TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format Detail ...€¦ · Daily Uquid Surf. Bulk Vapor Liquid...

Wooong loss Product Factor. 1.0000

Totatlosses (Ib): 2,«4.6515

•

,

4/141201011:13:58 AM

TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format

Detail Calculations (AP·42)· (Continued)

Horizontal Tank Rio Grande, Puerto Rico

Page 4

Annual Emissions Report

Components Working Loss I Gasoline (RVP 9) t,458.00 I

4/14/201011:13:58 AM

TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format Individual Tank Emission Totals

Losses(lbs 1 Breathing Loss I Total Emissions

986.65j 2,444.65

Horizontal Tank Rio Grande, Puerto Rico

PageS

Identification User Identification: City: State: Company: Type otTank: Description:

Tank Dimensions Shell Length (tt): Diameter (tt): Volume (gallons): Turnovers: Net Throughput (gaVyr): Is Tank Heated (yin): Is Tank Underground (yin):

Paint Characteristics Shell ColorlShade: Shell Condition:

Breather Vent Settings Vacuum Settings (psig): Pressure Settings (psig):

- - - - -

TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report - Detail Format

Tank Identification and Physical Characteristics

Dry Stack Diesel Tank Rio Grande Puerto Rico Coco Beach Horizontal Tank 5,000 gallons diesel tank

N N

16.00 8.00

5,000.00 26.00

130,000.00

WhitelWhite Good

-0.03 0.03

Meteorological Data used in Emissions Calculations: San Juan, Puerto Rico (Avg Atmospheric Pressure = 14.7 psia)

4/14/201011 :16:59 AM

- - -Horizontal Tank

Rio Grande, Puerto Rico

Page 1

-

- - - - - -- - -Horizontal Tank


TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report - Detail Format Liquid Contents of Storage Tank

Uquid Daily Uquid Surf. Bulk Vapor Liquid Vapor

Temperatures (deg F) Temp. Vapor Pressures (psia) Mol. Mass Mass Mol. Basis for Vapor Pressure MixturelC0!!!E0nent Month Avg. Min. Max. (des F) Avg. Min. Max. Weight Fract. Fract Weighl Calculations

Distillate fuel oil no. 2 All 62.35 76.16 86.55 79.90 0.0131 0.0116 0.0149 130.0000 188.00 Option 5: A=12.101. 8=8907

4114/201011 :16:59 AM Page 2

Annual Ernssion Cairulations Standing Losses (Ib):

Vapor Space Volume (cu It): Vapor Density (Ib/cu It) : Vapor Space Expansion Factor: Vented Vapor Saturation Factor:

Tank Vapor Space Volume Vapor Space Volume (cu It): Tank Diameter (It): Effective Diameter (ft): Vapor Space Outage (tt): Tank Shell Length (ft) :

Vapor Density Vapor Density (Iblcu It): Vapor Molecular Weight (Ibnb-mole): Vapor Pressure at Daily Average Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia): Daily Avg. Liquid Surface Temp. (deg. R): Daily Average Ambient Temp. (deg. F): Ideal Gas Constant R

(psia cult I (Ib·mol-deg R)): Liquid Bulk Temperature (deg. R) : Tank Paint Solar Absorptance (Shell): Daily Total Solar Insulation

Factor (Btu/sqtt day) :

Vapor Space Expansion Factor Vapor Space Expansion Factor: Daily Vapor Temperature Range (deg. R): Daily Vapor Pressure Range (psi a): Breather Vent Press. Setting Range(psia) : Vapor Pressure at Daily Average Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia): Vapor Pressure at Daily Minimum Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia) : Vapor Pressure at Daily Maximum Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia) : Daily Avg. Liquid Surface Temp. (deg R): Daily Min. Liquid Surface Temp. (deg R) : Daily Max. Liquid Surface Temp. (deg R): Daily Ambient Temp. Range (deg. R):

Vented Vapor Saturation Factor Vented Vapor Saturation Factor: Vapor Pressure at Daily Average Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia): Vapor Space Outage (It):

Working Losses (Ib): Vapor Molecular Weight (Ibnb-mole): Vapor Pressure at Daily Average Liquid

Surface Temperature (psia) : Annual Net Throughput (gal/yr.): Annual Turnovers: Tumover Factor: Tank Diameter (It):

4/14/2010 11 :16:59 AM

-

1.4837 512.2597

0.0003 0.0271 0.9972

512.2597 8.0000

12.7694 4.0000

16.0000

0.0003 130.0000

0.0131 542.0227

79.8800

10.731 539.5700

0.1700

1,832.8400

0.0271 16.7739 0.0033 0.0600

0.0131

0.0116

0.0149 542.0227 537.8292 546.2162

11.1800

0.9972

0.0131 4.0000

5.2884 130.0000

0.0131 130,000.0000

26.0000 1.0000 8.0000

- - - -

TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format

Detail Calculations (AP·42)

- -Horizontal Tank

RiD Grande, PuertD Rico

Page 3

-

'D - -

Working Loss Product Factor: 1.0000

Total Losses (Ib): 6.7721

4/14/201011 :16:59 AM

- - -TANKS 4.0

Emissions Report - Detail Format Detail Calculations (AP-42)- (Continued)

- - -Horizontal Tank


Page 4

-

.,. -

Annual Emissions Report

1 1

1 Components 1 Working Loss I [ Distillate fuel oil no. 2 1 5.29 1

4/14/201011 :16:59 AM

- - -TANKS 4.0

Emissions Report - Detail Format Individual Tank Emission Totals

Losses(lbs) Breathing Loss I Total Emissions

1.48 1 6.77

- -- -Horizontal Tank


Page 5

-

t

Apendice H - Evaluaci6n de Sombra

Enmienda Declaraci6n de Impacto Ambiental Final JCA-76-015 (JP) Coco Beach Lado Oeste

•

•

•

EVALUACION DE SOMBRA

COCO BEACH - LADO OESTE Rio GRANDE, PUERTO RICO

18 de mayo de 2010

Enmlenda Declaraci6n de Impacto Ambiental Anal JCA-76-001S (JP) Coco Beach Lado Oeste

Date: March 22 2010

t

Date: March 22 2010

Time: 10:00 am

Time: 4:00 pm

,

Date: June 22 2010

t

Date: June 22 2010

Time: 10:00 am

Time: 4:00 pm

•

Date: Time: September 22 2010 10:00 am

t

Date: Time: September 22 20104:00 pm

•

•

•

Date: Time: December 22 2010 10:00 am

•

Date: Time: December 22 2010 4:00 pm

t

Apendice I - Estudio Socioeconomico


•

t -

Estudios Tecnicos Inc.

Coco Beach Resort in Rio Grande

SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Draft

Submitted to: CMA Architects & Engineers LLP

December 21, 2005

Ave. Domenech 113. Hato Rey, Puerto Rico, 00918·3501 Apartado 12144, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 00914-0144

Tel. (787) 751-1675· Fax (787) 767·2117 [email protected]

•

~ ~

CMA Architects & Engineers LLP Draft Socioeconomic Analysis of Coco Beach in Rio Grande

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 3

MAIN FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................. 3

1. METHODOLOGY OF THE ANALySIS ............................................................................................... 5

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 5

1.2 DETERMINATION OF CENSUS VARIABLES TO BE USED ........................................................................... 5

2. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE REFERENCE REGION .................................................. 8

2.1 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE ........................................................................................................................ 8

2.1.1 Population and population density ......................................................................................... 8

2.1.2. Urban and rural population .................................................................................................... 9

2.1.3 Households ........................................................................................................................... 10

2.1.4 Population distribution by age ............................................................................................. 10

2.1.5 Housing characteristics ........................................................................................................ II

2.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE .................................................................................................................. 13

2.2.1 Educational attainment ......................................................................................................... -13

2.2.2 Employntent status ............................................................................................................... 13

2.2.3 Employntent by occupation .................................................................................................. 14

2.2.4 EmploytIlent by industry ...................................................................................................... 15

2.2.5 Labor mobility ..................................................................................................................... 16

2.2.6 Income and poverty status .................................................................................................... 16

2.2.7 Value of housing units ......................................................................................................... 18

3. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE COMMUNITY OF CONCERN .................................... 19

3.1 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE ...................................................................................................................... 19

3.1.1 Population and population density ....................................................................................... 19

3.1.2 Urban and rural population .................................................................................................. 20

3.1.3 Households ........................................................................................................................... 21

3.1.4 Population distribution by age ............................................................................................. 22

2.1.4 Housing characteristics ........................................................................................................ 22

3.2 SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE ................................................................................................................... 25

3.2.1 Educational attainment ......................................................................................................... 25

3.2.2

3.2.3

3.2.4

Labor status .......................................................................................................................... 26

Employntent by occupation .................................................................................................. 27

Employntent by industry ...................................................................................................... 28

3.2.5 Income and poverty status .................................................................................................... 29

3.2.6 Value of housing units ......................................................................................................... 30

Estudios Tecnicos, Inc. Page 1


4. PLANNING FRAMEWORK OF THE PROJECT ...•................•.................•.........•........•.•.•..•.•.•......... 32

4.1 CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHEASTERN COAST OF PUERTO

Rico .................................................................................................................................................... 32

4.2 PLAN OF THE EASTERN REGION OF PUERTO RICO ............................................................................... 32

4.3 MUNICIPAL LAND USE PLAN OF Rio GRANDE ............................................. .. ..................................... 33

S. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 34

BmLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................... 39

p -

t .


