HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment 3a-04 - CEQA Energy Review redactedAZ Office CA Office
4960 S. Gilbert Road, Ste 1-461 1197 Los Angeles Avenue, Ste C-256
Chandler, AZ 85249 Simi Valley, CA 93065
p. (602) 774-1950 p. (805) 426-4477
www.mdacoustics.com
MD Acoustics, LLC 1
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
December 5, 2022
Mr. Steven Schwartz
VWP-OP Nirvana Owner, LLC
2390 E. Camelback Rd., Ste. 305
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Subject: Shinohara Industrial Center Project – CEQA Energy Review, 517 Shinohara Lane
City of Chula Vista, CA
Dear Mr. Schwarts:
MD Acoustics, LLC (MD) has completed a CEQA energy review for the proposed Shinohara Industrial Project
located at 517 Shinohara Lane near Main Street between Oleander Avenue and Brandywine Avenue in the
City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California. The approximately 9.72-acre project site is proposed to be
developed with a 168,926 square foot warehouse and distribution center with 4,506 square feet of office
space and 4,724 square feet of mezzanine space.
1.0 Existing Energy Conditions
Overview
California’s estimated annual energy use as of 2019 included:
Approximately 277,704 gigawatt hours of electricity; 1
Approximately 2,136,907 million cubic feet of natural gas per year (for the year 2018)2;and
Approximately 23.2 billion gallons of transportation fuel (for the year 2015)3.
As of 2019, the year of most recent data currently available by the United States Energy Information
Administration (EIA), energy use in California by demand sector was:
Approximately 39.3 percent transportation;
Approximately 23.2 percent industrial;
Approximately 18.7 percent residential; and
Approximately 18.9 percent commercial.4
1California Energy Commission. Energy Almanac. Total Electric Generation. [Online] 2020.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation.
2Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. U.S. Energy Information Administration. [Online] August 31, 20020.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_SCA_a.htm.
3California Energy Commission. Revised Transportation Energy Demand Forecast 2018-2030. [Online] April 19, 2018.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/assessments/
4U.S. Energy Information Administration. California Energy Consumption by by End-Use Sector.
California State Profile and Energy Estimates.[Online] January 16, 2020 https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2
APPENDIX F
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 2
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
California's electricity in-state generation system generates approximately 200,475 gigawatt-hours each
year. In 2019, California produced approximately 72 percent of the electricity it uses; the rest was imported
from the Pacific Northwest (approximately 9 percent) and the U.S. Southwest (approximately 19 percent).
Natural gas is the main source for electricity generation at approximately 42.97 percent of the total in-state
electric generation system power as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Total Electricity System Power (California 2019)
Fuel Type
California
In-State
Generation
GWh)
Percent of
California
In-State
Generation
Northwest
Imports
GWh)
Southwest
Imports
GWh)
Total
Imports
GWh)
Percent
of
Imports
California
Power
Mix
GWh)
Percent
California
Power
Mix
Coal 248 0.12% 219 7,765 7,985 10.34% 8,233 2.96%
Natural Gas 86,136 42.97% 62 8,859 8,921 11.55% 95,057 34.23%
Nuclear 16,163 8.06% 39 8,743 8,782 11.37% 24,945 8.98%
Oil 36 0.02% 0 0 0 0.00% 36 0.01%
Other (Petroleum
Coke/Waste Heat)
411 0.20% 0 11 11 0.01% 422 0.15%
Large Hydro 33,145 16.53% 6,387 1,071 7,458 9.66% 40,603 14.62%
Unspecified
Sources of Power
0 0.00% 6,609 13,767 20,376 26.38% 20,376 7.34%
Renewables 64,336 32.09% 10,615 13,081 23,696 30.68% 88,032 31.70%
Biomass 5,851 2.92% 903 33 936 1.21% 6,787 2.44%
Geothermal 10,943 5.46% 99 2,218 2,318 3.00% 13,260 4.77%
Somall Hydro 5,349 2.67% 292 4 296 0.38% 5,646 2.03%
Solar 28,513 14.22% 282 5,295 5,577 7.22% 34,090 12.28%
Wind 13,680 6.82% 9,038 5,531 14,569 18.87% 28,249 10.17%
Total 200,475 100.00% 23,930 53,299 77,229 100.00% 277,704 100.00%
Notes:
1 Source: California Energy Commission. 2019 Total System electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-
electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation
A summary of and context for energy consumption and energy demands within the State is presented in
U.S. Energy Information Administration, California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Quick Facts”
excerpted below:
California was the seventh-largest producer of crude oil among the 50 states in 2018, and, as of
January 2019, it ranked third in oil refining capacity.
California is the largest consumer of jet fuel among the 50 states and accounted for one-fifth of
the nation’s jet fuel consumption in 2018.
California’s total energy consumption is the second-highest in the nation, but, in 2018, the State’s
per capita energy consumption ranked the fourth-lowest, due in part to its mild climate and its
energy efficiency programs.
In 2018, California ranked first in the nation as a producer of electricity from solar, geothermal,
and biomass resources and fourth in the nation in conventional hydroelectric power generation.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 3
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
In 2018, large- and small-scale solar PV and solar thermal installations provided 19% of
California’s net electricity generation5.
As indicated above, California is one of the nation’s leading energy producing states, and California per
capita energy use is among the nation’s most efficient. Given the nature of the proposed project, the
remainder of this discussion will focus on the three sources of energy that are most relevant to the project—
namely, electricity and natural gas for building uses, and transportation fuel for vehicle trips associated with
the proposed project.
Electricity and Natural Gas
Electricity and natural gas would be provided to the project by San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). SDG&E
provides electrical and natural gas service to the project area through State regulated utility contracts.
SDG&E provides electric energy service to 3.6 million people located in most of San Diego County and
the southern portion of Orange County, within a service area encompassing approximately 4,100 square
miles.6 The delivery of electricity involves a number of system components, including substations and
transformers that lower transmission line power (voltage) to a level appropriate for on site distribution
and use. The electricity generated is distributed through a network of transmission and distribution lines
commonly called a power grid. In 2020, SDG&E provided 17,445 Gigawatt hours per year of electricity.7
Table 2 identifies SDG&E’s specific proportional shares of electricity sources in 2019. As shown in Table
2, the 2019 SDG&E Power Mix has renewable energy at 31.3 percent of the overall energy resources, of
which biomass and waste is at 2 percent, solar energy is at 17 percent, and wind power is at 13 percent;
other energy sources include natural gas at 24 percent and unspecified sources at 44 percent.
