within the City of Vernon are identified as historic resources eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources in the City's General Plan (Vernon 2009). Items c: The City of Vernon is located in a highly urbanized area. The proposed projects would be developed in an area that has been previously disturbed in conjunction with the City's industrial uses. Construction of the 1 MW solar generating projects would be similar to other commercial construction/renovation projects. Grading or excavation activities would be limited, if necessary at all. Because excavations would be limited and occur in previously disturbed areas, the likelihood of encountering a subsurface paleontological resource during the project's construction is considered low. Item d: Because the proposed project would be developed in an area that has been previously disturbed and project excavations are expected to be limited, the likelihood of encountering any human remains during the construction of a I MW solar facility is considered remote. In the event that human remains are uncovered during construction, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 require all work to stop in the area of the find and notify the County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission. Compliance with these regulatory requirements would ensure impacts to human remains are less than significant. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most ❑ ❑ ® ❑ recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iv) Landslides? 0 0 ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ Z ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would ❑ ❑ Z ❑ become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the ❑ ❑ Z ❑ Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic ❑ ❑ ❑ Z tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Comments: Item a): Rupture of a known earthquake fault and ground shaking The City of Vernon, as with the entire Southern California region, is subject to secondary effects from earthquakes. The City of Vernon is not located within a designated Earthquake Fault Zone (DOC 2015). According to the City's General Plan Safety Element, there are no major faults identified within the City of Vernon; however, many fault systems traverse Los Angeles County and the broader region which have the potential to cause damage in the City in the event of an earthquake. The City's General Plan (Figure S-1, Regional Faults) identifies the regional fault system within 20 miles of the City. The Las Cienegas Fault is located adjacent to the City (Vernon 2009). While the City of Vernon a would potentially be subject to seismic ground shaking due to earthquakes, the project does not propose construction of habitable structures of any kind. The design and construction of the I MW solar facilities would meet current City of Vernon's Building Code and the most recent California Building Code (CBC). The nature of the proposed project would not expose people to potentially adverse effects related to seismic ground shaking. Therefore, project impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. Liquefaction A secondary effect of ground shaking is soil liquefaction. Liquefaction is a process by which sediments below the water table temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid rather than a solid. In the liquefied condition, soil may deform enough to cause damage to buildings and other structures. Seismic shaking is the most common cause of liquefaction. The General Plan Safety Element includes Figure S-2, Liquefaction Zone that illustrates the areas susceptible to liquefaction within the City. The Safety Element states that liquefaction is not considered a serious threat in Vernon. Because liquefaction is not considered a serious threat, combined with the City's standard practice of requiring engineering studies and conformance with the City Building Code and CBC, seismic -related ground impacts (including liquefaction) are considered to be less than significant. Landslides Seismically -induced landslides tend to occur in areas with weak soil and rock on sloping terrain. Generally these areas are characterized by steep slopes composed of weak materials that may fail when shaken by an earthquake. The topography of the City of Vernon and adjoining area are relatively flat. In the absence of significant ground slopes, the potential for seismically - induced landslides to occur is considered negligible and no impacts would result. Item b): The City of Vernon is highly urbanized and developed with limited open space. Construction and operation of 1 MW solar generation systems would not alter this condition. Construction activities associated with installation of PV systems would not require major grading or other earthmoving activities. In addition, the City is relatively flat, with very little variation in topography. Implementation of the project would not result in substantial changes in topography or create erosion or unstable conditions. The potential for erosion and/or unstable conditions is less than significant. Item c) & d): The geology of the region is comprised of structural trough overlying bedrock formations between the Western Shelf and the San Gabriel Mountains. This trough has been filled with marine and alluvial deposits of Quaternary and Tertiary age. Deposits nearly 30,000-feet thick are present near the central part of the basin and rise sharply to the east and to the west. The local geologic unit within this deep trough that represent the deposits around Vernon is comprised of Quaternary aged unconsolidated floodplain deposits of silt, sand, gravel and minor amounts of clay soil underlain by Tertiary and continental deposits. Expansive soils and unstable geologic units are not expected in the area. As discussed in Checklist Responses above, impacts relative to seismically induced ground -shaking (including liquefaction) would be less than significant. The project area is not located in an area subject to on- or off -site landslides. Seismic ground - Di shaking impacts would be less than significant with conformance with current City Building Codes and CBC standards, as well as standard engineering practices. No significant impact would result. Item e): The project does not require the development of either septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems. No related impacts would result. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for ❑ ❑ ❑ the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Comments: Item a): Solar PV systems would not emit greenhouse gases. Construction activities would emit minor amounts of greenhouse gases; however, the construction activities would be temporary. The SCAQMD has established a threshold of 10,000 metric tons per year for industrial projects and also recommend amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year period. Emissions from construction of solar PV systems would be well below this level. Impacts would be less than significant. To the extent that solar PV systems replace fossil -fuel generated power in the air basin, there would be a beneficial effect on GHG emissions. VIIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Would the project: Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ® ❑ through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ® ❑ through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ® ❑ hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous ❑ ❑ ® ❑ materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where ❑ ❑ ❑ such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety 10 hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the ❑ ❑ ❑ project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or ❑ ❑ ❑ death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: Items a — b: Though hazardous materials will be used during construction and are components of solar power generating systems, the types and quantities used will not create a significant hazard to the public. The hazardous materials used during construction will consist of fuels, paints, solvents, welding supplies and cleaners. These materials are commonly used in construction and it is expected that the construction crews are familiar with the handling, storage and cleanup requirements for these items. The use of these materials would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Though the solar power system components contain hazardous materials, these materials are not in a form that can be readily released and cause and exposure to the public or the environment. Additionally, the metals and other components of the systems continue to have value even after they are no longer functional, and it is expected that the system components will be recycled when they are no longer functional. Item c: The only school located within the City is the City of Vernon Elementary School, located at 2360 East Vernon Avenue. There are several schools are located within one -quarter of a mile south of the City boundary. The use of hazardous materials associated with construction of 1 MW solar generating systems are not expected to result in significant impact to these schools. Item d: It is possible that a solar generating project could be proposed on a site in the City that is on the list of hazardous materials sites. However, construction and operations of a 1 MW solar power system would not create significant impacts related to contaminated soils and groundwater at the site. Similar to other construction/improvement projects, if contaminated soil is excavated and removed during construction, the contaminated soil would be transported and disposed in accordance with state and federal requirements. No significant impacts are expected in the event that a solar power project is proposed and constructed on a site that is on the list of hazardous material sites. Items a and f: The nearest airport to the City is the Compton Municipal Airport, located over 7 miles to the south of the City. Item g: The construction of a 1 MW solar generating project would be similar to other commercial construction/renovation projects and would not be expected to interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. Item h: The City of Vernon is located within a highly developed urbanized area with no wild lands. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the proj ect: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Impact C ►41 11 MR planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, ❑ ❑ ❑ including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, ❑ ❑ ❑ including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ ❑ ❑ capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a ❑ ❑ ❑ IR federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a I00-year flood hazard area structures which would ❑ ❑ ❑ impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow ❑ ❑ ❑ Items a) and fl: Water discharges are not expected from the project and violations of water quality standards or water degradation would only occur as a result of an accident during construction involving the release of hazardous materials. Construction contractors are familiar with the management practices required by the California General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity, and it is expected that construction contractors have the training and equipment to contain and control hazardous materials that may spill as a result of an accident. Consequently, environmental impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, potential impacts to storm water may occur if the solar power projects result in panels or structure installation on undeveloped land. It is anticipated that best management practices required by the construction storm water general permit will minimize this potential impact. Item b): The City pumps groundwater from local, deep wells in the Central Groundwater Basin and provides Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's (MWD) treated surface water, which is a blend of Colorado River water and water from northern California. Solar power projects are not expected to use substantial quantities of water during construction or operations. The project would also not impede groundwater recharge in the basin. Items c) and d): The solar power projects would be developed on roof -tops, car port covers or previously graded lands, and construction of IMW solar power projects would not be expected to change drainage patterns. Items g) and h): Based on a review of the FEMA's National Flood Hazard Layer, developable lands in the City are not in a 100-year floodplain. In the rainy season of 2004-2005, the Los Angeles area received the second highest rainfall ever recorded, approximately three times the normal amount. The river channel adequately accommodated this flow. Item i): Nearly all of the land in Vernon lies within the potential inundation areas for both Hansen Dam and Sepulveda Dam which are located in the San Fernando Valley, more than 20 miles northwest of the City. As indicated in the City's Safety Element, flows from a failure of the Sepulveda dam would take more than eight hours to reach the and City and flow from Hansen Dam is predicted to take more than 19 hours to reach Vernon. The flow from either dam is estimated to peak at a depth of 2 feet in the City. Construction of new solar power projects would not be expected to result in exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. 