•

. -

t .


INTRODUCTION

CMA Architects & Engineers, LLP, is in the process of prepararing an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) for the development of new facilities in Coco Beach, in the

Zarzal ward of Rio Grande. The socio-economic analysis in this report is part of the

preparation of the EIS.

This analysis defines the reference region of the project and, by means of the analysis

of a set of Census variables, generates a demographic and socio-economic profile of

the area. This profile is then compared with the profile of the municipality of Rio

Grande, the reference region and Puerto Rico.

MAIN FINDINGS

• The analysis of the main socio-economic variables of Rio Grande and nearby

municipalities I shows· that Rio Grande is the municipality with most popUlation

and households in the region, and its population is expected to grow more rapidly

than in nearby municipalities. Also, that it has a proportion of vacant housing

units dedicated to seasonal use that, while high, is consistent with the rest of the

region. Rio Grande residents have an educational profile slightly lower than that

of neighboring municipalities, as well as a slightly lower labor participation rate.

On the other hand, per capita and household income in Rio Grande is higher than

typical for the studied region; nevertheless, its proportion of households in

poverty is higher than typical for the region.

• On the other hand, the socio-economic profile of Zarzal ward shows that it is the

ward in Rio Grande that shows the fastest growth in popUlation and housing units.

Zarzal also shows a relatively large proportion of vacant housing units, the great

majority of which are used for seasonal use. Also, Zarzal residents show a

slightly higher educational profile than is typical for the municipality, as well as a

I The municpalities considered in the analysis are Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande.


,

I '


higher labor participation rate, household and per capita income and lower

households in poverty than is average for the municipality as a whole.

• The planning framework provided by the documents reviewed for this document

show that the development of the Coco Beach property has been approved by the

Commonwealth agencies with land use planning authority, and that development

rights have been recognized by planning documents developed by municipal and

Commonwealth agencies regarding land uses in Rio Grande, in accordance to

current statutes.


• •

• •


1. METHODOLOGY OF THE ANALYSIS

This section provides a summary of the methodology applicable to the socio

economic analysis of the Coco Beach project and its surroundings. The analysis

started with the delimitation of the study area and its surroundings. For this area, a

set of census variables was selected, in order to provide a general profile of the area.

Finally, the findings of this profile are presented, compared to the values

corresponding to the totality of Puerto Rico for comparison purposes.

1.1 Purpose of the socio-economic analysis

This socio-economic analysis is prepared for the fulfillment of part of the requisites

of the Preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (P-EIS, or DIA-P, by its initials

in Spanish) of the project, as required by the Regulation for the Process of

Presentation, Evaluation and Other Procedures of Environmental Documents (our .

translation) of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB, or JCA, by its initials in

Spanish). Specifically, this analysis complies with Rule No. 253, part of which is

included below (our translation):

Rule No. 253: Contents Requisites

A. The EIS will include a general description of the proposed action, location,

purpose and need, and a description of important environmental elements that

could be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed action. Said description

will include the following information:

17. Development and population trends of the area Ander consideration and any

other information related to these variables that can justify the action or

determine the resulting impacts.

1.2 Determination of Census variables to be used

The variables to be used come from- the Population and Housing Census of the years

1990 and 2000. These variables area are divided in two groups:


· -· -

•

•


• demographic variables - these include population, number of households, age

distribution, among other variables.

• socio-economic variables - these include income distribution, employment and

unemployment, among other variables.

The variables to be included in the socio-economic analysis are included below.

Demographic variables

• Population.

• Population density.

• Urban and rural population.

• Households.

• Average household size.

• Age distribution.

• Housing units.

• Occupancy status.

• Vacancy status.

• Tenure of occupied housing units.

Socio-economic variables

• Educational attainment, persons 25 years or older.

• Employment status.

• Occupation.



• Industry.

• Median household income in 1999.

• Per capita income.

• Poverty status in 1999.

• Value of owner-occupied housing units.

•

• •

• •

• •

• •

•

Estudios Tecnicos, Inc. Page?

. -


2. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE REFERENCE REGION

In order to better understand the area where the Coco Beach project will be located, it

is necessary to know the demographic, economic and social conditions of the area.

For that reason, this section provides an analysis of the main demographic and socio

economic variables of the reference region, defined in this study as the municipalities

of Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande (see map in Appendix). These variables are

compared to the corresponding values for the totality of Puerto Rico. Data used are

from the Census of Population and Housing of years 1990 and 2000, unless otherwise

specified.

2.1 Demographic profile

2.1.1 Population and population density

During the last decade, the population of the reference region grew at a faster rate

than Puerto Rico, and that growth rate will decrease in the medium term (see Table

1). Between 1990 and 2000, the population in the reference region grew at an annual

rate of 1.2 percent, while population in Puerto Rico grew at an annual rate of 0.8

percent. On the other hand, according to Planning Board data, the population in the

region is expected to grow at an annual rate of 0.7 percent between 2000 and 2010,

while the population of Puerto Rico will grow at an annual rate of 0.8 percent in the

same period.

Table 1

PoplllatlOn and average annual growth 2000·2010' for the statistical reference region

Average annual growth Municipality 1990 2000

Pop.as% of the region 2010*

Pop.as% of the region 1990-2000 2000-2010

Fajardo Luquillo Rio Grande Region Puerto Rico

36,882 18,100 45,648

102,620 3,522,037

40,712 19,817 52,362

112,S91 3,SOS,610

36.1 % 17.6% 46.4%

43,567 20,872 5S,996

123,435 4,111,101

35.3% 16.9% 47.S%

1.0% 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 0.9~o O.S% O.S%

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990, 2000; population projections by the Planning Board.

Rio Grande has remained the municipality with the largest population in the region,

its proportion of the region population increasing from 45.4 percent in 1990 to 46.4


t

•

· '"

• •

• •

• •

•


percent in 2000. Its annual growth rate until 2010 will be 1.2 percent, the largest in

the region, and larger than that of Puerto Rico (0.8%).

On the other hand, Fajardo is the municipality of the region with the highest

population density. In year 2000, Fajardo had a density of 545.1 inhabitants per

square kilometer, higher than other municipalities of the regional and Puerto Rico

(see Table 2).

Table 2

Population Density Region , 2000

Municipality Fajardo Luquillo Rio Grande

Populationlkm2

545.1 295.4 332.5

Region 377.3 Puerto Rico 429.7

Source: Census of Population and

Housing, 2000.

2.1.2. Urban and rural population

95.6 percent of the population of Rio Grande was classified as urban in the 2000

Census. This proportion is slightly lower than the average for the reference region

(96.1 %), but slightly higher than the proportion in Puerto Rico (94.4%) (see Table 3).


Table 3

Urban and rural popUlation, 2000 Urban Rural

Number Percent Number Percent 39,805 97.8% 907 2.2% 18,605 93.9% 1,212 6.1% 50,076 95.6% 2,286 4.4%

108,486 96.1% 4,405 3.9% 3,595,521 94.4% 213,089 5.6%

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 2000.

Estudios Tecnicos, Inc.

Total 40,712 19,817 52,362

112,891 3,808,610

Page 9

)

· -• •

· -•

•

•


2.1.3 Households

Rio Grande is the municipality in the reference region with the highest average

number of persons per household, followed by Fajardo. The average number of

persons per household in Rio Grande (3.14) is significantly higher than the average

for the region (3.01) and Puerto Rico (2.98) (see Table 4).

Table 4

Households and persons per household, 2000


Households 14,138 6,577

16,430 37,145

1,261,816

Persons per household

2.86 3.00 3.14

3.01 2.98


2.1.4 Population distribution by age

Population distribution by age in the reference region shows a similar distribution

among the region's municipalities and the totality of Puerto Rico (see Table 5). The

proportion of persons ages 19 and younger in Rio Grande (33.1 %) is slightly higher

than the proportion for the region (32.5%) and Puerto Rico (32.0%). On the other

hand, the proportion of persons ages 65 and older in Rio Grande (9.5%) is lower than

the average for the region (10.8%) and Puerto Rico (11.2%).

Table 5

Popu latIOn distribution by age, 2000

Faardo Luquillo Rio Grande R ion Puerto Rico Under 5 8.4% 8.2% 8.2% 8.3% 7.8% 5-9 8.6% 8.4% 8.5% 8.5% 8.0% 10-14 7.8% 7.7% 8.3% 8.0% 8.0% 15-19 6.9% 8.0% 8.1% 7.7% 8.2% 20-24 7.1% 7.6% 7.6% 7.4% 7.9% 25-29 8.1% 7.6% 7.4% 7.7% 7.1% 30-34 7.3% 6.7% 7.4% 7.2% 6.9% 35-44 11.6% 12.7% 13.1% 12.5% 13.5% 45-54 11.1% 12.3% 12.5% 11.9% 12.2% 55-64 10.5% 10.1% 9.5% 10.0% 9.2% 65 and over 12.7% 10.7% 9.5% 10.8% 11.2%


Esludios Tecnicos, Inc. Page 10

· -• •

· -

•

•


2.1.5 Housing characteristics

In the last decade, the number of housing units increased in Rio Grande at a much

larger rate than in the region in Puerto Rico. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of

housing units increased by almost a third (32.2%) in Rio Grande, compared to 23.6

percent in Fajardo and 23.9 percent in Luquillo. The growth of housing units in Rio

Grande was larger than the growth in the region (27.2%) and Puerto Rico (19.3%) for

the same period (see Table 6).