Natural gas is delivered through a nation wide network of high pressure transmission pipelines. In 2020,
SDG&E provided 505.2 Million Therms of natural gas.8
The following summary of natural gas resources and service providers, delivery systems, and associated
regulation is excerpted from information provided by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
The CPUC regulates natural gas utility service for approximately 11 million customers that receive natural
gas from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Gas (SoCalGas), San Diego Gas & Electric
SDG&E), Southwest Gas, and several smaller investor-owned natural gas utilities. The CPUC also
regulates independent storage operators Lodi Gas Storage, Wild Goose Storage, Central Valley
Storage and Gill Ranch Storage.
California's natural gas utilities provide service to over 11 million gas meters. SoCalGas and PG&E
provide service to about 5.9 million and 4.3 million customers, respectively, while SDG&E provides
service to over 800, 000 customers. In 2018, California gas utilities forecasted that they would deliver
5State Profile and Energy Estimates. Independent Statistics and Analysis. [Online] [Cited: January 16, 2020.]
http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs2.
6 https://www.sdge.com/more-information/our-company
7 Obtained from http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx
8 Obtained from http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 4
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
about 4740 million cubic feet per day (MMcfd) of gas to their customers, on average, under normal
weather conditions.
The vast majority of California's natural gas customers are residential and small commercial customers,
referred to as "core" customers. Larger volume gas customers, like electric generators and industrial
customers, are called "noncore" customers. Although very small in number relative to core customers,
noncore customers consume about 65% of the natural gas delivered by the state's natural gas utilities,
while core customers consume about 35%.
The PUC regulates the California utilities' natural gas rates and natural gas services, including in-state
transportation over the utilities' transmission and distribution pipeline systems, storage, procurement,
metering and billing.
Most of the natural gas used in California comes from out-of-state natural gas basins. In 2017, for
example, California utility customers received 38% of their natural gas supply from basins located in the
U.S. Southwest, 27% from Canada, 27% from the U.S. Rocky Mountain area, and 8% from production
located in California.”9
Table 2
SDG&E 2019 Power Content Mix
Energy Resources 2019 SDG&E Power Mix
Eligible Renewable1 31.3%
Biomass & Biowaste 2%
Geothermal 0%
Eligible Hydroelectric 0%
Solar 17%
Wind 13%
Coal 0%
Large Hydroelectric 0%
Natural Gas 24%
Nuclear 0%
Other 0%
Unspecified Sources of
power2 44%
Total 100%
Notes:
Source: 'https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/files/documents/FINAL_S2010027_DecOnsert20.pdf
1) The eligible renewable percentage above does not reflect RPS compliance, which is determined using a
different methodology.
2) Unspecified sources of power means electricity from transactions that are not traceable to specific
generation sources.
9California Public Utilities Commission. Natural Gas and California. http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural_gas/
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 5
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Transportation Energy Resources
The project would attract additional vehicle trips with resulting consumption of energy resources,
predominantly gasoline and diesel fuel. Gasoline (and other vehicle fuels) are commercially provided
commodities and would be available to the project patrons and employees via commercial outlets.
The most recent data available shows the transportation sector emits 40 percent of the total greenhouse
gases in the state and about 84 percent of smog-forming oxides of nitrogen (NOx).10,11 About 28 percent
of total United States energy consumption in 2019 was for transporting people and goods from one place
to another. In 2019, petroleum comprised about 91 percent of all transportation energy use, excluding
fuel consumed for aviation and most marine vessels.12 In 2020, about 123.49 billion gallons (or about
2.94 billion barrels) of finished motor gasoline were consumed in the United States, an average of about
337 million gallons (or about 8.03 million barrels) per day.13
2.0 Regulatory Background
Federal and state agencies regulate energy use and consumption through various means and programs. On
the federal level, the United States Department of Transportation, the United States Department of Energy,
and the United States Environmental Protection Agency are three federal agencies with substantial
influence over energy policies and programs. On the state level, the PUC and the California Energy
Commissions (CEC) are two agencies with authority over different aspects of energy. Relevant federal and
state energy related laws and plans are summarized below.
Federal Regulations
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
First established by the U.S. Congress in 1975, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards
reduce energy consumption by increasing the fuel economy of cars and light trucks. The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) jointly administer
the CAFE standards. The U.S. Congress has specified that CAFE standards must be set at the “maximum
feasible level” with consideration given for: (1) technological feasibility; (2) economic practicality; (3) effect
of other standards on fuel economy; and (4) need for the nation to conserve energy.14
Issued by NHTSA and EPA in March 2020 (published on April 30, 2020 and effective after June 29, 2020),
the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule would maintain the CAFE and CO2 standards applicable
in model year 2020 for model years 2021 through 2026. The estimated CAFE and CO2 standards for
model year 2020 are 43.7 mpg and 204 grams of CO2 per mile for passenger cars and 31.3 mpg and 284
10 CARB. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory – 2020 Edition. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm
11 CARB. 2016 SIP Emission Projection Data. https://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/2017/emseic1_query.php?F_DIV=-
4&F_YR=2012&F_SEASON=A&SP=SIP105ADJ&F_AREA=CA
12 US Energy Information Administration. Use of Energy in the United States Explained: Energy Use for Transportation.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_energy_transportation
13 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=23&t=10
14 https://www.nhtsa.gov/lawsregulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 6
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
grams of CO2 per mile for light trucks, projecting an overall industry average of 37 mpg, as compared to
46.7 mpg under the standards issued in 2012.15
Intermodal Surface transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA)
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) promoted the development of inter
modal transportation systems to maximize mobility as well as address national and local interests in air
quality and energy. ISTEA contained factors that Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) were to
address in developing transportation plans and programs, including some energy related factors. To meet
the new ISTEA requirements, MPOs adopted explicit policies defining the social, economic, energy, and
environmental values guiding transportation decisions.
The Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21)
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21) was signed into law in 1998 and builds upon
the initiatives established in the ISTEA legislation, discussed above. TEA 21 authorizes highway, highway
safety, transit, and other efficient surface transportation programs. TEA 21 continues the program structure
established for highways and transit under ISTEA, such as flexibility in the use of funds, emphasis on
measures to improve the environment, and focus on a strong planning process as the foundation of good
transportation decisions. TEA 21 also provides for investment in research and its application to maximize
the performance of the transportation system through, for example, deployment of Intelligent
Transportation Systems, to help improve operations and management of transportation systems and
vehicle safety.