12 Item j): The City of Vernon is located approximately 12 miles from the coast it is surrounded by urban development for at least 5 miles in all directions and is in an area with generally flat topography. Consequently there is no threat of inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation ❑ ❑ ❑ of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ community conservation plan? Comments: The project includes changing the City code to allow 1MW solar generating projects without a CUP in commercial and industrial zones and either continuing or eliminating the allowance of other distributed generation projects with a CUP. Since the project includes a change in land use policy and regulation, it would not conflict with these policies and regulations once enacted. Changes to the policy for solar power generating projects in commercial and industrial zones are not expected to physically divide a community or conflict with habitat/natural community conservation plans. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ❑ ❑ ❑ would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: The change in policy and allowance for I MW solar generating projects without a CUP and/or the removal of the CUP process for other types of distributed generation projects will not change the availability of mineral resources at sites. XII. NOISE -- Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -borne Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 13 vibration or ground -borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ® ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where ❑ ❑ ❑ such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the ❑ ❑ ❑ project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: As stated in the Noise Element in the City's General Plan, the City consists almost exclusively of industrial uses and policy set forth in the Housing Element prohibits the construction of any new housing in recognition of the high noise levels associated with widespread industrial activity. The General Plan discourages any new noise -sensitive use that would be incompatible with the City's industrial focus. Zoning regulations also prohibit community facilities such as schools, day care centers, and hospitals. Construction and operations of IMW solar power generating projects would not result in permanent noise or vibration exposures that would be inconsistent with City policy or result in health impacts. Though noise levels would increase during construction, any increases would be short-term and are not expected to be at a level that would be inconsistent with City policy or result in health impacts. No public or private airports/airstrips are in or near the City. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in noise/vibration impacts as these types of projects could not be built. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly ❑ ❑ ❑ (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating ❑ ❑ ❑ the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: Modifying the City Zoning Ordinance to allow I MW solar power generating projects would not result in impacts to population and housing. Changes in land use or population density are not expected. Displacement of people or housing is not expected during construction. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in population and housing impacts as these types of projects could not be built. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated 14 a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Comments: Allowing IMW solar power projects without a CUP would not cause substantial adverse physical impacts requiring changes to fire, police, schools, parks or other public services facilities. Eliminating the allowance of other distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in Public Services impacts as these types of projects could not be built. XV. RECREATION -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and ❑ ❑ ❑ regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: As a highly developed industrial city, expanses of open space are not needed or present in the City for recreational purposes. The open spaces that exist are limited to privately -owned landscaping around buildings, utility easements, rail yards, and the Los Angeles River (Vernon 2009). Allowing IMW solar power projects without a CUP would not cause increase use of parks or recreational facilities in and around the City. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in impacts to recreation as these types of projects could not be built. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing ❑ ❑ ❑ measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel 15 `1 demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an ❑ ❑ ❑ M increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp ❑ ❑ ❑ M curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ M 0 Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public ❑ ❑ ❑ M transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Comments: Allowing 1MW solar power projects without a CUP would not cause substantial adverse physical impacts to traffic/transportation. Though traffic would increase during construction, the level of increase expected would be similar to other renovation and remodeling projects, and less traffic than expected from constructing a new or replacement building on a City parcel. These types of projects are commonly done in the City with no adverse impacts to traffic, even without traffic control plans. Construction of 1 MW solar power projects would not change air traffic patterns, create hazards by changing road geometry or use and is not expected to interfere with emergency access. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in transportation/traffic impacts as these types of projects could not be built. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the Potentially Less Than Less Than No project: Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ M Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater ❑ ❑ ❑ M treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ M facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from ❑ ❑ M ❑ existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider ❑ ❑ ❑ M which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ M ❑ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations ❑ related to solid waste? Comments: Allowing 1MW solar power projects without a CUP would not cause utilities and service systems. These projects could actually provide a benefit to ex region by reducing the load on these existing facilities. The 1 MW solar power projects would not generate wastewater that would require ❑ ❑ M adverse physical impacts to er generating facilities in the and no new water, storm water 16 OR or wastewater treatment facilities would be required for these projects. The projects would require water for periodic panel cleaning, but no new or expanded water entitlements are expected. Only minor quantities of waste would be generated during construction and solid waste is not expected to be generated during operations. At decommissioning, most of the material is expected to be recycled. Based on the information in the Los Angeles County Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan, in -county and out -of -county landfills that service the region have sufficient capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in utility and service system impacts as these types of projects could not be built. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the ❑ ❑ ❑ Z environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but ❑ ❑ Z ❑ cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause ❑ ❑ ❑ N substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: Allowing 1MW solar power projects without a CUP would not have direct impacts or contribute to cumulative impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils, hazards & hazardous materials, land use/planning, mineral resources, noise, populationihousing, public services and recreation. The construction and decommissioning activities associated with 1MW solar power projects could have negligible to minor cumulative impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology/water quality, transportation/traffic and utilities/service systems. However, if the 1MW solar projects replace fossil -fuel generated power in the region, these projects could result in a cumulative benefit in each of these areas. Eliminating the allowance of other types of distributed generation projects with a CUP would not result in cumulative impacts as these types of projects could not be built. Note: Authority cited: California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2015. Regional Geology Hazards and Mapping Program. Available at: http://www.guake.ca..gov/gmaps/WH/regulatoLymaps.htm (accessed January 19, 2015). National Park Service (NPS). 2015. National Register of Historic Places Program: Research. Available at: http://www.nps.gov/nr/research/ (accessed January 19, 2015). Vernon, City of. 2009 (as amended). City of Vernon General Plan, Resources Element. Available at: http://www.cityofvernon.orup/images/community-services/Zoning/Resources_Element _170_KB.pdf (accessed January 19, 2015). 17 14. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLYLEFT BLANK ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study M POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study APPENDIX C ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU PAGE C-1 `.1 POWER ENGINEERS, INC. Distributed Generation Impact Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ANA 092-062 (SR 02) COV 135853 (05/08/2015) YU PAGE C-2 0 t t > s# i C i {fix: Y tLiN$s; 44 4 a te $ i p for the Vernon Distributed Generation Project Consultant: RBF Consulting, a Michael Baker International Company 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618 Contact: Mr. Achilles Malisos Manager of Air and Noise Studies 949.472.3505 INTERNATIONAL ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT for the Vernon Distributed Generation Project City of Vernon, County of Los Angeles, State of California Consultant: RBF Consulting, a Michael Baker International Company 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618 Contact. Mr. Achilles Malisos Manager of Air and Noise Studies 949.472.3505 January 27, 2015 JN 143818 Vernon Distributed Generation Project TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY........................................................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 2 1.1 Project Description........................................................................................................... 2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF NOISE METRICS.................................................................................... 6 2.1 Standard Unit of Measurement...................................................................................... 6 2.2 Health Effects of Noise.................................................................................................... 