### AECOM (805)388

- 3775 tel 1220 Avenida Acaso (805)388

- 3577 fax Camarillo, CA 93012



# Memorandum

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

### To : 

## Lisa Beckham Page 

## 1

cc: 

## Shirley Rivera , Laurie Lile, Tom Barnett, Mike Carroll
Subject : 

## Supplemental BACT and Growth Analyses for the Palmdale Hybrid Power Project

From : 

## Seemantini Deshpande and Sara Head

Date : 

## July 2 1

, 201 1

A Supplemental Best Available Control Technology (BACT) evaluation and a Growth Analysis for the Palmdale Hybrid Power Project (PHPP) , along with other analyses, w ere submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) i n July 2010

. I n a meeting a year later between EPA and the City of Palmdale and its development team o n June 27, 2011 , EPA asked for additional information on these two analyses . This supplement to the PHPP Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) BACT and Growth Analys e s was prepared to address the EPA comments from the discussion at the meeting (w ritten comments were not provided by EPA )

.

A

. BACT Analysis for Fugitive Dust ( PM/PM10/PM2.5 ) Emissions from V ehicles D riving in the S olar F ield

This memorandum provid es documentation of the top

- down BACT Analysis for PM/PM10/PM2.5 fugitive emissions from vehicles driving in the proposed PHPP s olar f ield

. In accordance with EPA guidance, BACT was determined through a “top

- down” assessment that started with the Lowest A chievable Emission Rate (LAER) and proceeded through consideration of progressively lesser levels of control.

The first step for th is assessment was to identify the emissions control technology options to be evaluat ed. In order to identify emissions cont rol technology options for the project, a search of the EPA’s RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC) was performed. The results of the RBLC search are presented in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, paving roads (if practicable ) and preventing dust from becoming airborne by implementing du s t control measures are the methods available for control of fugitive dust from unpaved roads and areas

. Control measures that are being required by the California Energy Commission (CEC) for PHPP and measures implemented on othe r solar projects w ere also reviewed.

The second step for th is assessment was to compile, based on the findings of the research effort described above, a list of emissions control strategies for mitigating fugitive particulate emissions associated with th e vehicle traffic in the solar field. Vehicles in the solar field perform mirror washing and other maintenance activities . For each option that was identified, the technical feasibility of its application to the fugitive dust emissions associated with th e project was determined . After the elimination of technically infeasible control technologies, the remaining options were ranked in order of the level of control, thereby establishing the top

- down order for the subsequent analyses. The remaining control option with acceptable energy, environmental or economic impact is then proposed as BACT.

### AECOM 2

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## The CEC issued the Presiding Member’s Proposed Decision ( PMPD ) for the PHPP in June 2011. The CEC included control measures for the PHPP which will reduce the Proje ct impacts to insignificance. For example, Conditions of Certification AQ

- SC3 (requirement to pave the main access road) and AQ

- SC8 (dust control during operation of the project) of the PMPD include the follow ing requirements :

**•** The main access road throug h the facility to the Main Services Complex must be paved.

**•** The site operations fugitive dust control plan shall include the use of durable non

- toxic soil stabilizers on all regularly used unpaved roads and disturbed offroad areas within the project bounda ries, and shall include the inspection and maintenance procedures that will be undertaken to ensure that the unpaved roads remain stabilized. The soil stabilizer used shall be a non

- toxic soil stabilizer or soil we t ting agent, with or without the use of ge otextiles, that can be determined to be both as or more efficient for fugitive dust control than ARB approved soil stabilizers, and shall not increase any other environmental impacts including loss of vegetation to areas beyond where the soil stabilizers a re being applied for dust control.

**•** The owner shall provide a dust control plan that would be applicable to reducing fugitive dust from ongoing operations. The plan shall describe the active operations and wind erosion control techniques such as windbreaks and chemical dust suppressants, including their ongoing maintenance procedures that shall be used on areas that could be disturbed by vehicles or wind anywhere within the project boundaries.

**•** The dust control plan shall also identify the location of signs t hroughout the facility that will limit traveling on unpaved portion of roadways to solar equipment maintenance vehicles only. In addition, vehicle speed shall be limited to no more than 10 miles per hour on these unpaved roadways, with the exception that v ehicles may travel up to 25 miles per hour on stabilized unpaved roads as long as such speeds do not create visible dust emissions.

1. Identification of Available Control Mea s ures

The approximately 25 1

- acre solar field associated with the project w ill consist of parabolic solar

- thermal collectors and associated heat transfer equipment arranged in rows. Spacing between the rows allow s for maintenance vehicles to perform periodic spray washing to remove dust and maintain efficiency of the solar collectors. Mirro r washing w ill be conducted at regular intervals. The solar field would be kept free of vegetation by removal of the vegetation growth or the use of spot spraying of commercially available herbicides. Particulate emissions from vehicle travel are caused by a combination of wind erosion and the disturbance caused by vehicular traffic. The shearing action between the tires and the road surface lifts particles into the air. The prevailing wind can then provide further lift to the already s uspended particles. M oreover, the turbulence created by the vehicle speed further causes suspension of particulates into the air.

The available control technologies for controlling PM/PM10/PM2.5 emissions from vehicle traffic in the solar field include:

a. Paving or Gravel

– Pav ing or use of gravel on unpaved roads and other surfaces can reduce the particulate emissions.

### AECOM 3

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## b. Chemical Surfactants

– Dust suppressants such as polymeric binders, resins, emulsions and hygroscopic salts help bind the dust particles and prevent dusting.

c. Surface Watering

– Addition of moisture to the unpaved surface not only helps increase the weight of the individual particles but also assists in particles binding to one another. This inhibits particles from being re

- suspended into the air by vehicular mo vement.



## d. Traffic Speed Control

– Lower vehicle speeds, limiting the size (and weight) of the vehicles traversing unpaved roads and limiting the traffic activity on unpaved roads helps reduce particulate emissions from this PM source.

Table 1 RBLC Search Results

- Roadway Fugitives

RBLC
ID FACILITY
NAME FACILITY
STATE PERMIT
ISSUANCE

DATE PROCESS
NAME POLLUTANT CONTROL METHOD
DESCRIPTION AVG TIME
CONDITION CASE-BYCASE
BASIS OTHER
APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS

IL0102 AVENTINE
RENEWABLE ENERGY, INC. IL 11/01/2005 ROADWAYS
AND OTHER
FUGITIVE DUST Particulate Matter (PM) PAVE ROADS AND PARKING LOTS;
FUGITIVE DUST

CONTROL
PROGRAM. 7.47 T/YR BACTPSD OPERATING
PERMIT

LA0204 PLAQUEMINE
PVC PLANT LA 02/27/2009 ROAD -
FUGITIVE DUST Particulate
matter, filterable < 10 μ (FPM10) PAVINGS ROADS AS
MUCH AS
PRACTICABLE 0.22 LB/H BACTPSD OPERATING
PERMIT

LA0240 FLOPAM INC. LA 06/14/2010 Roadway Fugitives Particulate matter, total (TPM) Main roadway shall be paved where practical.
Precautions shall be

taken to prevent dust from becoming
airborne 0.04 LB/H HOURLY
MAXIMUM BACTPSD

LA0240 FLOPAM INC. LA 06/14/2010 Roadway Fugitives Particulate matter, total < 10 μ (TPM10) Main roadway shall be paved where practical.
Precautions shall be

taken to prevent dust from becoming
airborne 0.04 LB/H HOURLY
MAXIMUM BACTPSD EMISSION

LIMIT



## 2. Eliminate Technically Infeasible Controls

The available controls identified above were evaluated in light of practicability of application to the unpaved areas within the solar field that will be routin ely traveled by vehicles.

a. Paving or Gravel

– Paving can achieve up to 99 percent control efficiency (W RAP 2006) and covering with gravel is generally considered to provide on the order of 85 to 90 p ercent control

. Paving is technically feasible, and gene rally provides the highest level of control. However, beside its high cost, paving can create issues within the solar field such as creating impervious surfaces that could increase storm water run

- off

. Therefore, paving is generally limited to the main a ccess road

### AECOM 4

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## and power plant area. Use of gravel in the solar field is not feasible, as gravel can cause damage to the parabolic mirrors if rocks are thrown into the air by the vehicles traveling over the gravel

.

b. Chemical Surfactants

– Use of dust suppress ants also is a technically feasible c ontrol alternative and offers dust control ranging from 62

– 90+ percent (Rosbury and Zimmer 1983 ; EPA RBLC ). The operational fugitive dust control plan for the PHPP site includes the use of durable non

- toxic soil stabi lizers on all regularly used unpaved roads within the solar fields. Additionally, the plan stipulates that inspection and maintenance procedures are undertaken to ensure that the unpaved roads remain stabilized. The proposed soil stabilizer shall be a non

- toxic soil stabilizer or soil we t ting agent, with or without the use of geotextiles, that can be determined to be both as or more efficient for fugitive dust control than ARB approved soil stabilizers, and shall not increase any other environmental impacts including loss of vegetation to areas beyond where the soil stabilizers are being applied for dust control

.

c. Surface Watering

– According to Flocchini et al. (1994) , addition of water to increase the s oil moisture content from 0.56 percent to 2 percent can offer a PM 10 control efficiency of up to 86 percent. However, with typical water application rates control efficiencies of 50 to 70 percent are generally assumed (WRAP 2006)

. The availability of water for dust control can be an issue in an arid area suc h as Palmdale. Surface watering is a technically feasible mitigation option for this project.

d. Traffic Speed Control

– Lower vehicle speeds and limiting the traffic activity on unpaved areas are all technically practical control measures. According to Fl occhini et al. (1994), reducing vehicle travel speeds on unpaved roads from 25 to 10 miles per hour (mph) can reduce PM emissions by nearly 58 percent in some cases (WRAP 2006)

. As noted above, the CEC

- required fugitive dust control

measure s includes limit ing v ehicle speeds to no more than 10 miles per hour on unpaved roadways, with the exception that vehicles may travel up to 25 miles per hour on stabilized unpaved roads as long as such speeds do not create visible dust emissions.

3. Rank Remaining Control T echnologies by Effectiveness

Step 3 of the top

- down BACT determination process includes a ranking of the control technologies by effectiveness and a listing of the energy, environmental and economic impacts for each technology. After elimination of the tec hnically infeasible control technologies, the remaining control technologies are ranked by control effectiveness.

As discussed in S tep 2, paving will provide the greatest level of control. T he cost of paving such a large area is cost prohibitive for road s that are not heavily travelled and where other control measures are nearly as effective and much more cost effective

. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from the solar field were very conservatively estimated to be 7.2 and 0.7 tons per year, respectively, in the PSD application

. These estimates were based on assuming only 50 percent control from the use of soil stabilizers and water, actual control efficiencies are expected to be much greater and emissions are expected to be much less

. Accordingly, the main access road will be paved but additional road paving would not be cost effective and would only have minimal environmental benefits

.

### AECOM 5

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## Beside the substantial cost for paving, there are increased maintenance costs and other environmental disadvantages assoc iated with paving the travelled areas/roads in a solar field . Paving increases the amount of impervious surfaces, which increases storm water runoff and increases costs for maintenance of the storm water retention ponds. Paving can also lead to higher tem peratures in the solar field. Maintenance costs of paved roads are increased due to the intense desert heat affecting the edges of the asphalt

- on

- dirt application, which results in crumbling of the edges at a higher rate. The infrequent rain storms in th e desert can also erode the dirt out from under the paved edges, which also causes additional runoff issues and maintenance.

Given that the other measures are expected to be highly effective, and because mirror washing and other maintenance is only done on a periodic basis, and vehicle usage is low, road paving will be limited to the main access road.

For unpaved roads and surfaces , application of soil stabilizers (chemical surfactants), which provides a control efficiency of approximately 80 percent i s the next most effective particulate control measure. Although the referenced study ( Flocchini et al. 1994) indicated that s urface watering can achieve up to 86 percent control at some sites

, a lower level of control would be expected for the PHPP site

. W atering alone would not be expected to ach i eve 86 percent control at PHPP because the soils are sandy and less likely to conglomerate , and this level of control would require significant quantities of water that are not available

. S urface watering and/o r application of surfactants can be supplemented with l imiting vehicle speed and restricting traffic in the unpaved areas.

Experience in the existing solar fields (e.g., the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) facilities near Kramer Junction and Harper Lake) show that use of a combination of the above methods to be very effective in controlling fugitive dust. Use of soil stabilizers during the first few years of operation of the solar facility , followed by application of water and driving slowly in the solar field

, leads to a very stable surface that yields only minor amounts of fugitive emissions. In addition , after the solar facility is built, it is in the operator ’ s best interest to keep dust emissions to a minimum in order to reduce the amount of mi rror washing and loss of efficiency from dirty mirrors.