State Regulations
Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR)
Senate Bill 1389 requires the California Energy Commission (CEC) to prepare a biennial integrated energy
policy report that assesses major energy trends and issues facing the State’s electricity, natural gas, and
transportation fuel sectors and provides policy recommendations to conserve resources; protect the
environment; ensure reliable, secure, and diverse energy supplies; enhance the state’s economy; and
protect public health and safety. The Energy Commission prepares these assessments and associated policy
recommendations every two years, with updates in alternate years, as part of the Integrated Energy Policy
Report.
The 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report (2019 IEPR) was adopted February 20, 2020, and continues to
work towards improving electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel energy use in California. The
2019 IEPR focuses on a variety of topics such as decarbonizing buildings, integrating renewables, energy
15 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2018. Federal Register / Vol. 83, No.
165 / Friday, August 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules, The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021–2026 Passenger
Cars and Light Trucks 2018. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/safer-affordable-fuel-efficient-safe-
vehicles-final-rule.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 7
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
efficiency, energy equity, integrating renewable energy, updates on Southern California electricity
reliability, climate adaptation activities for the energy sector, natural gas assessment, transportation
energy demand forecast, and the California Energy Demand Forecast.16
The 2020 IEPR was adopted March 23, 2021 and identifies actions the state and others can take to ensure
a clean. Affordable, and reliable energy system. In 2020, the IEPR focuses on California’s transportation
future and the transition to zero-emission vehicles, examines microgrids, lessons learned form a decade
of state-supported research, and stakeholder feedback on the potential of microgrids to contribute to a
lean and resilient energy system; and reports on California’s energy demand outlook, updated to reflect
the global pandemic and help plan for a growth in zero-emission plug in electric vehicles.17
State of California Energy Plan
The CEC is responsible for preparing the State Energy Plan, which identifies emerging trends related to
energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a healthy economy.
The Plan calls for the state to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality,
reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy
costs. To further this policy, the plan identifies a number of strategies, including assistance to public agencies
and fleet operators and encouragement of urban designs that reduce vehicle miles traveled and
accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access.
California Building Standards Code (Title 24)
California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6)
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (California
Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6) were adopted to ensure that building construction and system design
and installation achieve energy efficiency and preserve outdoor and indoor environmental quality. The
current California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 standards) are the 2019 Title 24 standards,
which became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Title 24 standards include efficiency improvements
to the lighting and efficiency improvements to the non-residential standards include alignment with the
American Society of Heating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
All buildings for which an application for a building permit is submitted on or after January 1, 2020 must
follow the 2019 standards. The 2016 residential standards were estimated to be approximately 28 percent
more efficient than the 2013 standards, whereas the 2019 residential standards are estimated to be
approximately 7 percent more efficient than the 2016 standards. Furthermore, once rooftop solar electricity
generation is factored in, 2019 residential standards are estimated to be approximately 53 percent more
efficient than the 2016 standards. Under the 2019 standards, nonresidential buildings are estimated to be
approximately 30 percent more efficient than the 2016 standards. Energy efficient buildings require less
16 California Energy Commission. Final 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report. February 20, 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data -
reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2019-integrated-energy-policy-report
17 California Energy Commission. Final 2020 Integrated Energy Policy Report. March 23, 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data -
reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2020-integrated-energy-policy-report-update
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 8
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases
greenhouse gas emissions.
California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 11)
The 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11),
commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, went into effect on January 1, 2020. The 2019 CALGreen
Code includes mandatory measures for non-residential development related to site development;
energy efficiency; water efficiency and conservation; material conservation and resource efficiency; and
environmental quality.
The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2019
Triennial Code Adoption Cycle. HCD modified the best management practices for stormwater pollution
prevention adding Section 5.106.2; added sections 5.106.4.1.3 and 5.106.4.1.5 in regard to bicycle
parking; amended section 5.106.5.3.5 allowing future charging spaces to qualify as designated parking
for clean air vehicles; updated section 5.303.3.3 in regard to showerhead flow rates; amended section
5.304.1 for outdoor potable water use in landsca pe areas and repealed sections 5.304.2 and 5.304.3;
and updated Section 5.504.5.3 in regard to the use of MERV filters in mechanically ventilated buildings .
Senate Bill 100
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) requires 100 percent of total retail sales of electricity in California to come from
eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SB 100 was
adopted September 2018.
The interim thresholds from prior Senate Bills and Executive Orders would also remain in effect. These
include Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078), which requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned
utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable
sources by 2017. Senate Bill 107 (SB 107) which changed the target date to 2010. Executive Order S-14-
08, which was signed on November 2008 and expanded the State’s Renewable Energy Standard to 33
percent renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order S-21-09 directed the CARB to adopt regulations by
July 31, 2010 to enforce S-14-08. Senate Bill X1-2 codifies the 33 percent renewable energy requirement
by 2020.
Senate Bill 350
Senate Bill 350 (SB 350) was signed into law October 7, 2015, SB 350 increases California’s renewable
electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030. This will increase the use of
Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) eligible resources, including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and
others. In addition, SB 350 requires the state to double statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and
natural gas end uses by 2030. To help ensure these goals are met and the greenhouse gas emission
reductions are realized, large utilities will be required to develop and submit Integrated Resource Plans
IRPs). These IRPs will detail how each entity will meet their customers resource needs, reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and ramp up the deployment of clean energy resources.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 9
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Assembly Bill 32
In 2006 the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG
emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap
which will be phased in starting in 2012. Emission reductions shall include carbon sequestration projects
that would remove carbon from the atmosphere and best management practices that are technologically
feasible and cost effective.
Assembly Bill 1493/Pavley Regulations
California Assembly Bill 1493 enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations
that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. In 2005, the CARB submitted a
waiver” request to the EPA from a portion of the federal Clean Air Act in order to allow the State to set
more stringent tailpipe emission standards for CO2 and other GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and
light duty trucks. On December 19, 2007 the EPA announced that it denied the “waiver” request. On January
21, 2009, CARB submitted a letter to the EPA administrator regarding the State’s request to reconsider the
waiver denial. The EPA approved the waiver on June 30, 2009.
Executive Order S-1-07/Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Executive Order S-1-07 was issued in 2007 and proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source
of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State’s GHG emissions. It
establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten
percent by 2020. This Order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)
could be adopted as a discrete early-action measure as part of the effort to meet the mandates in AB 32.
