T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program - FEIS Chapters - PVD

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluation• The atmospheric dispersion analysis, which estimates ambient pollutant concentrations from airport-relatedemissions and includes “background” concentrations to account for non-airport sources located outside thestudy area.• The CO “Hot-Spot” analysis, which estimates concentrations of this pollutant from Airport and non-Airportmotor vehicle traffic and also includes background concentrations to account for CO emissions outside thestudy areas.• The General Conformity Rule applicability analysis, which evaluates the potential air quality impacts ofindividual projects in combination with all the other emissions contained in the SIP.• The Transportation Conformity Rule also evaluates individual roadway projects in combination with all theother surface transportation and transit projects in the region.5.7.8 Comparison of Alternatives B2 and B4This section provides a comparative summary of the effects of Alternative B2 and B4 on air quality in both theshort- and long-terms in comparison to the No-Action Alternative. The findings show that based on the NAAQSassessment there was no violation of the NAAQS, and the amount of ozone emitted by Alternatives B2 and B4 is below de minimis thresholds. In addition, the Improvement Program is not regionally significant.Table 5-92 shows that Alternatives B2 and B4 would not have a significant effect on air quality conditions locally,state-wide, or regionally when compared to the applicable thresholds. 5.7.8.1 Operational Emissions InventoryAs shown in Table 5-92, among Alternatives B2 and B4 and the No Action Alternative, total emissions of CO arepredominant, followed by emissions of NO X, VOCs, SO X, PM 10, and PM 2.5, respectively. For the No-ActionAlternative and Alternatives B2 and B4, total Airport-related emissions are expected to increase between the years2015 to 2025 by approximately seven to 15 percent (depending on the pollutant) - with or without theImprovement Program implementation. This is largely due to the corresponding increase in airport operationsover this same time period. When comparing Alternatives B2 and B4 and the No-Action Alternative, these totalsare expected to differ by about six percent by 2025. Again, this difference is due to the forecasted increase inairport operations combined with the expected changes in aircraft fleet mix, ground-based aircraft taxi distances tothe runway ends, the forecasted increase in motor vehicle traffic, and changes in roadway alignment while alsoaccounting for the expected reductions in emissions associated with GSE and motor vehicles. In 2015, totalemissions for Alternative B4 are slightly higher than for Alternative B2 due to the earlier construction ofRunway 5-23 extension and associated aircraft operations that would occur in 2015 instead of 2020.Chapter 5 - Environmental Consequences 5-168 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH05_Environmental_Cons_JUL_2011.doc