4. Select BACT

As discussed above

, the proposed BACT for controlling fugitive dust emissions from vehicle traffic in solar fields will be achieved through a combination of the measures described above. In accordance with the Conditions of C ertification required by the CEC, the following dust control measures will be implemented :

**•** The main access road into the plant site will be paved.

**•** A dust control plan will be developed that includes inspection and maintenance procedures undertaken to ensure that the unpaved roads remain stabilized.

**•** A durable non

- toxic soil stabilizers will be applied throughout the solar field for dust control. Additionally, unpaved roads with in the solar field used by wash trucks t hat spray and clean the mirrors will be treated with soil stabilizers periodically

.

### AECOM 6

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## • Water will be applied by water trucks on regularly disturbed areas where soil stabilizers are not as effective due to frequent use. The water used in the mirror washin g will also provide for some incidental dust control.

**•** Vehicle speeds will be limited to no more than 10 miles per hour on unpaved roadways, with the exception that vehicles may travel up to 25 miles per hour on stabilized unpaved roads as long as such sp eeds do not create visible dust emissions.

Accordingly, the CEC’s Condition of Certification AQ

- SC8 of the PMPD satisf ies BACT . Therefore, BACT for controlling fugitive dust emissions from vehicle traffic in solar fields will be met by the Applicant’s

com pliance with Condition of Certification AQ

- SC8

.

5. References

EPA. RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available at http://cfpub1.epa.gov/rblc/htm/bl02.cfm

Flocchini, R. G.

, T.A. Cahill, R.T. Matsumura, O. Carvacho, and Z. Lu, Study of fugitive PM10 emissions from selected agricultural practices on selected agricultural soils, 1994.

Rosbury , K.D. and R.A. Zimmer, “Cost

- Effectiveness of dust controls used on unpaved haul roads, Volume I

– Results, analysis and conclusions.” Prepared for Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior, by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., 1983.

Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook, 2006. Available at http://www.wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/content/FDHandbook_Rev_06.pdf

.

### AECOM 7

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

## B

. Additional Information Rel ated to the PHPP Growth Analysis

As noted at the beginning of this memo, a supplemental Growth Analysis was provided to EPA in July 2010. EPA requested that additional information be provided to support this analysis at the June 27, 2011 meeting

.

Since an extensive socioeconomic analysis was prepared for the Application for Certification (AFC) for the PHPP (July 2008)

, and contains a substantial amount of information related to the breakdown of the workforce requirements, the distribution of population throughout the area , and other statistics, we are submitting a copy of that section from the PHPP AFC at this time (see Attachment A).

EPA also noted that a comment has been received indicating that the growth impact information should be updated with 20 10 C ensus data that has very recently become available. The 2010 C ensus information for Palmdale has been reviewed. For example, the population of the City of Palmdale in the year 2000 ( as reported in the AFC ) was 117

, 729 . The AFC contained a projection of the 2010 population of Palmdale to be 176,506, however, the 2010 population of Palmdale according to the 2010 census is 152,750. Hence

, Palmdale did not grow quite as fast as projected in 2000.

In order to reflect more current information, some of t he discussion and tables in the attached Socioeconomics section from the AFC have been updated. In order to make it easy to tell what has been changed, that information is shown in “tracked changes” format. Note, this is not a comprehensive updating, but is focused on data in light of the 2010 C ensus , in particular the population and growth projections, as that is what was requested at the meeting with EPA . In addition

, the Environmental J ustice table (5.11

- 17) column on minority populations has been upda ted. 2010 Census data relative to economic factors has not been released, nor has block level data , and hence updates to those data cannot be made

. The conclusions of the Growth Analysis provided for PHPP in July 2010 remain unchanged by the 2010

censu s data . Those conclusions included that there is an ample work force in Southern California to support the construction of the PHPP (peak of 767 construction workers) without causing secondary impacts due to growth. Likewise there are sufficient housing/ hotels, services and amenities to support these workers in the area during the roughly two year construction period. The operations workforce of 36 employees can also be easily accommodated in the area without causing secondary impacts from growth. The P HPP does not result in any significant environmental impacts therefore there are not any significant impacts that may disproportionately impact low income or minority populations. No additional analysis is required.

### AECOM

BACT Analysis for Solar Field Fugitive Emissions and Additional Information for the Growth Analysis July 2011 

# Attachment A

Socioeconomics S ection from PHPP AFC With Revisions to Population and Growth Data Based on 2010 Census

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-1 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

# 5.11 Socioeconomics

This section discusses the potential socioeconomic impacts of the construction and operation of the PHPP. It includes an evaluation of Project-related im pacts on public services and infrastructure (e.g., schools, protective services, and housing), as well as an evaluation of impacts on community issues such as environmental justice.



# 5.11.1 LORS Compliance

A summary of potentially applicable LORS is presented in Table 5.11-1 and in the text following the table. The Project will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local LORS.

Table 5.11-1 LORS Applicable to Socioeconomics

LORS Applicability Where Addressed in AFC

Federal:
Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations.” As a result of the Executive Order, U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency (EPA) issued guidelines requiring Federal agencies and State agencies receiving Federal funds to develop strategies to address environmental justice issues. Section 5.11.3

State:

California Government Code (GC) Sections 65995-65997 (amended by SB 50). Public agencies may impose fees, charges or other financial requirements on developers to offset the cost for school facilities. Sections 5.11.1 and 5.11.3

Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 15131. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its guidelines state that economic or social factors of a project may be included in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), but shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment. Section 5.11.3

Local:

Palmdale General Plan (Land Use and Public Services Elements). Establishes goals and implementing policies to achieve a diversified economic base and adequate City services and infrastructure. Sections 5.11.2 and 5.11.3

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-2 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## 5.11.1.1 Federal LORS

Executive Order 12898

This law requires Federal agencies and State agencie s receiving Federal funds to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority and low income populations. Federal agency permits and approvals are considered “activities,” making this requirement more broadly applicable than merely to agencies receiving Federal funds. Because the PHPP will require a Federal agency approval (a PSD permit under the Clean Air Act), the Executive Order applies to the PHPP.



## 5.11.1.2 State LORS

California Government Code Sections 67995-65997

These codes state that public agencies may impose f ees, charges, or other financial requirements on developers to offset the co st of school facilities. For the Proj ect, the administering agencies implementing school impact fees are the Palmdal e School District, Westside Union School District, and the Antelope Valley Union High School District.

Title 14, CCR, Section 15131

CEQA and its guidelines state that economic or social factors of a project may be included in a CEQA document, but shall not be treated as significant e ffects on the environment. However, economic or social effects of a project may be used to determine the significance of physical changes caused by the project. Additionally, economic, social, and particula rly housing factors should be considered by public agencies, together with technological and environmental factors, in deciding whether changes in a project are feasible, to reduce or avoid the significant effects on the environment.



## 5.11.1.3 Local LORS

City of Palmdale General Plan

Although the proposed Project does not require soci oeconomic-related permits, the Palmdale General Plan contains goals related to maintaining and improvi ng the socioeconomic aspects of the county. One goal of the Public Services Element is to “ensure that adequate public services and facilities are available to support development in an efficient and orderly fashion.” Goals of the Land Use Element of the General Plan are to “create a vision for long term growth and development in the City of Palmdale which provides for orderly, functional patterns of land uses within urban areas, a unified and coherent form, and a high quality of life for residents; adopt land us e and development policies which encourage growth and diversity of the City’s economic base; and to plan for and reserve land to accommodate uses needed for public benefit, including open space, recreation, public improvements, schools, and community facilities.”



## 5.11.1.4 Involved Agencies and Local Contacts

No socioeconomics-related permits are required by the proposed Project. Therefore, there are no applicable permitting agencies or agency contacts.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-3 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## 5.11.1.5 Required Permits and Permitting Schedule

There are no required permits related to socioeconomics.



# 5.11.2 Affected Environment

This subsection discusses existing socioeconomic co nditions in the areas potentially affected by the PHPP. For purposes of this evaluation, the regi onal area is defined as Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County, and Kern County, including the cities of Palmdale, Lancaster, Santa Clarita, Victorville, Hesperia Adelanto, and Apple Valley. The local area is defined as the cities of Palmdale and Lancaster and the uninc orporated communities of Quartz Hill, Lak e Los Angeles, Acton, Little Rock, Sun Village, and Pearblossom. The socioeconomic char acteristics discussed include population, housing, employment and economy, public services, utilit ies, schools, local government finance, and environmental justice.



## 5.11.2.1 Regional Setting

The Project site is located in an area of the High De sert known as the Antelope Valley; all Project facilities with the exception of parts of the transmission line an d reclaimed water pipeline routes are located in the City of Palmdale; the rest of the transmissi on line and reclaimed water pipeline routes are in unincorporated Los Angeles County. The City of Pa lmdale and the adjacent City of Lancaster are the two largest communities of the Antelope Valley. The regional setting is illustrated in Figure 5.11-1. The nearest sizeable cities include Santa Clarita (25 miles west), Adelanto (39 miles ea st) Victorville (40 miles east), Hesperia (41 miles east), and Apple Valley (44 miles east). The City of Palmdale is bordered by the City of Lancaster and the unincorporated communit y of Quartz Hill to the north; the unincorporated communities of Lake Los Angeles, Sun Village, Littlerock and Pearblossom to the east; the unincorporated community of Acton to the south; and the unincorporated community of Leona Valley to the west.



## 5.11.2.2 Local Setting

The 377-acre PHPP plant site consists of undeveloped land in an industrial area of the City of Palmdale near the boundary with the City of Lancaster. Air Forc e Plant 42 is located to the south and east. Areas northeasterly of the site are undeveloped; the area northw esterly of the site is primarily industrial although it also contains a few scattered residences.



## 5.11.2.3 Population

Los Angeles County is the most populous county in southern California, and is the twelfth largest county in land area in the State, covering more than 4,000 sq uare miles. The population of Los Angeles County grew from 8,863,164 9,519,338 in 1990 2000 to 9,519,338 9,818,605 in 2000 2010 and reached an estimated 9,878,554 in 2007 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 2010 ). This growth represents a population increase of approximately 11.46 3.14 percent in 17 10 years. The population growth experienced during the 1990s 1990s of over 10 percent has continued slowed into in the first decade of the twenty-first century. Population estimates and future population projections for the local and regional area are summarized in Table 5.11-2.5.11 SocioeconomicsJuly 2008(Revisions July 2011)5.11-4Palmdale Hybrid Power ProjectTable 5.11-2 Population Estimates and ProjectionYearCounty/Community 200020073201020102011202020302035Los Angeles County19,578,9609,519,33810,331,9399,818,60510,718,0079,858,98911,501,88411,329,82912,221,79912,338,620Lancaster119,416118,718143,818156,633168,032157,795215,468202,406259,696261,501Palmdale117,729116,670145,468152,750176,506153,334259,712257,545299,324363,252Santa Clarita 151,088177,159176,320181,092176,971211,367205,935289,376239,923Acton 2,390n/a7,59610,754n/a14,473n/a17,527n/aLittle Rock 1,402n/a1,37719,289n/a25,585n/a30,753n/aQuartz Hill 9,890n/a10,91219,573n/a27,244n/a33,481n/aLake Los Angeles11,65811,523n/a12,32811878n/a12041n/a14667n/aSan BernardinoCounty11,709,4342,028,0132,035,2102,059,4202,052,3972,397,7092,582,7652,713,1493,133,801Adelanto18,17618,13027,13931,76525,93931,67135,35171,87744,129114,398Victorville64,87164,029102,538115,90381,592117,219103,353138,023123,641182,275Apple Valley54,58554,23970,29769,13570,87369,66883,70782,00595,67595,681Hesperia62,83562,58285,87690,17395,80090,726139,049148,751179,383211,108AdelantoBarstow18,17621,11927,13922,63925,93922,83935,35147,81044,12969,533Kern County2665,519661,645801,648839,6311,086,113846,8831,352,6281,808,239Bakersfield246,899247,057323,213347,483342,700351,443433,800549,1005.11 SocioeconomicsJuly 2008(Revisions July 2011)5.11-5Palmdale Hybrid Power Projectn/a = not availableNote 1:2000 and 2010Population data in this table isa compilation of three sourcesfrom the U.S. Census.For Victorville,actualpopulationgrowth, as estimated by the CaliforniaDepartment of Finance, has exceeded expectations(most recent available projections)of theregional planning agencies, which means that the table seems to predict a population decline between 2007 and 2010.This is ananomalyof the data,but the forecasts for growthareconsistent for all communitiesshown in the table.Note 2: Census data is not available for the unincorporated communities of Sun Village, Pearblossom, and Leona Valley.Note 3:2011 population data fromCalifornia Department of Finance information is compiled only for incorporated cities of California.Note 4: Southern California Association of Governments compiles projection data for census tracts. The population estimates for2010, 2020, and20302035for the unincorporated communities of Acton, Little Rock and Quartz Hill contain populations ofcensus tracts that encompassareas that extend beyond the boundaries of the community, thus inflating the estimates.Sources:1Southern California Association of Governments,20042008;2Kern Council of Governments, 2007;3California Department of Finance,20072011.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-6 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## The population of Palmdale in 1990 2000 was 66,842 116,670 . As shown in the table, the population grew to 117,729 152,750 in 2000 2010 . In 2007 2011 , the population of Palmdale was estimated at 145,468 153,334 , which represents a more than doubling of the population in 17 years 31.4 percent increase in eleven years . Palmdale is estimated to grow by another 153,856 209,918 people by 2030 2035 . The estimated population of Lancaster in 2007 2011 was 143,818 157,795 , an increase of 20 33 percent since 2000. The growth projections in Lancaster for 2010 2020 and 2020 2035 are 168,032 202,406 , and 215,468 261,501 , respectively (California Department of Finance, 2007 2011 ; Kern Council of Governments, 2004 SCAG, 2008 ). Santa Clarita, the fourth largest city in Los Angeles County had an estimated population of 177,159 176,971 in 2007 2011 . The estimated populations for the Cities of Victorville and Adelanto, both in S an Bernardino County, are approximately 102,538 117,219 and 27,139 31,761 , respectively. These San Bernardino County cities are expected to grow to 123,641 182,275 and 44,129 114,398 , respectively by 2030 2035