In the year 2000, there were in Rio Grande 19,928 housing units, the largest amount

of the municipalities in the region (see Table 6).

Table 6

Housing units in the reference region. 1990-2000


1990 13,864 7,530

15,078 36,472

1,188,985

2000 11,136 9,327

19,928 46,391

1,418,476

Rate of change ~:6% 23.9% 32.2% 27.2% 19.3%


The proportion of vacant housing units in Rio Grande was 17.6 percent in 2000,

proportion slightly lower than the average for the region (19.9%), but higher than the

proportion for Puerto Rico (11.1 %) (see Table 7).

Table 7

Housing occupancy in the reference region, 2000

Occu~jed Vacant Number Percent Number Percent Total

Fajardo 14,176 82.7% 2,960 17.3% 17,136 Luquillo 6,573 70.5% 2,754 29.5% 9,327 Rio Grande 16,430 82.4% 3,498 17.6% 19,928 Region 37,179 80.1% 9,212 19.9% 46,391 Puerto Rico 1,261,325 88.9% 157,151 11 .1% 1,418,476



. -

. -


Fajardo

LuquiRo

Due to the relatively high proportion of vacant housing in the reference region, the

status of vacant units was also analyzed. This analysis shows that more than half

(54.5%) of vacant housing units in the region are for seasonal, recreational or

occasional use2• This type of unit represents 49.1 percent of vacant housing units in

Fajardo, 53.5 percent in Rio Grande, and 61.7 percent in Luquillo (see Table 8).

Table 8

Vaca ncy s tatus "l the refelence regIOn 2000

For seasonal. Rented or sold, recreational or For migrant

For rent Forsaleon~ not occupied occasional use _rkers Other vacant

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total 332 11.2% 220 7.4% 122 4.1% 1,452 49.1% 1 0.0% 833 28.1% 2,960

238 8.6% 100 3.6% 124 4.5% 1,699 61 .7% 2 0.1% 591 21.5% 2,754

Rio Grande 2n 7.9% 1046 4.2% 2040 6.9% 1,871 53.5% 0 0.0% 964 27.6% 3,_

RS!!!!! 847 9.2% 466 5.1% 488 5.3% 5,022 54.5% 3 0.0% 2,388 25.9% 9,212

Puerto Rico 27,363 17.4% 16,248 10.3% 12,710 8.1% 32,041 20.4% 139 0.1% 68,650 43.7% 157,151


On the other hand, the great majority of occupied housing units are occupied by their

owners (see Table 9). 82.3 percent of occupied housing units are occupied by their

owners, proportion significantly higher than in the reference region (77.0%) and

Puerto Rico (72.9%).


Table 9

Tenure of occupied housing units, 2000

Owner occupied Number Percent 10,826 76.4% 5,134 78.1% 13,527 82.3% 29,487 79.3%

919,769 72.9%

Renter occupied Number Percent 3,350 23.6% 1,439 21.9% 2,903 17.7% 7,692 20.7%

341,556 27.1%


Total 14,176 6,573

16,430 37,179

1,261,325

2 The Census defmes this type of housing unit as vacant units used or entended for use only in certain seasons, for weekends, or other occasional use throughout the year. Included in this definition are interval ownership units, sometimes called shared-ownership or time-share condominiums.


,

•

• •

t -

CMA Architects & Engineers LLP Draft Socioeconomic Analysis of Coco Beach in RIo Grande

Fajardo Luquillo

2.2 Socio~economic profile3

2.2.1 Educational attainment

Educational attainment of Rio Grande residents is slightly lower than typical for the

reference region and Puerto Rico. According to the 2000 Census, 59.5 percent of Rio

Grande residents ages 25 and older have completed high school or a higher

educational level, compared to a proportion of 60.9 percent in the reference region

and 60.0 percent in Puerto Rico for the same age group (see Table 10). Also, 13.6

percent of Rio Grande residents in this age group had completed a Bachelor's or

higher degree, proportion lower than the average for the region (15.3%) and Puerto

Rico (18.3%).

Table 10

Educational attainment. persons 25 years and older. 2000 Graduate or

9th to 12th HighSchool College (no Associate Bachelor's profesSional Less than 9th (no diploma) Graduate degree) degree degree degree

21.6% 15.3% 26.5% 14.0% 6.4% 12.5% 3.7% 23.2% 17.0% 22.6% 13.0% 6.5% 11.9% 5.7%

Rio Grande 24.3% 16.2% 23.4% 13.6% 8.9% 11.1% 2.5% Region 23.1% 16.0% 24.4% 13.7% 7.6% 11.8% 3.5% Puerto Rico 25.4% 14.6% 22.3% 12.2% 7.2% 13.6% 4.7%

Source: Census of Population and Housing. 2000.

2.2.2 Employment status

The labor participation rate4 in Rio Grande in 2000 was 39.5 percent, which was

slightly lower than the rate for the reference region (40.9%) and Puerto Rico (40.7%)

for the same year (see Table 11).

3 Values used in this section were taken from the Summary File 3 (SF3) of the 2000 Census, which includes data obtained from a sample of the total population. Those values are then extrapolated to the entire population. Therefore, values in this section can vary slightly from values in the previous section of this report, which were taken from the Summary File I (SFI) of the 2000 Census, which includes data from the entire population. .

4 The labor participation rate is defined as the proportion of persons inside the labor force for a specific geographic area. The U.S. Bureau of the Census defines the labor force as all persons inside the civil labor force (employed and unemployed), plus members of the U.S. Anned Forces.


•

•

· -


Table 11

Participation in the labor force, persons 16 years and older, 2000

Inside labor force Outside labor force Number Percent Number Percent Total

Fajardo 12,623 41.9% 17,472 58.1% 30,095 Luquillo 6,081 41.4% 8,595 58.6% 14,676 Rio Grande 15,146 39.5% 23,239 60.5% 38,385 Region 46,668 40.9% 67,400 59.1% 114,068 Puerto Rico 1,156,532 40.7% 1,686,344 59.3% 2,842,876


Of people in the labor force in the reference region, only 211, or 0.6 percent, were in

the Anned Forces.

The unemployment rate in the region, according to the 2000 Census, was 20.2 percent

in that year (see Table 12). Rio Grande had an unemployment rate of 20.2 percent,

higher than the rate for the region and Puerto Rico (19.1 %).

Table 12

Labor status, persons 16 years and older, 2000 In the Civil labor force Unemployment

Armed Forces Employed Unemployed rate* Total Fajardo 175 10,131 2,317 18.6% 12,623 Luquillo 12 4,670 1,399 23.1% 6,081 Rio Grande 24 12,041 3,081 20.4% 15,146 Region 211 26,842 6,797 20.2% 33,850 Puerto Rico 4,669 930,865 220,998 19.1% 1,156,532 *Unemployment rate corresponds to the proportion of persons in the civil labor force who were not employed, but were looking for work and available to start a job.


2.2.3 Employment by occupation

The three main types of occupation of Rio Grande residents are sales and office

occupations (27.7%); management, professional and related occupations (22.7%); and

service occupations (20.0%) (see Table 13). These types of occupations represent

70.4 percent of employed Rio Grande residents, 70.5 percent in the refer~nce region

and 71.6 percent in Puerto Rico.


•

· -

~ -

t -

~

•

CMA Architects & Engineers LLP Socioeconomic Analysis of Coco Beach in Rio Grande

Table 13

Employment by occupation, 2000

Management, professional and related occupations

Service occupations Sales and office occupations Farming, fishing and forestry occupations

Construction, extraction and maintenance occupations

Fajardo 22.7% 22.2%

25.7% 0.4% 13.0%

Production, transportation and material moving occupations 16.0%


2.2.4 Employment by industry

Luguillo 25.2%

21.0% 24.6% 0.2% 13.1%

15.9"10

Draft

Rio Grande Region Puerto Rico 22.7% 23.1% 27.4% 20.0% 21.0% 16.2%

27.7% 26.4% 28.0% 0.4% 0.4% 1.1% 12.1% 12.6% 12.1% 17.0% 16.4% 15.2%

The industry sectors that employ the highest proportion of Rio Grande residents are

educational, health and social services, public administration and retail trade (see

Table 14). The industry sector of educational, health and social services employed

17.4 percent of employed Rio Grande residents in 2000. This proportion was equal to

that in the reference region, but lower than in the totality of Puerto Rico (19.3%).

The industry sector of public administration employed 12.3 percent of employed Rio

Grande residents, proportion higher than in the region (12.1%) and Puerto Rico

(10.7%). On the other hand, 11.7 percent of Rio Grande residents were employed in

retail trade in 2000, a proportion identical to the region and Puerto Rico.

Table 14

Employment by Industry 2000

Fajardo Luquillo Rio Grande Region Puerto Rico Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 0.7% 0.60/. 0.8% 0.7% 1.7% Construction 8.8% 10.0% 9.8% 9.5% 8.6% Manufacturing 12.9% 14.2% 11.3% 12.4% 13.5% Wholesale trade 1.8% 3.1% 4.5% 3.3% 4.4% Retail trade 12.6% 9.7% 11 .7% 11.7% 11.7% Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 6.3% 3.3% 5.5% 5.5% 4.2% Information 2.6% 2.4% 1.7% 2.1% 2.2% Finance, insurance and real estate, and rentin9 and leasing 3.0% 3.3% 5.1% 4.0"/. 5.0% Professional, scientific, management, administrative, and waste management services 4.9% 4.8% 6.4% 5.5% 6.8% Educational, health and social services 16.1% 20.0% 17.4% 17.4% 19.3% Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services 13.5% 13.0% 8.4% 11.1% 6.5% Other services (except publiC administration) 4.7% 4.1% 5.1% 4.8% 5.4% Public administration 12.1% 11.4% 12.3% 12.1% 10.7%


Estudios Tecnlcos, Inc. Page 15

. -, -

t -

-'


2.2.5 Labor mobility

Rio Grande is the municipality in the reference region that has the lowest proportion

of residents working in their municipality of residence, as well as the highest

proportion of residents working outside the region.