On April 23, 2009 CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard and
began implementation on January 1, 2011. The low carbon fuel standard is anticipated to reduce GHG
emissions by about 16 MMT per year by 2020. CARB approved some amendments to the LCFS in December
2011, which were implemented on January 1, 2013. In September 2015, the Board approved the re-
adoption of the LCFS, which became effective on January 1, 2016, to address procedural deficiencies in the
way the original regulation was adopted. In 2018, the Board approved amendments to the regulation, which
included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in-line with
California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32, adding new crediting opportunities
to promote zero emission vehicle adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and
advanced technologies to achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector.
The LCFS is designed to encourage the use of cleaner low-carbon transportation fuels in California,
encourage the production of those fuels, and therefore, reduce GHG emissions and decrease petroleum
dependence in the transportation sector. Separate standards are established for gasoline and diesel fuels
and the alternative fuels that can replace each. The standards are “back-loaded”, with more reductions
required in the last five years, than during the first five years. This schedule allows for the development of
advanced fuels that are lower in carbon than today’s fuels and the market penetration of plug-in hybrid
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 10
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, and flexible fuel vehicles. It is anticipated that
compliance with the low carbon fuel standard will be based on a combination of both lower carbon fuels
and more efficient vehicles.
Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn-derived ethanol at ten percent by volume and low sulfur diesel fuel
represent the baseline fuels. Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or blends of
these fuels with gasoline or diesel as appropriate. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also
may be low carbon fuels. Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles are also
considered as low carbon fuels for the low carbon fuel standard.
Executive Order N-79-20/Zero Emissions by 2035 Standard
Executive Order N-79-20 was issued in January 2021 and proposes a goal of the State that 100 percent of
in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks will be zero-emission by 2035. Furthermore, it proposes a
goal of the State that 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero-emission by
2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks, as well as to transition to 100 percent
zero-emission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035 where feasible.
California Air Resources Board
CARB’s Advanced Clean Cars Program
Closely associated with the Pavley regulations, the Advanced Clean Cars emissions control program was
approved by CARB in 2012. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and GHGs with requirements
for greater numbers of zero-emission vehicles for model years 2015–2025. The components of the
Advanced Clean Cars program include the Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV) regulations that reduce criteria
pollutants and GHG emissions from light- and medium-duty vehicles, and the Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV)
regulation, which requires manufacturers to produce an increasing number of pure ZEVs (meaning battery
electric and fuel cell electric vehicles), with provisions to also produce plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV)
in the 2018 through 2025 model years.18
Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling
The Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling (Title 13,
California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 10, Section 2435) was adopted to reduce public exposure
to diesel particulate matter and other air contaminants by limiting the idling of diesel-fueled commercial
motor vehicles. This section applies to diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight
ratings of greater than 10,000 pounds that are or must be licensed for operation on highways. Reducing
idling of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles reduces the amount of petroleum-based fuel used by the
vehicle.
Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen, and other Criteria
Pollutants, form In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles
18 California Air Resources Board, California’s Advanced Clean Cars Program, January 18, 2017. www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/acc.htm.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 11
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
The Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and other Criteria
Pollutants, from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles (Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Division
3, Chapter 1, Section 2025) was adopted to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen
NOX) and other criteria pollutants from in-use diesel-fueled vehicles. This regulation is phased, with full
implementation by 2023. The regulation aims to reduce emissions by requiring the installation of diesel soot
filters and encouraging the retirement, replacement, or repower of older, dirtier engines with newer
emission-controlled models. The newer emission controlled models would use petroleum-based fuel in a
more efficient manner.
Sustainable Communities Strategy
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, or Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), coordinates
land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet the GHG
reduction mandates established in AB 32.
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 and aligns regional transportation planning efforts,
regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPO) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternate planning
strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). CARB,
in consultation with each MPO, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted
by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be
updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies
affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. As of 2018, the 2020 and 2035 targets were set at 15
percent and 19 percent, respectively. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s sustainable
communities strategy or alternate planning strategy for consistency with its assigned targets.
3.0 Evaluation Criteria and Methodology
Evaluation Criteria
CEQA Energy Questions
In compliance with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, this report analyzes the project’s anticipated
energy use to determine if the project would:
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
In addition, Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the means of achieving the goal of energy
conservation includes the following:
MD Acoustics, LLC 12
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
19 The estimated construction timeline was generated based on CalEEMod default construction timelines for each phase of construction and a
completion date of mid-spring 2024.
20 Pray, Richard. 2017 National Construction Estimator. Carlsbad : Craftsman Book Company, 2017.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption;
Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil; and
Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.
Appendix F of the State CEQA guidelines also states that the environmental impacts from a project can
include:
The project’s energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for each
stage of the project including construction, operation, maintenance and/or removal. If appropriate,
the energy intensiveness of materials may be discussed.
The effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies and on requirements for additional
capacity.
The effects of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of
energy.
The degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards.
The effects of the project on energy resources.
The project’s projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient
transportation alternatives.
Methodology
Information from the CalEEMod 2022.1 Daily and Annual Outputs contained in the Shinohara Air Quality,
Greenhouse Gas, and Health Risk Assessment Impact Study (air quality and greenhouse gas analysis)
prepared for the proposed project by MD (December 5, 2022), was utilized for this analysis. The CalEEMod
outputs detail project related construction equipment, transportation energy demands, and facility energy
demands.
4.0 Energy Review
Construction Energy Demand
The construction schedule is anticipated to begin no earlier than March 2023 and be completed by mid-
spring 2024 and be completed in one phase.19 Staging of construction vehicles and equipment will occur
on-site.
Construction Equipment Electricity Usage Estimates
As stated previously, electrical service will be provided by SDG&E. The focus within this section is the
energy implications of the construction process, specifically the power cost from on-site electricity
consumption during construction of the proposed project. Based on the 2017 National Construction
Estimator, Richard Pray (2017)20, the typical power cost per 1,000 square feet of building construction
per month is estimated to be $2.32. The project plans to develop the site with 168,926 square foot
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 13
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
warehouse with 4,506 square feet of office space and 4,724 square feet of mezzanine space over the course
of approximately 18 months. Based on Table 3, the total power cost of the on-site electricity usage during
the construction of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately $7,439.96. Furthermore,
SDG&E’s service rate for schedule is approximately $0.24 per kWh of electricity for the proposed
industrial project.21 As shown in Table 3, the total electricity usage from Project construction related
activities is estimated to be approximately 31,392 kWh.