6 3.0 LAWS, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS, AND STANDARDS.....................................11 3.1 State.................................................................................................................................11 3.2 Local.................................................................................................................................11 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..............................................................................................15 4.1 Sensitive Receptors........................................................................................................15 4.2 Existing Conditions.......................................................................................................15 4.3 Future Noise Environment...........................................................................................18 5.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA....................................................................................................20 5.1 CEQA Criteria................................................................................................................ 20 5.2 Methodology.................................................................................................................. 20 6.0 ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS......................................................................................................25 6.1 Short -Term Noise Sources............................................................................................ 25 6.2 Long -Term Noise Sources............................................................................................. 28 7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES.....................................................................................................31 8.0 REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................33 8.1 List of Preparers............................................................................................................. 33 8.2 Documents.......................................................................................................................33 8.3 Web Sites/Programs...................................................................................................... 33 Acoustical Assessment January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project LIST OF FIGURES Figure1- Regional Vicinity..................................................................................................................... 3 Figure2 - Local Vicinity........................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 - Common Environmental Noise Levels................................................................................ 7 Figure 4 - 2007 Noise Contours for City of Vernon............................................................................17 Figure 5 - 2030 Noise Contours for City of Vernon............................................................................19 LIST OF TABLES Table1- Noise Descriptors...................................................................................................................... 8 Table 2 - Community Noise Standards................................................................................................12 Table 3 - City of Vernon Noise Standards...........................................................................................13 Table 4 - Sensitive Receptors..................................................................................................................15 Table 5 - Fuel Cell Noise Levels........................................................................................................ 24 Table 6 - Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment...................................................... 27 Table 7 - Noise Attenuation of Operating DG Facilities.................................................................... 29 Acoustical Assessment January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project DEFINITIONS OF COMMONLY USED TERMS IN NOISE CONTROL The definitions that follow are in general agreement with those contained in publications of various professional organizations, including the American National Standards Institute (ANSI); the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM); the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air -Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE); the International Organization for Standardization (ISO); and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). TERMINOLOGY acoustic; acoustical: Acoustic is usually used when the term being qualified designates something that has the properties, dimensions, or physical characteristics associated with sound waves (e.g., acoustic power); acoustical is usually used when the term which it modifies does not explicitly designate something that has the properties, dimensions, or physical characteristics of sound (e.g., acoustical material). ambient noise: The all -encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time, usually being a composite of sound from many sources arriving from many directions, near and far; no particular sound is dominant. attenuation: The decrease in level of sound, usually from absorption, divergence, scattering, or the cancellation of the sound waves. average sound level (L,,q): The level of a steady sound which, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A -weighted sound energy as the time -varying sound. Unit: decibel. A -weighted sound level (LA): The sound level measured with a sound -level meter using A - weighting. Unit: decibel (dBA). background noise: The total noise from all sources other than a particular sound that is of interest (e.g., other than the noise being measured or other than the speech or music being listened to). decibel (dB): A unit of level which denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the number of decibels correspond to the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio. [In many sound fields, the sound pressure ratios are not proportional to the corresponding power ratios, but it is common practice to extend the use of the decibel to such cases. One decibel equals one -tenth of a bel.] equivalent continuous sound level (average sound level) (Leo: The level of a steady sound which, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A -weighted sound energy as the time -varying sound. Unit: decibel (dBA). frequency (f): Of a periodic function, the number of times that a quantity repeats itself in one second, i.e., the number of cycles per second. Unit: hertz (Hz). Acoustical Assessment iii January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project noise: Any disagreeable or undesired sound, i.e., unwanted sound. noise level: Same as sound level. Usually used to describe the sound level of an unwanted sound. noise reduction (NR): The difference in sound pressure level between any two points along a path of sound propagation. sound: (1) A change in air pressure that is capable of being detected by the human ear. (2) The hearing sensation excited by a change in air pressure. sound level: Ten times the logarithm to the base 10 of the square of the ratio of the frequency - weighted (and time -averaged) sound pressure to the reference sound pressure of 20 micropascals. The frequency -weightings and time -weighting employed should be specified; if they are not specified, it is understood that A -frequency -weighting is used and that an averaging time of 0.125 seconds is used. Unit: decibel (dBA). Acoustical Assessment iv January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this Acoustical Assessment is to evaluate potential short- and long-term noise impacts resulting from implementation of permitted Distributed Generation (DG) facilities within the City of Vernon (City). The analysis focuses on several types of DG facilities, and the anticipated noise and vibration impacts that operation of these facilities would have on the City and the surrounding community. The DG facilities would be operated by or for a customer to supplement or serve the customer's electric service requirements that would otherwise be serviced by the City's Department of Gas & Electric (DG&E). This includes DG; cogeneration; emergency, back-up, and standby generation; Net Energy Metered Generating Facilities; and renewable fueled generating facilities. The City of Vernon is approximately 5.2 square miles in size and is located within Los Angeles County, California, approximately two miles south of downtown Los Angeles. Consisting almost entirely of warehouses and factories, the City's main industries are food service manufacturing, metalworking, rendering plants, food processors, smelters, and manufacturing of glass and plastic equipment. Housing is owned by the City and its few residents are employed within the City's limits. For the foreseeable future, the City will continue to be an almost totally industrial city, with limited retail commercial and food service operations to support the large day -time business population, and few residences. City policies, land use restrictions, and limited land availability will enable to City to continue its mission to attract new, highly specialized industrial businesses. The project would consist of implementing DG facilities within the City to either lower on -site energy demand or to export the energy via the DG&E distribution system. As a result, the City is considering whether changes to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance(Zoning Ordinance) should be made to allow DG projects without a conditional use permit (CUP) as currently required. Potential DG facilities include solar power (photovoltaic [PV] systems), wind power, microturbines, combustion gas turbines, and fuel cells. Based upon the results of the analysis, project implementation could result in short- and long- term noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. For some types of DG, mitigation measures would be an effective method to assure that these impacts would be considered less than significant. Maintaining the CUP requirement for power generated combustion, especially those with systems with pumps, conveyors or other mechanical systems for handling solid or liquid fuels, would provide the City the ability to require studies and develop permit conditions to evaluate and limit noise to allowable levels. From a noise perspective, the City could consider exempting solar PV, microturbines, and fuel cell systems from the CUP requirements as these types of facilities would not be expected to generate noise at significant levels. Acoustical Assessment 1 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Vernon Department of Gas & Electric (DG&E) is a municipal utility currently serving a five -square -mile area consisting primarily of 1,800 industrial and commercial customers. There is an existing 134 megawatt (MW) gas fired power plant interconnected to the City's 66 kilovolt (kV) system. Vernon owns and operates its own distribution system, which resides within the California Independent System Operator (ISO) control area. It is connected to California ISO through Southern California Edison's (SCE) 220-66 kV transformers at Laguna Bell Substation. Other than local generation production for its exclusive use, DG&E purchases additional energy to complement its 134 MW system demand using SCE 66 kV connection lines. 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT LOCATION The City of Vernon (City) is located within Los Angeles County, California, approximately two miles south of downtown Los Angeles; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity. The City is bordered by the City of Los Angeles to the north and west, the City of Commerce to the east, and the Cities of Huntington Park and Maywood to the south; refer to Exhibit 2, Local Vicinity. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Vernon City Zoning Ordinance permits generating facilities, power plants, and cogeneration facilities to be built subject to a City issued Conditional Use Permit. Interest in Distributed Generation (DG) has grown recently to either lower on -site energy demand or to export the energy via the DG&E distribution system. As a result, the City is considering whether changes to the Zoning Ordinance should be made to address DG. The City of Vernon General Plan contains one land use category (Industrial), and five Overlay Districts (Commercial, Rendering, Slaughtering, Housing, and Emergency Shelter). All uses allowed in the Industrial category are permitted in the Overlay Districts. Each Overlay District allows certain specialized uses not permitted in other areas of the City. Additionally, all power generation facilities require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for approval. Distributed generation (DG) refers to small scale power generation at the point of consumption. DG consists of a variety of small, grid -connected devices and typically includes solar power, wind power, microturbines, combustion gas turbines, fuel cells, biomass energy, and waste to energy. The following provides a brief description of each of these generation types: Solar Power (Photovoltaic 2VI Systems). PV solar panels are made up of discrete cells connected together that convert light radiation into electricity. The PV cells produce direct -current (DC) electricity, which must then be inverted for use in an alternating - current (AC) system. Acoustical Assessment 2 January 27, 2015 I K E R N COUNTY I Lebec I -- -- ---� — Gorman \ I I \ \ Lancaster I Pyramid \ Lake \ D I \ Palmdale itaic \ Lake Lake I I Lak� Piru CaSWie I I \ \ Piro \ L 0 S A N G E L E S illmore COUNTY \ Santa VENTURA \ an ® COUNTY \ Sylmar f I / Moorpark Simi Pacoima Valley Chatsworth I Burbank / Canoga i Park Van Glendale ' Nuys Monrovia Thousand A — H'I W dl d I Azuza / Oaks poure I s Westlake 1� Calabasas oo an Hills Sherman paw Pasadena Arcadia Claremont Upland Village 101 I Baldwin I / I Hollywood Alhambra Park Covina Dimas r Beverly Hills r Monterey West Covina Pomona i 1 Santa Pam Malibu Monica I Walnut Culver VERNO I , I Chino City Pico I ivera Whittier Le Habra Marina Del Ray Inglewood South Heights _ _ Playa Del Rey Gate Downey — Brea ElSegundo He me I Yorba 'I ireda inda Manhattan Beach I Compton Bellflower Fullerton Redondo ch Torrance Lakewood r )� Anaheim J ORANGE 1040 Carson i Orange COUNTY �9 G, Garden /� Subject rove is Verdes Site Estates Lon p Santa Tustin San Pedro Beech Ana 0 L' �— Huntington "9 Beach 'I Irvine ti Costa Lake Mesa Fn A.r NOT TO SCALE ,,,— f ... Q CONI.0 LTINO •=c—.— 01/15•JN 14381E ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT VERNON DISTRIBUTED GENERATION PROJECT Regional Vicinity Exhibit 1 This page intentionally left blank �r L... Vernon Distributed Generation Project • Wind Power. Wind turbines use the wind to produce electrical power. A wind system includes the rotor, generator, turbine blades, and drive or coupling device. As wind blows through the blades, the air exerts aerodynamic forces that cause the blades to turn the rotor. As the rotor turns, its speed is altered to match the operating speed of the generator. A single wind turbine can range in size from a few kW for residential applications to more than 5 MW. As with PV systems, the output of the generator is processed by an inverter that changes the electricity from DC to AC so that the electricity can be used. • Microturbines. Microturbines are small combustion turbines that produce between 25 kW and 500 kW and consist of a compressor, combustor, turbine, and generator. • Combustion Gas Turbines. Combustion turbines range in size from s about 500 kW to several hundred MW when configured as a combined cycle power plant. They are fueled by natural gas, oil, or a combination of fuels. Units smaller than 15 MW are generally referred to as industrial turbines, which differentiates them both from larger utility grade turbines and smaller microturbines. • Fuel Cells. Fuel cells use an electrochemical process to convert fuel into electricity. In addition to providing power, they can supply a thermal energy source for water and space heating, or absorption cooling. • Biomass Energy. Biomass energy refers to material from plants and animals that can be burned to produce energy. As an energy source, biomass can either be used directly via combustion to produce heat, or indirectly after converting it to various forms of biofuel. • Waste to EneUy. Waste to energy refers to the process of generating energy in the form of electricity and/or heat from the incineration of waste. The City of Vernon General Plan (Section 2.2) and Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Section 26.4.1-3) currently requires power generation projects to obtain a CUP. This analysis identifies potential environmental noise constraints and mitigation measures related to allowing various distributed power generation projects to be allowed by "right" instead of through the CUP process. Acoustical Assessment 5 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project 1%.1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF NOISE METRICS 2.1 STANDARD UNIT OF MEASUREMENT Sound is described in terms of the loudness (amplitude) of the sound and frequency (pitch) of the sound. The standard unit of measurement of the loudness of sound is dB. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency -dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A -weighted decibel scale (dBA) performs this compensation by differentiating among frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear. Decibels are based on the logarithmic scale. The logarithmic scale compresses the wide range in sound pressure levels to a more usable range of numbers in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquakes. In terms of human response to noise, a sound 10 dBA higher than another is perceived to be twice as loud and 20 dBA higher is perceived to be four times as loud, and so forth. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Examples of various sound levels in different environments are illustrated on Exhibit 3, Common Environmental Noise Levels. Many methods have been developed for evaluating community noise to account for, among other things: • The variation of noise levels over time; `. • The influence of periodic individual loud events; and • The community response to changes in the community noise environment. Table 1, Noise Descriptors, provides a listing of methods to measure sound over a period of time. 2.2 HEALTH EFFECTS OF NOISE Human response to sound is highly individualized. Annoyance is the most common issue regarding community noise. The percentage of people claiming to be annoyed by noise generally increases with the environmental sound level. However, many factors also influence people's response to noise. The factors can include the character of the noise, the variability of the sound level, the presence of tones or impulses, and the time of day of the occurrence. Additionally, non -acoustical factors, such as the persons opinion of the noise source, the ability to adapt to the noise, the attitude towards the source and those associated with it, and the predictability of the noise, all influence people's response. As such, response to noise varies widely from one person to another and with any particular noise, individual responses would range from "not annoyed" to "highly annoyed." Acoustical Assessment 6 January 27, 2015 Roth; Music Band Garbage Truck W-.�Lawnmower Average City Traffic Noise Vacuum Cleaner >�.=4 Normal Conversation Quiet Office 1011 1 Refrigerator Humming �r Whisper *JWRiusding Leaves Normal Breathing Regular wq osure over 1 minute ssf�c; permanent Dearing loss No more than 15 minute expomre recommended Annoying Annoying - interferes with conversation Telephone use Difficult Comfortable Quiet 40 30 Very Quiet 20 Just Audible 10 Q A Threshold of Hearing Source: Melville C. Branch and R. Dale Beland, Outdoor Noise in the Metropolitan Environment, 1970. Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (EPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004), March 1974. CONSULTING • � C-- 01/15•JN 143B18 ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT VERNON DISTRIBUTED GENERATION PROJECT Common Environmental Noise Levels Exhibit 4 Vernon Distributed Generation Project When the noise level of an activity rises above 70 dBA, the chance of receiving a complaint is possible, and as the noise level rises, dissatisfaction among the public steadily increases. However, an individual's reaction to a particular noise depends on many factors, such as the source of the sound, its loudness relative to the background noise, and the time of day. The reaction to noise can also be highly subjective; the perceived effect of a particular noise can vary widely among individuals in a community. Table 1 Noise Descriptors Decibel (0) The unit for measuring the volume of sound equal to 10 times the logarithm (base 10) of the ratio of the pressure of a measured sound to a reference pressure 20 micro ascals . A -Weighted Decibel (dBA) A sound measurement scale that adjusts the pressure of individual frequencies according to human sensitivities. The scale accounts for the fact that the region of highest sensitivity for the human ear is between 2,000 and 4,000 cycles per second (hertz). Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) The sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period. The Leq is the value that expresses the time averaged total energy of a fluctuating sound level. Maximum Sound Level Lmax The highest individual sound level dBA occurring over a given time period. Minimum Sound Level 1-min The lowest individual sound level dBA occurring over a given time period. Community Noise Equivalent Level A rating of community noise exposure to all sources of sound that (CNEL) differentiates between daytime, evening, and nighttime noise exposure. These adjustments are +5 dBA for the evening, 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM, and +10 dBA for the night, 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Day/Night Average (Ldn) The Ldn is a measure of the 24-hour average noise level at a given location. It was adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for developing criteria for the evaluation of community noise exposure. It is based on a measure of the average noise level over a given time period called the Leq. The Ldn is calculated by averaging the Leq's for each hour of the day at a given location after penalizing the "sleeping hours" (defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) by 10 dBA to account for the increased sensitivity of people to noises that occur at night. Exceedance Level (Ln) The A -weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% Lot, Lio, Lso, Lso, respective) of the time during the measurement period. Source: Cyril M. Harris, Handbook of Noise Control, 1979. The effects of noise are often only transitory, but adverse effects can be cumulative with prolonged or repeated exposure. The effects of noise on the community can be organized into six broad categories: • Noise -Induced Hearing Loss; • Interference with Communication; • Effects of Noise on Sleep; • Effects on Performance and Behavior; • Extra -Auditory Health Effects; and • Annoyance. Acoustical Assessment January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Although it often causes discomfort and sometimes pain, noise -induced hearing loss usually takes years to develop. Noise -induced hearing loss can impair the quality of life through a reduction in the ability to hear important sounds and to communicate with family and friends. Hearing loss is one of the most obvious and easily quantified effects of excessive exposure to noise. While the loss may be temporary at first, it could become permanent after continued exposure. When combined with hearing loss associated with aging, the amount of hearing loss directly caused by the environment is difficult to quantify. Although the major cause of noise - induced hearing loss is occupational, substantial damage can be caused by non -occupational sources. According to the United States Public Health Service, nearly ten million of the estimated 21 million Americans with hearing impairments owe their losses to noise exposure. Noise can mask important sounds and disrupt communication between individuals in a variety of settings. This process can cause anything from a slight irritation to a serious safety hazard, depending on the circumstance. Noise can disrupt face-to-face communication and telephone communication, and the enjoyment of music and television in the home. It can also disrupt effective communication between teachers and pupils in schools, and can cause fatigue and vocal strain in those who need to communicate in spite of the noise. Interference with communication has proved to be one of the most important components of noise -related annoyance. Noise -induced sleep interference is one of the critical components of community annoyance. Sound level, frequency distribution, duration, repetition, and variability can make it difficult to fall asleep and