Slightly more than one third (34.8%) of employed residents of Rio Grande work in

the municipality of residence, proportion slightly lower than Luquillo (35.8%), and

significantly lower than Fajardo (63.8%) (see Table 15).

On the other hand, more than half (56.0%) of employed residents of Rio Grande work

outside the region of concern, proportion significantly higher than Fajardo (24.9%)

and Luquillo (32.0%) (see Table 15).

Outside Rio Grande, the municipalities where the largest proportion of Rio Grande

residents works are San Juan and Carolina.

Fajardo Luquillo Rio Grande

Same municipality Numero Por ciento

6,325 63.8% 1,623 35.8% 4,094 34.8%

Table 15

Labor mobility. 2000 Other mun. In region Numero Por ciento

1,126 11.3% 1,464 32.3% 1,087 9.2%


2.2.6 Income and poverty status

Outside region Numero Por ciento

2,470 24.9% 1,450 32.0% 6,591 56.0%

Total

9,921 4,537

11,n2

The median household income in Rio Grande in 1999 was $15,006, according to the

2000 Census. This was slightly higher than the median income in the reference

region ($14,915) and Puerto Rico ($14,412) (see Table 16).


•

t

t -

• •

. ' ~


Table 16

Median household income, 1999 Fajardo $15,410 lUQuillo $13,631 Rio Grande $15,006 Region $14,915 Puerto Rico $14,412


Housing, 2000.

Per capita income in Rio Grande ($7,347) was lower than the income for the region

($7,561) and Puerto Rico ($8,185) (see Table 17).

Table 17

Per capita income. 1999

Fajardo luquillo Rio Grande Region Puerto Rico

$7,852 $7,529 $7,347 $7,561 $8,185

Source: Census of Population

and Housing, 2000.

47.05 percent of households in Rio Grande have incomes under poverty level. This

proportion is higher than the average for the region (45.68%), but lower than the

proportion in Puerto Rico (47.27%) (see Table 18).

Table 18

Poverty status for households, 2000

Under ~overty level Households Number Percent

Fajardo 14,138 6,029 42.64% luquillo 6,577 3,209 48.79% Rio Grande 16,465 7,746 47.05% Region 37,180 16,984 45.68% Puerto Rico 1,261,816 596,466 47.27%



•

• .

•


Fajardo Luquillo

2.2.7 Value of housing units

Most owner-occupied housing units, in Rio Grande as well as the reference region,

had in 2000 a value between $50,000 and $99,999 (55.7% and 56.0%, respectively).

The proportion of units in that price range was lower in Puerto Rico for the same year

(46.5%) (see Table 19).

Also, 75.3 percent of units in Rio Grande, and 75.5 percent in the reference region,

had in 2000 a value of less than $100,000. Such proportions were slightly higher than

the proportion of units in Puerto Rico in that price range (74.3%).

Table 19

Volue o f owner occup,cd hO USIng units 2000

Ln. than $10,000 $10,000-$49,999 $50,000-$ 99,999 $100,000-$199,999 $200,000 or more Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

102 0.9% 1,809 16.7% 6,641 61.4% 1,603 16.7% 461 4.3% 10,616 75 1,5% 1.076 21.0% 2.352 45.6% 1,241 24.2% 392 7.6% 5,136

Rio Grande 320 2.4% 2,345 17.3% 7,526 55.7% 2,770 20.5% 562 4.2% 13,523 Rellion 497 1.7% 5,232 17.7" 18,519 56.0% 5,814 19.1"- 1,415 4.8% 29,477 Puerto Rico 19,874 2.4% 207,574 25.4% 380,055 46.5% 161,146 19.7% 49,478 6.0% 817,927



. -

t

-'

t


3. SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE COMMUNITY OF CONCERN

This section provides an analysis of the main demographic and socioeconomic

variables of the Zarzal ward (barrio) of Rio Grande, designated as the community of

concern, as defined in the Environmental Justice analysis (see map in Appendix).

These variables are compared with the corresponding values for other wards in Rio

Grande, as well as values for the municipality. The data used are from the Census of

Population and Housing for the years 1990 and 2000.

3.1 Demographic profile

3.1.1 Population and population density

In Rio Grande, population concentrates in the wards (barrios) of Cienaga Baja

(18,220) and Zarzal (13,385). The population in these two wards represents 60.4

percent of the population of Rio Grande.

During the last decade, the population of the community of concern (Zarzal ward)

grew at a much faster rate than the average growth rate of the municipality.

Population in Zarzal ward grew at an average annual rate of 4.4 percent, more than

three times the growth rate of the municipality as a whole (1.4% annual rate) (see

Table 20).

Table 20

Population and average annual growth Growth

Ward (barrio) 1990 2000 rate Cienaga Alta 3.768 4.606 2.0% Cienaga Baja 17,805 18,220 0.2% Guzman Abajo 6,205 6.614 0.6% Guzman Arriba 765 928 2.0% Herreras 928 839 -1.0% Jimenez 2,467 2,903 1.6% Mameyes II 2,723 2.919 0.7% Rio Grande-Pueblo 2,273 1,948 -1.5% Zarzal 8,714 13,385 4.4% Total-Rio Grande 45,648 52,362 1.4%

Source: Census of Population and Housing. 1990,

2000.


, .

. -


The municipality of Rio Grande, with a geographical extension of 157.3 km2, has a

population density of 332.7 inhabitants/km2• The wards with the highest population

density are Rio Grande-Pueblo with 3,896 inhabitants per square kilometer, and

Cienaga Baja with 1,190 inhabitants per square kilometer (see Table 21). Zarzal is

the Rio Grande ward with the third highest population density (557.7 inhabitants per

square kilometer) and a population density that is 68 percent higher than the

population density of the municipality.

Table 21

Cienaga Alta 393.7 Cienaga Baja 1,190.8 Guzman Abajo 357.5 Guzman Arriba 45.7 Herreras 101.1 Jimenez 93.3 Mameyes II 105.4 Rio Grande-Pueblo 3,896.0 Zarzal 557.7 Total-Rio Grande 332.7


Housing, 2000.

3.1.2 Urban and rural population

The proportion of urban population in Zarzal, 94.5 percent, is slightly lower than the

proportion of urban population of the municipality of Rio Grande (95.6%) (see Table

22).

The proportion of urban population in the wards of Rio Grande is between 80 and 100

percent for all wards, with the exception of Guzman Arriba, where it is 62.3 percent.


f

• -

• •

• -

•

t


Table 22

Urban and rural population, 2000 Urban Rural

Ward Number Percent Number Percent Total CiEmaga Alta 4,547 98.7% 59 1.3% 4,606 CiEmaga Baja 18,220 100.0% 0 0.0% 18,220 Guzman Abajo 6,493 98.2% 121 1.8% 6,614 Guzman Arriba 578 62.3% 350 37.7% 928 Herreras 774 92.3% 65 7.7% 839 Jimenez 2,440 84.1% 463 15.9% 2,903 Mameyes II 2,429 83.2% 490 16.8% 2,919 Rio Grande-Pueblo 1,948 100.0% 0 0.0% 1,948 Zarzal 12,647 94.5% 738 5.5% 131385 Total Rio Grande 50,076 95.6% 2,286 4.4% 521362


3.1.3 Ho!!seholds

Cienaga Baja (5,644) and Zarzal (3,908) are the wards of Rio Grande with the highest

number of households (see Table 23). These two wards are also the ones with the

highest average number of persons per household: Zarzal in first place (3.29) and

Cienaga Baja second (3.21). They are the only wards in Rio Grande that have an

average number of persons per household that is higher than the value for the entire

municipality.

Table 23

Households and persons per household. 2000 Persons

Ward Households per household Cienaga Alta 1,479 3.11 Cienaga Baja 5,644 3.21 Guzman Abajo 2,136 3.06 Guzman Arriba 304 3.05 Herreras 276 3.04 Jimenez 960 2.96 Mameyes II 981 2.96 Rio Grande-Pueblo 742 2.62 Zarzal 3,908 3.29 Total Rio Grande 16,430 3.14



• •

• •

· -


3.1.4 Population distribution by age

Zarzal ward has the highest proportion of residents ages 19 and younger of all the

wards in Rio Grande (35.9%), proportion slightly higher than the average for the

entire municipality (33.1 %) (see Table 24) ..

On the other hand, the wards Rio Grande-Pueblo (19.9%), Herreras (13.2%) and

Mameyes II (13.2%) are the wards with the highest proportion of residents in the age

group of 65 years and older. Zarzal is the ward with the lowest proportion of

residents in this age group (6.6%).