.
Average annual population growth rates in the local and regional areas are shown in Table 5.11-3. As shown in the table, between 2000 and 2007 2010 , the fastest growth in the vicinity of the Project, based on percentage of population, has occurred in Kern County, San Bernardino, and then Los Angeles County. In percentage terms, Victorville represents the fastest growing community in the overall area of interest. Growth rates in Palmdale for the years 2010 to 2020 and 2020 to 2030 2035 are predicted to increase (2010 to 2020) and then decrease (2020 to 2030) from the rates of the recent past, but still are expected to exceed the growth rates of the other nearby communities.

The largest unincorporated community in the local vicinity is Lake Los Angeles with a population of 11,657 12,328 in 2000 2010 . The communities of Acton, Little Rock, Quartz Hills and Lake Los Angeles are expected to experience m oderate growth to the year 2030 2035

. While Lake Los Angeles is predicted to grow by 22.8 percent between 2020 and 2030, its population is expected to stay below 15,000. Census i nformation was not available for the communities of Pearblossom, Sun Village or Leona Village

. 

## 5.11.2.4 Housing

In 2005 2010 , Palmdale had 39,988 42,952 housing units, with a vacancy rate of 3.7 7.7 percent and Lancaster contained approximately 43,889 51,835 housing units, with a vacancy rate of 3.7 9.3 percent. Renter-occupied housing units represent 29.1 32.1 percent of the Palmdale housing occupancy and
41.1 39.6 percent of the Lancaster housing occupancy (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 2010 ). Lake Los Angeles has 3,469 3,658 housing units with a vacancy rate of 8.3 10.7 percent. Renter-occupied housing units represent 22.3 27.3 percent of the Lake Los Angeles housing occupancy.

In 2005 2010 , Los Angeles County contained approximately 3,339,763 3,445,076 housing units and had a housing vacancy rate of 4.7 5.9 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 2010 ). Renter-occupied units totaled 1,621,543 1,696,455 units, or 50.9 52.3 percent of the market. In addition to owner-occupied and rental housing, there are motel/hotel accommodations avai lable throughout the local area. Specifically, Palmdale has 14 motels/hotels and Lancaster has 16 motels/hotels (California Hotel and Lodging Association, 2008). As a comparison, Kern County as a whole contained approximately 262,651 284,367 housing units with a vacancy rate of 9.3 10.5 percent and San Bernardino County had 668,378 699,637 housing units with a vacancy rate of 11.3 12.6 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 2010 ).

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-7 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Table 5.11-3 Average Annual Population Growth Rates

County/City Annual Growth Rates

2000

- 2007 3 

## 2000-2010 2010-2020 2020- 2030 2035 Los Angeles County 1 

## 1.12% 0.3% 0.73% 1.5% 0.62% 0.9%

Lancaster 2.92% 3.2% 2.82% 2.9% 2.05% 2.9%

Palmdale 3.11% 3.1% 4.71% 6.7% 1.52% 4.1%

Santa Clarita 2.50% 1.7% 1.67% 1.7% 3.69% 1.7%

Acton n/a 21.8% 3.46% n/a 2.11% n/a

Little Rock n/a -0.2% 3.26% n/a 2.02% n/a

Quartz Hill n/a 1.0% 3.92% n/a 2.29% n/a
Lake Los Angeles n/a 0.7% 1.37% n/a 22.81% n/a

San Bernardino County 2.66% 1.9% 1.64% 2.7% 1.31 % 2.1%

Adelanto 7.04% 7.5% 3.6% 12.6% 2.48% 5.9%

Victorville 8.29% 8.1% 2.67% 1.9% 1.96% 3.2%
Apple Valley 4.11% 2.7% 1.81% 1.8% 1.43% 1.7%

Barstow 1.90% 0.7% 2.68% 11.1% 1.97% 4.5%
Hesperia 5.24% 4.4% 4.51% 6.5% 2.90% 4.2% Kern County 2 

## 2.9 2% 2.7% 2.45 5.9 % 3.37%

Bakersfield 4.41% 4.1% 2.66 2.5 % 2.66%

n/a = not available

Note 1 : Growth rates based on population estimates and projections in Table 5.11-2. Growth rates are unavailable for Acton, Littlerock, Quar tz Hill, Lake Los Angeles, Sun Village, Pearblossom, Leona Valley, and Antelope Center.

Note 2 : California Department of Finance information is compiled only for incorporated cities of California.

Sources: 1 

## Southern California Association of Governments , 2004 2008 ; 2 

## Kern Council of Governments, 2007;
3 

## California Department of Finance, 2007 U.S. Census Bureau, 2010

.



## 5.11.2.5 Economy and Employment

The 2005 employment by industrial sector for Lo s Angeles, San Bernardino, and Kern Counties is summarized in Table 5.11-4. As of November 200 6, Los Angeles County employment was 4,100,200, and San Bernardino employment was 1,345,100. As shown in Table 5.11-4, the government, construction, manufacturing, and retail trade sectors are the largest employers in all three counties. Los Angeles County also has a large professional and busin ess services sector that employs 14.5 percent of the working population.5.11 SocioeconomicsJuly 2008 5.11-8 Beacon Solar Energy ProjectTable 5.11-4 2006 Employment by Industry for LosAngeles, San Bernardino and Kern CountiesSector Los Angeles County San Bernardino County Kern CountyEmployment Employment Employment Percentage Employment PercentageGovernment 588,600 231,600231,600 14.4% 57,300 20.7%Agriculture 7,600 16,00016,000 0.2% 44,600 16.1%Construction and Manufacturing 619,000 255,000 255,000 15.1% 32,900 11.9%Retail Trade 423,200 181,500181,500 10.3% 29,200 10.5%Professional and Business Services594,700 152,700 152,700 14.5% 25,000 9.0%Education and Health Services 481,300 129,900 129,900 11.7% 22,900 8.3%Leisure and Hospitality 387,500136,000 136,000 9.5% 20,700 7.5%Finance, Information, Insurance and Real Estate 457,700 69,400 69,400 11.2% 11,600 4.2%Transportation and Utilities 165,70069,200 69,200 4.0% 9,300 3.4%Natural Resources and Mining 4,0001,400 1,400 0.1% 9,300 3.4%Wholesale Trade 225,200 57,10057,100 5.5% 7,500 2.7%Other Services 145,700 45,30045,300 3.6% 6,900 2.5%Total 4,100,200 1,345,100 1,345,100 100% 277,200 100%Source: California Employment Development Department, 2007.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-9 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## The employed labor force in the City of Palmdal e was 48,286 in 2000 and grew to approximately 60,116 by 2005. The employed labor force in the City of Lancaster was 49,136 in 2000 and grew to approximately 58,115 by 2005 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007) . The employed labor force in the City of Victorville was 22,385 in 2000 and grew to approximat ely 23,150 by 2004. Trends indicate that the labor force will continue to grow. The Southern California Association of Governments, in its Ninth Annual Regional Economic Forecast for Southern California 2 006-2007, reported that “the strongest job growth is associated with California’s inland c ounties and Southern California” with total non-farm employment in Riverside/San Bernardino Counties estimated to hav e increased 2.2 percent between 2004 and 2005; 3.9 percent between 2005 and 2006; and 4.7 percent betwe en 2006 and 2007 for an average annual change of 3.6 percent between 2004 and 2007 (SCAG, 2006). Em ployment data by industrial sector for the City of Palmdale are provided in Table 5.11-5. As illustrate d in the table, the major sectors of employment in the City are Education, Health, and Social Services, Retail Trade, and Manufacturing.

In 2000, the cities of Palmdale and Lancaster had annual unemployment rates of 6.1 and 6.5 percent, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007). Santa Clarita’s unemployment rate in May 2007 was 2.7 percent compared to 4.4 percent for Los Angeles Co unty as a whole and 4.9 percent for the State of California (California Employment Development Depart ment 2007). In 2005, the Cities of Victorville and Adelanto had annual unemployment rates (not adjust ed) of 6.0 percent and 7.8 percent, respectively, which were both above the rate of 5.0 percent for San Bernardino County for a whole in that year.

In 2006, Los Angeles County’s workforce makes up a pproximately 49 percent of its population, with the remaining 51 percent including, amon g others, children, the retired, m ilitary personnel, and prisoners. In 2000, Los Angeles County’s workforce represented 45 percent of the population. Between 2000 and 2006, Los Angeles County’s workforce grew from 4,312,264 to 4,888,595, representing a total employment growth of 13 percent. Between 2001 and 2006, the County’s labor force grew at an average annual rate of 1.7 percent, adding 5,800 members. Ke rn County’s labor force increased from 322,600 in 2005 to 328,400 in 2006, while employment grew by approximately 7,000 jobs during this same period. Total employment grew 2.4 percent between 200 5 and 2006, from 296,500 to 303,500 (Kern Economic Development Corporation, 2007a). As job growth exceeded labor force growth from 2005 to 2006, unemployment decreased from 26,100 to 24,900. Transformation from a resource-based economy to an industrial and service-oriented ec onomy has contributed to a drop in the County’s unemployment rate from 8.1 percent in 2005 to 7.6 percent in 2006, two percent above the state average.

In Kern County, industries that experienced r apid growth between 2005 and 2006 included energy and chemicals; transportation, logistics, and warehousing; business and pr ofessional services; and tourism, recreation, and entertainment (Kern Economic De velopment Corporation, 2007b). Between 2002 and 2006, the construction employment sector experienced the fastest growth rate of all major industries, increasing by 50 percent. The construction sector employed an estimated 4.6 percent of the workforce (Table 5.11-5).

As of January 2008, unemployment rates for the U.S., Los Angeles County, Kern County, and San Bernardino County were estimated at 4.8, 4.5, and 7. 6 percent, respectively. Available 2006 census data for local communities indicates that unemployment rates for Palmdale and Lancaster were 8.6 and 11.7 percent, respectively.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-10 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Los Angeles County’s total employment is expect ed to grow about 10.3 percent between 2004 and 2014; adding approximately 450,500 new jobs by 2014. Non-farm wage and salary employment, which accounts for 91.6 percent of the total employment, is expected to grow 11.3 percent over the 10 year period. Nearly 73 percent of all non-farm wage and sala ry jobs are forecasted to occur in construction, professional and business services, government, re tail trade, and education and health services (California Employment Development Department, 2007).