may cause momentary shifts in the natural sleep pattern, or level of sleep. It can produce short-term adverse effects on mood changes and �► job performance, with the possibility of more serious effects on health if it continues over long periods. Noise can cause adverse effects on task performance and behavior at work, and non - occupational and social settings. These effects are the subject of some controversy, since the presence and degree of effects depends on a variety of intervening variables. Most research in this area has focused mainly on occupational settings, where noise levels must be sufficiently high and the task sufficiently complex for effects on performance to occur. Recent research indicates that more moderate noise levels can produce disruptive after-effects, commonly manifested as a reduced tolerance for frustration, increased anxiety, decreased incidence of "helping" behavior, and increased incidence of "hostile" behavior. Noise has been implicated in the development or exacerbation of a variety of health problems, ranging from hypertension to psychosis. As with other categories, quantifying these effects is difficult due to the amount of variables that need to be considered in each situation. As a biological stressor, noise can influence the entire physiological system. Most effects seem to be transitory, but with continued exposure some effects have been shown to be chronic in laboratory animals. Annoyance can be viewed as the expression of negative feelings resulting from interference with activities, as well as the disruption of one's peace of mind and the enjoyment of one's environment. Field evaluations of community annoyance are useful for predicting the consequences of planned actions involving highways, airports, road traffic, railroads, or other noise sources. The consequences of noise -induced annoyance are privately held dissatisfaction, publicly expressed complaints to authorities, and potential adverse health effects, as discussed above. In a study conducted by the United States Department of Transportation, the effects of Acoustical Assessment 9 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project annoyance to the community were quantified. In areas where noise levels were consistently above 60 dBA CNEL, approximately nine percent of the community is highly annoyed. When levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL, that percentage rises to 15 percent. Although evidence for the various effects of noise have differing levels of certainty, it is clear that noise can affect human health. Most of the effects are, to a varying degree, stress related. Acoustical Assessment 10 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project 3.0 LAWS, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS, AND STANDARDS Land uses deemed sensitive by the State of California (State) include schools, hospitals, rest homes, and long-term care and mental care facilities. Many jurisdictions also consider residential uses particularly noise -sensitive because families and individuals expect to use time in the home for rest and relaxation, and noise can interfere with those activities. Some jurisdictions may also identify other noise -sensitive uses such as churches, libraries, and parks. Land uses that are relatively insensitive to noise include office, commercial, and retail developments. There is a range of insensitive noise receptors that include uses that generate significant noise levels and that typically have a low level of human occupancy. 3.1 STATE The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was enacted in 1970 and requires that all known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including environmental noise impacts. Under CEQA, a project has a potentially significant impact if the project exposes people to noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance. Additionally, under CEQA, a project has a potentially significant impact if the project creates a substantial increase in the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. If a project has a potentially significant impact, mitigation measures must be considered. If mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant are not feasible due to economic, social, environmental, legal, or other conditions, the most feasible mitigation measures must be considered. 3.2 LOCAL CITY OF VERNON GENERAL PLAN The City of Vernon General Plan Noise Element identifies goals, policies, and implementation measures that are used to guide development with regard to noise. The Noise Element sets the framework for working toward and maintaining environmental noise control appropriate to individual communities. As an industrial city, the aim of the Noise Element is to address compatibility among neighboring businesses and industries, and to work with adjacent communities to resolve any conflicts that may be associated with individual businesses along Vernon's municipal boundary. The following goals and policies outlined in the Noise Element are applicable to the project: Goal N-2: Incorporate noise and vibration considerations into land use planning decisions. Policy N-2.1: Consider the noise levels likely to be produces by any new business or substantially expanded business activities locating near existing noise sensitive uses such as schools, community facilities, and residences, as well as adjacent to Acoustical Assessment 11 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project established businesses involving vibration -sensitive activities. Policy N-2.2: Encourage acoustical design in all new construction. Goal N-3: Develop measures to control non -transportation noise and similar impacts. Polio: Continue to enforce the noise and vibration performance standards in the City Code to mitigate conflicts among neighboring uses. Policy N-3.2: Establish and maintain coordination among City agencies involved in noise abatement. Policy N-3.3: City departments will comply with all state and federal OSHA noise standards, and all new City equipment purchases shall comply with state and federal noise standards. The City has established community noise standards to help guide land use decisions and protect sensitive uses from excessive noise levels, as shown in Table 2, Community Noise Standards. Because the City consists almost exclusively of industrial uses and policies set forth in the Housing Element prohibit the construction of any new housing in recognition of the hazards - including high noise levels - associated with widespread industrial activity, these standards discourage any new noise -sensitive use that would be incompatible with the City's industrial focus. Similarly, zoning regulations prohibit community facilities such as school, day care centers, and hospitals. Table 2 Community Noise Standards y Residential - Multi -family, Duplex A A B B B C C Schools, Churches A A B C C C D Office Building, Research & Development, Professional A A A B B C C Offices, City Office Building Commercial Retail, Banks, Restaurants A A A A B B C Service Station, Auto Dealership, Manufacturing, A A A A B B B Warehousing, Wholesale, Utilities Agriculture A A A A I A A A Notes: A = Clearly Compatible: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation requirements. B = Normally Compatible. New construction or development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features in the design are determined. Conventional construction, with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. C = Normally Incompatible: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. D = Clearly Incompatible. New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Source: City of Vernon General Plan, Noise Element, Last amended February 23, 2009. Acoustical Assessment 12 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project CITY OF VERNON MUNICIPAL CODE The City's Municipal Code (Section 26.4.1-6, Development Standards) establishes the City's standards for a variety of nuisance noises. The noise standards summarized in Table 3, City o Vernon Noise Standards, shall apply to all lots within the designated noise zones, measured cumulatively with existing noise from all businesses on the lot. Table 3 City of Vernon Noise Standards In addition to the City's noise standards within designated noise zones, the City's Municipal Code states the following with regards to noise control within the City: (ii) No person, in any location within the City, shall create any noise, or allow the creation of noise, or any lot owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the cumulative noise level when measures at any point along the lot line of the lot on which the sources of the noise is located to exceed: (A) The applicable noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; or (B) The applicable noise standard plus five (5) dBA for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any one hour; or (C) The applicable noise standard plus ten (10) dBA for a cumulative period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour; or (D) The applicable noise standard plus fifteen (15) dBA for a cumulative period of more than one (1) minute in any hour; or (iii) In the event the ambient noise level exceeds any of the noise limit categories set forth in subsections (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (2)(ii) of this section, the cumulative period applicable to such category shall be increased to reflect the ambient noise level, plus 5 dBA. (iv) If a lot is located on a boundary between two (2) different noise zones, the noise level standard applicable to the quieter noise zone shall apply. (v) If the noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be determined, the measured noise Acoustical Assessment 13 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project level obtained while the source is in operation shall be compared directly to the lot's designated noise zone for the time of day the noise level is measured. (vi) Any noise source in excess of the standards set forth herein shall be permitted only with a conditional use permit. Acoustical Assessment 14 January 27, 2015 \.. Vernon Distributed Generation Project 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4.1 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Noise- and vibration -sensitive land uses are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound or vibration could adversely affect the designated land uses. Typically, sensitive receptors on noise -sensitive lands include residences, hospitals, places of worship, libraries and schools, nature and wildlife preservers, and parks. Noise sensitive land uses located within the City of Vernon are scarce, and include one school, one place of worship, and scattered residential units; refer to Table 4, Sensitive Receptors. It should be noted that the adjacent communities of Huntington Park and Maywood have residential neighborhoods and schools along and near their boundaries of Vernon. Table 4 Sensitive Receptors 4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS In 2007, the City conducted a comprehensive noise survey of the City to document the noise environment. Measurements were taken at 11 locations, including two border locations in adjacent communities. Three measurements consisted of 24-hour recordings of the sound environment, and the balance were limited duration measurements at representative locations throughout Vernon and, as noted above, on the border of neighboring communities. The most significant noise -producing activity within Vernon involves the transportation systems including the arterial roadways and train movements along regional rail lines. In addition, many major manufacturing businesses create high stationary noise levels. CNEL CONTOURS The 2007 noise measurements were modeled to create a community -wide "picture" of noise conditions. The CNEL contours for major arterial roadways and the I-710 freeway within the City were developed utilizing the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model and traffic data obtained from Caltrans and citywide traffic count data (2004-2007). The railroad contours were developed based on Wyle Laboratories' computational procedures and on a computer model developed by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Operational data for the railroads was obtained from Amtrak and Metrolink schedules, the Southern California Acoustical Assessment 15 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Regional Rail Authority, the Alameda Corridor Transit Authority, the Union Pacific Company, and the Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis. These noise measurements and modeling results collectively can be represented by noise contour lines. Similar to the way topographic maps show contours indicated elevation change, the noise contour maps indicate decreasing noise levels as you move away from the noise source. Exhibit 4, 2007 Noise Contours for City of Vernon, illustrates the noise contours for year 2007. TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES Arterial Roadways Exhibit 4 shows that noise levels associated with truck and automobile traffic along Vernon s arterial street are 70 CNEL along the roadway frontages. With regard to the gradual diminishment of noise as the receiver moves away from the street, the modeling does not take into account the mitigating effect of buildings that front the street. Freeway Noise The CNEL generated in Vernon by traffic on the 1-710 freeway is as high as 80 dB. However, the land uses affected by the traffic noise are largely industrial in nature and are not noise sensitive. 