Table 24

Cl6naga GuzmAn GuzmAn Rio Grande Cltnaga Alta Baja AlNIjo Arriba HerrerllS JIrn6nez Mameyesll Pueblo Zarzal

Less than 5 7.9% 7.9% 7.8% 7.7% 8.5% 7.4% 6.9% 6.5% 9.5% &-9 8.2% 8:4% B.7% 9.5% 7.4% 7.4% 7.4% 6.9% 9.3% 10·14 8.3% 8.2% B.2% B.9% 7.5% 7.8% 7.3% 6.2% 9.0% 15·19 8.5% 8.6% 8.3% 6.4% 7.0% 6.4% 7.5% 6.7% B.W. 20-24 6.9% 8.2% 7.4% 5.7% 8.9% 6.9% 7.2% 7.5% 7.2% 2&-29 7.5% 7.3% 6.8% 8.2% 8.1% 7.3% 6.3% 6.5% 8.2% 30-34 7.4% 6.6% 7.2% 9.1% 5.5% 7.4% 6.1% 5.2% 9.0% 3&-44 14.1% 12.1% 12.5% 15.5% 11.0% 11.1% 11 .4% 10.5% 15.6% 4&-54 12.0% 13.4% 13.1% 12.5% 12.6% 13.6% 13.7% 12.5% 10.5% 5&-64 10.0% 10.3% 9.7% 8.7% 10.3% 11.5% 12.9% 11.6% 6.8% 65 and older 9.2% B.9% 10.3% T.9% 13.2% 13.1% 13.2% 19.9% 6.6%


2.1.4 Housing characteristics

In the last decade, the number of housing units in Zarzal ward increased at a much

faster rate than in the municipality of Rio Grande. Between 1990 and 2000, the

number of housing units in Zarzal ward increased by 90.1 percent, compared with an

increase of 32.2 percent for the entire municipality of Rio Grande (see Table 25).

Other wards with an increase in housing units higher than the average for Rio Grande

were Cienaga Alta (45.4%) and Jimenez (40.0%). On the other hand, Mameyes II

ward had a decrease of 1.7 percent in housing units.


t ~

• J

•

CMA Architects & Engineers LLP Draft Socioeconom ic Analysis of Coco Beach in Rio Grande

Table 25

Housing units, 1990-2000 Rate of

1990 2000 change Ciemaga Alta 1,164 1,692 45.4% Cienaga Baja 5,176 6,072 17.3% Guzman Abajo 2,042 2,461 20.5% Guzman Arriba 288 364 26.4% Herreras 300 420 40.0% Jimenez 911 1,184 30.0% Mameyes II 1,565 1,539 -1.7% Rio Grande-Pueblo 821 853 3.9% Zarzal 2,811 5,343 90.1% Total Rio Grande 15,078 19,928 32.2%

Sources: Census of Population and Housing, 1990, 2000.

In year 2000, 73.1 percent of housing units in Zarzal ward were occupied, and 26.9

percent were vacant. The proportion of occupied housing units was significantly

lower than the proportion for the totality of Rio Grande (82.4%) (see Table 26). The

wards with the highest proportion of vacant housing in 2000 were Mameyes II

(36.6%) and Herreras (34.3%).

Table 26

Housing occupancy, 2000 Occu~ied Vacant

Number Percent Number Percent Total Cienaga Alta 1,479 87.4% 213 12.6% 1,692 Cienaga Baja 5,644 93.0% 428 7.0% 6,072 Guzman Abajo 2,136 86.8% 325 13.2% 2,461 Guzman Arriba 304 83.5% 60 16.5% 364 Herreras 276 65.7% 144 34.3% 420 Jimenez 960 81.1% 224 18.9% 1,184 Mameyes /I 981 63.7% 558 36.3% 1,539 Rio Grande-Pueblo 742 87.0% 111 13.0% 853 Zarzal 3,908 73.1% 1,435 26.9% 5,343 Total Rio Grande 16,430 82.4% 3,498 17.6% 19,928


Since the proportion of vacant housing in Rio Grande (17.6%) and the reference

region (19.9%) is higher than the proportion for Puerto Rico as a whole (11.1 %), the

status of vacant units was analyzed. In Rio Grande, more than half (53.5%) of vacant

housing units were for seasonal, recreational or occasional use. This proportion was


. -

•


up to three-quarters of vacant housing units in ZarzaI (76.8%) and Mameyes II

(74.4%) wards (see Table 27). On the other hand, more than half of vacant housing

units in Cienaga Alta, Jimenez and Rio Grande-Pueblo were classified as other vacant

(63.4%, 58.0% and 53.2%), respectively).

Table 27

V.1CJncy ~r,) t us 20CO

For .. asona~ Rented or sold. recreational or For migrant

For rent For sale onl~ not occul!led occasional use worbrs Other vacant

Numbw Percent Number Percent Numbw Percent Number Percent Number P6-cent Number Percent Total

Cienaga Alta 10 4.7% 6 2.8% 21 9.9% 41 19.2% 0 0.0% 135 63.4% 213

Clenaga Baja 81 18.9% 55 12.9'" 77 18.0'" 42 9.8% 0 0.0'" 173 40.4% 428

GuzmAn Abajo 48 14.8'" 27 8.3'" 34 10.5% 71 21.8'" 0 0.0'" 145 44.6% 325

Guzm4n Arriba 3 5.0'" 3 5.0% !> 0.0% 25 41.7% 0 0 .0% 29 48.3% 60 Herreras 10 6.9'" 2 1."'" 8 5.6% 101 70.1% 0 0 .0'" 23 16.0% 144

Jim~ 9 4.0% 17 7.6% 7 3.1% 61 27.2% a 0 .0% 130 58.0"- 224

Mrn~tl 19 3.4% 6 1.1'" 25 4.5% 417 74.7% 0 0.0% 91 16.3% 558

RIo Gnlnde-PuebID 20 18.0" 8 7.2% 13 11.7% 11 9.9% 0 0 .0% 59 53.2"- 111

Zanal 77 5.4" 22 1.5'" 55 3.8% 1.102 16.8% 0 0.0'lI. 179 12.5% 1 • .a5 Total Rio Grande 277 7.9% 146 4.2% 240 6.1% 1,871 53.5% 0 0.0'lI. 964 27.6'" 3 .....


The great majority of occupied housing units in all of Rio Grande wards are occupied

by their owners (see Table 28). This proportion varies from 70.4 percent in Rio

Grande-Pueblo ward to 87.8 percent in Guzman Arriba ward. The proportion of

owner-occupied housing. units in Zarzal ward (86.1 %) is the second-highest of all of

Rio Grande wards.

Table 28

Tenure of occupied housing units. 2000 Owner-occul!ied Renter-occul!led

Number Percent Number Percent Total Ci(maga Alta 1,236 83.6% 243 16.4% 1.479 Cienaga Baja 4,570 81.0% 1.074 19.0% 5,644 Guzman Abajo 1,714 80.2% 422 19.8% 2,136 Guzman Arriba 267 87.8% 37 12.2% 304 Herreras 222 80.4% 54 19.6% 276 Jimenez 795 82.8% 165 17.2% 960 Mameyes II 836 85.2% 145 14.8% 981 Rio Grande-Pueblo 522 70.4% 220 29.6% 742 Zanal 3,365 86.1% 543 13.9% 3,908 Total Rio Grande 13,527 82.3% 2,903 17.7% 16,430



•

•

• .

• ",.

D


3.2 Socioeconomic profiles

3.2.1 Educational attainment

The educational attainment of residents of Zarzal ward is significantly higher than the

attainment of other wards of Rio Grande, and of the municipality in general. 66.6

percent of Zarzal residents ages 25 and older have completed high school or a higher

educational level, the highest proportion in all of Rio Grande's wards, as well as

significantly higher than the municipality's proportion in this age group (59.9%) (see

Table 29). Zarzal is also the Rio Grande ward with the highest proportion of persons

25 years and older with a bachelor's, graduate or professional degree, 18.8 percent.

This proportion is also significantly higher than the proportion for the entire

municipality, 13.6 percent.

Table 29

EducatIOnal attalJlment. persons 25 years and older 2000

Graduate or 9th to12th HighScool Same college Associate Bachelor's professional

Less than 9th {no dlelomal Graduate {no degreel degree degree degree Cienaga Alta 34.0% 19.2% 19.1% 9.5% 10.2% 6.9% 1.2% Cienaga Baja 21.4% 17.1% 26.7% 14.0% 8.3% 10.1% 2.4% Guzmlin Abajo 29.0% 15.8% 22.7% 12.1% 9.1% 9.2% 2.0% Guzman Arriba 30.0% 10.7% 17.9% 19.7% 4.4% 15.1% 2.2% Herreras 30.6% 20.1% 27.9% 8.8% 2.3% 9.2% 1.0% Jimenez 29.4% 14.3% 19.8% 12.9% 12.5% 7.9% 3.2% Mameyes II 28.9% 17.8% 20.1% 11.5% 7.0% 11.5% 3.2% Rio Grande-Pueblo 26.0% 15.2% 25.7% 15.1% 6.2% 9.0% 2.9% larzal 18.8% 14.6% 22.1% 15.8% 10.0% 15.7% 3.1% Total Rio Grande 24.3% 16.2% 23.4% 13.6% 8.9% 11.1% 2.5%


S Values used in this section were taken from the Summary File 3 (SF3) of the 2000 Census, which includes data obtained from a sample of the total population. Those values are then extrapolated to the entire population. Therefore, values in this section can vary slightly from values in the previous section of this report, which were taken from the Summary File 1 (SFI) of the 2000 Census, which includes data from the entire population.