Table 5.11-5 Employment by Industry (Year 2006 Annual Average)

Industrial Sector Palmdale Employment (%) Lancaster Employment (%) Victorville Employment (%) Adelanto Employment

(%)*2000 Hesperia Employment (%)

Public Administration 2,570 (4.5%) 4,011 (8.2%) 1,348 (3.8%) 329 (6.8%) 1,864 (5.2%)
Education, Health, and Social Services 11,256 (19.9%) 10,886 (22.3%) 6,859 (19.2%) 900 (18.5%) 4,880 (13.5%)

Professional Services 5,645 (10.0%) 3,680 (7.5%) 2,905 (8.1%) 289 (5.9%) 2,928 (8.1%)
Arts, Recreation, and Food Services 4,875 (8.6%) 4,468 (9.1%) 2,201 (6.2%) 233 (4.8%) 3,262 (9.1%)

Retail Trade 7,915 (14.0%) 6,484 (13.3%) 5,768 (16.2%) 602 (12.4%) 5,636 (15.6%)

Manufacturing 7,004 (12.4%) 4,236 (8.7%) 3,712 (10.4%) 964 (19.8%) 4,064 (11.3%)
Transportation and Public Utilities 2,141 (3.8%) 1,924 (3.9%) 3,261 (9.1%) 454 (9.3%) 3,402 (9.4%)

Construction 6,047 (10.7%) 4,379 (9.0%) 2,397 (6.7%) 306 (6.3%) 5,461 (15.2%)
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 3,863 (6.8%) 3,037 (6.2%) 1,679 (4.7%) 168 (3.5%) 697 (1.9%)

Agriculture and Mining 356 (0.6%) 389 (0.8%) 212 (0.6%) 98 (2.0%) 0 (0.0%)

Other Services 4,907 (8.7%) 5,372 (11.0%) 5,367 (15.0%) 523 (10.7%) 3,856 (10.7%)

Total 56,579 (100%) 48,866 (100%) 35,709 (100%) 4,866 (100%) 36,032 (100%)



## 5.11.2.6 Public Services and Utilities

This subsection describes public services and utilities in the Project area.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-11 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Law Enforcement

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department is under contract with the City of Palmdale to provide police protection and public safety services. Thes e services include traffic and neighborhood police protection and public safety services. The Palm dale Sheriff Station is manned by 189 sworn deputies and 56 non-sworn employees (Palmdale Sheriff Station Operations, 2008). This station provides law enforcement services to an estimated 700 square mile s. The County Sheriff would respond to the PHPP plant site from the Palmdale Station located at 75 0 E Ave Q, which is located approximately 4.2 miles south of the site. According to the Palmdale Sheri ff’s Station, average response time to the PHPP site would depends on the severity of the incident and the lo cation of the deputies on call. In extreme cases, the Lancaster Sheriff Station may respond to emerge ncies (Palmdale Sheriff Station Operations, 2008). The Lancaster Sheriff Station is located at 501 West Lancaster Blvd. in Lancaster, approximately 3.7 miles to the north of the PHPP plant site. The Lan caster Station is manned by 189 sworn personnel and 74 civilian personnel (Lancaster Sheriff Station Operations, 2008).

The California Highway Patrol (CHP) is the prim ary law enforcement agency for State highways and roads. Services include law enforcement, traffic c ontrol, accident investigat ion, and the management of hazardous materials spill incidents.

Fire Protection

Fire protection in the Project area is provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The Los Angeles County Fire Department is a full-service department providing fire management, fire operations, fire and environmental safety, and emergency medical se rvices to the residents of Los Angeles County. There are ten fire stations in the City of Palmdal e (FS 24, 37, 93, 136, 79, 80, 81, 92, 114, and 131) and seven stations in the City of Lancaster (FS 33, 112 CFF, 117, 129, 130, 134, and 135. The nearest fire station is Station Number 129 located one mile to the west of the PHPP plant site at 42110 6 th 

## St W in the City of Lancaster. Average response time is estimat ed to be less than two minutes. This station employs nine full-time fire fighters and is trained to handle hazardous materials releases.

Hospitals

Emergency medical services in the Project area ar e provided by American Medical Response (AMR), which provides transportation, including ambulance service and monitoring, service area performance standards, and communication systems. According to staff at AMR, patients are transferred to the appropriate hospital based on the injury and availability of space at the local hospitals (AMR, 2008). The nearest hospitals to the PHPP plant site include An telope Valley Hospital Medical Center (five miles northwest), the LAC/High Desert Hospital (10 mile s northwest), and Lancaster Community Hospital (3.2 miles northwest) (Palmdale Chamber of Commerce, 2008). A hospital, the Palmdale Regional Medical Center, is currently under construction in Palmdale. Table 5.11-6 provides a summary of the hospital services in the Project area.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-12 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-6 Hospitals Serving the Project Area

Hospital/Address Available Services
Antelope Valley Hospital and Medical Center 1600 W Ave. J, Lancaster 24-hour Emergency Room, Obstetrica l Services, Critical Care Units, Rehabilitation, Maternal Child Health Care, Physical Therapy, Home Care Services, Radiology, Transportation Services, and Mental Health Care. An estimated 420 beds are available.
High Desert Hospital 44900 N 60th St., Lancaster Multi-service Ambulatory Care Cent er. An estimated 170 certified beds are available. Lancaster Community Hospital 43830 10 th 

## St W, Lancaster Emergency Department, Acute Rehab ilitation Unit, Center for Wound Care and Hyperbaric Medicine, Cardiac Center. An estimated 117- licensed acute care beds are available.

Natural Gas and Electricity

Natural gas services in the Project area are provided by the Southern California Gas Company. Electrical service to local consumers is provided by Southern California Edison.

Water and Wastewater

The Palmdale area receives its potable water from surface sources such as the California Aqueduct and local groundwater. The Project will use reclaim ed water supplied by the City of Palmdale Water Reclamation Plant (PWRP) for cooling tower makeup and other industrial uses. The PWRP’s current treatment capacity is 15 million gallons per day (mgd ), and in 2004 the PWRP treated an average flow of 9.4 mgd (Los Angeles County Sanitation District, 2005 ). The current 15 mgd capacity for the PWRP is projected to be reached by 2013, and the Los Angeles County Sanitation District 20 (District 20), which encompasses Palmdale, plans to expand the ca pacity of the PWRP to 22.4 mgd by 2025.

Treated wastewater management is a particular chall enge in District 20 because the Antelope Valley is a closed basin with no outlet to the Pacific Ocean. Hi storically, treated wastewater was disposed of through land application or agricultural reuse. In 2000, the Lahontan RWQCB revised it s discharge requirements for the PWRP due to suspected nitrate contamination in groundwater attributed in part to land application and agricultural reuse of treated wastewater. Land ap plication and agricultural use above rates that can be utilized by crops or vegetation are no longer acce ptable and the PWRP must devise alternative uses for treated wastewater. District 20 es timates that 7.8 mgd could be used for municipal reuse for irrigating parks, school grounds, golf courses, and similar areas, but this is still much less than the projected flow rate of 22.4 mgd in 2025 (Los Angeles County Sanitati on District, 2005). Therefore the District is looking for additional uses for reclaimed water, including the proposed Project.

The small quantity of potable water required by the Project's workfo rce will be provided by the Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40. This age ncy uses both surface water from the California Aqueduct and from Little Rock Reservoir (60 percent of their supply) and groundwater from local wells (40 percent of their supply).

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-13 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Solid Waste

Waste Management of Antelope Valley operates two landfills within the Antelope Valley. They are also responsible for the operation of two special waste fa cilities and provide information to the residents of Palmdale and Lancaster regarding recycling and waste r eduction techniques. The nearest landfills that serve the Project site include the Antelope Valley Lan dfill and the Lancaster Landfill, which are located at 1220 W. City Ranch Road in the City of Palmdale and 600 E Ave F in the City of Lancaster, respectively (also see Section 5.16, Waste Management).



## 5.11.2.7 Schools

Educational needs in the Project area are served by the Palmdale School District (PSD), Westside Union School District (WUSD), and the Antelope Valley Unio n High School District (AVUHSD). As of May 2008, there were 21 elementary schools, including four kindergarten through 5 th 

## grade, eleven kindergarten through 6 th 

## grade, and six kindergarten through 8 th 

## grade, and four intermediate schools, two 6 th 

## through 8 th 

## grade and two 7 th 

## through 9 th 

## grade within the PSD. Table 5.11-7 summarizes location, grades served, and student enrollment for schools within the PSD. Total enrollment in the PSD was approximately 21,500 students during the 2007-2008 school year.

Table 5.11-7 Summary of Schools and En rollment in Palmdale School District

School Name Grades Location (within the City of Palmdale) Students

Barrel Springs Elementary School K – 5 3636 Ponderosa Way 805
Buena Vista Elementary School K – 8 37005 Hillcrest Drive 915

Cactus Intermediate School 6 – 8 38060 20 th 

## St E 1,104
Chaparral Elementary School K – 6 37500 50 th 

## St E 1,020
Cimarron Elementary School K – 6 36940 45 th 

## St E 936
Desert Rose Elementary School K – 5 37730 27 th 

## St E 1,114
Desert Willow Intermediate School 6 – 8 36555 Sunny Lane 929
Golden Poppy Elementary School K – 8 37802 Rockie Lane 884
Joshua Hills Elementary School K – 5 3030 Fairfield 840
Juniper Intermediate School 7 – 8 39066 Palm Tree Way 964 Los Amigos Elementary School K – 8 6640 E Ave R-8 858
Manzanita Elementary School K – 6 38620 33 rd 

## St E 711
Mesa Intermediate School K – 8 3243 E Ave R-8 1,068
Mesquite Elementary School K – 6 37622 43 rd 

## St E 1,000 Oak Tree Learning Center K – 8 39139 10 th 

## St E 86
Ocotillo Elementary School K – 6 38737 Ocotillo School Dr. 1,162 Palmdale Learning Plaza K – 8 38043 Division Street 890

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-14 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## School Name Grades Location (within the City of Palmdale) Students

Palm Tree Elementary School K – 6 326 E Ave R 918
Quail Valley Elementary School K – 6 37236 58 th 

## St E 829

Shadow Hills Intermediate School 7 – 8 37315 60 th 

## St E 848
Summerwind Elementary School K – 6 39360 Summerwind Dr. 756
Tamarisk Elementary School K – 5 1843 E Ave Q-5 834
Tumbleweed Elementary School K – 6 1100 E Ave R-4 1,139
Wildflower Elementary School K – 6 39136 35 th 

## St E 887
Yellen Elementary School SDC 37015 Goldenview Way 46
Yucca Elementary School K – 6 38440 2 nd 

## St E 778
Source: Palmdale School District, 2007-2008 School Year.

The Project area is also served by the WUSD. The WUSD consists of 12 schools/programs servicing kindergarten through 8 th 

## grade students within the Antelope Valley. Table 5.11-8 summarizes current student enrollment at the 12 schools/ programs within the WUSD. Total enrollment for the WUSD was approximately 8,900 students for t he 2006-2007 school year as of June 2007 (WUSD, 2008).

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-15 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Table 5.11-8 Summary of School Enrollment in Westside Union School District

School Name Grades Location Students
Anaverde Hills Elementary School K – 8 39360-B Summerwind Drive Palmdale, CA 420

Cottonwood Elementary School K – 6 2740 W Ave P-8 Palmdale, CA 828

Del Sur School K – 8 9023 W Ave H Palmdale, CA 910

Esperanza Elementary K – 6 40521 35 th 

## St W Palmdale, CA 1,122

Hillview Middle School 7 – 8 40525 Peonza Lane Palmdale, CA 979

Joe Walker Middle School 7 – 8 5632 W Ave L-8 Palmdale, CA 890

Leona Valley Elementary School K – 8 9063 West Leona Avenue Leona Valley, CA 164

Quartz Hill Elementary School K – 6 41820 50 th 

## St W Quartz Hill, CA 957

Rancho Vista Elementary School K – 6 40641 Peonza Lane Palmdale, CA 896

Sundown Elementary School K – 6 6151 W Ave L-8 Lancaster, CA 861

Valley View Elementary School K – 6 3310 W Ave L-8 Lancaster, CA 861

Mountain School-Home School Program K – 8 Offices at Anaverde Hills Elementary School Unknown

Source: Westside Union School District, 2007

The Project area is also served by the AVUHSD. Th e AVUHSD consists of 15 schools/programs serving students in grades 9 through 12. Table 5.11-9 summarizes current student enrollment at the 15 schools/programs within the AVUHSD. Total enr ollment for the AVUHSD was approximately 24,700 students for the 2007-2008 school year as of May 27, 2008 (AVUHSD, 2008).