11*., Train Noise 7 The City is impacted by noise from train movements on six primary rail lines, numerous spur lines, and activities at the Burlington, Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) rail yard, as well as at the Union Pacific (UPRR) rail yard in the City of Commerce. The CNEL associated with train movements in and through Vernon is as high as 80 dB. However, the land uses affected by the traffic noise are largely industrial in nature and are not noise sensitive. The primary source of annoyance to residents in the vicinity of the UPRR line adjacent to Downey Road is train horn soundings at rail crossings. INDUSTRIAL NOISE SOURCES In general, industrial noise within the City is not considered excessive because Vernon is a predominantly industrial city with few noise -sensitive properties. However, at the few scattered residences within the City, as well as at the Vernon City Elementary School, noise levels can exceed generally acceptable standards for these noise -sensitive uses. The impact is primarily related to noise generated by loading dock operations, trucks entering and leaving the area, and mechanical equipment located both inside and outside building. Acoustical Assessment 16 January 27, 2015 z u mo O a �¢ M� Z O' o w= av m a. O �F 0 0 wo >_ O Ga 0 N m Y C W a d m e 0 d m m L F Vernon Distributed Generation Project Adjacent to the City of Vernon are residential neighborhoods in the cities of Huntington Park and Maywood. Noise measurements taken in 2006 indicated that while average noise levels ranged up to 66.7 dBA and noise spikes registered 87.6 dBA during daytime hours, the measured CNELs of 61.5 dB in Huntington Park and 64 dB in Maywood were less than the exterior CNEL standard of 70 dB for residential properties in Vernon.' 4.3 FUTURE NOISE ENVIRONMENT Exhibit 5, 2030 Noise Contours for City of Vernon, indicates projected noise contours for year 2030, assuming growth in regional traffic volumes through Vernon and anticipated activity along rail lines, the Alameda Corridor, and the regional rail lines. Land use policy provides for continued industrial use throughout the community, with provision for some commercial uses along Santa Fe Avenue and limited portions of Soto Street to meet the needs of the daytime employee population. As indicated above, land use policy prohibits the introduction of any new noise -sensitive uses. Thus, the City does not anticipate any new noise conflicts will arise in Vernon over the life of the current General Plan. With regard to existing conditions where established residences and Vernon City Elementary School sometimes experience high noise levels, the City works with surrounding businesses to achieve noise standards established in the Zoning Ordinance. I City of Vernon General Plan, Noise Element, last amended February 23, 2009. Acoustical Assessment 18 January 27, 2015 This page intentionally left blank � 1 4 1f 44 t l I � I�j`~ �'�j• 'Ji Ed Ed 5 IS vG3V4 e z�= � �00 a ¢F U W o 2. 0= awca m� 0 F oLa 0 �o 0 c� y 0 z 0 M N Y C a x d 0 v .� m a L F Vernon Distributed Generation Project 5.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines contains analysis guidelines related to the assessment of noise impacts. These guidelines have been utilized to evaluate the potential for specific DG facilities to cause potentially significant noise impacts. : • Expose persons to, or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies (refer to Section 6.1); • Expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels (refer to Section 6.1 and 6.2); • Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (refer to Section 6.2); • Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (refer to Section 6.2). It should be noted that the CEQA guidelines also list noise factors associated with proximity to airports and airstrips, but these factor are not relevant because the closest airport/airstrip is over 6 miles from the City. Maintaining the CUP requirement for facility types that could result in potentially significant noise impacts based on the analysis presented herein would provide the City and avenue to establish permit conditions and require studies that would address these potential noise impacts on a project -specific basis. 5.2 METHODOLOGY Noise impacts associated with the potential DG projects were assessed using the following assumptions related to the proposed construction and operational activities. CONSTRUCTION Noise and vibration generated during construction of DG facilities would be typical of industrial construction processes. Impacts associated with construction noise and vibration are assessed using a number of variables, including construction activity locations, equipment types, duration of construction, vehicular access, workforce, and distances to nearest sensitive receptors. Typical construction equipment noise and vibration levels are provided, and are discussed in relation to the nearest sensitive receptors. In general, construction equipment noise and vibration levels significantly attenuate with an increase in distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. Construction durations at various locations within the City of Vernon are also given consideration to assess noise and vibration exposure to sensitive receptors. Workforce and Acoustical Assessment 20 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project vehicular traffic generated during construction are discussed to assess the potential for traffic noise impacts on local roadways and sensitive receptors within the City of Vernon. All potential construction noise impacts are compared to the thresholds and provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance and Noise Element, and CEQA significance thresholds to determine the severity of impacts. OPERATION Noise impacts from operational activities associated with DG facilities would be generated from stationary, on -site mechanical equipment for individual generation types. Operational noise impacts would vary among generation types, and would include a combination of factors including, but not limited to, equipment location, equipment capacity, scale of on -site operations, location of sensitive receptors, existing noise sources, surrounding land uses, required maintenance, hours of operation, gen-tie line operations, and model of generation type. In order to assess noise impacts associated with operating DG facilities, existing noise data for the several DG types discussed in Section 11 Project Description, are utilized to calculate the distances at which noise impacts would be above the City's noise standards. As stated above, noise levels significantly attenuate with an increase in distance. Based on the standard point source noise -distance attenuation factor of 6.0 dBA for each doubling of distance (inverse square law), operational noise impacts are evaluated by Equation 1 for noise attenuation over distance: (1) L2 = L, - 201ogio (d1/d2) Where: L, = known sound level at d, L2 = known sound level at d2 d, = distance of known sound level from point source d2 = distance of impacted area from point source Below is a discussion of potential noise levels associated with each DG type, based on existing reference data, equipment specifications, and publications. PV Solar Panels Noise impacts associated with PV solar panel operations are primarily attributed to the PV solar inverters that convert the variable direct current (DC) output of a PV solar panel into a utility frequency alternating current (AC) that can be fed into the electrical grid. Typical noise levels for PV inverters reach a maximum level of 65 dBA when measured at a distance of three meters (approximately 10 feet)? Refer to Section 6.0 for a discussion of the significance of these noise levels. 2 Satcon. PowerGate Plus PV Inverters. Available at: http://www.satcon.com/en/technologies/powergate-plus. Accessed on January 5, 2015. Acoustical Assessment 21 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Wind Power The sources of noise emitted from operating wind turbines can be divided into two categories: 1) Mechanical noise, from the interaction of turbine components; and 2) Aerodynamic sounds, produced by the flow of air over the blades. Mechanical noise originates from the relative motion of mechanical components and the dynamic response among them. Sources of such noise include: 1. Gearbox 2. Generator 3. Yaw Drives 4. Cooling Fans 5. Auxiliary Equipment (e.g., hydraulics) Since the emitted noise is associated with the rotation of mechanical and electrical equipment, it tends to be tonal (of a common frequency), although it may have a broadband component. For example, pure tones can be emitted at the rotational frequencies of shafts and generators, and the meshing frequencies of the gears. In addition, the hub, rotor, and tower may act as loudspeakers, transmitting the mechanical sound and radiating it. The transmission path of the noise can be air -borne or structure -borne. Airborne means that the noise is directly propagated from the component surface or interior into the air. Structure -borne noise is transmitted along other structural components before it is radiated into the air. Modern wind turbine generators are designed to minimize noise. The gearbox is specially -designed for quiet operation; the gear wheels are designed to flex slightly and reduce mechanical noise. In addition, special noise -dampening buffer pads separate the gearboxes from the nacelle frame to minimize the possibility that any vibrations could become noise. Large-scale turbines generate electricity that is synchronized to the grid. To compensate for minor wind speed changes, they adjust the pitch of the blades into the wind. These adjustments change the noise power levels and frequency components of the noise. A turbine's noise power represents the noise energy at the center of the blades, which radiates from a point source defined by the hub. Typical noise levels for wind power facilities of less than 50 kilowatts (kW) generally fall between 58 dBA and 64 dBA when measured at a distance of 100 feet.3 It should be noted that wind power generating projects are not viable or known to be proposed in the City. The City of Vernon is located in an area that has a Wind Power Density (W/m2) of less than 100, and this correlates to a National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Class 1 ranking. NREL ranks wind potential in classes ranging from Class 1 to Class 7. Class 1 is the lowest level, representing extremely low power density and this severely limits wind power generation. According to the NREL, Class 1 areas are generally not suitable for wind generation projects (http://www.nrel.gov/gis/wind_detail.html). The CUP requirements or exemption is 3 California Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources (CADER). A Matrix for Distributed Energy Resource Technologies. Available at: http://www.distributed-generation.com/library/CADER_Tech_Matrix.pdf. Accessed on January 5, 2015. Acoustical Assessment 22 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project not relevant to wind projects since they are not feasible in the City due to meteorological conditions. Microturbines Noise impacts associated with microturbine operations can be attributed to the various components that make up the gas turbines including, but