Table 3: Project Construction Power Cost and Electricity Usage
Power Cost (per 1,000 square
foot of building per month of
construction)
Total Building
Size (1,000
Square Foot)
Construction
Duration
months)
Total Project
Construction
Power Cost
2.32 178.160 18 $7,439.96
Cost per kWh
Total Project Construction
Electricity Usage (kWh)
0.24 31,392
Assumes the project will be under Schedule TOU-A rate under SDG&E and, to be conservative, uses the
lower anticipated cost per kWh. Source: https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/files/regulatory/3-1-
21%20Small%20Commercial%20Total%20Rates%20Table.pdf
Construction Equipment Fuel Estimates
Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the
course of project construction. Fuel consumed by construction equipment was evaluated with the
following assumptions:
Construction schedule of approximately 18 months
All construction equipment was assumed to run on diesel fuel
Typical daily use of 8 hours, with some equipment operating from ~6-7 hours
Aggregate fuel consumption rate for all equipment was estimated at 18.5 bhp-hr/gal (from
CARB’s 2017 Emissions Factors Tables and fuel consumption rate factors as shown in Table D -21
of the Moyer Guidelines:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf ).
Diesel fuel would be the responsibility of the equipment operators/contractors and would be
sources within the region.
Project construction represents a “single-event” for diesel fuel demand and would not require
on-going or permanent commitment of diesel fuel resources during long term operation.
Using the CalEEMod data input from the air quality, greenhouse gas, and health risk analysis (MD
Acoustics 2022), the project’s construction phase would consume electricity and fossil fuels as a single
energy demand, that is, once construction is completed their use would cease. CARB’s 2017 Emissions
Factors Tables show that on average aggregate fuel consumption (gasoline and diesel fuel) would be
approximately 18.5 bhp-hr/gal. Table 4 shows the results of the analysis of construction equipment.
21 Assumes the project will be under Schedule TOU-A rate under SDG&E and, to be conservative, uses the lower anticipated cost per kWh. Source:
https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/files/regulatory/3-1-21%20Small%20Commercial%20Total%20Rates%20Table.pdf
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 14
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Table 4: Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates
Phase
Number
of Days Offroad Equipment Type Amount
Usage
Hours
Horse
Power
Load
Factor
HP
hrs/day
Total Fuel
Consumption
gal diesel
fuel)1,2
Grading
28 Graders 1 8 187 0.41 613 928
28 Excavators 1 8 158 0.38 480 727
28 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.4 790 1,196
28
Earthmovers/Tractors/
Loaders/Backhoes
3 8 97 0.37 861 1,304
Building
Construction
319 Cranes 1 7 231 0.29 469 8,086
319 Forklifts 3 8 89 0.2 427 7,366
319 Generator Sets 1 8 84 0.74 497 8,575
319
Earthmovers/Tractors/
Loaders/Backhoes
3 7 97 0.37 754 12,996
319 Welders 1 8 46 0.45 166 2,855
Paving
28 Pavers 2 8 130 0.42 874 1,322
28 Paving Equipment 2 8 132 0.36 760 1,151
28 Rollers 2 8 80 0.38 486 736
Architectural
Coating
28 Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48 225 340
CONSTRUCTION FUEL DEMAND (gallons of diesel fuel) 47,583
Notes:
1Using Carl Moyer Guidelines Table D-21 Fuel consumption rate factors (bhp-hr/gal) for engines less than 750 hp.
Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gl/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf)
2Totals may not add up precisely to rounding.
As presented in Table 4, project construction activities would consume an estimated 47,583 gallons of
diesel fuel. As stated previously, project construction would represent a “single event” diesel fuel
demand and would not require on going or permanent commitment of diesel fuel resources for this
purpose.
Construction Worker Fuel Estimates
It is assumed that all construction worker trips are from light duty autos (LDA) along area roadways. With
respect to estimated VMT, the construction worker trips would generate an estimated 301,454 VMT.
Data regarding project related construction worker trips were based on CalEEMod 2022.1 model
defaults.
Vehicle fuel efficiencies for construction workers were estimated in the air quality, greenhouse gas, and
health risk analysis (MD Acoustics 2022) using information generated using CARB’s EMFAC model (see
Appendix A for details). An aggregate fuel efficiency of 31.67 miles per gallon (mpg) was used to calculate
vehicle miles traveled for construction worker trips. Table 5 shows that an estimated 9,519 gallons of
fuel would be consumed for construction worker trips.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 15
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Table 5: Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates
Phase
Number of
Days
Worker
Trips/Day
Trip Length
miles)
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
gallons)
Grading 28 15 12 5,040 31.67 159
Building Construction 319 74.8 12 286,334 31.67 9,041
Paving 28 15 12 5,040 31.67 159
Architectural Coating 28 15 12 5,040 31.67 159
Total Construction Worker Fuel Consumption 9,519
Notes:
1Assumptions for the worker trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1 defaults.
Construction Vendor/Hauling Fuel Estimates
Tables 6 and 7 show the estimated fuel consumption for vendor and hauling during building construction
and architectural coating. With respect to estimated VMT, the vendor and hauling trips would generate
an estimated 88,264 VMT. Data regarding project related construction worker trips were based on
CalEEMod 2022.1 model defaults.
For the architectural coatings it is assumed that the contractors would be responsible for bringing
coatings and equipment with them in their light duty vehicles. Therefore, vendors delivering
construction material or hauling debris from the site during grading would use medium to heavy duty
vehicles with an average fuel consumption of 8.4 mpg for medium heavy-duty trucks and 6.41 mpg for
heavy heavy duty trucks (see Appendix A for details). Tables 6 and 7 show that an estimated 11,143
gallons of fuel would be consumed for vendor and hauling trips.
Table 6: Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (MHD Trucks)1
Phase
Number
of Days
Vendor
Trips/Day
Trip Length
miles)
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
gallons)
Grading 28 0 7.63 0 8.40 0
Building Construction 319 29.2 7.63 71,072 8.40 8,461
Paving 28 0 7.63 0 8.40 0
Architectural Coating 28 0 7.63 0 8.40 0
Total Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption 8,461
Notes:
1 Assumptions for the vendor trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1 defaults.
Table 7: Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (HHD Trucks)1
Phase
Number of
Days
Hauling
Trips/Day
Trip
Length
miles)
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
gallons)
Grading 28 22.3 20 12,488 6.41 1,948
Building Construction 319 0 20 0 6.41 0
Paving 28 8.4 20 4,704 6.41 734
Architectural Coating 28 0 20 0 6.41 0
Total Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption 2,682
Notes:
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 16
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
1Assumptions for the hauling trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2022.1 defaults.
Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures
Construction equipment used over the approximately 18-month construction phase would conform to
CARB regulations and California emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel efficiencies.
Construction of the proposed industrial development would require the typical use of energy resources.
There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of
equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment
that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies). Equipment
employed in construction of the project would therefore not result in inefficient wasteful, or
unnecessary consumption of fuel.
CARB has adopted the Airborne Toxic Control Measure to limit heavy-duty diesel motor vehicle idling in
order to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter and other Toxic Air Contaminants.
Additionally, as required by California Code of Regulations Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3)
Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing or
eliminating unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction
equipment. Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by
City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints. Compliance with these measures would
result in a more efficient use of construction-related energy and would minimize or eliminate wasteful
or unnecessary consumption of energy. Idling restrictions and the use of newer engines and equipment
would result in less fuel combustion and energy consumption.
Operation Energy Demand
Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would include transportation energy
demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the project site) and facilities
energy demands (energy consumed by building operations and site maintenance activities).
Transportation Fuel Consumption
The largest source of operational energy use would be vehicle operation of employees and truck trips. The
site is located is in an urbanized area 517 Shinohara Lane just east of the 805 Freeway. Furthermore, there
are existing transit services, provided by San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (SDMTS), approximately
0.2 mile walking distance of the proposed Project site. The nearest transit service is SDMTS Routes 703 and
704, with a stop along Auto Park Drive and Oleander Avenue.
Using the CalEEMod output from the air quality, greenhouse gas, and health risk analysis (MD Acoustics
2022), it is assumed that an average trip for autos and light trucks was assumed to be 9.5 miles, 3-axle
trucks were assumed to travel an average of 7.3 miles, and 4-axle trucks were assumed to travel an
average of 40 miles.22 To be conservative, it was assumed that vehicles would operate 365 days per year.
Table 8 shows the estimated annual fuel consumption for all classes of vehicles from autos to heavy -
heavy trucks.23 The proposed project would generate approximately 4,881 trips per day. The vehicle fleet
22 CalEEMod default distance for H-W (home-work) or C-W (commercial-work) is 9.5 miles; 7.3 miles for H-O (home-other) or C-O (commercial-other).
40 miles is a conservative estimate for the 132 4-axle truck trips estimated for the project.
23 Average fuel economy based on aggregate mileage calculated in EMFAC 2017 for opening year (2024). See Appendix A for EMFAC output.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 17
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
mix was used from the CalEEMod output from the air quality, greenhouse gas, and health risk analysis
MD Acoustics 2022). Table 8 shows that an estimated 912,487 gallons of fuel would be consumed per
year for the operation of the proposed project.
Table 8: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption
Vehicle Type Vehicle Mix
Number
of
Vehicles
Average
Trip
miles)1
Daily
VMT
Average
Fuel
Economy
mpg)
Total
Gallons
per Day
Total Annual
Fuel
Consumption
gallons)2
Light Auto Automobile 2,746 9.5 26,088 32.12 812.21 296,458
Light Truck Automobile 312 9.5 2,960 26.41 112.06 40,902
Light Truck Automobile 898 9.5 8,533 26.62 320.55 117,001
Medium Truck Automobile 599 9.5 5,691 20.43 278.54 101,667
Light Heavy Truck 2-Axle Truck 121 9.5 1,151 11.46 100.43 36,657
Light Heavy Truck 10,000 lbs + 2-Axle Truck 31 9.5 293 11.86 24.69 9,014
Medium Heavy Truck 3-Axle Truck 42 7.3 308 8.39 36.66 13,382
Heavy Heavy Truck 4-Axle Truck 132 40.0 5,280 6.48 814.81 297,407
Total 4,881 -- 50,303 -- 2,499.96 --
Total Annual Fuel Consumption 912,487
Notes:
1Based on the size of the site and relative location, heavy heavy truck trips were assumed to regional and all other trips were assumed to be local.
2Totals may not add up precisely to rounding.
Trip generation and VMT generated by the proposed project are consistent with other similar industrial uses
of similar scale and configuration as reflected respectively in the (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic
Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April, 2002). That is, the proposed project does not propose
uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips and VMT, nor
associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption. Furthermore, the state of California consumed
approximately 4.2 billion gallons of diesel and 15.1 billion gallons of gasoline in 2015.24,25 Therefore, the
increase in fuel consumption from the proposed project is insignificant in comparison to the State’s demand.
Therefore, project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or
otherwise unnecessary.
Facility Energy Demands (Electricity and Natural Gas)
Building operation and site maintenance (including landscape maintenance) would result in the
consumption of electricity and natural gas (provided by SDG&E). Operation of the proposed project
would involve the use of energy for heating, cooling and equipment operation. These facilities would
comply with all applicable California Energy Efficiency Standards and 2019 CALGreen Standards.
The annual natural gas and electricity demands were provided per the CalEEMod output from the air
quality and greenhouse gas analysis (MD Acoustics 2022) and are provided in Table 9.
Table 9, next page>
24 https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy/california-gasoline-data-facts-and-statistics
25 https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy/diesel-fuel-data-facts-and-statistics
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 18
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Table 9: Project Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary1
Natural Gas Demand kBTU/year
Unrefrigerated Warehouse - No Rail 2,613,095
Total 2,613,095
Electricity Demand kWh/year
Unrefrigerated Warehouse - No Rail 776,770
Parking Lot 149,963
Total 926,733
26 California Energy Commission, Electricity Consumption by County. https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx
27 California Energy Commission, Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx
Notes:
1Taken from the CalEEMod 2022.1 annual output in the Shinohara Industrial Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and
Health Risk Assessment Impact Study prepared for the proposed project by MD Acoustics (December 5, 2022).
As shown in Table 9, the estimated electricity demand for the proposed project is approximately 926,733
kWh per year. In 2020, the non-residential sector of the County of San Diego consumed approximately
11,658 million kWh of electricity.26 In addition, the estimated natural gas consumption for the proposed
project is approximately 2,613,095 kBTU per year. In 2020, the non-residential sector of the County of
San Diego consumed approximately 202 million therms of gas.27 Therefore, the increase in both
electricity and natural gas demand from the proposed project is insignificant compared to the County’s
2020 non-residential sector demand.