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-16 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-9 Summary of School Enrollment in Antelope Valley Union High School District

School Name Grades Location Students

Antelope Valley High School 9 - 12 44900 N. Division Street Lancaster, CA 2,149

Palmdale High School 9 – 12 2137 E Ave R Palmdale, CA 3,378

Quartz Hill High School 9 - 12 6040 W Ave J Quartz Hill, CA 3,428

Knight High School 9 - 12 37423 70 th 

## St E Palmdale, CA 3,471

Lancaster High School 9 - 12 44701 N. 32 nd 

## St W Lancaster, CA 3,248

Highland High School 9 - 12 39055 25 th 

## St W Palmdale, CA 3,308

Littlerock High School 9 - 12 10833 E Ave R Littlerock, CA 2,056

Eastside High School 9 - 12 3200 E Ave J-8 Lancaster, CA 1,995

Desert Winds Continuation High School 9 – 12 45030 3 rd 

## St E Lancaster, CA West Valley Campus: 6300 Wt Avenue L Quartz Hill, Ca 672

R. Rex Parris Continuation High School 9 – 12 38801 Clock Tower Plaza Palmdale, CA 585

Phoenix Community High School 9 – 12 North: 228 E Avenue H-8 Lancaster, CA
South: 2270 E Avenue Q Palmdale, CA 170

S.O.A.R. 9 – 12 128

Home Study Program 9 – 12 Offices at Lancaster High School 51

Desert Pathways 9 – 12 6300 W Avenue L, Rm. 23 Quartz Hill, CA 43

Source: Antelope Valley Union High School District, 2008.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-17 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## 5.11.2.8 Fiscal Resources

The local jurisdictions that will contain PHPP facilitie s and that have taxing power are the City of Palmdale and Los Angeles County. For the fiscal year (fy) 2006-2007, net assets as of June 30, 2007 for Los Angeles County totaled approximately $15.44 billion, which was an increase of over $1.3 billion (nine percent) from fiscal year 2005-2006. Los Angeles County’s key expenditures were on public protection, which comprised 36.5 percent of total expenditures. A summary of Los Angeles County’s expenses and revenues for the fiscal year is provided in Table 5.11-10.

Table 5.11-10 County of Los Angeles Expenses and Revenues for FY 2006-2007

Amount (in billi ons) Percentage

Expenses $13.33 100%

General Government $0.81 6%
Public Protection $4.87 36% Public Ways and Facility $0.28 2%
Health & Sanitation $2.22 17%
Public Assistance $4.54 34%
Education $0.10 1%
Recreation and Cultural Services $0.27 2% Interest on Long-Term Debt $0.24 2%
Revenues $15.45 100% Charges for Services $2.40 16% Operating Grants & Contributions $6.98 45% Capital Grants & Contributions $0.02 0.1%
Taxes $4.69 30%

Unrestricted Grants & Contributions $0.76 4.9% Investment Earnings $0.34 2%
Miscellaneous $0.26 2% Revenues minus Expenses $2.12 --
Source: County of Los Angeles, Auditor/Controller, 2008.

For the fiscal year 2006-2007, the City of Palmdal e’s total net assets increased by $33.97 million, due primarily to an increase in operating grants, property taxes, and tax increment revenue. As of June 30, 2007, net assets for the City of Palmdale totaled approximately $709.14 million. Total City revenues, which include program and general revenue, were ap proximately $182.16 million, while total expenses were approximately $148.19 million. In the fiscal year 2006-2007, property taxes amounted to approximately $17.07 million (approximately 9 percent) of the City of Palmdale’s total revenues. A

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-18 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## summary of the City of Palmdale’s expenses and re venues for fiscal year 2006-2007 is provided in Table
5.11-11.

Table 5.11-11 City of Palmdale Expenses and Revenues for FY 2006-2007

Amount (in milli ons) Percentage Expenses $148.19 100%
General Government $18.09 12% Public Safety $20.45 14%
Public Services $39.98 27% Community Development $35.77 24%
Health & Welfare $1.30 1%
Cultural and Recreation $17.60 12% Interest on Long-Term Debt $15.00 10%
Revenues $182.16 100% Charges for Services $33.57 18% Operating Grants & Contributions $16.12 9% Capital Grants & Contributions $44.18 24%
Tax Increment $41.64 23% Property Taxes $17.07 9%
Sales Taxes $18.24 10%
Other Taxes $7.64 4% Unrestricted Investment Earnings $2.88 2%
Other $0.82 1% Revenues minus Expenses $33.97 --
Source: City of Palmdale, Department of Finance, 2008.



# 5.11.3 Environmental Impacts

The following sections discuss the expected im pacts of PHPP construction and operation on the socioeconomic resources of the Project area.



## 5.11.3.1 Evaluation Methods and Significance Criteria

For the purposes of this evaluation, local environm ental impacts were determined by comparing Project demands during construction and operation with the socioeconomic resources of Los Angeles County, Palmdale, and nearby communities. The criteria used to determine the significance of Project-related socioeconomic impacts are those suggested in the CEQA guidelines. Project-related impacts would be considered significant if they:

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-19 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

##  Induce substantial growth or concentration of population;

 Displace a large number of people or existing housing;

 Cause a substantial decrease in employment or property values;

 Result in the addition of students into an impacted school;

 Cause a substantial increase in the demand for public services that would affect local agencies’ ability to provide public services; or

 Cause substantial disruption or division of t he physical arrangement of an established community.

Project socioeconomic impacts also could be consider ed significant if they cause substantial change in community interaction patterns, social organization, social structures, or so cial institutions; cause substantial conflict with community attitudes, values, or perceptions; or cause substantial inequities in the distribution of Project costs and benefits.



## 5.11.3.2 Construction

The following subsections describe the potential constr uction phase impacts of the Project on population, housing, employment, public services, utilities, school s, and the economic base and fiscal resources of Los Angeles County and the cities of Palmdale, Lancas ter, Santa Clarita, Victorville, Hesperia, Adelanto, and Apply Valley.

Project Work Force and Population

Project construction is expected to oc cur over a total of 27 months. Includ ing linear facilities as well as the plant site facilities, Project construction would re quire an average of 367 employees per day over the entire 27 month construction period with manpower requirements peaking at approximately 767 workers in Month 12 of construction (see Table 5.11-12).

The primary trades required for construction of the proposed Project will include carpenters, cement masons, electricians, ironworkers, millwrights, equi pment operators, welders, painters, pipefitters, insulators, boilermakers, skilled and unskilled laborer s, supervisors, teamst ers, management, operating engineers, and administrative staff. The anticipated number of worker s anticipated by trade required for Project construction is shown in Table 5.11-12.

According to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) report titled Socioeconomic Impacts of Power Plants, construction workers will commute as much as two hours to construction sites from their homes, rather than relocate (EPRI, 1982). The availability of construction workers by tr ade in Los Angeles is shown in Table 5.11-13; Tables 5.11-14 and 5.11-15 show the same data for the counties of Kern and San Bernardino. As shown in Table 5.11-16, nearly 350,0 00 construction workers are available within the combined Los Angeles, Kern, and San Bernardino c ounty region. The proposed Project would be expected to draw from the entire construc tion work force in the region.5.11 SocioeconomicsTable 5.11-12 PHPP Construction Workforce by SkillManpower by Trade/Project ElementM1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8M9M10M11M12M13M14M15M16M17M18M19M20M21M22M23M24M25M26M27Construction - Combined-Cycle ComponentWelders00001525303030353540303030252530252520151010101010Carpenters, Bricklayers and Masons202025303035353525151515151515151010101010555555Electricians121520202020202025252525252520202020201918151515151510Ironworkers51010101010101515151515151515151010555555555Laborers555555505050504545454545454527232323232323151515151515Millwrights0005515151518181820201110633333222111Equipment Operators8101212121212121010101010101010106666633333Plasterers000000000355432000000000000Painters000000333332222222222222211Pipefitters61012252545454545454040353535353535353535353523232323Sheetmetal Workers00000366121212121212121066663333333Sprinklerfitters0000000005710770000000000000Surveyors/Designers333333333333333333333333333Insulation Workers000000000059151818181410772000000Supervisors, Planners, etc.202530303434343838383434342828282323222222202020202020Subtotal12914816718520425226326726927227228527225922721018418116716615212611810610510499Construction - Solar ComponentUnskilled Laborers0024242436486084108132204216180108483030000000000Pipefitters002223457911171815942.52.5000000000Welders002223457911171815942.52.5000000000Electrician002223457911171815942.52.5000000000I&C002223457911171815942.52.5000000000Management, Engineering & Administration55444681014182234363018855000000000Masons002223457911171815942.52.5000000000Operating Engineers002223457911171815942.52.5000000000Subtotal4040406080100140180220340360300180805050000000000July 20085.11-19Palmdale Hybrid Power Project5.11 SocioeconomicsJuly 20085.11-20Palmdale Hybrid Power ProjectTable 5.11-12 PHPP Construction Workforce by Skill (Continued)Manpower by Trade/Project ElementM1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8M9M10M11M12M13M14M15M16M17M18M19M20M21M22M23M24M25M26M27Construction - Pipelines (Gas, Water Supply, Etc.)Unskilled Labor0000282828284242424242000000000000Welders0000333333333000000000000Pipefitters0000333333333000000000000Equipment Operators000099991414141414000000000000Foremen0000444488888000000000000Supervisors, Etc0000111122222000000000000Subtotal0000484848487272727272000000000000Construction- Transmission LinesGeneral Foremen3644641000003454000000000Foreman1414881282121610041316118000000000Leadman191944456401420202044400000000Journey Lineman20323636513281236180030403424000000000Apprentice Linemen8141616188241260068108000000000Groundman161920201710121212158814161081000000000Equipment operators243628283326182328171224364028241000000000Cement Truck Drivers1818000001280020202000000000000Welders82000000000091230000000000Mechanic4444641343003454000000000Skilled Laborers242400000168000282800000000000Carpenters990000040000000000000000Subtotal001671971201201479750102124702476182208110842400000000Total12914837442236443253851250760268876772870766149834431519116615212611810610510499

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-22 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-13 Available Labor: Long Beach Metr opolitan Statistical Area (Los Angeles County)

Occupational Title Annual Average Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

2004 2014 Number Percentage New Jobs Net Replacements Total

Construction Managers 7,300 7,950 650 8.9 65 132 197

Construction Trades Workers 130,460 140,910 10,450 8.0 1,045 2,352 3,397

Brickmasons and Blockmasons 2,210 2,370 160 7.2 16 33 49

Carpenters 24,680 27,330 2,650 10.7 265 402 667

Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers 3,870 4,370 500 12.9 50 78 128

Construction Laborers 24,820 25,880 1,060 4.3 106 330 436

Paving, Surfacing, and Tamping Equipment Operators 590 660 70 11.9 7 8 15

Operating Engineers and Other Construction Equipment Operators 4,080 4,580 500 12.3 50 105 155

Electricians 13,600 14,550 950 7.0 95 269 364

Insulation Workers 910 910 0 0.0 0 27 27
Painters, Construction and Maintenance 12,410 13,440 1,030 8.3 103 189 292

Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 12,580 13,780 1,200 9.5 120 289 409

Plasterers and Stucco Masons 2,810 2,930 120 4.3 12 51 63

Reinforcing Iron and Rebar Workers 1,210 1,300 90 7.4 9 24 33

Sheet Metal Workers 2,810 2,990 180 6.4 18 67 85
Helpers’ Construction Trades 7,070 7,500 430 6.1 43 293 336

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-23 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Occupational Title Annual Average Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

2004 2014 Number Percentage New Jobs Net Replacements Total
Helpers— Brickmasons, Blockmasons, Stonemasons, and Tile and Marble Setters 1,370 1,500 130 9.5 13 57 70

Helpers—Carpenters 960 1,100 140 14.6 14 40 54
Helpers--Pipelayers, Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 400 430 30 7.5 3 17 20

Welders, Cutters, Solderers, and Brazers 8,520 8,270 -250 -2.9 0 241 241

Plant and System Operators 4,700 4,890 190 4.0 19 136 155

Surveyors 730 810 80 11.0 8 25 33
Engineering Managers 6,660 7,270 610 9.2 61 133 194

Supervisors, Construction and Extraction Workers 13,480 14,600 1,120 8.3 112 229 341

First Line Supervisors/Mgrs of Construction Trades & Extraction Workers 13,480 14,600 1,120 8.3 112 229 341

Structural Metal Fabricators and Fitters 1,270 1,380 110 8.7 11 25 36

Machinists 9,550 9,090 -460 -4.8 0 223 223 Source: California Employment Development Department, 2007.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-24 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-14 Available Labor: Kern County Statistical Area

Annual Average

Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

Occupational Title 2004 2014 Number PercentNew Jobs Net Replacements Total Construction Managers 530 740 210 39.6 21 10 31

Construction Trades Workers 14,140 19,550 5,410 38.3 541 256 797

Brickmasons and Blockmasons 290 410 120 41.4 12 4 16

Carpenters 1,990 2,820 830 41.7 83 32 115

Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers 780 1,140 360 46.2 36 16 52

Construction Laborers 3,500 4,770 1,270 36.3 127 47 174 Paving, Surfacing, and Tamping Equipment Operators 50 80 30 60.0 3 1 4

Operating Engineers and Other Construction Equipment Operators 550 770 220 40.0 22 14 36

Electricians 1,590 2,180 590 37.1 59 32 91

Insulation Workers 80 100 20 25.0 2 2 4
Painters, Construction and Maintenance 1,080 1,450 370 34.3 37 16 53

Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 1,080 1,540 460 42.6 46 25 71

Plasterers and Stucco Masons 230 320 90 39.1 9 4 13

Reinforcing Iron and Rebar Workers 80 110 30 37.5 3 2 5

Structural Iron and Steel Workers 60 90 30 50.0 3 1 4

Helpers—Construction Trades 640 920 280 43.8 28 27 55

Helpers—Brickmasons, Blockmasons, Stonemasons, and Tile and Marble Setters 170 250 80 47.1 8 7 15

Helpers—Carpenters 250 370 120 48.0 12 11 23

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-25 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Annual Average

Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

Occupational Title 2004 2014 Number PercentNew Jobs Net Replacements Total
Helpers—Pipelayers, Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 150 220 70 46.7 7 6 13

Welders, Cutters, Solderers, and Brazers 810 1,000 190 23.5 19 23 42

Plant and System Operators 1,780 1,990 210 11.8 21 51 72

Surveyors 70 80 10 14.3 1 3 4
Engineering Managers 360 390 30 8.3 3 7 10
Supervisors, Construction and Extraction Workers 2,090 2,850 760 36.4 76 36 112

First Line Supervisors / Managers of Construction Trades and Extraction Workers 2,090 2,850 760 36.4 76 36 112

Structural Metal Fabricators and Fitters 50 50 0 0.0 0 1 1

Machinists 460 560 100 21.7 10 11 21 Source: California Employment Development Department, 2007.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-26 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-15 Available Labor: Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area (San Bernardino/Riverside Counties)

Annual Average

Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

Occupational Title 2004 2014 Number Percentage New Jobs Net Replacements Total

Construction Managers 3,160 4,370 1,210 38.3 121 57 178

Construction Trades Workers 106,020 135,250 29,230 27.6 2,923 1,876 4,799

Brickmasons and Blockmasons 2,630 3,760 1,130 43.0 113 39 152

Carpenters 28,050 34,500 9,450 33.7 945 457 1,402

Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers 5,170 3,950 1,780 34.4 178 104 282

Construction Laborers 20,010 25,290 5,280 26.4 528 266 794

Paving, Surfacing, and Tamping Equipment Operators 230 280 50 21.7 5 3 8

Operating Engineers and Other Construction Equipment Operators 4,0803,980 5,170 1,190 29.9 119 102 221

Electricians 6,730 7,860 1,130 16.8 113 133 246

Insulation Workers 220 240 20 9.1 2 7 9
Painters, Construction and Maintenance 7,570 9,410 1,840 24.3 184 115 299

Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 4,660 5,650 990 21.2 99 107 206

Plasterers and Stucco Masons 1,520 1,830 310 20.4 31 28 59

Reinforcing Iron and Rebar Workers 1,580 2,040 460 29.1 46 31 77

Sheet Metal Workers 3,930 3,480 550 18.8 55 70 125
Helpers’ Construction Trades 4,040 5,350 1,310 32.4 131 168 299

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-27 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Annual Average

Employment Employment Change Average Annual Job Openings

Occupational Title 2004 2014 Number Percentage New Jobs Net Replacements Total
Helpers— Brickmasons, Blockmasons, Stonemasons, and Tile and Marble Setters 1,450 2,000 550 37.9 55 60 115

Helpers—Carpenters 860 1,220 360 41.9 36 36 72
Helpers—Pipelayers, Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 700 880 180 25.7 18 29 47

Welders, Cutters, Solderers, and Brazers 3,920 4,420 470 11.9 47 112 159

Plant and System Operators 1,810 2,150 340 18.8 34 53 87

Surveyors 450 540 90 20.0 9 16 25
Engineering Managers 1,110 1,480 370 33.3 37 22 59

Supervisors, Construction and Extraction Workers 3,810 13,450 3,640 37.1 364 167 531

First Line Supervisors/Mgrs of Construction Trades & Extraction Workers 9,810 13,450 3.640 37.1 364 167 531

Structural Metal Fabricators and Fitters 930 1,040 110 11.8 11 22 33

Machinists 2,740 3,090 350 12.8 35 64 99 Source: California Employment Development Department, 2007.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-28 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Table 5.11-16 Available Construction Labor by Skill

Trade Available Workers By Metropolitan Area

Bakersfield (Kern) Los Angeles/ Long Beach San Bernardino/ Riverside Total for Three Areas Total Workers Needed (Peak)
Welders, Ironworkers, Millwrights, Boilermakers 960 8,710 4,570 14,040 152

Carpenters, Bricklayers, Masons 2,280 26,890 5,330 34,500 84

Electricians 1,590 13,600 6,730 21,920 253 Laborers (Construction) 3,500 24,820 45,300 73,620 65
Pipefitters, Sprinklerfitters 1,080 12,580 10,310 23,970 339
Painters, Plasterers 1,310 15,220 20,330 36,860 15
Unskilled Labor 3,500 24,820 45,300 73,620 44 Equipment Operators, Operating Engineers 550 4,080 10,170 14,800 108

Insulation Workers 80 910 220 1,210 56 Supervisors, Planners, Management, Administration 4,180 26,960 22,520 53,660 8

Source: California Employment Development Department, 2007

The availability of over 350,000 construction workers in Los Angeles, Kern and San Bernardino counties alone would be more than sufficient to meet the Pr oject peak needs of 767 employees. Therefore, Project construction labor demand would not significantly affect the availability of construction labor in the region.

As described above, it is assumed that few if any co nstruction workers would permanently relocate to the nearby communities of Palmdale, Lancaster, Lake Lo s Angeles, Santa Clarita, etc. during the Project construction phase. This is because construction workers typically commute relatively long distances to their work sites. Should some construction workers ch oose to stay temporarily at a local area motel or hotel, there are at least 30 hotels in the vicinity (P almdale and Lancaster) with rooms available to meet this demand. Should a portion of the workers relocate to the area for the duration of their construction assignments, impacts to available housing and population would be minor, as vacancy rates in Palmdale and Lancaster are both estimated at 3.7 percent.

It is anticipated that the Project construction work force would be drawn from the local area (e.g., Palmdale, Lancaster and Lake Los Angeles), from ot her parts of Los Angeles County (e.g., Santa Clarita and parts of the Los Angeles Basin), and from parts of San Bernardino County (e.g., the Victor Valley). Because of the size of the regional construction wo rk force, Project construction labor demand would not significantly affect the availability of construction labor in the region.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-29 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Population

As noted above, it is anticipated that the vast majority of the construction workfo rce (a peak workforce of 767 workers and an average of 367 workers per day over the 27-month duration of PHPP construction), would commute to the Project site rather than reloca te. Thus, impacts to population are expected to be minimal, and the Project would not induce substantial gr owth. Additionally, the Project would not displace existing populations.

Housing

Because the PHPP construction workforce largely wi ll commute to the area rather than relocate, increased demand on the local housing supply are expec ted to be negligible. In addition, because of the availability of hotel and motel accommodations, and the housing vacancy rates in nearby communities as described above, workers who choose to relocate tem porarily would not be expected to have a significant impact on housing availability.

Employment and Economy

Project construction would create a temporary, pos itive impact on the local economic base and fiscal resources. Construction employment wages and salaries would provide additional income to the area, as would local expenditures for construction materials a nd services. The Project construction payroll has been estimated at approximately $106 million (approxim ately $47 million annually), including the power generating facilities and linear facilities (transmission line and gas pipeline). Local expenditures for construction materials and supplies are estimated at $59 million. These include everything from permanent materials and equipment to small tools and consumables, concrete, rebar, formwork materials, asphalt, fencing, and local purchases in support of the field staff.

PHPP construction is expected to create an average of 367 and peak of 767direct jobs. These direct jobs will create both indirect and induced se condary employment in the region. Indirect employment is defined as employment that will be generat ed by the purchase of goods and serv ices required by the Project. Induced employment is defined as employment that will be generated by the purchase of goods and services by the businesses that are indirectly supported by the Project.

An Input-output model (IMPLAN Professional TM 

## ) was used to estimate economic impacts within Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Kern Counties based on Project construction-phase expenditures that would benefit the local economies. For the purpose of the input-output model, the following Project expenditures (rounded values) were assumed to be the project expenditures which would benefit the local economies: 1) Total Payroll ($105,730,000) and 3) Local Expenditures ($58,800,000). The total construction estimate ($273,204,000) was deter mined based on using an employee compensation percentage for construction operations and was used as an input into the model to predict economic impacts.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-30 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## Based on the assumptions stated above (during the 27 -month construction phase), the estimated annual beneficial economic output impacts within Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Kern Counties would be as follows (rounded values):

Direct expenditures = $ 273,000,000
Indirect regional revenues = $ 142,000,000
Induced regional revenues = $ 134,000,000
Total impact = $ 550,000,000

The top ten economic sectors that would benefit the most in terms of economic output impacts include: 1) other new construction; 2) architectural and engine ering services; 3) petroleum refining; 4) wholesale trade; 5) owner occupied dwellings; 6) real estate; 7) insurance carriers; 8) offices of physicians – dentists and other health; 9) food and drinking places; and 10) hospitals.

Also, using the assumptions stated above, during t he construction phase, the Project’s estimated annual job creation within Los Angeles, Kern, and San Bernardino Counties would be as follows:

Direct (Project) jobs = 367 workers
Indirect jobs = 937 workers
Induced jobs = 1,018 workers
Total jobs creation = 2,322 workers

These additional jobs would result from the PHPP’s local construction expenditures as well as from spending by local construction workers. These indirect and induced jobs are expected to be filled both locally and regionally, and would result in positive economic impacts.

Public Services

No significant impacts are expected on local public se rvices during construction. Current police, fire, and medical facilities should be sufficient to handle emergencies at the site. A security fence would be erected around the entire perimeter of the construc tion site; no significant adverse impacts would be expected on the Los Angeles County S heriff’s Department or the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Fire extinguishers will be available on site during “hot work,” and personnel will be trained in their proper use; no significant impacts would be expected on lo cal fire fighting agencies. Communication equipment will be available on site at all times to contact outsi de agencies if emergencies arise. No significant impacts are expected on local public social and medical services; constr uction workers would be expected to obtain health insurance from their employers.

Utilities

There would be very minor dem ands on utility services during construction as a result of onsite activities. PHPP construction would require utility services (elect ricity, water, sanitary wastewater and solid waste disposal. Sanitary wastes generated during constr uction would be collected in portable, self-contained toilets and hauled to an appropriate disposal site, and bottled water would be used for drinking. No significant impacts would be expected.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-31 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## Schools

The overwhelming proportion of the Project construction workforce would be expected to commute to the site daily. Further, construction wo rkers who relocate temporarily for a work assignment typically do not bring their families with them. Negligible impacts on school capacity would occur.

Fiscal Resources

Local expenditures on construction materials, supplies, and equipment are estimated to total approximately $58.8 million, which, at the Los Angeles County sales tax rate of 8.25 percent, would generate approximately $4.9 million annually in sales tax revenue. The 8.25 percent Los Angeles County sales tax rate is divided into 7.25 percent for t he State and 1.00 percent to the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. Based on local construction expenditures of $59 million, the sales tax generated for the State is estimated at approx imately $4.3 million and the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission sales tax revenues are esti mated at approximately $600,000. Fiscal impacts associated with operation of the Project are considered beneficial.



## 5.11.3.3 Operation

The following subsections describe the potential impacts of PHPP operations on socioeconomic conditions and resources.

Project Work Force and Population

The Project is expected to employ a total of 36 worker s during operation. Some of the Project operations jobs may involve relocation to the area for workers wi th specialized technical or managerial skills. Given the moderate size of the Project work force and the likelihood that some of these workers already would be residents of the local area, Project populat ion impacts would be less than significant.

Housing

Operation of the Project is expected to have an insi gnificant impact on housing because of the small number of workers needed for operation of the plant and the availability of local housing (e.g., current vacancy rates of 3.7 percent in Palmdale). Becaus e there are no residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the PHPP plant site and Project-related population increase will be minimal, no substantial change is expected in community interaction patterns, social organization, social structures, or social institutions.

Employment

As stated above, 36 full-time employees would be needed to operate and maintain the PHPP facility, including operations and power block routine mainten ance staff; solar field proj ect and maintenance staff; clerical and technical staff; and administrative and ma nagement staff. Most of the 36 employees will be hired locally with some specialized employees coming from outside the local area.

An Input-output model (IMPLAN Professional TM 

## ) was used to estimate economic impacts within Los Angeles, Kern, and San Bernardino Counties based upon operation-phase Project expenditures which

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-32 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## would benefit the local economies. For the purpose of the input-output model, the annual expenditures that would benefit local economies were assumed to be $3.7 million annually; and this figure was used as an input into the model to predict employment and economic impacts.

