2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
TACs
that
would
exceed
those
performance
standards.
Therefore,
combustion
of
collected
digester
gas
would
have
a
less
than
significant
localized
health
impact.
The
analysis
contained
in
the
Draft
EIR
is
a
programmatic
level
assessment
based
on
the
detail
contained
in
the
CPP-V
scenario,
which
provides
only
that
digestion
is
a
potential
renewable
energy
generation
element.
As
such,
details
that
would
be
necessary
to
estimate
emissions
from
combustion
of
digester
gas
to
operate
a
turbine
or
other
stationary
source
are
not
available.
Once
the
proposal
for
the
anaerobic
digestion
collection
facility
and
related
combustion
process
is
formally
proposed
it
would
have
to
undergo
a
project-level
CEQA
analysis
as
well
as
acquire
an
Authority
to
Construct
and
a
Permit
to
Operate
from
the
BAAQMD.
Refer
1
for
more
detail
on
the
differences
between
program
level
and
project
level
analysis.
The
final
paragraph
on
Draft
EIR
page
4.B-1
has
been
revised
to
read
as
follows
to
reference
the
Alemany
Gap,
which
affects
the
wind
condition
on
the
north
side
of
San
Bruno
Mountain:
Brisbane’s
proximity
to
the
onshore
breezes
stimulated
by
the
Pacific
Ocean
provides
for
generally
very
good
air
quality
at
the
Project
Site.
These
winds
are
the
result
of
the
presence
of
the
San
Bruno
Alemany
Gap
to
the
west
of
the
Project
Site.
The
San
Bruno
Alemany
Gap
is
oriented
northwest
to
southeast,
the
same
direction
as
the
prevailing
wind
with
elevations
under
200
feet.
Consequently,
the
Project
Site
receives
some
of
the
highest
wind
speeds
along
the
peninsula.
These
winds
maintain
relatively
good
air
quality
in
the
flat
valley
portions
of
Brisbane.
Comment
does
not
raise
any
significant
environmental
issues
regarding
the
adequacy
of
the
Draft
EIR
or
its
analyses
and
conclusions
The
Draft
EIR
contains
an
analysis
of
air
quality
and
GHG
emission
impacts
consistent
with
the
latest
(2012)
guidance
of
the
BAAQMD
cited
in
Section
4.F,
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
.
The
Draft
EIR
presents
the
air
quality
monitoring
data
for
the
monitoring
location
nearest
the
project
site.
This
monitoring
station
is
located
on
Arkansas
Street
in
the
Mission
Bay
area
of
San
Francisco.
As
discussed
on
page
4.B-
of
the
Draft
EIR,
while
the
San
Francisco
data
may
not
exactly
reflect
the
meteorological
environment
of
Brisbane
nor
the
proximity
of
site-specific
stationary
and
roadway
sources,
they
do
present
the
nearest
available
benchmark
that
is
most
applicable
to
regional
pollutants
such
as
ozone.
As
stated
by
BAAQMD,
although
resources
do
not
allow
placement
of
air
pollution
monitors
in
every
city,
it
can
be
demonstrated
that
air
pollution
levels,
in
the
absence
of
significant
local
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.1-6
May
2015