not limited to, compressors, turbine generators, recuperators, bearings, and power electronics. As with most DG technologies, the noise level range for microturbines is based on several factors; but most importantly, based on the microturbine s capacity and model. According to the California Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources (CADER), typical noise levels for microturbines reach a maximum of 60 dBA at a distance of 33 feet 4 Refer to Section 6.0 for a discussion of the significance of these noise levels. Combustion Gas Turbines Noise impacts associated with operating combustion gas turbines are associated with the three primary components of the combustion gas turbine: the compressor, combustion system, and turbine. The compressor draws air into the engine, pressurizes it, and feeds it to the combustion chamber. The combustion system is typically made up of a ring of fuel injectors that inject a steady stream of fuel into combustion chambers where it mixes with the air. The combustion produces a high temperature, high pressure gas stream that enters and expands through the turbine. The turbine is an array of alternate stationary and rotating aerofoil -section blades. As hot combustion gas expands through the turbine, it spins the rotating blades. Typical noise levels for small combustion gas turbines reach approximately 85 dBA when measured at a distance of three feet.5 Refer to Section 6.0 for a discussion of the significance of these noise levels. Fuel Cells Fuel cells do not rely on combustion, and are therefore relatively quiet. The only components that cause moderate noise are the pieces of ancillary equipment such as fans, compressors, and pumps. As with most DG technologies, noise levels associated with fuel cells vary among manufacturers, models, and type of fuel cell. Table 5, Fuel Cell Noise Levels, summarizes the typical noise levels for different fuel cell types. With the emerging market of fuel cells for DG, Bloom Energy's solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) have come to dominate the fuel cell market with their design, cost effectiveness, and efficiency. Bloom Energy has developed three primary SOFCs with base load outputs (net AC) of 160 kW, 200 kW, and 250 kW. According to Bloom Energy's product datasheets, the three SOFCs would generate a maximum noise level of 70 dBA when measured at a distance of six feet.6 Refer to Section 6.0 for a discussion of the significance of these noise levels. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. 6 Bloom Energy, Product Data Sheets, Available at: http://www.bloomenergy.com/fuel-cell/energy-server/. Accessed on January 5, 2015. Acoustical Assessment 23 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Table 5 Fuel Cell Noise Levels Acoustical Assessment 24 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project �,. 6.0 ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS 6.1 SHORT-TERM NOISE SOURCES CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS Construction activities have a short and temporary duration, lasting from a few days to a period of several months. Groundborne noise and other types of construction -related noise impacts would typically occur during the initial site preparation, which can create the highest levels of noise. Generally, site preparation has the shortest duration of all construction phases. Activities that occur during this phase include earthmoving and soils compaction. High groundborne noise levels can occur during this phase due to haul trucks, backhoes, and other heavy-duty construction equipment. It should be noted that the majority of the City is developed, and future DG facilities would not require excessive earthwork or grading activities. During future development of DG facilities, adjacent sensitive receptors would be exposed to sporadic high noise and vibration levels associated with construction activities (as a result of power tools, jack -hammers, truck noise, etc.). Sensitive receptors located within the City are scarce, and include one school, one place of worship, and scattered residential units. Additionally, there are several sensitive receptors (primarily residential units) located within close proximity to the City that could be exposed to high noise levels during construction. Future development of DG facilities within the City would be subject to compliance with �,. Municipal Code Section 26.4.1-6, which establishes the City's Noise Standards. Project -specific noise studies and conditions would be most appropriate for combustion gas turbines, biomass energy plants, and waste to energy plants. Additionally, potential mitigation measures for noise from construction are presented in Section 7.0 of this report. However, construction of DG in the form of solar PV (less than 1 MW), fuel cells, and microturbines would be minimal and do not require large-scale demolition, earthwork, or heavy construction equipment. Therefore, construction noise associated with these sources is less than significant. Project specific noise studies would not be necessary for small scale DG (i.e., solar PV less than 1 MW, fuel cells, and microturbines). Construction Traffic It is anticipated that construction traffic would access the potential construction sites within the City from several major roadways, including the City's designated arterial streets. The City's arterial streets, together with freeways, form a network carrying long-distance, high-speed traffic. Arterial streets transport large volumes of traffic from one part of the City to another and connect to the regional street system. The arterial streets also move traffic between cities in locations where a freeway does not link the two. Of the roadways designed, constructed, and maintained by the City, arterials are designed to have the highest traffic carrying capacity, the highest speeds, and limited interference with traffic flow by driveways. Limitations on truck access to and from abutting properties are most important on arterial streets to prevent obstructions and delays. It is anticipated that construction truck traffic would access the DG project site(s) utilizing the City's six designated arterial streets. The six arterial streets include Acoustical Assessment 25 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Alameda Street, Santa Fe Avenue, Pacific Avenue, Soto Street, Downey Road and Atlantic Boulevard. While the City has scarce sensitive receptors, they are all located within close proximity to-, or adjacent to the City's arterial streets. Truck noise levels depend on vehicle speed, load, terrain, and other factors. The effects of construction -related truck traffic depend on the level of background noise already occurring at a particular receptor site. As depicted in Exhibit 4, 2007 Noise Contours for the City of Vernon, existing noise levels along the City's designated arterial streets reach upwards of 70 CNEL in the vicinity of sensitive receptors. Due to the existing noise levels associated with heavy truck and automobile traffic along the City's arterial streets, it is not anticipated that construction traffic as a result of implementing DG facilities within the City would generate noise levels above existing conditions. Furthermore, traffic associated with constructing DG facilities would be temporary in nature, and cease upon completion of site -specific projects. Thus, noise impacts related to construction traffic are anticipated to be less than significant. CONSTRUCTION -RELATED VIBRATION IMPACTS The construction of DG facilities involves several construction phases that have potential to generate groundborne vibration. Such activities may include minor demolition, drilling, excavation, and grading. While these construction activities would result in minor amounts of groundborne vibration, such groundborne noise or vibration would attenuate rapidly from the source and would not be generally perceptible outside of the construction areas. The FTA has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. In general, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations (i.e., 0.2 inch/second) appears to be conservative. The types of construction vibration impact include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any cosmetic damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibration generated by construction equipment. The vibration produced by construction equipment, is illustrated in Table 6, Tit ical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment. Ground -borne vibration decreases rapidly with distance. As indicated in Table 6, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during project construction range from 0.003 to 0.644 inch -per -second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet from the source of activity. The groundborne vibration generated during construction activities would primarily impact existing sensitive uses that are located adjacent to or within the vicinity of specific projects. However, the City of Vernon is predominantly built out and construction activities related to DG facilities would primarily be related to demolition and building construction. Extensive grading and earthwork activities are not anticipated. Construction of DG facilities that would require pile driving activities to take place could require alternatives or control techniques to Acoustical Assessment 26 January 27, 2015 M Vernon Distributed Generation Project reduce vibration. Based upon the information provided in Table 6, vibration levels could reach up to 0.089 inches per second for typical construction activities (and up to 0.644 inches per second if pile driving activities were to occur) at sensitive uses located within 25 feet of construction. As a result, only pile driving has the potential to exceed the 0.2 inch/second FTA threshold. Additionally, the project would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section 26.4.1-6, which prohibits noise or vibration nuisances on neighboring properties. Compliance with the City's Municipal Code and mitigation measures in Section 7.0 would minimize pile driving impacts that occur near sensitive receptors and reduce the generation and/or exposure of persons or structures to excessive groundborne vibration to less than significant levels. Mitigation is not necessary for small scale DG projects (i.e., solar PV less than 1 MW, fuel cells, and microturbines) that do not include pile driving. Table 6 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment Large bulldozer 0.089 0.031 0.011 Loaded trucks 0.076 0.027 0.010 Small bulldozer 0.003 0.001 0.000 Auger/drill rigs 0.089 0.031 0.011 Jackhammer 0.035 0.012 0.004 Vibratory hammer 0.035 0.012 1 0.004 Vibratory compactor/roller 0.003 0.001 1 0.0004 Pile Driver (impact) 0.644 0.228 1 0.081 1. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Table 12-2. 2. Calculated using the following formula: PPV equip = PPVrerx (25/D)7 5 where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 12-2 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Acoustical Assessment 27 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project 1.. 