Based upon the Implan model results, the Project’s estimated annual job creation during the operation phase) is estimated as follows:

Direct jobs (Project) = 36 workers
Indirect jobs = 64 workers
Induced jobs = 59 workers
Total jobs creation = 159 workers

Public Services

Project operation would slightly increase demands on local police, fire, medical, and other emergency services. Population immigration is expected to be minimal and one additional industrial facility (the PHPP) with a small workforce would not be expected to have a significant adverse impact on the capacity of most local public services.

Utilities

The Project will use reclaimed water supplied by the City of Palmdale Water Re clamation Plant (PWRP) for cooling tower makeup and other industrial uses. Potable water for personnel uses such as drinking water, sanitary uses, safety show ers, etc. will be obtained from Los A ngeles County Waterworks District No. 40. The Project will be fueled with natural gas delivered via a new natural gas pipeline and will generate its own electrical power for onsite consumpt ion. Utilities impacts would be less than significant.

Schools

Operation of the Project is expected to have an in significant local and regional impact on schools because of the relatively small number of worker s needed for operation of the plant (maximum of 36 employees).

The PHPP would be required to pay a school impact f ee to the Antelope Valley Union High School District and the Lancaster Elementary School District. Accord ing to local school district personnel, the school impact fee for industrial projects in the Antelope Valle y Union High School District is $0.11/square foot of new industrial floor space and $0.34/square foot for the Lancaster Elementary School District (Thompson, 2008). Based on a total square foot age of 28,800 square feet, the Project would be required to pay total school impact fees of approximately $13,000.

Fiscal Resources

At present, there is no property tax on solar co mponents (mirrors, solar boiler, heat exchangers) improvements by law (Section 73 of the California Taxation and Revenue Code). Components included under the exemption include storage devise, powe r conditioning equipment, transfer equipment, and parts. The capital costs for the combined-cycle portion of the PHPP are estimated at $615 million to $715

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-33 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## million (2011 dollars). Assuming that the solar component exemption continues and assuming a Los Angeles County tax rate of 1.115433 percent, annual property tax revenues are estimated at approximately $685,000 to $797,000. Fiscal impacts associated with operation of the Project are considered beneficial.

The plant is expected to begin operation in the third quar ter of 2013. During operation, it is expected that local purchases for materials, supplies, equipmen t, and services would total approximately $3.7 million annually. Applying the Los Angeles County sales ta x rate of 8.25 percent, approximately $310,000 would be generated annually in local sales tax as a direct resu lt of the Project, or approximately $9.3 million for the nominal 30-year operating life of the Project. The 7.25 percent Los Angeles County sales tax rate is divided into 7.25 percent for the State and 1.00 per cent to the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. Based on annual non-labor expenditures of $3.7 million, the sales tax generated annually is estimated at approximately $270,000 for the St ate and $37,000 for the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission.



## 5.11.3.4 Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898, “Federal Acti ons to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low income Populations” was signed by then-President Bill Clinton on February 11, 1994. The purpose of this Executive Order is to identify and address whether high and adverse human health or environmental effects are likely to fall disproportionat ely on minority and/or low income populations of the community.

According to the guidelines establis hed by the EPA to assist Federal agencies to develop strategies to address this circumstance, a minority and/or low inco me population exists if the minority and/or low income population percentage of the affected area is 50 percent or more of the area’s general population; Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidance additionally suggests determining whether minority and/or low income populations in potentially affect ed areas are present in proportions meaningfully greater than those of the general popul ation of the area. The thresholds for poverty level for an individual (under 65 years of age) and a family of four (inc luding two related children under 18 years) in 2007 were income levels of $10,787 and $21,027, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). The CEQ defines the term “minority” as persons from any of the followi ng groups: Black/African American; Asian; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; American Indian or Alaska Native; and Hispanic, regardless of race. Additionally, for the purposes of this analysis, “minority” also includes all other nonwhite racial categories such as “some other race” and “two or more races.”

The Federal guidelines set forth a three-step screening process: 1) identify which impacts of the Project are high and adverse; 2) determine if minority or low income populations exist within the high and adverse impact zones; and 3) examine the spatial distribution of high and adverse impact areas to determine if these impacts are likely to fall disproportionat ely on the minority and/or low income population.

To assess the potential for disproportionate environ mental impacts on minority or low income populations as a result of the Project, population, poverty, and minorit y data within a six-mile radius of the Project site were gathered using database and mapping software pr ovided by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Project site is located entirely within census block group 91 01.00.1. There are 51 census tracts and 120 census block groups within a six-mile radius of the PHPP plant site.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-34 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## As shown in Table 5.11-17, as of 2000 2010 approximately half of the resi dents of Los Angeles County were considered to be part of a minority population ( 50.3 49.7 percent). Figure 5.11-2 illustrates the proportion of the minority population in each block group census tract in the area around the PHPP plant site. The proportion of minority populations in census block groups tracts located within the six-mile radius averaged 48.99 52.5 percent, which is lower higher than the minority population percentage of Los Angeles County as a whole ( 51.3 49.7 percent) Census block group 9101.00.1, which contains the PHPP plant site, had a substantial ly higher minority population (75.79 percent) than the surrounding area and the county as a whole, but this statistic is misleadi ng in that the block group includes Air Force Plant 42, which is adjacent to the PHPP site and has no residential population.

Table 5.11-17 shows the proportion of people with income considered below the poverty level (low income population) in the census blocks tracts near the plant site , as shown in the 2000 Census. Economic data collected in the 2010 Census has not yet been released

. Figure 5.11

- 3 illustrates the proportion of the population below the poverty level for each block group within a six

- mile radius of the PHPP site. The proportion of low income population in the study area ranged from 0 to 53.7 percent . As shown in Table 5.11-17, the poverty-level population within the block group census tract that contains the plant site is somewhat higher (21.1 percent) than th e Los Angeles County average (17.91 percent) and is in the middle of the range of poverty popul ations (12.0 to 30.8 percent) for the block groups census tracts in the immediate area.

Table 5.11-17 Environmental Justice Characteristics

Geographic Area

(Census Tract) Census Block Group Total Minority Population (Percent)) Total Poverty Level Population (Percent)

U.S. Census, 2000



## 9101.00 9101.00.1 75.79 52.0 21.10

9005.01 9005.01.1 47.77 54.1 20.60

9005.01.2 55.03

9005.04 9005.04.1 50.72 53.9 12.00

9005.04.2 47.06

9007.04 9007.04.1 56.67 59.5 30.80

9102.01 9102.01.1 28.80 43.0 19.20 County of Los Angeles 51.30 49.7 17.91
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 2010 . Note: Italicized block group Census Tract contains the PHPP plant site.



## The primary environmental justice issues for powe r plant siting and development would be related to potential air emissions, noise levels, and water use that could adversely affect the health or environmental quality of the local community. These is sues are discussed in detail in other sections of this AFC. Within the context of environmental just ice, impacts are determined by evaluating whether the Project will have a disproportionate high and adver se impact on low-income and minority populations.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-35 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## The proposed Project is not expected to have dispro portionate significant adverse impacts on lowincome or minority populations, based on a number of factors. The PHPP plant site is in an industrial area with very limited residential populations regardless of ethnicity or income level. The Project is not expected to have significant impacts on air quality, pub lic health, noise, or water use. The Project’s linear facilities also would have no disp roportionate adverse impacts on minor ity or low-income populations. The Project’s various pipelines would be buried and w ould not traverse residential areas; the transmission line route also is in largely non-residential areas (S egment 1) and/or within an existing transmission line ROW (e.g., all of Segment 2 which extends from the Pear blossom Substation to the Vincent Substation).



## 5.11.3.5 Cumulative Impacts

The potential for cumulative socioeconomic impacts exists where there are multiple projects proposed in an area which have overlapping construction schedules and/or project operations that could impact similar resources. Projects with overlapping cons truction schedules and/or operations collectively could result in a demand for labor that cannot be met by the Project area labor pool, which could lead to an influx of nonlocal workers and their dependents. This population increase could impact socioeconomic resources. Because of the large regional constr uction work force, no significant cumulative socioeconomic impacts associated with construction activities (e.g., population increases that affect housing availability) would be expected when consideri ng the PHPP together with the cumulative projects identified in Section 5.1.

The Project would have minimal socioeconomic impact s during operation, and thus would not contribute considerably to significant cumulative impacts. It also should be noted that Project employment and local expenditures for equipment and materials would benefit the local economy. The Project’s contribution to an adequate supply of electrical energy al so would be beneficial to the economy.



# 5.11.4 Mitigation Measures

No significant adverse socioeconomic impacts have been identified and thus, no mitigation measures are required.



# 5.11.5 References

California Department of Finance, 2007 2011 . City/County Estimates with Annual Percent Change – January 1, 2006 2010 and 2007 2011

. http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/Repo rtsPapers/Estimates/E1/documents/ E-1table.xls. Accessed November 27 July 20, 2011

.
California Employment Development Department, 2007. Information regarding labor market information for counties. Accessed November.

California Hotel and Lodging Association, 2008. Pe rsonal communication with M. Donohue, June 25, 2008.

City of Palmdale, 2008. City of Palmdale Budget. Fi scal Years July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009. July 2008.

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-36 Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant 

## City of Palmdale, 2008. Los Angeles County Property Tax Rate. Fiscal Year July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009. July 2008.

EPRI, 1982. Socioeconomic Impacts of Power Plants. February.

IMPLAN 2006. Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Stillwat er, MN. 2006 Data Files for Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Kern Counties. Most current data as of June 2008.

Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG), 2007. Kern COG 2007 Destination 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. May.

Kern Economic Development Corporation, 2007a. Monitoring Economic Development Strategy: Kern County, California. Second Annual Report. July.

Kern Economic Development Corporation, 2007b. Kern County Snapshot. Available at http://www.kedc.com/images/documents/182_30704.pdf.

Lancaster Sheriff Station Operations, 2008. Law En forcement Report, City of Lancaster, September 2007, personal communication with staff, and data ac cessed at http://www.cityoflancasterca.org, June
2008.

Los Angeles County, 2008. Los Angeles County Budge t. Fiscal Years July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009. July 2008.

Los Angeles County Auditor, 2008. Los Angeles Coun ty Property Tax Rate. Fiscal Year July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009. July 2008.

Los Angeles County CEO’s Office, 2008. Los Angeles County Tax Rate. Sid Kikkawa. Fiscal Year July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009. July 2008.

Palmdale Chamber of Commerce, 2008 Website http://www.palmdalechamber.org accessed June 2008.

Palmdale Sheriff Station Operations, 2008. Pe rsonal communication with staff. June 2008.

Palmdale Water District, 2008 Website http://www.palmdalewater.org, accessed June 2008.

Southern California Association of Government s (SCAG), 2004. SCAG Growth Forecasting. http://www.scag.ca.gov/forecast/downloads/2004GF.xls. Accessed June 2008.

Thompson, Cindy. Antelope Valley Union High School District Maintenance. Personal Communication. July 29, 2008.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2008. Demographic info rmation from 2000 Decennial Census. Accessed at http://factfinder .census.gov

.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2010, Demographic inform ation from 2010 Decennial Census. Accessed at http://factfinder 2.census.gov

## 5.11 Socioeconomics

July 2008 (Revisions July 2011) 

## 5.11-37 Palmdale Hybrid Power Project 

## U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development , 2007. U.S. Housing Market Conditions, Second Quarter, 2007. August 2007. Accessed at h ttp://www.huduser.org/periodicals/ushmc/summer07/ USHMC_Q207.pdf.

Waste Management, Inc., 2008. Personal communication with staff, June 2008.

WUSD, 2008. Woodside Union School District personal communication with staff. June 2008.