• -

• ..,

~ ....


3.2.2 Labor status

The analysis of labor situation shows that Zarzal ward has a higher participation rate6

than the average for the municipality, as well as a similar unemployment rate than the

municipality (see Tables 30 and 31).

In Zarzal, 44.0 percent of persons 16 years and older are classified as being inside the

labor force, which equals a participation rate of 44.0 percent. This proportion is the

second highest of all wards of Rio Grande, second only to Guzman Arriba ward

(46.3%). It is also significantly higher than the proportion for the entire municipality

of Rio Grande (39.5%) (see Table 30).

Table 30

Participation In the labor force, persons 16 years and older, 2000 Inside the Outside the labor force labor force

Number Percent Number Percent Total Cienaga Alta 1,133 31.9% 2,423 68.1% 3,556 Cienaga Baja 5,270 39.6% 8,053 60.4% 13,323 Guzman Abajo 1,758 36.1% 3,106 63.9% 4,864 Guzman Arriba 301 46.3% 349 53.7% 650 Herreras 223 37.2% 377 62.8% 600 Jimenez 898 40.7% 1,309 59.3% 2,207 Mameyes II 882 40.8% 1,282 59.2% 2,164 Rio Grande-Pueblo 520 33.4% 1,035 66.6% 1,555 Zarzal 4,161 44.0% 5,305 56.0% 9,466 Total Rio Grande 15,146 39.5% 23,239 60.5% 38,385

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 2000 .

6 The labor participation rate is defined as the proportion of persons inside the labor force for a specific geographic area. The u.s. Bureau of the Census defines the labor force as all persons inside the civil labor force (employed and unemployed), plus members of the U.S. Armed Forces.


. -

. -


The unemployment rate7 in Zarzal ward in year 2000 was 20.4 percent, figure that

equals the rate in the totality of the municipality of Rio Grande (see Table 31). This

rate was the fourth lowest of all wards in Rio Grande.

Table 31

Employment status , persons 16 years and older. 2000 In the Armed Civilian labor force Unemployment Forces Eml!lo~ed Uneml!lo~ed rate Total

Cienaga Alta 0 887 246 21.7% 1,133 Cienaga Baja 18 4,106 1,146 21.8% 5,252 Guzman Abajo 0 1,506 252 14.3% 1,758 Guzman Arriba 0 262 39 13.0% 301 Herreras 0 145 78 35.0% 223 Jimenez 0 707 191 21.3% 898 Mameyes" 6 721 155 17.7% 876 Rio Grande-Pueblo 0 393 127 24.4% 520 Zarzal 0 3,314 847 20.4% 4,161 Total Rio Grande 24 12,041 3,081 20.4% 15,122


3.2.3 Eml!loIment bI occul!ation

Just like in the totality of the municipality, in all wards of Rio Grande the main types

of occupation are sales and office occupations, service occupations, and management,

professional and related occupations. The proportion of persons employed in these

types of occupation varies from 55.2 percent in Herreras ward to 76.4 percent in

Zarzal (see Table 32).

In Zarzal ward, the types of occupation with the highest proportion of employed

persons are sales and office occupations (32.4%); management, professional and

related occupations (27.4%); and service occupations (16.6%) (see Table 32).

7 Unemployed persons are also defined in the Census as all civilians who were neither "at work", nor . "with a job but not at work" during the reference week, were looking for work during the last 4 weeks. and were available to start a job. Therefore, the definition of unemployment, and the unemployment rate used in this document, include only those persons in the civilian labor force, and exclude members of the U.S. Anned Forces.

Estudios Tecnlcos,lnc. Page 27

· -

· -» -

· --' •

•

,


Table 32

EmploynH'llt by occupcJtlon 2000

Cienaga Ciena9a Gu2mdn Guzmdn Rio Grande- Total Rio Alia Baja Abajo Arriba Herre,as Jimenez Mameyesll Pueblo Zarzal Grande

Management. professional and ,elated occupations 14.3% 22.9% 19.7% 22.5% 9.7% 24.6% 22.5% 14.0% 27.4% 22.1"-Service occupations 24.0% 22.1% lB.l% 16.8% 17.2"4 21 .4% 21 .6% 22.9% 16.6% 21.1"-Sales and office occupations 25.5% 25.7% 30.4% 23.3% 28.3% 22.B% 22.2% 26.0% 32.4% 30.1"-

Farming. fishing and foreslry occupations 0.8% 0.6% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 004%

Construction. ""',aelion end maintenance occupations 21 .B% 11 .3% 11.4% 6.5% 11.7% 12.0% 11 .5% 19.1% 10.7% 14.2%

Production. IrIInsportation and material moiling occupations 13.6% 17.4% 20.5% 26.0% 33.1% 19.2"- 22.2% 18.1% 12.8% 12.1%


3.2.4 Eml!lol:ment bl: industrl:

The industry sectors that employ the highest proportion of Zarzal ward residents are

educational) health and social services (17.4%») public administration (12.3%») retail

trade (11.7%) and manufacturing (11.3%). These four sectors represent more than

half (51.9%) of employed residents of Zarzal (see Table 33).

It is important to note that the four aforementioned industry sectors are also the ones

with the highest proportion of employed residents in the municipality of Rio Grande.

These sectors represent 52.7 percent of employed residents of the municipality (see

Table 33).

Table 33

CI6n1ll1 CI6n1ll1 GUDNn GUDNn RloGr.onde- Total Rio Alta Bojl Abajo Arribl Hemras Jiminez ~II Pueblo 21ml Grinde

Agriculture. fores1ry. fishing and huMlng. and mining 1.5% 0.5% 0.4% 7.6% 0.0'1(, 1.6% 1.0'1(, 0.0% 0.5% o.r", Const'UCtion 15.1% 9.9% 7.0'1(, 8.1% 11.0% 12.9% 9.8% 21.1% 6.0% t.I'!to Manufacturing 9.1% 9.6% 13.0% 14.5% 21 .4% 11.0% 16.9% 9.4% 11.&% 11.3% Whalesale trade 6.6% 5.1% 3.6% 4.6% • • 1% 1.6% 3.3% 2.8% 6.0% 4.5% -- 10.7% 11 .0% 15.3% 7.3% 14.5% 17.3% 12.'"" 18.1% 902% 11.7% Transpa1iIIcrl 1hI-.tJcusir4!. and UIiIti .. 8.4% • • 2% 7.6'11. 3.8% 0.0'1(, 3.3% 6.9% 0.0% 7.3% 5.S% InfonnItIcn 0.8% 2.0% 2.3% 3.1% 0.0'1(, 0.0% 0.0'1(, 0.0% 2.1% 1.7% Finance, Insurance. reoIes1Ite, and nnling and I_ing 4.4% 4 .• % 5.0% 5.3% 0.0'1(, 5.9% 5.1% 0.0% U% 5.1% Prdesslonal. scill1Uf1c, managemonl. admnistratNe, and _temanlll"""!_eo 13.9% 6.4% 7.2% 4.6% .. '"" 4.8% 6.5% 1.3% 6.3% 6.4% EducatlM"'. heoIth and sodal _es 9.9% lB.5% 18.0% 21.4% 19.3% 12.2% 13.6% 18.1% 19,3% 17.4% Arts. entet1ainmont, NCtUtion, -. and food sonlces 5.6% 9.3% 3.7% 7.6% t5.9% 14.0% 8.3% 11.7% 8.3% 1.4% Other sonic .. (_apt public adninistrallon) 6.0% 5.8% 3.8% 8.0% 4.1% 3.0% 4.7% 5.3% 4.9% 5.1% Public adminislratiM 10.9% 13.5% 13.1% 6.1% 4.,"" 12.6% 11.2% 12.2% 11.8% 12.3%



)

•

)

•

I

•

· -· -

, -

•


3.2.5 Income and poverty status

The median income of the households in Zarzal ward in 1999 was $17,929, the

highest of all wards in Rio Grande and significantly higher than the median for Rio

Grande ($15,006) (see Table 34).

Table 34

Median household income, 1999

Cienaga Alta Cienaga Baja Guzman Abajo Guzman Arriba Herreras Jimenez Mameyes II Rio Grande-Pueblo Zarzal Total-Rio Grande

$ 11,649 $ 15,031 $ 14,940 $ 13,750 $ 11,100 $ ' 16,727 $ 14,470 $ 11,111 $ 17,929 $ 15,006

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 2000,

Just like the household income, the per capita income of the residents of Zarzal ward

in 1999 ($7,952) was higher than the income for the municipality of Rio Grande

($7,347) (see Table 35). Nevertheless, the per capita income in Zarzal ward was not

the highest in the municipality; it was second to the per capita income of residents of

Rio Grande-Pueblo ward.

Estudios Tecnicos, Inc.

Table 35

Per capita income, 2000

Cienaga Alta Cienaga Baja Guzman Abajo Guzman Arriba Herreras

, Jimenez Mameyes II Rio Grande-Pueblo Zarzal Total-Rio Grande

$ 5,556 $ 7,402 $ 6,221 $ 7,040 $ 5,015 $ 7,827 $ 7,971 $10,448 $ 7,952 $ 7,347


Page 29

•

•


42.77 percent of households in Zarzal ward have incomes below the poverty level.

Said proportion is the second-lowest of all wards of Rio Grande, lower than the

proportion for the entire municipality (47.05%) (see Table 36).

