06-17-2003 Bayport Expansion Review Committee Meeting

Browse Search

o During the construction phase, the alternative sites would be likely to have PM 2.5 (particles with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less) emissions that are greater than at Bayport, and that could exceed the NAAQS. o The FEIS states that construction-related impacts at the other alternatives "would, in general, be greater than those related to the Bayport terminal location alternative since these locations would require additional stabilization and/or increase in elevation." e The Bayport facility will be more protective of public health and the environment than the FEIS shows because the analysis used overstated emissions. o The FEIS states, "Assumptions were generally made that would result in an estimate of the worst case scenario that could result from the terminal operation." o The study used very high estimates of emissions from construction and operations, like trucks and cranes. The FEIS states, "The emissions inventory presented for the terminal development is intended to be an order of magnitude of emissions greater than what would actually result from terminal operations." o The analysis in the FEIS did not include significant components of the PHA's air mitigation plan. o The study includes the first-ever model in Texas of the impact of such a facility under the new PM 2.5 air quality standard, as well as the impact of diesel particulate . emissions. o The FEIS did not consider all of the benefits of several upcoming environmental regulations that will improve air quality in the region, including the new diesel and fuel standards announced by EPA, new Tier II and Tier III diesel equipment, and other rules relating to the Houston clean air plan. The FEIS states, "This study did not fully account for future regulations and technological advances that would potentially reduce emissions from operations related to the terminal project." o The FEIS states, "Therefore, actual emissions related to the project are likely to be lower than those presented in this assessment." o The FEIS states, "Background levels of PM 2.5 should decrease over time as this pollutant is further controlled. This positive impact was not included in the analysis since it was not possible to determine the degree to which future background levels might decrease." • The Port has also committed to controls that will reduce emissions from Bayport, and further minimize the chance of any harm to citizens living near the facility. o The Port has committed to reducing emissions of ozone-forming chemicals well beyond what is required in the Houston clean air plan. HAYPORT POSITION PAPER page 2 of 7 May 2003