ceqa and climate changelgc.org/wordpress/docs/events/ceqa2008/capcoa... · projects of regional,...
TRANSCRIPT
CEQA and Climate Change
Evaluating & Addressing GHGEmissions from Projects
Barbara Lee, CAPCOA
CAPCOA’s Resource PaperAir Districts were approached by local
governments for help on CEQA & GHGCalifornia Air Pollution Control Officers
Association coordinated district’s effortsResource guide released in January ’08
Intended to provide support for lead agenciesincorporating GHG analysis into CEQA programs
Not intended to dictate policy decisionsPlan to provide addendum in 9 - 12 months with
thresholds set, new mitigations, etc.
available at: www.capcoa.org
Overview
Consideration of Fundamental IssuesWhat to do about ThresholdsAnalytical Methods & ToolsMitigation
Fundamental Principles
CEQA Requirement: Public agencies should refrain from approving
projects that have significant adverseenvironmental impacts if there are feasiblealternatives or mitigations that can substantiallyavoid those impacts
Fair Argument Standard: An EIR must be prepared if it can be fairly
argued (based on substantial evidence in therecord) that the project may have a significantenvironmental impact
More Fundamental Principles
Defensible AnalysesSufficient analysis of environmental
consequences to support informed decisionConclusions supported by substantial
evidenceGood faith effort at full disclosure
What About Thresholds?
Statewide ThresholdsLack of guidance on significance does
NOT change the agency’s obligation underCEQA
OPR to develop GHG mitigation guidanceby July ’09, and Resource Agency to adoptby January ’10
ARB could establish statewide approachunder AB 32 scoping plan
Interim Approach
Three Paths Through CEQA
What is Significant?Implementing CEQA with No GHG ThresholdImplementing CEQA with GHG Threshold set
at ZeroImplementing CEQA with a Non-zero
Threshold
CEQA with no GHG Threshold
CEQA does not require a lead agency toset a significance threshold
In the absence of a threshold, significanceis determined on a case-by-case basis
Issues:May create uncertainty for project proponentsMay create workload and resource issues for
agency
CEQA with GHG Threshold of Zero
Considers ALL emissions of GHG to besignificantAll projects must have EIR or MNDAll emissions must be mitigated to zero or
receive a Statement of OverridingConsiderations
Greater degree of certainty for projectproponents
Could place substantial workload andresource burdens on agency andproponents
CEQA with Non-zero Threshold
CAPCOA evaluated two approaches tosetting a non-zero threshold:Approach 1- Thresholds based on emission
reduction targets of Statutes and ExecutiveOrders
Approach 2- Tiered thresholdsOther approaches can be used but were
not examined in this reportGoal is to maximize environmental benefit
while minimizing burden on agencies &proponents
Non-Zero Threshold Approach #1
The Statute & Executive Order Approachwould require each project to meet theemission reduction targets of AB 32 andthe Governor’s Executive Order.Uniform Percentage for all projectsGreater Percentage for New DevelopmentPercentages by Economic SectorPercentages by Region
Establishing “business as usual” baselineDetermining appropriate percentages
Non-zero Threshold Approach #2Tiers = low, moderate, high potential for impactsTier or “bin” projects based on specified
characteristics (quantitative or qualitative)capture of a percentage of projects regulatory reporting thresholdsprojects of regional, statewide, or areawide significanceefficiency (normalize GHG emissions to different metrics)
Increased degree of review & mitigation for each tierTier 1 projects less than significant with Level 1 mitigationTier 2 projects less than significant with Level 1 & Level 2
mitigations additional process, possible noticeTier 3 projects require EIR or MND and Level 1, 2 & 3
mitigations
Approach #2: Defined Process
Establish a clear decision tree for projectreview
Add certainty with defined lists of criteriaand requirementsStatutory ExemptionsGreen ListMitigations for each tier (Level 1, 2, and 3)
Approach requires more up-frontpreparation and development
Analytical Methods & Tools URBEMIS
Direct Emissions Indirect Emissions
CCAR Protocols General Reporting Protocol Specific Protocols (e.g., Forestry, Local Government)
Specific Sectors and Source Categories Stationary Sources Wastewater and Solid Waste Construction
Longer Term: Integrated models such as IPLACE3S orCTG Energetics’ Sustainable Communities model
Report Table 10 compares 13 different emissionsestimating tools
Analytic ScenariosGeneral Plan:
Existing conditionsAB 32 Baseline = 1990 emissionsBuildout of the Existing General PlanBuildout of the Updated General Plan Increment between Buildout of the Existing and
Updated General PlansOther Plans:
Air Quality PlansRegional Transportation Plans
Specific Projects:New and expanded stationary and area sourcesRoad or levee construction
GHG Mitigation StrategiesForward Planning: Incorporate GHG reduction
strategies into the General Plan Land Use Design- Prioritize Smarter Growth, Connectivity,
Compactness, Diversity, Transportation Facilities,Redevelopment, Jobs-Housing-Balance, and ShippingMode Shift
Project Level Mitigation: Provide a “toolbox” ofstrategies to mitigate projects Project Design- Transit, Bike, & Pedestrian support,
Alternative Fuel & Electric Vehicles, Energy & WaterEfficiency, Green Building, Landscaping, Low EmissionTechnologies, and Offsets
GHG Reduction Plan: Implement a specific plan toreduce GHG emissions Establish jurisdictional baseline, reduction targets,
deadlines, and specific mitigation strategies and measures
Compiled MitigationsSpecific examples of projects, analysis,
mitigations applied, benefits realizedProject mitigation measures summary with basic
information on:ApplicabilityEffectivenessFeasibility (cost, technology, logistics)Secondary effectsJurisdictional assignment
General Plan mitigation strategy summarySource typeAgencyGeneral description
Mitigation Priorities & Issues
Systemic Design to Avoid EmissionsProject Design to Avoid EmissionsProject Elements that Control EmissionsConcurrent Onsite Actions to Offset
EmissionsConcurrent Offsite Actions to Offset
EmissionsUse of Mitigation FeesUse of Banked Offsets: Real, Permanent,
Quantifiable, Enforceable, Additional