Energy use in buildings is divided into energy consumed by the built environment and energy consumed
by uses that are independent of the construction of the building such as in plug-in appliances. In
California, the California Building Standards Code Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built
environment, mechanical systems, and some types of fixed lighting. Non-building energy use, or “plug-
in” energy use can be further subdivided by specific end-use (refrigeration, cooking, appliances, etc.).
Furthermore, the proposed project energy demands in total would be comparable to other industrial
projects of similar scale and configuration. Therefore, the project facilities’ energy demands and energy
consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Plan Consistency
Plan Consistency
Regarding federal transportation regulations, the project site is located in an already developed area.
Access to/from the project site is from existing roads. These roads are already in place so the project
would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may
be proposed pursuant to the ISTEA because SANDAG is not planning for intermodal facilities in the
project area.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 19
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the
applicant is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for
energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by
SDG&E.
Regarding the State’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards, the project would be required to meet or
exceed the energy standards established in the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part
11 (CALGreen). CalGreen Standards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ
building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills,
use LED lighting, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials.
As shown in the air quality, greenhouse gas, and health risk analysis (MD Acoustics 2022), the proposed
project is also consistent with the reduction strategies of the City of Chula Vista Climate Action Plan
CAP).
Site Conditions for Renewable Energy Usage
On-site renewable energy sources have been considered. Geothermal energy, the use of heat naturally
present in shallow soil or in groundwater or rock to provide building heating/cooling and to heat water,
requires the installation of a heat exchanger consisting of a network of below -ground pipes to convey
heated or cooled air to a building. The presence of natural-occurring methane and hydrogen sulfide
gases, in the soil beneath the project site and in the project area, associated with underlying and nearby
oil and gas fields, requires the implementation of a Gas Mitigation and Monitoring System to ensure
subsurface gases do not pose a significant health or safety risk, and makes the construction and
operation of a heat exchanger for project buildings infeasible. Installation of a heat exchanger would
also require additional excavation compared to the project, which could increase impacts on
paleontological resources.
Although methane is a renewable derived biogas, it is not available on the project site in commercially
viable quantities or form (i.e., a form that could be used without further treatment), and its extraction
and treatment for energy purposes would result in secondary impacts.
Wind power represents variable-energy, or intermittent, resources that are generally used to augment,
but not replace, natural gas-fired energy power generation, since reliability of energy availability and
transmission is necessary to meet demand, which is constant. City of Chula Vista Code requires that
Electrical Generating Facilities (including wind renewables) be located 1,000-feet away from residential
communities. The subject property is 812-feet by 515-feet with residential communities located 30 feet
to the west and 40 feet to the north. Therefore, as the 1,000-foot separation requirements could not be
met at the project site, wind power could not be used to augment energy at this location .
With respect to other on-site renewable energy sources, because of the Project’s location, there are no
local sources of energy from the following sources: biodiesel, biomass hydroelectric and small hydro,
digester gas, fuel cells, landfill gas, municipal solid waste, ocean thermal, ocean wave, and tidal current
technologies, or multi-fuel facilities using renewable fuels.
Shinohara Industrial Project
CEQA Energy Review
City of Chula Vista, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 20
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Future Renewable Energy Usage
The project will include pre-installed conduit and an engineered roof for future solar energy panels. At
this time, the tenants are unknown, so the feasibility of installing rooftop solar at the time of the
completion of warehouse construction and beginning of operation (anticipated build -out year is 2024)
will depend on the tenant’s needs. Factors evaluated will include the cost of the solar system, tax
incentives, rebates, or incentives from the electricity provider, how much power the system will produce,
and the utility cost of electricity.
Additionally, while natural gas lines would be connected to the project, future tenants may decide to not
use natural gas and only power the project with electricity. As shown in Table 2, 31.3% of the power
provided by SDG&E was from renewable sources in 2019, which would further renewable energy usage
for the project.
5.0 Conclusions
As supported by the preceding analyses, neither construction nor operation of the Project would result
in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources. The
proposed project does not include any unusual project characteristics or construction processes that
would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable
activities and is a industrial project that is not proposing any additional features that would require a
larger energy demand than other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration. As the proposed
project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation, the energy demands of the
project are anticipated to be accommodated within the context of available resources and energy
delivery systems. The project would therefore not cause or result in the need for additional energy
producing or transmission facilities. The project would not engage in wasteful or inefficient uses of
energy and aims to achieve energy conservations goals within the State of California.
The Project has been designed in compliance with California’s Energy Efficiency Standards and 2019
CALGreen Standards. These measures include but are not limited to the use of water conserving
plumbing, installation of bicycle racks, the use of LED lighting, and water-efficient irrigation systems. The
Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
MD is pleased to provide this CEQA Energy review. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please
don’t hesitate to call us at (805) 426-4477.
Sincerely,
MD Acoustics, LLC
Mike Dickerson, INCE Tyler Klassen, EIT
Principal Air Quality Specialist
MD Acoustics, LLC 21
JN: 06232111_Energy Letter Report_12.5.2022
Appendix A
CARB EMFAC 2017
EMFAC2017 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Air Basin
Region: SAN DIEGO
Calendar Year: 2021
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption. Note 'day' in the unit is operation day.