## P a l m d a l e H y b r i d P o w e r P r o j e c t

F i g u r e 5

. 1 1

- 1 R e g i o n a l S o c i o e c o n o m i c S e t t i n g L E G E N D



## M a p L o c a t i o n

P r o j e c t : 1 0 8 5 5

- 0 0 2 D a t e : J u n e 2 0 0 8Y:\Projects\InlandEnergy\Palmdale\MXD\AFC_Figures\Figure_5-11-1_Regional_Socioeconomic_Setting.mxd 

## P l a n t S i t e 1 4 5 8

5 8 3 9 5 1 4

5

1 1 8

1 0 1 E d w

a r

d

s A i r F

o r

c e B a s e E

d w

a r

d

s A i r F

o r

c e B a s e C a l i f o r n i a C i t y



## L a n c a s t e r

L a k e L o s A n g e l e s L a k e L o s A n g e l e s R o s a m o n d T e h a c h a p i T e h a c h a p i



## S a n t a C l a r i t a 1 3 8

5 2 1 0

2 1 0 S a d d l e b a c k B u t t e S t

a t e P a r k S a d d l e b a c k B u t t e S t

a t e P a r k

C a s t a i c L a k e S t a t e R e c A r e a C a s t a i c L a k e S t a t e R e c A r e a

2 2 7 1 4 

## P a l m d a l e

L o s A n g e l e s T r a n s m i s s i o n L i n e

L i t t l e r o c k L i t t l e r o c k
A c t o n A c t o n P e a r b l o s s o m P e a r b l o s s o m Q u a r t z H i l l Q u a r t z H i l l K e r n C o u n t y L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y

L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y V e n t u r a C o u n t y K e r n C o u n t y

S a n B e r n a r d i n o C o u n t y

L o s A n g e

l e s C o u n t y S a n B e r n a r d i n o C o u n t y

0 5 1 0 1 5 M i l e s 1 : 6 0 0

, 0 0 0 K i n g s M o n t

e r e y S a n B e n i t

o T u l a r e I n y o F r e s n o M e r

c e d M a d e r a E s m e r a l d a

L o s A n g e l e

s

S a n D i e g o O r a n g e S a n t

a B a r b a r

a

V e n t u r

a

R i v e r s i d e S a n L u i s O b i s p o S a n B e r n a r

d i n o K e r n N y e

## P a l m d a l e H y b r i d P o w e r P r o j e c t

F i g u r e 5

. 1 1

- 2 P e r c e n t a g e M i n o r i t y P o p u l a t i o n B y B l o c k G r o u p L E G E N D



## M a p L o c a t i o n

P r o j e c t : 1 0 8 5 5

- 0 0 2 D a t e : J u l y 2 0 0 8Y:\Projects\InlandEnergy\Palmdale\MXD\AFC_Figures\Figure_5-11-2_Percentage_Minority.mxd 

## 6 M i l e R a d i u s
o f P l a n t S i t e

P l a n t S i t e

A i r F o r c e P l a n t 4 2

( n o n

- r e s i d e n t i a l )

E P a l m d a l e B l v d R

a n c h o V i s t a

B l v d E A V E G

E A V E P E A V E M E A V E K

E A V E R S

i e r r a H w y E A V E J50thStE 2 0 t h S t E

3 0 t h S t W

W A V E L W A V E H

W L a n c a s t e r B l v d W A V E G

E A V E S W A V E M

W A V E N

E l i z a

b

e

t h L a

k

e R d W A V E I

W A V E P 1 0 t h S t W

W A V E J

E A V E Q W A V E K

T

i e r r a

S u b i d a A v e 2 0 t h S t W E A V E I

1 3 8

1 3 8 1 4

1 3 8 9 0 0 2

. 0 0

. 2

9 1 0 7

. 0 4

. 2

9 1 0 7

. 0 3

. 2 9 1 0 6

. 0 4

. 1 9 1 0 6

. 0 4

. 4

9 1 0 7

. 0 6

. 1 9 1 0 7

. 0 5

. 2

9 1 0 7

. 0 5

. 1 9 1 0 7

. 0 4

. 1 9 1 0 7

. 0 3

. 1 9 1 0 6

. 0 1

. 3 9 1 0 1

. 0 0

. 1

9 1 0 7

. 1 0

. 1 9 1 0 7

. 1 0

. 3 9 1 0 7

. 1 0

. 4

9 1 0 7

. 1 0

. 2 9 1 0 7

. 0 7

. 1 9 1 0 5

. 0 3

. 3
9 1 0 6

. 0 4

. 2 9 1 0 6

. 0 3

. 3

9 1 0 6

. 0 3

. 2 9 1 0 5

. 0 3

. 4 9 1 0 5

. 0 3

. 1

9 1 0 6

. 0 3

. 4 9 1 0 6

. 0 3

. 1 9 1 0 6

. 0 4

. 3 9 1 0 5

. 0 2

. 2 9 1 0 6

. 0 2

. 1 9 1 0 5

. 0 2

. 1 9 1 0 6

. 0 1

. 1 9 1 0 6

. 0 1

. 2

9 1 0 4

. 0 4

. 1

9 1 0 4

. 0 4

. 2

9 1 0 5

. 0 3

. 2 9 1 0 5

. 0 1

. 3 9 1 0 4

. 0 3

. 1 9 1 0 4

. 0 1

. 2 9 1 0 4

. 0 2

. 1 9 1 0 4

. 0 2

. 2 9 1 0 5

. 0 1

. 1
9 1 0 5

. 0 1

. 2 9 1 0 2

. 0 1

. 2 9 0 0 5

. 0 4

. 2 9 0 0 5

. 0 3

. 1 9 0 0 5

. 0 3

. 2

9 0 0 5

. 0 3

. 3 9 0 0 6

. 0 5

. 1

9 0 0 7

. 0 4

. 1 9 0 0 5

. 0 4

. 1 9 0 0 7

. 0 1

. 4 9 0 0 7

. 0 1

. 3 9 0 0 5

. 0 1

. 1

9 0 0 7

. 0 1

. 2 9 0 0 7

. 0 1

. 1

9 0 0 5

. 0 1

. 2 9 0 0 6

. 0 7

. 1 9 0 0 8

. 0 6

. 1

9 0 0 8

. 0 6

. 2 9 0 0 6

. 0 6

. 2

9 1 0 2

. 0 1

. 1 9 0 0 5

. 0 2

. 1 9 0 0 5

. 0 2

. 4 9 0 0 5

. 0 1

. 3 9 0 0 5

. 0 2

. 2 9 0 0 5

. 0 2

. 3 9 0 0 6

. 0 7

. 2 9 0 0 6

. 0 4

. 1 9 0 0 6

. 0 6

. 1 9 0 0 6

. 0 4

. 3 9 0 0 6

. 0 2

. 1
9 0 0 6

. 0 2

. 3 9 0 0 8

. 0 4

. 1 9 0 0 8

. 0 4

. 2

9 0 0 6

. 0 4

. 2 9 0 0 6

. 0 2

. 4 9 0 0 6

. 0 2

. 2 9 0 0 6

. 0 5

. 2

9 0 0 3

. 0 0

. 2 9 0 0 3

. 0 0

. 1

9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 4 9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 2 9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 3 9 0 1 0

. 0 5

. 3 9 0 0 7

. 0 3

. 2

9 0 0 7

. 0 3

. 1

9 0 0 8

. 0 5

. 2 9 0 0 8

. 0 5

. 3 9 0 1 0

. 0 5

. 1

9 0 1 0

. 0 5

. 2 9 0 0 8

. 0 5

. 1

9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 6

9 0 1 1

. 0 2

. 2 9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 5

9 0 1 1

. 0 2

. 1 9 0 1 0

. 0 6

. 1 9 0 1 1

. 0 2

. 3 9 0 1 0

. 0 4

. 2 9 0 1 0

. 0 4

. 1 9 0 1 0

. 0 4

. 3

9 1 0 3

. 0 2

. 2 9 1 0 3

. 0 1

. 1

9 1 0 2

. 0 2

. 2

9 1 0 3

. 0 1

. 2

9 1 0 2

. 0 2

. 1 9 0 1 0

. 0 7

. 1 9 0 1 0

. 0 7

. 2 9 0 0 7

. 0 5

. 1 9 0 0 7

. 0 5

. 3

9 0 0 7

. 0 5

. 2 9 0 0 7

. 0 3

. 3 9 0 0 8

. 0 3

. 1 9 0 0 8

. 0 3

. 4 9 0 0 8

. 0 3

. 3 9 0 0 8

. 0 3

. 2 9 0 0 9

. 0 0

. 2

9 1 0 8

. 0 4

. 1 9 1 0 4

. 0 1

. 1 9 1 0 2

. 0 3

. 3 9 1 0 2

. 0 3

. 1 9 1 0 2

. 0 3

. 2

9 1 0 2

. 0 6

. 1 9 1 0 2

. 0 4

. 1 9 1 0 3

. 0 2

. 1

9 1 0 2

. 0 5

. 1

0 1 2 M i l e s 1 : 1 0 0

, 0 0 0 

### 0

- 3 0 %
3 0

- 5 4 %
5 4

- 6 9 %
6 9

- 7 5 %
7 5

- 1 0 0 % B e l o w S t a t e A v e r a g e 5 3

. 3 %

B e l o w C o u n t y A v e r a g e 6 8

. 9 %

A b o v e S t a t e a n d C o u n t y A v e r g e 

### P e r c e n t a g e M i n o r i t y P o p u l a t i o n b y B l o c k G r o u p

K i n g s M o n t

e r e y S a n B e n i t

o T u l a r e I n y o F r e s n o M e r

c e d M a d e r a E s m e r a l d a

L o s A n g e l e

s

S a n D i e g o O r a n g e S a n t

a B a r b a r

a

V e n t u r

a

R i v e r s i d e S a n L u i s O b i s p o S a n B e r n a r

d i n o K e r n N y e

## P a l m d a l e H y b r i d P o w e r P r o j e c t

F i g u r e 5

. 1 1

- 3 P e r c e n t a g e o f P o p u l a t i o n B e l o w t h e P o v e r t y L e v e l B y T r a c t L E G E N D



## M a p L o c a t i o n

P r o j e c t : 1 0 8 5 5

- 0 0 2 D a t e : J u l y 2 0 0 8Y:\Projects\InlandEnergy\Palmdale\MXD\AFC_Figures\Figure_5-11-3_Percentage_Poverty.mxd 

## 6 M i l e R a d i u s
o f P l a n t S i t e

P l a n t S i t e A i r F o r c e P l a n t 4 2 ( n o n

- r e s i d e n t i a l )

E P a l m d a l e B l v d R

a n c h o V i s t a

B l v d E A V E G

E A V E P E A V E M E A V E K

E A V E R S

i e r r a H w y

E A V E J50thStE 2 0 t h S t E

3 0 t h S t W

W A V E L W A V E H

W L a n c a s t e r B l v d W A V E G

E A V E S W A V E M

W A V E N

E l i z a

b

e

t h L a

k

e R d W A V E I

W A V E P 1 0 t h S t W

W A V E J

E A V E Q W A V E K

T

i e r r a

S u b i d a A v e 2 0 t h S t W E A V E I

1 3 8

1 3 8 1 4

1 3 8

T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 1 0 T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 5 T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 0 7 T r a c t 9 1 0 8

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 1 0 4

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 1 0 5

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 1 0 6

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 1 0 6

. 0 4

T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 0 6 T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 0 5

T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 1 0 6

. 0 2

T r a c t 9 1 0 7

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 1 0 4

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 1 0 4

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 1 0 4

. 0 2 T r a c t 9 1 0 5

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 1 0 5

. 0 2 T r a c t 9 1 0 6

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 2

T r a c t 9 1 0 1

. 0 0 T r a c t 9 0 1 0

. 0 7 T r a c t 9 0 0 7

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 0 0 7

. 0 5 T r a c t 9 0 1 0

. 0 6 T r a c t 9 0 0 5

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 0 0 7

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 0 0 7

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 0 0 5

. 0 1 T r a c t 9 0 0 5

. 0 2 T r a c t 9 0 0 5

. 0 3 T r a c t 9 0 0 6

. 0 7 T r a c t 9 0 0 8

. 0 6

T r a c t 9 0 1 0

. 0 5 T r a c t 9 0 0 8

. 0 5 T r a c t 9 0 0 6

. 0 6 T r a c t 9 0 0 8

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 0 0 8

. 0 3

T r a c t 9 0 0 6

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 0 0 6

. 0 2 T r a c t 9 0 0 6

. 0 5 T r a c t 9 0 0 3

. 0 0

T r a c t 9 0 0 2

. 0 0

T r a c t 9 1 0 2

. 0 6 T r a c t 9 0 1 1

. 0 2 T r a c t 9 0 1 0

. 0 4 T r a c t 9 0 0 9

. 0 0

0 1 2 M i l e s 1 : 1 0 0

, 0 0 0 0

- 9 %
9

- 1 4 %

1 4

- 1 8 %
1 8

- 3 0 %

> 3 0 % B e l o w S t a t e A v e r a g e 1 4

. 2 %

B e l o w C o u n t y A v e r a g e 1 7

. 9 %

A b o v e S t a t e a n d C o u n t y A v e r g e 

### P e r c e n t a g e o f P o p u l a t i o n B e l o w t h e P o v e r t y L e v e l b y T r a c t

K i n g s M o n t

e r e y S a n B e n i t

o T u l a r e I n y o F r e s n o M e r

c e d M a d e r a E s m e r a l d a

L o s A n g e l e

s

S a n D i e g o O r a n g e S a n t

a B a r b a r

a

V e n t u r

a

R i v e r s i d e S a n L u i s O b i s p o S a n B e r n a r

d i n o K e r n N y e