6.2 LONG-TERM NOISE SOURCES OR OPERATIONAL NOISE IMPACTS Some DG facilities require minimal maintenance operations once completed. Key elements of the DG facility operations and maintenance include cleaning DG technology components, monitoring electricity generation, site security, and facility maintenance (replacing or repairing inverters, wiring, PV modules, turbine components, fuel cells, etc.). Once placed into service, DG facilities would require an operational staff for operations, maintenance, and security. On - site maintenance activities could occur seven days a week, 24 hours per day to ensure energy output during operations, and for security purposes. As discussed above in Section 5.2, noise impacts from operational activities associated with DG facilities would also be generated from on -site mechanical equipment for individual generation types. Operational noise impacts would vary among generation types, and would include a combination of factors including, but not limited to, equipment location, equipment capacity, scale of on -site operations, location of sensitive receptors, existing noise sources, surrounding environment, required maintenance, hours of operation, gen-tie line operations, and model of generation type. As stated above, noise impacts from operational activities associated with DG facilities would be generated from stationary, on -site mechanical equipment for individual generation types. Operational noise impacts are evaluated based on the inverse square law of propagation for standard point source noise -distance attenuation, which uses a factor of 6.0 dBA for each doubling of distance; refer to Section 5.2. It should be noted that the inverse square law provides conservative estimates of noise impacts, as it does not account for topography, nearby structures, existing ambient noise levels, climate, or other factors that can influence noise levels through absorption and reflection of sound energy. Utilizing existing and published data for potential noise levels associated with each DG type (refer to Section 5.2), Table 7, Noise Attenuation for Operating DG Facilities, summarizes the results of applying inverse square law for noise attenuation over distance. As shown in Table 7, typical noise levels for operating DG facilities are anticipated to generate noise levels ranging from 42 dBA (proton exchange membrane fuel cell) to 67 dBA (gas engine) when measured at a distance of 25 feet, and range from 30 dBA to 55 dBA when measured at 100 feet. When measured at 100 feet, all operating DG facilities comply with the City's community noise standards (refer to Table 2). Acoustical Assessment 28 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project Table 7 Noise Attenuation for Operating DG Facilities �. 51 45 PV Solar Panels 57 Wind Power <50 k 2 NA NA NA Microturbines 62 56 50 Combustion Gas Turbines 67 61 55 Gas Reciprocating Engine 67 61 55 Molten Carbonate 62 56 50 Phosphoric Acid 64 58 52 Fuel Cells Proton Exchange Membrane 42 36 30 H bdd Solide Oxide 62 56 50 Bloom Energy SOFC 58 52 46 Note: 1. Noise levels are rounded to the nearest whole number. 2. Wind power generating projects are not viable or known to be proposed in the City; therefore noise levels are not included in this table. The potential exists for DG sources such as biomass energy plants and waste to energy plants (in the form of a carpet burning plant) to be located in the City of Vernon. These types of energy generation plants include combustion and mechanical equipment similar to the sources identified in Table 7. As these facilities generally include larger scale DG, they have the potential to be considered "normally incompatible" if placed adjacent to schools or churches. Considering the only school and church within the City are located adjacent to each other at the southwest corner of South Santa Fe Avenue and East Vernon Avenue, construction of large scale DG facilities (e.g., biomass energy plants, carpet burning plants, etc.) in the vicinity of the Vernon City Elementary School and/or the Holy Angels Church of the Deaf should be discouraged. If new construction or development of DG facilities would occur within 100 feet of these sensitive receptors, a Conditional Use Permit and a detailed analysis of project specific noise impacts and associated reduction measures (if necessary) would be required pursuant to the Noise Element of the City's General Plan. Operational noise would also be associated with substation transformers. Transformers typically produce a maximum noise level of 57 dBA at 50 feet when operating at full powers. Therefore, noise levels from the transformer operating at full power would not exceed the City's noise limit of 60 dBA for sensitive receptors. Other maintenance activities, such as cleaning DG technology components, monitoring electricity generation, site security, and facility maintenance (replacing or repairing inverters, wiring, PV modules, turbine components, fuel cells, etc.) would be expected to be long-term over the life of DG facilities. Potential effects from these activities on the existing ambient noise levels may be detectable for a short duration at the project sites and on local roads (minor increase in traffic), but given the relative location and scarcity of sensitive receptors within the City, any potential increases in the noise levels at project sites are unlikely to be detectable or of concern to the general public. Because DG facilities are not trip -generating projects, operation of DG facilities would not interfere with traffic flow function, increase traffic volumes, or result in roadway modifications. Furthermore, 8 Aspen Environmental Group, Topaz Solar Farm Project Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 2010. Acoustical Assessment 29 January 27, 2015 M Vernon Distributed Generation Project the project would comply with Municipal Code Section 26.4.1-6, which generally restricts noise impacts on neighboring residential properties to 60 dBA for outdoor activity areas between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM and 65 dBA for between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Therefore, there would be no long-term effects on existing ambient noise and vibration levels from maintenance activities associated with DG facilities. OPERATIONAL VIBRATION IMPACTS As stated above, vibration impacts would be greatest during construction activities, including demolition, drilling, excavation, and grading. Vibration levels from project operation (e.g., operation of generators, solar panels, wind turbines, fuel cells, etc.) would be lower than levels associated with construction equipment (refer to Table 6). Groundborne vibration from operational and maintenance activities is highly localized and not expected to reach beyond the DG facility sites. According to the FTA, special -use facilities where vibration would interfere with operations within the buildings include, but are not limited to, vibration -sensitive research and manufacturing, hospitals with vibration sensitive equipment, university research operations, concert halls, television and recording studios, theatres, residential land uses, hotels, schools, churches, and other institutional uses. As the City of Vernon does not contain any of the aforementioned special -use facilities, with the exception of scarce residences, one church, and one school, the operation of DG facilities is not expected to impact these special -use facilities unless sited within close proximity to the locations listed above in Table 4. Acoustical Assessment 30 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project `. 7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures are examples of typical mitigation to reduce or minimize in potentially significant noise and/or vibration impacts. N0I-1 Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, project applicants shall submit a plan that demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City of Vernon Planning Division, that the project complies with the following (as applicable): • The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. • The construction contractor shall locate the pile driver such that the rear of the machine faces toward the noise sensitive receptors when the vibratory pile driver is being utilized. • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest possible distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. • Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent receptors as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporated insulation barriers, or other measures to the extent feasible. • The construction contractor shall ensure proper maintenance and working order of equipment and vehicles, and that all construction equipment is equipped with manufacturers approved mufflers and baffles. • The construction contractor shall ensure that construction traffic utilizes the City's designated arterial streets to the maximum extent feasible for delivery of construction materials to and from project sites. • Construction noise shall comply with the City of Vernon Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 26.4.1-6). NOI-2 Prior to the issuance of each grading or building permit, project applicants shall submit to the City Planning Division a list of measures to respond to and track complaints pertaining to construction noise, ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or construction. These measures shall include the following: • A procedure and phone numbers for notifying the City Planning Division staff and Vernon Police Department (during regular construction hours and off -hours); • A sign posted on -site pertaining the permitted construction days and hours and complaint procedures and who to notify in the event of a problem. The sign shall also include a listing of both the City and construction contractor's telephone numbers (during regular construction hours and off -hours); Acoustical Assessment 31 January 27, 2015 M Vernon Distributed Generation Project • The designation of an on -site construction complaint and enforcement manager for the project. The manager shall act as a liaison between the project and its neighbors. The manager's responsibilities and authority shall include the following: o An active role in monitoring project compliance with respect to noise; o Ability to reschedule noisy construction activities to reduce effects on surrounding noise sensitive receptors; o Site supervision of all potential sources of noise (e.g., material delivery, shouting, debris box pick-up and delivery) for all trades; and o Intervening or discussing mitigation options with contractors. • Notification of neighbors and occupants within 100 feet of project construction areas at least 30 days in advance of extreme noise generating activities about the estimated duration of the activity; and • A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the job inspectors and the general contractor/on-site project manager to confirm that noise measures and practices (including construction hours, neighborhood notification, posted signs, etc.) are completed. NOI-3 If pile driving is required for project construction, the construction contractor shall incorporate the following additional requirements on all plans, specifications, and contractor bids to the satisfaction of the Vernon Planning Division: • Wherever possible, sonic or vibratory pile drivers shall be used instead of impact pile drivers (sonic pile drivers are only effective in certain soils). • Engine and pneumatic exhaust controls on pile drivers shall be required as necessary to ensure that exhaust noise from pile driver engines are minimized to the extent feasible. • Where feasible, pile holes will be pre -drilled to reduced potential noise and vibration impacts. • Occupied residences within 100 feet of pile driving activities shall be notified of pile -driving activities at least two weeks prior to the commencement of pile driving. NOI-4 Prior to the issuance of building permits, a focused noise and vibration study shall be required for specific Distributed Generation projects that would be located within 100 feet of a sensitive receptor. The focused noise and vibration study shall identify any construction and operational impacts and mitigation measures (if required) to ensure that the City of Vernon's (or neighboring city, if applicable) noise standards are not exceeded. The focused noise and vibration study shall be subject to review and approval by the City Planning Division. Acoustical Assessment 32 January 27, 2015 Vernon Distributed Generation Project 8.0 REFERENCES 8.1 LIST OF PREPARERS RBF CONSULTING 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618 949/472-3505 Eddie Torres, INCE, Environmental Sciences Manager Achilles Malisos, Air and Noise Studies Manager Adam Furman, Environmental Analyst 8.2 DOCUMENTS 1. Aspen Environmental Group, Topaz Solar Farm Project Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 2010. 2. California Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources (CADER), A Matrix for Distributed Energy Resource Technologies. Available at: http://www.distributed- generation.com/library/CADER_Tech_Matrix.pdf. Accessed on January 5, 2015. 3. City of Vernon General Plan, Noise Element. Last amended February 23, 2009. 4. City of Vernon Municipal Code, Section 26.4.1-6, Development Standards. 5. Cyril M. Harris, Handbook of Noise Control,1979. 6. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. 8.3 WEB SITES/PROGRAMS 1. Bloom Energy, Product Data Sheets. Available at: http://www.bloomenergy.com/fuel- cell/energy-server/. Accessed on January 5, 2015. 2. Satcon, PowerGate Plus PV Inverters. Available at: http://www.satcon.com/en/technologies/powergate-plus. Accessed on January 5, 2015. Acoustical Assessment 33 January 27, 2015