Table 36

Poverty status for households, 2000 Under poverty level

Households Number Percent Cienaga Alta 1,562 857 54.87% Cienaga Baja 5,625 2,663 47.34% Guzman Abajo 2,109 1,021 48.41% Guzman Arriba 272 127 46.69% Herreras 244 131 53.69% Jimenez 940 390 41.49% Mameyes II 991 476 48.03% Rio Grande-Pueblo 782 396 50.64% Zarzal 3,940 11685 42.77% Total-Rio Grande 16,465 7,746 47.05%


3.2.6 Value of housing units

Most housing units, in Zarzal ward as well as in the municipality of Rio Grande, have

been valued, in the 2000 Census, between $50,000 and $99,999. The proportion of

owner-occupied housing units in this price range was 55.7 percent; both in Zarzal

ward and the municipality (see Table 37).

Also, the proportion of owner-occupied housing units valued under $100,000 was

slightly lower in Zarzal ward (72.2%) than in the entire municipality of Rio Grande

(75.3%).

On the other hand, the proportion of units valued over $200,000 was 3.6 percent in

Zarzal ward, the third-lowest of all wards of Rio Grande. This proportion was even

lower than the proportion of owner-occupied housing units in the entire municipality

in this price range (4.2%) (see Table 37).



Table 37

Valor of owner occupied hOUSing unit., 2000

Less than $10,000 $10,000 -$49,999 $50,000 -$99,999 $100,000-$199,999 $200,000 or more Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total

Cienaga Alta 30 2.4% 219 17.8% 636 51.6% 289 23.4% 59 4.8% 1,233 Cienaga Baja 152 3.3% 753 16.3% 2.906 63.1% n4 16.8% 24 0.5% 4.609

Guzman Abajo 54 3.1% 342 19.7% 881 50.8% 372 21.5% 85 4.9% 1,734 Guzman Arriba 0 0.0% 51 21.0% 105 43.2% 53 21.8% 34 14.0% 243

• Herreras 0 0.0% 44 21.9% 124 61.7% 19 9.5% 14 7.0% 201

Jimenez 10 1.2% 170 21.1% 314 39.0% 226 28.0% 86 10.7% 806 Mameyesll 0 0.0% 173 21.7% 317 39.8% 168 21.1% 138 17.3% 796 Rfo Grande-Pueblo 10 2.1% 91 18.7% 342 70.4% 43 8.8% 0 0.0% 486 Zarzal 64 1.9% 502 14.7% 1,901 55.7% 826 24.2% 122 3.6% 3,415

Total-Rio Grande 320 2.4% 2,345 17.3% 7,526 55.7% 2,nO 20.5% 562 4.2% 13,523


•

· -


t

•

· -

· -t .'


4. PLANNING FRAMEWORK OF THE PROJECT

This chapter provides a general planning framework for the proposed project. It

provides an overview of the Conceptual Plan for the Development of Tourism of

Northeastern Puerto Rico, the Regional Plan for the Eastern Region, and the

Municipal Land Use Plan (Plan Territorial) of Rio Grande.

4.1 Conceptual Plan for the Tourist Development of the Northeastern Coast of

Puerto Rico

This conceptual plan was prepared by the Puerto Rico Planning Board in 1996. Its

main objective is to stimulate and facilitate tourism development in the northeastern

coast of Puerto Rico, in order to maximize and diversify the supply of tourist facilities

in the area. The Plan stipulates the areas where development will be targeted, as well

as the parameters to be utilized on projects proposed for the study area.

The study area defined by the Plan includes the coastal areas of the municipalities of

Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande.

The area within the geographical limits of the Coco Beach development has been

recognized in the Plan as an area where development has been approved by the

Planning Board by means of land use review (consulta de ubicacion), even if there are

segments inside the area where development has not occurred yet.

4.2 Plan of the Eastern Region of Puerto Rico

This regional plan was approved by the Planning Board in 2000, as part of the

implementation of the Law of Autonomous Municipalities. The Plan provides a set

of regional strategies, which in turn will guide the development of Municipal Land

Use Plans (planes Territoriales).

The Regional Plan recognizes a possible development axis that covers the

municipalities of Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande. In this axis, sustainable tourism

development is encouraged, in order to stimulate economic development in the

region. This plan, nevertheless, does not provide specific recommendations for the


)

•

)

•

I ~

I ,

. ...


land where Coco Beach is located, and refers to the Conceptual Plan for Northeastern

Puerto Rico (see Section 4.1) the identification of places with tourism potential.

4.3 Municipal Land Use Plan of Rio Grande

The municipalities of Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande are in the process of

completing the preparation of their Municipal Land Use Plan (Plan Territorial), which

is being prepared by the three municipalities as a consortium. This Plan is currently

in its final phase, and is expected to be approved by the Planning Board within the

next six months.

The Municipal Land Use Plan of the Consortium recognizes the development rights

granted to Coco Beach by means of Land Use Review (consulta de ubicaci6n).

Therefore, the land within the geographical limits of Coco Beach has been classified

as Programmed Developable (Urbanizable Programado), and recommends an

Expansion Plan (Plan de Ensanche), which will develop Coco Beach as a mixed-use,

medium-density area, according to the development rights already granted.


,

,

•

· , , .

· '


5. CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions of the socio-economic proiIle of the reference region

• Rio Grande is the most populated of the municipalities in the reference region,

with nearly half (46.4%) of the population of the region. This proportion is

forecast to increase to 47.8 percent in 2010.

• The rate of population growth in Rio Grande is the highest in the region (1.4%

annually between 1990 and 2000), and it is expected to continue growing rapidly

in the next few years (1.2% between 2000 and 2010).

• Rio Grande has the highest number of households (16,430 in 2000) and the

highest average number of persons per household (3.14 in 2000) of the

municipalities in the regio~.

• Between 1990 and 2000, the number of housing units in Rio Grande increased by

32.2 percent, the highest increase in the region.

• The proportion of vacant housing units in Rio Grande is 17.6 percent, a

proportion lower than the region (19.9%), but higher than Puerto Rico (11.1 %).

• The majority of vacant housing units in Rio Grande (53.5%) are used for

seasonal, recreational or occasional use. Nevertheless, this proportion is slightly

lower than in the reference region (54.4%).

• The educational attainment of Rio Grande residents is slightly lower than the

average for the region, with 59.5 percent of residents ages 25 and older with a

high school diploma or higher degree, compared with 60.9 percent for the region.

• Residents of Rio Grande have a slightly lower labor participation rate than

average for the region, but a similar proportion of employed persons.


)

•

)

•

I

•

• •

• •

• •


• The three main types of occupations among Rio Grande residents are: sales and

office occupations (27.7%); management, professional and related occupations

(22.7%); and service occupations (20.0%).

• The industry sectors with the highest employment among Rio Grande residents

are: educational, health and social services (17.4%); public administration

(12.3%); and transportation, warehousing and utilities (11.7%).

• Rio Grande is the municipality of the region with the highest proportion of

workers (56.0%) who work outside the reference region.

• The median income of Rio Grande households in 2000 ($15,006) was slightly

higher than the median for the reference region ($14,915) and Puerto Rico

($14,412).

• Per capita income in Rio Grande in 2000 ($7,347) was slightly lower than the

income for the region ($7 ,561) and Puerto Rico ($8,185).

• The proportion of households with income under the poverty level in Rio Grande

in 2000 (47.05%) was higher than the proportion for the reference region

(45.68%), but slightly lower than the proportion for Puerto Rico (47.27%) .

• Most housing units, in Rio Grande and the reference region, were valued between

$50,000 and $99,999. Also, 75.3 percent of housing units in Rio Grande, and

75.5 percent in the reference region, had values of less than $100,000 .

Conclusions of the socioeconomic profile of Zarzal ward

• The most populated wards in Rio Grande are Cienaga Baja (18,220) and Zarzal

(13,385). On the other hand, Zarzal was the ward in Rio Grande with the largest

annual rate of growth between 1990 and 2000 (4.4%), a rate that was more than

three times the growth rate of Rio Grande.


)

•

)

•

)

•

I ,

• •

• •

t


• Population density in Zarzal is 527.7 inhabitants per square kilometer,

significantly higher than the average for Rio Grande (332.7), but substantially

lower than wards such as Rio Grande-Pueblo (3,896) and Cienaga Baja (1,190.8).

• The proportion of urban population in Zarzal (94.5%) is slightly lower than the

proportion for the entirety of Rio Grande (95.6%).

• Zarzal is the ward with the highest average number of persons per household

(3.29), higher than the average for Rio Grande (3.14).

• The proportion of persons ages 19 and younger in Zarzal is 35.9 percent,

proportion higher than the average for the municipality (33.1%). On the other

hand, Zarzal is the ward with the lowest proportion of population ages 65 and

older (6.6%), a proportion that is substantially lower than for the entirety of Rio

Grande (9.5%).

• Between 1990 and 2000, the nwnber of housing units in Zarzal increased 90.1

percent, the highest increase of all the wards in Rio Grande, and nearly three

times the increase in the entire municipality (32.2%).

• In 2000, 26.9 percent of housing units in Zarzal were vacant, a proportion higher

than that of Rio Grande (17.6%), but significantly lower than in other wards such

as Mameyes II (36.3%) and Herreras (34.3%).

• More than three quarters (76.8%) of vacant housing units in Zarzal are for

seasonal, recreational or occasional use, which suggests a high proportion of

second homes.