Region Calendar Year Vehicle CategoryModel Year Speed Fuel Population VMT Trips Fuel Consumption Fuel Consumption Total Fuel ConsumptionVMT Total VMT Miles Per GallonVehicle Class
SAN DIEGO 2021 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 19.70603036 2048.746 394.2783 0.514647577 514.6475765 297390.547 2078.265 1905787.878 6.41 HHD
SAN DIEGO 2021 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 15527.23298 1869653 161276.6 296.8758994 296875.8994 1903710
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDA Aggregated Aggregated GAS 1405370.343 54325094 6637549 1782.112456 1782112.456 55007781
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDA Aggregated Aggregated DSL 16466.05209 635343.6 77175.68 13.95697077 13956.97077 652152.3
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDA Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 25194.84986 1016385 125403.5 0 0 1796069.43 1220434 56880366.49 31.67 LDA
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 167731.3377 5908846 762175.3 230.7895865 230789.5865 5914591
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 122.7468928 2248.505 407.2422 0.099824064 99.82406388 2054.346
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 676.8949854 28400.04 3404.662 0 0 230889.411 42156.16 5958801.321 25.81 LDT1
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 489176.1351 17914884 2273551 759.478815 759478.815 17717581
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 2855.049194 121070.4 14006.3 3.609698443 3609.698443 128254
SAN DIEGO 2021 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 3108.075293 106352.4 15774.04 0 0 763088.513 138746.6 17984581.23 23.57 LDT2
SAN DIEGO 2021 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 35522.22756 1284364 529228.3 153.6544177 153654.4177 1262247
SAN DIEGO 2021 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 31258.46651 1191286 393192.2 65.94164702 65941.64702 219596.065 1204731 2466977.706 11.23 LHDT1
SAN DIEGO 2021 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 5376.908451 196023.5 80107.92 26.81591226 26815.91226 196430.8
SAN DIEGO 2021 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 10806.97417 422173.4 135938.1 26.17077313 26170.77313 52986.6854 432523.1 628953.9213 11.87 LHDT2
SAN DIEGO 2021 MCY Aggregated Aggregated GAS 78939.42299 649887 157878.8 17.82144116 17821.44116 17821.4412 640833.4 640833.4249 35.96 MCY
SAN DIEGO 2021 MDV Aggregated Aggregated GAS 322691.006 11660085 1484647 596.5493477 596549.3477 11505919
SAN DIEGO 2021 MDV Aggregated Aggregated DSL 7110.670233 304547.5 34609.71 11.93276205 11932.76205 316244.9
SAN DIEGO 2021 MDV Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 1374.088603 48649.72 7049.471 0 0 608482.11 74612.01 11896775.96 19.55 MDV
SAN DIEGO 2021 MH Aggregated Aggregated GAS 11196.99217 96423.8 1120.147 20.50270048 20502.70048 92397.51
SAN DIEGO 2021 MH Aggregated Aggregated DSL 3813.859036 34995.56 381.3859 3.622947918 3622.947918 24125.6484 34608.84 127006.3488 5.26 MH
SAN DIEGO 2021 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 3549.627505 201226.3 71020.95 42.14582571 42145.82571 207021.6
SAN DIEGO 2021 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 19530.20201 1159964 185173.5 124.7570406 124757.0406 166902.866 1194912 1401933.216 8.40 MHDT
SAN DIEGO 2021 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 1261.139691 65401.69 25232.88 13.94697763 13946.97763 63800.57
SAN DIEGO 2021 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 738.7079994 54068.48 7369.564 7.306031279 7306.031279 21253.0089 54661.75 118462.3219 5.57 OBUS
SAN DIEGO 2021 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 238.1041987 12615.2 952.4168 1.338477965 1338.477965 13954.7
SAN DIEGO 2021 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 2410.018913 75385.44 27811.28 9.530418287 9530.418287 10868.8963 75270.84 89225.54525 8.21 SBUS
SAN DIEGO 2021 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 386.0189728 40557.51 1544.076 7.329040218 7329.040218 42016.61
SAN DIEGO 2021 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 25 2628.079 100 0.555482686 555.482686 7884.5229 0 42016.61226 5.33 UBUS
EMFAC2017 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Air District
Region: SAN DIEGO COUNTY APCD
Calendar Year: 2022
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption. Note 'day' in the unit is operation day.
Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population Trips Fuel Consumption Fuel Consumption Total Fuel Consumption VMT Total VMT Miles Per Gallon Vehicle Class
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 18.77674363 375.6850865 0.510290016 510.2900165 294279.3224 2078.264597 1905787.878 6.48 HHD
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 15794.34681 164553.9614 293.7690323 293769.0323 1903709.613
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDA Aggregated Aggregated GAS 1435699.418 6783861.728 1756.768474 1756768.474 55007780.65
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDA Aggregated Aggregated DSL 17133.82279 80255.84288 13.98689813 13986.89813 652152.3233
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDA Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 29615.71622 147126.8242 0 0 1770755.372 1220433.518 56880366.49 32.12 LDA
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 169175.431 769447.3084 225.5647168 225564.7168 5914590.816
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 113.2397115 373.3953636 0.09031383 90.31383008 2054.345981
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 971.2611106 4899.002475 0 0 225655.0307 42156.15901 5958801.321 26.41 LDT1
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 488321.8489 2269428.213 726.6298291 726629.8291 17717580.65
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 3092.947351 15116.12168 3.722637831 3722.637831 128253.9843
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 4120.808458 20868.27325 0 0 730352.467 138746.596 17984581.23 24.62 LDT2
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 35010.024 521597.1927 149.4572747 149457.2747 1262246.991
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 31841.31105 400523.6367 65.79515455 65795.15455 215252.4293 1204730.715 2466977.706 11.46 LHDT1
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 5418.126472 80722.01142 26.59574267 26595.74267 196430.7729
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 11200.50375 140888.2469 26.45016182 26450.16182 53045.90448 432523.1484 628953.9213 11.86 LHDT2
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MCY Aggregated Aggregated GAS 79518.52429 159037.0486 17.58110647 17581.10647 17581.10647 640833.4249 640833.4249 36.45 MCY
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MDV Aggregated Aggregated GAS 321247.3365 1477989.237 570.2023147 570202.3147 11505919.06
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MDV Aggregated Aggregated DSL 7551.73175 36627.42275 12.05507792 12055.07792 316244.8871
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MDV Aggregated Aggregated ELEC 2146.208886 10981.04226 0 0 582257.3926 74612.01209 11896775.96 20.43 MDV
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MH Aggregated Aggregated GAS 10724.34317 1072.863291 19.4317695 19431.7695 92397.506
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MH Aggregated Aggregated DSL 3838.325727 383.8325727 3.551800241 3551.800241 22983.56974 34608.84284 127006.3488 5.53 MH
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 3610.281121 72234.50467 42.66175414 42661.75414 207021.6124
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 19669.05689 186583.7136 124.4046627 124404.6627 167066.4169 1194911.604 1401933.216 8.39 MHDT
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 1252.458708 25059.19382 13.42401562 13424.01562 63800.57212
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 726.8076341 7248.336044 7.199165246 7199.165246 20623.18087 54661.74976 118462.3219 5.74 OBUS
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 265.865016 1063.460064 1.458273949 1458.273949 13954.70263
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 2407.453653 27781.68138 9.452901387 9452.901387 10911.17534 75270.84262 89225.54525 8.18 SBUS
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 399.9064004 1599.625602 7.531505658 7531.505658 42016.61226
SAN DIEGO COUNTYAPCD2022 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 0 0 0 0 7531.505658 0 42016.61226 5.58 UBUS