• 86.1 percent of occupied housing units in Zarzal are occupied by their owners, a

proportion slightly higher than for Rio Grande as a whole (82.3%).

• In Zarzal, 66.6 percent of population ages 25 and older have completed high

school or a higher educational level, proportion higher than in the entire

municipality (59.9%). Also, Zarzal is the ward in Rio Grande with the highest


, •

•

· -

· -


proportion of residents who have completed a bachelor's, graduate or professional

degree (18.8%).

• Zarzal ward has a higher labor participation rate (44.0%) than the average for Rio

Grande (39.5%). On the other hand, the unemployment rate among Zarzal

residents ages 16 and older in 2000 was 20.4 percent, the same rate than in Rio

Grande.

• In Zarzal ward, and in Rio Grande as a whole, the main types of occupation are

sales and office occupations, service occupations, and management, professional

and related occupations.

• The industry sectors with the highest proportion of workers in Zarzal, and in Rio

Grande as a whole, are educational, health and related services, public

administration, retail trade and wholesale trade. These four industrial sectors

account for 51.9 percent of workers who reside in Zarzal, and 52.7 percent of

workers who reside in Rio Grande.

• Median household income in 1999 in Zarzal was $17,929, the highest of all wards

in Rio Grande. On the other hand, per capita income in Zarzal ($7,952), while

higher than the per capita of Rio Grande ($7,347) was lower to per capita income

in Rio Grande-Pueblo ward ($10,448).

• 42.77 percent of households in Zarzal have incomes below poverty level, the

second lowest value of all Rio Grande wards, and lower than the proportion for

the municipality (47.05%).

Conclusions of the planning framework of Coco Beach

• The Conceptual Plan for Tourism Development of the Northeastern Coast of

Puerto Rico recognizes the development rights granted to Coco Beach by the

Planning Board by means of land use review (consulta de ubicaci6n). Later

planning documents, such as the Regional Plan for Eastern Puerto Rico and the


I

•

· ,

• •

• •


Municipal Land Use Plan (Plan Territorial) of Rio Grande, also recognize those

rights.

Estudios Tecnicos,lnc. Page 38

)

•

• ,

, -

, -


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Puerto Rico Planning Board. (1996). Conceptual Plan for the Tourist Development of the Northeastern Coast

of Puerto Rico. San Juan.

Puerto Rico Planning Board. (2000). Regional Plans: Eastern Region. San Juan.

The Consortium of the Municipalities of Fajardo, Luquillo and Rio Grande (2005). Municipal Land Use Plan

(Plan Territorial). Draft.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1993). 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape File 3A.

Washington.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2002). 2000 Census of Population and Housing, Summary File 1. Washington.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2002). 2000 Census of Population and Housing, Tables DP-I, DP-2, DP-3, DP-4.

Washington.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2002). 2000 Census of Population and Housing, Summary File 3. Washington.



•

APPENDIX: MAP OF THE REFERENCE REGION

MAP OF THE COMMUNITY OF CONCERN

. -


<II

~

~o N

on

i 1'-il .. il i : :1

II I! d il I

·1 i. ~

, I UJ !I I, " 'i

\ ~ I.

t

)

j I

» -

» -

Community of Concern-Boo Zarzal

, ( {

/' Bo.Ci~naga Baja

Bo .Guzm~n AbaJo

Bo.Guzm~n Arriba

_._----o 1 2

scale: 1: 76.000

Bo.Zarzal

Bo.Jim~nez

Bo.Mameyes II

__________ Miles

4 6 8

Apendice J - Estudio Justicia Ambiental


· '

Estudios Tecnicos Inc.

Coco Beach Resort in Rio Grande

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STUDY

Draft

Submitted to: CMA Architects & Engineers, LLP

December 19, 2005

Ave. Domenech 113, Hato Rey, Puerto Rico, 00918-3501 Apartado 12144, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 00914-0144

Tel. (787) 751-1675· Fax (787) 767-2117 [email protected]

•

. '

CMA Architects and Engineers, LLP Coco Beach

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Draft Environmental Justice Study

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 2

KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................... 4

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................... 6

1. 1 GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT .... ... .. ............ ... . .... ......... . ... .. ..... ......... ...... . .. 6

1.2 GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES FOR THE COMMUNITY OF CONCERN ................. .. ................................... 6

II. DEMOGRAPHIC CONDITION OF THE COMMUNITY OF CONCERN ....................................... 7

2.1 SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES ................................................................................................................ 8

2.1.1 POPULATION ........................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.2 Per Capita Income ..................... ...... ..................................................................................... 10

2.1.3 Median Household Income .................. ......................................... ....................................... 11

2.1.4 Households below Poverty LeveL ................ ........... ..................... .... ................................... 13

2.1.5 Households with Public Assistance Income ......................................................................... 14

2.1.6 Households with Social Security Income ............................................................................. 15

2.1.7 Education ............................................................................................................................. 16

2.2 EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS .............. ................................................ . ........................................ 18

2.2.1 Labor Participation ............................................................................................................... 18

2.2.2 Labor Situation ..................................................................................................................... 19

2.3 HOUSING CHARACTERiSTICS ..................... .. ........................................................................................ 21

2.3.1 Occupancy Status ..................... ......... ................................................ ................................... 21

2.3.2 Housing Value .............................................................................. ....................................... 22

III. ENVIRONMENTAL LOAD PROFILE ................................................................................................ 23

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 24

BmLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................... 25

APPENDIX 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 26

APPENDIX 2 .................................................................................................................................................. 28


•

• •



INTRODUCTION

This report presents an environmental justice assessment for the community of

Zarzal in Rio Grande. The main objective of the report is to identify whether the

community is of low income or could be considered as a minority, when

compared to other selected areas, and if the proposed project represents a highly

disproportionate and adverse environmental burden to that community. If so, the

community would be considered as an environmental justice community and

several measures must be taken in order to increase commimity awareness and

participation, and to assure that the proposed project does not constitute a

discriminatory action given the race or socioeconomic conditions of the existing

communities in the area .

The Environmental Protection Agency defines environmental justice as follows I:

"Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful

involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national

origin, or income with respect to the development,

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,

regulations, and policies."

On February 1994, President William J. Clinton dictated the Executive Order

12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority

Populations and Low-Income Populations", to instruct that each federal agency

shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and

addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority

populations and low-income populations. 2

Even though the proposed action does not belong to a federal agency and is not

required for it to comply with the EO-12898, in the absence of guidelines at the

I Obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency web page: http://www.epa.b>ovJcompliancelenvironmentaljustice/index.html




local level, the procedures and guidelines established by the EPA Region 2 in the

Interim Environmental Justice Policy were used to identify potential

environmental justice communities.

At the local level, the Environmental Quality Board, in the 6510-Regulation3

requires that one ofthe components of the Environmental Impact Statements must

be an environmental justice study that should include the following analysis:

• popUlation distribution by ethnic groups; and

• population distribution by socioeconomic condition.

However, when doing an environmental justice study for Puerto Rico, is

important to consider the following demographic characteristics which have been

recognized by the EPA, Region 2:

"In certain circumstances, a community of concern may be

virtually indistinguishable from any of its neighbors for a given

environmental justice demographic factor. The examples in

Region 2 are in Puerto Rico and the u.s. Virgin Islands, where

every community is classified as Hispanic, in the case of Puerto

Rico and as communities of color in the case of the u.s. Virgin

Islands, even though additional racial differences may exist. When

the population in the larger area incorporating the community of

concern is relatively homogeneous for a given environmental

justice demographic factor, it is usually not useful to compute a

difference in that factor between the community of concern and the

reference area. "

2 Environmenlal Proleclion Agency. Region 2. Imerim Environmenlal Juslice Policy. December 2000.

3 1be 6510 Regulalion is known as Ihe "Regia menlo de I. Junta de CaJidad Ambiental para .1 proceso de presentacion, evaluacion y lrimite

de documenlos ambienlales".


. -



Acknowledging the aforementioned, an analysis of the demographic and

socioeconomic conditions is presented in the report in order to evaluate if the

community meets the environmental justice criteria.

KEY FINDINGS

After analyzing each of the socioeconomic variables selected for the

environmental justice assesment, the following findings can be emphasized using

the data of the 2000 Census of Population:

o Most of the the population in the community evaluated, Zarzal, are

females of 30-39 years of age, followed by men of the same age.

o The per capita income in Zarzal is higher ($7,952) than that of the

Municipality of Rio Grande ($7,347) and the statistical reference area

($7,576).4

o Zarzal is the community with the highest median household income of all

the wards of Rio Grande, the statistical reference area and Puerto Rico.

o When compared to the statistical reference area, the Municipality of Rio

Grande and Puerto Rico, Zarzal shows the lowest proportion of

households below poverty level.

o The percentage of households receiving Social Security income and public

assistance income is smaller in Zarzal than in the Municipality of Rio

Grande, the statistical reference area and Puerto Rico.

o Compared to the other wards of Rio Grande, Zarzal has the highest

proportion (28.8%) of residents who have reached a higher education

level: an associate degree, bachelor's degree or a graduate or professional

degree.

4 The statistical reference area is composed of the municipalities of Rio Grande, Luquillo and Fajardo, it is described in more detail in

Section II.


TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format Detail ...€¦ · Daily Uquid Surf. Bulk Vapor Liquid...

Documents

Transcript of TANKS 4.0 Emissions Report· Detail Format Detail ...€¦ · Daily Uquid Surf. Bulk Vapor Liquid...